Writing in
1963, Isaac Levy argued in favour of the pre-exilic
origin of “synagogues”:
As one pursues the search for evidence on the
place which prayer occupied in early forms of worship one is inevitably drawn
to the ceremony of dedication of the first Temple, and particularly to the
prayer uttered by King Solomon on that occasion, Throughout his long and
detailed supplication he makes no reference to the many sacrifices which might
be offered on its altar; instead he speaks only of the prayers which would be
rendered by the pilgrims who came there to worship. The various circumstances
and the national and person vicissitudes which demanded the presence of
worshippers in the Temple, to which he refers, would normally have called for
the offering of some special sacrifice, for this was the normal practice of the
repentant sinner or of a people in time of national calamity or anxiety; yet in
each of the instances which he specifies he speaks only of the prayers and
supplications which shall be directed towards the Temple (I Kings viii). His
constant repetition of the words tefillah
and hitpallel (prayer and
praying) seems convincing proof that this form of verbal worship was an
acknowledged practice and was to take its place alongside the sacrificial
system which would obtain in the newly-built Temple.
This close association of prayer and
sacrifice was apparently not new even in Solomon’s time, for one may cite an
instance of an even earlier period. Long before the Temple was built there
existed a sanctuary at Shiloh where Eli, the High Priest, officiated. It was to
this sanctuary that Elkanah, the father of the prophet Samuel, made annual
pilgrimage, and we are informed that he came there ‘to prostrate himself and to
sacrifice’ (I Sam. i.3). Such prostration must obviously imply the utterance of
some form of prayer. But even more precise evidence is made available by the
behaviour of his wife Hannah who accompanied him on that pilgrimage, and whose
praying so stirred the heart of the aged High Priest as he watched her in her
silent devotions. From these precise descriptions of the practices current
during the early centuries one feels impelled to conclude that the synagogue
inherited these spiritual influences at the very commencement of its existence
and that it based its procedure of worship on the ancient pattern devised and
developed during this pre-Temple period.
But eloquent as is this Biblical testimony to
the mode of prayer employed at this time, it does not point with any clarity to
even an approximate date on which a form of synagogue as a place of worship,
came into being, but would lead us to believe that the development was a
gradual one rather than a creation at a given moment in time. Yet even in this
respect there is a modicum of evidence which would point to the possibility
that some form of meeting place for prayer did exist outside of the precincts
of the central sanctuaries, such as those of Shiloh and the Temple of Solomon
We read, for example, of the visit of the Shunamite woman to Elisha and her
request to intercede on behalf of her sick child. The question which her
husband posed to her was ‘Wherefore wilt thou go to him today? It is neither
New Moon nor Sabbath’ (II Kings iv.23). This statement would surely imply that
it was customary for people to visit the prophets on such days, and since it
was not the practice of individuals to offer sacrifices on such occasions one
may assume that at special times a form of prayer meeting was conducted by the ‘man
of God’.
One reads of similar religious assemblies
convened by Samuel at Mizpah, when he offered prayers on behalf of the people
and called upon them to fast and repent of their sins (I Sam. Vii.5). It would
also not be presumptuous to assume that during the prophetic period, when
idolatry was so rife and the Temple was defiled by such malpractices, private
and secret meetings were held by the prophets and their followers at which prayers
were offered and a form of worship observed, since no sacrifices would have
been brought outside the Temple precincts. The reference constrained in II
Chronicles to the circuits made by priests and Levites who ‘taught in Judah and
had a book of the Law of the Lord with them, and went about throughout all the
cities of Judah and taught the people’ (xvii. 9) throws additional light on
this subject and points to a well-organized religious activity conducted
outside the established centres.
Such prayer meetings or religious conventions
held at a very early age may well be deemed the earliest known form of
synagogue, and whilst we have little evidence that such gatherings took place
in specific buildings, they seem to point to the pattern and type of activity which
was later incorporated in the synagogue building. When, however, one approaches
the immediate pre-exilic period one becomes aware of the existence of some form
of building which was used for these purposes.
Although the evidence is based on the use of
certain scriptural expressions it deserves to be treated seriously, since the
accepted interpretation of these passages ultimately became incorporated in
common popular usage and formed part of a long-standing tradition.
Thus in the literature of this pre-exilic
period we find Jeremiah describing the havoc created by the armies of
Nebuchadnezzar and stating ‘The Christians burned the king’s house and the house of the people (Beth Am) with fire’
(xxxix. 8). What was this Beth Am
which was so worthy of special mention in this context? The Jewish
commentators, Rashi and Kimchi, unhesitatingly describe it as a synagogue,
doubtless relying on a passage in the Talmud which speaks disparagingly of
those who call a synagogue by this name (Shab. 32a). The fact that this
expression was later associated with the synagogue points to the close affinity
of the two types of building. An even more poignant reference is to be found in
Psalm lxiv which depicts the agony of a people who witnessed the destruction of
the Temple and felt themselves forsaken by God. They saw ‘all the evil that the
enemy hath done in the sanctuary’ and the havoc wrought by the invading forces
who ‘burned up all the meeting places of
God’. These places were undoubtedly recognised buildings, since in this
context they cannot be identified with the Temple itself, for reference had
already been made to the enemy’s destruction of the sanctuary. The inference
must surely be that these buildings were distinct and acknowledged meeting
places for the purpose of worship. Hence the Authorised Version translated the
words ‘meeting places’ as synagogues.
The final piece of evidence available to us
from this sad period is the reference to the House of God which was to be visited by a group of eighty men from
Shechem, Shiloh and Samaria Jer. xli.5). These men came as mourners, with heads
shaven and clothes rent, to bring an offering to this House of God. This
building could not have been the Temple for the context clearly states that by
this time the Temple had been destroyed. One can only assume therefore that the
house served as a place of worship, enjoying a status similar to that of the
Temple, or that at least it was acknowledged as such by those who felt moved to
proceed to it for the purpose of participating in some divine office.
These observations lead us to the inevitable
conclusion that the pattern of the Synagogue began to take shape long before
the destruction of the First Temple, a form of worship having been a recognised
feature of religious observance at a very early age. But in consequence of the
national calamity the exiles in Babylon were naturally inclined to cherish the
memories of some of the practices which had been observed in their homeland,
especially those which involved verbal prayer worship. Now that they were denied
a Temple and could no longer offer sacrifices they concentrated their attention
on the use of prayers, and doubtless those they offered were largely devoted to
expressions of penitence and supplication for restoration.
To this they probably added the readings of
the works of the prophets which they possessed. But with the passing of time
and the slackening of the ties with the past, and especially because of their
failure to preserve their knowledge of the Hebrew language, much of the
influence which might have been exerted by a close development of their meeting
places for prayers waned. Only when active steps were taken by Ezra and Nehemia
to re-educate them, and the Men of the Great Synod devised and formulated the
procedure of prayer worship, could organised religious life be restored and the
synagogue become a firmly established institution. (Isaac Levy, The Synagogue: Its History and Function [London:
Vallentine and Mitchell, 1963], 11-14)
Levy has
further been vindicated by discoveries after his study came out, most notably Lee
Levine, The Ancient Synagogue: The First
Thousand Years (2d ed.; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2005), esp. pp. 21-34,
wherein Levine shows that pre-exilic synagogues existed as chambers in city
gates. As I wrote in On
Not Understanding the Book of Mormon:
Synagogues
in the Book of Mormon
It has been a long-standing criticism of the
Book of Mormon that its mention of “synagogues” represents an impossibility in
the text. But Webster’s 1828 dictionary defined the term in a rather generic
manner as a place of assembly for Jews, so its appearance in the Book of Mormon
as an English translation is not problematic.
The original scholarly consensus was that
synagogues did not exist until after the destruction of the second temple in AD 70, notwithstanding the mention of synagogues in the Gospels. With the
discovery of synagogues in Egypt dating to the first and second centuries BC,
the date was extended to the postexilic era. And further evidence indicates an
even earlier date for the origin of the synagogue. In 621 BC, with the
discovery of the Book of the Law (probably Deuteronomy), the Deuteronomic
reformation occurred with Josiah at its head (see 2 Kings 22–24). At this time
blood sacrifices and temple worship were centralized in Jerusalem, resulting in
local congregations of Israelites who met for worship, prayer, and
instruction.15 According to some scholars, such gatherings that took place in
the chambers of city gates were the original synagogues. Furthermore, the use
of certain terms such as bet haʿam
(Jeremiah 39:8), miqdash-me ʿat
(Ezekiel 11:16), and moʿade ʾel
(Psalm 74:8) have been invoked to substantiate a preexilic date for synagogue
origins.
In light of
scholarship, the common charge that “synagogues” in the Book of Mormon is an
anachronism has been refuted and shows our critics have not bothered to study
this (and many other) issues.
