by
Damien F. Mackey
“… Achior, the leader of all the Ammonites” (Judith 5:5), should read, instead,
“… Achior, leader of all the Elamites”. Not that Achior was ethnically an Elamite,
but because king Esarhaddon had assigned him to govern Elam. For Achior
was the same person as the famous Ahikar, governor of Elam, of whom
the blind Tobit tells (2:10): “… Ahikar took care of me for two years
before he went to Elymais [Elam]”.
Although Biblical critics claim to find whom they call “enlightened pagans” all through the Bible (Old and New Testaments), I am not so sure that they always get this right.
I took a sample of characters:
MELCHIZEDEK;
RAHAB;
RUTH;
ACHIOR;
JOB
and concluded - in some cases following other researchers - that none of these was in reality a pagan character.
Keeping it very simple by way of summary here:
MELCHIZEDEK was, according to Jewish tradition, the great Shem, righteous son of Noah. Whilst that does not make him a Hebrew (Israelite/Jew), which tribal concepts did not exist at that early stage, he, truly blessed as he was (cf. Genesis 9:26-27), was not, as is commonly thought, an enlightened Canaanite (hence pagan) king.
Melchizedek was the eponymous Semite (Shem-ite), a master of Canaan (9:26).
RAHAB the prostitute, in the Book of Judges, was truly enlightened (Hebrews 11:31):
“By faith the prostitute Rahab, because she welcomed the spies, was not killed with those who were disobedient”, but she, actually Rachab, may need to be distinguished from (the differently named) Rahab of Matthew’s Genealogy of Jesus the Messiah (Matthew 1:5).
RUTH was a Moabite only geographically, but not ethnically, otherwise she would have encountered this ban from Deuteronomy 23:3-4:
No Ammonite or Moabite or any of their descendants may enter the assembly of the LORD, not even in the tenth generation. For they did not come to meet you with bread and water on your way when you came out of Egypt, and they hired Balaam son of Beor from Pethor in Aram Naharaim to pronounce a curse on you.
ACHIOR. The same comment would thus apply to Achior ‘the Ammonite’, presuming that he truly was an Ammonite.
He wasn’t. Achior needs some special extra treatment (see further on).
JOB was, in my firm opinion, Tobias, the son of Tobit, a genuine Israelite from the tribe of Naphtali, in Ninevite captivity. I suspect that his given pagan name in captivity was the Akkadian ‘Habakkuk’ (also shortened to Haggai), the prophet of that name.
And I suspect, too, that others could be added to the list, as Israelites, not pagans.
The Magi, for one. See e.g. my article:
A Nativity Shining Light of relevance to Israelite Magi
(13) A Nativity Shining Light of relevance to Israelite Magi | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu
Delilah, a presumed Philistine. Whilst she may not deserve the epithet, “enlightened”, Delilah most probably was an Israelite - as brilliantly explained by George Athas:
https://withmeagrepowers.wordpress.com/2016/07/11/samson-and-delilah-the-israelite-woman/
Achior, his conversion and circumcision
Various significant misconceptions abound about this important character, ACHIOR.
First of all, Achior of the Book of Judith (and the Douay Tobit) was not an Ammonite.
The Book of Judith, as we now have it, suffers from an unfortunate confusion of names (people and places), making it most difficult to make sense of it.
“… Achior, the leader of all the Ammonites” (Judith 5:5), should read, instead, “… Achior, leader of all the Elamites”. Not that Achior was ethnically an Elamite, but because king Esarhaddon had assigned him to govern Elam.
For Achior was the same person as the famous Ahikar, governor of Elam, of whom the blind Tobit tells (2:10): “… Ahikar took care of me for two years before he went to Elymais [Elam]”.
To confuse matters even further, the Book of Judith has a gloss (1:6), in which Achior/Ahikar is now called “Arioch”: “Rallying to [the king] were all who lived in the hill country, all who lived along the Euphrates, the Tigris, and the Hydaspes, as well as Arioch, king of the Elamites …”.
As noted, had Ruth been a Moabite, or Achior an Ammonite – as is commonly thought – then the Deuteronomical ban against these two nations (23:3-4) would disallow either from being received into the Assembly of Israel – which, in fact, Achior was, after the triumphant Judith had shown him the head of his Commander-in-chief, “Holofernes” (Judith 14:6-7, 10):
When [Achior] came and saw the head of Holofernes … he fell down on his face in a faint. When they raised him up he threw himself at Judith’s feet and did obeisance to her and said, ‘Blessed are you in every tent of Judah! In every nation those who hear your name will be alarmed’.
….
When Achior saw all that the God of Israel had done, he believed firmly in God. So he was circumcised and joined the House of Israel, remaining so to this day.
The unfortunate misconception that Achior was an Ammonite, who converted to the House of Israel despite the Deuteronomical ban, is one of the primary reasons why the Jews (Protestants) have not accepted the Book of Judith into their scriptural canons.
The confusion of names (people and places), as already mentioned, is another reason. But this, too, can be rectified.
Tobit himself tells us precisely who was this Ahikar (Achior) (Tobit 1:21-22):
But not forty days passed before two of Sennacherib’s sons killed him, and when they fled to the mountains of Ararat, his son Esarhaddon reigned after him. He appointed Ahikar, the son of my brother Hanael, over all the accounts of his kingdom, and he had authority over the entire administration. …. Now Ahikar was chief cupbearer, keeper of the signet, and in charge of administration and accounts under King Sennacherib of Assyria, so Esarhaddon appointed him as second-in-command. He was my nephew and so a close relative.
