as the date of his death, thereby giving him a rule of some twenty-one years, an earlier date of 475/474 B.C.E. accords with the Bible record and has creditable testimony in its favor from certain of the ancient secular historians.—See ARTAXERXES No. 3.

Artaxerxes (Longimanus) to Darius II

The reign of Xerxes’ successor, Artaxerxes’ (Longimanus), is notable for his authorization of Ezra’s return to Jerusalem with a large contribution for the support of the temple there. This occurred in Artaxerxes, seventh year (469/468 B.C.E. according to the above-mentioned dating). (Ezra 7:1-26; 8:24-36) Some have assumed the reference to “a stone wall in Judah and in Jerusalem” (Ezra 9:9) to mean that Ezra was commissioned by Artaxerxes to rebuild the city walls. However, the Hebrew term does not necessarily refer to a massive wall, such as surrounded a city, but often describes a wall such as encompassed a vineyard (Num. 22:24; Isa. 5:5) or lined a courtyard. (Ezek. 42:7, 10) (The Revised Standard Version of this text says “to give us protection in Judea and Jerusalem,” while The Jerusalem Bible reads: “safety and shelter in Judah and in Jerusalem.”) Thus, this protective “wall” evidently refers figuratively to Jehovah’s extension of “loving-kindness before the kings of Persia” on behalf of his people, as mentioned in the same verse.

Thus, it was not until the twentieth year of Artaxerxes that a commission was given to Nehemiah to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the city, including “the wall of the city.” (Neh. 2:1-8) Artaxerxes appointed Nehemiah as “governor in the land of Judah,” giving him a military escort for the trip there. (Neh. 2:9; 5:14, 15) Nehemiah later returned for a time to the court of Artaxerxes in that king’s thirty-second year. (Neh. 13:6) Historians date Artaxerxes’ death as of 424/423 B.C.E.

An abortive rule by Xerxes II is considered to fit in between the rule of Artaxerxes and that of Darius II. Darius II, Artaxerxes’ son by a concubine, succeeded to the throne after Xerxes II was murdered. His original name was Ochus but he adopted the name Darius upon becoming king in 423 B.C.E., according to secular history. He seems to be the “Darius” referred to at Nehemiah 12:22.

Papyrus documents of Biblical significance

A considerable number of papyrus documents were written in Aramaic by a Jewish colony in Elephantine, an island in the Nile River near Syene (Aswan) Egypt, and these have been recovered and are dated by secular historians as from the reign of Darius I (beginning about 521 B.C.E.) to at least the reign of Darius II (c. 423-404 B.C.E.). The names “Sanballat” and “Johanan” occur in them and are thought to refer to those persons bearing the same names mentioned at Nehemiah 4:1 and 12:22. These papyri demonstrate the accuracy with which the books of Ezra and Nehemiah depict conditions and official communications during the Persian rule. As Professor Wright states: “Now . . . we are able to see that the Aramaic of Ezra is precisely that of its age, while the government documents are of the general type which we have become accustomed to associate with the Persian regime.” (Biblical Archaeology, p. 208) One document, credited to Darius II, contains a royal order concerning the celebration of the Passover by the Jewish colony in Egypt.

DOWN TO THE FALL AND DIVISION OF THE EMPIRE

Following Darius II came Artaxerxes II (called Mnemon), during whose reign Egypt revolted and relations with Greece deteriorated. His reign (dated as from 404 to 358 B.C.E.) was followed by that of his son Artaxerxes III (also called Ochus), who is credited with some twenty-one years of rule (358-338/37 B.C.E.) and is said to be the most bloodthirsty of all the Persian rulers. His major feat was the reconquest of Egypt. Secular history then gives a two-year rule for Arses and a five-year rule for Darius III (Codomannus), during whose reign Philip of Macedonia was murdered (336 B.C.E.) and succeeded by his son Alexander. In 334 B.C.E. Alexander began his attack on the Persian Empire, defeating the Persian forces first at Granicus in the NW corner of Asia Minor and again at Issus at the opposite corner of Asia Minor (333 B.C.E.). Finally, after the Greeks had conquered Phoenicia and Egypt, the Persians’ last stand, at Gaugamela in 331 B.C.E., was crushed and the Persian Empire came to its end.

Following Alexander’s death and the subsequent division of the empire, Seleucus Nicator obtained control of the major portion of the Asiatic territories with Persia as its central part. The Seleucid dynasty of kings, thus begun, continued until 64 B.C.E. Seleucus Nicator seems to be the one with whom the prophetic figure of the “king of the north” of Daniel’s prophecy first begins to manifest itself, opposing the Ptolemaic line of kings in Egypt, who initially appear to fill the role of the symbolic “king of the south.”—Dan. 11:4-6.

The Seleucid kings were restricted to the western part of their domain by the incursions of the Parthians, who conquered the territory of Persia proper during the third and second centuries B.C.E. They were defeated by the Sasanians in 226 C.E. and the Sasanian rule continued until the Arab conquest in 642.

The prophecy of Ezekiel (27:10) includes Persians among the men of war serving in the military force of wealthy Tyre, and contributing to its splendor. Persia is also listed among those nations forming part of the hordes directed by the symbolic “Gog of the land of Magog” against Jehovah’s covenant people.—Ezek. 38:2, 4, 5, 8, 9.

PERSIS

(Perʹsis) [a Persian woman].

A beloved Christian in Rome whom Paul greets and commends for her many Christian works.—Rom. 16:12.

PERUDA

(Pe·ruʹda).

Forefather of a family of Solomon’s servants; also called Perida.—Ezra 2:55; Neh. 7:57.

PESTILENCE

Any rapidly spreading infectious disease capable of attaining epidemic proportions and of causing death. In numerous texts pestilence is related to the execution of divine judgment, as regards both God’s name people and their opposers.—Ex. 9:15; Num. 14:12; Ezek. 38:2, 14-16, 22, 23; Amos 4:10.

BROUGHT BY ABANDONMENT OF GOD’S LAW

The nation of Israel was warned that refusal to keep God’s covenant with them would result in his ‘sending pestilence into their midst.’ (Lev. 26:14-16, 23-25; Deut. 28:15, 21, 22) Throughout the Scriptures, health, either in a physical or in a spiritual sense, is associated with God’s blessing (Deut. 7:12, 15; Ps. 103:1-3; Prov. 3:1, 2, 7, 8; 4:21, 22; Rev. 21:1-4), whereas disease is associated with sin and imperfection. (Ex. 15:26; Deut. 28:58-61; Isa. 53:4, 5; Matt. 9:2-6, 12; John 5:14) So, while it is true that in certain cases Jehovah God directly and instantaneously brought some affliction on persons, as the leprosy of Miriam, of Uzziah, and of Gehazi (Num. 12:10; 2 Chron. 26:16-21; 2 Ki. 5:25-27), it appears that in many cases the diseases and pestilence that came were the natural and inexorable results of the sinful course followed by persons or nations. They simply reaped what they had sown, their fleshly bodies suffering the effects of their wrong ways. (Gal. 6:7, 8) Concerning those who turned to obscene sexual immorality, the apostle states that God “gave them up to uncleanness, that their bodies might be dishonored among them . . . receiving in themselves the full recompense, which was due for their error.”—Rom. 1:24-27.

Israel affected

Thus, God’s warning to Israel in effect told them of the many ailments that a course of disobedience to his will would inevitably produce among them. His Law given to them served as a deterrent to and a protection against disease, because of its high moral and hygienic standards (see DISEASES AND TREATMENT [Accuracy of Scriptural Concepts]), also because of its healthful effect on their mental and emotional state. (Ps. 19:7-11; 119:102, 103, 111, 112, 165) Not an occasional infraction of that Law but outright abandonment and rejection of its standards is what Leviticus 26:14-16 describes, and this would certainly make the nation vulnerable to all manner of disease and contagion. History, both past and present, bears testimony to the truthfulness of this.

The nation of Israel fell into gross apostasy, and Ezekiel’s prophecy shows the people as coming to speak of themselves as “rotting away” due to their revolts and sins. (Ezek. 33:10, 11; compare 24:23.) As foretold, the nation experienced “the sword and the famine and the pestilence,” this reaching a climax at the time of the Babylonian invasion. (Jer. 32:16, 24) The frequent association of pestilence with sword and famine (Jer. 21:9; 27:13; Ezek. 7:15) is in harmony with known facts. Pestilence usually accompanies, or follows in the wake of, war and its associated food shortages. When an enemy force invades a land, agricultural activities are curtailed, crops are often confiscated or burned. Cities under siege are cut off from outside resources, and famine develops among the populace forced to live amid overcrowded and unsanitary conditions. Under such circumstances, resistance to disease drops and the way is open for the deadly assault of pestilence.

AT THE “CONCLUSION OF THE SYSTEM OF THINGS”

Jesus, when foretelling Jerusalem’s destruction and the “conclusion of the system of things,” showed that pestilence would be a notable feature among the generation within whose life-span the “great tribulation” would come. (Matt. 24:3, 21; Luke 21:10, 11, 31, 32) Written after Jerusalem’s destruction (which was accompanied by grave famine and disease), Revelation 6:1-8 pointed to a future time of sword, famine and “deadly plague.” These would follow the appearance of the crowned rider on a white horse who goes forth to conquer, a figure precisely paralleling that of Revelation 19:11-16, which clearly applies to the reigning Christ Jesus.

JEHOVAH’S PROTECTION

King Solomon prayed that, when menaced by pestilence, Jehovah’s people might pray to Him for relief, spreading out their palms toward the temple, and receive favorable hearing. (1 Ki. 8:37-40; 2 Chron. 6:28-31) Jehovah’s ability to protect his faithful servant against harm, including that of “the pestilence that walks in the gloom,” is comfortingly expressed in Psalm 91.

PETER

(Peʹter) [a stone; a piece of rock].

This apostle of Jesus Christ is named in five different ways in the Scriptures: by the Hebrew “Symeon,” the Greek “Simon” (meaning “hearing”), “Peter” (a Greek name he alone bears in the Scriptures), its Semitic equivalent “Cephas” (perhaps related to the Hebrew ke·phimʹ [“rocks”] used at Job 30:6; Jeremiah 4:29), and the combination “Simon Peter.”—Acts 15:14; Matt. 10:2; 16:16; John 1:42.

Peter was the son of John or Jonah. (Matt. 16:17; John 1:42) He is first shown residing in Bethsaida (John 1:44), but later in Capernaum (Luke 4:31, 38), both places being located on the northern shores of the Sea of Galilee. Peter and his brother Andrew were engaged in the fishing business, evidently associated with James and John, the sons of Zebedee, “who were sharers with Simon.” (Luke 5:7, 10; Matt. 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-21) Thus, Peter was no lone fisherman but part of an operation of some size. Though the Jewish leaders viewed Peter and John as “men unlettered and ordinary,” this does not mean they were illiterate or unschooled. Regarding the word a·gramʹma·tos applied to them, Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible (Vol. III, p. 757) says that to a Jew “it meant one who had had no training in the Rabbinic study of Scripture.”—Compare John 7:14, 15; Acts 4:13.

Peter is shown to be a married man, and, at least in later years, his wife apparently accompanied him on his missions (or some of them), as did the wives of others of the apostles. (1 Cor. 9:5) His mother-in-law lived in his home, one he shared with his brother Andrew.—Mark 1:29-31.

MINISTRY WITH JESUS

Peter was one of the earliest of Jesus’ disciples, being led to Jesus by Andrew, a disciple of John the Baptist. (John 1:35-42) At this time Jesus gave him the name Cephas (or Peter) (John 1:42; Mark 3:16) and the name was likely prophetic. Jesus, who was able to discern that Nathanael was a man “in whom there is no deceit,” could also discern Peter’s makeup. Peter, indeed, displayed rocklike qualities, especially after Jesus’ death and resurrection, becoming a strengthening influence on his fellow Christians.—John 1:47, 48; 2:25; Luke 22:32.

It was sometime later, up in Galilee, that Peter, his brother Andrew and their associates James and John, received Jesus’ call to come and be “fishers of men.” (John 1:35-42; Matt. 4:18-22; Mark 1:16-18) Jesus had chosen Peter’s boat from which to speak to the multitude on the shore, afterward causing a miraculous catch of fish, one that moved Peter, who had at first shown a doubtful attitude, to fall before Jesus in fear. He and his three associates, thereafter, abandoned their business without hesitation to follow Jesus. (Luke 5:1-11) After about a year’s discipleship, Peter was included among those twelve chosen to be “apostles” or ‘sent forth ones.’—Mark 3:13-19.

Of the apostles, Peter, James and John were several times selected by Jesus to accompany him on special occasions, as in the instances of the transfiguration scene (Matt. 17:1, 2; Mark 9:2; Luke 9:28, 29), the raising of the daughter of Jairus (Mark 5:22-24, 35-42) and Jesus’ personal trial in the garden of Gethsemane. (Matt. 26:36-46; Mark 14:32-42) These three, plus Andrew, were those who particularly questioned Jesus about Jerusalem’s destruction, Jesus’ future presence and the conclusion of the system of things. (Mark 13:1-3; Matt. 24:3) Though Peter is associated with his brother Andrew in the apostolic lists, the record of events more frequently pairs him with John, both before and after Jesus’ death and resurrection. (Luke 22:8; John 13:24; 20:2; 21:7; Acts 3:1; 8:14; compare Acts 1:13; Galatians 2:9.) Whether this was due to natural friendship and affinity, or because they were assigned to work together by Jesus (compare Mark 6:7), is not made known.

The Gospel accounts record more of Peter’s statements than of any of the other eleven. He was clearly of a dynamic nature, not diffident or hesitant. This doubtless caused him to speak up first or to express himself where others remained silent. He raised questions that resulted in Jesus’ clarifying and amplifying illustrations. (Matt. 15:15; 18:21; 19:27-29; Luke 12:41; John 13:36-38; compare Mark 11:21-25.) At times he spoke impulsively, even impetuously. He was the one who felt he had to say something on seeing the vision of the transfiguration. (Mark 9:1-6; Luke 9:33) By his somewhat flustered remark as to the worthwhileness of being there and his offering to build three tents, he apparently was suggesting that the vision (in which Moses and Elijah were now separating from Jesus) should not end but continue on. The night of the final Passover, Peter at first strongly objected to Jesus’ washing his feet, and then, on being reproved, wanted him to wash his head and hands also. (John 13:5-10) It may be