This work is accessible only to Andrews University faculty, staff, and students. Off-Campus Andrews University users should click the "Off-Campus Download" button below, then enter your Andrews University username and password when prompted.

Manuscript Type


Abstract (For book reviews see instructions below)

Moses, David, and Joshua are all designated the honorific title “servant of YHWH” in the HB. Even a cursory reading of the HB texts involving these figures would leave little surprise as to why they are bestowed this exclusive moniker. There are only ten individuals who are given this title in the MT, and of these ten, the majority of them do not raise questions, except one—the sixth-century Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar. Some have argued that his inclusion in this list is a result of a scribal error, or that it is limited in scope, as only a description of function. In this article, I have proposed that the biblical writers intended to communicate that Nebuchadnezzar is a full-fledged “servant of YHWH,” both in his function and in his unique relationship to YHWH. I support my conclusion in three ways. First, I discuss my research on the full list of those who are given the title “servant of YHWH” in the MT, finding that almost all not only function on behalf of YHWH but also possess a unique relationship with him as well. Next, I analyze the depiction of Nebuchadnezzar in the MT of the book of Daniel, arguing that differing conclusions can be made regarding his character. Finally, I analyze the episodic similarities held between Nebuchadnezzar and two others deemed “servant of YHWH,” namely David and Moses. I conclude by discussing some potential theological implications of my proposed solution.