2 Chron. 36:20) and the river Chebar is spoken of as being “in the land of the Chaldeans” (Ezek. 1:3), terms which designate lower or southern Mesopotamia, not an area as far N as the modern Khabur River.

Most scholars agree that when speaking of the “river Chebar” Ezekiel used the Hebrew term na·harʹ (usually rendered “river”) apparently in its widest sense to include the numerous Babylonian canals that once intersected the fertile area between the lower courses of the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers. This usage would be consistent with the corresponding Babylonian word that also describes either a river or a canal. Engineers are believed to have devised Babylon’s impressive irrigational canal system early in Mesopotamian history to control the otherwise destructive Tigris and Euphrates Rivers, which started rising during the rainy season each year, not only causing destructive floods, but depositing layers of soil-ruining salt over agricultural areas. Many of these canals were also broad enough for large sailing vessels, serving thereby to enhance Babylon’s already renowned commercial and economic position.—See CANALS.

Which canal of the vast network that laced Mesopotamia is the Biblical river Chebar cannot be determined with certainty. Some hold that since the Hebrew K^evarʹ (Chebar) may be derived from a word meaning ‘to be great or mighty,’ this would fit Babylonia’s Nahr Malcha or “Royal River,” an ancient, broad, deep canal connecting the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. Although apparently first dug in the days of Hammurabi, it was reopened by Nebuchadnezzar and is said to have been large enough to afford passage to merchant ships. The Nahr Malcha was rated one of the chief canals of Babylonia, running from a point N of Babylon on the Euphrates to Opis near Seleucia at the Tigris.

Most modern Biblical geographers, however, prefer some connection of the “river Chebar” with the Shatt en-Nil, which has been identified with the naru Kabari (or “Grand Canal”) mentioned in cuneiform contract tablets found at the city of Nippur, about fifty-three miles (85.3 kilometers) SE of Babylon. The Shatt en-Nil branches off the Euphrates above Babylon and runs in a SE direction, passing near Nippur, to rejoin the Euphrates S of Ur, about 150 miles (241.4 kilometers) below Babylon. Considered the canal par excellence of ancient Babylonia proper, it is said to have been fifteen to twenty feet (4.6 to 6.1 meters) deep in places, a sufficient depth to make it navigable by certain vessels. There are indications that Jews may have lived in this area about the time of the exile. Cuneiform tablets, believed to be from the archives of a Babylonian brokerage firm of the fifth century B.C.E. and containing many Jewish names among their list of clientele, have been found at Nippur along with the tablets that mention the naru Kabari.

The identification of the Chebar with the Shatt en-Nil is, of course, not positive. Shiftings and floodings of the Euphrates River are known to have greatly altered the topography of the country over the centuries. Skilled archaeologists admit uncertainty as to where the ancient canals lay, and they acknowledge that ruins of canals found may date back only to the Arab rule of the Middle Ages. This makes any definite locating of the ancient “river Chebar” an impossibility at this time.

CHEDORLAOMER

(Ched·or·la·oʹmer).

A king of ancient Elam who, prior to Abraham’s entry into the Promised Land in 1943 B.C.E., had extended his power westward to the borders of Egypt. After twelve years of servitude, five kings near the southern end of the Dead Sea rebelled against their eastern overlord. In the fourteenth year, Chedorlaomer and three allies, Amraphel of Shinar, Arioch from Ellasar and Tidal of Goiim, came W to put down the rebellion. Beginning in the N and sweeping S, they annihilated all the cities along the trade routes E of the Jordan, and S of the Dead Sea in territory later occupied by the Amalekites. It was then an easy matter to put to flight the five kings that formed the core of the insurrection.

Among Chedorlaomer’s captives was Abraham’s nephew Lot, who had been living nearby. Abraham, learning of this, quickly set out in hot pursuit with 318 of his armed servants. At Dan they surprised the enemy’s far superior forces, and, successfully pursuing them as far as Hobah north of Damascus, recovered Lot and his possessions.—Gen. 14:1-17.

The name Chedorlaomer itself has not been found in listings of ancient rulers of Babylonia. It is recognized as Elamite. Kudur, a possible variation of Chedor, appears in many compound names. Lagamar, bearing a resemblance to laomer, was an Elamite deity. Some therefore conclude that Chedorlaomer means “servant of Lagamar.”

CHEEK

The Bible speaks of striking the cheek, not so much to inflict physical harm, but to chastise, reproach or insult. Thus Jehovah’s prophet Micaiah was struck on the cheek for prophesying bad consequences against wicked King Ahab of Israel. (1 Ki. 22:24; 2 Chron. 18:23) Job was reproachfully struck on the cheeks by those who disrespected and ridiculed him during his trial at Satan’s hands.—Job 16:10.

The prophets Isaiah and Micah prophesied relative to the Messiah’s being struck on the cheek and the hair being pulled from the cheeks, all significant of the bitter reproach that his enemies would heap upon him. (Isa. 50:6; Mic. 5:1) This was fulfilled on Jesus Christ by the Jews at his trial before the Sanhedrin and by the Roman soldiers later on, just before he was put to death on the torture stake. (Matt. 26:67, 68; John 18:22, 23; 19:3) But Jesus did not retaliate in kind nor suffer loss of equilibrium and answer with bitter, angry words.

Jesus had given his disciples counsel: “You heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.’ However, I say to you: Do not resist him that is wicked; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other also to him.” (Matt. 5:38, 39) Here Jesus was not teaching pacifism nor denying the right of self-defense from bodily harm, but he was teaching that a Christian does not need to pay back blow for blow, retaliating, taking vengeance. He was inculcating the principle of avoiding quarrels by not replying or reacting in kind. A slap on the cheek is not intended to injure physically but only to insult or provoke into a fight. Jesus did not say that if someone strikes a Christian on the jaw that he should get up off the floor and hold the other side of his face for a target. What Jesus was saying was that if anyone tried to provoke a Christian into a fight or argument by either bitterly slapping him with an open hand or stinging him with insulting words it would be wrong to retaliate. This is in harmony with the statements of the apostles, giving further emphasis to this principle.—Rom. 12:17-21; 1 Pet. 3:9; see FACE.

CHEESE

The first reference to cheese making was about 3,600 years ago when Job in poetic language figuratively described how he had been formed in his mother’s womb, saying to the Grand Creator: “Did you not proceed to pour me out as milk itself and like cheese to curdle me?”—Job 10:10.

Making cheese differed from making butter; the latter was obtained by churning. To make cheese in ancient times milk was quickly curdled with rennet from an animal’s stomach or with juice of certain leaves or roots. After curdling, the whey was drained off and the fresh curds were eaten.

David was instructed to take “ten portions of milk” to the chief of the thousand under whom his brothers served in Saul’s army. (1 Sam. 17:17, 18) The literal reading of the original is “ten cuts of milk,” which may have meant “ten fresh-milk