In a well-known rabbinic legend, a group of rabbis are walking on Mount Scopus in Jerusalem, a city destroyed in 70 CE by the Romans, and see a fox wandering among the ruins of the Temple. They respond with tears—except for Rabbi Akiva, who bursts into laughter. Justifying their sorrow with a biblical verse, they ask Akiva to explain his bizarre behavior; he does so, citing a series of verses of his own. Meir Ben-Shahar offers a novel reading of Akiva’s answer, arguing that it originally served as an immediate call for armed revolt against Roman rule.

Akiva uses an innovative interpretation of Isaiah 8:1-2 to link a destructive prophecy—“Zion shall be plowed as a field” (Micah 3:12)—“with the prophet Zechariah’s redemptive vision that “there shall yet be old men and women in the squares of Jerusalem” (8:4-5). . . .

Micah’s prophecy about Zion being plowed as a field fits nicely with seeing the Temple Mount in shambles. But why, of the many prophecies of consolation in the book of Zechariah, did Akiva choose to quote these particular verses?

Note that the verse preceding the aforementioned prophecy in Zechariah states, “Thus said the Lord: I have returned to Zion, and I will dwell in Jerusalem. Jerusalem will be called the City of Faithfulness, and the mount of the Lord of Hosts the Holy Mount.” . . . Significantly, the only other verse in the Bible that place the terms “Zion, Jerusalem, and the mountain of the house / mountain of the Lord” alongside each other is the verse cited from Micah that predicts the calamity. . . . For this reason it is likely that Zechariah 8:3, and not the following verses, was originally quoted in Akiva’s homily. . . .

For some 60 years after its destruction [in 70 CE], Jerusalem served as a camp for a Roman legion. This situation changed after Emperor Hadrian’s visit to the East in 129-130 CE. If Hadrian indeed founded a new city on the ruins of Jerusalem during this visit, [as mounting historical evidence suggests], then Akiva’s interpretation essentially constitutes a call to revolt, together with the reassurance that now, when Micah’s prophecy of devastation has been realized in full, the time has come for God to return to Jerusalem as Zechariah promised.

Indeed, in 132 CE, the Jews, led by Simon bar Kokhba (whom Akiva is known to have supported) rose up against Roman rule. Ancient sources confirm that this revolt was provoked when Hadrian began rebuilding Jerusalem as a pagan city. According to Ben-Shahar, the text’s redactors, writing after the Bar Kokhba revolt ended in failure, altered Akiva’s words to leave the reader with a message of hope in the messianic future rather than with a call to arms.

Information about a supposedly near-finalized hostage deal continued to trickle out yesterday. While it’s entirely possible that by the time you read this a deal will be much more certain, it is every bit as likely that it will have fallen through by then. More likely still, we will learn that there are indefinite and unspecified delays. Then there are the details: even in the best of scenarios, not all the hostages will be returned at once, and Israel will have to make painful concessions in exchange, including the release of hundreds of hardened terrorists and the withdrawal from key parts of the Gaza Strip.

Unusually—if entirely appropriately—the president-elect’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, has participated in the talks alongside members of President Biden’s team. Philip Klein examines the incoming Trump administration’s role in the process:

President-elect Trump has repeatedly warned that there would be “all hell to pay” if hostages were not returned from Gaza by the time he takes office. While he has never laid out exactly what the specific consequences for Hamas would be, there are some ominous signs that Israel is being pressured into paying a tremendous price.

There is obviously more here than we know. It’s possible that with the pressure from the Trump team came reassurances that Israel would have more latitude to reenter Gaza as necessary to go after Hamas than it would have enjoyed under Biden. . . . That said, all appearances are that Israel has been forced into making more concessions because Trump was concerned that he’d be embarrassed if January 20 came around with no hostages released.

While Donald Trump’s threats are a welcome rhetorical shift, part of the problem may be their vagueness. After all, it’s unlikely the U.S. would use military force to unleash hell in Gaza, or could accomplish much in doing so that the IDF can’t. More useful would be direct threats against countries like Qatar and Turkey that host Hamas, and threats to the persons and bank accounts of the Hamas officials living in those counties. Witkoff instead praised the Qatari prime minister for “doing God’s work” in the negotiations.”