The prophet Jeremiah inveighs on multiple occasions against worship that takes place on bamot (singular, bamah), a term usually translated as “high places.” With even greater frequency, the book of Kings condemns the Israelites for maintaining such sanctuaries, which are mentioned in other biblical books as well. Ellen White describes the archaeological and linguistic evidence, and some of the theories proffered by scholars, as to what exactly the bamot were:

The term bamah can mean back, hill, height, ridge, or cultic high place. In the biblical text it is used to mean “the backs of one’s enemies,” “heights,” “top of clouds.” or “waves of sea.” Because of this, the scholar Roland de Vaux said, “The idea which the word expresses . . . is something which stands out in relief from its background, but the idea of a mountain or hill is not contained in the word itself.” This could explain why this word is used even though some of the shrines were not located on hills. The Ugaritic and Akkadian cognates usually mean an animal’s back or the trunk of its body. The Akkadian can also mean land that is elevated. In the text of the Bible, bamot can be found on hills, in towns, and at the gate of Jerusalem (2 Kings 23:8). Ezra 6:3 says they were in the ravines and valleys. The location of a bamah in a valley can also be seen in Jeremiah 7:31 and 32:35. . . .

It is believed [by most experts] that bamot were artificial mounds, which may or may not include a prominent rock. There is some debate as to whether the word bamah refers to [the mound or] to the altar itself. [Such explanations] could account for references to bamot being “built” and “destroyed.” Often attached to the bamot were buildings—houses or temples—where services were conducted and idols were kept. . . .

De Vaux suggested that Israelite bamot were modeled after the Canaanite ones. . . . In [the ancient fortress of] Megiddo, located in the Carmel Ridge overlooking the Jezreel Valley from the west, a bamah was believed to have been found. The structure was a 24-by-30-foot oval platform, which stood six feet tall, was made of large stones, and had stairs that lead to the top. A wall surrounded the structure.

A cultic structure found in Nahariyah, in the western Galilee, was discovered in 1947 and dates to the Middle Bronze Age, but was used until the Late Bronze Age [i.e., it was used during the second millennium BCE]. It consisted of a circular open-air altar, [similar] to the one found in Megiddo, and a rectangular building probably used as a temple workshop. It is also believed that two bamot from the 7th and 6th centuries BCE were found on a hill near Malhah [in southwestern Jerusalem].

Yesterday, the beepers used by hundreds of Hizballah operatives were detonated. Noah Rothman puts this ingenious attack in the context of the overall war between Israel and the Iran-backed terrorist group:

[W]hile the disabling of an untold number of Hizballah operatives is remarkable, it’s also ominous. This week, the Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant told reporters that the hour is nearing when Israeli forces will have to confront Iran’s cat’s-paw in southern Lebanon directly, in order to return the tens of thousands of Israelis who fled their homes along Lebanon’s border under fire and have not yet been able to return. Today’s operation may be a prelude to the next phase of Israel’s defensive war, a dangerous one in which the IDF will face off against an enemy with tens of thousands of fighters and over 150,000 rockets and missiles trained on Israeli cities.

Seth Frantzman, meanwhile, focuses on the specific damage the pager bombings have likely done to Hizballah:

This will put the men in hospital for a period of time. Some of them can go back to serving Hizballah, but they will not have access to one of their hands. These will most likely be their dominant hand, meaning the hand they’d also use to hold the trigger of a rifle or push the button to launch a missile.

Hizballah has already lost around 450 fighters in its eleven-month confrontation with Israel. This is a significant loss for the group. While Hizballah can replace losses, it doesn’t have an endlessly deep [supply of recruits]. This is not only because it has to invest in training and security ahead of recruitment, but also because it draws its recruits from a narrow spectrum of Lebanese society.

The overall challenge for Hizballah is not just replacing wounded and dead fighters. The group will be challenged to . . . roll out some other way to communicate with its men. The use of pagers may seem archaic, but Hizballah apparently chose to use this system because it assumed the network could not be penetrated. . . . It will also now be concerned about the penetration of its operational security. When groups like Hizballah are in chaos, they are more vulnerable to making mistakes.