TERAPHIM tĕr’ ə fĭm (תְּרָפִים, H9572, meaning unknown, vile things suggested). They were household gods ranging from rather small (Gen 31:34, 35), to nearly life-sized (1 Sam 19:13, 16). Recent archeological discoveries at Nuzi in Iraq have illuminated the function and significance of these idols. Their possession constituted the headship of the household with all of the rights attendant thereto. Rachel’s theft of the teraphim (Gen 31:19) was an attempt to procure such headship for her husband, although it was rightfully her brother’s. Laban’s extreme displeasure is explicable in this light.

It appears that throughout much of their history the Israelites did not find possession of teraphim inconsistent with Yahwism (cf. Judges 17; 18 and esp. 1 Sam 19:13, 16 where they are even found in the household of David). They are spoken of with disapproval from the time of Samuel (1 Sam 15:23) to that of Zechariah (Zech 10:2). The function of teraphim of which the prophets most disapproved was divination. As divinatory objects they often are mentioned with ephods, also used for divination (Judg 17; 18, where they seem to be separate from the idol, and Hos 3:4). Among the things purged during Josiah’s reform, teraphim seem to be grouped with mediums and wizards. The king of Babylon is said to consult them (Ezek 21:21) and Zechariah says they utter nonsense (Zech 10:2). Hosea speaks longingly of the day when Israel, in total dependence on God, will be able to live without the aid of teraphim. It has been suggested that the divinatory function of these household gods may explain the obscure use of elohim (may be tr. “God” or “gods”) in Exodus 21:6 and 22:7-10. See Idolatry.

Bibliography C. H. Gordon, “Biblical Customs and the Nuzu Tablets,” BA III (1940), 5f.; The Ancient Near East, 3rd ed. (1965), 128-130; A. E. Draffkorn, “Ilani/Elohim,” JBL LXXVI (1957), 216-224; M. Greenberg, “Another Look at Rachel’s Theft of the Teraphim,” JBL, LXXXI (1962), 239-248; C. LaBuschagne, “Teraphim—A New Proposal for its Etymology,” VT, XVI (1966), 115-117.