EVIDENCE

Israel mentioned on Egyptian Pedestal Relief 200 years before the Merneptah Stele?

2012-01-03T20:31:00.000-08:00

There is an interesting debate that has begun over an inscription in a German museum that has been in their archives for over 100 years. Recently scholarly attention turned to the third captive group mentioned on the "Berlin Statue Pedestal Relief" as it has been dubbed.

The case is being made that the heiroglyphic designation dated to about 1400 BC names (alongside Ashkelon and Canaan)... Israel. This mention would predate the dearliest known mention of Israel (the Merneptah Stele) by 200 years. Those who hold to an early date for the Exodus event will welcome this interesting discussion.

I find it also interesting to compare the cap on the head of the captive on the pedestal relief (third figure from the left to the right above) with the figure (Jehu or his representative) on the Black Obelisk of Shalmanesar III (~825 BC, below).

See:

Israel in Canaan (Long) Before Pharaoh Merenptah? A Fresh Look at Berlin Statue Pedestal Relief 21687 http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/12188019/1784144774/name/Jaei2-4VanDerVeenEtAl.pdf

New Evidence Supporting the Early (Biblical) Date of the Exodus and Conquest http://www.biblearchaeology.org/file.axd?file=2011%2f12%2f11_11_11+New+Evidence+Supporting+the+Early+(Biblical)+Date+of+the+Exodus+and+Conquest.pdf

Summary/Abstract

https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/jaei/article/view/83/

Follow Me: First Steps for New Believers

2010-03-04T10:37:00.000-08:00

I have been working on this short book for a while now. I hope that it will be of help to many new christians; and, perhaps to some who have known Christ for many years. It covers the three parts of the Great Commission found in Matthew 28:18-20.

Link for downloading 1.6 meg. book: http://bbcbrighton.org/gpage2.html

Messianic Portraits in the Hebrew Bible and in the Dead Sea Scrolls

2010-01-22T09:10:00.000-08:00

A Suggested Relationship between Messianic Portraits in the Hebrew Bible, The Diarchic Messianism of the Qumran Community, and the Nature of God as Revealed in Exodus 34:6-7

A Paper presented at the Qumran, Dead Sea Scrolls, and Biblical Interpretation Conference at the Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary by R. Kirk Kilpatrick

Dean of the Masters and Associates Programs
Professor of Old Testament and Hebrew
April 23, 2009

"What do you think about Messiah, whose son is he?"
(Matthew 22:42)

According to the Gospel of Matthew, this question was asked long ago in the temple court by Jesus Himself. After Jesus had answered many questions from various quarters (from Sadducees, Pharisees, Herodians, etc.), he asked this one question and, according to the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, it put an end the stream of questions for the time being.

The religious leaders responded to Jesus’ question by indicating that the Messiah was to be the “son of David” focusing on genealogy. But what other “son” could they have considered? Jesus’ question implies that there were other “son of” portraits that were discussed in the first century. “Son of David,” “son of Aaron,” a prophet like Moses, a “son of Joseph,”[1]—several of these messianic portraits may be seen in the text of the Hebrew Bible and in the Dead Sea Scrolls. One of the texts from Qumran even mentions a “Son of God.”[2]

As early as 1956, with regard to interpretive problems associated with such messianic material from Qumran, F. F. Bruce wrote:

"Among the many fascinating aspects of the study of the Dead Sea Scrolls few, if any, are so important as the lines of prophetic interpretation accepted by the Jewish community to which these manuscripts belonged. And among the various aspects of their prophetic interpretation none has been the subject of more debate (and, it must be added, more confusion) than their messianic expectation."[3]

From the time that Bruce made this comment it seems that little has changed. Though messianism is a broad, controversial area; there is, however, a measure of consensus regarding the two messianic figures at Qumran. Describing the understanding of the Dead Sea community, Lawrence Schiffman wrote, “According to the dominant view in the sectarian texts from Qumran, two messiahs were to lead the congregation in the End of Days, one priestly, and the other lay.”[4] Of this broad area of consensus among Scrolls scholars, Craig Evans noted:

"In the wake of the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, a great deal of attention focused on Qumran’s expectation of the appearance of two messiahs. Several times the Damascus Document speaks of a time when the 'anointed of Aaron and of Israel' will appear (e.g., CD 12:23-13:1). It is on this basis, though not exclusively, that scholars began to speak of a diarchic or binary messianism at Qumran. However, recently some scholars have challenged this near consensus. For example, Michael Wise and James Tabor have argued that Qumran’s messianism is monarchic. But the diarchic view remains widely held, and in my opinion is correct."[5]

While Evans spoke of near consensus on diarchic messianism at Qumran, what of the relationship between the Qumran community’s brand of messianism and the scriptures themselves. Are these messianic portraits of a priestly and of a royal messiah merely disparate pictures that should be understood as mutually exclusive offices as at Qumran; or was there a link between these portraits in the Hebrew Bible that would help to explain their existence in the biblical text and in the Dead Sea Scrolls? This paper will suggest a relationship between the messianic portraits in the Hebrew Bible, the diarchic messianism of the Qumran Community, and the nature of God as revealed in Exodus 34:6-7.

1) Two Messiahs Mentioned in the Dead Sea Scrolls

To speak of “the” Messianic hope of the Jews during the second temple period, as though it were a singular idea, would be a naïve approach to the topic. Just a casual look at the Genesis Rabbah or the Exodus Rabbah brings an awareness of the many interpretations that were debated in the past. Just as there are varying interpretations between Christian groups today and also varying interpretations between sects of Judaism today, there were also many interpretations within Judaism of that day. If interpretations can be gauged by the number of adherents or by the number of ancient witnesses to an interpretation, then the community attested in the Dead Sea Scrolls seems to have held a minority view.

Though in the Targums and in the Talmuds (Babli and Yerushalami) the regular reference is to “King Messiah” or simply “the Messiah,” the Qumran Community looked for the diarchic reign of the Messiah of Aaron (priestly) and the Messiah of Israel (royal). Occasionally this is true also in the Pseudopigrapha where two figures are mentioned in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. This is further evidence that among some there was an anticipation of two special rulers: a priestly ruler and a kingly ruler. This is evident in the Testament of Simeon (7.1-2); in the Testament of Judah (21.2-4); and in the Testament of Levi (18:2f).[6]

Thus, unlike messianic references in the Targums and the Talmuds which far outnumber the Dead Sea Scroll messianic references, at Qumran two annointed figures stand out. The Damascus Document spoke of a time of “ungodliness until the appearance of the messiahs of Aaron and of Israel (Damascus document 12.23-13.1; see also, 14.18-19). The Damascus Document indicated that a time of salvation and judgment was coming:

“Those who heed Him are the poor of the flock; they will be saved at the time of visitation. But others will be delivered up to the sword at the coming of the messiah of Aaron and of Israel” (Damascus document 19.9-11; see also, 19.33-20.1).

The Manual of Discipline spoke of “the coming of the prophet and the anointed ones of Aaron and Israel” (Manual of discipline 9.9b-11). And there are several others from the scrolls in this vein.

2) Messiah as Priest and King in the Hebrew Bible

While prophets, priests and kings were all anointed in biblical times, priests and kings in Judah were chosen from carefully traced genealogical lines. The priests were from Aaron. The kings descended from David. The “son of David” was anointed by the priest upon ascension to the throne as the rightful heir of David. As David was a warrior, a king, and a judge, so this “son of David” would share these traits. As David lay dying, he spoke of his hope of the promised kingdom:

"Now these are the last words of David. David the son of Jesse declares, The man who was raised on high declares, The anointed of the God of Jacob, And the sweet psalmist of Israel,
The Spirit of the LORD spoke by me, And His word was on my tongue. The God of Israel said, The Rock of Israel spoke to me, 'He who rules over men righteously, Who rules in the fear of God, Is as the light of the morning when the sun rises, A morning without clouds, When the tender grass springs out of the earth, Through sunshine after rain.' Truly is not my house so with God? For He has made an everlasting covenant with me, Ordered in all things, and secured; For all my salvation and all my desire, Will He not indeed make it grow? 6 But the worthless, every one of them will be thrust away like thorns, Because they cannot be taken in hand; But the man who touches them Must be armed with iron and the shaft of a spear, And they will be completely burned with fire in their place." [2 Samuel 23:1-7, NAS]

Salvation and Judgment were in David's last words that focused on the promised kingdom.
This focus was messianic. His rhetorical question in verse five concerning the future of his throne ("For all my salvation and all my desire, Will He not indeed make it grow?) calls for the unreserved affirmative response, "Surely He will." It is the root of the verbal "cause it to grow" (yatsmiach) in Hebrew that lays the foundation for later messianic allusions by way of the noun tsemach and it’s partial synonym “netser.”

Through the centuries the Branch prophecy would grow with each successive prophecy. The psalmist in 132:17 and the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Zechariah all contributed to the development of this important motif. In one of these allusions to this messianic vein of prophecy, Isaiah used the word netser, meaning “branch, shoot, sprout” to refer to the Messiah (Isaiah 11:1).

In Isaiah 6:13, as the Lord called the prophet Isaiah, He indicated that the kingdom of Judah would be cut down like a tree leaving only a stump of what once was a much greater kingdom. The hope then was the birth of a future son of David, described as a coming Branch, the rightful heir to the throne. In the ninth chapter four epithets were given: Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, and Prince of Peace. The enigma presented was of a child who would be both king (counselor and prince as synonyms of melek) and God. As his contemporary Micah left a similar mystery, one dealing with time, regarding the one to be born at Bethlehem whose goings forth were from the days of eternity. The Branch would come from Jesse; yet, the Branch (netzer) would also be the root (shoresh) of Jesse (Isaiah 11:1, 10); thus leaving again the enigma, “How can the descendant of Jesse also be the source of Jesse?”

Prophecies of the Branch

Isaiah 4:2 (The Beautiful Branch)
Isaiah 6:13 (The Branch from the stump of the felled tree of Judah)
Isaiah 11:1 (The Branch from Jesse's household)
Jeremiah 23:5-6 (The Righteous Branch)
Jeremiah 33:15-16 (The Righteous Branch)
Ezekiel 29:21 (The horn that will "sprout")
Zechariah 3:8 (My Servant the Branch)
Zechariah 6:12 (The man whose name is The Branch)
Psalm 132:17 (The horn of David that will "sprout")

In the New Testament the motif continues. Matthew made the connection with these prophecies when he noted that it was written that “He shall be called a Natsarene” (2:23); while in Acts 24:5, Luke referred to the way that the early Christians were called the “sect of the Natsarenes.” Far from being a recent discovery, this apparent relationship between netser and Nazareth was proposed by Eusebius (260-341 AD) in his Onomasticon and was also mentioned by Jerome (AD 345-420).[7]

Of all of the Branch prophecies, the most perplexing must have been the one in the sixth chapter of Zechariah. In 6:9-14, the prophet wrote:

The word of the Lord also came to me saying, "Take an offering from the exiles, from Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah; and you go the same day and enter the house of Josiah the son of Zephaniah, where they have arrived from Babylon. "And take silver and gold, make an ornate crown, and set it on the head of Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest. "Then say to him, 'Thus says the Lord of hosts," Behold, a man whose name is Branch, for He will branch out from where He is; and He will build the temple of the Lord. "Yes, it is He who will build the temple of the Lord, and He who will bear the honor and sit and rule on His throne. Thus, He will be a priest on His throne, and the counsel of peace will be between the two offices"' [NASB].

Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying: “Receive the gift from the captives—from Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah, who have come from Babylon—and go the same day and enter the house of Josiah the son of Zephaniah. Take the silver and gold, make an elaborate crown, and set it on the head of Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest. Then speak to him, saying, ‘Thus says the Lord of hosts, saying:

“Behold, the Man whose name is the BRANCH! From His place He shall branch out, And He shall build the temple of the Lord; Yes, He shall build the temple of the Lord. He shall bear the glory, And shall sit and rule on His throne; so He shall be a priest on His throne,
And the counsel of peace shall be between them both.”[NKJV]

The word of the Lord came to me: “Take silver and gold from the exiles Heldai, Tobijah and Jedaiah, who have arrived from Babylon. Go the same day to the house of Josiah son of Zephaniah. Take the silver and gold and make a crown, and set it on the head of the high priest, Joshua son of Jehozadak. Tell him this is what the Lord Almighty says: ‘Here is the man whose name is the Branch, and he will branch out from his place and build the temple of the Lord. It is he who will build the temple of the Lord, and he will be clothed with majesty and will sit and rule on his throne. And he will be a priest on his throne. And there will be harmony between the two.’ [NIV]

The word of the Lord came to me: Collect silver and gold from the exiles—from Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah—who have arrived from Babylon; and go the same day to the house of Josiah son of Zephaniah. Take the silver and gold and make a crown, and set it on the head of the high priest Joshua son of Jehozadak; say to him: Thus says the Lord of hosts: Here is a man whose name is Branch: for he shall branch out in his place, and he shall build the temple of the Lord. It is he that shall build the temple of the Lord; he shall bear royal honor, and shall sit and rule on his throne. There shall be a priest by his throne, with peaceful understanding between the two of them. [NRSV]

The word of the LORD came to me: Receive from the exiled community—from Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah, who have come from Babylon—and you, in turn, proceed the same day to the house of Josiahson of Zephaiah. Take silver and gold and make crowns. Place [one] on the head of High Priest Joshua son of Jehozadak, and say to him, “Thus said the LORD of Hosts: Behold, a man called the Branch shall branch out from the place where he is, and he shall build the Temple of the LORD. He shall build the Temple of the LORD and shall assume majesty, and he shall sit on his throne and rule. And there shall also be a priest h—seated on his throne—h and harmonious understanding shall prevail between them.” [JPS Tanakh]
________________
h-hSeptuagint reads “on his right side.”

Two approaches to the translation of this text. The KJV, NKJV, NAS, and NIV take the last part of the verse to refer to peace or harmony existing between the office of High Priest and the office of King in one person enthroned. The other tradition, as evidenced by the JPS Tanakh and also followed in the NRSV, follows the reading of the Septuagint and indicates that the prophecy has two men in view, a crowned High Priest and another priest to his right side.

This prophecy by Zechariah added more information to earlier revelation about the “Branch.” Earlier Isaiah had prophesied the Branch would be from Jesse’s line. Jeremiah said that the Branch would be “righteous.” In Zechariah 3:8 the Branch was referred to by the LORD as “My Servant.” In Zechariah 6 the Branch is strangely represented by a High Priest from Aaron’s line named Joshua, or Yehoshua, who is crowned and sits on the throne to rule and typifies the Branch who will build the Temple of the LORD. But how could this harmonize with the promise made to David?

The rule of a priest-king in Jerusalem, however, does make a connection with the distant past. Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek who was both priest and king of the Most High God.

3) The Nature of God and Messiah as Priest and King

“He made known His ways to Moses, His acts to the children of Israel.” (Psalm 103:7)

“Hear, my children, the instruction of a father, And give attention to know understanding; For I give you good doctrine: Do not forsake my law. When I was my father’s son, Tender and the only one in the sight of my mother, He also taught me, and said to me: “Let your heart retain my words; Keep my commands, and live. Get wisdom! Get understanding! Do not forget, nor turn away from the words of my mouth. Do not forsake her, and she will preserve you; Love her, and she will keep you. Wisdom is the principal thing; Therefore get wisdom. And in all your getting, get understanding” (Proverbs 4:1-7).

“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding” (Proverbs 9:10).

The psalmist wrote that the LORD, “made known His ways to Moses, His acts to the children of Israel” (Psalm 103:7). This Psalm captures God’s self-revelation in the book of Exodus. His mighty works from the Nile to the Red Sea to the descent at Sinai were known to the newly formed nation; but his ways were the special interest of Moses. In Vaelleh Shemot (Exodus) the name of the mother of Moses is given, Yahchaved, “the LORD of glory.” Long after the time of Moses’ youth, his birth-mother’s influence was strong in his life. Moses’ request to see the glory of God seems too great a coincidence. In Exodus 33:12-19, during one of his audiences with God at Sinai, Moses asked the LORD, “Show me now Your way that I may know You... Please, Show me Your glory.” The LORD replied, “I will make all My goodness pass before you, and I will proclaim the name of the Lord before you. I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.”

The text goes on to say:

NAU Exodus 34:1 Now the LORD said to Moses, "Cut out for yourself two stone tablets like the former ones, and I will write on the tablets the words that were on the former tablets which you shattered. 2 "So be ready by morning, and come up in the morning to Mount Sinai, and present yourself there to Me on the top of the mountain. 3 "No man is to come up with you, nor let any man be seen anywhere on the mountain; even the flocks and the herds may not graze in front of that mountain." 4 So he cut out two stone tablets like the former ones, and Moses rose up early in the morning and went up to Mount Sinai, as the LORD had commanded him, and he took two stone tablets in his hand. 5 The LORD descended in the cloud and stood there with him as he called upon the name of the LORD. 6 Then the LORD passed by in front of him and proclaimed, "The LORD, the LORD God, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in lovingkindness and truth; 7 who keeps lovingkindness for thousands, who forgives iniquity, transgression and sin; yet He will by no means leave the guilty unpunished, visiting the iniquity of fathers on the children and on the grandchildren to the third and fourth generations."

Moses grew up in Egypt and the names of gods and pharaohs were often arranged in a double cartouche. The two-part structure of the passage may be seen from the double pronouncement of the NAME to the balanced presentation of the nature of the LORD. After the double-pronouncement of the name, which occurs only here in all of the Hebrew Bible, the LORD used fifteen words to describe His mercy and grace and another fifteen words to describe His justice and wrath—or by letter count, fifty-five letters given to grace and fifty-one to justice. The words of the LORD and His presence resulted in Moses using the term Adonai twice in response, which may mark the beginning of a very old custom of divine name replacement with Adonai.

This statement was in response to Moses’ request to know the LORD’s ways. He revealed Himself as a God of mercy and grace, and also as a God of justice and wrath. Taken together, this appears to be the definition of Holy. Yet, there is an apparent contradiction in the passage. It is a contradiction in appearance only when context is taken into account. How can God “lift up” sin, transgression, and iniquity—effectively clear the guilty—while at the same time not clearing the guilty? This apparent problem is resolved when it is considered that the answer is atonement—and that this passage stands between the two sections of Exodus where the description of the tabernacle is given.

Two things were given at Sinai: the Law and the Tabernacle. The Tabernacle was the place for atonement to satisfy the gracious nature of God and the Law was the reflection of God’s justice. As Paul wrote in Romans 3, “that He might be just and the justifier…” When it comes to atonement, it stands at the center of the Torah. Not only are twice as many chapters given in Exodus to the Tabernacle design than to the Words of God and His Judgments combined; but the book of Leviticus stands at the center of the Torah.

Leviticus may be divided into thirty-seven parts based on the structural marker, “And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying….” As Wilfried Warning pointed out in his excellent work Literary Artistry in Leviticus, the book of Leviticus, or Vayyikra, is presented as thiry-seven audiences over thirty days given at the foot of Sinai.[8] Eighteen audiences are on one side and eighteen audiences are on the other side of the Chapter that gives the service of Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. So the Day of Atonement, or perhaps better “atonements,” stands at the heart of the Torah, just as the mercy-seat was the focal point for atonement on that day. The LORD is holy; and atonement is the basis for His extension of forgiveness.

Seven drops of blood from a bull and seven drops of blood from a goat were placed in view of the cherubim on the golden mercy-seat. Above the heads of the bowed cherubs was the Shekinah glory of the LORD. Beneath the drops of blood in the Ark were the unbroken tablets of the Law. The High Priest would then twice repeat the name of the LORD in that holy setting at that holy moment, calling on the LORD to forgive while the people quietly prayed for the same outside. Between the visible presence of the LORD and the tablets of His law were the seven drops of blood. As the Cohen Gadol, the High Priest, called upon the NAME of the LORD, the blood of the offering was the satisfaction of the divine nature that desired to clear the guilty, but could in no way clear the guilty—without atonement.

In that ceremony the wrath of God was satisfied, God was reconciled with His people, and the scapegoat symbolically removed the sin of the camp. Christians believe the LORD intended these things to anticipate better blood than that of bulls and goats, eternal reconciliation made possible with the LORD, and the removal of sin and guilt through the Messiah, the suffering Servant, who would be priest and sacrifice, prophet and king.

As the Apostle Paul wrote in Romans 3:21-26:

"21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."

As Paul reflected on God’s desire to be both Just and Justifier, which is the very presentation in Exodus 34:6-7, he made reference to “propitiation” using the term that in the Septuagint is the reference to the mercy-seat on top of the Ark of the Covenant. Here, as in Exodus 34:6-7, in the face of apparent contradiction—God’s desire to Justify over against His firm commitment to never clear the guilty—the only remedy is atonement.

4) Messiah as Priest & King: The “Acceptable Year” & the “Day of Vengeance”

Isaiah 61
“The Spirit of the Lord God is upon Me, Because the Lord has anointed Me To preach good tidings to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives, And the opening of the prison to those who are bound; To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, And the day of vengeance of our God; To comfort all who mourn, To console those who mourn in Zion, To give them beauty for ashes, The oil of joy for mourning, The garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; That they may be called trees of righteousness, The planting of the Lord, that He may be glorified.” And they shall rebuild the old ruins, They shall raise up the former desolations, And they shall repair the ruined cities, The desolations of many generations. Strangers shall stand and feed your flocks, And the sons of the foreigner shall be your plowmen and your vinedressers. But you shall be named the priests of the Lord, They shall call you the servants of our God. You shall eat the riches of the Gentiles, And in their glory you shall boast. Instead of your shame you shall have double honor, And instead of confusion they shall rejoice in their portion. Therefore in their land they shall possess double; Everlasting joy shall be theirs. For I, the Lord, love justice; I hate robbery for burnt offering; I will direct their work in truth, And will make with them an everlasting covenant. Their descendants shall be known among the Gentiles, And their offspring among the people. All who see them shall acknowledge them, That they are the posterity whom the Lord as blessed.”

In this this beautiful passage, Isaiah 61, there is One anointed by the LORD sent on a mission described with seven infinitives: 1) to preach good news, 2) to heal the broken-hearted, 3) to proclaim liberty to the captives, 4) to proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD and the day of vengeance of our God, 5) To comfort all who mourn, 6) to console those who mourn in Zion, 7) to give them beauty for ashes.

At the center of seven infinitives, the phrase “to proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD and the day of vengeance of our God” is the reflection of this section. Here is prophesied both an “acceptable year of the LORD” for salvation and a “day of vengeance” for the justice and wrath of God to be displayed. According to this passage, one Messiah was to announce and to accomplish both.

The verb “Nasa” and the “Acceptable Year of the Lord”

“Nasa”(Hebrew, literally meaning “to lift up” and by extension meaning “to forgive”) is the key verb in the first fifteen words of God’s self-revelation in Exodus 34:6-7. The lifting up of sin required a priest and a sacrifice. In Isaiah 61, the “acceptable [ratson] year of the LORD” speaks of a time that the LORD may be approached for forgiveness. In the context of Isaiah, the noun ratson carries the idea of an acceptable time and is often found in contexts dealing with deliverance or of acceptance of persons or acceptance of sacrificial offerings:

Isaiah 49:8 Thus saith the LORD: In an acceptable time have I answered thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee; and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to raise up the land, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages… [JPS]

JPS Isaiah 58:5 Is such the fast that I have chosen? the day for a man to afflict his soul? Is it to bow down his head as a bulrush, and to spread sackcloth and ashes under him? Wilt thou call this a fast, and an acceptable day to the LORD?

JPS Isaiah 60:7 All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered together unto thee, the rams of Nebaioth shall minister unto thee; they shall come up with acceptance on Mine altar, and I will glorify My glorious house.

JPS Malachi 2:13 And this further ye do: ye cover the altar of the LORD with tears, with weeping, and with sighing, insomuch that He regardeth not the offering any more, neither receiveth it with good will at your hand.

The relationship between the Tabernacle and the Law has been considered with reference to Exodus 34:6-7. But it is also important to consider the relationship of this to the frequent interchange throughout the Hebrew Bible of the themes of salvation and judgment. In the context of the whole book of Exodus, the judgments of the LORD upon Egypt and Pharaoh led to the deliverance of His people.

Anticipating this deliverance the LORD joined His NAME to what He would accomplish in Egypt:

"Therefore say to the children of Israel: ‘I am the Lord; I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, I will rescue you from their bondage, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great judgments (Exodus 6:6).

Among the minor prophets, concerning Nineveh, Jonah quoted verse six while a century later Nahum quoted verse seven. Like the balance of fifteen words between the two halves of the passage in Exodus 34, the books of Jonah and Nahum and nearly the exact same length. Jonah ends with a question dealing with grace while Nahum ends with a question that invites the wrath of God.

The holy nature of the LORD is revealed as encompassing both salvation and judgment. The verb nasa (“to lift up, to forgive”) is not only used with relation to sin, transgression, and iniquity in Exodus 34, but it also comes into view in the thirty-second psalm where David reflects on the blessed state of those who have been forgiven:

"Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven [nasa], Whose sin is covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord does not impute iniquity, And in whose spirit there is no deceit."

In Isaiah chapter one, the nation of Israel is depicted in need of a national day of atonement. Sin, transgression, and iniquity are all used in the opening verses to describe the nation’s condition. The spiritual condition of the nation is likened to a donkey or an ox that is sick, in rebellion to its owner, and has been beaten, bruised, and has untreated sores. All of these words return in the fifty-third chapter. But in this chapter a chorus sings about someone who had done no violence and was innocent as He took upon Himself the griefs, the stripes, the wounds, bruises, sins, transgressions, and the iniquity of those who sang in chorus in Isaiah’s vision.

In Isaiah 52:13-53:12, the verb nasa is used at the beginning, near the middle, and at the end of the section. In 52:13 the future, exalted state of the Suffering Servant is prophesied by the word of the LORD to be “high and lifted up” with the same description that Isaiah used in his vision in chapter six of the LORD Himself. Then in 53:4, He is depicted “lifting up” the grief’s of the singing remnant. Sin, transgression and iniquity are all dealt with by this Servant; thus framing a question that begs asking, “Who is this Servant who lifts up sin… only God can lift up sin?” Finally the Servant is said in 53:12 to “lift up the sin of many.”

The verb nasa also appears to be behind an obscure play on words in the New Testament. In Mark chapter two a paralytic is let down through a rooftop for Jesus to heal him. In response Jesus looks at the man and at his friends and says to the lame man, “Your sins are forgiven.” Upon this statement, those in the audience began to reason and murmur as they considered this potential blasphemy because they knew that the scripture said that only the LORD could forgive sin. To which Jesus responded:

“Why do you reason about these things in your hearts? Which is easier, to say to the paralytic, ‘Your sins are forgiven you,’ or to say, ‘Arise, take up your bed and walk’? But that you may know that the Son of Man has power on earth to forgive sins”—He said to the paralytic, “I say to you, arise, take up your bed, and go to your house.” Immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went out in the presence of them all, so that all were amazed and glorified God, saying, “We never saw anything like this!"

The play on words in this section does not make the connection in Greek that it does in Hebrew. By including the literal sense of nasa, the play on words connects:

Which is easier to say… “your sins are lifted up” or “Arise, lift up your bed and walk”? But that you may know that the Son of Man has power on earth to lift up sins—He said to the paralytic—“I say to you, arise, lift up your bed, and go to your house.”

The verb Naqah and the “Day of Vengeance”

Naqah is the key verb in the second part of God’s self-revelation in Exodus 34:6-7; and in this context it signifies “leaving unpunished.” The LORD revealed Himself as the Just Judge who would surely not allow the guilty to go unpunished. In Numbers 14:18 this thought is repeated:

JPS Numbers 14:18 The LORD is slow to anger, and plenteous in lovingkindness, forgiving iniquity and transgression, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, upon the third and upon the fourth generation.

Nahum captured this use with regard to Nineveh:

JPS Nahum 1:3 The LORD is long-suffering, and great in power, and will by no means clear the guilty; the LORD, in the whirlwind and in the storm is His way, and the clouds are the dust of His feet.

The Gospel of Luke records a significant moment in the ministry of Jesus as He returned to His hometown after word of His miracles had spread throughout Galilee. His choice of reading and especially His chosen place to stop reading are quite interesting:

"Then Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit to Galilee, and news of Him went out through all the surrounding region. And He taught in their synagogues, being glorified by all. So He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. And as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read. And He was handed the book of the prophet Isaiah. And when He had opened the book, He found the place where it was written:
'The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, Because He has anointed Me To preach the gospel to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, To set at liberty those who are oppressed; To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.' Then He closed the book, and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all who were in the synagogue were fixed on Him. 21 And He began to say to them, 'Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.' So all bore witness to Him, and marveled at the gracious words which proceeded out of His mouth. And they said, 'Is this not Joseph’s son?'” [Luke 4:14-22]

According to this text they waited for Jesus’ sermon upon reading the text from Isaiah and they were not treated to a lengthy discourse. As interesting as His assertion was about that time, it is hard not to notice that he did not include the rest of the phrase connected to the infinitive. The Anointed One was to proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD and the day of the vengeance of God.

Most who think of Jesus think of a meek carpenter who went around doing good. The description in 2 Thessalonians 1:6-7 is quite different. There Paul wrote of the Second Coming of Jesus:

". . . and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ."

The presentation of the Second Coming of Jesus in the Apocalypse is the same.

Conclusion

While the ancient references to monarchic messianism (the rule of one King Messiah) are in much greater supply in the Targums and in the Talmuds Babli and Yerushalami, a diarchic messianism (the rule of the messiahs of Aaron and Israel) appears to be the interpretation held by the community at Qumran. This prophetic interpretation of diarchic messianism at Qumran may have taken root in the difficult prophecy given in the sixth chapter of Zechariah.

In Zechariah chapter six, the High Priest Joshua was crowned and brought into the succession of “Branch” prophecies functioning by announcement and illustration as a type of a future Priest-King. In the distant past, in the days of the patriarch Abraham, a priest-king had ruled in Jerusalem. Melchizedek was both priest and king of the Most High God.

These two aspects, priestly and royal, meet in the nature of God. In Exodus 34:6-7 the LORD desires to lift up sin, transgression, and iniquity. Yet He remains the righteous, King-Judge who will not clear the guilty. Atonement is the only resolution to this apparent contradiction in His nature and is in view in the surrounding chapters that describe the construction of the Tabernacle.

As a High-Priest is crowned in Zechariah 6, so in Isaiah 61 a single Anointed-One is prophesied to proclaim both the “acceptable year” of the LORD and His “Day of Vengeance.” These two elements that follow a single infinitive align well with priestly and royal commissions.

"What do you think about Messiah, whose son is he?” (Matthew 22:42)

According to the Gospel of Matthew, this question was asked long ago in the temple court by Jesus himself. Was Messiah to be the “Son of David,” the “son of Aaron,” a prophet like Moses, the “son of Joseph,” the “Son of God?” The question is still quite relevant today.

Notes:
[1] Also mentioned in the Babylonian Talmud, Sukkah 52: "the slaying of the Messiah the son of Joseph" explaining Zechariah 12:10--"they will look on him whom they pierced."
[2] 4QAramaic Apocalypse (4Q246), col. II: "He will be called the Son of God, and they will call him the son of the Most High...His kingdom will be an eternal kingdom..."
[3] F.F. Bruce, "A Second Look at the Dead Sea Scrolls: Messianic Expectations at Qumran," Eternity.
(October 1956): 14-15, 29-30.
[4] Lawrence H. Schiffman, Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, p. 321-322).
[5] Craig Evans, “The Messiah in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in Israel’s Messiah in the Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls, edited by Richard S. Hess and M. Daniel Carroll R. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2003) p. 94.
[6] See also: I Enoch 46.1; 48.2-10; 52.4; Psalms of Sol. 17.21f; 2 Baruch 29.3f; 30.1; 39:7; and 72:2.
[7] Ad Marcellam, Epist. 46:13. From Jerome's Letter XLVI, Paula and Eustochium to Marcella, Paragraph 13: "If only you will come, we shall go to see Nazareth, as its name denotes, the flower of Galilee."
[8] Wilfried Warning,. Literary Artistry in Leviticus. Leiden: Brill, 1999.

The Messiah has come... and He is coming again!

2008-12-17T08:53:00.000-08:00

Bethlehem

1 Corinthians 15:1-6

"Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep."

1 Corinthians 11:26

"For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come."

Not only was Jesus born over two thousand years ago in Bethlehem... Jesus is coming! He is coming to judge the world in righteousness. His coming should not be something fearful for the believer; but it should motivate us to holy living and witnessing. One in every twenty-five verses in the New Testament refers to the second coming of the Lord Jesus.

While there were hundreds of prophecies in the Old Testament that were fulfilled in Christ’s coming long ago, many more Old Testament prophecies speak of His second coming than His first. Just as the prophecies of His first coming were fulfilled, those of His second coming will also be fulfilled to the letter.

In the Old Testament in the song of Moses they sang of the LORD as the King: "The LORD shall reign forever and ever" Ex 15:18. In the Psalms His kingship is mentioned frequently: "the LORD sitteth King forever" Ps 29:10; "The LORD hath prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom ruleth over all" Ps 103:19; "They shall speak of the glory of thy kingdom, and talk of thy power; To make known to the sons of men his mighty acts, and the glorious majesty of his kingdom. Thy kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and thy dominion endureth throughout all generations" (Ps 145:11, 13). King Hezekiah praised the Lord saying of Him--"thou art the God, even thou alone, of all of the kingdoms of the earth" (2 Kings 19:15).

In the Old Testament, the LORD’s second coming often comes into view, as when Isaiah wrote of the time "when the LORD of hosts shall reign in mount Zion, and in Jerusalem, and before his ancients gloriously" (Isaiah 24:23). Daniel prophesied that there would be given to the Son of Man “dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, ...and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed" (Daniel 7:14). Zechariah wrote "And the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one." (Zechariah 14:9).

The Kingdom of God came to earth when Christ came. The Kingdom began when the King came the first time. It had its beginning as a spiritual kingdom and is made up of those who have been born into it; as the Lord Jesus said to Nicodemus, “Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3). In Matthew 12:28 Jesus said, “But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.”

The full manifestation of the Kingdom of God will be Christ’s Second Coming. As the Lord Jesus taught His disciples to pray, “Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven” (Matthew 6:10). In Matthew’s Gospel it is also recorded, "Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world" (Matthew 25:34). At the Lord’s table we remember His words to His disciples: "But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom" (Matthew 26:29).

Those who are born into the Kingdom should not think that they are bound to the past or constrained by the present when it comes to how they should live. Rather, knowing the will of God for us is our sanctification (1 Thessalonians 4:4), and that the Holy Spirit strengthens the believer to obey the Lord, we should live by faith toward the higher calling of God. The Lord not only knows us as we were or simply as we are now; He knows us as we will be in a glorified body for a thousand years in his coming, earthly kingdom and throughout eternity future when heaven and earth will be joined. We should, by faith, prayerfully ask Him for strength to live toward what we will be. Pray for the coming physical manifestation of the kingdom of God.

The King has come and He is coming again to Rule all the nations! We need to get ready for His coming (sanctification), we need to proclaim His coming, and we need to help the nations prepare for His coming. “And He shall reign forever, and ever…” Jesus is coming!

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (Time to Question the Scientific Establishment)

2008-04-22T02:07:00.000-07:00

If you haven't seen Ben Stein's documentary yet [Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed] then you are missing out on why so many blogs are busy trying to do damage control. Richard Dawkins, atheist extraordinaire and one of the leading proponents of Neo-Darwinian thought, believes in Intelligent Design... at least that some intelligent aliens may have seeded our world with the first living cells... [blush, uncontrollable laughter, attaboy!].

Crystals?? Aliens?? Is this New Age mumbo jumbo or is it what "real" scientists think? You really have to see it to believe it.

In this documentary, Stein rightly lays the sins of Hitler at the feet of Charles Darwin. Darwin's theory fills Hitler's magnum opus, Mein Kampf, and was the blueprint for the systematic genocide of the Nazis. While others have made this connection for decades, it is quite powerfully and convincingly made in this film.

The fear... almost panic of the Neo-Darwinian web community is breathtaking. Blogs favorable to evolution went to defcon one. Whole websites were put up to counter the film. Dawkins himself quickly moved to try and rewrite what happened, all the while resorting to ad hominem attacks on Ben Stein (see: http://richarddawkins.net/article,2394,Lying-for-Jesus,Richard-Dawkins). Watch the documentary and see if you believe Dawkin's version of what happened in this interview.

On April 18th Dawkins wrote a piece on the eve of the film's debut to try and buffer what he knew was coming. He wrote, "Nevertheless, despite their [proponents of ID] notorious dishonesty, I sometimes hand an olive branch to these people by pretending to take their 'space aliens' political ploy seriously" (http://richarddawkins.net/article,2480,Gods-and-earthlings,Richard-Dawkins). In this article, Dawkins cited other evolutionists who had offered the theory that he put forward to Stein in the interview:

The distinguished molecular biologists Francis Crick and Leslie Orgel advanced a version of the notion, probably tongue in cheek, called "Directed Panspermia." Life, they argued, could have been "seeded" on the early Earth by a spacecraft packed with bacteria.

During the interview with Dawkins, he reads from his own book to clarify his hostility toward the God of the Old Testament:

The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.

Regarding the film, I find myself in basic agreement with L. Brent Bozell:

Now that the film is complete, the evolutionist prophets featured in the film are on the warpath inveighing against it, and the alleged idiots who would lower themselves to watching it. Richard Dawkins laments how the film will solicit "cheap laughs that could only be raised in an audience of scientific ignoramuses." Minnesota professor and blogger P.Z. Myers predicts the movie is "going to appeal strongly to the religious, the paranoid, the conspiracy theorists, and the ignorant —— which means they're going to draw in about 90 percent of the American market." Myers and Dawkins now both complain they were "duped" into appearing in the movie (for pay).

Everyone should take the opportunity to see "Expelled" — if nothing else, as a bracing antidote to the atheism-friendly culture of PC liberalism. But it's far more than that. It's a spotlight on the arrogance of this movement and its leaders, a spotlight on the choking intolerance of academia, and a spotlight on the ignorance of so many who say so much, yet know so very little. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/uc/20080418/cm_uc_crbbox/op_235852).

Stein's film will be a classic in my opinion. It is a wake up call for America and the rest of the world. In the west, the sleeping dragon of Social Darwinism may fully awaken in the next generation. What is taught in the classroom today will influence the philosophy of the government tomorrow. Abortion and euthanasia are just the first steps in the logical application of this godless, materialistic philosophy.

Which side of the wall are you on? The side that receives research grants and the accolades of academia... or the side vilified, despised, ridiculed, and relegated to academic oblivion? I hope that tens of millions heed Stein's call to question the scientific stranglehold that exists today.

Please see the movie... (and bring your biology teacher!): http://www.expelledthemovie.com/

Oh, and ask your friends to read a book that is not an ad hominem attack on any evolutionist, but has real substance:

Spetner, Lee M. Not by Chance: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution[http://www.amazon.com/Not-Chance-Shattering-Modern-Evolution/dp/1880582244/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1208928582&sr=8-1].

Also, here's an interesting ecard: http://www.buzzplant.com/illustra/ecard2/

The movie Expelled is a must see (http://www.expelledthemovie.com/); and Spetner's book does what the title indicates.

The "Servants of the LORD" in the Scroll of Isaiah

2008-02-20T10:31:00.000-08:00

Who is the "servant" of Isaiah 53? Is it Cyrus? Is it Israel? Or is it Messiah? Early Christians claimed this passage pointed to Jesus. The Gospels (Mark 15:28, *Luke 22:37, John 12:38) and the book of Acts (8:30-35) in the New Testament highlight this text as a prophecy of Jesus.

Isaiah 53 paints a portrait of "the Servant Who Will Be King." He is depicted as Servant, High Priest, Sacrifice, Sin-bearer, and King of Kings. The prophecies of Isaiah (~700 BC) presented several called "servants of the LORD." This provokes the question in Isaiah 53: "Of whom does the prophet speak?" Below is a survey of those referred to in this way by Isaiah.

Servant Cyrus

In the text of Isaiah this servant is spoken of (third person) by the LORD. There are not any first person speeches. The servant is always spoken of in the singular.

Called "the righteous man from the east" [41:2]; but also the "ravenous bird from the east ... the man that executes my counsel" [45:11].

The LORD makes him the ruler over // conqueror of many nations [41:2].

His conquest will be marked by peace and possibly rapidity [41:3].

Though hailing from the east he attacked Babylon from the north [41:25] and Likened to the potter treading clay [41:25].

Likened to a shepherd from the LORD [44:28].

He performs the desire of God to rebuild Jerusalem and the temple [44:28].

Name called before birth [45:1].

Name prophesied toward the end that he may come to know the LORD [45:3-5].

Called the "anointed" of the LORD [45:1].

His right hand the LORD holds [45:1].

The LORD will go before him making the "crooked places straight" so that the doors of Babylon will open to him [45:2-3].

Servant Israel

This servant is also spoken of by the LORD (third person) only without any first person speeches. The servant is addressed both as an individual and as a collective (group).

Called Israel, Jacob, and Jeshurun [44:1-2]; "worm Jacob" and "men of Israel" in a parallelism [41:14] and called the "seed of Abraham, My friend" [41:8].

The LORD has "taken them from the ends of the earth" [41:9]. Israel called "chosen" [41:8]. The LORD has chosen Israel as His servant not to be cast away or forgotten [41:9; 44:21].

Upheld by the LORD's righteous right hand [41:10]//the LORD holds Israel's right hand [41:13].

The nations which were Israel's enemies to be destroyed [41:11-16]; Israel will thresh them like wheat [41:15-16].

Called blind and deaf [42:18-20 and 43:8].

Called a people robbed, spoiled, and imprisoned; given over to robbers and spoilers by the LORD because of their sins [42:22-25].

Called by name due to creator/king ownership [43:1].

From Abraham their "first father" to the teachers of Israel, all have sinned against the LORD [43:27].

Servant Messiah

This servant is spoken of by the LORD and also speaks in first person. When the LORD speaks, this servant is always spoken of in the singular.

First and last poems both begin with "Behold" [42:1//52:13].

He is called "My Chosen" [42:1].

God will put His Spirit upon Him [42:1].

He "shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles" [42:1]; but His judgment will be "truth" and will extend over the whole earth. [42:4].

Called by God "in righteousness" [42:6].

The LORD will hold His hand // strengthen & protect [42:6].

Will be given as a covenant for the Jews and a light for the Gentiles [42:6; 49:8-12].

This servant will open blind eyes of Jews and Gentiles [42:7].

He will lead prisoners to freedom [42:7; 49:9].

His name called before birth [49:1].

Called "Israel" in one place [49:3]; yet, in this context as an individual formed in the womb He will be used of God to regather Jacob/Israel.

He will be "My S/salvation" for both Jew & Gentile to the ends of the earth [49:5-6].

This one will be despised by Gentiles and abhorred by Jews [49:7]; a "Man of Sorrows" from whom the Jews will turn away [53:3].

Though a "servant of rulers" [49:7]--Kings shall bow down and worship[49:7 & 52:15].

He will be given the "tongue of the learned;" and in turn will "give His back to the smiters ..." [50:4-6].

In spite of the knowledge of His impending suffering, He would "set His face like a flint" [50:7].

God will vindicate Him [50:7-8].

Though He will "be lifted up" [52:13], He will also "lift up" sicknesses and sins [53:4 & 12].

His face was to be severely marred beyond comparison [52:14].

By this He was to "sprinkle" many nations [52:15].

The report of Him would be believed by some and not by others [53:1].

He was to be wounded, bruised, beaten, and die for the sins, transgressions, and iniquities of those who believe [53:5, 6, 8, 12].

He would die with wicked men but be buried as though rich [53:9].

Though the LORD would "make His soul an offering for sin" in death, He was to live after death [53:10].

He was to intercede as a priest [53:12]

The First Christmas

2007-12-14T11:37:00.000-08:00

Christmas--what's it all about? Let's see--tinsel and glitter, shopping malls and Master Card, Santa Claus and his reindeer . . . does it seem a little bit shallow and out of focus?

Christmas is the season of great contrasts in our culture. Materialism and poverty, familial joy and solitary suicide, homes decorated with lights and homelessness--these contrasts to name a few walk hand in hand through the season. One thing I believe is a constant for all classes of people. The need of the up and out and of the down and out is real hope. The irony is that the source of all hope--the One who put on flesh nearly two thousand years ago-- is often forgotten in the ring of cash registers, the honk of car horns, and the sound of unwrapping gifts that cannot satisfy the needs of the heart.
Let's put aside for a moment the dizzying rush of a our present day--when Christmas is so out of focus--and look away from the North Pole and strip away the tinsel and glitter, and look back two thousand years to the time of the first Christmas at a little town near Jerusalem known as Bethlehem.

When was the First Christmas?
When in grade school, a student learns to date their paper. Though the Ten Commandments have been removed from public classrooms and other religious liberties curtailed, every student still writes the date (usually at the top right). It is 2007. Literally, A.D. "In the year of our Lord, Two thousand and seven." Jesus' birth was used by chroniclers as the event that divides history.
Though the intention long ago (a few centuries after Jesus was born) was to divide time, it appears that He was actually born in about 5 B.C. The death of Herod occurred in 4 B.C. and Jesus was born while Herod was living (Matt. 2:1-6). John the Baptist's ministry began during the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar at the age of thirty. This means that John's birth occured in the Spring of 5 B.C. and Jesus' birth followed in the Fall of the same year (perhaps at or near the time of the feast of "booths").
December 25th was originally the date of the Roman pagan feast of Saturnalia when friends gave gifts and slaves enjoyed a day of some freedom. While pagans praised idols and practiced immorality, early Christians chose to celebrate the birth of Christ as a holy festival.

The Place: Bethlehem
Bethlehem was the place of King David's birth. The Gospel of Matthew begins by linking Jesus to David: "The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham" (Matthew 1:1). Though Jesus' Father was God Himself, His mother was Mary who was in the line of David--the line of Israel's kings. For this reason, Luke's Gospel records, that because Caesar's census summoned all to the city of their ancestors, Joseph and Mary were to travel to Bethlehem.

Who Attended?

The Shepherds
"And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night" (Luke 2:8). Bethlehem is still a place of shepherds. One thousand years earlier (three thousand years ago), King David as a boy had watched his flock in the same hills surrounding Bethlehem.

The Angels
"And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid . . . And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God . . ." (Luke 2:9 & 13a).

The Wise Men
The wise men come from a great distance following the star. Although many suggestions have been made as to astronomical events that might explain this "star," I believe the best understanding is that it was simply supernatural. If you believe that God made all of the stars, this was a simple matter for Him.
The wise men were not there on the first night as is often supposed. Matthew tells us that they came to a "house" (Matt. 1:11). They probably arrived two or three months after Jesus' birth and found Joseph and Mary in a house (the crowds having left after the census). Herod's command to kill all of the infants at Bethlehem "two years old and under" was probably just an attempt to make sure that he slew the child (Matt. 2:16). Some have supposed due to Herod's command that the wise men came as late a year or two after Jesus' birth. However, age was often counted from conception not birth.
There is a tradition that there were three wise men--probably stemming from the three gifts mentioned (gold, frankincense, and myrrh). We do not know how many wise men there were for certain. It must have been a large caravan, for we read that "all Jerusalem" was aware of their presence and inquiry (Matt. 2:3). They had come to "worship" the newly born King.

Who was Born?
Over six hundred years before Jesus was born at Bethlehem, the prophet Micah had written:

But as for you, Bethlehem Ephratah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity" (Micah 5:2, NAS).

The context of Micah's prophecy contrasted the "tower" city of Jerusalem that would be without a king with the tiny town of Bethlehem where the future king would be born. In the shadow of the tower a king would be born. This king would enter time at Bethlehem--but He existed before it!
The One who was born at Bethlehem was the Lord Jesus Christ. The angel said to call Him Jesus because "He will save His people from their sins" (Matt. 1:21). His name means Savior. His disciples called Him Lord. This was the word used in the Greek Old Testament for the name of God. Thus, when they said, "Jesus is Lord" they were declaring "Jesus is God!" Lord means "owner/ruler." He owns and rules everything.
They called Him Christ, which means "Anointed One/Promised One." The Gospel, as it is given in the Bible is that Christ "died for our sins according to the scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the scriptures" (1 Cor. 15:3-4). The Christ (Greek) or Messiah (Hebrew) was the One who would fulfill the promises of God.
Gospel still means "Good News." The Good News this Christmas has not changed. Those who are willing to turn from their sins and trust in the Lord Jesus this Christmas season will find that the greatest gift ever given was given by God long ago. In Him is hope, meaning, and real life.

"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life" (John 3:16).

THE AMOUNT OF TIME BETWEEN THE CRUCIFIXION AND THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST

2007-11-09T10:17:00.000-08:00

Often around Easter questions will arise in the minds of those celebrating the anniversary of Christ's death and resurrection. Did Jesus Christ rise from the dead "on the third day" or "after three days" according to the New Testament? Did He eat the Passover meal or was the Last Supper held before Passover? On what day of the week was the Crucifixion of Jesus? All of these questions, and others as well, are related to the issue at hand.

Statements of the Time Factor
Twenty-one passages in the New Testament deal with the amount of time between the Crucifixion and the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Gospel writers employed four different phrases to express this interval of time:

1) “on the third day” as in Matthew 16:21, 17:23, 20:19, and 27:64; Luke 9:22, 18:33, 24:7, 24:21, and 24:46; Acts 10:40; and 1 Corinthians 15:4.

2) “in three days” (with en or diá) as in Mt. 26:61 and 27: 40; Mk. 14:58 and 15:29; and Jn. 2:19-20.

3) “after three days” (with metá) as in Mt. 27:63; and Mk. 8:31, 9:31, and 10:34.

4) “three days and three nights” as in Mt 12:40.

The formula occurring in the New Testament most frequently indicates clearly that Jesus rose from the dead on the third day ("on the third day" or "in three days" as in numbers 1-2 above). Sixteen of the twenty-one passages contain this formula pointing to the traditional understanding of Jesus' crucifixion occurring on Friday of Passion week. However, due to the phrases "after three days" and "three days and three nights" (listed above, numbers 3-4), some have argued that the crucifixion should be placed earlier in the week.

Matthew, Mark and Meta
Of the twenty-one passages in the New Testament that deal with the time factor between the Crucifixion and the Resurrection, four of them use the Greek preposition metá with the accusative which is normally translated "after three days" (see above: 3 under "Statements of the Time Factor"). In Bauer, Arndt, and Gingrich, there is an interesting entry under metá with the accusative:

metá (with the accusative) . . . Mt 27:63; Mk 8:31; 10:34; Lk 2:46; cf. Mt 26:2; Mk 14:1 (cf. Caesar, Bell. Gall. 4,9,1 post tertiam diem=on the third day).[1]
The equivalent in Latin of the Greek phrase normally translated "after three days" (metá with the accusative) was post tertiam diem. While Mark uses metá with the accusative in 8:31; 9:31; and 10: 34 in reference to the time factor between the crucifixion and the resurrection, the only other place that it is so used is in Matthew 27:63. Since the traditional audience of Mark's Gospel was Roman and the audience in Matthew 27:63 was Pilate, the above reference to the Latin phrase from a time very near that of the New Testament should be seriously considered.

In D'ooge and Eastman's treatment of the Gallic Wars they gave both a note and a grammatical explanation for understanding this prepositional phrase. In the note to the passage, they wrote:

"108 6 [line] Chap. 9. post diem tertium: i.e. the next day but one. The first and last days are usually included in the Roman reckoning (227.g)."

In their note they referred to 227.g in their grammatical section that treated this phenomenon with Latin dates:

227.g The dates intervening between any two points were counted as so many days before the second point. The Romans, however, in reckoning a series, counted both extremes; for example, the eleventh day of April was
counted as the third day before the Ides (that is, the thirteenth), the tenth of April as the fourth day before the Ides.

The example of the eleventh day of April being counted as the third day before the thirteenth harmonizes beautifully with the traditional day of the crucifixion (crucifixion on Friday). The above was not always considered when translating Latin, much less when considering Greek equivalents of Latin thought concerning time.

Though he does not allow that this was the usage in New Testament times, according to A. T. Robertson, the use of metá with the accusative should yield "into the midst" or "among."[2] However, this classic, root idea behind metá helps to make sense out of Matthew 27:62-64. Had the rulers of the Jews understood Jesus to mean “after three days,” then they would have asked for a guard until the fourth day. But the text clearly indicates their request was limited “until the third day.”

Instead of the later Greek idea of metá meaning “after,” the context clearly calls for understanding the earlier idea of “within” behind the use of the proposition. Since the traditional audience of Mark's Gospel was Roman and the audience in Matthew 27:63 was Pilate (a Roman), it seems that the Gospel writers were using metá for a Roman audience whose first language was Latin knowing that they would equate the usage to Latin "post diem tertium."

The Sign of Jonah
The “three days and three nights” statement by Jesus in Matthew twelve is a quotation from the book of Jonah. Some interpret this to mean that Jesus was in the tomb a full seventy-two hours. Not only is this untenable due to the many references that emphasize the truth that Jesus rose on the third day, it is also impossible considering the simple understanding of the prophecy of the preservation of Jesus’ body from decay (cf. Acts 2:27 and John 11:39).

The Jewish Talmud held that “any part of a day is as the whole.”[3] The Old Testament, in parallel or similar Hebrew usage, clearly presents the teaching that "part of a day" is to be looked upon as comprising the whole of that day [cf.. Gen. 40:13, 20; I Sam. 30:12, 13; II Chron. 10:5, 12; Esther 4:16 and 5:1]. Hence the Friday of Passion week began, according to Jewish reckoning, on Thursday at sunset (see Gen. 1:5, the first day began in the evening). So, day one consisted of Thursday night and Friday during the daylight hours. Day two was Friday from sunset until and Saturday at sunset. Day three began as the sun set on the Sabbath.

In Matthew 12, Jesus said “as Jonah was… so will I be….” In Greek the use of the verb “to be” was not required; but in this passage Jesus’ emphasis is clear by its presence in both places. Jesus said, "as Jonah was" using the imperfect form of the verb "to be." For those considering the chronology of Passion week, the focus is generally upon the statement of time. Yet, since the phrase relating the amount of time here differs from the other six mentions of it in Matthew, the actual emphasis here appears to be upon the state of Jonah in the great fish and the state of Jesus in the tomb.

Most Christians learn from an early age that Jonah was preserved in the great fish by a miracle of God; and they understand the language of Jonah’s second chapter as figurative with regard to death. Rare, “urban legend,” type examples of men swallowed by sharks or other large fish are drawn upon from far and wide to prove the possibility of such. While nothing is impossible for God, was Jesus alive in the tomb?

The followers of Islam are quick to pick up on this widespread, Christian approach to the book of Jonah (stressing Jonah's preservation) to argue for the “Swoon Theory.”[4] In a debate between Ahmed Deedat and Josh McDowell in South Africa, Mr. Deedat called out to his followers in the crowd about Jonah's state in the whale and they answered, "Alive!" Then he asked about Jesus' state in the tomb, and they again responded, "Alive!"[5]

Jonah 2 indicates that Jonah cried out the name of the Lord as he lost consciousness in the fish (Jonah 2:7). A greater miracle than preservation is taught by way of the “sign of Jonah.” Resurrection was the debate of Jesus’ time. Even the language of resurrection is used by God in Jonah 3:1-2 (compare the Hebrew command “Cum…”--“Arise” with Jesus’ words when he raised the little girl in Mark 5:41). Ultimately only two people knew the state of Jonah in the belly of the great fish: Jonah and God. Jesus, who is God incarnate, knew the state of Jonah during his ordeal in the fish.

While some might balk at the possibility of Jonah actually having been raised from the dead by God on the shore, his would not have been the first resurrection in the Old Testament. The miracles of resurrection that God wrought in the days of Elijah and Elisha would predate the resurrection of Jonah. While some prefer to consider the text of Jonah presenting a miracle of preservation and merely figurative language referring to a death-like state, the mystery of the state of Jonah in the great fish is merely hinted at in the poetry of Jonah's second chapter. The "sign of Jonah" alluded to in Matthew 12 pointed literally to Jesus' death and resurrection.

According to this reckoning, Jesus arrived at Bethany on Friday before sunset, six days before the Passover (John 12:1), which was Nisan 8, in keeping with the Jewish custom of arriving in the vicinity of Jerusalem six days before the feast.[6] He entered Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, Nisan 10 (cf. Exodus 12:3) as many lambs were being set apart for inspection at Jerusalem. The disciples came to Jesus and inquired where they should prepare to celebrate the Passover together on Thursday, Nisan 14, the day when the feast lambs must be slain (see Mt. 26:17; Mk. 14:12; and Lk. 22:7-8). Jesus was crucified on Friday, Nisan 15, the anniversary of their freedom from Egypt, at the time the Law of Moses called for sacrifice and solemn assembly (See Exo. 23:14-15; Lev. 23:5-8; Num. 28:16-25; and Deut. 16:1-8).

Jesus arose on Sunday, Nisan 17, the anniversary of the ark of Noah coming to rest (cf. Gen. 8:4 and Exo. 12:1-2). Peter used the Ark of Noah as a type of Christ (1 Peter 3:20). The Ark kept those eight passengers safe "through" the waters of death. The Ark came to rest on Mt. Ararat many centuries before Jesus' resurrection. However, Genesis 8:4 says that it came to rest in the seventh month, the seventeenth day of the month. The seventh month of Genesis is the first month of Exodus 12.

The Synoptics and John’s Gospel
Jesus ate the Passover not at an earlier time than the Law stipulated, but at the only time the Law allowed. Matthew and Mark recorded the initiative of the disciples to come to Jesus. Their initiative demonstrated that Jesus did not eat the Passover early. Luke's version does not explicitly replace the disciples' initiative with Jesus' initiative; instead, he recorded the names of the two that Jesus sent to make preparations. The Greek construction with "must" that Luke added is noteworthy. This was the day when the feast lambs "must" be slain. Since the Exodus, this day had been the close of Nisan 14. The lambs for the memorial supper were slain just before evening when the fifteenth of Nisan began.

Jesus was crucified, therefore, on Friday morning, Nisan 15. Though the Synoptics give clear testimony to this, John's Gospel has been interpreted by some to indicate that the crucifixion occurred on Nisan 14. John used the term “Passover” several ways to indicate either: 1) the Passover meal, 2) the feast lamb itself, or 3) the “Feast of Unleavened Bread.” This varied usage is the source of the confusion (See John 13:1; 18:28; and 19:14).[7]

Conclusion
Sixteen of the twenty-one statements that mention the time factor between the death and resurrection of Jesus pointed to His resurrection on "the third day" (see above: 1-2 under "Statements of the Time Factor"). Three of the statements (normally translated as "after three days") should be understood in light of the traditional, Roman audience of Mark's Gospel with one like this kind occuring in Matthew's Gospel when a Roman audience is obvious in the context of the passage (see above: 3 under "Statements of the Time Factor"). An accurate translation for these phrases would be "within three days." All four of these passages (listed under 3 above) indicated the same interval of time expressed through the other phrases, namely, on the third day or within three days. The fourth phrase used to express the time factor between the death and resurrection of Jesus (see above: 4 under "Statements of the Time Factor") was cited as a quotation from the book of Jonah and was an idiom understood by the ancient audience in line with the other phrases. Thus, the New Testament is consistent when it comes to the expression of the amount of time that elapsed between the Crucifixion and the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Notes

[1]William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature: A Translation and Adaptation of the Fourth Revised and Augmented Edition of Walter Bauer's "Griechisch-Deutsches Worterbuch zu den Schriften des Neun Testaments und der ubrigen urchristlichen Literatur," 2d ed. revised by F. Wilbur Gingrich and Frederick W. Danker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), s.v."meta" [p. 510 B. II].
[2]A[rchibald] T[homas] Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research, 4th ed. (Nashville: Broadman, 1934), 609-12."With the Accusative. At first it seems to present more difficulty. But the accusative-idea added to the root-idea ("midst") with verbs of motion would mean "into the midst" or "among." But this idiom does not appear in the N.T." p. 612.
[3] Nazir 5b.
[4] The “Swoon Theory,” which is popular among modern Muslim apologists, is the theory that Jesus did not actually die on the cross, but swooned and awakened in the tomb.
[5] Josh McDowell and John Gilchrist, The Islam Debate (San Bernadino, CA: Here’s Life, 1983), p. 153.
[6] J. B. Segal, The Hebrew Passover: From the Earliest Times to A.D. 70 (London: Oxford, 1963), 256.
[7] A. T. Robertson, A Harmony of the Gospels for Students of the Life of Christ (Chicago: W. P. Blessing, 1922), 283.

King Immanuel as the Branch of King David's Hope

2007-04-05T06:35:00.000-07:00

Palm branch on Coin of Judea

Above the head of Jesus and fixed to His cross was a sign written in three languages (Hebrew, Greek, and Latin). His "crime" the text declared: "This is Jesus the Natsarene the King of the Jews"

A Millennium before the Sign

"Now these are the last words of David.
David the son of Jesse declares, The man who was raised on high declares, The anointed of the God of Jacob, And the sweet psalmist of Israel, 2 "The Spirit of the LORD spoke by me, And His word was on my tongue. 3 "The God of Israel said, The Rock of Israel spoke to me, 'He who rules over men righteously, Who rules in the fear of God, 4 Is as the light of the morning when the sun rises, A morning without clouds, When the tender grass springs out of the earth, Through sunshine after rain.' 5 "Truly is not my house so with God? For He has made an everlasting covenant with me, Ordered in all things, and secured; For all my salvation and all my desire, Will He not indeed make it grow? 6 "But the worthless, every one of them will be thrust away like thorns, Because they cannot be taken in hand; 7 But the man who touches them Must be armed with iron and the shaft of a spear, And they will be completely burned with fire in their place."
[2 Samuel 23:1-7, NAS]

When King David was on his death bed, he spoke of the focus of his desire for the future. This focus was regarding the eternal kingdom promised to him and as such was messianic.

King David's rhetorical question in verse five concerning the future of his throne ("For all my salvation and all my desire, Will He not indeed make it grow?") calls for the unreserved affirmative response, "Surely He will." It is the root of the word "cause it to grow" (yatsmiyach from the root tsamach) in Hebrew that lays the foundation for the messianic allusion of the psalmist (132:17) and of the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Zechariah.

In one of these allusions to this messianic vein of prophecy, Isaiah used the word netser, meaning branch, shoot, sprout to refer to the Messiah (Isaiah 11:1).

Netser
Jesus the Nazarene does not signify "Nazarite"—because it is not a "z." The Greek equivalent to "z" leads us at first to think of Hebrew "z" = zayin. While Hebrew has a "z," Greek did not have a "ts" consonant. Hence in Greek they rendered the Hebrew "ts" (tsade) as the Greek "z" (zeta). Hence we read in English, "He shall be called a Nazarene" when it should be understood, "He shall be called Natsarene [i.e. "the Branch"]."

Isaiah 4:2 (The Beautiful Branch)

Isaiah 6:13 (The Branch from the stump of the felled tree of Judah)

Isaiah 11:1 (The Branch from Jesse's household)
(On the community of the Branch see Isa. 60:21 & 61:3)

Jeremiah 23:5-6 (The Righteous Branch)

Jeremiah 33:15-16 (The Righteous Branch)

Ezekiel 29:21 (The horn that will "sprout")

Zechariah 3:8 (My Servant the Branch)

Zechariah 6:12 (The man whose name is "The Branch")

Psalm 132:17 (The horn of David that will "sprout")

Matthew 2:23 (He shall be called a Natsarene)

Acts 24:5 (The sect of the Natsarenes)

Far from being a recent discovery, this apparent relationship between netser and Nazareth was proposed by Eusebius' (260-341 AD) Onomasticon and Jerome's (345-420 AD) Ad Marcellam, Epist. 46:13. From Jerome's Letter XLVI, Paula and Eustochium to Marcella, Paragraph 13: "If only you will come, we shall go to see Nazareth, as its name denotes, the flower of Galilee." So strong was this association, early on the followers of Jesus were called Nazaraioi (Branches, or implying followers of the Branch).

The Branch and Isaiah 53

Of whom does Isaiah speak? He speaks of the Messiah, as many rabbis of the distant past concluded. The second verse of Isaiah 53 makes it clear. The figure grows up as "a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground." The shoot springing up is a reference to the Messiah, and it is a common Messianic reference in Isaiah and elsewhere.

The Davidic dynasty was to be cut down in judgement like a felled tree, but it was promised to Israel that a new sprout would shoot up from the stump (Isaiah 6:13, Isaiah 11). The Messiah was to be that sprout. Several related words in Hebrew were used to refer to this Messianic image.

Isaiah 11, which virtually all rabbis once agreed referred to the Messiah, used the words "shoot" (hoter) and branch (netser) to describe the Messianic King. Isaiah 11:10 called Messiah the "Root (shoresh) of Jesse," Jesse being David's father. Isaiah 53 described the suffering servant as a root (shoresh) from dry ground, using the very same metaphor and the very same word as Isaiah 11. We also see other terms used for the same concept, such as branch (tsemach) in Jeremiah 23:5, in Isaiah 4:2 and also in the prophecies of Zechariah 3:8 and 6:12.

Rabbi Moses Maimonides: "What is the manner of Messiah's advent....there shall rise up one of whom none have known before, and signs and wonders which they shall see performed by him will be the proofs of his true origin; for the Almighty, where he declares to us his mind upon this matter, says, `Behold a man whose name is the Branch, and he shall branch forth out of his place' (Zech. 6:12). And Isaiah speaks similarly of the time when he shall appear, without father or mother or family being known, He came up as a sprout before him, and as a root out of dry earth, etc....in the words of Isaiah, when describing the manner in which kings will harken to him, At him kings will shut their mouth; for that which had not been told them have they seen, and that which they had not heard they have perceived." (From the Letter to the South (Yemen), quoted in The Fifty-third Chapter of Isaiah According to the Jewish Interpreters, Ktav, 1969, Vol. 2, pp. 374-5).

Temple of Augustus or Temple of the LORD?

2007-03-23T13:40:00.000-07:00

Coin of Herod Phillip (The British Museum)
http://www.livius.org/he-hg/herodians/philip.htm

Initially, when I saw the “symbols” of the so-called “chevron and circle” I thought that, as tomb decorations, they might be associated with the Temple of the LORD instead of the association made in the "Lost Tomb of Jesus" film to some mysterious, early Christian symbol.

While I still fully reject the sensational, embarrassing claims of the "Lost Tomb" film for the marking on the tomb facade, I think that an association other than my first impression seems more likely.

After finding the similarity on the coins of Herod Philip II, I made an association that may have been too hasty with the Nicanor gate. There was a frequent association of tombs with temples by way of decorative motifs (see also this motif on an ossuary here).

Considering the names of those in the tomb together with the proximity to Jerusalem, the temple at Jerusalem seemed likely. Yet, the Temple of the LORD was usually depicted with a “flat roof” and not a pitched (gable) roof. There is an example on a fourth-century plate discovered in the Via Labina cemetery in Rome, though late (4th century), of the temple of the LORD with a pitched roof (Sporty, 121). However, the height of the Ulam (portico) is said to have been much higher than the rest of the temple.

The Nicanor gate has been depicted at times having a pitched-roof feature (either above the doorway or over the columns depicted on the facade). I suggested in the last entry that, since these were Jews that this was more likely. The coin of Herod Philip II, I thought, must have been depicting the temple at Jerusalem and not the temple of Augustus as it has normally been treated.

Upon further reflection and additional research, I believe that another possibility should be considered:

The Temple of Augustus. The coin of Herod Philip II (see examples of coins catalogued as Hendin 531, 532, 533, 534, 535, 538, 539, etc.) struck at Caesarea Philippi shown above and in the last entry of this blog is almost universally associated with the Temple of Augustus in his territory by numismatists (Meshorer, 76-77; Roller, 191). See Hendin 530 where the shield feature is enlarged (here). It is thought that the temple appeared in this way at Sebaste as a tetrastyle (four columned) temple (though possibly enlarged at some point to be peristyle--six columned across the front and surrounded by columns as was the one at Caesarea Maritima). Such a tetrastyle temple of Augustus (with shield motif nicely matching the “circle”) may be seen at Pula, Croatia:

Note the raised, circular shield under the pitched roof just as depicted on the coin of Herod Phillip II and nicely matching the feature of the so-called "Lost-Tomb." See other photos of the Pula temple here and here.

While the Temple of the LORD at Jerusalem was also tetrastyle (possibly by relief on the Ulam--Portico) in depiction (such as the below example from the time of Shimon Bar Kochba) there is no evidence for the same "shield" design under a pitched (gable) roof.

Another example of a temple to Augustus with the same features (though eight-columned) once stood at Ankara and and artist's representation may be seen here.

Summary of Considerations: The occurrence of this “symbol” or architectural feature raises many questions for the so-called “lost tomb.” Who are those buried within? Why would Jews want to be associated with the temple of Augustus? Were they Herodian Jews? Were they Roman citizens who wished to be associated with the emperor? Or were they representing on their tomb facade some other feature of architecture, possibly a motif repeated by Herod, from a similar building facade? Is this a primary feature of the tomb or a secondary feature?

Did Herod repeat this “shield design” above the doorway of the Temple of the LORD on the facade? or above the Nicanor gate? or above the entrance to the Royal Stoa (also tetrastyle)? There is no hard evidence for it in such places. However, there is concrete evidence for the design on the temple of Augustus.

It appears that some of those buried within this tomb were identifying themselves with the dynasty of Herod or with the temple of Augustus.

Early Christians would not declare “Caesar is Lord.” To the contrary they declared “Jesus is Lord” in the face of martyrdom. Symbolism related to the cult of Caesar over a tomb doorway seems entirely unfitting for early Christians. It appears to be the "Lost Tomb" of some devotees to Caesar.

Selected Bibliography:

Mazar, Eilat. The Complete Guide to the Temple Mount Excavations. Jerusalem: Old City Press, 2002.

Meshorer, Ya’akov. Jewish Coins of the Second Temple Period. Translated from the Hebrew by I. H. Levine. Tel-Aviv: Am Hassefer and Massada, 1967.

Overman, J. Andre, Jack Olive and Michael Nelson. “Discovering Herod’s Temple to Augustus: Mystery Temple Found at Omrit.” Biblical Archaeological Review, March/April (2003) 40-49.

Roller, Duane W. The Building Program of Herod the Great. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998.

Sporty, Lawrence D. “Identifying the Curving Line on the Bar-Kochba Temple Coin. The Biblical Archaeologist 46, 2: 121-123.

So-called "Lost Tomb of Jesus": Mysterious Chevron and Circle?

2007-03-05T12:02:00.000-08:00

Coin of Herod Phillip, 4 BC-AD 34
www.JerusalemCoins.com

Nicanor gate facade

with the Temple in the background

Coin of Herod Phillip (The British Museum)

http://www.livius.org/he-hg/herodians/philip.htm

In a previous post I mentioned the possibility that the symbols that are being used in such a sensational way on the official "Jesus Tomb" website (http://www.jesusfamilytomb.com/) --just as they were used in the "documentary" -- might not be early Christian symbols at all.

On the coins above (Herod Phillip) a "chevron and circle" pattern is clearly visible as a depiction of the facade of the Nicanor gate of the Temple of God in Jerusalem. The Nicanor gate marked the end of a pilgrimage. The last fifteen steps are still marked by the "Psalms of Ascent," or better, "the Psalms of the ascending ones." The entrance to the tomb also marked the end of a pilgrimage.

Such an architectural feature points to temple worship; and this means that those buried in the tomb on last night's "documentary" were more likely observant Jews. Though it is not impossible that they were Jewish Christians (who met for a while in "Solomon's porch"), given the numbers of Jews to Christians over the amount of time ossuaries were in use... I don't think it would take a statistician to figure out that the odds are much better that this is simply a Jewish tomb.

But the Pontormo Code? or the All-seeing eye? or the Knight's Templar? This is where conspiracy theory meets archaeology in my opinion. If they can't, I blush for them.

Perhaps this was a priestly family (see comments this entry). Or perhaps this was a family related to the restoration of temple worship (see earlier article on "The Talpiot Tombs..." below for Hasmonian/Maccabean possibilities for the names on these ossuaries). Or, perhaps this was just a very observant family that loved to worship at the temple. Certainly the verse comes to mind from David's Psalm 23, "...and I will dwell in the house of the LORD forever."

Links:

Jesus Tomb Exposed: Excellent collection of links

http://jesustombexposed.blogspot.com/2007/03/jesus-tomb-buried-in-controversy.html

Faithmaps: Another good collection of links

http://faithmaps.org/scripts/prodList.asp?idcategory=160&curPage=3&sortField=sortorder

Crosstie.org: Another good collection of links

http://www.crosstie.org/2007/03/jesus-tomb-reopened.html

Targuman: "The Chevron and Circle on "Jesus'" Tomb

http://targuman.org/blog/?p=565

Dr. Craig A. Evans: "The Tomb of Jesus and Family? Second Thoughts"
http://www.deinde.org/story/2007/3/2/203419/9162

Rod Bennett: Progress on the Lost Tomb

http://rod-bennett.blogspot.com/2007/03/progress-on-lost-tomb.html

In the so-called “Family Tomb of Jesus”: Mariamne or Mariamenon?

2007-03-05T09:32:00.000-08:00

They have the wrong name. As I noted below in my first article that dealt with the history of sensational claims from Talpiot, “The Talpiot Tombs: Again, and Again and Again,”—early on R. Bauckham caught the fact that the name inscribed on the ossuary read by Simcha Jacobovici, Dr. James Tabor, et al. “Mariamne” should be read “Mariamenon.” The inscription reads: “Mariamenou e Mara.” The genitive of Mariamne would be Mariamnes (final letters eta, sigma). Hence Mariamenou comes from Mariamenon.
___________________

Repost from below "The Talpiot Tombs...":
“Belonging to Mariamenon who is Mara” [Genitive of Mariamenon with a second name “Mara” (a short form of Martha)]. This has been suggested by R. Bauckham [http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/ (See Wednesday February 28, 2007)]. The Discovery Channel film proposes to read Mara as the Aramaic word ‘the master’ (as in Maranatha). Bauckham later wrote: "But, since we know that Mara was used as an abbreviated form of Martha, in this context of names on an ossuary it is much more plausible to read it as a name. This woman had two names: Mariamenon and Mara. It could be that the latter in this case was used as an abbreviation of Mariamenou, or it could be that the woman was known by Mariamenon, treated as a Greek name, and the Aramaic name Mara, conforming to the common practice of being known by two names, Greek and Semitic" [http://www.christilling.de/blog/2007/03/guest-post-by-richard-bauckham.html].
___________________

Note that R. Baukham’s early notice that they had the wrong name did not phase the defenders of the "documentary" last night. Both Jacobovici and Taber misrepresented the name either due to poor scholarship or… well I think the rest would be transparent enough. It is a little hard to believe that they would not know this after months... years in some cases of studying these inscriptions. See also: http://ntgateway.com/weblog/labels/Naassenes.html.

The Mariamne connection to Mary Magdalene was already one of those great big “ifs” alluded to by Bock on the Koppel program that followed. Since it is Mariamenon… as this is weighed by scholarship today, let’s just say that “if” has really grown.

“Family Tomb of Jesus”--or Simcha's Cash Cow?

2007-03-05T00:21:00.000-08:00

[This is one of four articles on the so-called "Lost Tomb of Jesus" on this blog. Please see blog archive on the right side of this page].

The resurrected Jesus said to His disciples:

"Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have" (Lk. 24:39).

A SPIRIT HATH NOT FLESH AND BONES
Does it matter whether or not Jesus of Nazareth’s bones were placed in an ossuary. The answer to that is a resounding yes! The Apostle Paul wrote: “And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain” (1 Cor. 15:14).

Could Jesus have risen from the dead and simply "left His body behind" before he ascended as Dr. James Tabor suggested to Ted Koppel last night? That would make a mockery of the Apostle Peter’s sermon which hinged on the difference between David’s bones resting in his tomb and the fulfillment of the prophecy that David made about Christ; namely, that the flesh of the Holy One of God would not “see corruption” (Acts 2:27-31).

If there is any value to the future study of this tomb, it is hard to see past the heresy for the blasphemy. The Apostle Paul prophesied a "falling away" before the end time. These are interesting times in which we live.

“CHEVRON AND CIRCLE”
What about the mysterious “chevron and circle”? Often on tomb facades there were decorative connections related to the temple. What did the temple facade look like before the renovations of King Herod? What did it look like afterward? Never mind that… on the official site we are fed theories related to the “all-seeing eye.”

OPPORTUNISM
Did we see a film on the “Lost Tomb of Jesus”--or Simcha Jacobovici’s cash cow?

Count the many agendas name them one by one--
Count the many agendas see what Simcha & Co. have done.

1) Direct a dramatized hypothesis in coordination with his book’s release $.
2) Promote his dramatized hypothesis just before Easter $.
3) Conclude a dramatized hypothesis leaving room for Talpiot Tomb II $.
4) Use these ossuaries to help the case for his other book on the James ossuary $.
5) Use scholars for analysis of inscriptions while editing out their opinions.
6) Order the inscriptions so that those most acceptable to Christians appear in the “documentary” first—while the radical suggestions are left as a sneak attack.
7) Present a not-so-subtle feminist agenda in depicting Mary Magdalene.
8) There was no mention of the fact that 35 persons were buried in this tomb: “17 in the ossuaries (based on an average of 1.7 individuals per ossuary), and 18 outside the ossuaries” [See Amos Kloner, “ A Tomb with Inscribed Ossuaries in East Talpiot, Jerusalem,” ‘Atiquot (Jerusalem), vol. 29 (1996), 15, fn. 2]. With an average of almost two persons per ossuary, exactly how were they certain that they had the DNA of the person mentioned in the inscription? This is just one of many gaps in logic in this “documentary.”

DIFFERENCE IN QUALITY OF INSCRIPTION
As I point out in the article below [“The Talpiot Tombs: Again and Again and Again!”] the difference in the quality of the inscription on the “Yeshua bar Yehosef” ossuary was given little attention.

According to Amos Kloner’s report, the tomb was vandalized in antiquity and the blocking stone, known as a golal, was never found for this tomb. It was supposed to have been removed in antiquity. Or was it removed in more modern times? Though the original maps of the Talpiot tomb shows that the soil level was almost a foot above the buried ossuaries, the inscription on the “Yeshua bar Yosef” ossuary was scratched in a messy fashion near the lid. Only one or two of the first four letters are fairly legible.

In an article for MSNBC [“Have Researchers Found Jesus Christ’s Tomb?” March 5, 2007 issue], Lisa Miller and Joanna Chen related the Concern of John Dominic Crossan, “leader of the liberal Jesus Seminar and author of “Excavating Jesus.” According to Crossan, “the biggest questions relate to the early break-in: who vandalized the cave, when, what did they do there and why?”

Many Palestinian Arabs and also Israelis have been known to enter tombs to find and sell antiquities. An ossuary inscription from Talpiot was the focus of Islamic claims against the resurrection of Jesus in 1945. The inscription “Yeshua bar Yosef” is the most interesting that has been found in the tomb for many reasons. Several ossuaries have been found bearing this same inscription. Of all of the inscriptions it is the one done poorly—scratched—with apparent lack of light or visibility. The others appear possibly to have been done outside the tomb in antiquity and are more deeply etched. “Jesus, son of Joseph” looks suspiciously like it was accomplished inside the tomb itself. If so, when was it inscribed?

Even if all of the inscriptions are genuine, these were very common names. As I point out below, several of these names were Maccabean and very popular in this period. As for Mariamenon e Mara, I offer a few suggestions below that the "documentary" did not explore. How many possibilities did it explore? Oh, yes... one.

Can anyone call this “documentary” what it is—callous, prideful, sensational, unscholarly opportunism! As I described below, there were sensational claims for an ossuary in 1931 with the same inscription (Yeshua bar Yosef) and again in 1945 (two ossuaries with the name “Jesus” appeared—from a Talpiot tomb). Yet in those days there was no Hollywood producer biting—and no Emmy-award-winning directors who had read Dan Brown’s book.

R. Kirk Kilpatrick
Associate Professor of Old Testament and Hebrew
Mid-America Baptist Theological Seminary

Links:
Jesus Tomb Exposed: Excellent collection of links
http://jesustombexposed.blogspot.com/2007/03/jesus-tomb-buried-in-controversy.html
Faithmaps: Another good collection of links
http://faithmaps.org/scripts/prodList.asp?idcategory=160&curPage=3&sortField=sortorder
Targuman: "The Chevron and Circle on "Jesus'" Tomb
http://targuman.org/blog/?p=565
Dr. Craig A. Evans: "The Tomb of Jesus and Family? Second Thoughts"
http://www.deinde.org/story/2007/3/2/203419/9162
Rod Bennett: Progress on the Lost Tomb
http://rod-bennett.blogspot.com/2007/03/progress-on-lost-tomb.html

The Talpiot Tombs: Again and Again and Again!

2007-03-02T10:09:00.000-08:00

Photo courtesy IAA

Has “Jesus’ family tomb” been identified in 2007? Does the inscription in the photo above read "Yeshua bar Yosef" or "Hanun bar Yosef"?

Due to a messy, debated, scratched inscription near the lid of an ancient ossuary, James Cameron has recently claimed to have found the “Lost tomb of Jesus” at a place called Talpiot, a neighborhood in the southeastern environs of Jerusalem.

He claims that his discovery will change history.

“The Talpiot district of Jerusalem, where the so-called Caiaphas crypt was discovered, has yielded up many tombs and ossuaries (Fishwick 1963; Kloner 1996)” [Evans, 112].

These fantastic assertions about inscriptions on ossuaries (stone boxes for the secondary burial of bones) are being made in an upcoming documentary called “The Lost Tomb of Jesus,” by James Cameron (A Canadian of Hollywood fame… Oscar winning film director of “Titanic,” “Terminator,” etc. who is producing the documentary) and Simcha Jacobovici (A Canadian Orthodox Jew who is an Emmy award winning director).

Also lending expert opinion to bolster their claims are Dr. James Tabor (Chairman of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte who has just written The Jesus Dynasty that in some respects is a bit more scholarly version of the “Da Vinci Code”), Dr. Andrey Feuerverger (a professor of statistics and mathematics at the University of Toronto), and a few others.

A HISTORY OF SENSATIONALISM
In 1963, in an article by was entitled “Talpioth again and again,” Duncan Fishwick returned to examine some of the claims for ossuaries that have come from the Talpiot area outside of Jerusalem. This entry is simply the next installment. There has been a regular pattern of claims, from this area of ancient burial, that have stirred up media interest and have momentarily shaken the faith of some. These claims generally have come as attacks upon the deity of Jesus and the resurrection.

Since the nineteenth century more than a thousand ossuaries have been found in the vicinity of Jerusalem—many with “biblical names.”

In 1873 Charles Clermont-Ganneau made sensationalist claims about several ossuaries upon finding a “funerary cave” near Bethany. The Hebrew inscriptions on these ossuaries included the names: “Salome, Judah, Simeon son of Jesus, Martha, Eleazar (Lazarus), and Salampsion.” The Greek inscriptions “provided the names Jesus, Nathaniel, Hedea, Kythras, Moschas, and Marias.” The name Jesus appeared “three times in all” [Kraeling, 18].

In 1931 there was a flurry of activity among reporters distributing the story that “the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth had been found” due to the misunderstanding of a presentation by Professor E. L. Sukenik to the German Archaeological Society with regard to an ossuary that had the inscription: “Jesus, son of Joseph” [Kraeling, 18].

In 1946, Carl H. Kraeling reflected “Under a date of October 3, 1945 many American newspapers carried brief accounts of an archaeological discovery made at Jerusalem.” This time the discovery was at Talpiot. Kraeling continued, “Between them the accounts provide an interesting example of what happens to a simple record of fact when handled by sensation-hunting newspaper reporters.” The papers carrying sensationalist headlines included the New York Times, New York Daily, and the London Daily Herald, where it was written:

“…what is believed an eyewitness account of the death of Christ has been discovered by Arabs digging in the foundations of a house outside of Jerusalem. Described by the chief archaeologist of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem as a “most important discovery,” the Greek writings were believed the work of a family of Jewish disciples who stood among the multitudes on Calvary. A bitter and moving lamentation, the account was probably written within a few weeks of the crucifixion. It was incased in four stone coffins in a vault within the house, which is on the road to Bethlehem” [Kraeling, 16].

In the next issue of Biblical Archaeologist, G. E. Wright wrote: “The last number of the B.A. contained the interesting article by Professor Carl Kraeling on the urns reported last October as being the earliest witness to the death of Jesus Christ. It adequately debunked the whole thing, and showed that what we have here is merely another discovery of some Jewish ossuaries.” He also wrote that a “certain Mohammedan paper in Palestine… will have to look for other grounds on which to challenge the belief in the resurrection of Jesus” [Wright, 43].

The Official Guide to Israel in 1950, said, “About seven hundred metres behind Talpiot a tomb was excavated in 1945 and several ossuaries containing human bodies were found. Inscriptions and coins proved that the burial in the tomb took place in the years 41-42. Two ossuaries were found marked with the word “Jesus,” and some others have so far been undeciphered. It has therefore been assumed that followers of Jesus had been buried in this tomb. If this assumption proves correct, this tomb would show the earliest historical evidence known about the followers of Jesus” [Official Guide to Israel, Tel Aviv: 1950, 247].

THE INSCRIPTIONS ON OSSUARIES FROM THE TALPIOT TOMB:
According to Richard Bauckham (as quoted by Ben Witherington):
“We have a data base of about 3000 named persons (2625 men, 328 women, excluding fictional characters). Of the 2625 men, the name Joseph (including Yose, the abbreviated form) was borne by 218 or 8.3%. (It is the second most popular Jewish male name, after Simon/Simeon.) The name Judah was borne by 164 or 6.2%. The name Jesus was borne by 99 or 3.4%. The name Matthew (in several forms) was borne by 62 or 2.4 %. Of the 328 named women (women’s names were much less often recorded than men’s), a staggering 70 or 21.4% were called Mary (Mariam, Maria, Mariame, Mariamme) [http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/ (for Thursday March 1, 2007)].

The inscriptions on the ossuaries in question (5 Aramaic, 1 Greek):

1) Maryah or Maria [form of Miriam, spelled here Mem, Resh, Yod, Heh].

2) Matia [form of Matthew, spelled here Mem, Tav, Yod, Heh].
About 35% of Jewish males during this period had “Hasmonian” [Maccabean] names. These include: Matthew, John/Jonathan, Simon, Judah/Judas, Eleazar, and Joseph.

3) Yose [A contraction of Yosef (Joseph), spelled here Yod, Vav, Samech, Heh].

4) Yehuda bar Yeshua [Judah son of Yeshua/Joshua/Jesus (Gk.)].
The third most common name for a Jewish male during this period was Yehuda (Judah/Judas). Of 1986 names surveyed for this period, 128 times Yehuda [T. Ilan].

5) Yeshua (?) bar Yosef [Joshua (Hebrew) son of Joseph (Yeshua in Hebrew which in Greek is Iesous or the English rendering "Jesus"--See Acts 7:45].
Frank Moore Cross reads Yeshua bar Yosef. Amos Kloner and Stephen Pfann question this reading and suggest that it may read Hanun bar Yosef. In T. Ilan’s lexicon, the name “Jesus” was noted for 104 individuals during this period. Given that the greater environs of Jerusalem probably exceeded 100,000 in population, there were probably as many as 5,000 or more men with this name in the vicinity of Jerusalem. **Twenty-two ossuaries have been found bearing the inscription “Jesus” in some form—and four of them with the inscription Jesus son of Joseph.

6) Mariamne (?) e Mara or Mariamenou e mara [Beautifully carved in Greek].
According to the documentary this reads “Mary known as the master”—however, this could mean several things, including (but not limited to):

>“Belonging to Mariamenon who is Mara” [Genitive of Mariamenon with a second name “Mara” (a short form of Martha)]. This has been suggested by R. Bauckham [http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/ (See Wednesday February 28, 2007)]. The Discovery Channel film proposes to read Mara as the Aramaic word ‘the master’ (as in Maranatha). Bauckham later wrote: "But, since we know that Mara was used as an abbreviated form of Martha, in this context of names on an ossuary it is much more plausible to read it as a name. This woman had two names: Mariamenon and Mara. It could be that the latter in this case was used as an abbreviation of Mariamenou, or it could be that the woman was known by Mariamenon, treated as a Greek name, and the Aramaic name Mara, conforming to the common practice of being known by two names, Greek and Semitic" [http://www.christilling.de/blog/2007/03/guest-post-by-richard-bauckham.html].

>“Bel. to Mariamenon the beautiful”

>“Bel. to Mariamenon the bitter”(?), unlikely but possible.

> "Bel. to Mariamenon [and?] Mara (short form of Martha) [2 person's bones in ossuary].

>“Belonging to Maraimenon the queen(?)” this would be a rare variant of the Aramaic word rendered in the documentary as “Master”--and as such it is unlikely. But this would follow an old semitic formula (Preposition, name, definite article, title), hence: LeMariamenon haMalqah (Belonging to Mariamenon the queen). Marana can mean “Govenor" or ruler and it is an interesting possibility that this could mean “Queen” due to the title of Herod the Great’s wife and the tower named after her, the Mariamne Tower a.k.a. “e Basilis”—“the queen.” Mariamne the queen had relatives whose names included Joseph, Matthew, Judah, etc. The Jewish historian Josephus was related to the Hasmonian dynasty and had the names Matthew (Matthew Ephlias, Matthew Curtis, and two other Matthews including his own father), Joseph (three ancestors so named), and Mariamne in his own family. It is interesting what can be done with these common names...

Variants of this name “Mariamne” have been found on over twenty ossuaries.

In 1974 a text called the “Acts of Phillip” was discovered by Francois Bovon and Bertrand Bouvier in the library of Xenophrontos Monastery in Greece. The copy that they found was made in the fourteenth century, but it is claimed that the text goes back to the fourth century in Asia Minor. In the Acts of Phillip (a fourth century AD heterodox, non-canonical work), Phillip’s sister is called Mariamne and is considered by Bovon to be Mary Magdalene. In this text there are mythical elements including talking animals, Mariamne slaying a dragon, and at one point under threat she turned into a cloud of fire.

DNA
There were ten ossuaries in the tomb. Why did they just take DNA from the one marked Yeshua bar Yosef and the one marked Mariamnou e mara? How many skeletons were in these two ossuaries? Amos Kloner’s report clearly indicated multiple burials in most of these ossuaries. Does it seem like there is an agenda here?

THE JAMES OSSUARY?
The use of the James ossuary in the documentary is to strengthen the case for the tomb. This ossuary, however, has been declared a fake by the Israel Antiquities Authority. The inscription: Yaacov bar yosef achdi Yeshua (James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus) is quite sensational. But is it real? Though the Israel Antiquity Authority’s ruling is in (forgery), the jury is still out in the collector’s trial that is on-going in Jerusalem.

Cameron and Jacobovici suggest that, based on tests that were developed just for this documentary, the patina of the James ossuary matches the patina of the Talpiot tomb’s ossuaries. They also claim that it is the exact same measure as one of the Talpiot tomb’s ossuaries that they claim “went missing.” Amos Kloner, the archaeologist who oversaw the original work in the tomb disputes their assertion that any of the ossuaries were ever missing. He also says that the James ossuary is the wrong size to have been one of this group.

In a note recently sent by Joe Zias who also was one of the archaeologists who worked at the site in 1980, Zias wrote:
Re: Jesus Tomb Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2007 6:02 AM
"Amos Kloner is right as I received and catalogued the objects, the 10th was plain and I put it out in the courtyard with all the rest of the plain ossuaries as was the standard procedure when one has little storage space available. Nothing was stolen nor missing and they were fully aware of this fact, just didn't fit in with their agenda. ShalomJoe” [See: http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/].

Zias later wrote:
Re: Jesus Tomb Sent: Thursday, March 1, 2007 4:31 PM "There was no photo of the 10th ossuary as there was no reason to photograph it, plain white ossuaries, basically once you have seen one you have seen them all. time is money and it would be a waste of time to waste resources on something which was put out in the courtyard. Remember these are large, and heavy not to forget that Kloner has the measurements. They know this from me personally. The conspiracy idea fits in well with their agenda of hyping the film as well as his/their book."Joe [See: http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/].

STATISTICS
Numbers fly in this documentary from 1 in 97,280,000 to 1 in 2,400,000 to 1 in 30,000 that this isn’t Jesus’ tomb. The statistician eventually settles on 600 to 1 that this is Jesus’ tomb. Is that a fact, or is there a factor (or two) not being included in the mix?

POTENTIAL FOR FORGERY
In an article for MSNBC [Have Researchers Found Jesus Christ’s Tomb? March 5, 2007 issue], Lisa Miller and Joanna Chen related the Concern of John Dominic Crossan, “leader of the liberal Jesus Seminar and author of “Excavating Jesus.” According to Crossan, “the biggest questions relate to the early break-in: who vandalized the cave, when, what did they do there and why?”

One very important factor was added to the equation by David Horovitz of the Jerusalem Post. In his article “Raiders of the Lost Tomb” that appeared 2-27-2007 as part of the Post’s Online edition, he mentioned that one man “called out from a top-floor window” of one of the apartments near the tomb, “We should be charging you an entrance fee.”

The reporter then noted that this same man “recalled that the tomb had been kept open for a long time after its initial discovery, and that it had been re-opened twice in the past year or so.”

According to Kloner’s own notes, “The discovery, made prior to construction activity, was reported by K. Mandil and A. Shohat of the Solel Boneh Construction Company. The site was initially examined by E. Braun. Salvage excavations were conducted from March 28-April 14, 1980 (Permit 938)” [Kloner, “A Tomb with Inscribed Ossuaries,” Note 1, p. 22].

According to Amos Kloner’s report, the tomb was vandalized in antiquity and the blocking stone, known as a golal, was never found for this tomb. It was supposed to have been removed in antiquity. Or was it removed in more modern times? Though the original maps of the Talpiyot tomb shows that the soil level was almost a foot above the buried ossuaries, the inscription on the “Yeshua bar Yosef” ossuary was scratched in a messy fashion near the lid. Only one or two of the first four letters are fairly legible.

The inscription “Jesus, son of Joseph,” while foreign to an ascription that would be made by a follower of Jesus, is, nevertheless, more welcome in other theological circles. Atheistic, Liberal Christian, Jewish and Muslim thought is much more welcoming of such an association when it comes to Jesus of Nazareth. Many Palestinian Arabs have been known to enter tombs to find and sell antiquities. An ossuary inscription from Talpiot was the focus of Islamic claims against the resurrection of Jesus in 1945. The inscription “Yeshua bar Yosef” is the most interesting that has been found in the tomb for many reasons.

Of all of the inscriptions it is the one done poorly—scratched—with apparent lack of light or visibility. The others appear possibly to have been done outside the tomb in antiquity and are more deeply etched. “Jesus, son of Joseph” looks suspiciously like it was accomplished inside the tomb itself. If so, when was it inscribed?

EXPERT OPINION
Archaeologists and Scholars who have already spoken out against the claims of Cameron, Jacobovici, et al. include: Amos Kloner, William Dever, Joe Zias, Michele Piccirillo and the list is growing.

William Dever, Professor Emeritus at the University of Arizona and an expert on Near Eastern Archaeology said, “The fact that it has been ignored tells you something.”

Professor Amos Kloner, the archaeologist who was in charge of clearing the Talpiot tomb in 1980, was interviewed on 2-27-07 by David Horovitz (questions below in bold) of the Jerusalem Post:

Horovitz: What do you make of the assertion that Jesus and his family were buried there?
Kloner: It makes a great story for a TV film. But it's completely impossible. It's nonsense. There is no likelihood that Jesus and his relatives had a family tomb. They were a Galilee family with no ties in Jerusalem. The Talpiot tomb belonged to a middle class family from the 1st century CE.

Horovitz: But there is apparently such a confluence of resonant names.
Kloner: The name "Jesus son of Joseph" has been found on three or four ossuaries. These are common names. There were huge headlines in the 1940s surrounding another Jesus ossuary, cited as the first evidence of Christianity. There was another Jesus tomb. Months later it was dismissed. Give me scientific evidence, and I'll grapple with it. But this is manufactured.

Horovitz: What of the assertion that the 10th ossuary disappeared from your care and may be none other than the "James" ossuary?
Kloner: Nothing has disappeared. The 10th ossuary was on my list. The measurements were not the same (as the James ossuary). It was plain (without an inscription). We had no room under our roofs for all the ossuaries, so unmarked ones were sometimes kept in the courtyard (of the Rockefeller Museum).

INCOMPREHENSIBLE INSENSITIVITY AND OPPORTUNISM
Some questions that have been raised for consideration are:
>Why are they making these claims just before Easter?
>Why don’t Cameron and Jacobvici cite scholars who disagree with their claims?
>Why are they using the James ossuary, labeled a forgery, as evidence for their claims?
>Why would Jesus’ family members bury Jesus’ bones in a family tomb and then claim that Jesus had been bodily raised from the dead?
>Why didn’t Jesus’ enemies expose this tomb?
>Why would Jesus’ disciples endure torture, imprisonment, and die for a lie?
>Who is Matia?
>How many gaps in logic can be found related to the documentary’s use of “DNA evidence”?
>Are statistics completely reliable?
>Have the statisticians accurately factored in the popularity of the names inscribed?
>What about the tradition that says that Mary was with John at Ephesus and was buried there? >What about the Catholic tradition that places her burial beneath the Dormition Abbey in Jerusalem?
>What about the record of Eusebius that the body of James was buried alone near the Temple mount?
>Jesus family was poor and from Nazareth… why would they have an expensive family tomb outside of Jerusalem?

Some matters the Scriptures make clear:
>Jesus never married and He certainly never had a child.
>Jesus was not called “son of Joseph” by his followers.
>Jesus’ body did not decompose—He was raised bodily.
(See the end of all four Gospels and Peter’s sermon in Acts 2).

Robert Knight, who is the director of the Media Research Center’s Culture and Media Institute, said: “The Discovery Channel bills itself as the ‘number one non-fiction media company reaching more than 1.5 billion people in over 170 countries.’ But this bigoted documentary is pure fiction. Numerous leading scholars, including the Israeli archaeologist who first studied the site, have already rejected the notion that Jesus of Nazareth’s bones were found in the Talpiot tomb.” L. Brent Bozell III, president of the Media Research Center said, “In terms of credibility, the Discovery Channel will have dug its own grave if it doesn’t pull this documentary.”

The filmmakers have also located another tomb only 20-25 yards away from this tomb and after inserting cameras found that it contained three more ossuaries. Sounds like Lost Tomb II will be coming to a cable channel near you soon.

TALPIOT AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN
Isaiah the prophet (Yeshayahu haNabi) once wrote: “Who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?”

Those who rejected the prophet’s report will be more likely to receive the report of this Hollywood producer (et al.) whose recent claims should be seen as nothing less than a prideful, vicious, irresponsible attack upon Christians everywhere.

Michele Piccirillo, with the Franciscan Archeological Institute, said: "Before, archeology was used to do politics. Now archeology is just to do money…. There are some people interested in destroying the faith of others and that's not good” http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070226/jesus_tomb_060226/20070226?hub=TopStories].

When it comes to the resurrection of Jesus, the issue still comes down to faith. Those who think the DNA in this tomb belongs to Jesus have faith grounded upon the opinions of a Hollywood sensationalist, a Canadian journalist, and a couple of maverick scholars who say that some etchings upon an ancient bone box—not even unique in its debatable inscription—disprove the bodily resurrection of Christ. Those who have faith that the Bible points to Jesus as the resurrected Son of God have faith grounded upon the Word of God.

James Cameron could not be more wrong—empirically, ethically, and ultimately. The find that changed history was the empty tomb.

TIMELINE:
1873 Charles Clermont-Ganneau makes sensational claims for ossuaries from Bethany.
1931 Professor Sukenik starts a media frenzy in Berlin over a presentation on an ossuary that had the inscription “Yeshua bar Yosef.”
1945 Two ossuaries found at Talpiot both bearing the name Jesus.
1963 Duncan Fishwick’s article re-examining the sensational Talpiot ossuaries.
1980 March… official “discovery” of the Talpiot tomb during an excavation for a housing project. Since the bones found in the ossuaries appear to belong to Jews, they are buried according to Jewish custom.
1996 BBC documentary “The Tomb that Dare not Speak Its Name”
2003 Simcha Jacobovici documentary on the James Ossuary.
2006 The Da Vinci Code released just before Easter.
2006 Dr. James Tabor’s book The Jesus Dynasty is released.
2007 Press Conference at the New York Public Library announcing “discovery” and documentary “The Lost Tomb of Jesus." Jacobovici and Pelegrino’s book The Lost Tomb of Jesus is released by Harper-Collins.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Evans, Craig A. Jesus and the Ossuaries, 2003; Fishwick, Duncan. "Talpioth ossuaries again.” New Testament Studies 10 (1963) 49-61; Ilan, T. Lexicon of Jewish Names in Late Antiquity (TSAJ 91; Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002); Kraeling, Carl Hermann “Christian Burial Urns?” Biblical Archaeologist 9, 1 (1946), 16-20; Rahmani, L. Y. A Catalogue of Jewish Ossuaries in the Collections of the State of Israel (Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities and Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, 1994); Wright, George Ernest. “New Information regarding the supposed 'Christian' ossuaries” Biblical Archaeologist 9, 2 (1946), 43.

This article in Portuguese:

http://notria.blogspot.com/

http://pastorluciano.blogspot.com/2007/03/o-sepulcro-da-famlia-de-jesus-foi_08.html

Translation by Alan Amorim and Airton Santos.

Some links:

Faithmaps.org on the "Lost Tomb"

http://faithmaps.org/scripts/prodList.asp?idCategory=160

'Jesus tomb' documentary ignores biblical & scientific evidence, logic, experts say

http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=25053

'Lost Tomb' is pure sensationalism, Mohler says on 'LKL'

http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=25054

Examining the 'Jesus Tomb' Evidence

http://news.yahoo.com/s/realclearpolitics/20070305/cm_rcp/examining_the_jesus_tomb_evide

Special Report: Has James Cameron Found Jesus's Tomb or Is It Just a Statistical Error? Should You Accept the 600-to-One Odds That the Talpiot Tomb Belonged to Jesus?

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanId=sa003&articleId=14A3C2E6-E7F2-99DF-37A9AEC98FB0702A

The Truth about the "Lost Tomb of Jesus"

http://jesustombexposed.blogspot.com/2007/03/jesus-tomb-buried-in-controversy.html