Titus Flavius Josephus and the Prophet Jeremiah – Biblical Archaeology Society

Titus Flavius Josephus and the Prophet Jeremiah – Biblical Archaeology Society:

'via Blog this'

Titus Flavius Josephus is best remembered as an unparalleled chronicler of first-century C.E. Jewish history. His legacy also includes a military record marked by the betrayal of his peers and capitulation to the Romans. As a commander in the Jewish revolt, Josephus attempted to persuade his companions to open the gates of Yodfat for the Romans, and when the city fell, he reneged on the group’s suicide pact and personally surrendered. After the destruction of Jerusalem, Titus Flavius Josephus lived as a Roman citizen in the emperor’s palace, enjoying the luxurious life of a dignitary and scholar.

Josephus’s repeated calls for surrender to the Romans have been labeled as betrayal. In the September/October 2012 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, distinguished scholar Avisahi Margalit contrasts the historian’s tarnished reputation with that of the prophet Jeremiah. The prophet Jeremiah also urged total surrender to a militarily superior foe, the Babylonians. He tried to escape Jerusalem, and, much like Titus Flavius Josephus, was accused of trying to defect. Avisahi Margalit asks: how is it that the Biblical prophet Jeremiah is revered while Josephus is criticized?

Avishai Margalit

Avisahi Margalit writes that “Josephus offers two kinds of defenses: defense of creed and defense of his people.” Josephus portrayed the zealots as irrational while defending the majority of Jews and the Roman dynasty, conveniently omitting the widespread support for the revolt and the atrocities committed by the Romans. Margalit writes that Jeremiah is also a historian, but “his appeal to history is not out of an interest in human affairs as such, but rather in history as a source of obligations to God. The religion of the Bible is, broadly speaking, a historically based religion; the primary arena of the Bible is history; the divine manifestation is set essentially in history.”

Neither Titus Flavius Josephus nor the prophet Jeremiah considered the creation of a Judean vassal state to be idolatry, and both took it upon themselves to warn their people of the superior military force of their enemies. Yet Avishai Margalit states that, “Josephus was tainted by his relation to power; Jeremiah was willing to risk everything. Josephus’s relation to power should not disqualify him as a witness in the court of history but it does disqualify him as a moral witness: a moral witness is never in the service of the ruling power.”

Acts 13 — Photo Illustrations # 2 | Ferrell's Travel Blog

Acts 13 — Photo Illustrations # 2 | Ferrell's Travel Blog:

'via Blog this'

Acts 13 — Photo Illustrations # 2

Posted on September 26, 2012 | 2 Comments

During the trip to Israel I got a little behind in the photo illustrations for the chapters of Acts.

When we come to Acts 13 and 14, there are so many places to consider that it could take weeks to cover them all in detail. In fact, if you use the search box you will see that we have posts on most of the places mentioned in these chapters.

It seems that Paul and Barnabas did not stop to preach in Perga on the outgoing portion of the first journey. The text says, almost casually, that “going on from Perga, they arrived at Pisidian Antioch” (Acts 13:14).

Here we have one of the longer sermons of the book of Acts — Paul’s sermon in the Jewish synagogue. While it appears that we have a vibrant Jewish community in Pisidian Antioch, we also find a receptive Gentile audience. When the Jews rejected the message of the risen Christ, Paul and Barnabas said,

“we are turning to the Gentiles.” (Acts 13:46 ESV)

Pisidian Antioch was a city of numerous idol temples. There was a sanctuary or temple dedicated to the Emperor Augustus (30 B.C. – A.D. 14) built by Tiberias (A.D. 14-37).

Ruins of the Augustus Imperial Sanctuary at Pisidian Antioch. Photo by Ferrell Jenkins.

The foundation of the sanctuary is cut from the solid bedrock.

The Augustus Imperial Sanctuary at Pisidian Antioch. Photo by Ferrell Jenkins.

Peter Walker describes the temple,

Beyond the propylon was a large, semicircular courtyard, surrounded by colonnades, the eastern part of which was cut out from the hill-side’s rock. And standing in the centre, towards the back, was the sanctuary of Augustus’ temple. Though quite small – some 15 by 30 feet (4.5 x 9 m) – it was set on a high foundation of natural rock and approached by a further twelve steps. Antioch’s residents were expressing in impressive fashion their gratitude to the emperor for their city’s increased prestige under his rule. However, for Paul it demonstrated the daunting challenge ahead. What room would there be for his own message, focused on a rival world-ruler, in a city where this imperial cult was evidently growing at such a pace? (In the Steps of Paul, 87,89).

Maps. In your study of Acts you might enjoy the use of the Digital Map of the Roman Empire available here. This map, based on the Barrington Atlas, includes the road system. Because the maps show the terrain, you can get some concept of the difficulties encountered by Paul and his companions as they traveled from place to place.

Thanks to Dr. Rasmussen for the lead to this map.

ARCHAEOLOGY - Archaeologists discover second Lycian synagogue

ARCHAEOLOGY - Archaeologists discover second Lycian synagogue:

'via Blog this'

ANTALYA - Anatolia News Agency

The second synagogue from the Lycian civilization has been discovered in Finike. AA photo

Archaeological teams digging in the ancient city of Limyra in the Mediterranean province of Antalyahave announced the discovery of a second synagogue from the Lycian civilization.

Researchers initially thought the house of worship was a glass furnace, according to the head of the excavations, Dr. Martin Seyer of the Austrian Archaeology Institute. “We first found a bath and a menorah. After some [further] investigation, we found out that it was a synagogue,” he said.

Second synagogue in the Lycian city 

The synagogue in Limyra, which is located in Turunçova in Antalya’s Finike district, is the second to be found in the historical Lycian region after one discovered in 2009 in the ancient city of Myra in Antalya’s Demre district. Limyra was the former capital of the Lycian Federation, which some have called the first democratic union. 

“We have excavated a small part of the synagogue field, but we think that the synagogue was on a very large field,” he said, citing the relevant law under Emperor Theodosianus that only permitted the restoration of existing synagogues rather than the construction of new Jewish houses of worship. “There was a wide and rich Jewish group of people living there. The synagogue is a very important discovery for Jews and the ancient city of Limyra. Thanks to this synagogue, we have chance to see the Limyra excavations and its history.” 

Excavations will continue in the area around the synagogue next year, Seyer said, adding that the ancient city would attract many more tourists once the archaeological work is complete.

September/25/2012

The Rapture?

The Rapture[1] is defined as the gathering together of all Christians on earth at the time of the return of Jesus Christ.   Belief in the rapture as a prophesied future event is found primarily  among “Protestant” groups[2].   However, one only has to look at the word and seek to look up the word “Rapture” in the scripture and you will find NO SUCH TERM. The reason why is because it is an English word derived from the Latin word rapio which means "caught up" or “snatch” and is found in the Vulgate rendering of 1 Thessalonians 4:17 – NOT THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE (Greek).  But – one may argue,  “That’s what RAPTURE means! What difference does it make if it is Latin, Greek, or English?”  The answer to that question,  is that it makes a big difference when you look at what men promote this to say. 

Regarding the “rapture”, 1 Thess.4:17 is our first text in question. In vs.13 the subject of Paul’s statement that leads down to vs.15-17. “..we would not have you ignorant, brethren, concerning them that fall asleep; that ye sorrow not, even as the rest, who have no hope.”  

• What’s my hope if I die before the Lord comes again?
• What’s my hope if I’m alive when the Lord does come again

In vs.14-16 we learn that those who have passed on before the Lord returns, the “dead in Christ shall rise first,”   before those who are still alive are called. Now the question remains, “What about those who are alive when the Lord comes again?  The answer is in vs.17, 18.  Paul states, “we that are alive, that are left, shall together with them be caught up in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.”  Someone might say, “But doesn’t this teach the Rapture? See it says that they were CAUGHT UP!”   Answer – yes, it does. Yet, from the definition that you see from the context of the passage,  Paul is simply answering the question that plagues us all who believe, about what is going to happen when the Lord returns. 

• IF we’re dead – what happens? 
• If we’re still alive – what happens? 

It says NOTHING about a "Rapture" as it is commonly taught, a 1000 yr. reign, Antichrist, people being left behind, or anything else.  So, someone might say, “Well this is only one passage! There are other passages that confirm the Rapture, a 1000 yr. reign, and THE Antichrist.”  Look at 2 Thess.2:1-12!     Again, let’s observe the context. Paul’s writing here is concerning the coming of Christ and our “gathering [3]” to Him.  His statement is respecting this and "the gathering of the saints." Whatever that time is, Paul is wanting to make sure that they are not shaken in their faith, or troubled (vs.2,3). He reminds them of things that he told them while he was with them…

1. That whatever the time being referred to is, it is pertinent to the believers at that time as vs.2 states whatever this was, it was “just at hand”
2. A “falling away” is going to happen, a defection from the truth. People would abandon their faith. (This is why he is writing to them, so that they won’t be shaken by these things and so too abandon their faith.)
3. He states that at that time “the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition”  Let’s notice some things from the context about this “man of sin [4]”

•  “he that opposeth and exalteth himself against all that is called God”
•  “or that is worshipped;”
• “so that he sitteth in the temple of God, setting himself forth as God.”

One of the first things that we have a tendency to do is automatically ASSUME things that are not in the passage. For instance, some say that this is talking about the Pope. Others believe it is Hitler. In our own time, some have said that it was Sadaam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden. But please note, that the person is NOT NAMED!  Without another biblical passage to tell us who this is, it literally could be Santa Claus!  So, to start saying that this is so and so, is a dangerous thing to do because it immediately takes the statement out of the original context of the passage. What then is important in the passage? Paul’s warning that lawlessness or sin by any other definition is already at work even as HE is writing this.  Who is this “lawless one?” Again, people like to jump to conclusions. Let’s let Paul tell us more.

Whoever this is will be revealed when the Lord comes. Lawless or not, this will occur![5] In vs.4 Paul first begins with an individual. Being lawless, whoever this is, their work is the work of Satan and not God. Whoever it is has no interest in God or anything that God stands for. In vs.5-7 there are several things to note.

• In vs. 5 Paul writes, “when I was yet with you, I told you these things?”
• In vs.6 Paul says “he might be revealed in his time.” 
• In vs.7 he states, “the mystery of iniquity doth already work…” 

This indicates that Paul was writing about something taking place in HIS time.  Emperor Gaius Julius Caesar Germanicus also known as Caligula ("little boots") attempted to desecrate the Temple. Everywhere else in the Roman Empire subjugated peoples had been forced to conform to the cult of Rome and acknowledge not only Caesar as Lord but also fall into line by adopting the Roman pantheon of gods. Caligula [6] gave an order to set up his statue in the Holy of Holies in the Temple. Notice now in vs.9 he references “he” but in vs.10 he switches to “they.”  Could it be that Paul is not referring to one particular person, but a GROUP or Classification of people?  Let’s read further.

• Whoever he-they are, they do not receive the truth or have desire to be saved from lawlessness or sin. (vs.10). This follows because their deeds are lawless and their work or deeds are after Satan and not God.
• God hands “them” over to their error. If they do not wish his salvation, then he allows THEM to pursue their lawlessness without restraint. In the end, THEY will be judged because they refused to believe the truth and took pleasure in their evil. (vs.11,12)

NO Rapture, No Millenium, No hype --  the truth. Let it speak for itself. It will state volumes and set you free!

Jim

__________________________________________________

Reference Notes

[1]  Ephraem of Nisibis, in 373 AD preached in the only  known sermon of that time that, "For all the saints and Elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins."  This teaching was not heard of prior to this, nor was it taught in any circles of the apostles.  Fourteen Hundred  years after Ephraem, there was  an allusion to the Rapture in a book written in 1788 by a Catholic priest named Emmanuel Lacunza and published in Spain in 1812.  John Darby, a Brethren preacher, taught the Rapture doctrine in 1827.  The evangelist, William Blackstone popularized Rapture doctrine in his best seller, "Jesus is Coming."  The Rapture doctrine entered mainstream Christianity with its inclusion in the Scofield Reference Bible.  There is no real history to the Rapture doctrine until the 1800's. The doctrine of the Rapture was not heard of again until the Protestant Reformation and the rise of Dispensationalism.  In fact, some people believe that the Rapture doctrine was developed to help alleviate some the the problems associated with Dispensationalism, specifically the belief that God deals with Israel and Christians in different ways.

[2]  David B. Currie, Rapture: The End-Times Error That Leaves the Bible Behind:  "the belief system of rapturists allows them to take a certain comfort in the face of evil. For when things really deteriorate into chaos, they expect to be  safely tucked away in Heaven. There is a problem with this approach to life, however. It may comfort the person witnessing suffering, but it does absolutely nothing positive for the person experiencing the suffering. This theology is appealing only as long as the pain is someone else's…Quite simply, the rapturist system contains no Cross."  He also points out that rapturists largely (if not completely) ignore the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., an event so significant that to ignore it is to guarantee incorrect interpretations of vital Scripture passages. "These rapturists refuse to even consider the events of 70 A.D. as a key to understanding any prophecies of the Bible because the events themselves are not enumerated in Scripture," Currie points out. "It is almost as though these events did not even occur. Therefore, they are left grasping for a still-future fulfillment." Another observer notes, "The Rapture relieves humans of thinking about more than themselves.   If one does some particular thing (a good work, something opposed to Martin Luther's thinking) like believing a particular thing, that person will be swept harmlessly away from all difficulty.

[3]  “GATHERING” - Only here and Heb.10:25. The verb episunagōgē  is used, as the noun here.

[4] In Paul’s own time, Caligula. The Emperor of Rome claimed to be God.  The deification of the Roman emperor is evidenced in a coin of Julius with “theos” on one side and “Thessalonikeōn” on the other.  It is not clear that Paul has in mind only one individual or even individuals at all rather than evil principles and influences.  2Thess.2:6 speaks of “that which restraineth” while vs. 7 it is “the one that restraineth.”

[5] Romans 14:11, “every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess to God.”

[6] Now Caius Caesar did so grossly abuse the fortune he had arrived at, as to take himself to be a god, and to desire to be so called also, and to cut off those of the greatest nobility out of his country. He also extended his impiety as far as the Jews. Accordingly he sent Petronius with an army to Jerusalem to place his statues in the temple, and commanded him that, in case the Jews would not admit of them, he should slay those that opposed it, and carry all the rest into captivity. Flavius Josephus, Antiquities, 15, 403 ff.

PaleoJudaica.com: 09/16/2012 - 09/23/2012

PaleoJudaica.com: 09/16/2012 - 09/23/2012:

'via Blog this'

THE GOSPEL OF JESUS' WIFE is getting endless attention in the media and the blogosphere, but I don't see very much today which adds anything new.  As far as I know, no papyrologist has come out in favor of its authenticity or even pointed to another ancient papyrus fragment that shares its odd features.  So it looks to me as though we have a small fragment that really, really fortunately preserves just the words that say exactly what we really, really would like to have an ancient gospel fragment say about Jesus.  Coincidentally, the physical features of the fragment are also highly unusual or even unprecedented.  So we've won the lottery twice.  Either that or it's a fake.

James McGrath has produced an excellent roundup of media and blog coverage:  2 Jesus’ Wife.

A couple of specific new items are worth flagging.  First, as I have said, no papyrologist (with the possible exception of the two who originally studied the fragment, although they themselves have not released any statements) argues that the fragment is genuine.  And so far I have only been able to find one specialist in any related area who defends its authenticity.  At the CNN blog, Eric Marrapodi has 5 questions and answers about Jesus' 'wife', which reports the following:

Elaine Pagels, a professor from Princeton University who is an expert on gnostic writings such as this one, noted to CNN, "You can find boxes filled with Coptic fragments." But what makes this one significant is for the first time, it explicitly has Jesus referring to "my wife."[...]
Some experts in the field, including Pagels, suggest the fragment contains too little to be faked, suggesting that a forger would have included much more in the document to try and raise the value.

I have not seen the exact wording of anything Professor Pagels may have said, so I don't know how accurately her views are being related. But the argument, whoever is making it, is very weak.  The forger, if it is forged, produced just enough to accomplish the objective (fake an ancient gospel with Mary of Magdalene as Jesus' wife and disciple).  Why include more text?  If it were accepted as genuine as it stands now, it would already be fantastically valuable in terms of the antiquities market, and each new line of forged text would make it increasingly likely that the forger would make a slip and be detected.

Second, April DeConick has a blog post is which she says that the Gospel of Philip, another fourth-century Coptic text that we already knew, also says that Mary was Jesus' wife:

But let's keep in mind that we actually already have a text that mentions Jesus' wife. It is the Gospel of Philip. We already know that there were some early Christians, in particular the Valentinian Gnostics, who taught that Mary Magdalene was Jesus' consort or wife. They wrote about it in the Gospel of Philip.

Unless the Coptic word translated as "companion" in Gospel of Philip 59.6-10 and 63.30-32 has the specific connotation of "wife" or "consort" (in which case, why is it not so translated in the Robinson, Meyers, or Layton translations?) the new fragment makes explicit what is at most implied in theGospel of Philip. I have put this point to April in the comments, so you can see what she has to say when she answers.

So my current judgement, which seems to be what most people are thinking, is that the Gospel of Jesus' Wife fragment is very likely a fake. If it is genuine, it tells us what one late apocryphal tradition speculated about Jesus, but nothing about the historical Jesus.

I will continue reporting as new discussion of interest comes up.

Gathercole on Jesus' Wife | Tyndale House

Gathercole on Jesus' Wife | Tyndale House:

'via Blog this'

The Web is by now awash with stories of an ancient text in which Jesus says ‘my wife’. The story which broke yesterday in the New York Times and some other sources, is being carried today by outlets too numerous to list. Some of the reporting is responsible, but not all. Consider this extract from The Daily Mail: “If genuine, the document casts doubt on a centuries old official representation of Magdalene as a repentant whore and overturns the Christian ideal of sexual abstinence.” We are of course in a context where there is so much ignorance of basic facts about Christianity that even when the media properly relay facts they get completely distorted and misunderstood in popular perception. This can be seen in the way derivative media put spin on the story and in the online comments below the news items. Here we try to establish a few facts. The scholarly article upon which almost all knowledge of the fragment is based is here. What do we know from this?
What’s in a name? First, let’s start with the name. The scholar involved, Professor Karen King of Harvard, has decided to call thisThe Gospel of Jesus’s Wife. However, it might more appropriately be named The Fragment about Jesus’s Relations, since there’s no evidence that it was called a gospel and the text mentions at least two family members. Of course, such a name would not generate the same publicity. Despite this unfortunate choice of name, Professor King is to be commended for publishing a good photograph and detailed scholarly analysis of the fragment simultaneously with the press release. Usually in the case of controversial text the media hype comes long before the availability of the text.
Genuine or forgery? Professor King has provided pictures of the papyrus, but it is not publicly known who owns it, or where it came from. If genuine, it almost certainly came from Egypt because that is where papyri like this are found. Because it was not found in situ it is obviously possible to doubt its genuineness. Scholars at Tyndale House think that, on the basis of the limited evidence currently available, it is possible it is genuine, though there are good reasons for scepticism – see the comments of Dr Christian Askeland, an expert in Coptic manuscripts here.
What about date? It is written in Coptic, the language of Egypt which descended from the even earlier language of the Hieroglyphs. Coptic is Egyptian written in the Greek alphabet with a few extra letters. Because Coptic was only emerging as a written language in the third century and papyrus went out of use in the seventh century the 8 cm x 4 cm fragment has to be dated some time from the third to the seventh century and the scholars involved with this fragment have stated that it is fourth century on the basis of the handwriting. Since we have virtually no firmly dated Coptic handwriting, this date is just an educated guess. Then we turn to the date of the contents. Here Professor King puts the text in the late second century, but all that we really know is that the text is at least as old as the manuscript.
The papyrus at the centre of the publicity
What does it say? This is King’s translation of the text, with square brackets used where the text does not survive: FRONT: 1 ] “not [to] me. My mother gave to me li[fe…” 2 ] The disciples said to Jesus, “.[ 3 ] deny. Mary is worthy of it[ 4 ]……” Jesus said to them, “My wife . .[ 5 ]… she will be able to be my disciple . . [ 6 ] Let wicked people swell up … [ 7] As for me, I dwell with her in order to . [ 8] an image [BACK: 1 ] my moth[er 2 ] three [ 3 ] … [ 4 ] forth which … [ 5 ] (illegible ink traces)
We believe this to be a largely reliable translation. But is it evidence that Jesus had a wife? The answer is an emphatic ‘no’. Not even Karen King is claiming that it is, though it’s inevitable that some of the news outlets will present it otherwise. What we have here is a typical sort of text which arose after Christianity had become very popular and when derivatives of Christianity began to emerge. The language of the text is very similar to the Gospel of Thomas, sayings 101 and 114, and the Gospel of Thomas saying 101 shows influence of Luke 14:26, as the Gospel of Thomas does elsewhere. This way of speaking belongs to the mid-second century or later, in other words generations later than the books of the New Testament. We asked Dr Simon Gathercole, an expert on apocryphal gospels and Senior Lecturer in New Testament in the University of Cambridge, for his comments. (See his analysis below).
The Gospel of Jesus’ Wife This piece of papyrus has been authenticated by two reputable scholars, Profs. Roger Bagnall and AnneMarie Luijendijk. There are doubts, however, which have been raised about its authenticity, especially by scholars at the International Congress of Coptic Studies in Rome, where there is a good deal of scepticism. This is a tiny fragment of text, but which has something unprecedented in it, namely a reference to Jesus addressing someone as “My wife....”: 1 ] not. My mother has given me [life] 2 ] The disciples said to Jesus, [ 3 ] deny. Mary is worthy of it [ 4 ] Jesus said to them, “My wife... [ 5 ] She will be able to be a disciple to me, and [ 6 ] Let evil man ??? [... 7 ] As for me, I am with her because [ ] an image [ Relation to other gospels What is interesting about the relation of this fragment to other gospels is that it is closest to the Gospel of Thomas:
Line 1: Gos. Thom. 101.3:	My mother has given me [life]. My true Mother has given me life.
Line 3: Gos. Thom. 114.1:	Mary is worthy of it Simon Peter said to them, ‘Let Mary come out from us, because women are not worthy of life.’
Line 5: Gos. Thom. 101.1-2:	She will be able to be a disciple to me Whoever does not hate his father and his mother as I do cannot be a disciple to me. And whoever does not love his Father and his Mother as I do cannot be a disciple of mine.
There is obviously ongoing debate here about the role of Mary, and by extension. What is not paralleled elsewhere is that Jesus addresses someone – probably Mary Magdalene – as his wife. There are two possible implications of this: 1. This could be like the special relationship that Mary Magdalene and Jesus have in the Gospel of Philip. There, Mary is closer to Jesus than the other disciples are, as Mary Magdalene is an important symbol: the relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene is an allegory of the soul’s meeting with God in the bridal chamber, i.e. salvation. 2. It could reflect debates about marriage and sex in the early church. Tertullian (c. 200, the time of this fragment), discussed marriage a lot, in particular re-marriage after death of a spouse (which he said was wrong), and his view of marriage was that the ideal marriage was without sex. Others at the time, like Clement of Alexandria, report opponents using Jesus’ celibacy as an argument for Christians remaining celibate. Some, he says, “say outright that marriage is fornication and teach that it was introduced by the devil. These arrogant  people say that they are imitating the Lord, who neither married nor possessed anything in this world, boasting that they understand the gospel better than others.” (Clement, Stromateis 3.49.1).  The use of such a striking motif as Jesus being married obviously had a point to it: it may have been that Jesus’ marriage was invented as a reason to justify marriage. 3. It could be a text like the Gospel of Mary, where Mary has become an alternative channel of revelation. She is given a place very close to Jesus, so that she can be a mouthpiece for an alternative treatment of salvation. Other references to Jesus in similar relationships Jesus has female disciples in the canonical gospels, who support his ministry (Luke 8), and who are part of his entourage generally. There is no reference to marriage of any kind, which is striking in a biography. (Suetonius’ Lives of the Caesars, for example, mentions wives and fiancées of all 12 of his subjects.) Other apocryphal gospels develop some of these relationships. So, for example, Salome who is a very minor character in the gospels (mentioned only twice, only in Mark’s gospel), but she becomes significant in the Gospel of the Egyptians, and especially in the Gospel of Thomas, where she shares a couch with Jesus: it was a dining couch rather than a bed, but sharing a dining couch was still a louche thing to do, and effectively meant being married or lovers. The Gospel of Philip might refer to Jesus kissing Mary, but the manuscript has some holes in at the key point! In a later text called the Greater Questions of Mary, Jesus even – in front of Mary Magdalene - has sex with a woman whom he has produced out of his side. Harvard Professor Karen King, who is the person who has been entrusted with the text, has rightly warned us that this does not say anything about the historical Jesus. She is correct that “its possible date of composition in the second half of the second century, argues against its value as evidence for the life of the historical Jesus”. But she is also right that this is a fascinating discovery which offers us a window into debates about sex and marriage in the early church, and the way Jesus could be adapted to play a part in a particular debate. If it is genuine. Simon Gathercole

Millennial Kingdom?

The Millennial Kingdom This is a complex subject that has many facets and twists depending upon which view you take.  It is also one that is packed with emotion, with people becoming very emotional about it on either side.  It is easy to become defensive about what we have been taught over the years, especially when we have accepted it to be true.  All that I can ask is that as you continue read, that you do so open mindedly and studiously with your Bible at your side.  Lay aside preconceived notions, prejudices and personal theories and at least consider the history and context of the matters at hand.

Would it surprise you to know that the teaching of the “Millennium” is not a new one?  There is a not dissimilar belief in Judaism, both ancient and modern. It began to be fostered during the period of the exile of the Jews in Bablyon (587–538 B.C.). A mystic belief was perpetuated following the release from Babylon and rebuilding of the Temple, that the time of the Messiah would come after which there would be a 1000 year period of godliness during which all enemies would be routed and a paradise of sorts on earth would occur. In this period, any non-Jew who lives according to the Seven Laws of Noah is regarded as a righteous gentile, and is assured of a place in 'olam ha-ba  (the world to come), the final reward of the righteous and all others to Gehinom the eternal realm of the damned.  As such a period has not occurred in Jewish history, many have then stated that the true Messiah of God has not come which is why it has not happened as the Messiah must come before the end of this period. 

This mirrors the more modern belief of the “Rapture” and “Millennial Kingdom of God” as many know it today.  However, if one researches the history of this belief it can be traced back to circa 175 A.D.  

• Paul in his epistles and John in his, battle with such a perpetuated believe that began to surface among Jewish converts as early as 50 A.D.  
• In 1 Cor.15 addresses what heaven and spiritual life will be like, dealing with heresies that were being perpetuated surrounding it.  
• 1 Thess.4,  Paul writes to the Thessolonians  not to worry about the status of those who are already dead where it concerns eternity and whether Christ comes again or not. This was to refute a teaching that was being perpetuated by some mystics among them that taught that the Lord had already returned but that the people had “missed it.” 
• 2 Thess.2 deals with the rise of those who would elevate themselves to the status of “god” whether secular or spiritual and would try to lead people away from the path that Jesus taught. This stemming from giving in to emperor worship of the day by some.  
• Even going into the beginning of the second century, Justin Martyr wrote, “I signified to you that many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise (Dialogue with Trypho (Chapters 80-81)).” 

So, the question becomes whether this teaching is correct, is there going to be a “Millennial Kingdom” or not?  I propose in the remainder of this article and possibly some to follow that we go back to the basis from which this started and come forward in order to answer this question.  As stated initially, this is not a new teaching, but something that came from the teaching of mystics after the return from the Babylonian Exile in 538 B.C.. Even the fight for the present day “Israeli state” stems from this concept that the recognition of Israel as a nation and the return of the land to the Jews, heralds the return of the Messiah and the 1000 year Kingdom of God upon the earth.  So, let’s begin here.

1. The return of Israel to the land after the Exile was indeed something that was promised. However, God spoke through Isaiah that only a remnant would return and be involved from both Judah and Israel (Is.1:9; 10:20-25; Jer. 30:3,4; 50:3,4).  As before, there was a condition upon staying and keeping this (Dt.28:15 ff), that they remain faithful to God in all things and walk in his statutes. 
2. That the descendants of the Exiles did not do this is evident by Jesus’ own statements to them (Mk..2:17, 9:1; Mt.21:43 and ch.23)
3. There was NEVER another promise to restore the Jews to the land of Israel given in the Bible after the destruction of the Temple in A.D.70 (Acts 1:6; Acts 2:38-47)

Another facet to this, is that teaching that there is yet a mystical Millennial Kingdom to come, assumes that prophesy has not been fulfilled and God’s Kingdom has not come. Daniel’s prophesy of Dan.2:40-44 states that from Daniel’s time there were four kingdoms that would precede the coming of God’s Kingdom.  

1.  Babylon (Head of Gold)  
2.  Mede-Persian (chest of silver)  
3. Greece under Alexander (Brass thighs)  
4.  Roman (Legs of Iron – feet of Iron/Clay)  

It would be in the days of the fourth Kingdom (Iron/Iron-Clay) Rome that God would set up His kingdom that would never be destroyed.  Jesus came in the days of the Roman Empire (Mt.3; Lk.2) and was crucified by the Jews of that day and Pilate during the Reign of Augustus Caesar.  Jesus had told the Jews that there would be some STANDING THERE that would not die until they saw His Kingdom come (Mk.9:1), He told his disciples/apostles that He was giving them the keys to it (Mt.16:18f), and Jesus and His apostles went about preaching the Kingdom (Mt.10:7; Acts 2:47; 20:25). In Acts 2:19f, Peter stated that day that we had entered what the Holy Spirit stated in Joel’s prophesy were the “last days.”  He taught that the Messiah had come, God’s Kingdom had come and that mankind should repent of their sins and be baptized in the name of Christ (Acts 2:38).  Those who did so THAT DAY were “added” to God’s assembly, just like you if you do the same thing, will be added today.  Peter states in 2 Pt.3:9,10 that God wants us to repent NOW.  Paul states in Rom.1:16 that we should not be ashamed of the gospel NOW, and in 2 Cor.6:2  Paul states that TODAY is the day of salvation.  There is NOTHING MORE TO COME!  God states in Hebrews 1 that there is NO MORE revelation – we have everything we need in Christ.  Jude vs.3 states that salvation HAS been delivered – there is NO OTHER! With God, it is simple. You are either part of His Kingdom or you are not.  All that remains is for that day within the Father’s knowing (Mt.24:36; Mk.13:32) when time ends and earth is No More (2 Pet.3:10). And there Peter makes a good observation, “Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God..”

Jim

The Shephelah and the Coastal Plain | Ferrell's Travel Blog

The Shephelah and the Coastal Plain | Ferrell's Travel Blog:

'via Blog this'

Today was an easy day of travel, but an extremely important one.We left Jerusalem headed for the Shephelah (lowland; Deuteronomy 1:7). We made a brief stop at Beth-shemesh where the ark of the covenant was returned from the Philistines to Israel (1 Samuel 6). This was also the territory of Samson (Zorah and Esthaol (Judges 13).

We drove through the Valley of Elah (1 Samuel 17) and called attention to the sites located in the area (Socoh, Azekah, and Khirbet Qeiyafa). We made a stops at Tel Goded, Maresha, Tel Burna, Lachish, and Tell es-Safi/Gath for photographs.

Our final stop was at Joppa (Yaffo). This is the site we intended to begin with, but our flight was delayed leaving New York and we were not able to go there on the first day of the tour. The photo below is of the fishing port and lighthouse at Old Joppa.

The fishing port and lighthouse at Old Joppa. Photo by Ferrell Jenkins.

Joppa is located in the Plain of Sharon and served as the seaport for Jerusalem which is about 35 miles away. The city is now called Jaffa, or Yafo. Joppa was a walled town as early as the reign of Pharaoh Thutmose III (1490-1435 B.C.) who mentions Joppa in his town lists.

Here are a few of the biblical highlights for Joppa.

• Joppa was assigned to the tribe of Dan, but was not controlled by the Israelites till the time of David (Joshua 19:46).
• Hiram of Tyre floated cedar from Lebanon to Joppa for Solomon’s Temple (2 Chronicles 2:16).
• Jonah sought a ship for Tarshish at Joppa to avoid going to Nineveh (Jonah 1:3).
• Cedars from Lebanon again were floated to Joppa for the rebuilding of the temple (520-516 B.C.; Ezra 3:7). The port of the city is behind St. Peter’s Church.
• Tabitha (Dorcas) lived in Joppa. When she died the disciples sent for Peter who was a Lydda. He came to Joppa and raised Dorcas (Acts 9:36-42). (Acts 10:6).
• Peter stayed many days in Joppa with Simon the tanner (Acts 9:43). His house was by the sea (Acts 10:6). A house near the port is shown as the house of Simon, but there is no way to know this with certainty.
• Peter received the housetop vision and learned that he was to go to Caesarea to preach the gospel to the Gentiles at the house of the Roman centurion Cornelius (Acts 10:23).

When it feels like God is hiding. | Stuff Christians Like – Jon Acuff

When it feels like God is hiding. | Stuff Christians Like – Jon Acuff:

'via Blog this'

#1287.When it feels like God is hiding.

September 12, 2012 in serious wednesdays with 1 Comment

A few weeks ago, I went jogging with a friend.

He’s that friend who decides to run his first marathon and then finishes it in 3:39.

He’s fast and tall and made in a factory that produces long distance runners.

Suffice it to say, I have a hard time keeping up with him, but it’s great because it forces me to run faster. (Pretty sure that iron sharpens iron verse applies to neighborhood jogging.)

Toward the end of the run, I was doing my best hold it together. He was still producing paragraphs of conversation, barely out of breath. I was just yelling single words like, “Sure!” or “Yeah!” or “Car!” I also had headphones in, adding a soft undercurrent of Explosions in the Sky to the run. I was thinking about a speech I was giving at Belmont the next night. And last but not least, I was trying to avoid packs of feral dogs. Not that I’ve seen any in our neighborhood, but I swear to you I saw some sort of jackal/coyote hybrid run into a drainage pipe at the library.

Weirdest thing I’ve ever seen.

Needless to say, during the run I was distracted. I was bent on moving forward, on keeping pace and not losing focus on what was in front of me. As we turned the last corner though, I saw a reflection on a sign ahead. I turned around for the briefest of moments and this is what I saw behind me.

It was massive. It was colorful. It was beautiful without me adding a single filter to it. It was breaking over the river and through the woods, like it was on its way to grandmother’s house. And I almost missed it.

I was so distracted by life that I almost missed what was behind me. What was inescapable once I paused for just a second and looked around.

I think, all too often, that’s what happens with God too. We get in a rush. We get anxious about something right in front of us. We try to hold it together and just keep going and we don’t see him. It feels like he’s not there. He’s nowhere to be found. Fear spurs us on faster. Worry throws blinders on our day.

But, if we’d turn around for a second, if we’d stop running for a second, we’d see him. Maybe not in a way that would make a wicked awesome Instagram image, but he’d be there. He’d be there behind us, reminding us of all the other times he’s pulled us through a situation. All the times he’s been faithful and good because that is his character.

Maybe you’re better at pausing than I am. But if you’re not, the next time life gets fast, don’t be too busy to stop and look around. You just might be surprised by what you see.

SUICIDE

Suicide.  I’ve been asked to write on this, and must admit that I find myself struggling. Not because the article is hard, but because I have been there and it conjures thoughts that I would just as soon leave buried.  Many are in this same boat and struggle to find answers when there seems to be none.  So the next question is how to approach this topic.

The Bible records three instances of it in the scripture. King Saul, when defeated in battle and about to be captured by enemies, killed himself by falling on his own sword rather than be taken alive and tortured (1 Sam.31:4). One of David's advisers when he was rejected by David (2 Sam.17:23), went home and hung himself. And Judas, after betraying Jesus, hung himself (Mt.27:5). The scriptures in these instances are silent as to the eternal fate of those who did them. So, the question remains, is it something God overlooks? Is it sinful? Is it unforgiveable?

Answer to the questions comes from the question, do you love God?  Jesus states in Mt.22:37 “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.”  Elsewhere, Jesus states “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.” (Jn.14:15)

• Is suicide something that God overlooks?  No.  The fact that God recorded the instances that are in the scripture shows us that He does not.  Is someone who commits suicide, someone who loves God?   God calls us to trust Him in all things, even the dark times (Psa.23). When we do not, we do not love God with all of our heart. We are trusting in our own understanding (Prov.3:5;28:6; Job 13:15;  Isa.12:2). 
• Is that sinful? – Yes  If we do not love God, if we are not for God, Jesus says we are against Him (Lk.11:23)
• Is it unforgiveable?  Of that, we cannot be the judge. God is the judge of eternal destiny, and only He knows the hearts of men (Jn.12:47,48)  All that you and I can know is what His word says, and with reference to this topic – it is not loving God to take one’s own life.

Here are some things to consider.

• Jesus states, “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full” (John 10:10)  The thief in this passage is Satan, who comes to steal, kill and destroy.  Why should we allow the evil one to take from us, what Jesus Himself said that He came to GIVE us?
• Regardless of what you call it, suicide is an act of murder, killing, that taking of a human life that you have judged and devalued as unworthy to live. Jesus in Mt.5:21,22  reaffirms the law of God, “you shall not commit murder.”  When a person devalues their own life and judge it unworthy to continue and take their life, they are murdering themselves.  They are taking a life, that is not theirs to take. Especially for a Christian this is true because Paul states, “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own, you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body” (1 Cor. 6:19-20)

Perhaps the predominant question is, is it unforgiveable?  The only answer that I know to this question is 1Jn 3:4  Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness, for sin is lawlessness. As discussed above, it is sin in more than one way. When we put ourselves outside of God, how can we home to be invited in by God? 

I mentioned before, that I have been there. Yes, I have thought about it – on more than one occasion. These thoughts were what kept me going.  I love God…with all my heart. I cannot choose my own will above God’s when He gave His Son to be killed for me. That, would be thoughtless and selfish.  As much as people think that the world is better off without them, this is a lie. Those thinking about suicide rarely take into consideration how it will make others feel or how it will affect the future of those lives that we have influenced. Especially your spouse, children, mother, father and immediate family will be traumatized forever because of the thoughtless act of one individual. Would you be that selfish?

This is not a pleasant topic to write about, nor is it a pleasant one to think about.  If you are, then seek professional help. Understand that God and people love you and want you here. It is not hopeless. Christ died to give you hope, life, and life abundant!

Jim