You DON'T Want to See!

It is interesting in study of the scriptures to notice when things begin and the consequences of those things.  It is the story of humanity, and the great revealer of the grace and mercy of God.  To say as Paul quote, "There is none righteous, no not one" a quote even from the days of David (Psa.14:3; 53:3), you can understand when you look at the purity of God versus the humanity of man. 

What started out described and implemented by God in the Law of Moses as a good thing, winds up being even before the cross to the promised land, a corrupted thing. yet, during the First Temple period it remains reasonably sound and mostly what God wants. However, while the efforts of Ezra and Nehemiah are notable, noble, and commissioned by God, the Priesthood never resumes its full status. The scripture while a standard is trumped by "circumstances of life."  The Jewish people were not "their own" and from the Babylonian Captivity forward are always subjugated and occupied - subject to the whims of those who ruled over them. Such, was the priesthood, especially the High Priest.

In the era of the Maccabees, following the re-dedication of the temple, there was a division in the ranks over the question of whether to continue fighting or not. When the revolt began it was seen as a war for religious freedom to end the oppression of the Seleucids. The Maccabees wanted to continue the revolt and conquer other lands with Jewish populations. When Judah Maccabee died in battle in 160 BC he was succeeded by his younger brother, Jonathan, was already High Priest, but the dynasty was established and from that point forward the High Priest's role was more political than religious. Independent Hasmonean

Burial Ossuary of Joseph ben Caiaphas
High Priest in the time of Christ

rule lasted until 63 BC, when the Roman general Pompeus intervened in Hasmonean civil war, making it a client kingdom of Rome. The Hasmonean dynasty ended in 37 BC when the Idumean Herod the Great became king of Israel, designated "King of the Jews" by the Roman Senate, effectively transforming the Hasmonean Kingdom into Herodian Kingdom – a client kingdom of Rome. Annas, the Father-in-law of Caiaphas the High Priest at the time of Jesus, was chosen to the high priesthood by Quirinius, the imperial governor of Syria; obliged to give way to Ismael by Valerius Gratus, procurator of Judaea, in the beginning of Tiberius' reign, 14 A.D. Eleazar, the son of Annas, followed Ismael; then Simon; then Joseph Caiaphas, son-in-law of Annas (John 18:13).

What is the point of all of this? Well, in our study we have been looking at coming up - the trials of Jesus and how illegal things were handled and were about the whole deal. Even non-Jews and non-Christians have commented about the illegality of it all. Yet, the whole incident shows us several things about humanity:

• When a society is based upon corruption, that corruption will eventually rise and feed upon itself until it is destroyed.
• When people act based upon covetousness, nothing is illegal, even when the act itself is illegal.
• One should not expect fairness, from a society and system that is corrupt.

The teaching of Jesus becomes paramount in his final days because there is no greater injustice than His crucifixion. An innocent man dies, all because men think only of themselves more than their brother (Mt.22:37-40) or God. These men that were High Priests, served themselves, their own glory and power. God's word had only a superficial place to elevate them in the eyes of others. The will of God had no place in their lives.

Before we do a lot of condemning here though - go look in your bathroom mirror. You're liable to see a reflection of yourself that you don't like (Jas.1:22-25).

Jim

Reviewing the Night of Judas' Kiss

Having just moved to a new city and now working with a new congregation, I found it interesting that they were in the midst of studying what I had reviewed in my own study several months previous. One of the most interesting encounters are the events in the Garden of Gethsemane leading up to the arrest of Jesus.  We see Jesus at his finest, even in a time of tremendous trial. We see humanity at its worst in several ways.

The kiss of Judas, even among non-believers is regarded as one of the most treacherous acts of history. If asked to bring up moments of treachery in history, Benedict Arnold comes to mind, John Wilkes Booth, and Brutus who slayed Caesar, and Judas all come to mind. Mark uses the normal word for kiss, which means "to love," in telling of the arrangement Judas had made with the chief priests. They were to seize the one whom he (Judas) kissed. This seems strange since Jesus had taught in the Temple, the Temple Guards whom Judas brought with him had most certainly seen him about. Yet, so there would be no mistake, it would be the man Judas "kissed."  In the actual moment, when Judas carries this deed out, Mark uses a different form of that word, that means a prolonged kiss, a lover's kiss -- a deliberate, prolonged, apparently loving act, yet done with cold determination to accomplish his own purpose. Accompanied by the words "Hail Rabbi"  what would have in any other circumstance been a greeting of long lost friends reunited, here betray the treachery of the deed. We shudder at the thought and speak with disgust at those who would do such a thing. 

Yet, does it occur to us, that this same heart can exist within us, and at times we do the same type of thing? Especially in moments of mob mentalities. We see it on the news and in the news daily! We “sacrifice” someone with “a word of kindness,” then leave them to vultures who do nothing but tear and rend.  Judas “thought” he was doing right. I wonder what he was thinking when he hung himself over what he had done after the fact. I doubt that he was patting himself on the back. 

Peter's “defense”  is also an interesting point of this scenario. Peter is trying to make a show of bravado - carrying out what he believed and had voiced earlier, "I will die with you." He grabs the sword and, as the priests and soldiers move in on Jesus, he slashes away. But so poor is his aim that all he does is lop off the ear of the high priest's servant. We too, act similarly.  We strike out in our attempts to carry out our purposes, our faith - yet all we accomplish is the lopping-off of somebody's ear. Attempts to do what we think is right -- but is this how Jesus' would have acted? Even in the context of this moment, the process of being arrested and knowing he was going to die - Jesus says ENOUGH! He begs them to look at what they are doing - ALL of them. And He points out that things like their behaviors have NOTHING to do with God at all. We have all done this. Jesus reaches out, touches and heals the man's (Malchus) ear.  And so the question comes to us, How many lopped-off ears have we been responsible for during our lifetime, that Jesus has to come behind us and healed because we thought we were doing what is right?

It is a foregone fact, that all of the disciples forsook him. I am sure this means that, at that moment, after three-and-a-half years, all their confidence that Jesus was indeed the Messiah suddenly forsook them. His willingness to give himself over without any resistance into the hands of his enemies and his refusal to defend himself in any way becomes, in their eyes, a betrayal of his being the Messiah. Now it is every man for himself, and so they flee because they had made what in the instant a "how could I have been so stupid" moment. In Luke's account of the resurrection - remember that as two disciples walked along the road to Emmaus, a stranger appeared, a man whom they did not recognize, and they discussed with him the events that had taken place in Jerusalem. Notice in the conversation, how they phrase the matters concerning Jesus of Nazareth, "We had hoped (notice the past tense) that he was the one who would redeem Israel," (Luke 24:21). Their hope was gone, so they forsook him and fled.  And thus the smiting of the shepherd resulted in the scattering of the sheep, just as Jesus had said that it would.

Mark adds what is almost a postscript in Verse 51 “And a young man followed him, with

nothing but a linen cloth about his body; and they seized him, but he left the linen cloth and ran away naked.” (Mk 14:51-52)  Whoever this young man is, it seems to be through him that we get the account of Gethsemane. Think about it. None of the disciples could have given it. Judas was with those who were arresting Jesus, one who betrayed him and killed himself before he could have written anything (Mt.27:5; Acts 1:17,18). Seven of them were in a part of the garden some distance from Jesus. When the events happen, they run. Three of them were close to him, but they were sound asleep and could not have heard the crying and the prayers; they did not see the angel come and minister to him. They were close to the Lord when the crowd appears, but, they too run. But somebody was watching. A certain young man (perhaps Mark himself?), was there watching the whole thing. He runs - yes. But not until the last moment, and then naked. Whoever it is, this account can help us, when we either feel that we do not want to do what God tells us to do, or feel confident that somehow we can work it out in our own strength. When we are called to stand with God, but in turn run away naked, this account to reminds us that even though we ran, we can “come to the throne of grace and find mercy and grace to help in time of need."

So, who are we? Judas? Peter lopping off ears? The running disciples? – or maybe even the young man? Will we open our eyes and hearts to understand this passage? We have Jesus, risen from the dead, who goes before us to meet us. The shepherd upon whom we can rely, to whom we can go in the hour of anguish and find the strength -  to do what we do not want to do to obey when we would rather do something else.

Let's pray that we can be as strong as Jesus when our Gethsemane comes.

Jim

Dayenu

No, Jim’s not going mad.  Dayenu is a song that is part of the Jewish holiday of Passover.

The word "Dayenu" means approximately, "it would have been enough for us", "it would have been sufficient", or "it would have sufficed" (day in Hebrew is "enough", and -enu the first person plural suffix, "to us"). This traditional up-beat Passover song is over one thousand years old, but the tradition goes back even further than that. Some have even suggested that this is a song of the captivity, sung when the Jews were able to return to their homeland under Ezra.  

Dayenu has 15 stanzas representing the 15 gifts God bestowed. The first five involve freeing the Jews from slavery, the next describe the miracles he did for them, and the last five for the closeness to God he gave them. After each of the stanza, it is followed by singing the word "Dayenu" (it would have been enough) repeatedly in between stanzas. 

Jesus would have sung this song.

The song is about being grateful to God for all of the gifts he gave the Jewish people, such as taking them out of slavery, giving them the Torah (Law) and Shabbat(the Sabbath), and had God only given one of the gifts, it would have still been enough. This is to show much greater appreciation for all of them as a whole.  I understand the “blanch” that some take toward the OLD LAW, that it was done away with, and we’re not bound by it anymore. But, we do not need to throw the baby out with the bath water. There is a good concept taught in this song, which as we stated before Jesus would have sung with His family, friends, and His disciples as part of the Passover observance.

Some have suggested that this was the song sung in 

Mt.26:30 before they went to the Mount of Olives.

• Whether it was the song of Matt.26 or not, the point is - are we grateful for what God has done through Jesus to restore us unto fellowship to Him?  Dayenu!  
• Is realizing that God has given us yet one more day of life enough? Dayenu! 
• That you have food today and clothes on your back and shelter over you enough? Dayenu!  
• That we have the Church, the body of Christ with all of its flawed people and knowing that Christ died to make this possible enough? Dayenu! 

In this modern world of bigger is better, and more – more – more, where is Dayenu in our lives?

 “Was there no one found to return and to recognize and give thanks and praise to God except this foreigner ?”

Luke 17:18

Jim

Speaking in Tongues in the Bible What happened at Pentecost? Megan Sauter Biblical Archaeological Review 07/13/2015

Biblical Archaeology Review

View latest issue 

Subscribe now 

Give a Gift 

• What’s New
• Browse Topics
• Scholar’s Study
• Media
• Reviews

Download your copy of The Holy Bible: A Buyer's Guide and start receiving Bible History Daily —both absolutely free! Read more…

Speaking in Tongues in the Bible

What happened at Pentecost?

Megan Sauter   •  07/13/2015

“All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them ability.”
—Acts 2:4

SPEAKING IN TONGUES IN THE BIBLE. This Armenian manuscript was illustrated by Zakaria Gnunetsi in 1575. It depicts Acts 2 when Jesus’ disciples receive the gift of speaking in tongues at Pentecost. Some believe this is the first instance of glossolalia in the Bible, but others maintain that the disciples are speaking human languages.

What happened at Pentecost in the New Testament?

Acts 2 describes a miracle: During the festival of Pentecost, Jesus’ disciples are given the Holy Spirit, and they begin speaking in tongues (other languages). Are the disciples speaking in human languages, or is this an instance of glossolalia in the Bible?

Glossolalia—speaking in angelic tongues—is described as a spiritual gift in 1 Corinthians 12–14. Webster’s dictionary defines glossolalia as “prayer characterized chiefly by incomprehensible speech, originating in primitive Christianity and now practiced by Pentecostal groups in ecstatic forms of worship.”

Ben Witherington III addresses what happened at Pentecost in his Biblical Views column “Speaking in the Tongues of Men or Angels?” in the July/August 2015 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review. While some believe that Acts 2 is the first instance of glossolalia in the Bible, he maintains that it is not.

When the disciples begin speaking in tongues, Acts 2:6 says that the crowd of Diaspora Jews who were in Jerusalem for the festival of Pentecost “gathered and was bewildered, because each one heard them speaking in the native language of each.”

Those who believe this is an instance of glossolalia in the Bible say that two miracles took place: The disciples were speaking in angelic tongues, and each person heard the message in his native language. However, Ben Witherington III contends that just one miracle occurred. The disciples miraculously began speaking other human languages, which is supported by the Greek grammar of Acts 2:6. Witherington explains:

The phrase “in their native language” modifies the verb “speaking” in verse 6, not the verb “hearing.” So there is exactly one miracle of speech at Pentecost—a miracle my Greek students regularly pray for, namely, the ability to suddenly speak a foreign language without further study! In short, the Pentecost story is not about glossolalia, despite the name of the modern Protestant denomination. If you want to find a story about glossolalia in a story about conversion in Acts, then you should turn to the story of Cornelius in Acts 10.

In our free eBook Easter: Exploring the Resurrection of Jesus, expert Bible scholars and archaeologists offer in-depth research and reflections on this important event. Discover what they say about the story of the resurrection, the location of Biblical Emmaus, Mary Magdalene at the empty tomb, the ancient Jewish roots of bodily resurrection, and the possible endings of the Gospel of Mark.

TOWER OF BABEL. Pieter Bruegel the Elder’s painting Tower of Babel is on display at the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna. Ben Witherington III explains that what happened at Pentecost—speaking in tongues—overcame the effect of the Tower of Babel—the confusion of language.

Witherington further explains that what happened at Pentecost is the opposite of what occurred at the Tower of Babel (Genesis 11:1–9). As a result of the Tower of Babel, human language is confused, and a language barrier is created, but at Pentecost, the language barrier is surmounted:

At Pentecost the multiple languages problem and language barrier is not resolved, but the Good News overcomes the problem by being shared in all the various languages of the persons present there. While Pentecost doesn’t reverse the effect of God’s confusing the languages at Babel, itovercomes the problem for the sake of the salvation of the nations.

To see Ben Witherington III’s full analysis of what happened at Pentecost, read his Biblical Views column “Speaking in the Tongues of Men or Angels?” in the July/August 2015 issue of BAR.

——————

"So what if He is?"

The last article, ended with the question of whether you believe the accounts given where Jesus did the things He claimed.  Because if He did as He claimed, then there is NO comparison to any of the others - He IS the One and there is NO other. Yet, this poses another question, "So what if He is?" 

It is curious to me, at the ambivalence of many in today's society, that have no care whether there is a God, or whether there should be any attention paid to the fact that if there is a God then what does that mean for us?  Yet, this is not a new question. Pharaoh of the Exodus asked the same question, "Who is the LORD, that I should obey his voice...?" Here is something to consider in this question, posture, and attitude.

• While it is phrased in the form of a question, it is the expression of an attitude and a disposition. While many see nothing wrong with it here is something to consider. When you disregard respect for something, you also disregard the rights and wishes of the people that do believe there is a God. This is a prevailing attitude among people today. 
• Enamored over the "rights" or "entitlements" of the mass opinion, what does it matter if there are those who want to listen to God's voice? If I don't have to listen to God, then why should I grant you any feeling or respect that you should? Ergo, This was seen in the incidence in Exodus, as well as it was seen in Rome, Nazi Germany, and other such establishments that adopt the same proud attitude. 

 "So this is how liberty dies...with thunderous applause."

Padmé Amidala (Natalie Portman) in

 "Star Wars III: The Revenge of the Sith

Here is the quandary. When we do not accept righteousness, when we do not accept the authority of the God who asks for that righteousness, what is left?  Well, man becomes "a law unto himself." Not necessarily a bad thing until someone comes along and says, "Why should I listen to you?" Everyone likes throwing God off, until evil and cruelty reign. Yet, this is the child of an attitude where we men "set his mouth against the heavens" (Psa_73:9), and "exalted himself above all that is called God" (2Th.2:4). 

When men exalt themselves, it is to their own destruction. When men say "it is

unsinkable" they are proven wrong. When men say "we can do it ourselves" they are proven wrong just like children and toddlers. Without guidance to proper and productive behavior, man CANNOT direct his own steps (Jer.10:23). 

The truth?  There is NOTHING to compel you to listen to, follow, or even admit that God is real. There is NOTHING to compel you to believe that Jesus is the Christ. But...you DO have a choice!  

• Door #1 - Believe God, follow God and understand an opportunity to live for eternity awaits you (Jn.3:16)  
• Door #2 - Deny there is a God, live the way you like, think only of yourself and understand the path of  destruction that awaits you and your descendants if you do.

Choose wisely!

Jim

Was Jesus Made Divine By Humans - Part 6

We have examined now for the last five articles, whether Jesus claimed to be divine, the history behind the concept of the Messiah and whether the Messiah was ever considered to be divine, what history has said about the subject and more. This article is going to focus on one particular thing - whether Jesus was the promised Messiah of God and deserving of the claim and title "Son of God." 

To many followers of the Bible, the answer to this is simple, yet to many others it is not. To them, Jesus is just another in a list of many in a line of people that God has used throughout time, but is nothing more than that. To many, Jesus is just another prophet. To others, he is just another claimant  What sets Jesus apart from these? Is He no different than the rest?

There have been many throughout history that have laid claim to the title "Messiah," some even to calling themselves the "Son of God" throughout history. Going back to the days of the old kings, many of the kings and Pharaohs of ancient time referred to themselves as divine. Yet, as history has borne out, these were all human and nothing in the scope of humanity was changed as a result of what they did. Neither, was anything done as regards man's relationship with God as a result of their rule. Their have been good rulers and bad rulers. But none could offer man anything with respects to immortality or the soul. Even during the time of Jesus, there were several other contenders that made the claim to Messiah. Even the New Testament itself refers to two of these.

Judas of Gamala

1.) Judas of Galilee or Gamala was a man who rose up an armed resistance to the census imposed for Roman tax purposes by Quirinius in Iudaea Province around 6 AD. Josephus records this in his Wars and Antiquities, and is supposed to have been one of the progenitors of the Zealot movement that was alive even in the day of Jesus. He was thought by many to be the Messiah that would lead Israel to victory against Rome, however, he and his revolt were crushed, and even Gamaliel in Acts 5:37 refers to his Messiah-like status. Yet, even Gamaliel's statement shows that concerning that or claiming any divinity, he was a failure and considered such according to historical record.

2.) Theodeus was another man that arose after Jesus, around 44 A.D. He made claim to be the Messiah, able to work miracles, and even claimed to be divine. Josephus mentions him as well as does Acts 5. Again, while making a lot of noise and trouble for a lot of people, his rebellion was shot down and stifled by Rome, with Theodeus himself being beheaded. The movement quietened and disappeared.

Others have come after Jesus as well. Buddha, Mohammad, even into our own day, Mahatma Ghandi, and others that have arisen to Messiah-like status. Yet, none of these claimed to be divine. All movers and shakers of sorts, but human in every aspect.

How and why is Jesus any different? What makes him apart from the crowd? There are several things that separate him from the crowd. 

• Jesus DID claim to be Divine and the "Son of God."  
• Jesus is the ONLY one of the claimants, to state that He would raise from the dead. He is also the ONLY one to have witnesses that saw, testified, and gave their lives to state that this was the truth.
• Jesus is also the ONLY of the claimants, that claimed to have the remedy of man's sin that separates him from God (Jn.3:16). 

Now the question is, if you believe the accounts given where He did these things.  Because if He did as He claimed, then there is NO comparison to any of the others - He IS the One and there is NO other.

I think God has said it best concerning Jesus, 

"This is my beloved Son, 

with whom I am well pleased; 

listen to him.." (Mt17:5)

If you disagree...that's ok. I'll let you argue with God because He is the one you will have to answer to. If Jesus isn't what He says He is - then I'm just another nutcase.

Jim