Exodus 1:22, Pharaoh Screws Up

Then Pharaoh gave this order to all his people: "Every boy that is born you must throw into the Nile, but let every girl live."  

//In the days of Israel's captivity in Egypt, Israel's men are driven hard as slaves, yet they only grow stronger and more virile. Pharaoh, recognizing that the birth rate among Israel is skyrocketing, gives this decree: kill all the boys as soon as they are born.

It doesn't work, of course. Ancient Israel is polygamous, and killing boys doesn't halt the birth rate. In fact, had Pharaoh understood the basics of evolution, he would realize he only added to the problem.

So we've got a generation of strong, studly guys. Pharaoh decides to kill all their male offspring. A new generation of girls grows up, with no guys to impregnate them. Suddenly, the studly generation has twice as many women to enjoy. 

Pharaoh, hoping to curtail the population explosion, probably only stimulated it.

Genesis 8:3-4, The Ark Runs Aground

The water receded steadily from the earth. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the water had gone down, and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat.

//Ever wonder why Noah’s Ark ran aground? The Bible says it’s because the waters receded, but that turns out to be hardly necessary. Here’s how much it rained:

The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than twenty feet. –Genesis 7:20

On the face of it, this sounds impressive. Indeed it is … the waters rose to twenty feet above the mountains. But it isn’t nearly as impressive as the measurements of Noah’s boat.

This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. –Genesis 6:15

So the ark was more than twice as high as the water level! I’d say Noah did some pretty miraculous steering to have kept the boat afloat for 150 days.

Book review: Apocalyptic Tremors

by C. R. Chapman

★★★★

Let me start by saying Chapman reads Revelation the traditional way: as a promise of our future. She also firmly believes in the inerrancy of scripture. Therefore, she and I will certainly differ in opinion. It’s hard for me to grasp how any serious scholar of Revelation can still read the Bible as inerrant scripture, but  Chapman gives herself two outs: She emphasizes that her foundation is scripture alone, and she admits that John did not fully understand the vision himself. Whereas I read the book from the understanding that John knew full well the things he was watching happen with his own eyes, and the things he anticipated in his near future.

That said, Chapman’s writing is logical, simple, and well-organized. It’s a nicely written book, and will be appreciated especially by conservative Christians. It’s also true to the flavor of Revelation, which made it enjoyable for me as well. She remains true to the Scripture, varying only occasionally for embellishment, and does not dampen the spirit of revelation by pulling punches. She reveals revelation to be a song of wrath and vengeance. She highlights the dichotomy of Revelation, its us-versus-them plea. For example, she wonders if the sword of the red horseman represents the sword of Islam. “Islam is already murdering Christians because they don’t follow the laws of Islam.”

Scholars will protest, of course, knowing that John’s intended meaning couldn’t possibly have been a nation or religious movement he had never heard of. But Chapman’s book shouldn’t be read in that manner. Chapman makes Revelation contemporary, as if it were written by a minister of today. She modernizes the message by substituting Muslims for the hated Rome, and the apostate church for the wayward Jerusalem, and maintains precisely the right tone of vitriol for both.  As Revelation’s Babylon became a dwelling place for demons, so has the Vatican today (the Vatican’s chief exorcist says he has dealt with 70,000 cases of demonic possession in his life). Chapman brings to life the apocalyptic, leave-it-to-Jesus atmosphere of John’s day by suggesting that the plagues of Revelation will mock the attempts of environmentalists to save the earth and the seas from pollution. This treatment actually brought Revelation alive for me, by forcing me to imagine how its fiery message was first received by the Christians John was writing to. I imagine with much the same disparate feelings as fundamentalist Christians today would read Chapman’s book. (I confess, that worries me.)

Two-thirds of the way through the book, the coverage of Revelation dwindles and Chapman begins discussing the rapture and the argument for a post-tribulation timing. Rapture is, of course, a Pauline idea, and most of Chapman’s treatment the rest of the way concerns the writings of other Biblical authors. I merely scanned from this point forward as my interest waned once the topic moved away from Revelation. But back to Revelation and a few of the discussions I found interesting:

Chapman believes in a post-tribulation rapture. She understands the two periods of tribulation to be periods of trial for the Christians. She welcomes this time with joy and anticipation, knowing what is to follow.

She and I agree a great deal on how to interpret Revelation’s bizarre imagery. For example, we agree that the rider of the white horse is an apostate force. We agree that the seals, trumpets, and vials are unique sequences. She proposes that we have entered the seal period, just as I surmise that John of Patmos felt he was living in the seal period as he wrote. Yet Chapman surprised me at times with new ideas, such as her comparison of the four beasts around the throne with the four horsemen.

A large part of Chapman’s theology is the rebuilding of the Temple. She anticipates this during the era of the two witnesses. This puzzled me at first, because Revelation says absolutely nothing about rebuilding the Temple; one of John’s most striking contributions is his direct contradiction of the prophets (primarily Ezekiel) who promised a new Temple. Instead, Revelation says just that opposite, that there will be no Temple in the New Jerusalem. Jesus, says both Revelation and John’s Gospel, is the new Temple. But as I continued reading, I began to recognize the reason for Chapman’s emphasis on a rebuilt Temple. If she is translating Revelation to the current day, the Abomination of Desolation has to go somewhere! From the point of view of my own book, the AofD came and went back in the first century while there was still a Temple, of course, but we must somehow make Revelation current to our time for Chapman’s treatment, and we don’t have a Temple today! Ergo, it apparently has to be rebuilt!

That led to the next confusing part for me. She apparently interprets Revelation’s “new heaven and new earth” to coincide with the arrive of a NEW New Jerusalem…this second New Jerusalem residing up in heaven and having no Temple…presumably replacing the first New Jerusalem. “The millennial city has no walls, but the eternal city has walls.” I hope I haven’t misinterpreted her meaning.

Conclusion: I enjoyed reading and enjoyed the atmosphere of the book. None of it is relevant to me as a historian except that fitting the story into contemporary surroundings, fearing the Muslims and dreaming of living in heaven, helped me share in Revelation’s original flavor. Yet I cannot give it five stars because, should it be read by the wrong audience, it would stimulate distrust rather than understanding between religions and nations.

Isaiah 25:8, The Death of Hell part II of II

He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces;

//Yesterday, I pointed out the verse in Revelation that tells how hell would be destroyed. It turns out that God isn’t destroying hell at all, but Sheol, a dark, shadowy netherworld where the Jews believed the souls of all men descended after death. At first it was imagined that these souls would gradually fade away and disappear, but in time, the Jews came to believe in bodily resurrection, and imagined Sheol to be only a holding place until its residents were brought again to life.

But what’s this about Sheol being destroyed? Today’s verse shows that the destruction of “death” was long believed to be part of God’s glorious plan. Paul jumps on the bandwagon as well:

1 Corinthians 15:26, The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

Many seem to read these verses as a sort of creative way of promising that there will be no more death in the age to come. Indeed, Revelation makes that promise, but accomplishes it by literally destroying the abode of the dead! It reads quite plainly: Death and Sheol are literally destroyed in a lake of fire.

A number of other Jewish writings continue this theme, if you want to study further: 4 Ezra 8:53, The Apocalypse of Baruch 2:23, and the Testament of Levi 18.

Revelation 20:14, The Death of Hell, Part I of II

And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

//Few Christians are aware of this verse, and fewer still know what to make of it. John’s famous apocalypse, the book of Revelation, promises here that hell will one day be destroyed. All of the evil people down there will be emptied out and tossed into a flaming lake of fire, and then hell itself will be tossed into the flames.

Wait. Isn’t the lake of fire down in hell to start with? How can hell be disposed of in the lake?

Answer: This isn’t hell that Revelation is talking about, it’s Sheol, the underworld where the souls of men descend after death to await punishment or reward. And neither is the lake of fire part of hell. It’s just a place to dispose of evil fellows, to kill them a second time. “This is the second death,” today’s verse explains, after they have been brought up from Sheol.

It’s absolutely amazing to me what people think Revelation says. There’s no hell in that book at all. More about this topic tomorrow.

Book review: Third Way Allegiance

by Tripp York

★★★★

Here's a perfect selection for your book club. York feeds us a collection of thought-provoking essays, ranging from the politics of war to the proper celebration of our holidays. York doesn't have the answers, but he has plenty of questions to make us wonder whether we have, in capitalistic America, lost our way down the Christian path. 

For one thing, Christianity may hardly be worth fighting the New Atheists over. Have we forgotten what a fantastic story it is we cling to? Didn't Tertullian get it right when he claimed to believe precisely because the story was unbelievable? Christianity is simply not philosophically defensible, and it may be that our very attempt to defend Christianity, ironically, leads to its demise. When it becomes common sense, guys, it's all over for Christianity.

But is it common sense to seek the common good? Goods are only good if they are shared goods, at least according to Scripture and early Christian history. Yet without reverence for the seven deadly sins (lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy, pride) our capitalistic country would fold in on itself. What's a good Christian to do?

York will leave you wondering whether it's even possible anymore to be a Christian.

Nehemiah 13:1, No Ammonites forever

On that day they read in the book of Moses in the audience of the people; and therein was found written, that the Ammonite and the Moabite should not come into the congregation of God for ever.

//Today's verse was written about a time of ethnic purging. The Jews were returning in waves from their captivity in Babylon, back to Jerusalem, and trying to reestablish its holiness. They decreed that all gentiles must be banished from the city of Jerusalem, and today's verse provided scriptural backing.

But if today’s verse quotes from Deuteronomy, it’s a misquote. There, in verse 23:3, the wording is: No Ammonite or Moabite or any of his descendants may enter the assembly of the LORD, even down to the tenth generation. (NIV) Not “forever,” but only “ten generations.”

So, which is God’s command? Forever excluded, even down to the 6th century B.C. and the ethnic purge of Jerusalem, or just ten generations? Maybe neither. Consider this verse:

1 Kings 14:31, And Rehoboam slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in the city of David. And his mother's name was Naamah an Ammonitess.

Who was this man Rehoboam, son of an Ammonitess woman, buried in Jerusalem? Turns out his father was king Solomon. We're back in the tenth century, 400 years before Nehemiah, when a second-generation Ammonite is welcome in Jerusalem.

John 19:30-31, Casting Lots for Jesus' Clothes

When the soldiers crucified Jesus, they took his clothes, dividing them into four shares, one for each of them, with the undergarment remaining. This garment was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom. "Let's not tear it," they said to one another. "Let's decide by lot who will get it." This happened that the scripture might be fulfilled which said, "They divided my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing." So this is what the soldiers did.

//New Testament writers had a penchant for searching the scriptures for an explanation for what happened to Jesus. Here, John reports that the soldiers crucifying Jesus cast lots for his clothes. This, they did, so that "scripture would be fulfilled."

So let's look at the scripture being fulfilled. It comes from Psalm 22:18: They divide my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing. 

What is happening in this psalm? A man feels abandoned by God because a gang of evil men has surrounded him. They have bound his hands and feet and left him lying on the ground, where he appears to be attacked by a pack of dogs. The villains divide his stolen clothes by casting lots, and the man prays to God for help, promising that if God will come to his aid, he will praise God to all his brethren. The text isn't clear, but it appears God rescues the man and the rest of the psalm is a song of praise.

This type of "fulfillment" (which actuality bears little resemblance to the circumstances of Jesus) is quite common in New Testament writing. I don't mean to ridicule the prophecies, but I do want to point out that they aren't prophecies! The Old Testament authors had no clue their writings would be used in such a way ... or did they?

Yes, I think they did. The psalmists speak to the human experience. Psalm 22 (a favorite among the Gospel writers) was "fulfilled" in Jesus, and by thousands of others, thousands of times over.

Book review: And God Said, Let There Be Evolution!

Edited by Charles M. Wynn, Sr. and Arthur W. Wiggins

★★★★★

This is a fantastic book idea! Nearly half of America’s scientists believe science and religion are compatible. So, let’s take believing scientists from the three major monotheistic religions—Judaism, Christianity, and Islam—and get them to talk about evolution. Why the evidence forces them to acknowledge a 13.7 billion year old universe and a human race that evolved over nearly 4 billion years, and then how they reconcile this scientific evidence with the Bible.

The first half of the book, which discusses the evidence for planetary and biological evolution, is interesting but not as strong. All readers will presumably be interested in religion, but not all will be interested in science, and I think this section could have been summed up more succinctly. Ten pages for each of the three writers would have been sufficient.

The second half, however, is superb. Let me give you a sampling of each writer.

Christian scientist Howard Van Till: Howard has learned to respect scripture in a new way. Claims of divine inspiration and infallibility are unwarranted. Many people, he surmises, will find this disappointing. But for him, it “feels like a load has been taken off my shoulders.” He now recognizes the Bible as “storied theology,” creatively crafted stories shaped by a deeply theological agenda.

Trying to reconcile Genesis with what we now know about our origins is “wrong, wrong, wrong. This wonderful bit of dramatized theology should never be mistaken for some primitive version of Big Bang cosmology.” Concordism, says Howard, is a failed strategy.

Jewish scientist David Kay: We are wrong to dismiss our ancient ancestors as primitives. These guys knew the rains came (or didn’t) regardless of the faithfulness of their fellow Hebrews. Readers of the Torah back in the day knew better than to take it literally, but rather sought in its pages a deeper lesson.

“If reality doesn’t conform to Scripture, don’t assume either is wrong: the problem isn’t reality or Scripture; the problem is your own understanding of one, the other, or most likely both.” Rabbinic interpretation finds ways to understand sacred text that are both reverent and relevant.

Muslim scientist T. O. Shanavas: Thankfully for more conservative readers, they may find more of a kindred spirit in Shanavas, who definitely believes in the Genesis story. Not that Shanavas disagrees with evolution; on the contrary, he argues convincingly that the Qur’an describes our evolutionary beginnings much more directly than the Hebrew Bible. Genesis is accurate, but Adam and Eve should be understood not as a story of biological origin. Adam was the first spiritual man.

Prepare to be astounded as Shanavas digs up ancient Muslim thinker after thinker who describes natural selection and the creation of man in evolutionary terms. These guys pre-dated Darwin by as much as a thousand years! Yikes, while we Christians were fumbling around in the dark ages, were the Muslims beating us to the punch? Many of us still remain in the dark, and it’s time we realized that, in a number of ways, we can remain Muslims/Christians/Jews without rejecting the scientific discoveries which should leave us in awe of our world.

Revelation 20:12, The Book of Life

And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books.

//Here's a fascinating topic. Everybody has heard about the Book of Life up in heaven. If your name is in it, you get through the Pearly Gates. If not, tough luck, down you go to the flames. 

Many people who have near-death experiences recall seeing a big book, sometimes sitting on a pedestal, describing their deeds. Undoubtedly the image derives from the book of Revelation in the Bible.

John, in writing Revelation, relies heavily upon the Old Testament book of Daniel, and there is a heavenly scene in that book which looks like a court of law. But when God "opens the books" in Daniel's court of law, it is to decide upon and impose a sentence. It is never to determine guilt or innocence; the party's guilt has been established before the book is opened. The guilty pronouncement has already been made. In Revelation, the sentence of evil men is to die a second time in the Lake of Fire.

But is this book in Daniel supposed to be the Book of Life? Elsewhere in the Old Testament, the "book of life" is better explained as the "book of the living." It is a book full of names of people who are still alive. When it's your turn to die, your name is blotted out of the book. Picture the gods keeping the book handy, and when they've had enough of you, they open it up to your name and blot you out with their thumb.

John seems to have taken these two themes--Daniel's book of sentences and the Old Testament's book of the living--and combined them into one. The book changes from diabolical to wonderful, and becomes a list of people who will inherit eternal life.

Much better, don’t you think?

1 Corinthians 14:34-35, Gals, you gotta be quiet in here!

For you can all prophesy one by one, that all may learn and all may be encouraged. And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not the author of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints. [Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church.] Or did the word of God come originally from you? Or was it you only that it reached? If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord. But if anyone is ignorant, let him be ignorant.

//I apologize for the length of today's passage, but it really needs to be quoted in full. See the section enclosed in brackets? Verses 34 and 35? Textual scholars are all but certain that this passage was not written by Paul's own hand but was added later. Read the passage again, omitting the bracketed section. Now it reads seamlessly.

These two verses, inserted in to an authentic Pauline letter, radically contradict Paul's stance about women in the church. Isn't it Paul who wrote "there are no more distinctions between Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and female?" In fact, Paul established many female leaders in his churches: Junia, Phoebe, Prisca, Tryphaena and Tryphosa.

Book review: Revelation: The Way it Happened

I thought it would be fun to present a review of my own book that I received while it was still in the galley stage. I think Fran Lewis was the very first to read the published version. 

Fran is a sweetie who probably reads about a book a day, and who takes her commitment to provide positive exposure seriously. Authors, she should be on your list for sure! 

As this was my first book about religion (I had published a couple of poker books before this), Fran's review was fun to read, opening my eyes to how differently readers perceive a book from the way the author imagines it. :) Unfortunately, the review is very long for a reprint, so I'll limit my post to a few words. Fran gives a synopsis of the book and its themes, and then she closes with this paragraph:

"Author Lee Harmon provides an accurate detailed account of the events in the Book of Revelation through the words of Samuel, the questions of Matthew and the many explanations both from the book and his own commentaries. Taking the reader through the many sections and verses of the Book of Revelation itself, the reader can visualize, experience and understand the time, the people, the culture and the writings of John and its message. I can truly say that I have a better understanding of many of the events than I did before reading this book and the hardships, wars, sacrifices and more that both the Jewish people and Christians endured. Although this book is geared for adults only, I think that children will understand the discussion between father and son and would definitely read and understand it."

Fran can be found in a multitude of places, but here's her blog: http://gabina49.webs.com/home.htm

 

Matthew 28:16-18, Where did the Twelve first encounter the risen Jesus?

Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. ... Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

//Nowhere does the Bible contain more contradicting stories than in the resurrection appearances. Take, for example, the question of where Jesus first appears to the Twelve. 

For Matthew, it happens on a mountain in Galilee. Jesus, after rising from the dead, instructs the women who first encounter him to tell the disciples he will meet them in Galilee. Immediately, they head for the hills, and Jesus meets up with them there. 

For Luke and John, the meeting takes place in Jerusalem. There, according to John, Jesus dispenses the Holy Spirit when he greets them. Luke's version differs a little: When Jesus meets the Twelve, he explains the Spirit will come along shortly ... actually, forty days later at Pentecost. Jesus tells them, "I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high." Note the command to remain in Jerusalem, a direct contradiction of Matthew.

Can Mark settle the argument of where they met? No, sorry, in Mark there is no meeting at all! Mark's resurrection chapter originally ended with verse eight (the margin comments in your Bible may confirm this), with the women who discovered the empty tomb running away afraid, telling no one. Nobody sees Jesus; he’s just gone. Before you discount Mark's version out of hand, remember that all throughout Mark, the disciples just don't catch on; they never do grasp the significance of Jesus. Mark’s mysterious ending fits the story he tells, leaving it up to us to see if we understand.

Little wonder there is so much argument between Bible scholars about the nature of the resurrection!

Book review: Seeing the Good in Unfamiliar Spiritualities

by Gethin Abraham-Williams

★★★★★

If Gethin is not a poet, then certainly his love of poetry shines. Verse mixes with prose to lend richness throughout. I think this is a book which should be read outdoors, in the squares of our busiest cities or beside the brooks of our remotest parks. 

It's about God, our perception and experience. It meanders thoughtfully around the topics of faith, mercy, sexism, and hell, on its journey to "reaching middle ground" between the various world religions. The stability of our society rests on "mutual respect, and a genuine attempt to understand and to appreciate the other, to detect the voice of God in the other, and to pursue a thoughtful, caring life with the other."

Religious thought is evolving, but the evolution of our understanding of God has been a gradual process, and we are by no means at the end of it. Enchantment is coming back into vogue, and society may be experiencing sacralization rather than secularization. Many of us yearn to "feel the Greatness and the Glory, and all those things that begin with a Capital Letter," but we're unsure how to proceed. The closer we approach the mystical (though not the magical, that stuff is evil, right?) the further away we appear. 

Gethin's gimmick of threading the story of Ezekiel throughout the discussion is what makes the book real. I laugh out loud as I write this, but it is so; Gethin doesn't feed us the wild-eyed, theatrical Ezekiel most of us avoid, but the human, struggling-to-understand-it-all Ezekiel. The Ezekiel strolling mournfully beside Babylon's Tigris, dreaming of Israel's Jordan. For all his extraordinary visions, Ezekiel never actually gets to see God. 

This book is a joy to read, and one to fill our dreams with hope.

Matthew 6:13, For Thine is the Kingdom

And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.

//Today's verse concludes the Lord's Prayer as recorded in the book of Matthew. But this final stanza, beginning with For thine is the kingdom, isn't original to the prayer. You won't find it in Luke's rendition, and you won't find it in our earliest copies of Matthew. It was added sometime later.

Why did it get added? I can offer an opinion, but it’s only an opinion.

First, it must be recognized that this is an eschatological prayer. That is, it anticipates the arrival of God's kingdom on earth; presumably with the return of Jesus. So, likewise, the final pre-edited stanza: Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. Many scholars recognize this as a plea for rescue from the trying times that must precede the Lord's arrival. Readers of Paul's letters and the book of Revelation will know what I mean: Jews and Christians both anticipated a period of suffering, sometimes called the Woes of the Messiah, before the inauguration of God's kingdom, God's era of righteous rule on the earth.

But the prayer ends rather abruptly, and on a dark note. Evil. Something like, Please, God, guide us safely through that awful time, so that we might participate in the coming age of plenty ... when debts will all be forgiven, and there will be bread to eat every day, and your righteous rule will extend your kingdom over the entire earth.

Then comes the new addition to the prayer, speaking of power and glory forever. Gently redirecting us away from our fears and dreams of the future, with one very important word: is. While all of the rest of the prayer is futuristic, looking ahead to a better time, this little word "is" suddenly invites participation in the glorious kingdom of God now. Perhaps it was added by someone who recognized the silliness of living entirely in anticipation of a future day, encouraging us instead to grasp what is ours now through the goodness of God. It is a shift in understanding of what the Kingdom of God is ... from a future arrival of a Messiah to a living, worldwide Christian movement, already under the reign of Jesus.

Book review: Why Four Gospels? The Historical Origins of the Gospels

by David Alan Black

★★★★★

Very good. This is a concise, well-organized explanation of the historical and textual arguments for David Black’s Fourfold-Gospel Hypothesis and an early writing of the Gospels. It’s a conservative treatment; David’s purpose in writing is to “renew, restore, and strengthen faith in the truth of the Gospels by providing scientific support for the church’s continuous teaching on their apostolicity and historicity.

I have been looking for a simple guide to the argument for apostolic authority and the traditional ordering of the Gospels, and this one does the trick. Relying heavily on the testimony of the early church fathers, David presents a reasonable scenario for the development of the Gospels.  It is not David’s claim that the fathers of the church solve the synoptic problem; it is that any approach that rejects their testimony is lacking. A hypothesis is needed that does justice both to critical scholarship and to the integrity of the church fathers.

Matthew’s Gospel came first, written in Greek. It was a response to a need within the early church (years 33-44) to preserve the story of Jesus. But Matthew’s version, while highly respected in Jerusalem circles, didn’t fit the bill for Gentile readers, and Paul commissioned Luke to rework the Gospel message for the benefit of his own Greek churches. Luke was able to “change the whole emphasis of the Gospel into a demonstration of the good fortune of the Gentiles in being given equality by Jesus with the original chosen people.”

Peter happened to be in Rome at the time of Paul’s captivity, so Paul met with Peter and asked his advice about Luke’s new gospel. Peter was happy to compare the two (Luke and Matthew), and since it was his plan to give a series of speeches in Rome, he took both together and, with Mark in attendance, fitted them into five lectures which Mark preserved in writing. These lectures are recorded in Mark 1:2-3:19, 3:20-6:13, 6:14-10:1, 10:2-13:37, and 14:1-16:8. Peter’s intent was to refer only to those portions of Jesus’ life of which he had been an eyewitness and could personally vouch for. Thus, there exists no birth stories or resurrection narratives in Mark.

Those who listened to Peter were delighted with what they heard, and requested from Mark copies of what Peter said. Peter allowed this, and Mark’s Gospel was birthed. The final twelve verses of the gospel (which are not in the earliest manuscripts) were surely added by Mark at a later date, when he decided to publish the gospel as an act of piety to the memory of Peter.

That’s the way David fits the puzzle pieces together, relying heavily upon the patristic evidence, and it explains the internal data “at least as well as the Markan priority hypothesis, and often much better.” It also explains the need for three Synoptic Gospels.  David then goes pericope-by-pericope through the Gospels explaining how Mark was pieced together from Matthew and Luke, and while I didn’t take time to study his analysis, it’s nice to know he did his homework.

While I’m not a conservative believer and have no issue with Markan priority (as proposed by the popular solution to the synoptic problem), and while a number of issues remain unresolved (such as Matthew’s apparent familiarity with the events of 70 CE), I found this a very helpful review of the patristic evidence for traditional beliefs.

Job 1:11-12, Satan Wins a Bet

But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face. And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD.

//Ever play that kid’s trick on your little brother, where you say "Bet you five cents I can hit you softer than you can hit me!" So, he brushes your shoulder with a gentle little fist-kiss, and when your turn comes you haul off and whack him silly. "Oops, guess you won, here's your nickle."

Take the story of Job, and the friendly little wager between God and Satan. God, with all his foreknowledge, hardly needs to run a contest to find out what Job will do. God knows before he begins who's gonna win this bet. And Satan's no dummy either, I don't think; he surely knows God can see the future. He knows he doesn't have a ghost of a chance in this bet.

So who's playing who? It sure seems to me that God gets played. Satan gets to torment Job all he wants, with God's blessing, and never offers so much as an apology. Not even an "Oops, here's your nickle."

Acts 16:9, The First He-She?

During the night Paul had a vision of a man of Macedonia standing and begging him, "Come over to Macedonia and help us." 

//Paul, traveling around preaching Jesus, one day received a vision of a "man of Macedonia" calling him there. Paul concluded that God wanted him to preach in Macedonia, and he set off on a journey there.

But when Paul arrived, he found no man at all! He went "to the river," where he expected to find Christians gathered to pray, and instead he found a cluster of women. Immediately recognizing the women as the reason for his visit, Paul sat down with them and began to teach.

One of those listening was a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul's message. 

Lydia invited Paul and his companions to stay at her house, and the Lord "opened her heart." The "man of Macedonia" turned out to be a woman! Well, dreams can be a little hazy!

Book review: Blurring the Lines

by Jerry Zehr

★★★

Fun, short little book! Thomas, a naive young man from an Amish heritage, moves to Los Angeles hoping to pursue a career in acting. The Amish connection isn't overplayed; Thomas is a pretty normal fellow, but breaking into this business is tough, and earning enough money on the side to survive proves difficult. He falls in with the wrong crowd, and his innocence plays against him until his experiences begin to bring more than shame; they land him in danger, both for his life and with the law.

Thomas is lucky, though, to have developed a special friendship with a man who encourages and provides spiritual guidance, while downplaying Thomas's mistakes. We can assume Thomas would drift ever deeper into darkness were it not for this mysterious acquaintance. The ending is surprising and memorable, though in retrospect, I really should have gathered enough clues during the story to guess the climax. 

This is Christian literature, though Zehr's outlook is not conservative and the language is a bit rough. Part of Thomas's growing-up includes learning to look at God differently. Nothing monumental or overly deep, though, and the story's brevity prevents a fully-developed plot. This is a good book for teens.

On the downside, the book starts out in quite passive prose, so it doesn't grab you from the opening. Do keep reading! Also, I was given a pre-edited version, and a few editing and formatting corrections would be expected for the published version.

Genesis 11:6-7, Rebuilding the Tower of Babel

The LORD said, "If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other."

//One day, the inhabitants of the earth decided to build a tower up to heaven. Unfair, they felt, that the gods frolicked up in heaven while they were stuck on the earth. So they put their mind and muscle to the task, and started building.

God panicked. Mankind, if they spoke the same language and worked together as one, could accomplish anything! They could invade the privacy of the gods! So, God confused their languages, and scattered the earth's inhabitants around the globe. That's why, today, there are so many languages.

There came a day, however, when God changed his mind. He decided it would be nicer to share his living space with his creation, and set about reopening the channel from heaven to earth. He came down and set things right. You know this as the Day of Pentecost.

Acts 2:2, Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting.

It’s Babel’s ending being reversed! Everyone, filled with the Holy Spirit, began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them. Parthians, Medes, Elamites, Mosopotamiams, Judeans, Asians, Phrygians, Egyptians, Cretans, Arab, Romans ... all were able to understand each other. Amazed and perplexed, they asked each other, "What does this mean?"

Perhaps the answer is this: Once again, as one under the Spirit, mankind can do anything they set their mind to.

Acts 6:2, The Day Clergy Were Born

So the Twelve gathered all the disciples together and said, "It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables.

//Today’s post might not be appreciated by all, but it’s something we should think about.

Here's the story. Christians in the early church felt a keen responsibility to care for others, even to the point of donating all their belongings and holding all things in common. But the number of disciples was growing too fast, and not everybody was getting the daily distribution of food. So, the bigwigs got together and chose seven other people to take care of mundane duties, like waiting on tables. That freed the bigwigs up to "give our attention to prayer and the ministry of the word."

But this separation of clergy and laity may not be what Jesus had in mind at all. Read, for example, Luke 22:26-27:

[T]he greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves. For who is greater, the one who is at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who is at the table? But I am among you as one who serves.

Thus Jesus expressly taught the Twelve how to be good waiters. The very men who later disdained that role, feeling they were too busy to bother, so as to take upon themselves the responsibility of ministry, instead.

On this day the clergy was born.

Book review: Romans: The Divine Marriage

by Tom Holland

★★★★★

First, my apologies to Tom and PICKWICK Publications for taking so long on this review. The thing is, reading Holland’s take on Romans is like reading a foreign letter. So unfamiliar is Holland’s corporate spin that it took me forever to get through the book … not just because it’s a comprehensive work, but because I wound up reading several passages twice to pull myself away from the more common individualistic interpretation. You’ll learn to recognize two distinct, corporate communities at odds with one another: one in Adam with sin as its head, the other in Christ with Jesus as its head.

This is a verse-by-verse study of the book of Romans, and would make a good university text. Remember: Romans is Paul’s magnum opus, with every verse saturated with meaning. I try to write reviews appropriate for casual readers, but this book belongs in academics as well. Not only is every verse explored, but Holland delves into several topics in detail. I think there are nine such “excursions” peppered throughout the text.

Now, Tom is a conservative believer, so I don’t quite see eye to eye with him on every topic, but his research is deep and not at all preachy. Holland bemoans the way other scholars tend to interpret the New Testament by relying on Greek secular literature, instead of appreciating its Hebraic flavor. “The only allusions or echoes we can safely consider are those which reflect the Old Testament literature” (quotation reprinted without supporting context, which is substantial). So, he digs deep.

This book could sit on your shelf for reference, but that would be a misuse. Holland’s particular interpretation really requires analyzing the letter as a whole. Themes of corporate justification, Passover, the second exodus, and the pilgrimage of God’s chosen resonate throughout, and these underlying themes set the tone for Paul’s more confusing passages. Baptism (dying and rising with Christ) carries a different meaning in this light. Even the word “sin” gets a remake with a corporate meaning: Paul sees sin as a predator, waiting to attack and kill. Try replacing the word “sin” with Satan throughout to get a better grasp of Paul’s meaning. Remember the Adamic community? That’s Satan, not sin, at its head. Also as you read, I suggest you keep the book’s title uppermost in your mind: The Divine Marriage. We’re talking about the eschatological marriage with its great cosmic banquet. Paul’s theology is so deep that it’s easy to lose track of the fact that he really is going somewhere in this letter.

My favorite discussion in the book was Holland’s exposition of the following passage: 10:6-7 But the righteousness that is by faith says: “Do not say in your heart, ’Who will ascend into heaven?’” (that is, to bring Christ down) “or ‘Who will descend into the deep?’” (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead.) After a ten-page explanation, these two verses finally makes sense.

Luke 2:10, Tidings of Great Joy

And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

//You may recognize this verse in its Christmas theme; the baby Jesus brings hope of great joy, which, the verse says, shall be to "all people."

Paul, writing in 1 Corinthians 15:22, echoes a similar sentiment: For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

This universal hope is again extended to "all" ... that is, we assume, "all people." Wonderful, isn't it, how all are enveloped in great joy! But is it possible that even "all people" is too restrictive? Luke's verse could be more literally translated as "all flesh." After all, here is the promise, back in the Old Testament book of Joel:

Joel 2:28, And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh.

Not just people, but all flesh. Animals, too, perhaps. But what about the plant kingdom? Back to Joel, a few verses prior to this, about that wonderful day:

Be not afraid, O land; be glad and rejoice. Surely the LORD has done great things. Be not afraid, O wild animals, for the open pastures are becoming green. The trees are bearing their fruit; the fig tree and the vine yield their riches.

Makes me wonder if perhaps even Universal Christians aren't universal enough!

Genesis 1:28, Subdue the earth

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

//In this verse, just after God creates humankind on the earth, he grants us dominion over all the animals and tells us to “subdue” the earth. What does this mean? There are two main ways of reading this, and I’ve heard both sides preached.

On the one hand, utilitarian readers interpret this verse as permission to use the earth as they wish, to their own end. Knowing that God will one day destroy his creation anyway, they reason that there’s no point of preserving it, and gladly accept the call to dominate all that lives.

On the other hand are those who see this verse as a call to care for the earth. They read the story of Adam and Eve in Eden, placed there to care for God’s garden, and see today’s verse as a similar call for responsible stewardship.

My own opinion? Logic dictates that we hedge our bets and come down on the “responsible stewardship” end of the spectrum, just in case God does want us to save the whales.

Book review: DMT, the Spirit Molecule

by Rick Strassman, M. D.

★★★★★

Absolutely fascinating! Suspend your skepticism for a few hours and enter the incredulous world of Strassman’s research with a powerful hallucinogen. DMT, sort of a fast-acting LSD, was used in DEA-approved clinical research at the University of New Mexico between 1990 and 1995, where volunteers repeatedly described experiences similar to near-death and alien abduction reports.

The question is this: Are the experiences entirely psychedelic, or is the drug allowing volunteers to tap into another reality, where aliens really do exist? Strassman takes the question seriously, and while the implications are more than a little disturbing, the volunteers “unquestionably had some of the most intense, unusual, and unexpected experiences of their lives.” (After reading the case studies, I can believe it.)

Strassman connects DMT with the pineal gland, the “house of the soul.”  The pineal gland develops in the human fetus 49 days after conception, with its DMT chemical secretion serving as a portal to astral worlds. OK, this is wayyy outside my comfort level and not something I know anything about, yet I can’t help it: This is a five-star book, guys, even though it steps on some religious toes. Skip ahead to part IV, The Sessions, if you must, and then come back to read the rest after your mind is blown.

Strassman presents his data like a research doctor, and he admits that one of his deepest motivations behind the DMT research was the search for a biological basis of spiritual experience. He went into this research already intrigued with the pineal gland, so his hypotheses are not unexpected. His application was entirely professional, with intravenous injections under strict supervision—this is not an experiment that can be undertaken at home. The experiences are kaleidoscopic and often frightening. Yet I couldn’t help wonder how many people, after reading this book, found a way to obtain the drug and jump into the next universe. I sure wanted to.

Romans 8:15, Abba, Father

But ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

//Much has been made of Jesus' choice of words for his Father in heaven. Jesus claimed a blasphemously close relationship with God, even calling God "Abba," and it eventually got him the death penalty.

This terminology found its way into Christian language rather quickly, as evidenced by Paul's letters, where, twice, Paul encourages us to speak to the Father with the same familiarity. This should be no surprise: religious Jews fervently believed that one day, God would return to earth and dwell personally with his people, calling them his children. The Christian claim was that this day had arrived with the coming of Jesus.

But what, exactly, does abba mean? 

The truth is, we don't know anymore. We assume it is meant to convey intimacy. A 20th-century German scholar, Joachim Jeremias, suggested that the word abba is best translated as "daddy." Jeremias apparently backed off somewhat from this assertion, but the translation stuck. It's heart-warming and intimate, exactly the way we think of Jesus' relationship with the Father. I, too, suggest the translation "daddy" in my books about Revelation and John’s Gospel. 

But it's good to remember, like so many other translation issues from the original Greek and Hebrew of our Bible, that we don't really know what Jesus meant.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29, Be careful who you rape!

If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives.

//In a patriarchal society, where most women (married or not) are the property of men, what happens to you if you defile another man’s property?

Answer: It depends.

[1] Today’s verse explains that if she isn’t yet married, then you pay a fee to the father (fifty shekels of silver) and marry her.

[2] If the woman turns out to be already married, you and she must both die.

[3] If she is unmarried but betrothed to another, it gets a little more complicated. If you rape her in the country, you die and she lives. If you rape her in the city, and she goes along with it quietly, you both die. But if she screams, she lives and you die.

[4] Finally, if you’re not a Jew, it doesn’t much matter whether the girl cooperates; the laws of Israel don’t apply. You’ll probably be lynched.

So, do your homework first.

Book review: The Reality Bible

by Ash Vaz 

★★★

Too much! Far too much is covered in this book to provide even a basic grasp of the concepts presented. Ash’s intent seems to be not to explain, but to mystify and bewilder, as he carries us on a journey into the science of the world around us … and of worlds far away. Ash isn’t a scientist, he is a “metaphysics thinker and phenomenologist” who isn’t shy about contradicting scientific theory. There was no big bang; a steady-state universe is more consistent with the facts. Relativity is unhelpful as a theory because light dwindles over distances. Forget about e=mc2. The moon doesn’t cause tides. Gravitational forces don’t exist (at least not as expected) because the earth doesn’t crash into the sun.

Instead, all is explained by forms of energy. Other planets can produce biological cells, but only earth produces multi-cellular life, and this is important … we are the key. Everything exists because we can think. Through our thoughts, we conceptualize God, energy, everything.

The book’s most frustrating flaw is its difficult readability. Sentences read like clusters of big words with few relative pronouns.  “Astronomy informs star centers with cores of helium atoms exhaust protons over billion years.” “The postulated colossal universe appearing from a point, terminating everything inside, and simultaneously abetting the creation of existences outside is preposterous thinking.” You’ll get used to the writing style about the time the book ends.

1 Samuel 18:9-10, Saul brings about his own death

So Saul disguised himself, putting on other clothes, and at night he and two men went to the woman. "Consult a spirit for me," he said, "and bring up for me the one I name." But the woman said to him, "Surely you know what Saul has done. He has cut off the mediums and spiritists from the land. Why have you set a trap for my life to bring about my death?"

//In a bizarre series of events, Saul, the first king of Israel, finds himself in a close battle with the Philistines. Terrified, Saul “inquires of the Lord” to find out what to do, but none of the prophets step forward to answer for God. Samuel, Israel’s primary prophet, had died.

So Saul goes in search of a witch to bring Samuel up from the dead, hoping to ask Samuel for advice. But Saul himself had outlawed necromancy just a few verses before this, under penalty of death. So, he finds himself breaking his own law, punishable by death, in hopes of saving his life.

Samuel “comes up” at the witch’s bidding, but he isn’t amused. He says to Saul, “tomorrow you and your sons will be with me.” Meaning, they’ll be dead, residing in Sheol, the underworld.

Oops! Should have obeyed your own law, Saul.