NOTES ON EZEKIEL AND DANIEL

Ezekiel 1 The “eagle” is probably a type of vulture. Images of the four creatures may have come from 

Babylonian deities, which are now merely decorations on Yahweh's chariot.

Ezekiel 4:9 It was against Jewish law to mix seeds. Even priests like Ezekiel will be forced to eat 

unclean food. This may be the first step of God turning Ezekiel from a priest to a prophet. Another later

defiling action included going into the valley of the dry bones.

Ezekiel 8 This was written before the Temple was destroyed. There was still a remnant in the land, 

who had polluted the Temple by their actions.

Ezek. 8:8-9 The temple looks good on the outside but inwardly is filled with vileness. This is similar to 

Jesus calling the Pharisees whitewashed tombs.

Ezekiel 9:4,6 The "mark" was the last Hebrew letter tav. In paleo-Hebrew script it is written as X.

Ezekiel 11:1, 13 In the 1970's, a seal dating from this era was excavated at Ketef Hinnom having the 

name Palta, which is short for Pelatyahu.

Ezekiel 22:30-31 can be read as a job description for a prophet, i.e. one who intercedes for the people 

before God. (see Psalm 106:23)

Ezekiel 27:50 A recently discovered bronze South Arabian tablet lists Dedan in northern Arabia as a 

destination of foreign trade circa 600 BC.

Ezekiel 28:15 There are possible implications here regarding original sin or the age of accountability.

Ezekiel 34:2-3 sins of commission

Ezek. 34:4 sins of omission

Ezekiel 43:1,4 Large number of house doorways have been excavated in Iron Age Israel facing east 

(not the expected direction). This has been interpreted to identify east as the direction God resides 

(the rising sun?). (BAR Nov/Dec 2017, p. 29)

Ezekiel 44:6-16 The story of Korah's rebellion in Numbers 16-18 may be the background for these 

verses.

Daniel 1 lessons:

1. You will never rise so high in life that pressure ceases (vv. 3-4).

2. You are never a mere pawn without choices (v. 8).

3. God is at work in your Babylon (vv. 2,9,17).

4. There is no such thing as an insignificant compromise if it dishonors God.

Dan 1:2-3 There is a parallel between the vessels and the young men.

Dan. 1:7 There is discernment between major (diet) and minor (name) issues.

Daniel 3:1 There is significance to the number 6 as falling short of the perfect number 7. The idol is 

associated with the king. (See the gold head of the statue in Daniel 2:38). All that he had learned from 

ch. 2 events.

Dan. 3:16 The address to the king is not the usual "O King." This stresses the fact that he is just a man.

Daniel 9 In the prayer Daniel identifies himself with all Israel even though he himself is blameless.

Daniel 10:11 This phrase applied to Daniel only appears elsewhere in the Bible as a description of 

John the Baptist.

 

SOLOMON'S EMPIRE: ARCHEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE

Among the magazines to which I subscribe, The Smithsonian is my favorite. That is mainly due to the wide variety of subjects it covers. As a recent example, the December 2021 contained featured articles on the caribou in Alaska, footbow distance contests, Roquefort cheese, and “Quest for Copper.” It is this last article, by Matti Friedman, that I would like to highlight because it is a good illustration of the difference between two philosophical approaches to biblical archeology: Minimalism and Maximalism. Those in the first group start out with a skeptical attitude regarding the historicity of biblical accounts and only change their minds when the evidence overwhelmingly supports the Bible. But those in the second group begin with an attitude of faith in what the Bible states and only reluctantly admit that maybe their particular interpretation of the Bible has been faulty if the data indicate it. In Israel today, these respective schools of thought are represented by Tel Aviv University and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

The article on copper mining concerned excavations in the ancient land of the Edomites. These have direct implications on biblical history since Edom, south of Judah, was under the economic and political control of Israel during the reigns of David and Solomon, and only ceased at the end of Solomon's reign when Hadad rebelled. Below is a brief summary of archeological findings in that area that illustrate the shifting opinion over the years regarding Solomon's reign, vacillating between minimalism and maximalism.

Max: In 1934, Nelson Glueck found ample evidence of copper mining in the area in the form of extensive slag deposits on the surface of the earth. This is not at all surprising since Deuteronomy 8:9 mentions that copper can be found in that general region. At the same time, he uncovered pottery sherds he dated to around 1000 BC, exactly the time of the United Kingdom under Solomon. Glueck thus proposed that this was the source of Solomon's massive copper reserves, obviously needed for the furnishing of the temple described in passages such as I Kings 7.

Max: During the 1950's, Yigael Yadin discovered Solomonic building projects at cities such as Gezer and Hazor.

Min: In the 1960's, Rothenberg made further excavations at Timna, in Edomite territory and uncovered the underground copper mines themselves. But associated with these remains were numerous Egyptian artifacts pre-dating Solomon's supposed reign by centuries. Based on these findings, Rothenberg deduced that it was an Egyptian mining site abandoned around 1200 BC and not used again until well into the Roman rule. He stated, “There is no factual and, as a matter of fact, no ancient written literary evidence of the existence of 'King Solomon's Mines.'”

Min: The prevailing skeptical opinion during the late 1990's and early 2000's regarding the historicity of Solomon's vast empire took Rothenberg's findings as yet another example that the biblical account was largely fictional. Minimalists similarly dismissed many of Yadin's earlier claims.

Max: It was only in 2009 that Erez Ben-Yosef (now of Tel Aviv University) re-investigated the Timna site and approached it with few preconceived notions in mind. Author Friedman calls him a man with “no religious affiliation [who] who describes himself as indifferent to the historical accuracy of the Bible.” Surprisingly, Ben-Yosef and his team found through C-13 dating that the organic remains at the mining site (from scraps of fabric to dates to donkey droppings) were from about 1000 BC, the time of the Solomonic Kingdom.

Min: However, there were no camel bones at the site dating any earlier than 900 BC. This appeared to contradict the biblical account of the Patriarchs riding camels centuries earlier. (But see my post on the subject of camels titled “Genesis 24:10-11; 31:24 Camels in the Bible”).

Max: So the next most logical theory was that extensive mining operations had been carried on by the Edomites during the time of Solomon's reign long after the Egyptians had abandoned the mines. This was confirmed by excavations carried out by other archeologists in different parts of Edom. Remains showed “evidence for an organized Edomite kingdom, such as advanced metallurgical tools and debris.”

Max: Additional evidence was uncovered at Temna of an advanced culture engaged in extensive economic trade with countries to the north. This included remains of fish, pistachios, lentils, almonds and grapes, all of which needed to be imported from other lands.

Max: Looking to other countries for confirmation of the above picture, elemental analysis of figurines from 11^th century Egypt and a cauldron from ancient Greece showed that the metal had come from those same Edomite mines.

Max: Also uncovered at the mines were scraps of cloth shown to have been colored with purple dye, which could have only come from certain snails found in the Mediterranean waters. Purple dye was highly prized in ancient days and was only available to the very wealthy. That indicated a highly organized society which included elite members.

Neutral: Since all of the above findings tended to contradict the conventional wisdom of the liberal scholars at Tel Aviv University where he taught (but not the findings of a few large Solomonic cities, according to the Hebrew University in Jerusalem), Ben-Yosef held off on publishing them until he had gotten tenure.

Friedman summarizes the situation at that point of time as follows: “The rival schools of biblical archaeologists were split over whether the United Israelite kingdom was fact or fiction, arguing vehemently about whether certain ruins should be dated close to 1000 B.C. Or later. But they agreed that the primary point was the existence or non-existence of buildings. They differed on the answer, in other words, but shared a faith in their ability to settle the question.”

Max: Ben-Yosef's findings may have helped break the tie since they had amply demonstrated that a sophisticated and wealthy culture such as at Edom could be around at 1,000 BC and yet leave not a trace of major buildings to indicate its existence. In fact, the common supposition that an ancient nomadic culture must have been totally resistant to any form of centralized government and cooperative efforts (held by both maximalists and minimalists) may have been false from the very start.

Max: But is there any indication that the inhabitants of the United Kingdom of Israel could have maintained a somewhat nomadic existence during that period, as did the Edomites? There is one strong biblical hint that they could have indeed, and that is found in I Kings 8 describing the dedication of the temple taking place at the very height of Solomon's reign. The king summoned all the people of Israel” including their tribal leaders (vv. 1-2) together for the ceremony. And after it was complete, we learn in v. 66 that “he sent the people away; and they blessed the king, and went to their tents.” So, of course, there would be little trace of their dwellings left today, just as the only evidence attesting to the elaborate nature of the Edomites is through artifacts found at the sites that had more regular occupancy during the year.

By the way, there is also no trace left of Solomon's grand temple either. As R.J. McKelvey explains, “Indeed, it is likely that the work of levelling the rock and building up the great retaining walls for the courtyard of Herod's Temple obliterated any earlier constructions.”

Neutral: In 2019, Ben-Yosef published his findings and conclusions, which were met with expected results. While there was no real dispute regarding the accuracy of his results, some remained to be convinced of the applicability of his thesis to the question of the United Israelite kingdom. Thomas Levy, an archaeologist from UCSD also working in Edom, says that what Ben-Yosef has proved is that “archaeology has overstated its authority. Entire kingdoms could exist under our noses, and archaeologists would never find a trace.”

 

FALLING WALLS IN THE BIBLE

There are two examples of walls falling down that are found in the Bible, one in the Old Testament and one in the New Testament. Despite the differences in these two accounts, both are instructive in what they tell us regarding the subject of theodicy – reconciling the presence of disasters in the world with a loving and all-powerful God. Theodicy is a rather large subject, and you may want to look at my post entitled “Theodicy: the Problem of Evil” for more information on the subject.

The OT example is the most well known by far – the fall of Jericho. In that particular case, the actual fall of the wall was accomplished without the Israelites having to break it down. Its fall was obviously a case of divine action although God did allow the Jews to take part in the process through marching around the city, blowing the horn, and carrying out the actual attack. Because of their faith, they cooperated with God's will in the situation, and so they were able to share in the glory of a successful campaign.

But next consider the fate of those inside the city walls. All but Rahab and her family were slain, and that included all the children as well. This is a sticking point for many people, including those of faith. First look at the adults of Jericho. We are told twice in the text (Joshua 2:8-14 and Joshua 5:1) that the news had already spread to the people of Canaan how the God of the Israelites had miraculously dried up the waters to allow the Jews to escape from Egypt. But despite their recognition of that fact, the Canaanites still opt to stay within their walls to keep God's people out. This is a clear example of those who know the truth of God but would rather reject it. And so they suffer the logical consequences of their own actions.

The deaths of the innocent children appear to be an entirely different matter in our mind. It seems horribly cruel of God to allow that to happen, but most of our problem with accepting it is due to our limited earthly perspective. As the author of Ecclesiastes amply demonstrates, nothing makes sense on earth if all we see is this present life, life “under the sun.” From a heavenly perspective, which is the preferable fate for the children of Jericho: (1) an existence for a limited number of years sharing in the evil, pagan pursuits of their parents followed by an eternity away from God or (2) a fleeting moment of pain followed by an eternity in the presence of a loving God?

And what else does God accomplish at the same time? By Rahab's free choice to believe in the God of the Israelites, she and her family are saved to live among them. That choice leads to her becoming the direct ancestress of Jesus so that the whole world will have the opportunity for eternal salvation. To look at the conquest of Jericho only in terms of bloodthirsty slaughter is to sell God short in many ways and not even to acknowledge that God can see much further into the future than we can in formulating His ultimate plan for mankind.

The New Testament example of sudden disaster being visited on people due to a portion of a wall falling is found in Luke 13:1-5. The story starts out with Jesus being informed of a recent tragedy in which Pilate had executed a group of Galileans while they were worshiping. Those who are telling Jesus this event apparently used it as an object lesson pointing out that those men were obviously being punished for their sins. We may wonder at the simple-minded conclusion they had come to, especially in light of the well known tale of Job and his innocent suffering. But how is their faulty reasoning any different from that of the prominent televangelist who a few years ago pronounced that the flooding of New Orleans was God wreaking his justice on the sinful inhabitants of that city?

In any case, Jesus wastes no time in setting them straight, as he does on another occasion narrated in John 9:2. Then, as Fitzmyer puts it, “Jesus plays at one-upsmanship, matching the story of the deliberate, gruesome death of the Galileans with that of the accidental death of eighteen Jerusalemites killed by the sudden collapse of a tower in the old well of the city near the pool of Siloam.” Both stories are vivid reminders of the fleetingness of earthly existence prompting others to change their way of life while it isn't yet too late.

Craddock says, “Surely it is not coincidental that...the one is an act of human evil, the other what we term natural evil. Jesus is as inclusive in his comments as the problem is universal: Why did this tragedy happen to these people? Perhaps no one has explored and exposed easy answers to the question 'Why?' more poignantly than Thornton Wilder in his short novel The Bridge of San Luis Rey.” If you don't recall that story, it is not at all improbable that Wilder actually based it on the incident in Luke 13. It concerns a South American priest who attempts to find out why God caused a bridge over a long gorge to fall just as a small group of unrelated people were crossing. He is never able to discover any common link between those particular people that would account for it, but there are hints the reader is given indicating that God may have actually accomplished his will in each of those individual's lives in quite different ways all at the same time.

Looking again at the two stories in Luke 13 and getting back to the subject of theodicy, we probably have a lot less problem with accounting for the violent deaths of the Galileans. It was an obvious act of an evil individual Pilate. But it could have been equally due to the possible evil actions of those Galileans in attempting to revolt against Roman rule, as suggested by some commentators. In either case, the only way for God to have stopped their deaths in the first place would have been to erase human will and not allow any of them (or us) to have the freedom of choice, whether for good or bad.

But what about the “natural disaster” of the falling tower? That appears to represent an entirely different category of evil. However, even it could have been due to the evil actions of human beings if, for example, the “lowest bid” method of choosing a builder for the tower was used in order to save a little money in construction. But more probably we should lay the blame for the fall on the force of gravity. Thus, the same physical laws that God put in place to allow us to stay on earth without all flying off into space comes with the natural potential to also cause harm on occasion.

I suggest that it is an instructive exercise some time to start trying to design a better universe that God has created which would totally eliminate all negative consequences in human existence. I guarantee that you won't get very far before you throw up your hands in frustration. But our very imperfect present existence is not even to be compared to the future existence that God has planned for us on a renewed earth.

 

WHAT'S SO WRONG ABOUT RIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION? (MATTHEW 7:1-5; JAMES 1:19-20)

    “Do not judge that you may not be judged. Because you will get the measure of judgment you give to others.” (Matthew 7:1-2)

    “Let everyone be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to anger since your anger does not lead to God's righteousness.” (James 1:19-20)

Of my many personal faults, perhaps the one that I have had the hardest time breaking is the tendency toward righteous indignation. I think I picture myself at times as acting in the steps of Jesus as he threw the money changers out of the temple. By the way, that is the real danger one takes in following the advice of Sheldon in his Christian classic In His Steps to its logical conclusion. The problem is that we aren't Jesus, who had both pure motives and divine knowledge, neither of which are possessed by us.

I can still vividly remember one rather minor incident in my own life years ago in which I got on my high horse feeling that someone else was definitely in the wrong. At the time I was a kid with very little spending money to my name and I went to the public pool with some friends. I paid the small entrance fee and received my change. I was convinced that the lady had shortchanged me and made a rather large stink over the situation until she relented. Then when I got home, I realized that the coin I thought I had given her was still in my pocket. I was too embarrassed to go back and admit my mistake and regret it to this day. I would like to say that I soon learned the lesson that God taught me and have never done it again, but the truth is that I have made several similar mistakes of judgment since that time based on inadequate knowledge of the situation.

There are many biblical examples illustrating some of the issues involved in judging others, but I will just cite just a few in chronological order:

    I Samuel 1-2: Eli is sitting in the temple and sees a woman, Hannah, praying silently to God and moving her lips while she asks for a child. Since the common practice at the time was to pray aloud, Eli jumps to the conclusion that she is disgracing the temple by coming there while drunk. He bawls her out in the mode of righteous indignation but is soon set straight regarding her actions. Not only was he judging her without having all the facts first, but in addition there is a good chance that his motives were not the purest either. I say this because Eli had apparently been turning a blind eye to the drunken and evil manner in which his own sons had been disgracing the temple of God. God's justice is slow to take place. But in an ironic twist, the son Hannah had been praying for was Samuel, who grew up to displace Eli's sons.

    II Samuel 12: A very well-known parable is the one Nathan tells story to King David to convict him of his behavior toward Bathsheba and her husband Uriah the Hittite. David is so enraged concerning the sin of a rich man taking away a poor man's little lamb that he condemns the man to death. Nathan points out that David has just condemned himself in that judgment. There is probably no clearer example in the whole Bible of someone trying to take a splinter out of another one's eye while having a log in their own eye.

    Luke 9:54: Jesus takes James and John on a trip with him and they pass through Samaria. When a Samaritan village refuses to accept their message, these brothers want Jesus to let them destroy the village with fire. If this were all we knew of the personalities of these two disciples, we could say this was a clear case of righteous indignation on their part. But when we factor in their desire to have favored spots in heaven and John's indignation at an “outsider's” ability to cast out demons in Jesus' name, I think we can make the reasonable assumption that all these actions are due to ego issues of which they were probably not even aware.

It is awfully hard for us to gauge our own motives when we act righteously indignant, much less the motives of others. So although I find it very hard to justify the actions of the crowd who stormed the Capitol almost exactly one year ago, today I can refrain from judging them since many of them probably felt that they were acting out of the noble motive of saving our nation from those who were trying to wrest power away from the will of the people. But I can still seriously question (1) whether their actions were solely due to such a noble motive and (2) whether they truly had an accurate understanding of all the facts before proceeding.

 

PARABLES AS PROPHECY

In my post titled “The Parables: Lesson Guide,” I divided the biblical parables among twelve different categories (shown in bold below) for convenience in studying them. But my divisions were somewhat arbitrary since many of the parables are multifaceted and could have just as well been put in different categories instead. And one category that I left out altogether was that of the prophetic parables, even though a number of the biblical parables could have fit that description.

Looking at these narratives is somewhat like the story of blindfolded people trying to describe an elephant. Each of us approaches the subject with certain presuppositions in mind. There is one popular school of theology which tries to force-fit each parable into its proper chronological scheme of the future. On the other hand, there are scholars who refuse to see any prophetic implications in Jesus' stories at all and treat them strictly as ethical teachings. And each of these points of view is partially correct, but not wholly so. That is because parables by their very nature refuse to be narrowly pigeon-holed.

But in case any of you have not thought much about the prophetic implications of parables before, here are a few example to consider:

Old Testament Parables

The Prophet's Parable to King Ahab (I Kings 20:35-43): Ahab is confronted with his evil deeds by a disguised prophet who foretells the fate God has in mind for him due to his actions.

The Unproductive Vineyard (Isaiah 5:1-7): Isaiah demonstrates that a parable can not only be a prophecy but also a poem. God's chosen people are compared to a vineyard lovingly cared for by God which refuses to bear fruit. Therefore God will turn it into a wasteland.

Responses to Grace

Two Debtors (Luke 7:36-50): On the personal level, this is an object lesson Jesus gives the Pharisees concerning their attitude in which they felt they needed no forgiveness since they had earned a reward from God. But on a prophetic level, it also predicted the turning of the relatively sinful Gentiles to God while the self-righteous Jews rejected His grace.

Unmerciful Servant (Matthew 18:23-35): This somewhat similar parable given to the disciples is a variation on the line in the Lord's Prayer asking God to forgive us as we forgive those who have sinned against us. But it goes much further than the above parable in predicting eternal judgment on those who violate this principle. One could argue that this isn't really a prophecy since it doesn't refer to earth-shaking events that affect the whole earth, but it certainly does deal with the certainty of the Final Judgment for each of us.

Lostness

Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32): This well loved story can be taken on a personal level. But, on the other hand, it can easily be seen as a veiled prophecy predicting the contrast between the Gentiles accepting Christ while his own people rejected him. Again, it represents the vast difference between those who are aware of their sinfulness and throw themselves on God's mercy and those who feel they have earned the right to stand before God unashamed.

Present Kingdom

Growing Seed (Mark 4:26-29): Although I placed this parable into the above category, it really goes far beyond that in chronological scope. The seed was first planted in a tiny group of twelve followers. But then through the hidden action of the Holy Spirit working within their lives, the message of love and grace began to slowly grow until today it has reached throughout the world. But a time of harvest will come eventually to all humanity.

Israel

Wicked Tenants (Matthew 21:33-46; Mark 12:1-12): The four stories of Jesus that I placed in this category probably represent the clearest examples of prophetic parables. In each case, the downfall of either Israel as a nation, its whole sacrificial system, and/or its religious leaders is clearly foretold. And, of course, the prophecy did come to pass in AD 70.

“Immoral” Parables

Workers in the Field (Matthew 20:1-16): This story offends our sense of fairness since the same reward is given to those who have been toiling the whole day and those who had only been hired recently. But from a divine viewpoint, God doesn't care whether you are a thief on the cross making a deathbed confession of faith or one who has been serving faithfully his whole life. There is also a predictive component to this parable in that it also speaks to the contrast between the Jews who had been trying to live in accord with God's word for generations and the Gentiles who would come much later to the table. There is enough in God's richness to make sure that all are equally satisfied.

Future Judgment

It really requires no explanation as to why the seven parables I placed in this category should be considered as prophetic parables. The prospect of the Last Judgment is front and foremost in each of these stories, such as The Wheat and the Tares, the Ten Virgins, and the Sheep and the Goats.

Enacted Parables

In the Old Testament, Jeremiah and Ezekiel provide most of the examples of this specific sub-group of parables. In each case, the mimed actions of the prophets convey vividly to the people of Israel truths concerning God and his will for their individual and corporate lives. In one such case, Jeremiah is told to buy a field just on the eve of exile from the Holy Land (ch. 32). Through this very public and outrageous action, he is demonstrating to the people that they will not be in exile forever, but God will eventually allow their descendants to return.

The clearest example in the New Testament is that of Jesus cursing of fig tree for being unproductive (Matthew 21; Mark 11). This event proves that a parable (of the acted-out type) can at the same time be a miracle and a prophecy. The last aspect of Jesus' action was to predict the downfall of the whole temple cult which would take place 40 years later.

The Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37)

I placed this rich parable in a category all by itself. Whereas it primarily has its intent and application to our individual lives, it also contains a hint of prophecy in foreshadowing the amazing fact of the gospel being accepted by Samaritans while many of the Jews still rejected it and their leaders were intent on persecuting the church (Acts 8). The parable demonstrated that no ethnic group is beyond the scope of God's love.

Short Paired Parables on Discipleship

Many of these are too brief to contain much multiple laying to them. However, one pair at least does contain implications for the future: new cloth on an old garment (Matthew 9:16; Mark 2:21; Luke 5:36) and new wine in old bottles (Matthew 9:17; Mark 2:22; Luke 5:37). These short stories predict and warn against the battle within the church that will take place soon after Jesus' death (and related in Acts) caused by the circumcision party who tried to graft the gospel message on to the Old Covenant with its important feast days, sacrificial system, and the need for circumcision.

John's Parables

Many would reject these rather extended discourses as not fitting the definition of parables, but I chose to include them for reasons of completeness. Each of them definitely contains a prophetic component. The Bread of Life (John 6:30-71) contains teachings regarding Jesus' future resurrection, Judas' coming betrayal, and His pivotal role in both eternal salvation and future judgment. The Shepherd and the Sheep (John 10:1-30) predicts Jesus' coming death as well as, in v. 16, the coming of the Gentiles to faith.

Parables of Watching

There is no doubt that the main purpose of the six stories I considered under this title was to warn people concerning a future judgment that would come upon them suddenly. The only real controversy surrounding these parables is to whether an individual parable was meant to predict the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 or whether it was a more eschatological event that he was talking about. On this issue, the various theological camps are so divided that it is probably best for me not to comment without alienating half of you in the process. But you should be open-minded on such a controversial subject and even consider the possibility that some of the parables may have in fact been intended to apply to both near and far events.

 

I KINGS 9-14: ARCHEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE

I Kings 9-14: Archeological Evidence

In an issue of Biblical Archaeological Review (Vol. XV (3), p. 33), there is a discussion of the Shishak Relief at Thebes and its relationship to various events related in I Kings. Two problem passages, in the minds of some scholars have been I Kings 10:14,21,23 and I Kings 14:25-26. The riches described in I Kings 10 appeared to be highly inflated while the military campaign in I Kings 14 was suspected to have invented in order to explain why the gold had disappeared (see also II Chronicles 12:2-4).

Several archeological discoveries tend to confirm the biblical accounts:

    1. A fragment of a stone monument at Megiddo (in Canaan) was found to contain the cartouche (oval or oblong in an Egyptian inscription containing the name and title of a prominent person) of King Sheshak.

    2. The large triumphal relief found at Thebes tells of Shishak's conquests in Judah and Israel. Several place names are on this relief. One is Jehallel, listed in I Chronicles 16. Another is the Fort of Abram, and the third contains the name Shibboleth, meaning “stream.” You may recall that it was the pronunciation of this particular word that resulted in the exposure of an Ephraimite in Judges 12.

    3. Soon after Shishak's conquests in Canaan, he died and Osorkon became pharaoh in 924 BC. There is a record on a granite pillar found in Egypt of Osorkon's gifts to his pagan gods. They total 380 tons of gold and silver soon after he came into power. One plausible explanation of where this pharaoh got this much riches so soon is that it came from Solomon's treasury, plundered by Shishak. At least 36 tons of gold are specifically listed in I Kings 9-10 alone.

 

CONSOLING THE BEREAVED: II SAMUEL 13-19

 

this past year a number of our friends and relatives have suffered the loss of someone close to them. And it is always a problem knowing how to comfort them and what to say that will help rather than make things even worse. In that regard there are some pertinent stories found in II Samuel involving King David and his general Joab that bear repeating.

After Absalom had killed his half-brother Amnon, he fled from Jerusalem and stayed away for three years (II Samuel 13:1-38). Verse 39 says that “the heart of the king went out, yearning for Absalom, for he was now consoled over the death of Amnon.

Out of pity for his king, Joab concocts an elaborate but successful scheme designed to bring about a reconciliation between David and Absalom, as described in II Samuel 14:1-27. Now Joab is a complex character, as one can see by reading through his long career from II Samuel 2 to I Kings 2. J.D. Douglas calls Joab's character “a strange mixture” of love and hate, purity of motive and deceit, concern and violence. In any case, Joab's motives appear to be above board and designed only for the king's welfare. But despite his noble actions, Absalom repays him by burning down his field in a fit of anger and ends up splitting the kingdom in two.

I was reminded of this story when recently watching a documentary about the life of Dean Martin. At one point in his life right after his son had died in a plane crash, Dean withdrew into himself for a period of time while trying to deal with his grief. His very good friend Frank Sinatra decided that the best thing for Dean would be to give him some activity to take his mind off his problems. I see a very close parallel here with Joab's actions in regard to King David, especially since Sinatra was another very interesting mixture of occasional violence and great compassion.

The parallels continue in considering the scheme that Sinatra had in mind. He convinced a reluctant Dean Martin to join him with other members of the Rat Pack on stage in Las Vegas for a series of performances. Instead of it helping the situation, however, the plan backfired on Sinatra since Dean was not at all ready to get out in public yet and ended up walking out and not speaking to Sinatra again for years. These similar stories demonstrate that you really have to know what you are doing when you are trying to console someone who is grieving. Otherwise you may end up doing much more harm than good, despite your good motives.

Getting back to the trio of David, Absalom and Joab: The bloodthirsty side of Joab's personality is demonstrated when he finally gets his revenge on Absalom by stabbing him as Absalom is hanging from a tree (II Samuel 18:9-15). This, of course, triggers another bout of grief for David, which has the potential of totally demoralizing David's troops and again harming the unity of the nation. And again, it is Joab who has to shake him out of his grief and into appropriate action before too much harm is done (II Samuel 19:1-8). This time, Joab is totally correct in his actions. This serves as a valuable object lesson in demonstrating that very similar motives and recommendations may result in a good outcome one time and a disastrous one under different circumstances.

So how does one know how to go about comforting and advising someone who is deep in grief for their loss? I asked this question recently of someone who had lost her husband. She replied that the best help by far came from friends of hers who had experienced a similar situation. They seemed to be the only ones who could truly empathize with her because of their own experiences.

Perhaps the best advice one can give to someone confronted with the question of what to say or counsel to those going through pain and loss in their life is just to act like Job's friends did initially. They showed their support by just being there and saying nothing at all. It was only when they opened their mouths that they got into trouble.

PRAYING IN JESUS' NAME (JOHN 14:13-14)

In terms of teachings on prayer, R.E. Brown recognizes four distinct but related categories found in John's writing, especially in John 14-16:

    a. Those in which Jesus himself will answer prayers given in his name (John 14:13-14).

    b. Those in which God answers prayers given in Jesus' name (John 15:16 and 16:23).

    c. Requests granted, but no mention of “in my name” (John 15:7 and 16:24). In these cases, God is inferred to be the grantor.

    d. The request is granted by God without Jesus' name being invoked (John 16:26; I John 3:21-22; 5:14-15).

The concept of “name” is an extremely important theological term in the Bible, with the word appearing over 1,000 times. F.F. Bruce's extensive entry in the New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology contains a number of statements pertinent to the passage at hand:

    “In the faith and thought of virtually every nation the name is inextricably bound up with the person, whether of a man, a god, or a demon.”

    “Of primary significance is the name of Yahweh, which he himself made known in his revelation (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 3:14; 6:2)...The name of Yahweh, indeed, is such a powerful expression of his personal rule and activity that it can be used as an alternative way of speaking of Yahweh himself (Lev. 18:21; Ps. 7:17; Amos 2:7; Mic. 5:4).”

    “God gives the Holy Spirit in the name of Jesus (Jn. 14:26)...And in his name the congregation prays (Jn. 14:13f; 15:16) – that is, according to his will and instruction, in order that the commission may be fulfilled, which Jesus gave to his own. This is the reason why these prayers are heard.”

    “'Name and power' are used parallel to one another (Acts 4:7; 16:18).”

    “Such statements show that the OT manner of speaking of the name of Yahweh has been transferred to Jesus and his name.”

In Mark 9 we are told about some people not officially belonging to Jesus' inner circle who were successfully casting out demons in Jesus' name. But in Acts 19, some itinerant Jewish exorcists attempt to use the same formula and are instead beaten up by the evil spirit for their troubles since the demon knows that they are not really representing Christ at all.

The NT Epistles have something to say on the subject also. Starting with Paul, we find that the concept of “Jesus' name” is used in various contexts:

    Paul speaks about the church in Corinth “calling on the name” (I Corinthians 1:2).

    He appeals to that church in Jesus' name to be in agreement with one another (I Corinthians 1:10).

    Paul passes judgment on a man in the name of Christ (I Corinthians 5:3-4).

    He states that the Corinthians were sanctified and justified in his name (I Corinthians 6:11).

    Ephesians 5:20 says, “Give thanks to God the Father at all times and for everything in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

    Colossians 3:17: “Whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.”

    Paul commands the Thessalonians in I Thessalonians 3:6 in Jesus' name to keep away from idle believers.

Despite all of the above, as far as I was able to determine, Paul never uses “in Jesus' name” in his own prayers found in Acts and Paul's letters. Therefore, this is another indication that it is not a mere formula that must be recited each time we pray.

The Epistle to the Hebrews brings out another aspect to this issue. Hebrews 4:14-16; 10:19-25; and 13:15 explain that it is only because we have Jesus as a High Priest in heaven that we have free access to the Father for both praises and requests. This is therefore another aspect of what “in Jesus' name” may mean in relationship to prayer.

All of the above goes together to prove the commonly agreed meaning of “in his name” found in John 14:13-14:

    Bietenhard suggests that “'asking in Jesus' name' probably means praying both 'according to his will' and 'with the invocation of his name.'” (Borchert)

    Morris: “This does not mean using the name as a formula. It means that prayer to be in accordance with all that the name stands for. It is prayer proceeding from faith in Christ, prayer that gives expression to a unity with all that Christ stands for, prayer which seeks to set forward Christ Himself.”

    Blum: “'In My name,' is not a magic formula of invocation. But the prayers of believers, as Christ's representatives doing His business, will be answered.”

 

NOTES ON JEREMIAH

Jeremiah 1:13 Cauldron itself was probably upright. But the hearth in which it was being heated was 

open to the north.

Jeremiah 2:13 This shows the attempts of man to provide his two basic needs: security and 

significance.

Jeremiah 3:13 Lit. “turn, you turning children”

Jer. 3:15 You get the leaders you deserve.

Jeremiah 6:28 There are cognate words for merchant (rokel) and swindler (rakil).

Jeremiah 9:4 see Jer. 6:28 note.

Jeremiah 10 The choruses praising God (6-7, 10, etc.) are missing in the Septuagint and the Dead Sea 

scrolls.

Jeremiah 12:1 Like Job, Jeremiah has little hope that he would win over God in a court of law.

Jeremiah 18:1 Again, God tells Jeremiah to go somewhere (as in 17:19).

Jeremiah 20:1 A 6-7^th centtury BC bulla (seal impression) was found in tailings from excavations 

from the temple area. It was inscribed with Immer's name on it.

Jeremiah 29:7 This is somewhat similar to aid given Germany and Japan after WWII, compared to the 

aftermath of WWI.

Jeremiah 32:27 God quotes Jeremiah's words in v. 17 back to him.

Jer. 32:29 At the remains of Ashkelon the first evidence of roof-top altars was found.

Jeremiah 35:7 The idea was not to be overly involved in society, such as separatist Christian groups 

today.

Jeremiah 37:3; 38:1 Archeologist Mazar uncovered a clay bulla in the City of David in 2005 reading 

“Belonging to Jehucal, son of Shelemiah, son of Shovi.” Three years later a bulla was uncovered that 

stated it belonged to Gedaliah, the son of Pashhur (Jer. 38:1).

Jeremiah 39:3 A Babylonian tablet dating to the same general time was deciphered in 2007 giving the 

name Nebo-sarsechim as the chief eunuch, Nergalsharusur the Sin-magir, and Nabuzeriddinam as the 

chief cook (or butcher of  humans (Jer. 39:9).

Jer. 39:18 It has been supposed that Ebed-Melech the Cushite accompanied Jeremiah to Africa, back 

to the land of his birth. See Jer. 42:19-20 and Jer. 43:7 for Jeremiah's exile into Egypt.

Jeremiah 40:8 See II Kings 25:23.

Jer. 40:14 A seal impression found at Tell el-Umeiri has the name of King Baalis of the Ammonites.

Jeremiah 42:10 is parallel to 1:10.

Jeremiah 47:4  Archeological evidence demonstrating the ferocity of the Babylonian attack has been 

found at Ashkelon.

Jeremiah 51:15 One proposed translation is: "though I have filled you with men like the locust 

(i.e. increased your population), yet they (your assailants) lift up their shout against you."

COLOSSIANS 3-4

In an earlier post on the book of Micah, I showed how one could almost construct a commentary on a book of the Bible without even consulting any actual commentaries. Now I would like to give an example to demonstrate that one can also gain some good information using Bible commentaries that are not even specifically written on the particular book in question.

This is a piece of advice that I wish I had heard when I first began slowly accumulating a library of Bible reference books and reading them. Later on, when I would be preparing for a lesson on a particular chapter of the Bible, I would dimly remember that I had read some interesting fact relating to that passage in one of the books in my library, but I couldn't for the life of me remember where I had read it. So from that point on, when I was reading a new commentary and happened to come across some information of worth relating to a completely different passage in the Bible, I would put a mark in the margin of the book. Then when I had finished reading, I would go back and cross-reference that page with the new Bible reference in a spreadsheet. From then on, whatever subject I was asked to speak on, I could simply consult that spreadsheet and see where I could turn to in my library to get more material for my lesson.

These two chapters in Colossians were chosen as a random example to see what I was able to find without looking at any commentaries specifically on Colossians at all.

Colossians 1:15-18 Commenting on the letter to the church at Laodicia in Revelation 3:14, R.H. Mounce says that “the final designation, 'the beginning of the creation of God,' is undoubtedly linked to Paul's great christological passage in Colossians 1:15ff, where Christ is designated 'the beginning' (vs. 18) and 'the firstborn of all creation' (vs. 15). The close geographical proximity of the two cities and Paul's instructions to Colossae that they exchange letters make it all but certain that the writer of Revelation knew the Colossian epistle.” Other parallels include Colossians 1:27 with Revelation 3:17 and Colossians 3:1 with Revelation 3:21. (The Book of Revelation)

Colossians 3:1 In John 8:23, Jesus says to the Jews, “You belong to what is below; I belong to what is above.” In John 17:16, the disciples are included along with Jesus when he states, “They do not belong to the world, any more that I belong to the world.” “Col iii 1 offers an interesting parallel to this terminology: 'If you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above!'” Thus, believers today are included along with Jesus and the apostles in that regard. (R.E. Brown, The Gospel According to John I-XII)

Colossians 3:5 “While pathos [passions] includes all ungovernable affections, 'epithumia kaka (evil desire)...reaches to all evil longings.” (Lightfoot, quoted in L. Morris, The First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians)

“The proud, unbridled self wishes to make the universe center on itself, to draw all things inward to itself, confident that if it can amass enough of the power, security, and pleasure that money and possessions signify it will be secure. Idolatry exists to satisfy these desires, so it is not surprising that Paul should identify covetousness as idolatry (Col. 3:5). This may also explain why the prohibition of covetousness is the last of the Ten Commandments: to break this command is to break the first, in effect.” (J.N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66)

Colossians 3:9-11 Martyn notes the close parallels between Galatians 3:26-28; I Corinthians 12:13; and Colossians 3:9-11. He feels that all three stem from an ancient baptismal formula, “in form an address directed to a group of baptizands, announcing to them – and to the attending witnesses – the facts of their new existence.” (J. Louis Martyn, Galatians)

Colossians 3:11 Barth and Blanke also find parallels in Galatians 3:28a and I Corinthians 12:13b. “The formulas presuppose the existence of anthropological social differences and distinctions and their formerly divisive consequences. But they flatly deny their relevance in the present and future, after Christ has come.” (Barth and Blanke, The Letter to Philemon)

Colossians 3:18 “The term toankon expresses what is 'proper, fitting, suitable' in a given set of circumstances...the verb occurs only a few times in the NT.” These include Colossians 3:8; Ephesians 5:4; and Philemon 8. (J.A. Fitzmyer, The Letter to Philemon)

Colossians 3:18-19 “These admonitions did not apply to the feelings wives and husbands should have toward one another, but rather to the treatment that should be expected of them.” (G.W. Buchanan, To the Hebrews)

Colossians 3:18-4:1 “Parallels exist between the Haustafel [the proper domestic or household order in a Christian home] of Colossians, especially between its uniquely intensive and extensive section treating the master-slave relation in 3:22-4:1, and Philemon as a case study. It is hardly fortuitous that the verb adikeo (doing wrong) is used by Paul in the treatment of the same subject only in Col 3:25 and Philem 19.” (Barth and Blanke)

Colossians 3:22 The term translated “eye service” only appears in the Bible here [Ephesians 6:6] and and in Colossians 3:22. “It is found nowhere else except in ecclesiastical writings. Literally, it means 'eye service' connoting 'to serve with a view to impressing others'...it refers to the outward activity of work without the corresponding inward dedication.” (H.W. Hoehner, Ephesians)

Colossians 4:1 The term isotes only appears in the New Testament here and II Corinthians 8:13-14. “It means 'what is fair' (in relation to one's slaves).” (V.P. Furnish, II Corinthians)

Colossians 4:7-8 There is a very close correspondence between these verses and Ephesians 6:21-22, with 32 words in exact agreement. “It certainly suggests that the author of [Colossians] copied from [Ephesians.] It is very possible that both epistles were written at the same time or that the author still had the first letter while he was penning the other. It may well be that if Paul were the author of both epistles, as is argued in this commentary, Tychicus took both letters with him when he went to Asia Minor.” (Hoehner) You may be surprised that there is even the slightest doubt concerning Pauline authorship; but if so, you are probably not well acquainted with liberal biblical scholarship.

Colossians 4:10-14 “Some have inferred from the listing of Luke's name separately from 'those of the circumcision' that Luke was a Gentile.” Allen spends several pages discussing the various reasons against that common supposition. (D.L. Allen, Lukan Authorship of Hebrews)

Colossians 4:14 “In Col 4:14, Demas...is probably the same as the one named here [Philemon 24], and in Tim 4:10, where he is said to have deserted Paul.” It is reported by two early church leaders, Epiphanius and Photius of Constantinople, that he became a pagan priest. (Fitzmyer)

Colossians 4:16 “Knox...argues strongly for the identification of [the Letter to] Philemon with 'the letter from Laodicea.'” (Orr and Walther, I Corinthians)

In stark contrast, “C.P. Anderson, followed by Jewett, believes that Hebrews is the letter to the Laodiceans referred to in Col. 4:16, and that it was written from prison (Phm. 23)...The argument leans rather heavily on points of contact between Hebrews and Colossians.” These include parallels between Colossians 4:12 and Hebrews 2:10; 6:11; and 10:22. (P. Ellingsworth, Commentary on Hebrews)

Colossians 4:17 Archippus is only mentioned here and in Philemon 2. Concerning this person, “two things are evident, and the third may be implied: (1) This man had assumed a ministry in the church. (2) He did not yet fulfill it completely. (3) He may have been absent from Colossae when Colossians was written or publicly read ('Tell him...').” (Barth and Blanke)

Note that these various statements above come from commentaries on Isaiah, John, I Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, I and II Thessalonians, Philemon, Hebrews, and Revelation.

 

RECENT INSIGHTS FROM BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGY REVIEW

I have subscribed to BAR almost from its inception and always look forward to my new issue. Although it would not be considered as a “Christian” publication by any means and some of its articles are way too detailed to be of much interest to me, this magazine generally contains at least one gem or two of use to those involved in Bible study. But the Winter 2021 issue was really packed with items that I would like to share below.

Genesis 6

In response to a letter to the editor (p. 8), Alan Millard explains that the various Hebrew words for “boat” or “ship” are all missing in the Genesis description of Noah's ark. This adds to the supposition that it was in fact more of a box-like wooden structure designed only for floating, not for actual sailing.

Amos 1:1 and Zechariah 14:5

Steinmeyer on pp. 12-13 of this issue of BAR points out the following: Although there is ample archeological evidence in towns throughout Israel for a massive earthquake occurring in the 8^th century BC, as mentioned in these two prophetic texts, it is only recently that excavations in the old City of David area of Jerusalem have shown that the earthquake also impacted the Judean hill country as well.

Ezekiel 27:19

Mark Wilson discusses the various translations of this verse and opts for “and they traded wine from Izal in your marketplace” based on the Septuagint version of this verse. Interestingly, Syrian Christians in the modern city still produce wine there using ancient production methods for use in their Eucharist services. (pp. 16-18)

Isaiah 56:5 and Ezekiel 37:11-14

Kerry Sonia (pp. 20-22) writes an article discussing the care for the dead among the ancient Jews. Whereas the eunuch in Isaiah 56 has no sons or daughters to commemorate him in death through the proper burial practices, as portrayed in Genesis 49:29-32; 50:12-14; and Judges 16:31, God takes on that duty (see also Ezekiel 37).

Archeology and Faith

Pages 23-24 contain a review of William Dever's book titled Has Archaeology Buried the Bible? The reviewer makes the following comments:

    “...very few professional archaeologists working in Israel, Jordan and elsewhere today claim to dig with the Bible in one hand and a spade in the other.”

    “...many came to realize that archaeology had failed to offer evidence for the historicity of certain pivotal biblical events...”

However, Dever (by no means a conservative Christian voice) feels that archaeology can aid readers to “find things they can still believe in reading Bible – things for which they need to offer no apologies.” This is not exactly a ringing endorsement of the truth of the Bible, but it is at least a step back from the skeptical scholarly trend toward biblical minimalism.

Acts 12: 1-4, 21-23

Pages 30-38 summarize studies by Jean-Baptiste Humbert of Ecole Biblique concerning the so-called Tomb of the Kings located in Jerusalem. He concludes that the tomb was originally commissioned to be built by King Herod Agrippa I, who was the one responsible for the execution of the apostle James. However, when Agrippa died suddenly for his almost blasphemous behavior (also narrated in Acts 12), the tomb was still unfinished. Subsequently, Humbert and others believe, the tomb was bought by Queen Helena of Adiabene, who was a convert to Judaism, and she was buried there. So the Tomb of the Kings should really be called the Tomb of the Queen.

Deuteronomy 1:1,6

On pages 39-53, the reader is exposed to both sides of the debate concerning the authenticity of a document (now lost) claiming to be the oldest known biblical manuscript. It contained what looked like an early version of material in Deuteronomy 1, verses 1 and 6. The issues involved are somewhat technical in nature, so you would have to read both sides of the story and make up your own mind whether it was a fake or not. But it does illustrate two things: (1) even experts in the field often disagree on how to interpret the same data and (2) you must be very wary in accepting information obtained from possibly dubious sources.

Plague Stories in the Bible

J. Beltz in pp. 58-59 attempts to draw an analogy between Yahweh as a plague god (as in Habakkuk 3:5; II Samuel 24:10-25; I Chronicles 21:1-30; II Kings 19:35; and II Chronicles 32:21) and other Middle Eastern gods of disease. He concludes by stating that there “are significant differences between the Mesopotamian and Israelite conceptions too...”

Galatians 1:17; II Corinthians 11:32-33; and Acts 9:25

In Galatians, Paul says that he went to “Arabia” after his conversion in Damascus. Ben Worthington, in pages 60-61, clarifies this word by explaining that it does not refer to Saudi Arabia, but to the Nabatean Kingdom just south of Damascus. There Paul probably stayed in its capital city of Petra, where he preached long enough to come to the attention of King Aretas, who tried to capture him when he returned to Damascus (see the II Corinthians passage above). This indicates that the city of Damascus was probably also part of Nabatean territory at the time.

Psalms 101 and 102

On pages 62-54 of this BAR issue, Elizabeth Backfish presents an interesting article demonstrating some examples of Hebrew wordplay present in the Psalms which are often lost in translation.

Thus, Psalm 101:3b is an example of alliteration:

    esoh-setim saneti

    “The work of transgressors I hate”

and in Psalm 104:12, the rare sound oph is found in both lines of this verse.

It turns out that the early writers who produced the Septuagint apparently appreciated this sort of wordplay and tried to duplicate it in their Greek translation of these psalms.

 

BOOK OF MICAH: COMMENTS WITHOUT COMMENTARIES

If one were asked to present a lesson on a particular book in the Bible (or chapter in that book), the most logical place to go for information would be a commentary on that particular book. But I often like to first purposely avoid such commentaries and search elsewhere for my material. That way, I always run into unexpected facts or applications that I never would have come across otherwise. And it tends to add interest to my presentations. So as an example, here are some insights I found concerning the book of Micah mainly by consulting the Scripture index at the back of some books in my library.

Micah 1:1,3 The article on the city of Lachish in the Dictionary of Old Testament Historical Books notes that the fact this verse associates that city with chariots may identify the large excavated open area behind the palace with a place for military training and parades.

Micah 1:8 “Making the prisoners go barefoot served the practical purpose of preventing escape and of providing loot for the victors...The prophets wandered about barefooted, vividly acting out the inevitable fate of those destined for captivity.” Also see Isaiah 20:2-4. (Dictionary of Biblical Imagery)

Micah 1:10 “The reader must be attentive to the effect of the message not only on mind and eye but also on ear and heart. Thus readers of Micah 1:10-16 will fail to appreciate the full force of the prophet's words unless they understand something of the play on sounds and meanings in the words of judgment (e.g. 'In Beth Ophrah [house of dust] roll in the dust' ['apar], v. 10).” (A Complete Literary Guide to the Bible)

Micah 3:3b “The Hebrew text has k'sr, 'as,' so that we would render:

        And they break (them) in two as in the pot

        And like flesh in the midst of the cauldron.

That is not impossible, but as poetry it limps and the parallelism is imperfect. What has apparently happened is that k'sr was written accidentally for ks'r, which means 'meat' or 'flesh.'” Thus, NRSV renders these lines as:

    and chop them up like meat in a kettle

                                like flesh in a cauldron.

(Divine Commitment and Human Obligation, Vol. 1)

Micah 3:5-11 “In 1 Sam 9:7 Saul expresses his concern that he has no present to give the prophet Samuel in the upcoming meeting, suggesting that giving a gift to a prophet was a common courtesy. This courtesy suffered abuse throughout Israel's history (also in Jer 6:14; 8:10).” (New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, article on “gift”)

Micah 4:3 The later prophet Joel (3:10) takes Micah's familiar prophecy of peace (“they shall take their swords and turn them into plowshares”) and turns it on its head. (The Literary Guide to the Bible)

Micah 4:9-5:4 Payne sees a pattern of progressive predictions in these verses as follows:

    4:9          fall of Jerusalem in 586 BC

    4:10a     Babylonian exile

    4:10b     Persian restoration

    4:11-13 Maccabean victories

    5:1       fall of Jerusalem in 63 BC

    5:2-3a  birth of Christ

    5:3b    conversion of the Gentiles

    5:4      Messiah's millennial rule

(Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy)

Micah 4:10 Concerning the word translated “burst forth”:

“the word appears with uncertain meaning in a context describing the sorrowful birthpangs of daughter Zion as she faces captivity...Driver suggests the translation 'heave' for this passage, which he sees as consistent with the basic sense of the root, viz., to strain to the point of bursting. Some scholars emend gohi here to g'i, scream. Micah's metaphor may intend the coming captivity, which like childbirth may be the painful means of the nation's new birth.” (NIDOTTE, Vol 1)

Micah 5:2b “The Old Testament, on a few occasions, contains a few texts that may suggest some inkling of messianic preexistence and thus messianic deity.” Thus, “His goings are from long ago, from the days of eternity.” “The temporal expressions, however, may refer to the Messiah's continuity with the line of David...” (Hidden But Now Revealed)

Micah 5:2-4 “Since the current Davidic kings were associated with Jerusalem, Micah, like Isaiah, may here be foretelling the rejection of the present Davidic line in favour of a new 'David.'” (New Dictionary of Biblical Theology)

Micah 5:10-15 “The only possible interruption of the good news of this section [chapters 4-6] is the prediction of coming destruction upon military installations and idolatry...and this most likely should be directed to the nations..., not Israel, and therefore represents yet more good news.” (The Literary Structure of the Old Testament)

Micah 6:6-8 “Two different and opposing kinds of false claim are made about this text. Some readers see the text as refuting all external, ceremonial religion in favor of a totally internalized faith response to God. Others argue that essential religious acts focus solely on issues of justice, mercy and humility.” The author concludes that “this passage is more than just an ethical or cultic substitute for all inventions of religion posed by mortals. It is duty, indeed, but duty grounded in the character and grace of God.” (Hard Saying of the Bible)

Micah 6:8 “That humanity's good requires people to act justly and love mercy may or may not be common sense. But the invitation to 'walk humbly with your God,' if accepted, sets people on a path where common sense itself...may have to be surrendered if we are to reach our ultimate good.” (Dictionary of Scripture and Ethics)

Micah 7:3 “The Hebr literally has 'on the evil (their) hands to do good' which ...apparently means that they are out to do evil though they appear to want to do good.” (Old Testament Translation Problems)

Micah 7:16-17 demonstrates “the lesser role of the Gentiles in the millennium.” (The Millennial Kingdom)

Micah 7:18 “The mercy of God proclaimed by all the prophets will be shown to the remnant [of Israel].” (Dreams, Visions and Oracles)

 

EXALTED PROSE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT (JOHN 1:1-5)

We often divide writing into poetry and prose. But there is a third category which falls somewhere in between these two categories, and it has been called “Exalted Prose.” There are many examples of this type of writing in the New Testament, especially in the writings of John and Paul. I will just concentrate on one passage in the prologue to John's Gospel, John 1:1-5. Most translations will render John 1 as prose; however, the Jerusalem Bible indents it as poetry instead. This demonstrates the intermediate nature of this whole chapter.

As I have stressed in several of my posts, the defining characteristic of most Hebrew poetry is the repetition of words and thoughts in going from one line to the next. This characteristic can also be seen in the exalted prose found in the first chapter of John as well as in some of Jesus' extended discourses to the apostles found only in John's Gospel. And it explains why some readers are a bit put off by John's writing because of the seemingly unnecessary repetition found in it. This repetition actually reflects strongly the influence of Hebrew poetry found in the Old Testament. I have attempted to highlight this repetition in the spacing of the following lines, rendered as in the NRSV:

John 1:1-2     “In the beginning was the Word,

                                                    and the Word was with God,

                                                    and the Word was         God.

                        He was in the beginning with God.”

Lines 1a and 1b are a form of “stair-step parallelism” in which the end of the first line is repeated at the start of the next line.

Lines 1b and 1c present an interesting variation on “incomplete parallelism,” another form of OT poetry.

Then, verse 2 actually echoes the thought in combined John 1:1a-b.

And finally, the whole of these two verses can be recast in the form of “introverted, or chiastic, parallelism” in which an idea advances and then backs up on itself to the starting point:

    A. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God.

        B. and the Word was God.

    A'. He was in the beginning with God.”

Now the reader can see that the clear central thought has been saved for the amazing proclamation in Section B. This explains why John has not built up to the grand climax in the last line, as we would do. Instead, he has in fact bracketed his main point with the two lesser statements on either side.

John 1:3a “All things came into being                          through him and,

                without him                              not one thing came into being”

The second line of this verse does two interesting things. For one thing, its first phrase echoes the last part of line 1 while the second final phrase of line 2 matches the first phrase in line 1. This makes it equivalent to an introverted poetic parallelism. But at the same time, the second line expresses the idea in the first line using negatives. This is called antithetic parallelism.

John 1:3b-5

    “What has come into being in him was life

                                                      and the life was the light of the world.

                                                                                The light shines in the darkness

                                                                                                        and the darkness did not overcome it.”

And so John concludes with the clearest example in the Bible of “stair-step parallelism."

 

EXCAVATIONS AT DAN (I KINGS 12:28-31)

 

The site of Dan at the far north of the territory of Israel was identified in 1838 by E. Robinson. One area at that site was tentatively felt to be the “high place” or sanctuary mentioned in I Kings 12. However, there was no real evidence other than the fact that it was dated to 800-750 BC.

In 1984, further excavations were carried out by Abraham Biran. They showed steps leading up to the sanctuary and also uncovered a number of chambers associated with the priests and worship, as evidenced by relics such as two small incense altars, fancy bronze bowl, and three iron incense shovels. These last items were pictured in mosaics in synagogues of the 4th-5^th century AD and also described in Exodus 27:3, but never before found. The hole containing the bowl had ashes which were tentatively identified as coming from frankincense and myrrh.

Altogether, Biran recovered the remains of three different layers from this center of worship covering the reigns of Kings Jeroboam I, Ahab, and Jeroboam II in the tenth, ninth, and eighth centuries BC, respectively. There is evidence that the earliest level was destroyed by fire “Perhaps by the Aramean king Ben Hadad I (I Kings 15:20, 2 Chron 6:14).” (Gilmour)

Another important find in the remains of Dan was the House of David Inscription on a stele with writing in Aramaic, discovered in 1993. It dates to the 9^th century BC and tells of Jehu's rebellion described II Kings 9, giving a slightly different take on that event. The mention of the House of David confirms the existence of a Davidic dynasty, which had been doubted by many liberal Bible scholars. In addition, the inscription provided evidence that David's kingdom did indeed spread as far north as Dan, also doubted by earlier scholars. Note the common reference in the Bible to the phrase “from Dan to Beersheba” (or “from Beersheba to Dan”) in passages such as Judges 20:1; I Samuel 3:20; I Chronicles 21:2, etc).

The final Israelite level in the city shows signs of destruction by fire, no doubt attributed to Tiglath-Pileser II and mentioned in II Kings 15:19,29 and I Chronicles 5:26.

PRAYING IN JESUS' NAME (JOHN 14:13-14)

In terms of teachings on prayer, R.E. Brown recognizes four distinct but related categories found in John's writing, especially in John 14-16:

    a. Those in which Jesus himself will answer prayers given in his name (John 14:13-14).

    b. Those in which God answers prayers given in Jesus' name (John 15:16 and 16:23).

    c. Requests granted, but no mention of “in my name” (John 15:7 and 16:24). In these cases, God is inferred to be the grantor.

    d. The request is granted by God without Jesus' name being invoked (John 16:26; I John 3:21-22; 5:14-15).

The concept of “name” is an extremely important theological term in the Bible, with the word appearing over 1,000 times. F.F. Bruce's extensive entry in the New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology contains a number of statements pertinent to the passage at hand:

“In the faith and thought of virtually every nation the name is inextricably bound up with the person, whether of a man, a god, or a demon.”

“Of primary significance is the name of Yahweh, which he himself made known in his revelation (Gen. 17:1; Exod. 3:14; 6:2)...The name of Yahweh, indeed, is such a powerful expression of his personal rule and activity that it can be used as an alternative way of speaking of Yahweh himself (Lev. 18:21; Ps. 7:17; Amos 2:7; Mic. 5:4).”

“God gives the Holy Spirit in the name of Jesus (Jn. 14:26)...And in his name the congregation prays (Jn. 14:13f; 15:16) – that is, according to his will and instruction, in order that the commission may be fulfilled, which Jesus gave to his own. This is the reason why these prayers are heard.”

“'Name and power' are used parallel to one another (Acts 4:7; 16:18).”

“Such statements show that the OT manner of speaking of the name of Yahweh has been transferred to Jesus and his name.”

In Mark 9 we are told about some people not officially belonging to Jesus' inner circle who were successfully casting out demons in Jesus' name. But in Acts 19, some itinerant Jewish exorcists attempt to use the same formula and are instead beaten up by the evil spirit for their troubles since the demon knows that they are not really representing Christ at all.

The NT Epistles have something to say on the subject also. Starting with Paul, we find that the concept of “Jesus' name” is used in various contexts:

    Paul speaks about the church in Corinth “calling on the name” (I Corinthians 1:2).

    He appeals to that church in Jesus' name to be in agreement with one another (I Corinthians 1:10).

    Paul passes judgment on a man in the name of Christ (I Corinthians 5:3-4).

    He states that the Corinthians were sanctified and justified in his name (I Corinthians 6:11).

    Ephesians 5:20 says, “Give thanks to God the Father at all times and for everything in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

    Colossians 3:17: “Whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.”

    Paul commands the Thessalonians in I Thessalonians 3:6 in Jesus' name to keep away from idle believers.

Despite all of the above, as far as I was able to determine, Paul never uses “in Jesus' name” in his own prayers found in Acts and Paul's letters. Therefore, this is another indication that it is not a mere formula that must be recited each time we pray.

The Epistle to the Hebrews brings out another aspect to this issue. Hebrews 4:14-16; 10:19-25; and 13:15 explain that it is only because we have Jesus as a High Priest in heaven that we have free access to the Father for both praises and requests. This is therefore another aspect of what “in Jesus' name” may mean in relationship to prayer.

All of the above goes together to prove the commonly agreed meaning of “in his name” found in John 14:13-14:

    Bietenhard suggests that “'asking in Jesus' name' probably means praying both 'according to his will' and 'with the invocation of his name.'” (Borchert)

    Morris: “This does not mean using the name as a formula. It means that prayer to be in accordance with all that the name stands for. It is prayer proceeding from faith in Christ, prayer that gives expression to a unity with all that Christ stands for, prayer which seeks to set forward Christ Himself.”

    Blum: “'In My name,' is not a magic formula of invocation. But the prayers of believers, as Christ's representatives doing His business, will be answered.”