Ur and Abraham: A Rejoinder to Tim Bulkeley

My fellow blogger, Tim Bulkeley from New Zealand, wrote a blog, “Reading Abram/Abraham,” in which he expresses his concern over the issue of history/historicity when writing an article about Abraham.

Tim also called attention to my blog in which I made reference to an exhibit about the treasures found in the royal tombs of Ur, which I called “The City of Abraham.”  The issue raised by Tim is whether the Ur of the Chaldeans mentioned in the biblical text is the same Ur located in southern Mesopotamia and home of the royal tombs.

I share Tim’s concern about the historicity of the biblical tradition. The biblical record is unanimous in affirming that Terah, the father of Abraham, and his family left Ur to move to the land of Canaan: “Terah took his son Abram, his grandson Lot son of Haran, and his daughter-in-law Sarai, the wife of his son Abram, and together they set out from Ur of the Chaldeans to go to Canaan. But when they came to Haran, they settled there” (Genesis 11:31).  

The name “Ur of the Chaldeans,” the city of Abraham’s ancestors, appears four times in the Old Testament (Genesis 11:28; 11:31; 15:7; Nehemiah 9:7). The name given to Abraham’s place of origin, “Ur of the Chaldeans,” is an anachronism.  The Chaldeans, a group of Aramean seminomadic tribes who lived along the Persian Gulf in the southern part of Mesopotamia (present day Iraq), did not establish what is called the Neo-Babylonian empire until the 7th century BCE.  The Neo-Babylonian Empire began with the reign of Nabopolassar in 626 BCE and ended with the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus in 539 BCE.

Scholars disagree whether the Ur of the Chaldeans mentioned in Genesis is identical with the Sumerian city of Ur that flourished in southern Mesopotamia in the third millennium BCE.  Some scholars have attempted to locate Ur in northern Mesopotamia, near the city of Haran.  

Two reasons are given for this shift in location.  First, the patriarchal narratives seem to corroborate the view that the patriarchs considered upper Mesopotamia, especially the region of Haran, as their place of origin.  According to this view, Haran would be out of the way as a route for a group of people moving from Ur to Canaan.

The second reason is that when Abraham sent his servant to his place of origin to procure a wife for his son Isaac (Genesis 24:1-10) and when Isaac sent Jacob to the place of origin of his ancestors (Genesis 28:1-5; 29:1-8), both Abraham’s servant and Jacob came to the region of Haran in upper Mesopotamia.  

Cyrus Gordon, in his article “Abraham and the Merchants of Ura,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 17 (1958) 28-31, proposed the northern Mesopotamia city of Ura, a city that is mentioned in cuneiform texts, as the city from which Abraham came.  According to Gordon, Abraham was a merchant prince who was involved in caravan trade.  

As Tim mentioned in his post, the majority of scholars today, however, still accept the ancient Sumerian city of Ur, located on the southern bank of the Euphrates, as the place referred to in the patriarchal narratives.  They also accept the biblical tradition which affirms that the ancestors of Abraham came from southern Mesopotamia.

As for the issue of historicity of the patriarchal traditions, the debate continues unabated.  However, the fact is, that in order to write an article on Abraham, the only resource available is the biblical text.  Whether these texts are theology, as Jim West proposes, history, or historiography, the biblical texts are the only witnesses available that declare that there once was a man called Abraham.  Without the biblical texts, no one would ever know that Abraham existed, and thus, no one would be able to write anything about him.

No one today can prove whether the patriarchal narratives are historical. However, if the four texts that mention Ur of the Chaldeans are the work of people who lived in the exilic period, then they knew that the ancient city of Ur was now Ur of the Chaldeans.  As Claus Westermann, in his book Genesis 12-36 (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1981), p. 136, wrote: “The author of the priestly writing knows that the dominion of the city of Ur is older than that of Babylon; but he designates it by the name which was current for it in his own time and region: Ur of the Chaldees.”

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

King Tut

The National Geographic Magazine has a very interesting video presentation on King Tutankhamun, one of the most famous pharaohs of Egypt.  The video shows King Tut’s burial chambers and his mummified remains.  The video begins with a spectacular view of the paintings on the four walls of King Tut’s tomb.  These paintings describe King’s Tut journey into the afterworld and his reception by the gods and goddesses of Egypt.

I highly recommend that you take time to see this presentation of King Tut’s journey into the afterlife.  In order for you to be able to enjoy this presentation, you will need a high-speed Internet connection.  Click here to see the video presentation.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

To a Wonderful Son

Today I am going personal. Since I began this blog on August 15, 2005, I have avoided writing on personal issues. Today, I have broken that commitment because I believe that I must give “honor to whom honor is due” (Romans 13:7).

It is true that behind every successful man there is a woman kicking him in the pants in order to help him get ahead. I have one of those women in my life and I have the prints on my pants to prove it.

Today, however, I want to say that my blog owes much of its success to the work of my son, a work that is done mostly in the background. Several days ago, a reader asked me who J. R. Mariottini, my team member, was. J. R. is my son and J. R. stands for Claude Mariottini, Jr.

J. R. works for a company that provides support work for companies using Oracle. Because of his knowledge of computers and software, J. R. has designed and maintained the web page since its inception. In fact, it was my son who encouraged me to begin a web page and to blog on a regular basis.

In addition, JR has given me ideas for blogs and suggested topics for me to research and write. More than anyone else, JR has promoted the success of my blog. As a result of his work, thousands of people visit both the web page and the blog regularly. Many pastors, churches, seminary students, and lay people have linked my blog to their blogs. The comments and emails from readers in the USA and other countries attest to the success and popularity of my blog. I owe a debt of gratitude to my son for his help.

J. R. is a blogger himself. His blog, www.bolivargrads.com keeps track of students who graduated from Bolivar High School in Bolivar, Missouri from 1985-1991. So popular has his blog become, that the local Bolivar newspaper wrote a long article on J. R.’s blog.

J. R. and his wife Kristen have two beautiful daughters, Payton (the oldest) and Macy (the youngest). It is wonderful having grandchildren.

I call J. R., “meu filho,” Portuguese for “my son.” So, to meu filho, a wonderful son, I say: “Thank you for your work and support.”

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Of Making Many Books: Writing on the Second Coming of Christ

A few days ago, I received an email from Paul M. Kingery, PhD, MPH, in which he sent me a link to his web page inviting me to read his book, which is available free on his web site.  I visited Mr. Kingery’s web site and read the first chapter of his book.  Here are my comments.

The premise of his book is that God has made three covenants and is about to make a fourth.  The four covenants were made with righteous men, with a physical nation, with Christians scattered in churches, and with gathered Christians in the kingdom.

These covenants were made in three separate dispensations.  The first dispensation was from Adam to Abraham and lasted 2000 years.  The second dispensation was from Abraham to Christ and lasted 2000 years and the third dispensation was from Christ to the present and lasted another 2000 years.  The final dispensation, the dispensation of the kingdom, will last 1000 years.

According to Mr. Kingery, the seventh millennium is the dispensation of the kingdom.  According to him, at his second coming, Christ will establish a “multi-racial kingdom in the land of Canaan.”  He said: “The promised land, the land beyond Jordan, is reserved for the children of God from every nation. Jerusalem is the capitol [sic] of the coming kingdom of Christ, the footstool of his throne.”

Mr. Kingery sees the number seven in the Old and New Testaments to be related to the seventh millennium.  He has an extensive list of the occurrences of the number seven in the Bible and relates each one of them to the actions of God in the seventh millennium (I wonder what he would do with 1 Samuel 2:5?).

The premise of Mr. Kingery’s book is very shaky; it is like a house built without a solid foundation (Luke 6:49).  The chapter I read is mostly an allegorization and spiritualization of the biblical text.  It is impossible for me to make a detailed criticism of what I read, but the comments below demonstrate the shaky premises the book.

1.  The spiritualization of the Old Testament takes away the historical integrity of the text.  One basic issue of interpretation is that the biblical text has a message for the people who lived in a very specific historical period.  To say that Jacob’s bowing seven times before Esau means that “God’s people will endure seven millennia on earth with the people of the world who do not value Christ before the judgment” is to say much, much more than what is intended by the text.

2.  To divide human history into three periods of 2000 years each is to reject the historical reality that the world is much older than 6000 years.  As John Bright has demonstrated in his book, A History of Israel (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 2000), p. 24, the earliest settlement in Jericho can easily be dated to 8000 B.C.

The division of human history into periods goes back to Jewish Apocalyptic.  Jewish tradition teaches that from Adam to Abraham there were 2000 years of chaos and anguish.  Then, Abraham brings about 2000 years of Torah which is then followed with 2000 years of preparation for the coming of the Messiah, who will come to establish his kingdom for the Jewish people and for the nations of the world.

The early Christian church took a similar approach.  The Epistle of Barnabas says: “In six thousand years the Lord will make an end of all things, for a day is with him as a thousand years. And he himself beareth witness unto me, saying: Behold this day a day shall be as a thousand years. Therefore, my children, in six days, that is in six thousand years, shall all things be brought to an end” (Epistle of Barnabas 15:4).

Out of these words of Barnabas there has come the popular saying found in so many millenarian books: “As there had been 2,000 years from Adam to Abraham, and 2,000 from Abraham to Christ, so there will be 2,000 years for the Christian era and then would come the Millennium.”

The classical exposition of the view that human history is 6000 years old was developed by Bishop James Ussher, whose chronology was placed on the top of the pages of many of the old editions of the King James Bible.  Calculating the years back from the birth of Christ, Ussher concluded that the world was created on October 23, 4004 B. C. at 6:00 a.m.

3.  Another fallacy with Mr. Kingery’s premise is that by his account, the millennium kingdom should have begun in 2000 (even though the seventh millennium begins in 2001), which means, that the beginning of the kingdom is six years late, or using Ussher’s chronology, which conforms better with the biblical text, the kingdom is almost ten years late already.

Ussher himself estimated that the second coming of Christ would occur exactly 6000 years after the creation of the world, that is, in the fall of 1996. His conclusion is based of the view that each day of creation represents a thousand years.  This view is called the "millennial week."  Thus, according to Ussher, on the seventh millennial day, October 23, 1996, Jesus Christ would return to earth and life as we know today would cease.

Many people have established dates for the coming of Christ.  Based on an incorrect interpretation of Daniel 9:24-25, a passage which I hope to study sometime in the future, and based on the dispensational teachings of C. I. Schofield, many people believed that, since the millennium would begin in 2000, the rapture would occur in 1993.

For instance, Benny Hinn, the famous TV evangelist, predicted that the rapture of believers would occur in 1993.  A millenarian religious movement in the Ukraine predicted that the coming of Christ and the end of the world would happen on November 7, 1993.

Lee Jang Rim, a pastor in Korea, wrote a book in which he said God revealed to him that the rapture of the church would occur on October 27, 1993, which it did not.  Many of his followers committed suicide in order to avoid the tribulations of the last days.

I waited until October 28 (just to be sure) and then wrote a letter to the Chicago branch of the Korean church, telling the pastor there that the reason the so-called rapture of the church did not occur was because his church’s interpretation of Daniel was incorrect.  Many religious people, including Jehovah’s Witnesses and Seven-Day Adventists, have set dates for the coming of Christ, only to be proven wrong.

I know that Mr. Kingery means well, but his book, Land of Canaan, is based on a very shaky foundation.  The Lord is coming but of the day and hour, of the month or year, “no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father” (Matthew 24:36).

After reading the first chapter of the book, I realized there was no reason to read the rest of the book.  You do not have to read the book either, but if you insist, then, go ahead and click here.

The writer of Ecclesiastes was right: “Of making many books there is no end” (Ecclesiastes 12:12 ESV).  Or, as the New Living Translation puts it: “There is no end of opinions ready to be expressed. Studying them can go on forever and become very exhausting.”


Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

The Royal Tombs of Ur, the City of Abraham

The royal tombs of Ur were discovered in the 1920s and 1930s. Ur was an ancient Sumerian city, the place where Abraham and his family lived. Ur was located in what is now southern Iraq.

The site of ancient Ur was excavated by British archaeologist C. Leonard Woolley. Woolley found 1,850 burial sites, most of them intact and well preserved. The royal tombs contained many artifacts, which reflect the royal status of the people buried in the tombs. The jewelry found in the tombs were made of gold and other precious stones.

Mesopotamia is considered the cradle of civilization. According to the biblical text, most of the early human history took place in Mesopotamia.

For a good article dealing with the treasury of the royal tombs of Ur, click here.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Pastors and Their Theological Education

The call to pastoral work is a call to lead the church to accomplish its work.  Called people enter the ministry because they have sensed the hand of God in their lives and because they have heard the voice of God calling them to minister to his people.  The ministry is not just a traditional job, a career among many careers.  The ministry is a vocation and only those who have felt the sense of divine call to this vocation belong in the ministry.

Another reason people enter the ministry is because they want to be obedient to the call of God.  The ministry is a call to obedience.  God has given a mission to each believer and those who fill the call to pastoral ministry also accept the call to prepare themselves to fulfill that mission.

The pastor’s mission is to prepare God's people "for the work of the ministry" or as the NIV says, to prepare God's people "for the work of service."  The pastor is at the same time a teacher.  As a teacher, the pastor prepares God's people for their ministry.  

Every Christian is a minister and the pastor is called to be a teacher of ministers.  However, the preparation of God's people cannot be done by one person alone.  The risen Christ gave gifts to everyone whom he has called to the ministry.  Paul said that Christ selected some people to be apostles, some to be prophets, others to be evangelists, and still others to be pastor-teachers (Ephesians 4:11).  Christ selected all these people so that together, according to their gifts, they might equip God's people for their ministry.

In the church of Jesus Christ there are people with a diversity of gifts that are needed by the church as it helps people to fulfill their ministry.  In order to accomplish its mission, the church needs people who are committed to pastoral ministry, to evangelism, to missions, to education, to music, to counseling, and to administration.  Thus, a pastor cannot work alone.  In the preparation of God's people for the work of their ministry, pastors must work with other partners who also are engaged in Christian ministry.  These people must join their gifts and their abilities in order to enable others to exercise their Christian ministry.

Theological education is a partnership, a partnership in which two people, a teacher and a student, work together toward a common goal: the preparation of God's people for the work of the ministry.  This partnership is seen in the relationship between Paul and Timothy.  When Paul met Timothy, Timothy was a young man, immature, and still developing his abilities.  However, Paul saw Timothy's commitment, his faith, and dependability and Paul set Timothy apart and prepared to teach him, equipping him for the work of the ministry.  Timothy learned how to be a minister from Paul.  He had observed how Paul exercised his own ministry and what made Paul successful as a minister of Jesus Christ.

The process of theological education in a seminary setting has some things that parallel the relationship between Paul and Timothy.  True theological education happens when teachers and students seek to imitate that relationship.

One thing that contributes to a successful ministry is a good theological education.  A call to the ministry is also a call to preparation.  The ministry requires much study because pastors must prepare themselves in order to teach others to become ministers.  Paul exhorted Timothy: "Study to present yourself approved, a workman that needs not to be ashamed" (2 Timothy 2:15 KJV).  Study is an integral part of theological education.  

First, in the classroom a teacher guides students to study the events and matters that relate to the church, to faith, and to ministry.  Study, in and out of the classroom, provides the foundation that contributes to a better understanding of the call and mission of the minister.  The ministry demands the best of those who are involved in it.  The Greek word spoudatzo, translated "study" in the KJV and translated "do your best" in the NIV literally means, "to pursue earnestly."

Second, the teacher can become an example worthy of being followed.  Paul could say to his followers: "Follow my example as I follow the example of Christ."  Being a teacher requires much discipline and hard work.  But, where the teacher becomes an example is in his teaching.  

The pastor by vocation is called to be a pastor-teacher.  A pastor must learn somewhere how to be a teacher.  Pastors learn how to become teachers from the model that is set before them: their own teacher.  Paul said to Timothy: "What you have heard from me keep as the pattern" (2 Timothy 1:13).  And again: "What you have heard from me through many witnesses entrust to faithful people who will be able to teach others as well" (2 Timothy 2:2).

Third, teachers can help their students to think theologically.  Every pastor is also a theologian, because pastors must interpret the Scriptures and teach the articles of faith to those in the congregation who will exercise their ministry.  However, what churches need today is the kind of theologian who can maintain a balance between theology and practice and who can apply theological concepts to basic human experiences.  To be a pastor-theologian is to possess the capacity to hear and interpret the unarticulated longings of the spirit through the ordinary language of the people.  To think theologically involves four basic things:

1.     Pastors must be familiar with the Scriptures, the foundation of the church, and they must articulate them to the community of faith.  To think theologically then, is to articulate clearly the teachings of the Old and New Testaments so that people might learn and apply the teachings of Scriptures to their own lives.

2.     Pastors must be familiar with the history of the church and the great declarations of faith that give meaning and vitality to the church.  To think theologically then, is to be able to relate to people the history and faith of the church so that the congregation might learn its relationship with the church through the ages and identify themselves with those who gave their lives to preserve the life of the church.

3.     Pastors must be familiar with the debates among intellectuals that relate to the basic issues of life.  Human history has been a long debate on the meaning and purpose of human existence.  To think theologically then, is to think philosophically.  Pastors must learn how to relate the human struggle for meaning to the message of the Gospel so that faith becomes a search for understanding in the light of the cross.

4.     Pastors must be familiar with the meaning of reconciliation and forgiveness so that they might comprehend the meaning of Godforsakenness and human suffering.  To think theologically then, is to relate Scriptures, theology, history, and philosophy to humanity's search for a relationship with God.  Pastors who fail to do these things in their ministry have failed in their mission to equip God's people to accomplish their ministry.

Pastors and theologians, teachers and students must develop this partnership so that theological education becomes an enterprise where the classroom develops into the vehicle by which theological students, in partnership with teachers, work together to fulfill their mutual mission: the preparation of God's people for the work of the ministry.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Note: This post is an adaptation of an address given to entering students at Northern Baptist Seminary.

The Mormon Church and the Lost Tribes of Israel

For many years, the Mormon Church has claimed that Native Americans were the descendants of one of the lost tribes of Israel that migrated to the Americas around 600 B.C.  In addition, according to Mormon doctrine, this tribe divided into two groups, the Nephites, who were whites, and the Lamanites, who became black as a punishment for worshiping idols.

However, DNA tests have contradicted the teachings of the Mormon Church.  In an article written by William Lobdell and published in the Los Angeles Times on February 16, 2006, Lobdell said that the Mormon Church has disregarded DNA evidence as irrelevant.

I recommend the reading of this article.

Bedrock of a Faith Is Jolted
DNA tests contradict Mormon scripture. The church says the studies are being twisted to attack its beliefs.
By William Lobdell
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

February 16, 2006

From the time he was a child in Peru, the Mormon Church instilled in Jose A. Loayza the conviction that he and millions of other Native Americans were descended from a lost tribe of Israel that reached the New World more than 2,000 years ago.

"We were taught all the blessings of that Hebrew lineage belonged to us and that we were special people," said Loayza, now a Salt Lake City attorney. "It not only made me feel special, but it gave me a sense of transcendental identity, an identity with God."

A few years ago, Loayza said, his faith was shaken and his identity stripped away by DNA evidence showing that the ancestors of American natives came from Asia, not the Middle East.

"I've gone through stages," he said. "Absolutely denial. Utter amazement and surprise. Anger and bitterness."

For Mormons, the lack of discernible Hebrew blood in Native Americans is no minor collision between faith and science. It burrows into the historical foundations of the Book of Mormon, a 175-year-old transcription that the church regards as literal and without error.

For those outside the faith, the depth of the church's dilemma can be explained this way: Imagine if DNA evidence revealed that the Pilgrims didn't sail from Europe to escape religious persecution but rather were part of a migration from Iceland — and that U.S. history books were wrong.

Critics want the church to admit its mistake and apologize to millions of Native Americans it converted. Church leaders have shown no inclination to do so. Indeed, they have dismissed as heresy any suggestion that Native American genetics undermine the Mormon creed.

Yet at the same time, the church has subtly promoted a fresh interpretation of the Book of Mormon intended to reconcile the DNA findings with the scriptures. This analysis is radically at odds with long-standing Mormon teachings.

Some longtime observers believe that ultimately, the vast majority of Mormons will disregard the genetic research as an unworthy distraction from their faith.

"This may look like the crushing blow to Mormonism from the outside," said Jan Shipps, a professor emeritus of religious studies at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, who has studied the church for 40 years. "But religion ultimately does not rest on scientific evidence, but on mystical experiences. There are different ways of looking at truth."

According to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, an angel named Moroni led Joseph Smith in 1827 to a divine set of golden plates buried in a hillside near his New York home.

God provided the 22-year-old Smith with a pair of glasses and seer stones that allowed him to translate the "Reformed Egyptian" writings on the golden plates into the "Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ."

Mormons believe these scriptures restored the church to God's original vision and left the rest of Christianity in a state of apostasy.

The book's narrative focuses on a tribe of Jews who sailed from Jerusalem to the New World in 600 BC and split into two main warring factions.

The God-fearing Nephites were "pure" (the word was officially changed from "white" in 1981) and "delightsome." The idol-worshiping Lamanites received the "curse of blackness," turning their skin dark.

According to the Book of Mormon, by 385 AD the dark-skinned Lamanites had wiped out other Hebrews. The Mormon church called the victors "the principal ancestors of the American Indians." If the Lamanites returned to the church, their skin could once again become white.

Over the years, church prophets — believed by Mormons to receive revelations from God — and missionaries have used the supposed ancestral link between the ancient Hebrews and Native Americans and later Polynesians as a prime conversion tool in Central and South America and the South Pacific.

"As I look into your faces, I think of Father Lehi [patriarch of the Lamanites], whose sons and daughters you are," church president and prophet Gordon B. Hinckley said in 1997 during a Mormon conference in Lima, Peru. "I think he must be shedding tears today, tears of love and gratitude…. This is but the beginning of the work in Peru." (To read the rest of the article, click here).

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Jeremiah’s Ministry and Ours

Ministers today live in a very complex world and as they seek to exercise their ministry, they are confronted with a variety of problems, including apathy, indifference, opposition, rejection, and burnouts.  Contemporary ministers also face a problem of identity.  In a postmodern world, ministers are looking for models that will serve as paradigms for their ministry.  It is common for today’s ministers to model their ministries after successful administrators, famous business executives, popular coaches, or compassionate clinical psychologists.

The prophet Jeremiah is a good model for Christian ministry.  In Jeremiah, ministers find a model of ministry that is consistent with the biblical vision and one that can empower ministers to exercise an effective prophetic ministry in the new millennium.
Although Jeremiah lived in a different historical and cultural situation from ministers today, Jeremiah’s ministry provides evidence of valid and relevant qualities that ministers must possess, regardless of the time and place of their ministries.

When God called Jeremiah to the prophetic ministry, God called him to do an almost impossible work.  Jeremiah was called to minister to a rebellious people.  He was born in the last days of Manasseh’s reign, a time of great apostasy in the religious life of Israel.  He was called into the prophetic ministry during the reign of Josiah, a time of great religious revival.  However, most of his ministry occurred during the last years of the Southern Kingdom, a time of political unrest, religious turmoil, and social inequalities.

The message and person of Jeremiah provide an invaluable model for contemporary ministers.  In the message of Jeremiah, people hear a message of judgment against those who refused to believe the word that God had sent to them; a message of hope and comfort for those committed Israelites who dared to be faithful to God in the midst of religious unfaithfulness.  In the person of Jeremiah people see a minister who had a strong conviction about his call, who had a personal and intimate relationship with God, who understood the meaning and power of prayer, and who struggled to present to his people a better understanding of the true meaning of life before God.  

In Jeremiah people see a minister who strives to bring his people back to God by emphasizing the need for trust and faith in the midst of chaos.  In Jeremiah people also see a person of integrity, a minister who proclaimed what the people needed to hear even at the cost of his own popularity.  In addition, in the life and ministry of Jeremiah people find a minister who grieved and lamented for his people, a minister who suffered because, with, and for his people.

The life and sufferings of Jeremiah for his people are, in many respects, a mirror that displays God’s love for Israel.  In the life and ministry of Jeremiah people can see a God who grieves over the tragic plight of his people.  When Jesus asked His disciple:  Who do people say that the Son of Man is?  The disciples answered:  Some say [that you are] Jeremiah (Matthew 16:14).  The fact that many people saw Jeremiah in the life and ministry of Jesus must continually remind ministers and congregations today that a ministry of love and compassion is modeled upon an effective prophetic ministry.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

The Church and the World

We live in a great country, a country where almost any person can grow up to become the president, a country that still attracts thousands of new people every year, a country that provides an opportunity for everyone to succeed.

America is a great country. It is not a perfect country, for we still have racism among us, we still have prejudice, we still have poverty.  With all these problems, America is still such a great country that if we would open the doors of our country, people would come in by the thousands.

One of the greatest freedoms people enjoy in this great country is the freedom to worship God anywhere, any day, in any manner one chooses. However, things are changing. More and more our country is becoming neutral to religion. More and more those who are religious are becoming the object of ridicule.  In many places, God is not welcome anymore. In the name of tolerance, many places do not allow people to talk about religion or discuss issues related to faith.

George Barna wrote that America is becoming a society ruled by moral anarchy. According to him, this moral anarchy can be seen in the attitude and behavior of Americans.  As examples, he cites the rapid growth of the pornography industry, violation of speeding laws as the norm, rampant cheating on income tax, identity theft, rising levels of crime, lying and cheating as a way of life, increasing rates of cohabitation, adultery, and other practices that until a few years ago were considered forbidden behavior.

The Christian Church is struggling to influence the nation's culture because believers have taken a view that there is little they can do to change these trends.  This loss of influence comes because believers live in a “me” society.  Christians think of themselves as individuals first, Americans second, and Christians third.  Because the church has refused to take seriously the cause of Christ in society, the church will continue to lose influence, and biblical principles will become one more option among the numerous options from which Americans may choose.

I suggest that our nation is now in a state of spiritual anarchy as well.  Bob Webber, Professor of Worship and Spirituality and my colleague at Northern Seminary, wrote in one of his books that Christians today are living in a neo-pagan society.  Worse yet, many church members have accepted the tenets of this neo-pagan culture and as a result, their commitment to the claims of the Gospel does not include the transformation of society.  The result is that church loyalty, respect for the ministry, acceptance of absolutes, tolerance of Christianity, reverence for God, a desire to strive for personal holiness have become old fashioned in society and even inside the church.

The rejection of biblical values has created a void that must be filled by something else. Many people in our society have taken God out of their lives. They have substituted God for things that cannot satisfy their spiritual cravings.  They removed God and replaced him with empty religious practices that are not biblical.  They removed the Word of God and replaced it with the words of false prophets who only deceive.  The result is that today there is a generation of Americans who do not have much knowledge of God, no knowledge of the Bible, and little concern for spiritual matters.

Can the church change all this? I asked my students whether they believed the church could make a positive impact on the world with the Gospel of Christ? All of them said it could.  If this is true, why then is the church not impacting American culture with the Gospel of Christ?

The only way for the church to impact our culture is by returning to the vision Jesus gave to his disciples and to the New Testament church.  The church today must accept anew the challenge of the Great Commission (Matthew 28:16-20).

Jesus told his disciples to “go and make disciples of all nations.”  The problem today is that few Christians are willing to go and make disciples. It is easier to stay at home and let the preacher do the work of evangelism.  Many church members forget that believers must be Christians in the world, even when it is tough being a Christian in the world.  It is easy being a Christian inside the church, a place where everyone accepts faith and spiritual values.  However, as long as believers are satisfied with being believers inside the four walls of the church building, the world will never be confronted with the claims of the Gospel of Christ.  In order to make a difference in the world, you and I must go!  We must go!  Jesus said: “As the Father sent me, so send I you” (John 20:21).  Because we are a sent people, we must go.

Go, and do what?  Jesus said: “Make disciples.” Making disciples in the world is the mission of the church.  As followers of Jesus Christ, we must make disciples.  Jesus did not call his disciples to make church members.  Any person can become a church member.  Becoming a church member is the easiest thing in the world.

Jesus commanded his disciples to make more disciples.  That is what Jesus wants: more disciples.  A disciple is a student, one who learns from Jesus.  However, people today do not want to become disciples. Being a disciple of Jesus is hard.  Discipleship demands time, it requires sacrifice.  Jesus said: “If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters--yes, even his own life--he cannot be my disciple.  And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple” (Luke 14:26-27).  

To hate does not mean to be angry with someone or to have ill feelings toward another person.  It means to make a choice - it is loving or not loving.  To be a disciple of Jesus means to love Jesus more than one loves family, to love him more than one loves oneself.

To be a disciple of Jesus is to take his cross.  Many people today do not want to take the cross of Christ.  This is what Dietrich Bonhoeffer, in his book The Cost of Discipleship (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1959), p. 36, called “cheap grace.”  “Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate.”  When one takes the cross of Christ, one is called to suffer with him, one is called to make sacrifices for him, one is called to die with Jesus on that cross. As Bonhoeffer wrote: “When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die” (p. 79).  To die on the cross is to die for others.  Jesus demonstrated this truth when he died on the cross to save others.

Believers must be willing to die on that cross if they are to make a difference in the world.  Jesus said: “In the same way, any of you who does not give up everything he cannot be my disciple” (Luke 14:33).  This is the reason some people refuse to be followers of Jesus.  They do not want to give up anything for the sake of Christ.  Some people want the glory but not the crown of shame. They want to enjoy life, not to die on a cross.  They want to get more, not to give up everything.  However, this is precisely what Jesus wants. Jesus wants disciples, faithful disciples, men and women who are willing to follow Jesus, wherever he leads.  Jesus wants disciples who are willing to sanctify themselves for the sake of an unbelieving generation.  Jesus wants men and women who are willing to accept the mission bestowed on them, people who are not willing to fail in carrying out that mission.

Jesus also commanded his disciples to teach the new disciples to obey everything he commanded them.  If the church is to make a difference in the world, it is because believers are willing to become teachers.  “Teach them to obey.”  The disciples of Jesus are obedient people. They obey the laws of God and the laws of men.  If believers are going to teach people to obey the laws of God and men, they also must obey them. Obedience begins at home.  Jesus told his disciples to teach the new disciples to obey “everything I have commanded.”  Everything. People cannot choose what to obey and what not to obey.  True believers discover God’s will for their lives and follow it.

I believe the church can make an impact on our nation. I believe the church can make an impact on our world.  The truth is with the church: the Word of God is truth.  The power to change the world is with the church. “And you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit comes upon you.” The church has been authorized by Jesus himself: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.  Therefore go and make disciples of all nations.”  

One of my favorite verses in the New Testament is found in Acts 17:6:   When Paul and Silas came to Thessalonica, the people there said: “These people who have been turning the world upside down have come here also.”  Those early believers were turning the world upside down with the gospel of Christ. They were transforming the world with the good news of Jesus. Today, we cannot even shake the communities around our churches with the Gospel, much less turn it upside down. The Lord needs you; your church needs you; our nation needs you.  Let us join hands in our common mission and together, let us transform the world for Christ.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Song of Songs: The Most Beautiful Song

One of the books of the Bible that is least read and least understood is “Song of Songs,” also known as “The Song of Solomon,” and “Canticles.” The title of the book in Hebrew is “Song of Songs.” In Hebrew, this expression is a superlative and literally means “the greatest song,” or “the most beautiful song.” The title indicates that this song was considered to be the finest and the noblest of all songs.

Scholars differ on issues of authorship and interpretation. The traditional view is that Solomon wrote the book in his younger age, probably to celebrate his marriage to Pharaoh’s daughter or to a beautiful maiden identified as the Shulammite. Others believe the book is about Solomon, describing the struggles of a king (Solomon) at winning the love of a woman who was in love with another man, a shepherd.

The book has also been interpreted allegorically as a poem presenting the love of God for Israel or the love of Christ for the Church, using the symbolism of the bridegroom and the bride. Modern approaches interpret the book literally, as a collection of songs of love that demonstrate the deep and romantic love between a man and a woman.

In the past, Jewish interpreters refused to accept the literal interpretation of Song of Songs. The Mishna declared anathema anyone who treated these poems as a collection of secular songs. One of the reasons for this reluctance is the sensual and sexual connotation of the songs.

Even today, some people reject Song of Songs as the expression of the mutual love between a man and a woman. Song of Songs, when read and understood in the context of love, romance, and marriage teaches that intimate love between a man and a woman is not unnatural, but beautiful and desirable.

When correctly understood, Song of Songs reveals the secret intimacies between a man and a woman without becoming obscene. The language of Song of Songs and the imagery used to convey intimacy is too sensuous for the taste of many Christians today. This is evident in the reaction that many Christian retailers have demonstrated toward the release of a CD that puts Song of Songs to music.

The Original Love Song is a recording of Song of Songs following, for the most part, the biblical text as it appears in the New International Version (NIV). The CD includes the voices of a man and a woman portraying the lover and the beloved reciting the words of the book over a background soundtrack that is attractive and appealing.

The Original Love Song was created and produced by Guy Bickel, who also reads the words of the lover. The material was taken directly from the Old Testament: “Taken straight from the Old Testament, The Original Love Song brings the secret book of the Bible to life with its masterful blend of sensuous dialogue and musical imagery... tastefully weaving the Song of Solomon into a compelling theatrical style story with an enchanting, electro-symphonic score.”

Because the CD advertises itself as “sensual, passionate,” “irresistibly romantic,” “exquisitely tasteful,” and “a godly gift of intimacy,” the recording has received little attention among Christians and many Christian retailers have refused to carry the CD.

The CD also includes a guideline containing romantic rules and sensuous suggestions for husbands and wives, written by Dr. David Clarke, a Christian psychologist and author. Dr. Clark says: “Spiritual intimacy, bringing God into the marriage and into the bedroom, will ignite the flame of passion and keep it burning forever. Spiritually bonding with your mate will create a better, more passionate sex life, better than you could ever imagine.”

It is amazing that people are willing to read the Song of Solomon in the Bible but are not willing to listen to the same song on a CD. The Original Love Song is worth listening to because it is well done and well produced. I strongly recommend that you listen to this CD, buy a copy, and give it to a couple who truly appreciate the meaning of Christian marriage.

You can listen to a sample of the CD online by visiting The Original Love Song website. To know more about The Original Love Song, visit their web page at http://www.originallovesong.com/. To listen to a sample of one of the sensual songs in the CD click here.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Psalm 100:3: Which Version Is Better?

The post for February 6, “Rereading Psalm 100:3: In Search of a Better Translation,” generated several comments and questions from readers (to read the post, click here).  Instead of answering all the questions and comments individually, I have decided to provide a brief explanation of what is involved in dealing with textual problems in the Old Testament and how the scribes knew that errors of transmission had crept into the biblical text.

The scribes who copied the text of the Old Testament were called the Sopherim, “Men of the Book.”  Their main responsibility was to copy the manuscripts and make sure that they were preserved for posterity.  

Another group of scribes was called the Masoretes.  The Masoretes transmitted the traditional reading of the text, counted the number of words and letters on the different books of the Old Testament, and catalogued the errors found in the text.  This is the reason the text of the Hebrew Bible is called “The Masoretic Text.” In addition, the notes and information placed on the margins of the Hebrew Bible is called “The Masorah.” The word “Masorah” means “tradition.”

Describing the work of the Masoretes, Norman K. Gottwald, in his book The Hebrew Bible: A Socio-Literary Introduction (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1985), p. 119, wrote: “Included in the marginal and final Masorah was a great mass of technical information and instruction that served to alert copyists to the minutest details and peculiarities of the text so that they might be copied with unfailing accuracy.  The Masoretic notes identified unusual spellings, words, and grammatical forms, and often took account of their frequency of occurrence and exact locations throughout the biblical text.”

Because the Masoretes knew the text and the sounds of the words by memory and because they transmitted the traditional reading of the biblical text from generation to generation, it was easy for them to notice an error in transmission.  This is what happened with Psalm 100:3.

According to the Masoretes, there are fifteen places in the Old Testament where the problem with the homophone containing the word lô  (Hebrew Al) and the word lo’  (Hebrew al) appear.  In future posts, I will be dealing with some of texts where these homophones occur.

As for which version is better, it is important to remember that all translations are good, but some translations may translate a verse or a word better than others.  Some versions attempt to translate the Bible in today’s English, since the “thees” and “thous” of the King James are hardly used today.  The Bible is the Word of God and no textual problem, error in transmission, or language used will change that.  God’s Word was written to help believers know God and his divine plan for humanity.  Thus, every Bible, no matter what translation is used, will help readers know what God has accomplished in the history of Israel and in Jesus Christ.

Biblical scholars and Old Testament professors may debate how to translate a word in the Bible or how to understand a text in a biblical book.  They also may debate what was the original text or the original intent of a biblical writer.  This is the reason biblical scholars write so many books, and at times, why they cannot agree on their final conclusions.  The average person, however, desires mostly to discover God’s will for their lives and how to live according to God’s teachings.  This can be accomplished by studying God’s Word in the King James Version (KJV), in the English Standard Version (ESV), the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), or in any other version.

It is for this reason that students of the Bible should not allow the different versions to confuse or scare them.  In the end, those who love the Bible should remember this: The Bible is the Word of God, no matter what version one uses and no matter what textual problems may be present in a text of Scripture.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary.

Women and Christianity

A few days ago, a reader sent me a link for an article dealing with the treatment of women in Saudi Arabia.  The article depicts how women are treated by their fathers and other relatives.  The story of these women is filled with pathos.  It is amazing that at the dawn of a new century, women still live in situations where their worth and potential are not appreciated.

The picture of women in the gospels is different than the one found in Saudi Arabia.  There is no question that Jesus reached out to women and involved them in his ministry.  Several texts in the gospels illustrate how women had a very special place in Jesus’ ministry.  The prominence of women in the resurrection narrative is a clear example of how Jesus valued women in proclaiming the glorious event of Easter Sunday.  Jesus’ treatment of women differed from the way Judaism treated women in the first century.  

The same principle is found among the disciples of Jesus.  The negative view about women that existed in many parts of the ancient world did not become the norm in the life of the church.  As the Apostle Paul wrote: “In Christ's family there can be no division into Jew and non-Jew, slave and free, male and female. Among us you are all equal. That is, we are all in a common relationship with Jesus Christ” (Galatians 3:28 Msg).  The gospel of Christ broke down the barriers that separated people because of race, social status, and gender.

Describing how men and women become new persons in Christ, Don Williams, in his book, The Apostle Paul and Women in the Church (Van Nuys, CA: BIM Publishing Co, 1977), p. 70, wrote: “Male dominance, egotism, patriarchal power and preferential priority is at an end.  No longer can Genesis 2-3 be employed to reduce women to an inferior position or state.  If redemption is real the warfare between the sexes is over.”

With this understanding of how the Gospel of Christ has revolutionized the way women should be treated in society, read how women are treated in Saudi Arabia by clicking here.

Now that you have read this article, let me know what you think about what you read.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
    

Rereading Psalm 100:3: In Search of a Better Translation

Psalm 100 is one of those great psalms of the Bible.  The psalm is a song of thanksgiving, calling all people to praise the Lord as the creator. All nations are invited to serve the Lord because of his goodness and faithfulness.

The doctrine of creation in the Old Testament was Israel’s testimony of the uniqueness and sovereignty of the Lord over nations and individuals.  In the very act of creation, the Lord demonstrates his power by calling the world into existence.

Thus, in his call for human beings to worship God, the psalmist declares that we are not self-created, that we owe our existence to God, because only the God of Israel is the creator: “Know ye that the Lord is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture” (Psalm 100:3 KJV).

The translation of the King James Version poses a difficult issue of interpretation.  The problem is focused on a textual corruption introduced into the Hebrew text.  In Hebrew, there are several words that sound alike but have different meanings.  Words that sound alike are called homophones.  A homophone is “a word pronounced the same as, but differing in meaning from another, whether spelled the same way or not, as in heir and air.”  There are many homophones in English also; a classical example are the words to, two, and too.

In biblical Hebrew there are many words that are pronounced the same but have different meanings. Two of them are the words lo’  (Hebrew לא) and the word lô (Hebrew לו).  The first word is negative and means “not.”  The second word is positive and means “to him.”

In Psalm 100:3 the written Hebrew text or the ketiv (the word ketiv means “what is written”) reads lo’, “not.”  However, an old scribal traditions notes in the margin of the text that the correct reading of the text should be lô, “to him.”  This marginal reading is called the qere.  The word qere means “what should be read.”

In making this marginal note, the scribe or scribes who copied the text are telling the reader that even though the text reads lo’, “not,” that it should be read lô, “to him.”

Several older translations have adopted what is written in the text.  Among these are the Darby Bible, the Douay-Rheims Bible, the Geneva Bible, the King James Version , the New American Standard Bible, the New King James Version, and the Revised Webster Bible.

Modern translations, such the New International Version (NIV), the English Standard Version (ESV) and others, have adopted the correction proposed by the scribes.  For instance, the New Revised Standard Bible reads: “Know that the LORD is God. It is he that made us, and we are his; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture” (NRSV).

In light of the different readings between the older and modern translations, which translation is better?  Which translation provides a better understanding of what the psalmist was trying to convey to his readers?  As it is, both translations are plausible and both of them make sense.  Both readings would fit the context of the words of the Psalmist and both readings would be in harmony with the teachings of the Old Testament.

The reading of the KJV is found also in the Septuagint (the Greek version of the Old Testament), the Vulgate (the Latin version of the Bible), and the Peshitta (the Aramaic version of the Old Testament). However, from the perspective of the world of the Old Testament and of other nations in the Ancient Near East, no people of antiquity, however primitive they might have been, believed  that they had made themselves.  Only someone with a sense of grandeur, one who is obsessed with the pride of possession, one who would believe himself to be a god, like the Pharaoh of Egypt, would dare say about a small part of creation: “The Nile is mine, and I have made it for myself” (Ezekiel 29:3).

Every Israelite believed the Lord to be the true creator.  The faith of Israel declared that men and women derived their beings from God.  A similar idea to Psalm 100:3 is also found in Psalm 95:7: “For he is our God, and we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand.”

The message of Psalm 100:3 is clear: God is the creator.  He made us, therefore, we are not independent, but belong to him.  For this reason, the reading of the NRSV and other modern translations should be adopted.  Because God created us and because we belong to him, we should worship the Lord with gladness, we should come into his presence with singing (Psalm 100:2).

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Wrestling for the Lord

Current religious data shows that church attendance is declining in nearly all major denominations in the United States. One study shows the proportion of the population in the United States that call themselves Christian has declined from 86% in 1990 to 77% in 2001.

In order to attract people to their worship services, churches are resorting to new forms of evangelism. One church in Georgia has decided to give away cars and groceries as an outreach inducement. However, the most creative outreach method has been developed by Rob Adonis, a professional wrestler who developed Ultimate Christians Wrestling. His goal is to bring new people to church by wrestling for the Lord.

Mr. Adonis said the idea of using wrestling as an evangelism tool came when God appeared in a dream and told him to use his abilities to bring people to the Lord. When asked whether Christianity and pro-wrestling were compatible, Mr. Adonis points out that in the Old Testament, Jacob wrestled with an angel (to read the full story, click here).

But did he? Did Jacob wrestle with an angel? This is not what the Bible says. In the story of Jacob’s encounter with the heavenly being, the biblical text says: “Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him until daybreak” (Genesis 32:24). I believe the words of the text are important for the correct understanding of what happened to Jacob. The text says it was the angel who wrestled with Jacob and not Jacob who wrestled with the angel.

From the beginning, Jacob’s life was marked by wrestling with people. It was by cunning and deceit that Jacob had wrestled the birthright from his brother Esau. It was by cunning and deceit that he wrestled the blessing from his father Isaac. In addition, it was because of cunning and deceit that Jacob was forced to flee from the wrath of his father-in-law Laban.

When Jacob was fleeing the threat posed by his brother Esau, God appeared to him and renewed the promise he had made to Abraham: “I am the LORD, the God of Abraham your father and the God of Isaac; the land on which you lie I will give to you and to your offspring” (Genesis 28:13). Then, God made another promise to Jacob: “I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you” (Genesis 28:15).

The Lord never left Jacob alone. At the command of the Lord and after twenty years from that first encounter with God, Jacob left his home in Paddan-aram to return to the land of his ancestors, the land of the promise (Genesis 31:3).

In order to save Jacob from Esau’s wrath and in order to bring Jacob to a point in his life where the promise could be fulfilled, it was necessary for God to first meet Jacob as an enemy and convince him that his real opponent was God. In a sense, God put aside his divine power and struggled with Jacob as a man struggles with a man. The struggle between God and Jacob was not just a dream or a mere spiritual struggle. God became a human in order to wrestle with what Emil Brunner called, “a man in revolt.”

God wrestled with Jacob all that night. Wrestling with Jacob is what God did all that night and what God had been doing all of Jacob’s life. In the end, God was unable to defeat Jacob. When the man saw that he could not prevail against Jacob as they wrestled, he deliberately threw Jacob's hip out of joint. The disabling of Jacob indicates how hard he had wrestled with God. The new name Jacob received indicates that, in his wrestling with men and with God, Jacob had prevailed.

There is an important lesson for us to learn from this. Wrestling for the Lord can be fun, entertaining, and it may pay well, but wrestling with the Lord can be painful and life changing. The truth is, those believers who wrestle with God and win, may obtain many glorious victories but, in the end, they will come out with broken bones. The lesson every Christian must learn is simple: it does not pay to wrestle with the Lord.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary