God, Darwin, and Evolution

The New York Times has published a very interesting article written by Robin Marantz Henig on evolution and religion titled “Darwin’s God.” It is a long article but worth reading. The following is an excerpt of the article:

God has always been a puzzle for Scott Atran. When he was 10 years old, he scrawled a plaintive message on the wall of his bedroom in Baltimore. "God exists," he wrote in black and orange paint, "or if he doesn't, we're in trouble." Atran has been struggling with questions about religion ever since - why he himself no longer believes in God and why so many other people, everywhere in the world, apparently do.

Call it God; call it superstition; call it, as Atran does, "belief in hope beyond reason" - whatever you call it, there seems an inherent human drive to believe in something transcendent, unfathomable and otherworldly, something beyond the reach or understanding of science. "Why do we cross our fingers during turbulence, even the most atheistic among us?" asked Atran when we spoke at his Upper West Side pied-à-terre in January. Atran, who is 55, is an anthropologist at the National Center for Scientific Research in Paris, with joint appointments at the University of Michigan and the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York. His research interests include cognitive science and evolutionary biology, and sometimes he presents students with a wooden box that he pretends is an African relic. "If you have negative sentiments toward religion," he tells them, "the box will destroy whatever you put inside it." Many of his students say they doubt the existence of God, but in this demonstration they act as if they believe in something. Put your pencil into the magic box, he tells them, and the nonbelievers do so blithely. Put in your driver's license, he says, and most do, but only after significant hesitation. And when he tells them to put in their hands, few will.

If they don't believe in God, what exactly are they afraid of?

Atran first conducted the magic-box demonstration in the 1980s, when he was at Cambridge University studying the nature of religious belief. He had received a doctorate in anthropology from Columbia University and, in the course of his fieldwork, saw evidence of religion everywhere he looked - at archaeological digs in Israel, among the Mayans in Guatemala, in artifact drawers at the American Museum of Natural History in New York. Atran is Darwinian in his approach, which means he tries to explain behavior by how it might once have solved problems of survival and reproduction for our early ancestors. But it was not clear to him what evolutionary problems might have been solved by religious belief. Religion seemed to use up physical and mental resources without an obvious benefit for survival. Why, he wondered, was religion so pervasive, when it was something that seemed so costly from an evolutionary point of view?

The magic-box demonstration helped set Atran on a career studying why humans might have evolved to be religious, something few people were doing back in the '80s. Today, the effort has gained momentum, as scientists search for an evolutionary explanation for why belief in God exists - not whether God exists, which is a matter for philosophers and theologians, but why the belief does.

This is different from the scientific assault on religion that has been garnering attention recently, in the form of best-selling books from scientific atheists who see religion as a scourge. In "The God Delusion," published last year and still on best-seller lists, the Oxford evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins concludes that religion is nothing more than a useless, and sometimes dangerous, evolutionary accident. "Religious behavior may be a misfiring, an unfortunate byproduct of an underlying psychological propensity which in other circumstances is, or once was, useful," Dawkins wrote. He is joined by two other best-selling authors - Sam Harris, who wrote "The End of Faith," and Daniel Dennett, a philosopher at Tufts University who wrote "Breaking the Spell." The three men differ in their personal styles and whether they are engaged in a battle against religiosity, but their names are often mentioned together. They have been portrayed as an unholy trinity of neo-atheists, promoting their secular world view with a fervor that seems almost evangelical.

Read the article in its entirety by clicking here.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: God, Darwin, Evolution, Scott Atran

The Prosperity Gospel: Brazilian Style

An article published on March 19, 2007 in The New York Times reports that a Brazilian pastor and his wife we caught in Miami smuggling more than $56,000 into the USA. Pastor Hernandes is a pastor in the “prosperity gospel” movement. He and his wife preside over an empire worth millions of dollars.

The following is an excerpt of the article published in The New York Times:

SAO PAULO, Brazil - In their heyday, Estevam and Sônia Hernandes were the Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker of Brazil, on television preaching a gospel of material success and living a life to match.

But that was before they were arrested in Miami in January and charged with illegally smuggling cash into the United States, including $9,000 concealed in a Bible.

All told, American authorities seized $56,467 that the couple and other family members had hidden on their bodies and in luggage, according to the United States indictment. Brazilian authorities, who have charged them with money laundering and fraud, are seeking their extradition.

Because the Hernandeses are so prominent and controversial in Brazil, their travails have focused new attention on not just their own church but also the growing wealth and power of the religious movement they are part of, the fastest-growing in Brazil: Pentecostalism.

Mr. Hernandes, originally a marketing executive, and his wife, formerly a boutique manager, founded the Rebirth in Christ Church in the mid-1980s. They now preside over a religious and business structure that includes more than 1,000 churches, a television and radio network, a recording company, real estate in Brazil and the United States and, according to Brazilian news reports, a horse-breeding ranch and the trademark on the word "gospel" in Brazil.

On television and at their home church here - which has been defaced with graffiti saying "You don't carry money in the Bible, thief!" and other insulting slogans - Mr. Hernandes, 52, and his wife, 48, preached a "theology of prosperity," often accompanied by her singing and sometimes by his saxophone playing.

Each year, the Rebirth in Christ Church also sponsored a March for Jesus down the main avenue of Sao Paulo, South America's largest city, mobilizing as many as three million people.

Read the entire article by clicking here.

Here is the truth people have to learn, the same truth expressed by an irate believer: “You can’t hide stolen money in the Bible.” People should always remember the words of Jesus:

“For there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out into the open” (Luke 8:17).

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tag: Prosperity Gospel

Rereading Isaiah 9:1: The Use of Gender Inclusive Language

One difficult issue in Bible translation today is the use of gender inclusive language. The debate is focused on whether the use of inclusive language changes the meaning of the text and misrepresents what the biblical author was trying to communicate.

I am not against the use of inclusive language provided that the translation does not misrepresent the intent of the original text. Word-for-word translation is just not practical because one language does not automatically translate into another language.

A translation of the Bible should be clear and accurate. It should communicate in English precisely what the biblical author was trying to communicate to the primary audience. At times, a good translation may require a little liberty with the text in order to communicate the real message of the original text, but the original intent of the writer must not be changed.

One verse where some translations have chosen to use inclusive language is Isaiah 9:1. However, the use of inclusive language in Isaiah 9:1 has completely changed the original meaning of the text and fails to represent the intent of the message of the writer.

The proper understanding of Isaiah 9:1 requires a brief historical introduction.

When Ahaz became king of Judah in 735 B.C., the nations of the Ancient Near East were dealing with the menace posed by the Assyrian army and the policies of total conquest initiated by Tiglath-pileser III, king of Assyria.

The Northern Kingdom was not immune to the threat posed by Assyria. When Pekahiah, the son of Menahem, became king in 738, he continued his father's policy of cooperation with Assyria. However, the burden of the tribute paid to Assyria convinced many Israelites that it was time for change. In 737 B.C., Pekahiah was assassinated by Pekah, who was the third man in Pekahiah's war chariot. Pekah had the support of the anti-Assyrian faction in Israel and of those who advocated cooperation with Syria

Pekah came to the throne of Israel in order to foment revolt against Assyria. Pekah, king of Israel, and Rezin, king of Syria, formed an alliance in order to resist Tiglath-pileser. Acting in partnership, Pekah and Rezin turned their efforts to the south, to Judah, hoping to increase the strength, proximity, and size of their coalition.

At first, Jotham and then later, his son Ahaz, king of Judah refused to join the alliance. Rezin, king of Syria, and Pekah, king of Israel, invaded Judah in order to place on the throne, Tabael (Isaiah 7:6), a man who would favor a joint alliance to fight against Assyria. This was the beginning of the Syro-Ephraimite War.

Aware that his situation was precarious, and against the advice of the prophet Isaiah, Ahaz asked Tiglath-pileser for military help (2 Kings 16:7). Ahaz paid a heavy tribute to Assyria. In order to gather the money needed for the tribute, Ahaz took gold and silver from the temple and from the royal treasury ( 2 Kings 16:8).

Ahaz sent messengers to Tiglath-pileser with the following message: “I am your servant and your son. Come up, and rescue me from the hand of the king of Syria and from the hand of the king of Israel, who are attacking me” (2 Kings 16:7).

In response to Ahaz's invitation, Tiglath-pileser came to Palestine to help Judah. He conquered Philistia first and then invaded Syria. Tiglath-pileser “marched up against Damascus, and took it, carrying its people captive to Kir, and he killed Rezin” (2 Kings 16:9).

Then, Tiglath-pileser came against Israel, conquered several cities in Galilee and Naphtali and deported many people to Assyria: “In the time of Pekah king of Israel, Tiglath-Pileser king of Assyria came and took Ijon, Abel Beth Maacah, Janoah, Kedesh and Hazor. He took Gilead and Galilee, including all the land of Naphtali, and deported the people to Assyria” (2 Kings 15:29).

A few years later, the prophet Isaiah proclaimed an oracle recorded in Isaiah 9:1-6 that is a direct reference to the events related to the Syro-Ephraimite War. Although time and space does not allow me to deal with the entire passage (I may do so at a later time), Isaiah 9:1 (the versification is different in the Hebrew Bible. Isaiah 9:1 is 8:23 in the Hebrew Bible) has been translated differently by translators.

“But there will be no gloom for her who was in anguish” (Isaiah 9:1 ESV).

“But there will be no gloom for her that was in anguish” (Isaiah 9:1 RSV).

“But there will be no gloom for those who were in anguish” (Isaiah 9:1 NRSV).

“Nevertheless, there will be no more gloom for those who were in distress (Isaiah 9:1 NIV).

These four translations differ on how the first part of verse 1 is translated. The word “her” of the ESV and the RSV refers to the “land.” The word “those” of the NIV and the NRSV refers to the people.

The feminine pronoun in the Hebrew text requires that the “her” be related to the land. The ESV and the RSV say that because of the events related to the war, the land was in distress. The translation of the NIV and the NRSV distort the message of the verse and convey an incorrect impression to the reader by saying that because of the war, the people were in distress.

The translation of the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB) is direct and to the point:
“Nevertheless, the gloom of the distressed land will not be like that of the former times” (Isaiah 9:1).

Why did the NIV and the NRSV choose to change the text and use “those” instead of “her” in translating the pronoun? There are two possible answers:

1. The translators of the NIV and the NRSV understood the land (“her”) to represent the people (“those”). However, this translation disregards the fact that the word “land” in “the land of Zebulun” and “the land of Naphtali” is feminine and is in direct relationship with the pronoun “her.”

2. It is possible that the translators were using gender inclusive language and refused to use the word “her” in the same way they avoided using the word “him” in other texts in the two translations.

I suspect the use of “those” in Isaiah 9:1 came out of a desire to be gender inclusive, but this effort at being gender inclusive completely changes the meaning of the text and does not allow the reader to grasp the real message of the prophet.

In their books, the prophets emphasize that the land suffers because of the sins of the people. Hosea said that because of the sins of the people, “the land mourns” (Hosea 4:3). Because of the sins of the people, the land was defiled and became an abomination (Jeremiah 2:7). The message of Isaiah must be understood in the context of the Syro-Ephraimite War: because of the sins of the people, the land was in distress.

The translation of the NIV and the NRSV is unfortunate. Those who read Isaiah 9:1 in these translations may have compassion for the people who were in distress but they will feel nothing for the land, the real concern of the prophet. And the only reason the reader will be unable to sympathize with the distress of the land is because somewhere a committee decided to be politically correct rather than to convey the real message of the prophet.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Bible Translation, Inclusive Language, Isaiah 9:1

The Dead Sea Scrolls - Cain and Abel

The National Geographic Society is announcing two special programs that are of interest to students of the Old Testament. The following is the press release from the National Geographic Society:

NEWS FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC CHANNEL EXPLORES
THE HISTORY AND MYSTERY OF THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS AND
THE ORIGINAL SIBLING RIVALS CAIN AND ABEL

Back-to-Back One-Hour Specials Delve into Ancient Writings
That Still Speak to the Modern World

(WASHINGTON, D.C. — March 6, 2007) It is one of the most important archaeological finds of modern times, still stirring debate and discussion among scholars. And to the major religions of the world, it is the story of the first murder and, thus, the first death. On Sunday, March 11, 2007, the National Geographic Channel (NGC) premieres back-to-back one-hour specials that delve into controversial biblical mysteries that still resonate today. Decoding the Dead Sea Scrolls, at 9 p.m. ET/PT, and Cain and Abel, at 10 p.m. ET/PT, are both programs that give us insight into the world as it was during a pivotal time in history, when two religions parted ways and changed the course of time forever. Scientists and theologians close to the projects continue to discuss their meaning in today’s world.

Decoding the Dead Sea Scrolls
Sunday, March 11, at 9 p.m. ET/PT (World Premiere)
“The Dead Sea Scrolls are part of the greatest treasures, not only of the Jewish nation, but actually of mankind.” — Adolpho Roitman, Curator

Comprised of more than 900 manuscripts and tens of thousands of brittle fragments, the Dead Sea Scrolls are the oldest known collection of biblical texts, which contain not only representations of the Jewish and Christian Bibles, but also unknown psalms, random apocalyptic musings and even a treasure map. Interestingly, they also include information on the rituals and tenets of a mysterious monastic sect that many scholars believe authored the Scrolls.

The special examines the modern-day impact of these ancient treasures, and how 60 years after their discovery, they are still revealing new clues and shedding new light on the world into which Jesus Christ was born. Join NGC as we trace the steps of their discovery by Bedouins in 1947 in Judean desert caves just as the country of Israel was fighting for recognition and survival; through the illegal buying and selling of fragments on the black market; and eventually to the museum in Jerusalem where they remain today.

Featuring interviews with renowned scientists and conservators, this one-hour special also examines the extraordinary efforts being made to preserve these priceless writings before they disintegrate and their secrets disappear forever. In particular, one scientific team is using the latest infrared and computer imaging technology to literally spell out this 2,000-year-old mystery one letter at a time.

Experts featured in The Dead Sea Scrolls include Michael Baigent, author and commentator on ancient religions; Dr. Eric H. Cline, archaeologist, George Washington University (Washington, D.C.); Hanan Eshel, archaeologist, bar Ilan University (Israel); Robert Feather, metallurgist and religion scholar; Katharina Galor, archaeologist, Brown University (Rhode Island); Dr. Oren Gutfeld, archaeologist, Hebrew University of Jerusalem; Jodi Magness, archaeologist, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Yuval Peleg, archaeologist; Stephan Pfann, president, University of the Holy Land of Jerusalem; Adolpho Roitman, curator, The Shrine of the Book, The Israel Museum (Jerusalem); Pnina Shor, archaeologist, Israel antiquities authority; Emanuel Tov, editor-in-chief, Dead Sea Scrolls Publication Project; and Dr. Bruce Zuckerman, director of the West Semitic Research Project and the Hebrew Bible, University of Southern California at Los Angeles.

Cain and Abel
Sunday, March 11, at 10 p.m. ET/PT (World Premiere)
“This story is highly relevant today. It lays down the principles of war and peace, of really two different ways of approaching the world.” — Akbar Ahmed, renowned Islamic scholar

Told in just 16 lines, it is a short and enigmatic tale that has inspired philosophies of peace and nonviolence as well as justifications for hatred and bigotry throughout the centuries. Cain, a farmer, and his brother Abel, a shepherd, both make offerings to God, but Cain’s offering is rejected. Consumed with rage and jealousy, Cain kills Abel and God banishes him from Eden.

The story of Cain and Abel has posed mysteries that theologians and scholars are still debating today: Why would God prefer one brother over another? Why is Cain’s life spared after he committed such a sin? What is the “mark of Cain” that God uses to protect him – and what would Cain need protection from? In this one-hour special, biblical scholars and archaeologists trace the roots of this dark mystery back to Middle Eastern traditions and history.

Over 5,000 years ago, Egyptian pharaohs immortalized tantalizing parallels to the story of Cain and Abel in writings on tomb walls – hieroglyphics depict the murder of the god Osiris by his brother Seth. But even further back in time, in what is now Iraq, the first agricultural revolution took place, and there were great clashes between herders and farmers. Many experts believe this area of the world is where the biblical Eden actually existed. Was this the true backdrop to the tormented story of Cain and Abel? According to the Bible, Cain eventually married and built a city – the first city. Aside from a story of sin and forgiveness, is the story of Cain and Abel also really a parable about the great social and economic movement that began civilization as we know it today?

Join the National Geographic Channel as it explores the fascinating dimensions of this brutal, perplexing and haunting tale.

Experts featured in Cain and Abel include Dr. Akbar Ahmed, Ibn Khaldun chair of Islamic Studies and professor of international relations at American University (Washington, D.C.); Osama ElShemy, archaeologist, Supreme Council of Antiquities of Egypt; Gary Greenberg, historian and author, 101 Myths of the Bible: How Ancient Scribes Invented Biblical History; Dr. Salima Ikram, Egyptologist, American University in Cairo; Dr. Christopher Leighton, executive director, Institute for Christian and Jewish Studies; Dr. Jon Levenson, professor and Jewish scholar, Harvard University; David Rohl, Egyptologist, historian and author, Legend: The Genesis of Civilization; and Dr. Juris Zarins, professor of anthropology and archaeology, Missouri State University.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Abel, Cain, Dead Sea Scrolls

Jezebel’s Tomb

Jezebel’s Tomb, a book by David Hilzenrath, is being serialized by The Washington Post. The book is a work of fiction. The books is also a biblical mystery and an archaeological thriller.

The Washington Post provides the following synopsis of the book:

In 1883, a Jerusalem merchant claimed to have purchased from a Bedouin an unusual text found in a cave near the Dead Sea. He was on the verge of selling it to the British Museum for £1 million when he was denounced as a fraud.

Disgraced and destitute, he committed suicide. His artifact was lost to history.

Generations later, the forgotten man holds the key to a Jerusalem bombing and a 2,000-year-old mystery.

In the shadow of the Old City, a blast destroys one of Jerusalem’s premier archaeological museums. The Israeli Mossad blames Palestinian terrorists. Journalist Benjamin Jordan finds disturbing holes in the official explanation and quickly finds himself in the crosshairs.

Struggling to penetrate a deadly plot, Jordan follows his only lead to the University of Michigan and a young scholar named Catherine Cavanaugh.

Mutual attraction competes with mutual suspicion as they plunge deeper into danger.

Driven by ambition, scarred by terrorism, torn by the crosscurrents of an age-old conflict, Jordan must decide whom to trust and how far he’ll go.

His digging could unlock an ancient mystery—and unleash a cataclysm.

Since I like novels that are related to the Old Testament, I will spend part of my Summer vacation reading this book.

To read the book on line, click here.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Jezebel’s Tomb, David Hilzenrath

Judges 11:39: The Virginity of Jephthah’s Daughter

This is the third essay on Jephthah’s daughter.

To read the first article in the series, “Rereading Judges 11:31: The Sacrifice of Jephthah’s Daughter, click here.

To read the second article in the series, “Judges 11:39: The Fate of Jephthah’s Daughter,” click here.

This final essay on Jephthah’s daughter will deal with the issue of her virginity. There is no question that she was a virgin to the day of her death. On this issue, all scholars agree. The issue of her virginity is directly related to the manner in which she died. The translation of Judges 11:39 affects the way her death is interpreted. What follows is the way the RSV and the NIV translate Judges 11:39:

“And at the end of two months, she returned to her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had made. She had never known a man” (Judges 11:39 RSV).

“After the two months, she returned to her father and he did to her as he had vowed. And she was a virgin” (Judges 11:39 NIV).

To the average reader, the two translations are identical. The only difference in the two translations is found in the words translators use to describe her sexual condition: “she had never known a man” and “she was a virgin.” However, for the interpreter of the text, the way the text is translated affects the way the text is interpreted.

C. J. Goslinga (p. 391, note 182) explains how the translation of Judges 11:39 affects the interpretation of the text. Goslinga wrote:

It is hard to translate these words without opting for a particular interpretation of the text. The most obvious translation would be “and she had never known a man” (cf. RSV), but the preceding clause would then have to mean that Jephthah sacrificed his daughter. A more neutral but equally permissible translation would be “she had no relations with a man,” or “she was a virgin.” The meaning would be that she remained celibate her entire life and died a virgin. Such translation is therefore preferable. It does not contradict the thought that she was killed, but it also leaves open the possibility that she lived on as a virgin.

Goslinga is very clear: the translation of the RSV, “she had never known a man,” which he calls “the most obvious translation,” implies that Jephthah sacrificed his daughter. The translation of the NIV, “she was a virgin,” means that she was not sacrificed, but rather, that she remained celibate for the rest of her life.

The ambiguity of the text forces the interpreter to ask questions. Is the text saying that after she returned from her retreat she knew no man after that, that is, she never had sex until she died? Or is the text saying that she was sacrificed as a virgin?

C. F. Keil (p. 392) takes the former view. In his commentary of Judges, he wrote: “To mourn one’s virginity does not mean to mourn because one has to die a virgin, but because one has to live and remain a virgin.”

Keil then (p. 393) explains the words “and she knew no man”:

The clause in the account of the fulfilment of the vow, “and she knew no man,” is not in harmony with the assumption of a sacrificial death. This clause would add nothing to the description in that case, since it was already known that she was a virgin. The words only gain their proper sense if we connect them with the previous clause, he “did with her according to the vow which he had vowed,” and understand them as describing what the daughter did in fulfilment of the vow. The father fulfilled his vow upon her, and she knew no man; i.e., he fulfilled the vow
through the fact that she knew no man, but dedicated her life to the Lord, as a spiritual burnt-offering, in a lifelong chastity.

Even Goslinga struggled in deciding what happened to Jephthah’s daughter. He waivered between the fact that the text requires her death and the view that it was hard to understand “how a man like Jephthah could have taken a vow that obligated him to offer a human sacrifice” (p. 395). He then concluded:

In my view the words of verse 39, which conceal more than they reveal, do not absolutely rule out the possibility of permanent separation. Jephthah’s daughter could indeed have been put to death, but there could also have been a mournful ceremony in which she was sent off into the desert to wither and die. The words “and she was a virgin” would then make clear what Jephthah’s decision did to her, and the custom reported in verse 40 could have been a means to lighten her unbearable fate a little by allowing her to have company for four days a year.

I sympathize with people who are uneasy with the outcome of this passage. It is hard to believe that a man endowed with the Spirit of God would offer human sacrifice to the God of Israel, but he did. Jephthah’s action should not be interpreted in light of the teachings of Jesus Christ. After all, Jephthah was a B.C. man.

The near sacrifice of Isaac in Genesis 22 reveals that the reality of human sacrifice was a possibility in the world in which ancient Israel lived. However, if Genesis 22 is a polemic against human sacrifice, then the greatest lesson to be learned from the near sacrifice of Isaac is that human sacrifice was not to be a part of the religion of the God of Abraham.

Jephthah’s daughter, unfortunately, was sacrificed as a burnt offering. The dedication of Samuel to God in 1 Samuel 1:11-28 is not a good precedent for the view that the sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter was just a “spiritual sacrifice.”

The sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter is not the focus of Jephthah’s narrative; the real focus of the story is the irrevocability of a vow. As Boling wrote (p. 209): “The fact of human sacrifice in Jephthah’s story is secondary to the theme of the irrevocability of the vow.” Although Boling believed that the “whatever” of verse 31 could be a reference to a domesticated animal, his view that the writer of the book of Judges is sympathetic with Jephthah, and his conclusion that the focus of the story is the writer’s portrayal “of Jephthah’s integrity in fulfilling his vow” (p. 210) is correct.

Christians will continue to discuss the sacrifice of Jephthah’s daughter and whether Jephthah actually offered his daughter as a burnt offering to God. Those who reject the view that she was not sacrificed, do so without much textual support.

The issue of how one views the fate of Jephthah’s daughter also affects the manner in which the text is translated. Bible translators cannot allow personal preferences to influence the way a text is translated. However, this is easier said than done.

Each translation is an interpretation of the text. The responsibility of the translator is to translate the text as the text appears in the manuscripts without conveying a meaning that is not present in the text.

For instance, to translate 2 Samuel 21:19, that Elhanan killed the brother of Goliath, as the TNIV does, is wrong because those words are not in the text. The words of Judges 11:31 and 11:39 are more difficult to translate because of the ambiguity already present in the text. The translator here must be faithful to the text and leave it to the interpreter yo decide what the text means.

References:

Boling, Robert. Judges. The Anchor Bible. Garden City: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1975.

Goslinga, C. J. Joshua, Judges, Ruth. Bible Student’s Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986.

Keil, C. F. Joshua, Judges, Ruth. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950.

Claude F. Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Child Sacrifice, Jephthah, Judges 11

The Lost Tomb in the News

The Lost Tomb is “pop archaeology

Archaeologists and clergymen in the Holy Land are denying that the claims in the documentary produced by James Cameron contradict major Christian beliefs. “The conclusion by the filmmakers that the bone boxes showed Jesus had a wife and son is ‘pop’ archaeology.”

Click here.

The Lost Tomb: Made-for-TV Religious Scholarship

Dr. McCane, a Professor of Religion at Wofford College, wrote:

This is not scholarship; it's marketing. These programs go for the quick buck. In their world, the boring old-school scholarly disciplines of research, writing and peer review are replaced by Web sites, publicity campaigns and book tours. If responsible scholars criticize these programs, pointing out glaring errors of fact and logic, market-savvy promoters are ready with smooth talk about "hearing both sides" or "staying open-minded." They ask, "what are the scholars afraid of?" or they say (as they did Monday), "this is just the beginning." Real scholarly knowledge about the Bible and archaeology takes a back seat. Everything is crafted to generate interest, to create viewers, to make sales.

Click here.


The Lost Tomb: Belief Exploited in Faux Documentary

The hype surrounding this latest show, and the lack once again of accepted publication and peer review protocols, only heightens the sense that the new documentary is more Erich Von Daniken than Ken Burns.

Click here.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Archaeology, James Cameron, Jesus Ossuary, Lost Tomb

Christians, Child Abuse, and the Old Testament

The issue of child abuse is a concern that is universal. Parents, government, schools, and churches are concerned that children be protected from abuse. According to recent statistics, more that 3 million children are abused every year.

The problem that many people face is defining child abuse. This confusion is expressed by an opinion published in the Springfield News-Leader, of Springfield, Missouri. The person who wrote the opinion said:

To one writer, child abuse is practiced by Christians who obey Old Testament injunctions to "spare the rod and spoil the child" and if California Assemblywoman Sally Lieber, D-San Francisco, has her way there will be a law prohibiting parental spanking of children younger than 4. Spanking will then be a crime punishable by fines or time in the pokey. And, you know that — often — what is settled in Sacramento ultimately wends its way throughout the rest of the nation.

Child abuse is an act that places the life of a child in danger. Child abuse can be physical, emotional, or sexual. Physical abuse comes out of violence against a child and causes bodily injury. Emotional abuse is attitude and behavior that affect the mental development of a child. Sexual abuse is any sexual approach between an adult and a minor.

But, is spanking a child a form of child abuse and a crime punishable by time in prison? Parents have a right to discipline their children and that right includes spanking. However, parents must be very careful because the use of force to discipline a child can inflict pain and cause injury.

There is a difference between spanking for the purpose of correction and beating as a form of punishment. When punishment gets out of control, then it ceases to be an act of discipline and it becomes an act of physical abuse.

Are Christians who obey the Old Testament injunction to “spare the rod and spoil the child” guilty of anything? The answer is “no!”

The answer is “no” because Christians will never obey the Old Testament injunction to “spare the rod and spoil the child” since such an injunction is not in the Old Testament.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Child Abuse, Spanking

Social Cannibals

Who said that Old Testament laws are not relevant today?

In Tennessee, a woman borrowed $1,000 for 30 days. At the end of 30 days she owed $1,000, plus another $220!

After 18 months the woman paid more than $4,000 and still owed $1,200.

There must be a law to stop these kinds of predatory practices.

Tennessee State Rep. Craig Fitzhugh and State Sen. Roy Herron wrote about this situation:

Mind you, the rich preying on, instead of praying with, the poor is an issue as ancient as Scripture. That is why Old Testament law prohibits lending practices now common in Tennessee. That is why the Hebrew prophets like Hosea, Amos and Micah raged against injustices done to God's people.

The good people of Tennessee must learn from the laws of the Old Testament and prohibit lending practices that prey on the poor.

The prophet Micah compared the people who abused the poor with cannibals, because they stripped off their skin, and broke their bones, and ate their flesh, Social cannibals are people who chop people up like meat for the cooking pot. Here is what Micah said:

"Listen, you leaders of Israel! You are supposed to know right from wrong, but you are the very ones who hate good and love evil. You skin my people alive and tear the flesh from their bones. Yes, you eat my people's flesh, strip off their skin, and break their bones. You chop them up like meat for the cooking pot. Then you beg the LORD for help in times of trouble! Do you really expect him to answer? After all the evil you have done, he won't even look at you!" (Micah 3:1-4).

I hope the good people of Tennessee will put an end to these social cannibals.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Lending Practices, Micah, Poor

Amazing Grace: A Film Christians Should See

James A. Smith Sr., in an article published in the Baptist Press, reviews the movie Amazing Grace and says that this is a movie Christians should see. What follows is an excerpt of his review.

It’s not very often that Hollywood positively portrays evangelical Christians, but such is the case in "Amazing Grace," a major motion picture about William Wilberforce's extraordinary leadership in the abolition of slavery. Celebrating the 200th anniversary of the slave trade's demise in Great Britain, "Amazing Grace" opens in theaters this weekend nationwide.

Although the film is at times a bit vague about the extent and details of Wilberforce's Christian faith, "Amazing Grace" is a movie every Christian should see -- both because of its inspiring portrayal of the crusade to end the great moral evil of its day, and because of the relevance Wilberforce's campaign for societal change teaches us about the great moral struggles of our day.

Rated PG for thematic material depicting the cruelty of slavery and some mild language, "Amazing Grace" is directed by Michael Apted and stars Ioan Gruffudd as Wilberforce, a man of tremendous historical import who is nevertheless largely unknown today.

It's disappointing that Wilberforce's conversion to Christianity was only fleetingly addressed in the movie in light of its extraordinarily pivotal role in his decision to lead the abolition movement.

To the read the review, visit the Baptist Press by clicking here.

I have not seen the movie yet, but on Smith’s recommendation, I am planning to see the movie and learn more about the life of this remarkable Christian man, “a man of tremendous historical import who is nevertheless largely unknown today.”

P.S.
Baptist Press announces that “Amazing Grace” has strong opening weekend.

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)--"Amazing Grace," the movie about British abolitionist William Wilberforce, had a strong opening weekend, finishing third among the top 20 movies on a per-theater average.


Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Amazing Grace, Christian Films, William Wilberforce

How Much Bible Do You Know?

How much Bible do you know? Over the past several months I have been writing about the way people use or misuse the Bible. In the following story, a writer for the Frederick News Post uses the Bible. Tell, me: does the writer of this article use the Bible correctly?

In announcing that Jon and Carrie Lewis will perform at the Mudd Puddle Cafe in Frederick, Maryland on Saturday, Bill D'Agostino, a writer for the Frederick News Post, of Frederick, Maryland, wrote:

There's a genuine warmness that infuses Jon and Carrie Lewis' songs.

They are just as amiable in person. Married four years, they still act like newlyweds -- with Carrie stealing reassuring glances from Jon during a hour-long interview at their local Westminster coffeehouse.

Their kindness is even reflected in their day jobs. He works outreach at a library, singing and telling stories to children. She teaches at an after-school program for at-risk kids.

On Saturday, they'll bring their warm harmonies and personalities to the Mudd Puddle Cafe in Frederick. They'll also have copies of their self-titled, self-produced five-song CD for sale.

Jon and Carrie met as undergraduates at Baptist Bible College in the Poconos Mountains. On their first date, they played each other their songs.

"Afterwards she was like, 'Oh, he's all right.' And I was head over heels," Jon recalled. "I eventually wore her down."

Carrie said she came to realize Jon was "a good catch."

"He was really kind to people on campus -- and befriended them -- that other people wouldn't. That really stood out to me," she said, explaining why she eventually fell for him. "And he also took the time to earn my trust, just to be my friend for a good solid six months before anything else. Before there even was glimmer, we would just hang out."

Since marrying four years ago, they've been making music collaboratively.

As their choice of college suggests, their Christian faith is important to them. It also plays a role in some of their songs.

"Trouble," a bouncy and harmonic tune written and sung by Jon in a smooth manner reminiscent of Dave Matthews, includes passages paraphrased from the Old Testament Book of Romans and the New Testament Book of Proverbs.

And "New Song," an atmospheric ballad written and sung by Carrie, is directly about her belief in God. Somedays, she said, her faith seems like it's primarily doubt. "New Song" is about the glorious moments when the doubt is lifted.

"My songs are always written about my life or deep emotional things," Carrie said. "Music, even without words or lyrics, is a language that speaks."

Carrie was initially trained as a classical pianist, and her confident instrumental performance on "New Song" reflects that background. She said it took her a long time to become comfortable as a vocalist.

"I was never the singer, I was always the piano player," she said. Nevertheless, her soulful crooning gives "New Song" a deeply emotional and personal feel. "You have rescued my poor soul from death," she sings.

The couple cautioned that they are not out to convert anyone to their faith.

"I try to write about my beliefs in a way that people can listen to and can consider," Jon said, "and not be beaten over the head."

What is wrong with this use of the Bible in the article?

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Biblical Illiteracy