The Use of Upper Case in Translations of the Bible

In a recent post on the use of upper case in translating biblical passages, Suzanne McCarthy at Better Bibles Blog wrote:

However, one can see how the choice of whether to use upper case or not could well be doctrinally motivated.

We can’t really have the same experience as those who read this in the original language. Having upper case letters means one thing and not having them means something else.

In her study, she provides examples taken from Judges 9:13, Psalm 110:1, Psalm 2:2, and Isaiah 63:10. In this post, I want to demonstrate that two of Suzanne’s statements are true, that is, “the choice of whether to use upper case or not could well be doctrinally motivated,” and that “having upper case letters means one thing and not having them means something else.”

The use of upper case in English is very common and represents an author’s deliberate effort to communicate a message to the reader. For instance, the word “god” is used to represent a false god while the word “God” is used to represent the God of the Bible. The word “son” is used to designate the offspring of a father or mother while the word “Son” represents Jesus Christ. In the same way, the word “he” is used to designate a man, while the word “He” is used to designate God or Jesus Christ.

This use of upper case to convey a theological message is generally used by Christian writers. For instance, in his book Old Testament Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007), Bruce K. Waltke believes that the Hebrew word for serpent in Genesis 3:1 “functions as a proper name.” He wrote (p. 222): “In Genesis 3:1 the Serpent–with a capital S to represent its uniqueness–brings unaided humanity under its rule.” Thus, the serpent ceases being one of the “beasts of the field which the LORD God had made” to become the incarnation of Satan (p. 265), “that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan” (Revelation 12:9).

In the same manner, the “seed of the woman” becomes a reference to Jesus Christ. Waltke asks: “To whom does the ‘seed’ refer?” He answers his own question by saying: “Surely the most satisfactory identification of the ‘seed’ is Jesus Christ and the church” (p. 62). Although Waltke never uses upper case for “seed,” the New King James Version does: “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel” (Genesis 3:15 NKJ).

These two examples demonstrate that Suzanne’s statement, that the “choice of whether to use upper case or not could well be doctrinally motivated,” is true. The use of upper case in translations of the Bible serves, in many cases, to emphasize a certain theological perspective about a text.

Suzanne’s other statement, that “having upper case letters means one thing and not having them means something else,” can be demonstrated by different translations of Daniel 9:25. Let me illustrate this point by quoting from the King James Version:

Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times (Daniel 9:25 KJV).

It is clear in this translation from the KJV that the word “Messiah” with upper case is a clear reference to Jesus Christ. In late Judaism, the Messiah was considered to be God’s agent who would bring restoration to Israel. The New Testament used the title and applied it to Christ to designate him as the savior of the world.

There is no doubt that readers of the King James would identify the “Messiah” with Christ. The problem with the KJV’s translation, besides the upper case, is that in Hebrew, however, the word “mashiach” means “the anointed one.” So, to do justice to the Hebrew word, the NIV translates Daniel 9:25 as follows:

Know and understand this: From the issuing of the decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven ‘sevens,’ and sixty-two ‘sevens.’ It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble (Daniel 9:25 NIV).

The NIV corrects one of the mistakes of the KJV. The NIV correctly translates the word “Messiah” but it keeps the upper case in “Anointed One.” Thus, a reader of the NIV will also have no problem identifying the “Anointed One” with Jesus Christ.

The problem with both the KJV and the NIV is that they use the upper case to show that, in the mind of the translators, the “Messiah” or the “Anointed One” was Jesus Christ. The Revised Standard Version eliminates this problem by eliminating the upper case. The RSV reads as follows:

Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the word to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time (Daniel 9:25 RSV).

So, in the RSV, the “Messiah” and the “Anointed One” becomes “an anointed one.” However, another problem with the KJV and the NIV is that in they use the definite article “the” to identify the person referred to in Daniel 9:25. In the KJV that person is “the Messiah.” In the NIV it is “the Anointed One.” In the Old Testament two people were anointed: the priest and the king. By using the definite article, both the KJV and the NIV are saying (indirectly) that the “Messiah” or the “Anointed One” is a king.

However, the definite article does not appear in the Hebrew text and the RSV’s translation reflects this fact: “to the coming of an anointed one.” This means that the “anointed one” of Daniel 9:25 could be either a priest or a king. The proper exegesis of Daniel 9:25 reveals that the “anointed one” in Daniel 9:25 is a priest.

Thus, by using the upper case in Daniel 9:25, the translators of the KJV and the NIV say that the “Anointed One” was Jesus Christ, while the RSV by not using upper case is saying that the one coming could be either a priest or a king.

In conclusion, translators should refrain from using upper case in translating biblical texts from Hebrew into English because the use of upper case in translation of biblical texts infuses a text with a theological meaning that may not be present in the original text. This infusion of meaning becomes in itself an interpretation of the text that then is transmitted to readers who have little or no knowledge of the original language. These readers, in turn, will accept the inference that these theologically infused translations represent the real meaning of the text.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Bible Translation, Daniel 9:25, Satan, Serpent

Life in Tell el-Amarna Was Tough

Image: Akhenaten





Archaeologists have discovered that many of the people who worked at Tell el-Amarna were sick, and worked under harsh conditions. Archaeologists have studied the remains of ordinary ancient Egyptians found in a cemetery in Tell el-Amarna and the results show that many Egyptians suffered from anemia, fractured bones, stunted growth, and high juvenile mortality rates.

Tell el-Amarna was the capital of ancient Egypt during the reign of Akhenaten, the Pharaoh who ruled Egypt between 1379 and 1362 BC. Akhenaten abolished the worship of Egyptian gods in favor of Aten, the sun god. Akhenaten built and lived in Tell el-Amarna for about 15 years. The city was abandoned after his death.

Read the news report by clicking here.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Akhenaten, Archaeology, Tell e-Amarna

God, Prayer, Physicians, and Medicine

Fox News is reporting that a child in Weston, Wisconsin died because her parents refused to take her to a physician. They believed the power of prayer would heal the child. The following is an excerpt from the news report:

An 11-year-old girl died after her parents prayed for healing rather than seek medical help for a treatable form of diabetes, police said Tuesday.

Everest Metro Police Chief Dan Vergin said Madeline Neumann died Sunday.

"She got sicker and sicker until she was dead," he said.

Vergin said an autopsy determined the girl died from diabetic ketoacidosis, an ailment that left her with too little insulin in her body, and she had probably been ill for about 30 days, suffering symptoms like nausea, vomiting, excessive thirst, loss of appetite and weakness.

The girl's parents, Dale and Leilani Neumann, attributed the death to "apparently they didn't have enough faith," the police chief said.

They believed the key to healing "was it was better to keep praying. Call more people to help pray," he said.

The mother believes the girl could still be resurrected, the police chief said.

Some people would commend the parents for their faith because they believed in the power of prayer. Although their intention was good, the decision to hold treatment was wrong and in the end it cost the life of their daughter.

Christians have to understand that God answers prayer to heal the sick but he also uses physicians and medicine to do his work.

The book of Ecclesiasticus, also known as Sirach, has a good statement on God, physicians, and medicine. It reads:

Honor physicians for their services, for the Lord created them; for their gift of healing comes from the Most High, and they are rewarded by the king. The skill of physicians makes them distinguished, and in the presence of the great they are admired. The Lord created medicines out of the earth, and the sensible will not despise them. Was not water made sweet with a tree in order that its power might be known? And he gave skill to human beings that he might be glorified in his marvelous works. By them the physician heals and takes away pain; the pharmacist makes a mixture from them. God's works will never be finished; and from him health spreads over all the earth. My child, when you are ill, do not delay, but pray to the Lord, and he will heal you. Give up your faults and direct your hands rightly, and cleanse your heart from all sin. Offer a sweet-smelling sacrifice, and a memorial portion of choice flour, and pour oil on your offering, as much as you can afford. Then give the physician his place, for the Lord created him; do not let him leave you, for you need him. There may come a time when recovery lies in the hands of physicians, for they too pray to the Lord that he grant them success in diagnosis and in healing, for the sake of preserving life. He who sins against his Maker, will be defiant toward the physician (Sirach 38:1-15).

So, when Christians get sick, they must pray for healing, but they also should go to the doctor and take whatever medicine is prescribed by the physician.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Doctors, Healing, Medicine, Prayer, Sirach

Solomon's Early Reign (2 Chr 1:1-17)

The story of Solomon as presented by the Chronicler (Chr) is inspired by the narratives found in 1 Kings. The description of Solomon’s reign provides continuity with the reign of David and affirms that God’s promise to David was fulfilled in the reign of his son and in the construction of the temple. Chronicles presents a more positive depiction of Solomon's reign than the book of Kings. A major portion of the narrative about Solomon’s reign is dedicated to events related to the construction of the temple. This dominant theme in the Solomonic narrative is seen as the realization of the promise made to David and the culmination of David's preparation for the building of the temple. The Chr also focuses on Solomon's wisdom and wealth. These gifts were given to him to prove the Chr’s agenda that Solomon was blessed because of his obedience. In 1 Chr 29:25 it is said of Solomon that “the LORD highly exalted Solomon in the sight of all Israel and bestowed on him royal splendor such as no king over Israel ever had before.” Because of Solomon’s obedience, God blessed him with wealth and wisdom, which he used to build the temple.

1:1-6 / The Chr begins his narrative about Solomon’s reign by introducing
him as the son of David. This introduction emphasizes that Solomon is continuing David’s work and that in him God was establishing David’s house. According to the Chr, Solomon’s reign began with a religious pilgrimage to the holy place at Gibeon. This pilgrimage occurred after Solomon established himself firmly over his kingdom (v.1). The establishment of the kingdom in Solomon's hand (cf. 1 Kgs 2:46b) may reflect the problems Solomon had in his struggle against Adonijah, his older brother (1 Kgs 1:1-2:46). The same phrase is used to describe the beginning of the reign of Rehoboam (12:13), Abijah (13:21), Jehoshaphat (17:1), and Jehoram (21:4). This expression is used by the Chr to indicate that a new king assumed the throne after overcoming some opposition. The religious focus of the Chr is evident in his declaration that the LORD was with Solomon and that he greatly blessed him.

Because the Chr omits Solomon's struggle with Adonijah, Solomon’s first act as king becomes his visit to the high place at Gibeon (v.3). The narrative in Chronicles differs slightly from 1 Kgs 3:4-15. The book of Kings presents the visit to Gibeon as a personal pilgrimage of the new king. The Chr, however, says that Solomon went to Gibeon with all the leaders in Israel (v.2). These leaders represented the tribal organization of early Israel (cf. 1 Chr 28:1). Among these leaders were the commanders of thousands (1 Chr 13:1), commanders of hundreds (1 Chr 13:1), judges (1 Chr 17:8), the leaders in Israel (1 Chr 11:3), and the heads of families (1 Chr 15:2). These leaders represented all Israel. Solomon led the whole assembly in this religious pilgrimage. At Gibeon, Solomon and the assembly worshiped the LORD and inquired of him (v.5). While Kings says that Gibeon “was the most important high place” (1 Kgs 3:4), the Chr defends Gibeon as a proper place of worship by saying that the Tent of Meeting and the altar of bronze made by Bezalel, ben Uri ben Hur, under the direction of Moses were in Gibeon (Exod. 40:17-19; 1 Chr 16:39-40; 21:29). The Ark was in Jerusalem under the tent David had made when he brought the Ark of God from Kiriath Jearim (1 Chr 15:1). Solomon offered a large offering upon the bronze altar. The large number, a thousand, may be a hyperbole used by the Chr to show Solomon’s dedication to the worship of God. On this occasion, the Chr uses a large number in order to magnify Solomon’s devotion to God. The Chr says that Solomon went up to the bronze altar, and offered sacrifices before Yahweh (v.6). This expression, missing in 1 Kings, affirms that Solomon acted as a priest at this occasion (cf. JPS: “Solomon ascended the bronze altar”).

1:7-13 / The theophany narrative in vv.7-13 is an abbreviation of 1 Kgs 3:3-
15. There are several differences between Kings and Chronicles. The Chr does not mention that God appeared to Solomon in a dream, although that may be implied in the fact that the theophany occurred at night. In the postexilic period dreams had fallen into disrepute because of past abuse (cf. Jer 23:23-28). The Chr omits Solomon’s statement that he was a “little child” maybe in an effort to present Solomon as a capable leader. The Chr also omits God’s exhortation to Solomon to obey the law (1 Kgs 3:14). This omission may reflect the Chr’s view that Solomon had already been exhorted by David to keep the law (1 Chr 22:13). God appeared to Solomon and offered to grant him any request to help him discharge his duties as king and govern the people (v.7), which God identifies as my people (v. 11). God’s words to Solomon serve to emphasize that Solomon’s rule over Israel was divinely ordained. Solomon acknowledged God’s great kindness toward his father (v. 8) and requested that God confirm his promise to David. The reference to the people being as numerous as the dust of the earth (v.9) is a reference to the promise God made to Abraham (Gen 13:16) and to Jacob (Gen 28:14). Instead of power and possessions, Solomon asked for wisdom and knowledge to rule over the people (v.10). “Wisdom” refers to the ability to rule righteously. “Knowledge” means the intellectual discernment to make right decisions. The promise Solomon alluded to in his request (v. 9) refers to God’s promise made to David in 1 Chronicle 17. God’s promise assured David that one of his sons would succeed him (1 Kgs 17:11) and that he would build a house for God (1 Kgs 17:12). God granted Solomon what he had requested and in addition promised to bless and prosper him with the wealth, riches and honor which he did not request (v. 11). The Chr wants to emphasize that Solomon’s wealth and wisdom are the result of his obedience to God. After worshiping the LORD at Gibeon, Solomon returned to Jerusalem and reigned over all Israel. The Chr omits Solomon’s sacrificing before the Ark after he returned to Jerusalem (1 Kgs 3:15).

1:14-17 / The accumulation of great wealth by Solomon was seen as the
fulfillment of God's promise. God had promised to give Solomon great wealth and now the Chr describes it. Solomon had 1,400 chariots and 12,000 horses or horsemen (the Hebrew word Päräšîm can be translated either as horses or horsemen). According to 2 Chr 9:25 Solomon had 4,000 stalls for his horses and chariots. Solomon placed some of the horses and chariots in Jerusalem and in chariot cities he had built for them throughout Israel. Megiddo, Hazor, and Gezer have been identified as Solomon's chariot cities, but this identification has been questioned by some archaeologists. Archaeologists question whether the structures at Megiddo are to be identified as stables or storehouses. They also question whether these structures should be associated with Solomon or be assigned to Ahab, king of Israel.

Solomon accumulated his wealth by acting as a merchant. He imported chariots from Egypt and horses from Egypt and from Kue, a region in southeast Asia Minor identified with Cilicia. Solomon sold the horses and chariots to all the kings of the Hittites and of the Arameans. The Hittites were an Indo-European people who occupied most of the central Anatolian plateau (modern Turkey). The Arameans consisted of a confederation of city-states who flourished at the end of the second millennium in the area occupied by modern day Syria. Chariots were probably introduced into Egypt by the Hyksos about 1800 BCE. These chariots were usually drawn by two horses. The price of a chariot was six hundred shekels of silver and the price of a horse was a hundred and fifty shekels. Thus, a chariot cost four times the price of a horse. Solomon became so rich with his commercial ventures that it was said that silver and gold became as common as the stones in the hills of Israel and the expensive cedar became as plentiful as the sycamore-fig trees found in the Shephelah, the low foothills of Judah (cf. 1 Kgs 10:27; 1 Chr 27:28). The Chr does not criticize Solomon for accumulating wealth, rather he received favorable approval because his role in international trade brought him wealth, riches, and honor. Thus, the Chr is emphasizing that Solomon’s riches were the result of God’s blessings because Solomon’s wealth was to be used in the building of the Temple.

Additional Notes

1:1 / Established himself. The NIV translation implies that Solomon’s
accession to the throne came after he overcame the political struggles with Adonijah. The KJV’s translation, “was strengthened in his kingdom” suggests that it was the LORD who placed Solomon on the throne. The words the LORD his God was with him emphasize the LORD’s role in giving Solomon the throne.

1:3 / Assembly. The Hebrew word qāhāl is used to designate a gathering or an
assembly of any sort but the word is used more often to designate an assembly gathered together for religious purposes.

1:5 / Inquired of him. The text here is ambiguous. It could be translated
“inquired of it,” that is, the bronze altar. This is the translation adopted by the NRSV.

1:8 / Great kindness. The Hebrew word hesed, which is generally translated
great kindness, mercy, and steadfast love means loyalty and it refers to a deep commitment that comes out of a covenant obligation.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Solomon

The Perpetual Virginity of Mary: A Response to Brant Pitre

In a recent post, “A Biblical Basis For Mary's Perpetual Virginity,” Brant Pitre at Singing in the Reign wrote that Numbers 30, a chapter dedicated to vows taken by women, provides a biblical basis for the Catholic doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary.

In his post, Pitre defines the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary as follows: “The Catholic Church teaches that the Blessed Virgin Mary not only conceived Jesus in a state of virginity but that she remained a virgin throughout her entire married life.”

Protestants do not accept the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary because they claim the dogma lacks a biblical foundation. Pitre recognizes that Protestants do not accept the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary. He wrote: “It is also well-known that most of our Protestant brothers and sisters do not accept this doctrine, usually because the Gospels mention the ‘brothers’ of Jesus such as ‘James and Joseph’, who are assumed to be uterine siblings of Jesus, born of Mary (cf. Matt 13:55).”

The purpose of the present study is not meant to be an anti-Catholic polemic nor a personal attack on Pitre and his belief. Rather, the purpose of this article is to ascertain whether Pitre’s exegesis of Numbers 30 provides an adequate biblical justification for the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary.

First, let me summarize Pitre’s argument. Pitre said that “according to some commentators, it [Numbers 30] appears to specifically be concerned with vows of sexual abstinence taken by married women” (emphasis his).

Pitre emphasizes that the key to understanding the chapter on vows made by women is Numbers 30:13. He cites 30:13-15 as follows (the emphasis in verses 13-15 are his):

Context: Vows to "Afflict Herself"
[13] Any vow and any binding oath to afflict herself, her husband may establish, or her husband may make void. [14] But if her husband says nothing to her from day to day, then he establishes all her vows, or all her pledges, that are upon her; he has established them, because he said nothing to her on the day that he heard of them. [15] But if he makes them null and void after he has heard of them, then he shall bear her iniquity."

Pitre quotes Jacob Milgrom in order to explain that “to afflict herself” in Numbers 30:13 [H 30:14] means to abstain from sexual intercourse. Pitre wrote:

All right: so what does all of this mean? The key is in the final section; the chapter is concerned with a woman's vows to "afflict herself," which, as the great Torah scholar Jacob Milgrom points out, was interpreted by ancient Jews as referring to fasting and refraining from sexual intercourse. Similar terminology is used in descriptions of the Day of Atonement, when Jews were expected to fast and refrain from sexual intercourse (see Milgrom, Harper Collins Study Bible n. Lev 16:29; citing Targum Pseudo-Jonathan; cf. also Exod 19:15). Once this terminology is clear, the whole chapter makes sense. It is discussion (sic) three kinds of vows:

1. Vows of sexual abstinence taken by a young, unmarried woman.
2. Vows of sexual abstinence taken by a married woman.
3. Vows of sexual abstinence taken by a widow or divorced woman.

I argue in the present post that Pitre’s exegesis of Numbers 30 is incorrect and that he took Milgrom’s statement out of context. I contend also that a proper interpretation of Numbers 30 does not provide a biblical basis for the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary.

1. The expression in Numbers 30:13 (H 30:14), לענת נפש (le‘annoth nephesh), literally “to afflict the soul”, generally carries the idea of fasting (Isaiah 58:3; Psalm 35:13), but it also can imply other kinds of self-denial, as Milgrom mentioned in his comments.

2. In his discussion of Leviticus 16:29 and the expression “you shall practice self-denial” (Leviticus 16:29 TNK), Milgrom wrote (p. 1054): “The entire phrase is usually interpreted as referring to fasting. Ibn Ezra declares categorically that ʿinnā nepeš always denotes fasting.” But Milgrom also says that the expression may also imply other depravation. To prove his point Milgrom quotes Targum Pseudo-Jonathan: “Afflict yourselves, from food, drink, and from enjoying bathing, and from anointing, and from sexual intercourse.”

Using Milgrom’s statement in Leviticus 16:29 that “self-denial” means sexual abstinence, Pitre applied Milgrom’s statement to Numbers 30 and said that Numbers 30 deals with vows of sexual abstinence taken by a young, unmarried woman, vows of sexual abstinence taken by a married woman, and vows of sexual abstinence taken by a widow or divorced woman.

Once Pitre concluded that Numbers 30 deals with a vow of sexual abstinence, he applied his interpretation to Mary and her relationship with Joseph. He said that Mary “took a vow of sexual abstinence, and her legal husband--in our case, Joseph--heard of the vow and said nothing, then the vow stands, and she is bound to keep it. This provides a solid historical basis for Joseph and Mary having a perpetually virginal marriage.”

What Pitre failed to notice in his study of Numbers 30 is that the injunctions of Pseudo-Jonathan, which Milgrom quoted, are exhortations to the priests to abstain from sexual relations on the Day of Atonement. This fact is made explicit in the Mishna Yoma 8:1, which Milgrom also mentioned in his commentary on Leviticus. Yoma 8:1 reads: “On the Day of Atonement it is forbidden to eat, drink, bathe, put on any sort of oil, put on a sandal, or engage in sexual relations.”

The vow a woman takes in Numbers 30 has nothing to do with sexual abstinence for life. Rather, as Baruc Levine has shown is his commentary on Numbers (p. 425), the legislation about vows made by women deals with “the legal status of women who have pronounced vows and taken oath, and by so doing have assumed binding obligations, often involving cost.”

According to Levine, women would likely make vows in situations that involve “a request for safe return from a journey, for healing and rescue and the like.” Women also would make vows asking “God for a child.” These vows would be accompanied by a pledge of goods or property which would be guaranteed by their fathers and husbands, the ones who “bear responsibility for the obligations undertaken by their daughters and wives” (p. 434).

Levine goes on to explain the implications of vows made to God. He wrote (p. 435):

Payment of the neder becomes due when God has done his part. Judging from the formulation of Numbers 30, this code of law is dealing with situations in which young unmarried women or married ones had pronounced vows and entered into binding agreements under oath on their own initiative. This indicates that the vows and oaths of women were binding in the first instance, and that women could undertake them without the prior knowledge or consent of their fathers or husbands. There is, however, another factor involved in the provisions of Numbers 30: This code of law assumes that fathers and husbands were responsible for making good on the commitments of their wives and daughters. This was probably due to the fact that women owned little if any property or wealth that was not under the control of their fathers and husbands. Such limitations on ownership of property and wealth by women produced a conflicting legal situation: On the one hand, women were free to assume obligations independently, whereas on the other, the legal responsibility to make good on these obligations befell the men in charge of them, their fathers and husbands.

Thus, Pitre’s exegesis of Numbers 30 does not provide a biblical basis for the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary. Numbers 30 deals with vows women made that required payment of goods or property. The regulation was enacted because fathers and husbands were responsible to make good on the vows their daughters and wives made. In addition, the prohibition of abstaining from sexual relations, which Pitre applies to Numbers 30, refers not to women’s vows, but to the priest and Levites serving on the Day of Atonement.

In conclusion, the proper exegesis of Numbers 30 does not provide a biblical basis that Mary “took a vow of sexual abstinence” nor does it provide “a solid historical basis for Joseph and Mary having a perpetually virginal marriage” since according to the Gospel of Matthew, Joseph took Mary as his wife, “but had no marital relations with her until she had borne a son; and he named him Jesus” (Matthew 1:24-25 NRSV).

References:

Jacob Milgrom, Leviticus 1-16. The Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 1991.

Baruc A. Levine, Numbers 21-36. The Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 2000.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Numbers 30, Perpetual Virginity, Virgin Mary

Queen Tiye and Amenhotep III

Image: Queen Tiye

Egyptian and European archaeologists have announced they have discovered a giant statue of Queen Tiye, the wife of the 18th dynasty Pharaoh Amenhotep III on the site of the Colossi of Memnon. The statue stands 3.62 meters high (almost 12 feet).

According to the archaeologists, the statue was discovered around the site of the massive Colossi of Memnon twin statues that look down on the road to Luxor’s famed Valley of the Kings. In addition, “two sphinxes representing Tiye and Amenhotep III as well as 10 statues in black granite of the lion-headed goddess Sekhmet, who protected the pharaohs,” were also found by the archaeologists.

Read the news release by clicking here.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Amenhotep III, Archaeology, Queen Tiye

Antony Flew: There Is A God

Antony Flew’s book, There Is A God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind, has received the 2008 Christianity Today Book Award for the best book in the area of Apologetics/Evangelism.

This is how the blurb for the book reads:

In one of the biggest religion news stories of the new millennium, the Associated Press announced that Professor Antony Flew, the world's leading atheist, now believes in God.

Flew is a pioneer for modern atheism. His famous paper, Theology and Falsification, was first presented at a meeting of the Oxford Socratic Club chaired by C. S. Lewis and went on to become the most widely reprinted philosophical publication of the last five decades. Flew earned his fame by arguing that one should presuppose atheism until evidence of a God surfaces. He now believes that such evidence exists, and There Is a God chronicles his journey from staunch atheism to believer.

For the first time, this book will present a detailed and fascinating account of Flew's riveting decision to revoke his previous beliefs and argue for the existence of God. Ever since Flew's announcement, there has been great debate among atheists and believers alike about what exactly this "conversion" means. There Is a God will finally put this debate to rest.

This is a story of a brilliant mind and reasoned thinker, and where his lifelong intellectual pursuit eventually led him: belief in God as designer.

Flew’s book is in my reading list. As soon as I finish reading the book, I will write a post on my reaction to Flew’s conversion experience.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Antony Flew, Atheism, Conversion

The Shroud of Turin: Is It Authentic?

Discovery News is reporting that the director of one of three laboratories that studied the Shroud of Turin 20 years ago is calling for the scientific community to re-evaluate the Shroud’s authenticity. According Christopher Ramsey, director of England's Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, new research has revealed that the Shroud may not be a fake after all.

Read the news report and watch a video about the Shroud of Turin by clicking here.

Personally, I believe that, even as scientists and archaeologists re-evaluate the authenticity of the Shroud, studies will reveal that the Shroud of Turin is a medieval creation.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tag: Archaeology, Shroud of Turin

The Baptism of Jesus Christ - Uncovering Bethany Beyond the Jordan

“The Baptism of Jesus Christ: Uncovering Bethany Beyond the Jordan,” is a film that describes the effort to locate the site where Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist.

Watch the trailer by clicking here.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Baptism, Bethany, Jesus

The James Ossuary on 60 Minutes

Bob Simon of 60 Minutes Reports On The Mystery Surrounding The James Ossuary.




Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tag: 60 Minutes, Bob Simmon, James Ossuary

Will Noah and His Family Survive the Flood?

This headline appeared in the Washington Post today, March 24, 2008:

Forecasters Warn of Flooding in Ark.

In just wonder if Noah and his family will survive the flood.

(P.S. I know it is an awful joke, but I like it).

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tag: Flood, Noah

Ancient Babylonian City Found

Iraqi archaeologists have announced that they have discovered the remains of an ancient Babylonian city located 180 kilometers south of Baghdad. According to archeologists, the site is more than 20,000 square meters in area. Some of the remains discovered at the site include administrative quarters, temples, and other buildings which archaeologists describe as of “magnificent and splendid design.”

Archaeologists have been unable to identify the name of the ancient Babylonian city, but they believe that it belonged to the Late Babylonian Period, about 1000 BC. Archaeologists also discovered several cuneiform tablets. However, they were unable to read the tablets because those archaeologists who could read cuneiform have left Iraq.

To read the news release, click here.

It is a shame that the remains of this ancient Babylonian city cannot be studied by experts. Hopefully, some Western scholars will be invited to visit the site and analyze the findings, specially the cuneiform tablets, and make the results available for scholarly research.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Archaeology, Babylon, Cuneiform

Does God Drink Wine?

Duane Smith at Abnormal Interest has an interesting post on Judges 9:13. The passage is a portion of Jotham’s fable (Judges 9:7-15). In the fable, Jotham rebuked the people of Shechem for anointing Abimelech as king over them.

In his condemnation of the people, Jotham said:

“But the grapevine said to them, ‘Should I stop giving my wine that cheers both God and man, and rule over trees?’” (HCSB).

In commenting on this passage, Duane wrote: “But the allusion to gods finding cheer in the pressings of the vine has caused problems for both teetotalers (or at least those who think it unseemly for God or the gods to drink wine) and monotheists.”

Chris Heard at Higgaion joined the discussion by examining how English translations deal with the text. Chris discovered the following:

KJV, NJPS, NLT, ASV, NASB, ESV, HCSB, and WEB translate אֶלֺהִים as the singular “God” (the translators supplying a capital G), while the NIV, NRSV, NAB, NJB, NEB, and NCV translate אֶלֺהִים as the plural “gods” (the translators using a lower-case g).

In the case of Judges 9:13, one must remember that Jotham was criticizing the people of Shechem because he believed that Abimelech should not be allowed to rule as king over them. Since the people of Shechem were probably Canaanites, it is evident that Jotham was talking about the gods of the Canaanites and not about the God of Israel. Thus, the translation adopted by the KJV, NJPS, NLT, ASV, NASB, ESV, HCSB, and WEB is incorrect.

The translation offered by the KJV, the NLT and others raises a very interesting question: does God drink wine? Since I did not know the answer to this question, I decided to investigate the issue by searching the Bible to find out whether any passage presents the God of Israel as drinking wine.

After checking all the references in the Bible where the words “wine” and “strong drink” appear, I came to the conclusion, to the delight of teetotalers everywhere, that the Bible never says that God drinks wine.

Several texts from the Ancient Near East refer to gods drinking wine. In his post, Duane cites an Ugaritic text that makes reference to gods drinking wine. In the story of Bel and the Dragon, the Babylonians believed Bel was a living god because every day he drank about fifty gallons of wine (Bel 1:6).

There are, however, a few cases in the Old Testament where the text may give the impression that God drinks wine.

Jeremiah 25:15 reads: “For thus the LORD, the God of Israel, said to me: Take from my hand this cup of the wine of wrath, and make all the nations to whom I send you drink it.”

Psalm 75:8 reads: “For in the hand of the LORD there is a cup with foaming wine, well mixed; he will pour a draught from it, and all the wicked of the earth shall drain it down to the dregs.”

The references in Jeremiah and Psalm refer to the cup of God’s wrath which he puts on the lips of the wicked and holds it there until they drink it to the dregs. Other references to the cup of God’s wrath appear in Isaiah 51:17 and Ezekiel 23:32-24.

Psalm 78:65 says: “Then the Lord awoke as from sleep, like a warrior shouting because of wine.”

This text does not say that God was drunk but that when defending Israel, he will behave like a warrior aroused for battle, shouting like a drunken soldier.

In the New Testament, wine is associated with the Lord’s Supper. During the supper, Jesus and his disciples drank together:

“Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink from it, all of you’” (Matthew 26:27).

“Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he gave it to them, and all of them drank from it” (Mark 14:23).

“Then he took a cup, and after giving thanks he said, ‘Take this and divide it among yourselves’” (Luke 22:17).

It is important to observe, however, that the gospel writers never used the word “wine” to explain what took place during the meal. Instead, they use the word “cup.” The word “wine” is never used in the context of the celebration of the Lord’s Supper.

After Jesus gave the cup to his disciples, he said:

“I tell you, I will never again drink of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom” (Matthew 26:29).

“Truly I tell you, I will never again drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God” (Mark 14:25).

“I tell you that from now on I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes” (Luke 22:18).

Again, Jesus never used the word “wine” to explain what he would drink in the Kingdom of God. He used the expression “the fruit of the vine.”

In Hebrew there are two words for wine. The wordתִירֹוש (Tîrôš) is used to refer to unfermented wine or grape juice. The word יַיִן (yäyin) is used to refer to fermented wine. Micah 6:15 makes a distinction between Tîrôš and yäyin where Tîrôš is translated as “new wine” or “grapes” and yäyin is translated as “wine.”

“You will plant crops, but will not harvest them; you will squeeze oil from the olives, but you will have no oil to rub on your bodies; you will squeeze juice from the grapes [Tîrôš], but you will have no wine [yäyin] to drink” (Micah 6:15 NET).

In Isaiah 65:8 Tîrôš is the new wine “found in the cluster” (ESV) or “the new wine found in a bunch of grapes” (HCSB):

“Here is what ADONAI says: As when juice [Tîrôš] is found in a cluster of grapes, and people say, ‘Don't destroy it, there is still some good in it,’ so I will do likewise for the sake of my servants, and not destroy them all” (Isaiah 65:8 CJB).

I think this ambiguity of whether new wine or fermented wine was used in the celebration of the Lord’s Supper is very important for the contemporary church. I believe that God, in his divine providence, knew that the church would be divided between winebibbers and teetotalers. So, God left the question of the wine to be use in the Lord’s Supper as a matter of interpretation. Those who believe that “the cup” contained yäyin, use fermented wine. Those who believe that “the cup” contained Tîrôš, use grape juice.

I do not think, however, that the issue is as simple as explained above, but both winebibbers and teetotalers can find here an explanation for what they practice.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Communion, Lord’s Supper, New Wine, Wine

A Rare Half-Shekel Coin Found in Jerusalem

The Israel Antiquities Authority has announced that a rare half-shekel silver coin was found in an excavation in Jerusalem. The Israel Antiquities Authority has released the following press release:

A silver coin that was used to pay the half-shekel head tax to the Temple was found in what was the main drainage channel of Jerusalem in the Second Temple period

A rare ancient silver coin, of the type used to pay the half-shekel tax in ancient times, was recently discovered in an archaeological excavation that is being conducted in the Walls Around Jerusalem National Park near the City of David, in what was the main drainage channel of Jerusalem during the Second Temple period.

The excavations, directed by Eli Shukron of the Israel Antiquities Authority and Professor Ronny Reich of the University of Haifa, are being conducted on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority, the Nature and Parks Authority and the Ir David Foundation.

Archaeologist Eli Shukron surmises, “Just like today, when coins sometimes fall from our pockets and roll into drainage openings at the side of the street, that’s how it was some two thousand years ago – a man was on his way to the Temple, and the coin which he intended to use for paying the half-shekel head tax found its way into the drainage channel.”

The origin of the commandment to pay the half-shekel head tax to the Temple is in the weekly Biblical reading “Ki Tisa”, in the Book of Exodus: “When you take the census of the people of Israel, then each shall give a ransom for his soul to the Lord when you number them … half a shekel … the rich shall not give more, and the poor shall not give less… you shall take the atonement money from the people of Israel and shall appoint it for the service of the Tent of Meeting; that it may bring the people of Israel to remembrance before the Lord, so as to make atonement for your souls.”

At the time of the Temple’s construction, every Jew was commanded to make an obligatory donation of a half shekel to the edifice. This modest sum allowed all Jews, of all economic levels, to participate in the building of the Temple. After the construction was completed, they continued to collect the tax from every Jew for the purpose of purchasing the public sacrifices and other needs of the Temple. The collection began every year on the first day of the month of Adar when the “heralding of the shekelim” took place, and it ended on the first day of the month of Nissan, the beginning of the new fiscal year for the Temple, when the purchase of public sacrifices was renewed.

It was most likely a shekel of Tyre that Jesus and Peter used to pay the Temple head tax (a half shekel each): "Go thou to the sea, and cast a hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money. That take, and give unto them for me and thee" (Matthew 17:27). Moreover, Tyrian silver coins probably comprised the infamous payment to Judas Iscariot, when "they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver" (Matthew 26:15).

The annual half-shekel head tax was given in shekel and half shekel coins from the Tyre mint, where they were struck from the year 125 BCE until the outbreak of the Great Revolt in 66 CE. At the time of the uprising, the tax was paid using Jerusalem shekelim, which were specifically minted for this purpose. In the rabbinic sources, the Tosefta (Ketubot 13:20) states “Silver mentioned in the Pentateuch is always Tyrian silver: What is Tyrian silver? It is Jerusalemite.” Many have interpreted this to mean that only Tyrian shekels could be used to pay the half-shekel head tax at the Temple.

The shekel that was found in the excavation weighs 13 grams, bears the head of Melqart, the chief deity of the city of Tyre on the obverse (equivalent to the Semitic god Baal) and an eagle upon a ship’s prow on the reverse. The coin was minted in the year 22 CE.

Despite the importance of the half-shekel head tax for the economy of Jerusalem in the Second Temple period, only seven other Tyrian shekels and half shekels have previously been found in excavations in Jerusalem.

Melqart (pictured above), the deity of Tyre, was the god Jezebel worshiped. Jezebel tried to impose the worship of Melqart in the Northern Kingdom but she was opposed by Elijah (1 Kigs 18).

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Archaeology, Coins, Shekel

Jesus: Not Welcome in Hollywood

Tyler Perry, the author-director of movies such as Diary of a Mad Black Woman and Madea’s Family Reunion and the actor who will appear as the head of the Starfleet Academy in the new Star Trek movie, said that Jesus is not welcome in Hollywood.

In an article published in Time, Perry said “that he’d been asked to produce a TV comedy series but turned it down because it couldn’t be religious.” According to the article, Perry told a group of admirers:

“Did you know you can’t say ‘Jesus’ in a sitcom?” “They told me that, and I was like, You gotta be kiddin’ me. If you don’t want my God here, you don’t want me here either. God has been too good to me to go and try to sell out to get some money. That’s O.K. I will sit in a corner and be broke with the Lord before I will sit there and have them give me millions and sell my soul. It ain’t gonna happen.”

It seems that there are still a few people in Hollywood who will put God above money. After all, as Jesus said, “You cannot serve God and money” (Matthew 6:24).

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Hollywood, Jesus, Money, Tyler Perry

Northern Baptist Seminary’s New President

Dr. Alistair Brown is the new president of Northern Baptist Seminary. Dr Brown comes to Northern Seminary from his current position as the General Director of the Baptist Missionary Society in the UK, where he has served since 1996.

Dr. Brown has prepared a video in which he sent greetings to Northern’s community and to all friends of the seminary. To watch the video and listen to Dr. Brown’s greetings, click here.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Alistair Brown, Northern Seminary

Pi Day

Today is a special in the world of mathematics.

Today is Pi Day: March 14 = 3.14.

Happy














Pi Day



Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

The Minoan Culture

The Onassis Cultural Center in New York is presenting a new exhibition called “From the Land of the Labyrinth: Minoan Crete, 3000-1100 B.C.” The exhibit displays more than 280 artifacts from Crete.

Most people are unfamiliar with the Minoan civilization. Archaeology magazine has a good review of the exhibit at the Onassis Cultural Center in New York. The review also provide a photo gallery showing 10 items from the exhibit. The photos are gorgeous and they reveal a small aspect of Minoan life and culture. You may not be interested in Minoan culture but you will enjoy the photos.

The photo above, one from taken from the photo collection included in the review, shows a clay tablet inscribed with six lines of Linear A writing from Zakros, end of Late Minoan IB (ca. 1450 B.C.). The photo is a courtesy of the Onassis Public Benefit Foundation.

To read the review and enter the photo gallery, click here.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Archaeology, Crete, Minoan Culture

Who Should You Vote for President in 2008?

WARNING: This post has nothing to do with the Old Testament.


Who Should You Vote for President in 2008?

Take this test and discover which presidential candidate comes closer to your views.

To take the text, click here.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Candidates, Election

Archaeological Discoveries from the First Temple Period

A rich layer of finds from the latter part of the First Temple period (8th-6th centuries BCE) was recently discovered in archaeological salvage excavations in the northwestern part of the Western Wall plaza. Photo: Israel Antiquities Authority The Israel Antiquities Authority has released a press release in which they report that several items from the First Temple period have been discovered in salvage excavation in the northwestern part of the Western Wall plaza, c. 100 meters west of the Temple Mount. Because of the importance of the findings, I am reproducing below the press release in its entirety. In an excavation being carried out by the Israel Antiquities Authority in partnership with the Western Wall Heritage Foundation in the northwestern part of the Western Wall plaza a rich layer of finds from the latter part of the First Temple period was recently discovered. Also found was a seal that bears an inscription in ancient Hebrew which reads: [belonging] to Netanyahu ben Yaush. A rich layer of finds from the latter part of the First Temple period (8th-6th centuries BCE) was recently discovered in archaeological salvage excavations that are being carried out in the northwestern part of the Western Wall plaza, c. 100 meters west of the Temple Mount. In the excavations, which the Israel Antiquties Authority has been conducting for the past two years under the direction of archaeologists Shlomit Wexler-Bdoulah and Alexander Onn, in cooperation with the Western Wall Heritage Foundation, remains of a magnificent colonnaded street from the Late Roman period (2nd century CE) were uncovered that appears on the mosaic Madaba map and is referred to by the name - the Eastern Cardo. The level of the Eastern Cardo is paved with large heavy limestone pavers that were set directly on top of the layer that dates to the end of the First Temple period. Thus the Roman road "seals" beneath it the finds from the First Temple period and has protected them from being plundered in later periods. This is actually the first time in the history of the archaeological research of Jerusalem that building remains from the First Temple period were exposed so close to the Temple Mount - on the eastern slopes of the Upper City. The walls of the buildings are preserved to a height of more than 2 meters. Personal Hebrew seal made of a semi-precious stone (IAA) Another impressive artifact that was found in the salvage excavations is a that was apparently inlaid in a ring. The scarab-like seal is elliptical and measures c. 1.1 cm x 1.4 cm. The surface of the seal is divided into three strips separated by a double line: in the upper strip is a chain decoration in which there are four pomegranates and in the two bottom strips is the name of the owner of the seal, engraved in ancient Hebrew script. It reads: לנתניהו בן יאש ([belonging] to Netanyahu ben Yaush). The two names are known in the treasury of biblical names: the name נתניהו (Netanyahu) is mentioned a number of times in the Bible (in the Book of Jeremiah and in Chronicles) and the name יאש (Yaush) appears in the Lachish letters. The name Yaush, like the name יאשיהו (Yoshiyahu) is, in the opinion of Professor Shmuel Ahituv, derived from the root או"ש which means “he gave a present” (based on Arabic and Ugaritic). It is customary to assume that the owners of personal seals were people that held senior governmental positions. It should nevertheless be emphasized that this combination of names - נתניהו בן יאוש (Netanyahu ben Yaush) - was unknown until now. In addition to the personal seal, a vast amount of pottery vessels was discovered, among them three jar handles that bear LMLK stamped impressions. An inscription written in ancient Hebrew script is preserved on one these impressions and it reads: למלך חברון ([belonging] to the king of Hebron). These finds, as well as the numerous fertility and animal figurines, are characteristic of the Kingdom of Judah in the latter part of the First Temple period - the end of the 8th century BCE to the destruction of the Temple in the year 586 BCE.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Archaeology, Ben Yaush, Cardo, First Temple, LMLK Stamps

The Devil’s Bagpipe or God’s Voice?

John E. Sharp, a historian at Hesston College, the two-year college of the Mennonite Church USA, located in Hesston, Kansas, recently gave a lecture on the history of the organ in the Anabaptist tradition.

Sharp told his audience “that opposition to instrumental music in worship was as much a factor in the founding of the Anabaptist movement as were believers’ baptism, voluntary membership, rejection of the sword, and separation of church and state.”

According to Sharp,

The Anabaptist movement was born in Zurich Switzerland in 1525 during a time of iconoclastic fury (literally, demolishing icons). Conrad Grebel and Felix Mantz’s spiritual mentor, Swiss reformer Ulrich Zwingli led Zurich in its rejection of all things Catholic—ceremonies, rituals, liturgy, images, and instrumental music. Though he was a musician of extraordinary talent, Zwingli said the New Testament taught none of those popish mockeries; thus they were rejected and forbidden. Sharp said a prime example of what was rejected and forbidden was the organ.

Sharp also said that "the reformers dismissed Old Testament commands to praise God with harp and lyre as childishness; and beside, the Old was superseded by the New Testament. "

Sharp’s lecture is very illuminating. According to him to Sarah Davies he organ was also called the “Devil’s Bagpipe,” the “Pope's Bagpipe,” the “Devil's Trumpet,” and a “Seducer to the Worship of the Roman Anti-Christ.” How times have changed!

I am sure Jim West will be glad to know this information about Zwingli’s view on the use of the organ in church and on music in the Old Testament.

To read the news report about the lecture, click here.

To watch a video of the lecture, click here.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Music, Organ, Zwingli

UPDATE

Recently, I received an email from John in which he makes a public apology to Sarah Davies for failing to give proper credit to her work which he used in the preparation of his presentation.

John’s email was sent to me and to the editor of the History News Network. Since there is no way for me to express John’s apologies to those who have read my post, I have decided to make John’s email available to the readers of this blog as a way for John to express his apology to the readers.

What follows is John’s email:


Rick Shenkman
Editor, History News Network

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

I am writing to report my lack of judgement and integrity in a presentation I made recently, and to apologize publically to the author of an excellent source I used. The author to whom I owe the apology is Sarah Davies, musicologist and organist, New York City. My written version was properly cited, but I neglected to do the same in my oral presentation, which then appeared on YouTube. My presentation was entitled "The Devil's Bagpipe or God's Voice: The Organ in Historic Context" given on the eve of the dedication of a new organ at Hesston College and Hesston Mennonite Church, March 1, 2008. Davies' paper given at the 2000 International Musicological Society is listed below. It was subsequently published as also noted below. I deeply regret my error in properly citing what is a most excellent and insightful source. Her sources included the work of a Zurich scholar, Friedrich Jakob. In addition she used primary sources from six Swiss archives and libraries. Primary sources in the U. S. included the Goshen (Ind.) Archive. Her secondary sources were also largely German. She has translated the Swiss and German sources making the research accessible to English-speaking historians and musicologists. Davies should be recognized for her outstanding work which follows:

"Destroying the Devil's Bagpipe: Iconoclasm and the Fate of the Organ in Reformation Switzerland" September 2000: International Musicological Society. Liszt Academy, Budapest.

2003 Published in the Conference Proceedings, "The Past in the Present" (Budapest, Liszt Academy) July 2000: American Guild of Organists, National Convention. Seattle WA.

You apparently made reference or linked to this presentation on your site. Please make corrections where you have quoted me, or delete reference to me entirely, and use instead Sarah Davies' paper/chapter.

My presentation on YouTube has been removed.

Sincerely and humbly,

John Sharp
Centennial History Writer, Instructor in History
Hesston College
Hesston, Kansas 67062
620-327-8248

I want to thank John for sending me this email. I appreciate his candor and honesty. It is easy for people who write and speak to consult and use many sources and at times, failing to acknowledge the use of a source. I am glad that John took the time to ratify his omission,

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

The Death of Lazarus and the Problem of Evil

The B&H Publishing Group of LifeWay Christian Resources of the Southern Baptist Convention has published the Apologetics Study Bible. This Bible contains more than 100 articles and other features designed to help believers defend the Christian faith. One of the articles in the Apologetics Study Bible deals with God and evil. The article was written by Gregory E. Ganssle who is on the faculty of the Rivendell Institute for Christian Thought and Learning in New Haven, Ct., a special project of the Campus Crusade for Christ ministry at Yale University.

Here is an excerpt from the article:

Today, the most important form of the argument against the existence of God from evil is called the "evidential argument from evil." The one who presses this argument admits that the existence of God and the reality of evil are not logically incompatible. The argument is that the amount and the kinds of evil we find in the world is strong evidence against the existence of God.

Even though it is possible that God has a reason to allow the evils we find in the world, it does not seem likely that there are good reasons for some of the evils we see. We cannot prove that there is no good reason, but if we have lots of cases in which it seems as though there is none, we will conclude that there probably is no good reason to allow these evils. If it is true that probably there is no good reason to allow these cases of evil, then it is probable that God does not exist. This argument is called the "evidential argument" because we cannot prove that there is no good reason to allow the particular evils we are thinking about. These evils do, then, look like good evidence that God does not exist.

In order to begin to answer this argument, we must think about the claim that it is probable that no good reason exists to allow the evil in question. Why should we believe this is true? The one who puts this argument forward will appeal to cases of evil in which it is difficult to find a reason that might fit. Does this mean we ought to conclude that it is probable that there is no reason? No.

The reasoning here goes as follows: It seems like there is no reason to allow this evil; therefore, probably there is no reason to allow it. Sometimes this kind of reasoning is strong and other times it is weak. Let me illustrate. The argument is of the form: It seems like there is no x, therefore, probably there is no x. The Bible has numerous cases where one could mount this argument. Let's take the case of Lazarus's death in John 11. Lazarus was likely in the prime of his life. He's a good man and a close friend of Jesus. Lazarus becomes ill and dies. The citizens of his village, Bethany, could see such an evil and after three days of mourning come to the conclusion that there is no reason for this. Therefore, God doesn't exist. Then Jesus comes to Bethany. Lazarus' sisters, Mary and Martha, chastise Jesus for not getting there sooner. As we read John's account, we see that unbeknownst to Mary and Martha, Jesus had reasons for delaying. Moreover, there were reasons Lazarus was permitted to die in the prime of his life. When Jesus arrived at Lazarus's tomb, He prayed and then called Lazarus to come out of the tomb four days after his death. The reason for Lazarus's sickness, death, Jesus' delay and Lazarus's resuscitation was that God's glory might be seen.

Some of the citizens might have thought they had a strong case against the existence of God the three days after Lazarus died. But subsequent events place the evil of Lazarus's death in a much different context. In light of this context, Lazarus's death is seen to be part of a much greater good than anyone in Bethany could imagine.

After I read the article in its entirety, I came to the conclusion that Ganssle’s argument taken from Lazarus’ death is very helpful to believers but it will not convince atheists and other non-believers. Let me share a personal experience.

Many years ago when I was in seminary, a young seminary student was killed in the prime of his life. He was in his mid-twenties and fresh out of college. He came to seminary because he was called by God into the ministry. A few weeks after arriving on the seminary, he became pastor of a small rural church. One day, while helping repair one of the church’s buildings, he was killed in a tragic accident. How can one explain the death of a young man who came to seminary in answer to God’s call? In this case, since there was no resurrection (not yet, anyway), no one saw the glory of God and no one found the greater good in this death. The purpose of his death remains a mystery. People still continued to believe in God even when they were unable to explain the reasons for his death.

As a believer, I can affirm that sin has affected God’s creation and human depravity causes most evil and suffering in the world. I can also accept the fact that no human being can understand the reasons for every evil, calamity, and suffering in the world. Believers can accept the reality of God and the existence of evil. The presence of evil in the world is no reason to deny the existence of God. As Jesus said: “You do not understand what I am doing now, but later you will understand” (John 13:7).

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Death, evil, Lazarus

The Brits Are Coming

Picture: Northern Baptist Seminary's New President


The Board of Trustees of Northern Baptist Theological Seminary has released the following press release:

On March 7, 2008, in a meeting characterized by a profound sense of God’s leading, the Board of Trustees of Northern Baptist Theological Seminary unanimously elected the Rev Dr. Alistair Brown the Seminary’s tenth President.

Dr. Brown currently serves as the General Director of the Baptist Missionary Society (BMS) with its World Mission headquarters in Didcot, Oxfordshire, UK. The General Director is the CEO. BMS is responsible for 160 mid and long term mission workers and 200 plus supported partner workers (indigenous personnel). The Society has a staff of 70 with an annual budget of 14.4 million dollars.

After a short career in journalism, Dr Brown sensed a call to ministry and studied at the University of Edinburgh, gaining a BA with Merit, a BD Honours degree in New Testament Language, Literature and Theology, and a PhD with a thesis that examined metaphors of baptism in the Pauline literature. Later, while serving with BMS, he gained an MBA from The Open University.

Dr. Brown has told friends for years that the only thing that could ever pull him away from his current role is preparing people for ministry. As he pondered the possibility of becoming Northern’s president he wrote, “Walking by faith never ends, so exploring this role is part of my faith journey. Christ is more real and more precious now than ever before, and my determination to know and do his will controls all my decisions. … With every breath and every act I seek to serve Jesus and always will.” In responding to Northern’s call he quoted the language of Northern’s prospectus seeking a new president, “The next leader of Northern will come because following Jesus offers no other choice.”

The Chair of Northern’s Board and chair of the search, Ted Rodgers, stated, “We are profoundly grateful to God for guiding us to Alistair Brown. Dr. Brown is a proven effective and visionary leader with the skills and breadth and depth of experience necessary to lead Northern as she approaches her second century of preparing congregational leaders.”

In his letter to the Board of Trustees of March 7, 2008 Dr. Brown stated, “It’s said that nothing ever takes God by surprise. I agree. But God certainly takes us by surprise. God holds me, as he holds Northern in his firm grasp, and that’s all we need. … Right now we may be a little surprised at what God is doing. I look forward to the surprise turning into wonder and gratitude as we see God accomplish far more than we can imagine.”

I welcome the new president to Northern Baptist Seminary. May his tenure with us be a blessing to our institution.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Alistair Brown, Northern Baptist Seminary

Moses and Divine Providence

In an excellent article, “When YHWH Tests People: General Considerations and Particular Observations Regarding the Books of Chronicles and Job,” published in The Philip R. Davies Festschrift, Ehud Ben Zvi deals with the issue of divine testing. He wrote that in many societies kings were concerned with assessing whether their servants were loyal and trustworthy servants. Ben Zvi’s contention is that even YHWH needed to know whether his servants were loyal and whether they loved him as king. In his article Ben Zvi said “that the more a personage seemed to embody the values of loyalty and commitment to YHWH, the more likely candidate she or he will be to stand as the main object of a tradition of a divine test.”

I agree with Ben Zvi’s conclusions. The examples Ben Zvi gives in his article provide irrefutable evidence that YHWH’s faithful and loyal servants are tested for their faithfulness and loyalty. In the present study I would like to include another reason for divine testing. I contend that potential servants of YHWH are also tested to see whether they are worthy of a greater assignment.

One good example of a person who was tested by YHWH in preparation for a greater assignment was Moses. The biblical narratives about Moses present him as an individual who went through much trial and tribulation before he was ready for the work God had prepared for him: to lead the people of Israel from their oppressive situation in Egypt to their journey toward the land of Canaan. From a child in peril, to the luxury of the palace, to a fugitive from justice, to the savior of his nation, Moses was tried and tested in preparation for his work of liberating Israel from their oppression in Egypt.

According to the biblical narratives, Moses grew up with the members of the royal family in Egypt, enjoying the life of luxury that came from being the adopted son of Pharaoh’s daughter (Exodus 2:10). But all that changed when, in a fit of rage, Moses killed an Egyptian who was mistreating a Hebrew. All of a sudden, Moses became a wanted man and a fugitive from justice.

His attempt at helping the Hebrew slaves was a costly mistake. Instead of becoming the savior of his people, Moses had become an outlaw. Because Pharaoh wanted Moses dead, he had to abandon his life in the palace and leave Egypt. By divine providence Moses fled to Midian, a region outside Egyptian control, where he lived for forty years. When Moses arrived in Midian, he sat by a well and there he was again confronted with injustice. Several women came to the well to water their father’s sheep but some shepherds came and chased them away. Moses rescued the women and helped them water their sheep.

By rescuing the women, Moses acted as a deliverer of the oppressed and by stooping down to water their flock, Moses was serving the women. And it is here where Moses’ education begins. People whom God calls into service must begin their education by finding a place of service because those who lead others must learn how to serve all. This was the lesson Rehoboam never learned.

When Rehoboam sought the counsel of the elders concerning the request of the people of Israel to remove the forced labor, the elder told him: “If you will be a servant to this people today and serve them, and speak good words to them when you answer them, then they will be your servants forever” (1 Kings 12:7). But Rehoboam disregarded the advice that the elders gave him because in his mind, a king could not be a servant of the people.

Moses’ life in Midian became a time of preparation. The first lesson that Moses had to learn was how to control his anger. Because of anger he became a fugitive. In his encounter with the shepherds he did not kill them as he had killed the Egyptian. The second lesson Moses learned was how to become a servant. By watering the flock for the women, Moses was learning how to serve others. Another lesson Moses learned while in Midian was how to survive in the wilderness. Living in the wilderness helped Moses gain a basic knowledge of wilderness survival and how to find food and water in the desert.

One experience in Midian that greatly contributed to Moses’ spiritual education was his association with Jethro and his family. Jethro was a priest and he became Moses’ father-in-law (Exodus 3:1). It is possible that Jethro belonged to the Kenites, a Midianite tribe of nomads who lived in the wilderness, in the vicinity of Mount Sinai. The Midianites were descendants of Abraham through his wife Keturah (Genesis 25:1-2). Jethro was “the priest of Midian” and it is possible that his God was the God of Abraham. If the Midianites worshiped the God of their father Abraham, then Moses received religious instructions about the God of the Fathers from Jethro.

In addition, in Midian Moses became a shepherd. In fact, Moses was keeping the flock of his father-in-law at the time he came to Horeb, the mountain of God (Exodus 3:1). Moses’ new profession was his final break with Egypt since shepherds were an abomination to the Egyptians (Genesis 46:34). One lesson shepherds learn very fast is that sheep depend totally on shepherds for their care.

It was by taking care of Jethro’s flock that Moses learned how to be the shepherd of Israel, how to rescue, protect, and feed the people on their journey from Egypt to Canaan. When the Psalmist was thinking about what God had done for Israel, he said: “You led your people like a flock by the hand of Moses” (Psalm 77:20). At the end of his life, Moses asked God to raise another shepherd to care for Israel. Moses prayed: “Let the LORD, the God of the spirits of all flesh, appoint someone over the congregation who shall go out before them and come in before them, who shall lead them out and bring them in, so that the congregation of the LORD may not be like sheep without a shepherd” (Numbers 27:16-17).

God used the trials and tribulations in Moses’ life to prepare him for his work as the deliverer of Israel. Throughout all the ordeals Moses faced, God was training him for a very special work. It took God eighty years of training to prepare Moses for forty years of ministry.

Going to Midian, living in the wilderness, and becoming a shepherd was not part of Moses’ plan for his life. However, God used those events in Moses’ life to teach and prepare him for his assignment. In order for Moses to become the deliverer of Israel it was necessary for Moses to be tested and tried.

In Moses’ life and experience Christians discover the real meaning of Paul’s words: “We know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose” (Romans 8:28).

The greatest desire in the lives of those who serve the Lord is to know that they will be able to serve God with gladness of heart and the assurance of divine help. However, the reality is that at times they serve the Lord with much sorrow, suffering, and trials. Although many of the trials and tribulations bring sorrows and discomfort, in God’s providence they can be useful. In fact, as Paul says, these things that happen to the Christian can be overruled by God for his good.

However, if God knows the problems and the struggles of his servants, why then are they not delivered from these afflictions? The answer, as Paul shows, is that in the providence of God, these trials and tribulations can become a teaching time for God’s friends, so that, although they are not removed, God can make them work for their good.

Paul’s words and Moses’ experience teach God’s friends that whatever may be the number and overwhelming character of their trials, they are all contributing to their spiritual preparation. Divine providence uses all things to teach and prepare God’s friends to serve him in a greater way.

It is tough being God’s friend.

Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

Tags: Midian, Midianites, Moses, Providence, Test, Tribulation