After the death of Saul, the followers of David, the son of Jesse, proclaimed him king of the clans of Judah. David established Hebron as the capital of his kingdom and ruled Judah for seven and a half years. David’s kingship was very limited and his jurisdiction did not go beyond the borders of Judah.
The Northern tribes proclaimed Ish-Bosheth their king (2 Samuel 2:8-10 NIV). Ish-Bosheth, also called Esh Baal (1 Chronicles 8:33; 9:39 NIV), was the only son of Saul to survive the slaughter at Mount Gilboa (1 Samuel 31:1-6). His kingship, however, was very short. Ish-Bosheth was killed by two of his officials after only two years’ reign as king of Israel. Without a leader, the elders of the Northern Tribes came to Hebron, made a covenant with David, and proclaimed him king over all Israel.
In his desire to unify the tribes of Judah and Israel, David set out to establish a capital for the new, united kingdom. With the help of his army, David conquered the fortress of Zion (the slope located south of the ancient city of Jerusalem) from the Jebusites, and established Jerusalem as his new capital. The Jebusites were one of the seven nations that occupied the land of Canaan, together with the tribes of Judah and Israel.
The events related to the establishment of David’s reign are found in 2 Samuel. The text says that after he became king of all Israel, David captured the fortress of Zion, made it the capital of his kingdom, and called it “The City of David.” After conquering Jerusalem, David built additional fortifications around the city, starting at the Millo and working inward (2 Samuel 5:7-11). It was at this time that David made a covenant with Hiram, King of Tyre, who sent messengers to David, along with carpenters, stonemasons, and cedar logs to build him a palace.
It is important to understand the significance of Jerusalem at the beginning of the monarchy. Jerusalem was an old Bronze Age city that had remained independent from the tribes of Israel. Since the city belonged to the Jebusites, Jerusalem was a neutral territory that had no connections with Judah or Israel, thus, it became the ideal place for the capital of the new kingdom because of its central location between Judah and Israel.
For decades, the exact location of David’s palace had eluded the work of archaeologists. However, according to an article written by Steven Erlanger, "King David’s Palace Is Found, Archaeologist Says," published in The New York Times on August 5, 2005, an Israeli archaeologist, Eilat Mazar, a professor at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, claims she has found the remains of David’s palace in East Jerusalem. The remains found by Professor Mazar are that of a major public building which can be dated with confidence to the 10th century B.C. The structure that has been identified as David’s palace was found in the village of Silwan, just outside the old walls of the city of Jerusalem.
During the excavations at the site, Professor Mazar found broken pieces of pottery (shards) that are dated to the time of David and Solomon. In addition, she also discovered a bulla, an official government seal, belonging to Jehucal, the son of Shelemiah, whose name appears twice in the book of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 37:3; 38:1). These additional findings are important because they establish the site as a governmental building that can be dated to the time of David.
The claim by Professor Mazar that she discovered the remains of David’s palace has provoked much discussion inside and outside of academic circles. Some archaeologists are skeptical about the findings and dismiss the claim that the foundation walls are the remains of David’s palace. These archaeologists contend the remains cannot be linked with David and his kingdom.
The discovery also has been rejected by Palestinians who say that a Jewish presence in Jerusalem is a religious myth created by Israelis in order to justify Jewish historical claims to the city. Palestinians claim that Israelis are trying to fit archaeological discoveries into a biblical context in order to justify Israel’s occupation of an Islamic holy place. To many Palestinians, Mazar’s claim is a further evidence of Jewish colonialism.
The focus of the controversy is whether David and Solomon were historical figures and whether the monarchy established by David truly existed in the 10th century B.C. Those who accept the historicity of the Bible believe the books of Samuel and Kings give detailed and accurate information about the reign of the two most famous kings of Israel.
Those who reject the historicity of the biblical texts, the so-called “minimalists,” believe that David never existed and that he was not a historical person. One writer, J. Albert Soggin, in his book An Introduction to the History of Israel and Judah (Valley Forge: Trinity Press International, 1993) concludes that since David and Solomon are never mentioned outside the Bible, that they never existed. Soggin wrote, “So it is possible that the reference to David and Solomon and to their empire is simply a later, artificial construction, tending to glorify a past which never existed to compensate for a present which is dull and gray” (p. 32).
In two future essays, I will continue to discuss whether archaeology affirms the existence of David and whether the biblical record reflects the actions of a historical person named David. My next essay will be a discussion of the Mesha Stela and the House of David monument discovered at Tel Dan. The second essay will deal with the historicity of David.
The reliability of Israel’s history and the reliability of the historical narratives of the Old Testament are under attack. For those who believe that the Old Testament is an integral part of Christian Scriptures, the reliability of the biblical narratives is of outmost importance.
The Old Testament is a reliable document because it is the history of a people whose memory has preserved an accurate record of the past. As remains of the past are discovered by archaeologists, these new findings provide the proper context for the understanding of the history of Israel. The discovery of the remains of David’s palace will become an item of debate for years to come. The mere possibility that this finding is authentic is very significant. This finding is another piece of that great puzzle that helps us affirm that David really existed.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Monday, October 31, 2005
Monday, October 17, 2005
Jeremiah: Prophet for Pagan Times
Jeremiah, a prophet of God who lived at the end of the seventh century and the first part of the sixth century B.C., lived at a very difficult time in the life of Judah. Jeremiah was called to preach a message of repentance to a people who had abandoned the true God to serve idols made with human hands. He called Israel to return to the traditions of the past and be faithful to the covenant the nation had established with God. In the end Jeremiah failed and Judah was conquered by Babylon and taken into exile.
When God called him to the prophetic ministry, Jeremiah vacillated. He lived in pagan times and was called to preach against the corrupt practices of the society in which he lived. Jeremiah kept on pleading with kings and priests, prophets and people to turn to Yahweh and avoid the death of the nation.
Jeremiah is one of my favorite books of the Old Testament. In this prophet we see a sensitive man who was deeply touched by the rebellion of his people. Like the God whom he represented, Jeremiah suffered because of the sins of the people. He shed tears because the people refused to believe that destruction was imminent.
The greatest virtue of Jeremiah was that he stood for truth even though everyone around him rejected his ministry and ridiculed his message of what was about to happen to the nation. His times were not different from ours. We live in a society that is filled with hatred and violence. People today are practicing the same immoralities that were present in Israelite society in the days of Jeremiah. The people of Judah had abandoned God to worship the gods of their own imagination. As the Lord spoke through Jeremiah, the people worshiped worthless things and became worthless themselves (Jeremiah 2:5).
For those who want to preach from the book of Jeremiah, I would like to recommend Philip G. Ryken’s book, Courage to Stand: Jeremiah’s Battle Plan for Pagan Times (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1998). Ryken’s book is a series of expository sermons on the book of Jeremiah. At the time these sermons were preached, Philip Graham Ryken served as the Associate Minister of Preaching at the Tenth Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia, a historic church known for great preaching.
In these sermons the author explores the struggle Jeremiah had in proclaiming the message he received from the Lord. Jeremiah lived and ministered in the southern kingdom of Judah during the last years of the Davidic monarchy. Jeremiah lived at a time of historical crisis and religious degeneration. The syncretistic practices of the people had profoundly affected the religious life of the nation. The worship of God in the temple of Jerusalem was contaminated with pagan practices and rituals.
God called Jeremiah to preach a very unpopular message to the people of Judah at a very crucial time in its history. The title of Ryken’s book, Courage to Stand, comes from God’s words to Jeremiah at the time of his call. God ordered Jeremiah to stand up and preach the words that were to be given to him (Jeremiah 1:17). The subtitle, Jeremiah’s Battle Plan for Pagan Times, reflects Jeremiah’s work and the religious conditions of Judah at the end of the seventh and the beginning of the sixth centuries B.C.
In his exposition of Jeremiah’s message, Ryken looks at the situation in Judah during the years before the destruction of the temple and the exile of the nation in 587 B.C. and draws lessons for Christians who live in a post-Christian society at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Ryken recognizes that Christianity at the end of the twentieth century had lost most of its religious and cultural influence in the West. This loss of influence has come because the church has been involved in liberal politics and has been aligned with the right-wing agenda. The church’s desire for political power has destroyed the spiritual influence of the church. Ryken knows that not every Christian can do what Jeremiah did; his call was unique. However, he believes that God empowers his people to serve him in the midst of a pagan culture, the kind of culture that the church in confronting today.
In his exposition on Jeremiah’s Temple Sermon (pp. 55-67), which he calls “one of the greatest reformation sermons in the history of God’s people,” Ryken says that what the church needs today is reformation. “Reformation,” Ryken says, “begins with preaching God’s Word” (p.56).
Ryken emphasizes that in Jeremiah’s time, people were worshiping God in the temple, but their lives did not reflect obedience to the demands of God’s covenant. They were trusting the trappings of religion instead of putting their trust in God. For his criticism, Jeremiah was rejected and ostracized by friends and family. Ryken takes Jeremiah’s message and struggles and relates them to the ministry of the church today. What makes Ryken’s book relevant is that he is able to demonstrate that Jeremiah’s struggles with the people and the leaders of Judah provide encouragement to believers today to live faithful lives for Christ even in the midst of a pagan culture.
Courage to Stand should be read not only by pastors, but by everyone who desires to bring renewal to the church today. The book consists of 13 chapters, which reflect only a small selection of the whole message of Jeremiah. Ryken prepared a more detailed exposition of the book of Jeremiah. His complete exposition of Jeremiah was published under the title Jeremiah & Lamentation (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2001). Those readers who take the time to read Courage to Stand will want to read the larger volume containing the complete expositions on the book of Jeremiah. Ryken has written a book that should be read by people who really want to learn how to apply Jeremiah’s message to today’s society.
People today need to read the book of Jeremiah to understand God’s pain and compassion. Jeremiah teaches us that God suffers because of the rebellion of his people. God cared for the people of Judah even when they had been unfaithful to him. God still cares. People must seriously consider God’s call to repentance. Jeremiah’s message for us today is that God will bring discipline for the rebellion of our society just as he did when Judah rebelled against divine love. Jeremiah also affirms that even during the process of discipline, God is committed to restore those who return to him in faith and obedience.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Email: claude@claudemariottini.com
When God called him to the prophetic ministry, Jeremiah vacillated. He lived in pagan times and was called to preach against the corrupt practices of the society in which he lived. Jeremiah kept on pleading with kings and priests, prophets and people to turn to Yahweh and avoid the death of the nation.
Jeremiah is one of my favorite books of the Old Testament. In this prophet we see a sensitive man who was deeply touched by the rebellion of his people. Like the God whom he represented, Jeremiah suffered because of the sins of the people. He shed tears because the people refused to believe that destruction was imminent.
The greatest virtue of Jeremiah was that he stood for truth even though everyone around him rejected his ministry and ridiculed his message of what was about to happen to the nation. His times were not different from ours. We live in a society that is filled with hatred and violence. People today are practicing the same immoralities that were present in Israelite society in the days of Jeremiah. The people of Judah had abandoned God to worship the gods of their own imagination. As the Lord spoke through Jeremiah, the people worshiped worthless things and became worthless themselves (Jeremiah 2:5).
For those who want to preach from the book of Jeremiah, I would like to recommend Philip G. Ryken’s book, Courage to Stand: Jeremiah’s Battle Plan for Pagan Times (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1998). Ryken’s book is a series of expository sermons on the book of Jeremiah. At the time these sermons were preached, Philip Graham Ryken served as the Associate Minister of Preaching at the Tenth Presbyterian Church in Philadelphia, a historic church known for great preaching.
In these sermons the author explores the struggle Jeremiah had in proclaiming the message he received from the Lord. Jeremiah lived and ministered in the southern kingdom of Judah during the last years of the Davidic monarchy. Jeremiah lived at a time of historical crisis and religious degeneration. The syncretistic practices of the people had profoundly affected the religious life of the nation. The worship of God in the temple of Jerusalem was contaminated with pagan practices and rituals.
God called Jeremiah to preach a very unpopular message to the people of Judah at a very crucial time in its history. The title of Ryken’s book, Courage to Stand, comes from God’s words to Jeremiah at the time of his call. God ordered Jeremiah to stand up and preach the words that were to be given to him (Jeremiah 1:17). The subtitle, Jeremiah’s Battle Plan for Pagan Times, reflects Jeremiah’s work and the religious conditions of Judah at the end of the seventh and the beginning of the sixth centuries B.C.
In his exposition of Jeremiah’s message, Ryken looks at the situation in Judah during the years before the destruction of the temple and the exile of the nation in 587 B.C. and draws lessons for Christians who live in a post-Christian society at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Ryken recognizes that Christianity at the end of the twentieth century had lost most of its religious and cultural influence in the West. This loss of influence has come because the church has been involved in liberal politics and has been aligned with the right-wing agenda. The church’s desire for political power has destroyed the spiritual influence of the church. Ryken knows that not every Christian can do what Jeremiah did; his call was unique. However, he believes that God empowers his people to serve him in the midst of a pagan culture, the kind of culture that the church in confronting today.
In his exposition on Jeremiah’s Temple Sermon (pp. 55-67), which he calls “one of the greatest reformation sermons in the history of God’s people,” Ryken says that what the church needs today is reformation. “Reformation,” Ryken says, “begins with preaching God’s Word” (p.56).
Ryken emphasizes that in Jeremiah’s time, people were worshiping God in the temple, but their lives did not reflect obedience to the demands of God’s covenant. They were trusting the trappings of religion instead of putting their trust in God. For his criticism, Jeremiah was rejected and ostracized by friends and family. Ryken takes Jeremiah’s message and struggles and relates them to the ministry of the church today. What makes Ryken’s book relevant is that he is able to demonstrate that Jeremiah’s struggles with the people and the leaders of Judah provide encouragement to believers today to live faithful lives for Christ even in the midst of a pagan culture.
Courage to Stand should be read not only by pastors, but by everyone who desires to bring renewal to the church today. The book consists of 13 chapters, which reflect only a small selection of the whole message of Jeremiah. Ryken prepared a more detailed exposition of the book of Jeremiah. His complete exposition of Jeremiah was published under the title Jeremiah & Lamentation (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2001). Those readers who take the time to read Courage to Stand will want to read the larger volume containing the complete expositions on the book of Jeremiah. Ryken has written a book that should be read by people who really want to learn how to apply Jeremiah’s message to today’s society.
People today need to read the book of Jeremiah to understand God’s pain and compassion. Jeremiah teaches us that God suffers because of the rebellion of his people. God cared for the people of Judah even when they had been unfaithful to him. God still cares. People must seriously consider God’s call to repentance. Jeremiah’s message for us today is that God will bring discipline for the rebellion of our society just as he did when Judah rebelled against divine love. Jeremiah also affirms that even during the process of discipline, God is committed to restore those who return to him in faith and obedience.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Email: claude@claudemariottini.com
Friday, October 14, 2005
Earthquakes in the Bible
The great earthquake that struck Pakistan, India, and Afghanistan devastated entire villages, caused massive landslides, and killed thousands of people. Many of the survivors were badly hurt, without food, water, and electricity. Hundreds of thousands of people were left homeless and with little hope that aid would be forthcoming in the near future.
The earthquake destroyed schools and hospitals. Doctors had to improvise in order to treat the wounded. Rescue workers worked hard to break through the rubble to rescue men, women, and children who miraculously survived the devastation.
Human affliction, caused by natural disasters, affects people in the depth of their beings. These events in nature cause terror and anguish, fear and anxiety, distress and a sense of impotence. In the face of pain and death, people are inclined to ask, “Where is God?” In this article, I am not dealing with the theological issues raised by natural evil. I have already expressed my views in my article on “God and Hurricane Katrina,” part1 and part 2.
Much has been written about natural evil and the amount of death nature inflicts upon human beings. According to a report released by the Associated Press, in the last 80 years, 23 earthquakes of magnitude 6 or higher killed more than one million people. When people look at these numbers, they believe that earthquakes are a new phenomenon that is increasing in number and intensity. However, this is not true.
Until the nineteenth century, the causes of earthquakes were poorly understood. The rise of the scientific study of earthquakes has demonstrated that earthquakes are the result of the incremental buildup of stresses within the earth over a period of many years. Eventually these stresses are released causing violent movement of the earth in the form of an earthquake.
The people of the Bible were not immune to earthquakes. Several earthquakes are mentioned in the Bible. I have posted on my web page an article on earthquakes I wrote for the Mercer Dictionary of the Bible. Click here to read the article.
One of the most important earthquakes in the Bible happened in the days of Uzziah, King of Judah around 760 B.C. The call of the prophet Amos to the prophetic ministry is dated from this event: “The words of Amos, who was among the herdsmen of Tekoa, which he saw concerning Israel in the days of Uzziah king of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam the son of Joash king of Israel, two years before the earthquake” (Amos 1:1).
This earthquake probably was very devastating because it remained in the memory of the people of Israel for centuries. Two hundred years later, the prophet Zechariah spoke of that earthquake as a divine judgment upon the sins of Jerusalem: “And you shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yes, you shall flee, like as you fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah” (Zechariah 14:5).
Josephus, the Jewish historian, mentioned an earthquake in the seventh year of the reign of Herod (31 B.C.), an earthquake “such a one as had not happened at any other time, and which earthquake brought a great destruction upon the cattle in that country” (Antiquities XV, v.2). According to Josephus, about ten thousand people perished in the devastation caused by the earthquake
In the Old Testament, the manifestation of the divine presence is called a “theophany.” When God reveals himself, human beings are in awe and nature is in convulsion. Earthquakes were seen as demonstration of the power and the presence of God. The theophany of God to Moses at Mount Sinai is accompanied by fire, smoke, thunder, lighting, and earthquakes (Exodus 19:16-19).
Earthquakes will continue to scare people because of the physical destruction it causes and because of the psychological and emotional stresses it produces in their lives. For those who truly understand the message of the Bible, such a devastation confirms the biblical truth that “the whole created universe groans in all its parts as if in the pangs of childbirth” (Romans 8:22).
No one can really understand the mysteries of nature and why it produces so much pain and suffering in the lives of people. However, when we look at the devastation caused by earthquakes, we begin to understand God’s word to Adam: “Cursed is the ground because of you” (Genesis 3:17).
The earthquake destroyed schools and hospitals. Doctors had to improvise in order to treat the wounded. Rescue workers worked hard to break through the rubble to rescue men, women, and children who miraculously survived the devastation.
Human affliction, caused by natural disasters, affects people in the depth of their beings. These events in nature cause terror and anguish, fear and anxiety, distress and a sense of impotence. In the face of pain and death, people are inclined to ask, “Where is God?” In this article, I am not dealing with the theological issues raised by natural evil. I have already expressed my views in my article on “God and Hurricane Katrina,” part1 and part 2.
Much has been written about natural evil and the amount of death nature inflicts upon human beings. According to a report released by the Associated Press, in the last 80 years, 23 earthquakes of magnitude 6 or higher killed more than one million people. When people look at these numbers, they believe that earthquakes are a new phenomenon that is increasing in number and intensity. However, this is not true.
Until the nineteenth century, the causes of earthquakes were poorly understood. The rise of the scientific study of earthquakes has demonstrated that earthquakes are the result of the incremental buildup of stresses within the earth over a period of many years. Eventually these stresses are released causing violent movement of the earth in the form of an earthquake.
The people of the Bible were not immune to earthquakes. Several earthquakes are mentioned in the Bible. I have posted on my web page an article on earthquakes I wrote for the Mercer Dictionary of the Bible. Click here to read the article.
One of the most important earthquakes in the Bible happened in the days of Uzziah, King of Judah around 760 B.C. The call of the prophet Amos to the prophetic ministry is dated from this event: “The words of Amos, who was among the herdsmen of Tekoa, which he saw concerning Israel in the days of Uzziah king of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam the son of Joash king of Israel, two years before the earthquake” (Amos 1:1).
This earthquake probably was very devastating because it remained in the memory of the people of Israel for centuries. Two hundred years later, the prophet Zechariah spoke of that earthquake as a divine judgment upon the sins of Jerusalem: “And you shall flee to the valley of the mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach unto Azal: yes, you shall flee, like as you fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah” (Zechariah 14:5).
Josephus, the Jewish historian, mentioned an earthquake in the seventh year of the reign of Herod (31 B.C.), an earthquake “such a one as had not happened at any other time, and which earthquake brought a great destruction upon the cattle in that country” (Antiquities XV, v.2). According to Josephus, about ten thousand people perished in the devastation caused by the earthquake
In the Old Testament, the manifestation of the divine presence is called a “theophany.” When God reveals himself, human beings are in awe and nature is in convulsion. Earthquakes were seen as demonstration of the power and the presence of God. The theophany of God to Moses at Mount Sinai is accompanied by fire, smoke, thunder, lighting, and earthquakes (Exodus 19:16-19).
Earthquakes will continue to scare people because of the physical destruction it causes and because of the psychological and emotional stresses it produces in their lives. For those who truly understand the message of the Bible, such a devastation confirms the biblical truth that “the whole created universe groans in all its parts as if in the pangs of childbirth” (Romans 8:22).
No one can really understand the mysteries of nature and why it produces so much pain and suffering in the lives of people. However, when we look at the devastation caused by earthquakes, we begin to understand God’s word to Adam: “Cursed is the ground because of you” (Genesis 3:17).
Monday, October 10, 2005
The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4
David, a visitor to my web page, sent an email asking me to explain the meaning of the sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4. I welcome questions about texts and issues dealing with the Bible in general and the Old Testament in particular.
This passage of Scripture is difficult to interpret because scholars disagree on the identification of the sons of God and the daughters of men. Since the writer introduced these two groups of people without identifying them, it is left to the reader of Genesis to decide the interpretation of this enigmatic passage.
Several theories have been developed by interpreters for identifying the people involved in this story. The first possibility is that the sons of God were the descendants of Seth and the daughters of men were the descendants of Cain. Thus, the problem mentioned in this passage is the marriage of the godly descendants of Seth and the ungodly descendants of Cain.
Another theory, developed by Finis Jennings Dake, the author of the Dake’s Bible, is that the sons of God were the descendants of Cain and the daughters of men were the descendants of Seth. The issue again is the problem of mixed marriage.
A third view, developed by Meredith Kline, proposes that the sons of God were dynastic rulers and the daughters of men were the women in their royal harem. This view proposes that the sin of the kings was polygamy.
A fourth view proposes that the sons of God were angels and the daughters of men were mortal women. This view emphasizes the marriage between angelic beings and humans in violation of God’s order.
The first three views do not carry much weight. The issue of mixed marriage appears often in Scripture and so does the problem of polygamy. It is difficult to conceive that God would destroy the whole world with the flood because of polygamy or mixed marriages since these same two issues appear after the flood without divine recrimination.
The view that the sons of God were angels is developed in The Book of First Enoch, an apocryphal book that contains the account of the fall of a group of angels called “The Watchers.” The story in Enoch is similar to the story in Genesis. The Watchers are angels who have intercourse with women and as a result, they give birth to evil men, giants, whose violence brings desolation to the earth.
The intermingling between divine beings with mortal women finds support in passages such as 1 Peter 3:19-20, where the writer speaks of spirits in prison who disobeyed in the days of Noah; in 2 Peter 2:4-6, where the writer speaks of God not sparing the angels who sinned and not sparing the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protecting Noah and his family; and in Jude 6, where the writer speaks of angels who did not keep their own position, but left their proper dwelling.
These passages above are obscure and controversial. The problem is compounded by the presence of a group of people called the Nephilim (NIV). The King James Version calls these people “giants.” The issue is whether the Nephilim are the descendants of the sons of God and the daughters of men. The issue is complicated since the Nephilim are related to the Anakim and other giants mentioned in the Old Testament. For those who are interested in exploring this topic in detail, read my article “The Anakim and the Nephilim” posted on my web page. Click here to get access to the article.
Thank you, David, for your question. Your request has allowed me to discuss a difficult topic in the Old Testament and at the same time help others learn more about this difficult passage in Genesis. Remember, your questions and comments are always welcome.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Email: claude@claudemariottini.com
This passage of Scripture is difficult to interpret because scholars disagree on the identification of the sons of God and the daughters of men. Since the writer introduced these two groups of people without identifying them, it is left to the reader of Genesis to decide the interpretation of this enigmatic passage.
Several theories have been developed by interpreters for identifying the people involved in this story. The first possibility is that the sons of God were the descendants of Seth and the daughters of men were the descendants of Cain. Thus, the problem mentioned in this passage is the marriage of the godly descendants of Seth and the ungodly descendants of Cain.
Another theory, developed by Finis Jennings Dake, the author of the Dake’s Bible, is that the sons of God were the descendants of Cain and the daughters of men were the descendants of Seth. The issue again is the problem of mixed marriage.
A third view, developed by Meredith Kline, proposes that the sons of God were dynastic rulers and the daughters of men were the women in their royal harem. This view proposes that the sin of the kings was polygamy.
A fourth view proposes that the sons of God were angels and the daughters of men were mortal women. This view emphasizes the marriage between angelic beings and humans in violation of God’s order.
The first three views do not carry much weight. The issue of mixed marriage appears often in Scripture and so does the problem of polygamy. It is difficult to conceive that God would destroy the whole world with the flood because of polygamy or mixed marriages since these same two issues appear after the flood without divine recrimination.
The view that the sons of God were angels is developed in The Book of First Enoch, an apocryphal book that contains the account of the fall of a group of angels called “The Watchers.” The story in Enoch is similar to the story in Genesis. The Watchers are angels who have intercourse with women and as a result, they give birth to evil men, giants, whose violence brings desolation to the earth.
The intermingling between divine beings with mortal women finds support in passages such as 1 Peter 3:19-20, where the writer speaks of spirits in prison who disobeyed in the days of Noah; in 2 Peter 2:4-6, where the writer speaks of God not sparing the angels who sinned and not sparing the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protecting Noah and his family; and in Jude 6, where the writer speaks of angels who did not keep their own position, but left their proper dwelling.
These passages above are obscure and controversial. The problem is compounded by the presence of a group of people called the Nephilim (NIV). The King James Version calls these people “giants.” The issue is whether the Nephilim are the descendants of the sons of God and the daughters of men. The issue is complicated since the Nephilim are related to the Anakim and other giants mentioned in the Old Testament. For those who are interested in exploring this topic in detail, read my article “The Anakim and the Nephilim” posted on my web page. Click here to get access to the article.
Thank you, David, for your question. Your request has allowed me to discuss a difficult topic in the Old Testament and at the same time help others learn more about this difficult passage in Genesis. Remember, your questions and comments are always welcome.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Email: claude@claudemariottini.com
Friday, October 07, 2005
The Call to the Ministry
In a fascinating article titled “Ultimately, applying spiritual calling is up to us,” published in the Chicago Sun-Times on September 30, 2005, Cathleen Falsani asked a thought-provoking question: “Can you have a calling, if nobody else hears it?”
Her article deals with two issues: the upcoming Vatican ban against allowing homosexual men to be ordained as priests of the Catholic Church and how to deal with those people who are homosexuals and feel the voice of God calling them to the ministry. On the issue of gays in the ministry, Falsani quoted a gay Catholic priest who is against the Vatican’s decision. The priest said, “If the clergy has become this gay, is this not the hand of God?”
Falsani concluded that in deciding who should be in the ministry, the church must consider the call of an individual. The issue in the gay debate is who determines whether a call is true or false. How can a community of faith determine whether an individual’s call from God is genuine? Her conclusion is that, as the title of her article implies, ultimately, applying spiritual calling is up to us.
I agree with Falsani on the supremacy of the call as the crucial test whether a person should enter the ministry. Those who are involved in theological education have seen many people who are unqualified for the ministry enter a seminary. Some of these people are individuals who have come out of painful divorces, people who are hurting because of the death of a spouse, people who have failed in business or secular professions, those who are influenced by the words of parents, friends, or ministers, and those who are seeking spiritual nourishment or the care of a supporting community.
The seminary community has also seen people who desire to enter the ministry because of the allurements of the respect and authority given to ministers and the view that ministers only work once a week. Some people view the ministry as a trade or profession and not as a vocation that requires the assurance that one has been constrained by the hand of a holy God.
All of these people come to seminary because they heard God’s call, but can there be a calling, if nobody else hears the voice of God? In addition, how can one be sure that the voice heard is the voice of God and not our own? It is possible that the voice we hear in our hearts is our own voice telling us what we want to hear.
When we look at the Old Testament and the vocation of the prophets to their ministry, there are several lessons that can be learned from the call of the prophets. An important lesson is that not everyone who is in the ministry belongs in the ministry. Speaking of some prophets in the days of Jeremiah, God said, “I did not send the prophets, yet they ran; I did not speak to them, yet they prophesied” (Jeremiah 23:21). These prophets were not sent by God and yet they became involved in ministry, and driven by a human impulse, they spoke as if God had commissioned them.
In the New Testament, Jesus spoke against people who were doing the work of the ministry without authorization: “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many deeds of power in your name?’ Then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; go away from me, you evildoers’” (Matthew 7:15, 21-23).
Another lesson we learn from the prophets is that the community of faith can validate the call of a prophet, but God has a veto power over the decision of the community. For instance, the prophet Hananiah had the support of the religious and political communities of Judah as well as the endorsement of the people, so much so, that in his confrontation with Jeremiah, the religious authority and the people supported the word of Hananiah against the word of Jeremiah.
In the end, the final decision belonged to God. God sent Jeremiah with a very strong message: “And the prophet Jeremiah said to the prophet Hananiah, ‘Listen, Hananiah, the Lord has not sent you, and you made this people trust in a lie’” (Jeremiah 28:15). Hananiah had spoken with authority, in the name of God, even using the prophetic formulation for a divine message (Jeremiah 28:2), but his message was false. Even though the community of faith endorsed Hananiah, he was a false prophet because his words contradicted the word God had spoken through Jeremiah.
Another example is found in 1 Kings 22. In this text, four hundred prophets who were recognized by the people and the political and religious communities as prophets of God spoke with one voice in the name of God to express divine support for the war against the Arameans. They told King Ahab that God would give him success in battle against his enemies. However, the prophets were wrong because they were not speaking the true word of God.
The third lesson we learn from the prophets is that the true prophet or minister of God receives the word directly from God and as a result preaches faithfully the word received from God. Jeremiah says that the true prophet knows God’s word because he has been in the presence of God: “For who has stood in the council of the Lord so as to see and to hear his word? Who has given heed to his word so as to proclaim it?” (Jeremiah 23:18).
On the other hand, the false prophets have no word from God to proclaim, so they steal God’s word from another prophet: “See, therefore, I am against the prophets, says the Lord, who steal my words from one another” (Jeremiah 23:30). These are the prophets who preach an empty message because they do not have a word from the Lord: “Thus says the Lord of hosts: Do not listen to the words of the prophets who prophesy to you; they are deluding you. They speak visions of their own minds, not from the mouth of the Lord. They keep saying to those who despise the word of the Lord, ‘It shall be well with you’; and to all who stubbornly follow their own stubborn hearts, they say, ‘No calamity shall come upon you.’” (Jeremiah 23:16-17).
The focus of Christian ministry is the word of God. When God calls a person, God endows that person with the gift of his words. When God called Jeremiah, he touched Jeremiah’s mouth and said to him, “Now I have put my words in your mouth” (Jeremiah 1:9). Then God told the prophet, “You shall speak whatever I command you” (Jeremiah 1:7).
God’s word is placed in Jeremiah’s mouth and Jeremiah is to embody God’s word through his ministry. Ezekiel had the same experience. He was ordered to eat God’s word and the divine word became part of his very being (Ezekiel 2:8-3:3). For the minister, the word of God is always the focus of the ministry. According to Paul, the minister “must have a firm grasp of the word that is trustworthy in accordance with the teaching, so that he may be able both to preach with sound doctrine and show those who oppose it where they are wrong (Titus 1:9).
This is the area where a homosexual minister will have problems with the call. If the minister, like the prophet of the Old Testament, must receive the word of God and teach it faithfully to others, what will a gay minister do with Leviticus 18:22: “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” It is hard to avoid the fact that the Old Testament condemns homosexuality as an abomination to God. It is also hard to deny the fact that the Old and New Testaments have never abolished this view. In their commitment to be faithful to God's word, ministers must deal with this issue with integrity.
The Bible says that there are some issues that may disqualify a person from being a prophet: drunkenness (Isaiah 28:7), adultery, ungodliness, falsehood (Jeremiah 23:9-15) , simony (Acts 8:18-21), and rejection of the Torah of God (Hosea 4:6). How can homosexuals be faithful to the word of God when living the kind of life that is contrary to the same word of God they are preaching? Any person called to the ministry has a responsibility to be faithful to the word of God as revealed to us in the pages of Scriptures. Ministers do not have the power to change God's word, but God's word has the power to change the life of the minister.
People cannot be ministers of God because they choose to become ministers or because others say that they should be ministers. The fact is, that although every Christian has the responsibility to carry the good news to every person everywhere, not all persons are called to the ministry. Although many people want to go, they should not run unless they are sent.
So, can you have a calling, if nobody else hears it? It is evident that the call requires the validation of the community of faith. The community of faith can also reject the call of some people on the basis they do not meet a specific biblical or doctrinal principle. Falsani is right: “what we choose to do with [the call] is, at the end of the day, really up to us.” The community of faith has to decide whether God calls a person. Ordination committees will decide whether a candidate meets the biblical standard for a person called by God. Yet, their decision is not final. The ultimate judge of whether a person is called by God is God himself.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
email: claude@claudemariottini.com
Would you like to ask a question? Click Here
Her article deals with two issues: the upcoming Vatican ban against allowing homosexual men to be ordained as priests of the Catholic Church and how to deal with those people who are homosexuals and feel the voice of God calling them to the ministry. On the issue of gays in the ministry, Falsani quoted a gay Catholic priest who is against the Vatican’s decision. The priest said, “If the clergy has become this gay, is this not the hand of God?”
Falsani concluded that in deciding who should be in the ministry, the church must consider the call of an individual. The issue in the gay debate is who determines whether a call is true or false. How can a community of faith determine whether an individual’s call from God is genuine? Her conclusion is that, as the title of her article implies, ultimately, applying spiritual calling is up to us.
I agree with Falsani on the supremacy of the call as the crucial test whether a person should enter the ministry. Those who are involved in theological education have seen many people who are unqualified for the ministry enter a seminary. Some of these people are individuals who have come out of painful divorces, people who are hurting because of the death of a spouse, people who have failed in business or secular professions, those who are influenced by the words of parents, friends, or ministers, and those who are seeking spiritual nourishment or the care of a supporting community.
The seminary community has also seen people who desire to enter the ministry because of the allurements of the respect and authority given to ministers and the view that ministers only work once a week. Some people view the ministry as a trade or profession and not as a vocation that requires the assurance that one has been constrained by the hand of a holy God.
All of these people come to seminary because they heard God’s call, but can there be a calling, if nobody else hears the voice of God? In addition, how can one be sure that the voice heard is the voice of God and not our own? It is possible that the voice we hear in our hearts is our own voice telling us what we want to hear.
When we look at the Old Testament and the vocation of the prophets to their ministry, there are several lessons that can be learned from the call of the prophets. An important lesson is that not everyone who is in the ministry belongs in the ministry. Speaking of some prophets in the days of Jeremiah, God said, “I did not send the prophets, yet they ran; I did not speak to them, yet they prophesied” (Jeremiah 23:21). These prophets were not sent by God and yet they became involved in ministry, and driven by a human impulse, they spoke as if God had commissioned them.
In the New Testament, Jesus spoke against people who were doing the work of the ministry without authorization: “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many deeds of power in your name?’ Then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; go away from me, you evildoers’” (Matthew 7:15, 21-23).
Another lesson we learn from the prophets is that the community of faith can validate the call of a prophet, but God has a veto power over the decision of the community. For instance, the prophet Hananiah had the support of the religious and political communities of Judah as well as the endorsement of the people, so much so, that in his confrontation with Jeremiah, the religious authority and the people supported the word of Hananiah against the word of Jeremiah.
In the end, the final decision belonged to God. God sent Jeremiah with a very strong message: “And the prophet Jeremiah said to the prophet Hananiah, ‘Listen, Hananiah, the Lord has not sent you, and you made this people trust in a lie’” (Jeremiah 28:15). Hananiah had spoken with authority, in the name of God, even using the prophetic formulation for a divine message (Jeremiah 28:2), but his message was false. Even though the community of faith endorsed Hananiah, he was a false prophet because his words contradicted the word God had spoken through Jeremiah.
Another example is found in 1 Kings 22. In this text, four hundred prophets who were recognized by the people and the political and religious communities as prophets of God spoke with one voice in the name of God to express divine support for the war against the Arameans. They told King Ahab that God would give him success in battle against his enemies. However, the prophets were wrong because they were not speaking the true word of God.
The third lesson we learn from the prophets is that the true prophet or minister of God receives the word directly from God and as a result preaches faithfully the word received from God. Jeremiah says that the true prophet knows God’s word because he has been in the presence of God: “For who has stood in the council of the Lord so as to see and to hear his word? Who has given heed to his word so as to proclaim it?” (Jeremiah 23:18).
On the other hand, the false prophets have no word from God to proclaim, so they steal God’s word from another prophet: “See, therefore, I am against the prophets, says the Lord, who steal my words from one another” (Jeremiah 23:30). These are the prophets who preach an empty message because they do not have a word from the Lord: “Thus says the Lord of hosts: Do not listen to the words of the prophets who prophesy to you; they are deluding you. They speak visions of their own minds, not from the mouth of the Lord. They keep saying to those who despise the word of the Lord, ‘It shall be well with you’; and to all who stubbornly follow their own stubborn hearts, they say, ‘No calamity shall come upon you.’” (Jeremiah 23:16-17).
The focus of Christian ministry is the word of God. When God calls a person, God endows that person with the gift of his words. When God called Jeremiah, he touched Jeremiah’s mouth and said to him, “Now I have put my words in your mouth” (Jeremiah 1:9). Then God told the prophet, “You shall speak whatever I command you” (Jeremiah 1:7).
God’s word is placed in Jeremiah’s mouth and Jeremiah is to embody God’s word through his ministry. Ezekiel had the same experience. He was ordered to eat God’s word and the divine word became part of his very being (Ezekiel 2:8-3:3). For the minister, the word of God is always the focus of the ministry. According to Paul, the minister “must have a firm grasp of the word that is trustworthy in accordance with the teaching, so that he may be able both to preach with sound doctrine and show those who oppose it where they are wrong (Titus 1:9).
This is the area where a homosexual minister will have problems with the call. If the minister, like the prophet of the Old Testament, must receive the word of God and teach it faithfully to others, what will a gay minister do with Leviticus 18:22: “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” It is hard to avoid the fact that the Old Testament condemns homosexuality as an abomination to God. It is also hard to deny the fact that the Old and New Testaments have never abolished this view. In their commitment to be faithful to God's word, ministers must deal with this issue with integrity.
The Bible says that there are some issues that may disqualify a person from being a prophet: drunkenness (Isaiah 28:7), adultery, ungodliness, falsehood (Jeremiah 23:9-15) , simony (Acts 8:18-21), and rejection of the Torah of God (Hosea 4:6). How can homosexuals be faithful to the word of God when living the kind of life that is contrary to the same word of God they are preaching? Any person called to the ministry has a responsibility to be faithful to the word of God as revealed to us in the pages of Scriptures. Ministers do not have the power to change God's word, but God's word has the power to change the life of the minister.
People cannot be ministers of God because they choose to become ministers or because others say that they should be ministers. The fact is, that although every Christian has the responsibility to carry the good news to every person everywhere, not all persons are called to the ministry. Although many people want to go, they should not run unless they are sent.
So, can you have a calling, if nobody else hears it? It is evident that the call requires the validation of the community of faith. The community of faith can also reject the call of some people on the basis they do not meet a specific biblical or doctrinal principle. Falsani is right: “what we choose to do with [the call] is, at the end of the day, really up to us.” The community of faith has to decide whether God calls a person. Ordination committees will decide whether a candidate meets the biblical standard for a person called by God. Yet, their decision is not final. The ultimate judge of whether a person is called by God is God himself.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
email: claude@claudemariottini.com
Would you like to ask a question? Click Here
Monday, October 03, 2005
King Saul: Little in His Own Eyes
Saul was the first king of Israel. He came to the throne at a time when the nation faced great challenges. In a nation where people were fiercely independent, Saul was able to gain the support of the people and bring the tribes together to confront the threat posed by the Philistines.
With the ambivalent support of the prophet Samuel, Saul was placed on the throne because the prophet believed that Saul offered the best hope to unite Israel and rescue the nation from the Philistine menace.
The relationship between Samuel and Saul was rocky almost from the beginning. Samuel represented the old order; Saul represented the new reality in Israel. Many people in Israel were against the centralization of the government. Samuel’s attitude toward Saul reflects the sentiment of the people who were against the idea that a human king should rule over the people of God. The rise of the monarchy brought many changes to Israelite society and many people were unhappy with these changes.
The conflict between Samuel and Saul arose because Saul refused to obey the words of Samuel. Saul disobeyed the words of Samuel twice. The first time was when he decided to act as a priest and offer sacrifices in order to keep the people together before a battle against the Philistines. The second time was when Saul spared the life of Agag, king of the Amalekites. Saul’s reason was that he was trying to please his soldiers, who were beginning to doubt his abilities as king.
Because of Saul’s disobedience, Samuel withdrew his support from Saul. The lack of prophetical approval was devastating to Saul. Together with the stress posed by the rise of David, that sense of rejection by Samuel practically destroyed Saul as a leader of Israel.
Saul’s problem was the same problem faced by people everywhere. People need to find affirmation in their own heart that other people support and affirm them. This sense of affirmation creates personal growth and helps develop strong personalities. On the other hand, when people have the perception, real or imaginary, that they are rejected by others, they develop a sense of inferiority which can be compounded by low self-esteem.
The feeling of inferiority that affects so many people in our society comes from different sources. Saul’s problem came because of his faulty relationship with Samuel. Saul found himself in a situation where his abilities as a king, his attitude toward the responsibility of his office, and his obedience to God’s command were denigrated and criticized by Samuel.
Saul had worked hard to be worthy of his office and to please the people around him. He made an attempt at justifying his actions by providing his own rationale for the reasons he failed to abide by the words of Samuel, but he failed.
Saul’s need for social approval acted as a powerful motivator for his actions. As a king, Saul believed that he needed the approval of the people and especially, the approval of Samuel. People with low self-esteem often need the approval of other people in order to give them the required social boost they so desperately seek.
Saul’s problem was that he forgot who he was. Samuel said to him: “Though you are little in your own eyes, are you not the head of the tribes of Israel? The LORD anointed you king over Israel” (1 Samuel 15:17). Saul believed that he was a nobody, that nobody cared for him, and yet, he was the king of Israel and the one chosen by God to govern the people. His feelings of inferiority destroyed his kingship.
Many Christians are just like Saul. They believe that they are nobodies, that they are not loved and appreciated by people around them. Many Christians do everything they can to get the approval of others, when they already have the approval of God.
Christians who have low self-esteem and who suffer from an inferiority complex must know who they are: they are children of God, children of the Great King. As children of the Great King they are also heirs of the promises of God.
Christians must remember that in Christ they are very important people. The Apostle Paul said that Christians are chosen in Christ. In Christ they are adopted as God’s children and that in Christ they have obtained an eternal inheritance (Ephesians 1:4-6). The truth is: God’s people have no reason to be little in their own eyes because they are the “apple of His eye” (Deuteronomy 32:10).
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
With the ambivalent support of the prophet Samuel, Saul was placed on the throne because the prophet believed that Saul offered the best hope to unite Israel and rescue the nation from the Philistine menace.
The relationship between Samuel and Saul was rocky almost from the beginning. Samuel represented the old order; Saul represented the new reality in Israel. Many people in Israel were against the centralization of the government. Samuel’s attitude toward Saul reflects the sentiment of the people who were against the idea that a human king should rule over the people of God. The rise of the monarchy brought many changes to Israelite society and many people were unhappy with these changes.
The conflict between Samuel and Saul arose because Saul refused to obey the words of Samuel. Saul disobeyed the words of Samuel twice. The first time was when he decided to act as a priest and offer sacrifices in order to keep the people together before a battle against the Philistines. The second time was when Saul spared the life of Agag, king of the Amalekites. Saul’s reason was that he was trying to please his soldiers, who were beginning to doubt his abilities as king.
Because of Saul’s disobedience, Samuel withdrew his support from Saul. The lack of prophetical approval was devastating to Saul. Together with the stress posed by the rise of David, that sense of rejection by Samuel practically destroyed Saul as a leader of Israel.
Saul’s problem was the same problem faced by people everywhere. People need to find affirmation in their own heart that other people support and affirm them. This sense of affirmation creates personal growth and helps develop strong personalities. On the other hand, when people have the perception, real or imaginary, that they are rejected by others, they develop a sense of inferiority which can be compounded by low self-esteem.
The feeling of inferiority that affects so many people in our society comes from different sources. Saul’s problem came because of his faulty relationship with Samuel. Saul found himself in a situation where his abilities as a king, his attitude toward the responsibility of his office, and his obedience to God’s command were denigrated and criticized by Samuel.
Saul had worked hard to be worthy of his office and to please the people around him. He made an attempt at justifying his actions by providing his own rationale for the reasons he failed to abide by the words of Samuel, but he failed.
Saul’s need for social approval acted as a powerful motivator for his actions. As a king, Saul believed that he needed the approval of the people and especially, the approval of Samuel. People with low self-esteem often need the approval of other people in order to give them the required social boost they so desperately seek.
Saul’s problem was that he forgot who he was. Samuel said to him: “Though you are little in your own eyes, are you not the head of the tribes of Israel? The LORD anointed you king over Israel” (1 Samuel 15:17). Saul believed that he was a nobody, that nobody cared for him, and yet, he was the king of Israel and the one chosen by God to govern the people. His feelings of inferiority destroyed his kingship.
Many Christians are just like Saul. They believe that they are nobodies, that they are not loved and appreciated by people around them. Many Christians do everything they can to get the approval of others, when they already have the approval of God.
Christians who have low self-esteem and who suffer from an inferiority complex must know who they are: they are children of God, children of the Great King. As children of the Great King they are also heirs of the promises of God.
Christians must remember that in Christ they are very important people. The Apostle Paul said that Christians are chosen in Christ. In Christ they are adopted as God’s children and that in Christ they have obtained an eternal inheritance (Ephesians 1:4-6). The truth is: God’s people have no reason to be little in their own eyes because they are the “apple of His eye” (Deuteronomy 32:10).
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)