Thursday, May 29, 2008
New Inscriptions Mention Seti I and Ramses II
According to a news release, Egyptian archaeologists have discovered an ancient fortress which served as the ancient headquarters of the Pharaonic army beginning in 1570 B.C. The place has been identified with the ancient city of Tharu, a place located in the Sinai peninsula.
Among the artefacts discovered in the fortress were inscriptions mentioning the names of three Pharaohs: Tuthmosis II, who ruled Egypt from about 1512 B.C. and who built one of the military installations, Seti I, and Ramses II, two Pharaohs who ruled Egypt from 1318 to 1237 B.C.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Archaeology, Ramses II, Seti I,
Among the artefacts discovered in the fortress were inscriptions mentioning the names of three Pharaohs: Tuthmosis II, who ruled Egypt from about 1512 B.C. and who built one of the military installations, Seti I, and Ramses II, two Pharaohs who ruled Egypt from 1318 to 1237 B.C.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Archaeology, Ramses II, Seti I,
Biblical Archaeology in the News
In case you missed reading these reports related to archaeological discoveries in Israel, here are some links to news release dealing with biblical archaeology and issues related to the Bible. Some of these reports are new, others are old. The links are listed together because they serve as a quick reference to recent archaeological news.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tag: Archaeology
- German Archaeologist on Trail of Ark of the Covenant
- Jerusalem Mansion May Have Housed Exiled Queen
- Archaeologists May Have Found Biblical Wall
- Royal Seal Indicates Biblical Queen Jezebel's Power
- Quarry Used to Build Second Temple Found Near Jerusalem
- Ancient Sewer 'Escape Hatch' Found in Jerusalem
- Archaeologists Discover Ancient Beehives in Israel
- Warriors May Have Occupied Dead Sea Scrolls Site
- Israeli Scientists: Masada Bodies Are Roman, Not Jewish
- Israel Museum Puts Medieval Hebrew Manuscript on Display
- Israeli Archaeologist May Have Found Tomb of King Herod
- UNESCO Asks Israel to Halt Jerusalem Archaeological Digging
- Expert: James Cameron's 'Jesus Tomb' Claim Based on Faulty Reading
- Scholars, Clergymen Criticize New Documentary on Alleged Tomb of Jesus Christ
- Egyptian Tomb Inscription May Be Oldest Proto-Canaanite Text Yet
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tag: Archaeology
Between Mars and Heaven
Fourteen months after his first vision of God (Ezekiel 1:1), Ezekiel had another vision (Ezekiel 8:1) in which God revealed to him the abominations of Jerusalem. In his vision, Ezekiel saw a figure that looked like a human being. Ezekiel tried to describe what he saw in his vision. Ezekiel said that the figure “stretched out the form of a hand, and took me by a lock of my head; and the spirit lifted me up between earth and heaven, and brought me in visions of God to Jerusalem, to the entrance of the gateway of the inner court that faces north, to the seat of the image of jealousy, which provokes to jealousy” (Ezekiel 8:3).
The expression, “between earth and heaven” means that Ezekiel was lifted up into space and carried to Jerusalem where he was brought to the entrance of the north gate of the Temple and to the inner court. Through this vision, Ezekiel was able to give God’s message to the elder who had come to his house to inquire of the Lord.
Many years ago, I read a book by Salem Kirban titled I Predict in which the author wrote that the expression “between earth and heaven” was a prophecy of astronauts going into space because no one can travel in space without the equipment astronauts have. Only a fertile mind can see a prophecy of future astronauts in Ezekiel 8:3.
On April 12, 1961, Yuri Gagarin, a citizen of Russia, became the first human in space and was the first human to be between earth and heaven. It is said that in a speech to the Central Committee of the Soviet Union, Nikita Khrushchev said that Gagarin flew into heaven, but did not see any God there.
Gagarin did not go to heaven; he was in space, a few miles above earth. He was between “earth and heaven.” Since Gagarin, many people, both men and women, have been between earth and heaven. From that position, that is, from between earth and heaven, one can see the beauty of the earth from a perspective that few of us will ever see.
No one has even been between Mars and heaven, not yet. Some day, even during the lifetime of my sons, people will be able to travel to Mars and step on another world, a world which most of us have seen only through pictures. A few days ago NASA’s Phoenix Mars Lander landed on the north polar region of the red planet. The pictures it is sending reveal a landscape that to some extent, is similar to earth’s.
No one has even been between Mars and heaven but the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter spacecraft has and it is sending amazing pictures of Mars. Ask yourself this question: What would it be like to fly over Mars? If you are interested in finding out, NASA has prepared a video that combines data from the orbiting Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter spacecraft with information from the Spirit rover to create a digital movie that will allow you to fly over the Columbia Hills of Mars. It is an amazing video with an amazing view of the Columbia Hills of Mars.
If you are fascinated with space travel and want to see more about Mars, you must watch this video. To watch the NASA video, click here.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Mars, Space
The expression, “between earth and heaven” means that Ezekiel was lifted up into space and carried to Jerusalem where he was brought to the entrance of the north gate of the Temple and to the inner court. Through this vision, Ezekiel was able to give God’s message to the elder who had come to his house to inquire of the Lord.
Many years ago, I read a book by Salem Kirban titled I Predict in which the author wrote that the expression “between earth and heaven” was a prophecy of astronauts going into space because no one can travel in space without the equipment astronauts have. Only a fertile mind can see a prophecy of future astronauts in Ezekiel 8:3.
On April 12, 1961, Yuri Gagarin, a citizen of Russia, became the first human in space and was the first human to be between earth and heaven. It is said that in a speech to the Central Committee of the Soviet Union, Nikita Khrushchev said that Gagarin flew into heaven, but did not see any God there.
Gagarin did not go to heaven; he was in space, a few miles above earth. He was between “earth and heaven.” Since Gagarin, many people, both men and women, have been between earth and heaven. From that position, that is, from between earth and heaven, one can see the beauty of the earth from a perspective that few of us will ever see.
No one has even been between Mars and heaven, not yet. Some day, even during the lifetime of my sons, people will be able to travel to Mars and step on another world, a world which most of us have seen only through pictures. A few days ago NASA’s Phoenix Mars Lander landed on the north polar region of the red planet. The pictures it is sending reveal a landscape that to some extent, is similar to earth’s.
No one has even been between Mars and heaven but the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter spacecraft has and it is sending amazing pictures of Mars. Ask yourself this question: What would it be like to fly over Mars? If you are interested in finding out, NASA has prepared a video that combines data from the orbiting Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter spacecraft with information from the Spirit rover to create a digital movie that will allow you to fly over the Columbia Hills of Mars. It is an amazing video with an amazing view of the Columbia Hills of Mars.
If you are fascinated with space travel and want to see more about Mars, you must watch this video. To watch the NASA video, click here.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Mars, Space
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Seizing Antiquities as Ransom Payment
A decision by a federal judge in Chicago is setting a bad precedent that can affect antiquity collections in museums and universities.
A federal judge in Chicago has authorized victims of terrorism to seize Iranian artifacts from the University of Chicago and the Field Museum as payment in a $251 million default judgment against Iran.
Among the items to be seized are tens of thousands of ancient tablets and other antiquities that are housed in the University of Chicago and in the Field Museum.
I fear that such a seizure of antiquity could create a bad precedent and lead to similar action in cases where acts of terrorism are involved.
Read the full press release here.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tag: Archaeology
A federal judge in Chicago has authorized victims of terrorism to seize Iranian artifacts from the University of Chicago and the Field Museum as payment in a $251 million default judgment against Iran.
Among the items to be seized are tens of thousands of ancient tablets and other antiquities that are housed in the University of Chicago and in the Field Museum.
I fear that such a seizure of antiquity could create a bad precedent and lead to similar action in cases where acts of terrorism are involved.
Read the full press release here.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tag: Archaeology
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
How to Dispose of Old Bibles
How to dispose of old Bibles? Many Christians have old Bibles they no longer use. How to dispose of them? Here is a Rabbi’s view of old Bibles:
Read what he recommends about disposing of old Bibles by clicking here.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tag: Bible
Old deteriorated Bibles still bear the word of God and the name of God in them. They are old and worn, but they are still vessels of the holy, and so they cannot be disposed of in the garbage with yesterday’s green bean casserole
Read what he recommends about disposing of old Bibles by clicking here.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tag: Bible
A Criticism of the Documentary Hypothesis
The Biblical Archaeology Review has published an article by Rabbi Yosef Reinman in which he exposes the fallacies of the Documentary Hypothesis. Here is an excerpt from the article:
This is an interesting article. However, I believe that the explanations the Rabbis offered for some of the problematic passages in the Torah, like the Ishmaelites/Midianites controversy in the Joseph story, are too simplistic. The article is free online. Read the article by visiting the BAR web page.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Documentary Hypothesis, Yosef Reinman
I just want to bring people up close to some of the ravages the critics have wrought on the ancient text and the faulty reasoning that drives them. The very idea is amazing. Never in the history of the world has a book been spliced together from multiple documents by the kind of elaborate surgery that the critics perform on the Bible text. Most amazing of all is that after all the analysis and the identification of different documents and subdocuments and subsubdocuments, after all the deletions and emendations and claims of scribal errors, numerous anomalies and difficulties remain.
When all is said and done, the critics are faced with one glaring question: How is it possible that these mythical redactors, who allegedly managed to pull off one of the most colossal hoaxes in the history of the world, were not careful enough to avoid the red flags that drew the attention of the critics? If the first creation story is followed by a second creation story that contradicts the first, why didn`t the redactors fix it? If in one place Esau`s wives are identified by one set of names and elsewhere by another set of names, why didn`t the redactors fix it?
After all, these people were brilliant. They supposedly put together a masterpiece of deception that gave rise to the religions that dominate the world to this day. Why weren`t they more careful with editing and proofreading?
This is an interesting article. However, I believe that the explanations the Rabbis offered for some of the problematic passages in the Torah, like the Ishmaelites/Midianites controversy in the Joseph story, are too simplistic. The article is free online. Read the article by visiting the BAR web page.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Documentary Hypothesis, Yosef Reinman
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Enkidu, Jeremiah, and the Mother of Seven
A few days ago I wrote a post on “The Mother of Seven,” a study of Jeremiah 15:9. Now, Duane Smith at Abnormal Interest has written a post, “Enkidu, Jeremiah and the Mother of Seven” in which he links the harlot in Gilgamesh with the passage in Jeremiah.
Duane’s argument is provocative and deserves further study. I recommend that you visit Duane’s post and evaluate his proposal.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Enkidu, Harlot, Jeremiah
Duane’s argument is provocative and deserves further study. I recommend that you visit Duane’s post and evaluate his proposal.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Enkidu, Harlot, Jeremiah
God Saw Good
In a previous post, I criticized a new translation of the Bible, The Ancient Roots Translinear Bible (ARTB). My colleague Blake Water, commenting on what I wrote, called my attention to the first 11 verses of Genesis. To show how awful this translation is, I am quoting Genesis 1:1-11 from the The Ancient Roots Translinear Bible.
The title of this post is taken from Genesis 1:10:
Gen 1:1 First, God created the heaven and the land.
Gen 1:2 The land was a chaotic abyss, with darkness over the face of the abyss. The Spirit-wind of God fluttered over the face of the waters.
Gen 1:3 God said, "Light, be!" And light was.
Gen 1:4 God saw the light was-good. God separated between the light and the darkness.
Gen 1:5 God called the light "Day", and he called the darkness "Night". Evening was and morning was; day one.
Gen 1:6 God said, "Expanse, be amidst the waters! Be the separation between the ||waters||!"
Gen 1:7 God made the expanse to separate between the waters with waters under the expanse and above the expanse. So it was.
Gen 1:8 God called the expanse 'Heaven'. Evening was and morning was the second day.
Gen 1:9 God said, "Waters under the heaven: Wait at one place, to see the dry-land!" So it was.
Gen 1:10 God called the dry-land "Land", and the pool of waters he called "Seas". God saw good.
Gen 1:11 God said, "Land, spring-up grass! Cereals, sow seed! Fruit trees, make the kinds of fruit with seed in it over the land!" So it was.
Maybe “God saw good” (v. 10) but I doubt he is very happy with this translation.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Bible, Strong’s Concordance, Translation
The title of this post is taken from Genesis 1:10:
Genesis 1:1-11 (The Ancient Roots Translinear Bible):
Gen 1:1 First, God created the heaven and the land.
Gen 1:2 The land was a chaotic abyss, with darkness over the face of the abyss. The Spirit-wind of God fluttered over the face of the waters.
Gen 1:3 God said, "Light, be!" And light was.
Gen 1:4 God saw the light was-good. God separated between the light and the darkness.
Gen 1:5 God called the light "Day", and he called the darkness "Night". Evening was and morning was; day one.
Gen 1:6 God said, "Expanse, be amidst the waters! Be the separation between the ||waters||!"
Gen 1:7 God made the expanse to separate between the waters with waters under the expanse and above the expanse. So it was.
Gen 1:8 God called the expanse 'Heaven'. Evening was and morning was the second day.
Gen 1:9 God said, "Waters under the heaven: Wait at one place, to see the dry-land!" So it was.
Gen 1:10 God called the dry-land "Land", and the pool of waters he called "Seas". God saw good.
Gen 1:11 God said, "Land, spring-up grass! Cereals, sow seed! Fruit trees, make the kinds of fruit with seed in it over the land!" So it was.
Maybe “God saw good” (v. 10) but I doubt he is very happy with this translation.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Bible, Strong’s Concordance, Translation
A Mother and Her Seven Sons
Yesterday I posted a study on the mother of seven sons who became a symbol of the tragedy that came upon Jerusalem. In ancient Israel, being a mother of seven sons was considered to be a great blessing. Thus, being a mother of seven sons became a proverbial expression to describe a woman blessed by God.
There is a story in 2 Maccabees 7:1-40 about a mother and her seven sons who were martyred because of their faith in God and because of their commitment to the religious traditions of Judaism. The story reflects the persecution of the Jews under Antiochus IV.
The story of the mother and her seven sons is a beautiful story of faithful believers who loved their God. Since many people have never taken the time to read 2 Maccabees, I have decided to reproduce the story here. The text is taken from the New Revised Standard Version. Enjoy the story of the mother and her seven sons.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Martyrs, Resurrection, Seven Sons, Suffering
There is a story in 2 Maccabees 7:1-40 about a mother and her seven sons who were martyred because of their faith in God and because of their commitment to the religious traditions of Judaism. The story reflects the persecution of the Jews under Antiochus IV.
The story of the mother and her seven sons is a beautiful story of faithful believers who loved their God. Since many people have never taken the time to read 2 Maccabees, I have decided to reproduce the story here. The text is taken from the New Revised Standard Version. Enjoy the story of the mother and her seven sons.
A Mother and Her Seven Sons (2 Maccabees 7:1-41)
It happened also that seven brothers and their mother were arrested and were being compelled by the king, under torture with whips and thongs, to partake of unlawful swine's flesh. 2 One of them, acting as their spokesman, said, "What do you intend to ask and learn from us? For we are ready to die rather than transgress the laws of our ancestors." 3 The king fell into a rage, and gave orders to have pans and caldrons heated. 4 These were heated immediately, and he commanded that the tongue of their spokesman be cut out and that they scalp him and cut off his hands and feet, while the rest of the brothers and the mother looked on. 5 When he was utterly helpless, the king ordered them to take him to the fire, still breathing, and to fry him in a pan. The smoke from the pan spread widely, but the brothers and their mother encouraged one another to die nobly, saying, 6 "The Lord God is watching over us and in truth has compassion on us, as Moses declared in his song that bore witness against the people to their faces, when he said, 'And he will have compassion on his servants.'"This story was very popular among Jews and Christians because the experience of the woman and her seven sons gave meaning to the persecution they suffered because of their faith. The belief in the resurrection from the dead (see 7:9, 11, 14 and also the mother’s words in 7:23) provided the martyrs with the hope that allowed them to remain faithful until the end.
7 After the first brother had died in this way, they brought forward the second for their sport. They tore off the skin of his head with the hair, and asked him, "Will you eat rather than have your body punished limb by limb?" 8 He replied in the language of his ancestors and said to them, "No." Therefore he in turn underwent tortures as the first brother had done. 9 And when he was at his last breath, he said, "You accursed wretch, you dismiss us from this present life, but the King of the universe will raise us up to an everlasting renewal of life, because we have died for his laws." 10 After him, the third was the victim of their sport. When it was demanded, he quickly put out his tongue and courageously stretched forth his hands, 11 and said nobly, "I got these from Heaven, and because of his laws I disdain them, and from him I hope to get them back again." 12 As a result the king himself and those with him were astonished at the young man's spirit, for he regarded his sufferings as nothing.
13 After he too had died, they maltreated and tortured the fourth in the same way. 14 When he was near death, he said, "One cannot but choose to die at the hands of mortals and to cherish the hope God gives of being raised again by him. But for you there will be no resurrection to life!" 15 Next they brought forward the fifth and maltreated him. 16 But he looked at the king, and said, "Because you have authority among mortals, though you also are mortal, you do what you please. But do not think that God has forsaken our people. 17 Keep on, and see how his mighty power will torture you and your descendants!"
18 After him they brought forward the sixth. And when he was about to die, he said, "Do not deceive yourself in vain. For we are suffering these things on our own account, because of our sins against our own God. Therefore astounding things have happened. 19 But do not think that you will go unpunished for having tried to fight against God!" 20 The mother was especially admirable and worthy of honorable memory. Although she saw her seven sons perish within a single day, she bore it with good courage because of her hope in the Lord. 21 She encouraged each of them in the language of their ancestors. Filled with a noble spirit, she reinforced her woman's reasoning with a man's courage, and said to them, 22 "I do not know how you came into being in my womb. It was not I who gave you life and breath, nor I who set in order the elements within each of you. 23 Therefore the Creator of the world, who shaped the beginning of humankind and devised the origin of all things, will in his mercy give life and breath back to you again, since you now forget yourselves for the sake of his laws."
24 Antiochus felt that he was being treated with contempt, and he was suspicious of her reproachful tone. The youngest brother being still alive, Antiochus not only appealed to him in words, but promised with oaths that he would make him rich and enviable if he would turn from the ways of his ancestors, and that he would take him for his Friend and entrust him with public affairs. 25 Since the young man would not listen to him at all, the king called the mother to him and urged her to advise the youth to save himself. 26 After much urging on his part, she undertook to persuade her son. 27 But, leaning close to him, she spoke in their native language as follows, deriding the cruel tyrant: "My son, have pity on me. I carried you nine months in my womb, and nursed you for three years, and have reared you and brought you up to this point in your life, and have taken care of you. 28 I beg you, my child, to look at the heaven and the earth and see everything that is in them, and recognize that God did not make them out of things that existed. And in the same way the human race came into being. 29 Do not fear this butcher, but prove worthy of your brothers. Accept death, so that in God's mercy I may get you back again along with your brothers."
30 While she was still speaking, the young man said, "What are you waiting for? I will not obey the king's command, but I obey the command of the law that was given to our ancestors through Moses. 31 But you, who have contrived all sorts of evil against the Hebrews, will certainly not escape the hands of God. 32 For we are suffering because of our own sins. 33 And if our living Lord is angry for a little while, to rebuke and discipline us, he will again be reconciled with his own servants. 34 But you, unholy wretch, you most defiled of all mortals, do not be elated in vain and puffed up by uncertain hopes, when you raise your hand against the children of heaven. 35 You have not yet escaped the judgment of the almighty, all-seeing God. 36 For our brothers after enduring a brief suffering have drunk of ever-flowing life, under God's covenant; but you, by the judgment of God, will receive just punishment for your arrogance. 37 I, like my brothers, give up body and life for the laws of our ancestors, appealing to God to show mercy soon to our nation and by trials and plagues to make you confess that he alone is God, 38 and through me and my brothers to bring to an end the wrath of the Almighty that has justly fallen on our whole nation."
39 The king fell into a rage, and handled him worse than the others, being exasperated at his scorn. 40 So he died in his integrity, putting his whole trust in the Lord. 41 Last of all, the mother died, after her sons.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Martyrs, Resurrection, Seven Sons, Suffering
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
A New Second Temple Period Quarry
The Israel Antiquities Authority has announced that archeologists have discovered a Second Temple Period quarry. This quarry provided the stones used to build the Western Wall.
According to a news report published in The Jerusalem Post, “The quarry is believed to be one of those used to build the Jerusalem holy site because the size of the stones match those at the Western Wall.”
For the full story and a picture of the quarry, visit The Jerusalem Post online.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Archaeology, Second Temple
According to a news report published in The Jerusalem Post, “The quarry is believed to be one of those used to build the Jerusalem holy site because the size of the stones match those at the Western Wall.”
For the full story and a picture of the quarry, visit The Jerusalem Post online.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Archaeology, Second Temple
A New Translation of the Bible: The Ancient Roots Translinear Bible
As most biblical scholars and translators know, translating the Bible from Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek into English or any other language is not easy. How does a translator clearly communicate the meaning of Hebrew words to English speaking people? Because the task is difficult, the result is that today we have many different translations of the Bible.
Now the problem has been solved. Let us welcome a new translation of the Bible: the Ancient Roots Translinear Bible. The aim of the Ancient Roots Translinear Bible is to solve the problem that different translations of the Bible create for the average reader.
The following press release explains the aim of the Ancient Roots Translinear Bible:
How did this translator produce a Bible that solved the problems translators have struggled for centuries to solve? How was this done? It was easy! The translator, A. Frances Werner, used Strong’s Concordance to make sure that every Hebrew word was translated in the same way in English. Here is what she says about the Strong’s words number 120 [adam] and 376 [ish]:
Any one who has translated from Hebrew to English will agree that the approach taken by Ancient Roots Translinear Bible is very simplistic. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible was first published in 1890. Strong’s Concordance is an index of the Bible based on the translation of the King James Version. The index is designed to help students find a phrase or a word and compare how the same word was used in another section of the Bible.
The major weakness of the Ancient Roots Translinear Bible is its dependence on Strong’s Concordance:
It seems to me that this new Bible will be consistent in translating the same Hebrew words into English, but it will be a Bible which will fail to communicate the beauty of the biblical message and the intricacies of the Hebrew language to its readers.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Bible, Strong’s Concordance, Translation
Now the problem has been solved. Let us welcome a new translation of the Bible: the Ancient Roots Translinear Bible. The aim of the Ancient Roots Translinear Bible is to solve the problem that different translations of the Bible create for the average reader.
The following press release explains the aim of the Ancient Roots Translinear Bible:
The "Ancient Roots Translinear Bible (ARTB)" is a completely new concept designed and patented by a scientist and bible-lover who asked the basic question: Why do we have to interrupt our reading of the bible to look up the original meaning of the Hebrew text in a separate book or footnote? Why don't English bible translations match the ancient text?
Author and scientist A. Frances Werner has done her homework. She has documented exactly why you have required to have the extra (and sometimes expensive) tools such as concordances, bible dictionaries and cross-referenced study bibles to decipher most English bible translations. By counting up all the word variations in the Old Testament in over 20 bibles, Werner has demonstrated that translators have unnecessarily complicated matters by not keeping the English consistent with the original Hebrew.
A. Frances Werner designed the Ancient Roots Translinear Bible (ARTB) to be 100% consistent with the ancient texts to simplify bible study. "The word "translinear" has been created to let you know that it is completely consistent between Hebrew and English. Thus, every unique English word matches every unique Hebrew word. Even thought the concept seems incredibly obvious and simple, it hasn't been done in 1500 years of English bible translations. That's why the ARTB is patented. Now you can save some time and money. You don't need to stop and reach for expensive reference books to be assured you finding the accurate word of God."
How did this translator produce a Bible that solved the problems translators have struggled for centuries to solve? How was this done? It was easy! The translator, A. Frances Werner, used Strong’s Concordance to make sure that every Hebrew word was translated in the same way in English. Here is what she says about the Strong’s words number 120 [adam] and 376 [ish]:
What you see is that there are two very distinct words in Hebrew designated by two different Strong's numbers 120 and 376. The major versions primarily reuse the word man for both. The ARTB utilizes the word human for 120 and man for 376 because they are different words.
But the confusion goes deeper. If you look up Strong's number 376 for the NASB, you'll find that not only did the NASB utilize the word man in 66% of the cases, but also words like husband, one, persons, and each, to words like tiller, soldier, tradition, and father for the remaining 33% of the cases--close to 1500 references. This is typical of all modern bible translations.
The Ancient Roots Translinear Bible (ARTB) began as a project to see what the Old Testament really looked like with all the missing words restored. But as they were restored, they were always applied with the rule of 1:1 correspondence to the ancient word. So in ARTB, the word human is utilized 100% of the time for Strong's number 120 [adam] and no other Strong's number.
Any one who has translated from Hebrew to English will agree that the approach taken by Ancient Roots Translinear Bible is very simplistic. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible was first published in 1890. Strong’s Concordance is an index of the Bible based on the translation of the King James Version. The index is designed to help students find a phrase or a word and compare how the same word was used in another section of the Bible.
The major weakness of the Ancient Roots Translinear Bible is its dependence on Strong’s Concordance:
Since Strong's Concordance identifies the original words in Hebrew and Greek, Strong's Numbers are sometimes misinterpreted by those without adequate training to change the Bible from its accurate meaning simply by taking the words out of cultural context. The use of Strong's numbers does not consider figures of speech, metaphors, idioms, common phrases, cultural references, references to historical events, or alternate meanings used by those of the time period to express their thoughts in their own language at the time. As such, professionals and amateurs alike must consult a number of contextual tools to reconstruct these cultural backgrounds.
It seems to me that this new Bible will be consistent in translating the same Hebrew words into English, but it will be a Bible which will fail to communicate the beauty of the biblical message and the intricacies of the Hebrew language to its readers.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Bible, Strong’s Concordance, Translation
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
The Mother of Seven
“The mother of seven will grow faint and breathe her last. She will die, ashamed and humiliated, while it is still daylight” (Jeremiah 15:9).
In ancient Israel, the symbolism of giving birth to seven children was used as a proverbial expression to describe a woman blessed with children or to refer to a family whose future in Israel was guaranteed because the family name would survive in the memory of the community through the sons. Two classic examples of “mother of seven” appear in the Old Testament.
When Hanna was delivered from her barrenness and gave birth to Samuel, she said: “The barren has borne seven” (1 Samuel 2:5). These words reflect Hannah’s joy in becoming a mother and the awareness that she had conceived a son because of God’s help.
The second example is found in Ruth 4:15. After Ruth married Boaz and gave birth to Obed, the women of Bethlehem paid her the highest compliment by telling Naomi that her daughter-in-law Ruth was better “than seven sons.” This recognition spoke highly of Ruth’s character since being a mother of seven sons was the highest accolade a woman in Israel could receive.
For a woman, to be a mother and to have sons was to be blessed by God. Psalm 113:9 says that the Lord should be praised because “He gives the barren woman a home, making her the joyous mother of children.”
On the other hand, women such as Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel, and Samson’s mother were barren and unhappy. These women carried with them the sorrow of being unable to give children to their husbands and the opprobrium of their society for not being blessed by God.
In light of the positive sentiment that the proverbial expression of being a mother of seven carried in Israel, it is significant that Jeremiah used the same imagery to describe the enormous tragedy and the depth of sorrow that would come to Jerusalem as a result of the judgment that God was bringing upon the nation.
During the invasion of Jerusalem, so many husbands would be killed that the widows of Jerusalem would become “more numerous than the sand of the seas.” So many children would die that mothers would receive news that their sons were killed early in battle (Jeremiah 15:8).
According to Jeremiah, when the judgment arrives upon Jerusalem and a mother of seven hears the news of the death of her children, that mother will be filled with anguish, tormented by the terrible deaths of her children. Robbed of her children in the prime of their lives, the woman grows faint, breathes her last, and dies (Hebrew: “breathes out her life”), ashamed and humiliated because she has lost her seven sons (Jeremiah 15:9).
The imagery of a mother of seven losing her children is used to describe the anguish, pain, and sorrow that will fall upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem. The imagery, although painful, is a good illustration of the paroxysms of emotion evoked by the disaster that came upon Judah in 587 BCE.
There is no greater human sorrow than the one which comes to a home when a mother of many children dies in the prime of her life, leaving her children deprived of maternal love. This is the imagery Jeremiah uses to describe the plight of the people of Judah. Jeremiah, anticipating the coming judgment that the Lord will bring upon Judah, uses the imagery of a husband mourning the death of his wife and the mother of his many children.
Mother Jerusalem (2 Samuel 20:19) has lost her children and her judgment is a reversal of the promise God has made to the ancestors. The promise of life that God had made to Abraham, “I will indeed bless you, and I will make your offspring as numerous as the sand on the seashore,” now becomes the reality of death: “Their widows will be more numerous than the grains of sand on the seashore” (Jeremiah 15:8).
The promise of life once made to Abraham has become an illustration of what will happen to Jerusalem when the destroyer comes. The city that once was full of people will now become like a widow deprived of her children (Lamentations 1:1). The proverbial expression used to describe a woman blessed with God’s favor will now become the symbol of bereavement and death.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Children, Jerusalem, Judgment, Mothers, Widows
In ancient Israel, the symbolism of giving birth to seven children was used as a proverbial expression to describe a woman blessed with children or to refer to a family whose future in Israel was guaranteed because the family name would survive in the memory of the community through the sons. Two classic examples of “mother of seven” appear in the Old Testament.
When Hanna was delivered from her barrenness and gave birth to Samuel, she said: “The barren has borne seven” (1 Samuel 2:5). These words reflect Hannah’s joy in becoming a mother and the awareness that she had conceived a son because of God’s help.
The second example is found in Ruth 4:15. After Ruth married Boaz and gave birth to Obed, the women of Bethlehem paid her the highest compliment by telling Naomi that her daughter-in-law Ruth was better “than seven sons.” This recognition spoke highly of Ruth’s character since being a mother of seven sons was the highest accolade a woman in Israel could receive.
For a woman, to be a mother and to have sons was to be blessed by God. Psalm 113:9 says that the Lord should be praised because “He gives the barren woman a home, making her the joyous mother of children.”
On the other hand, women such as Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel, and Samson’s mother were barren and unhappy. These women carried with them the sorrow of being unable to give children to their husbands and the opprobrium of their society for not being blessed by God.
In light of the positive sentiment that the proverbial expression of being a mother of seven carried in Israel, it is significant that Jeremiah used the same imagery to describe the enormous tragedy and the depth of sorrow that would come to Jerusalem as a result of the judgment that God was bringing upon the nation.
During the invasion of Jerusalem, so many husbands would be killed that the widows of Jerusalem would become “more numerous than the sand of the seas.” So many children would die that mothers would receive news that their sons were killed early in battle (Jeremiah 15:8).
According to Jeremiah, when the judgment arrives upon Jerusalem and a mother of seven hears the news of the death of her children, that mother will be filled with anguish, tormented by the terrible deaths of her children. Robbed of her children in the prime of their lives, the woman grows faint, breathes her last, and dies (Hebrew: “breathes out her life”), ashamed and humiliated because she has lost her seven sons (Jeremiah 15:9).
The imagery of a mother of seven losing her children is used to describe the anguish, pain, and sorrow that will fall upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem. The imagery, although painful, is a good illustration of the paroxysms of emotion evoked by the disaster that came upon Judah in 587 BCE.
There is no greater human sorrow than the one which comes to a home when a mother of many children dies in the prime of her life, leaving her children deprived of maternal love. This is the imagery Jeremiah uses to describe the plight of the people of Judah. Jeremiah, anticipating the coming judgment that the Lord will bring upon Judah, uses the imagery of a husband mourning the death of his wife and the mother of his many children.
Mother Jerusalem (2 Samuel 20:19) has lost her children and her judgment is a reversal of the promise God has made to the ancestors. The promise of life that God had made to Abraham, “I will indeed bless you, and I will make your offspring as numerous as the sand on the seashore,” now becomes the reality of death: “Their widows will be more numerous than the grains of sand on the seashore” (Jeremiah 15:8).
The promise of life once made to Abraham has become an illustration of what will happen to Jerusalem when the destroyer comes. The city that once was full of people will now become like a widow deprived of her children (Lamentations 1:1). The proverbial expression used to describe a woman blessed with God’s favor will now become the symbol of bereavement and death.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Children, Jerusalem, Judgment, Mothers, Widows
The Children of My Children
 |
After Jacob came to Egypt, and before he died, he called Joseph to bless him and his children. When Joseph appeared before his father, Jacob said to Joseph: “I had no hope of seeing your face again, but God in his mercy has let me see you and your children” (Genesis 48:11).
I believe that a great joy for a father is when he is able to live long enough to see the children of his children. God has blessed me and my wife Donna with three wonderful sons. My older son JR has three daughters and I have posted the picture of two of his daughters here.
My middle son Chris, is the father of a beautiful daughter, Brianna. She is the joy of our house because she is at the age when everything she does is cute. The picture in this post is a photo of Chris and Brianna.
My younger son James is still single. If things continue the way they are at the present, James may be my last hope for a grandson. I love my granddaughters, but if one of my sons does not give me a son, then my name and the name of my family will not be remembered by future generations.
James, I am counting on you.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Children, Sons
Friday, May 09, 2008
The Sons of Rizpah: Reflections on a Mother’s Love
Then Rizpah the daughter of Aiah took sackcloth, and spread it on a rock for herself, from the beginning of harvest until rain fell on them from the heavens; she did not allow the birds of the air to come on the bodies by day, or the wild animals by night. (2 Samuel 21:10).
This coming Sunday is Mother’s Day. On that day most churches will be honoring mothers and the contributions they have made to the lives of their children. As part of the celebration, ministers will be talking about biblical mothers. Generally, sermons about biblical mothers use Hannah, Elizabeth, Mary, and a few other notable women as examples of mothers who love their children and set a positive role model for mothers today.
One mother who probably will never be remembered on Mother’s Day is Rizpah. Ask yourself this question: how many sermons about Rizpah have you heard preached from the pulpit? Probably, you have never heard or you have never preached a sermon about the extreme demonstration of love Rizpah displayed on behalf of her sons. Today, I want to honor Rizpah and her love for her children. Here is her story:
During the days of king David there was a severe famine over all the land that lasted three years. The time of the famine is unknown and except for the reference in 2 Samuel 21:1-10, there is no other reference to this famine in the Bible. Not knowing the reason for the famine, David went to inquire of the Lord in order to ascertain the cause of the famine and the reason the Lord was punishing Israel.
The Lord answered David’s prayer and he was told that Saul and his house were guilty of the massacre he had inflicted upon the Gibeonites. Nothing is known about this event and what caused Saul to shed Gibeonite blood. The Gibeonites were part of the original inhabitants of the land. With their tricks, they deceived Joshua and the people of Israel. Their deception led Joshua and Israel to make a covenant with them.
According to 2 Samuel 21:2, Saul, because of his zeal for the honor of Israel and Judah, tried to destroy the Gibeonites. Saul persecuted the Gibeonites and planned to exterminate them so that they would be completely removed from all the territory of Israel (2 Samuel 21:5). It is possible that the Gibeonites had done something wrong and Saul had used the occasion to exterminate them from Israel.
Because of the revelation from God that Saul’s bloodshed caused the famine, David called the Gibeonites together to decide how to repair the wrong done to them. David said to the Gibeonites: “What shall I do for you? And with what shall I make atonement, that you may bless the inheritance of the Lord?” (v. 3).
The Gibeonites refused to take any money from Saul or from his family. They also recognized that they were not allowed to kill anyone in Israel. When David asked again what he could to make amends for the crime committed against them, the Gibeonites answered:
The man who consumed us and planned to destroy us, so that we should have no place in all the territory of Israel, let seven of his sons be handed over to us, and we will impale them before the Lord at Gibeon on the mountain of the LORD” (2 Samuel 21:5-6).
To save Israel from the famine, David agreed to their request. In making his selection, David spared Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan, because of the promise he had made to Jonathan. In order to select the seven descendants of Saul, David selected Armoni and Mephibosheth, the two sons of Rizpah, the daughter of Aiah, Saul’s concubine. David also selected the five sons of Merab, Saul’s daughter and the wife of Adriel, the son of Barzillai the Meholathite.
The Gibeonites took the seven descendants of Saul and impaled them on the mountain before the Lord. The seven were impaled at the beginning of the barley harvest.
There, at the foot of the cross, “Rizpah the daughter of Aiah took sackcloth, and spread it on a rock for herself, from the beginning of harvest until rain fell on them from the heavens; she did not allow the birds of the air to come on the bodies by day, or the wild animals by night” (2 Samuel 21:10).
The sackcloth was a type of clothing worn when mourning for the dead. Out of love for her dead sons, Rizpah kept a watch over her dead sons “from the beginning of harvest until rain fell on them from the heavens” (2 Samuel 21:10), that is, from March until October.
Deuteronomy 21:22-23 says that when a person was impaled (or crucified), the body should be removed at the end of the day: “When someone is convicted of a crime punishable by death and is executed, and you hang him on a tree, his corpse must not remain all night upon the tree.” The sons of Rizpah remained on the stake more than six months and Rizpah stayed with her sons until it rained.
The reason the bodies were left on the cross was because they were making atonement for Saul’s sin and they had to remain there until the end of the drought. The coming of the rain was a sign that God’s judgement had come to an end and that the sins of the nation had been forgiven.
Day and night, week after week, Rizpah kept a dreary watch over her dead sons, scaring away scavenger birds from feeding on their bodies during the day and not allowing wild animals to eat their bodies at night.
This demonstration of maternal affection is very moving. Her action is the action of a loving mother moved by grief, deeply affected by the agony her sons suffered on that cruel cross. Her attempt at protecting the integrity of the exposed bodies of her sons reveals the fire of love which burned intensively in Rizpah’s heart.
The tragedy and the agony of Rizpah has been captured in the poem by Felicia Hemans:
The Vigil of Rizpah
Who watches on the mountain with the dead,
Alone before the awfulness of night?
A seer awaiting the deep spirit’s might?
A warrior guarding some dark pass of dread ?
No, a lorn woman! –On her drooping head,
Once proudly graceful, heavy beats the rain;
She reeks not–living for the unburied slain,
Only to scare the vulture from their bed.
So, night by night, her vigil hath she kept
With the pale stars, and with the dews hath wept.
Oh! surely some bright Presence from above
On those wild rocks the lonely one must aid!
Even so; a strengthener through all storm and shade,
The unconquerable Angel: mightiest Love!
Who watches on the mountain with the dead,
Alone before the awfulness of night?
A seer awaiting the deep spirit’s might?
A warrior guarding some dark pass of dread ?
No, a lorn woman! –On her drooping head,
Once proudly graceful, heavy beats the rain;
She reeks not–living for the unburied slain,
Only to scare the vulture from their bed.
So, night by night, her vigil hath she kept
With the pale stars, and with the dews hath wept.
Oh! surely some bright Presence from above
On those wild rocks the lonely one must aid!
Even so; a strengthener through all storm and shade,
The unconquerable Angel: mightiest Love!
May the memory of this loving mother be a blessing to all!
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: David, Gibeonites, Love, Mother, Rizpah
Thursday, May 08, 2008
Queen of Sheba’s Palace Discovered in Ethiopia
The latest news about the Queen of Sheba and the Ark of the Covenant:
This is another attempt at proving that the Ark of the Covenant was taken to Ethiopia. Other attempts at finding the Ark of the Covenant in Ethiopia have failed and this one will also fail. It is doubtful that the Ark of the Covenant was taken to Ethiopia.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Ark of the Covenant, Ethiopia, Exum, Queen of Sheba
A team of archaeologists from the University of Hamburg said they discovered the Queen of Sheba's palace and an altar that may have once held the Ark of the Covenant in Axum, Ethiopia.
A Christian king built a new palace over the 10th-century B.C. structure, which probably didn't survive for very long, the university said in a statement. The altar, oriented toward the star Sirius, has two columns and may have been where the Ark of the Covenant, the holiest treasure of early Judaism, was kept until the first temple was built in Axum, the researchers said.
This is another attempt at proving that the Ark of the Covenant was taken to Ethiopia. Other attempts at finding the Ark of the Covenant in Ethiopia have failed and this one will also fail. It is doubtful that the Ark of the Covenant was taken to Ethiopia.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Ark of the Covenant, Ethiopia, Exum, Queen of Sheba
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
Richard Dawkins and the Intelligent Designer
Last week I watched Ben Stein’s movie “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed.” I liked the movie and I believe that people should watch it just to see how PC is alive and well in academia.
To me, the best part of the movie came at the end, when Ben Stein interviewed Richard Dawkins. I am not going to tell you what happened just before Stein interviewed Dawkins but the symbolism was powerful. You have to see it to understand.
Here comes what I believe was the best part of the movie. When Ben Stein interviewed Richard Dawkins and asked him how life began from non-life and how he would explain the intricacies and the complexities of life, Richard Dawkins had to admit that there was an Intelligent Designer behind the existence of life.
I have to confess, this was the first and only time I ever agreed with Richard Dawkins.
On Ben Stein's movie, read Expelled: Ben Stein and the Culture of PC Liberalism
NOTE: My blog has moved to a new address. If you enjoyed reading this post, you can subscribe to my blog by visiting my web page or subscribing to my blog here:
Dr. Claude Mariottini
Subscription
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Ben Stein, Expelled, Intelligent Design, Richard Dawkins
To me, the best part of the movie came at the end, when Ben Stein interviewed Richard Dawkins. I am not going to tell you what happened just before Stein interviewed Dawkins but the symbolism was powerful. You have to see it to understand.
Here comes what I believe was the best part of the movie. When Ben Stein interviewed Richard Dawkins and asked him how life began from non-life and how he would explain the intricacies and the complexities of life, Richard Dawkins had to admit that there was an Intelligent Designer behind the existence of life.
I have to confess, this was the first and only time I ever agreed with Richard Dawkins.
On Ben Stein's movie, read Expelled: Ben Stein and the Culture of PC Liberalism
NOTE: My blog has moved to a new address. If you enjoyed reading this post, you can subscribe to my blog by visiting my web page or subscribing to my blog here:
Dr. Claude Mariottini
Subscription
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Ben Stein, Expelled, Intelligent Design, Richard Dawkins
The Moral Value of Plants
The Federal Ethics Committee in Geneva has submitted a report on the dignity of plants. According to a press release, the report “condemned the decapitation of flowers without reason, among other sins.”
According to the members of the committee, plants deserve respect and killing them arbitrarily was morally wrong, except when it comes to saving human life.
A few members of the committee objected to genetic engineering of plants since such action infringes on the plant’s “moral value.”
I believe Christians should be good stewards of God’s creation, but the view proposed by this committee is going too far. Consider “the wild grass, which is here today and tomorrow is tossed into the fire to heat the oven” (Luke 12:28 NET), do they have the moral capacity to say to humans that to use them as fuel for the fire is a sin against them?
We kill trees to make paper, we kill corn to make fuel for cars, we kill soy to make soap for human consumption, and we decapitate roses to make our wives happy.
If allowing plants to die without reason is a sin, should we rescue plants when they are being scorched by the hot sun (Mark 4:6)? Should we try to save plants when they are being killed by other plants (Luke 8:7)? The grass will always wither and the flowers will always fade when the wind of the Lord blows upon them (Isaiah 40:7) and there is nothing we can do about that.
We recognize the dignity of human life and work hard to preserve it. We recognize the worth of animals and abhor animal cruelty. We also appreciate the value of plants because they are part of God’s beautiful creation. However, there is a difference between humans, animals, and plants. Enjoying the beauty of the lilies of the field is one of the joys God has given to his creatures. And picking one of them for their beauty and enjoyment is not a sin against the Creator, much less a sin against the plant.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Creation, Plants
According to the members of the committee, plants deserve respect and killing them arbitrarily was morally wrong, except when it comes to saving human life.
A few members of the committee objected to genetic engineering of plants since such action infringes on the plant’s “moral value.”
I believe Christians should be good stewards of God’s creation, but the view proposed by this committee is going too far. Consider “the wild grass, which is here today and tomorrow is tossed into the fire to heat the oven” (Luke 12:28 NET), do they have the moral capacity to say to humans that to use them as fuel for the fire is a sin against them?
We kill trees to make paper, we kill corn to make fuel for cars, we kill soy to make soap for human consumption, and we decapitate roses to make our wives happy.
If allowing plants to die without reason is a sin, should we rescue plants when they are being scorched by the hot sun (Mark 4:6)? Should we try to save plants when they are being killed by other plants (Luke 8:7)? The grass will always wither and the flowers will always fade when the wind of the Lord blows upon them (Isaiah 40:7) and there is nothing we can do about that.
We recognize the dignity of human life and work hard to preserve it. We recognize the worth of animals and abhor animal cruelty. We also appreciate the value of plants because they are part of God’s beautiful creation. However, there is a difference between humans, animals, and plants. Enjoying the beauty of the lilies of the field is one of the joys God has given to his creatures. And picking one of them for their beauty and enjoyment is not a sin against the Creator, much less a sin against the plant.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Creation, Plants
Monday, May 05, 2008
Bruce Waltke on the Nephilim
Although I am on sabbatical and working on a book project, I have been reading, here and there, Bruce Waltke’s An Old Testament Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007). Waltke’s book was the best-seller at the Zondervan exhibit during the 2007 SBL meeting in San Diego. I have not been able to dedicate much time to finish reading the book because of other commitments.
An Old Testament Theology is a very interesting book. Waltke is an evangelical scholar and professor emeritus at Regent College in Vancouver, British Columbia. He writes from an evangelical perspective and takes a very conservative approach to the Old Testament.
Waltke wrote that his book is more than an Old Testament theology; it is a biblical theology. If I had to classify his book, I would say that this book is a Christian perspective on the theology of the Old Testament. How else could one explain the fact that in his discussion of the creation of men and women in Genesis 1:26-28 he also discusses the role of women in ministry and issues of church government. On his discussion of Genesis 1:26-28, he wrote (p. 246):
He then concludes that the church should not appoint women to an office or a position in which she would have authority over her husband. He said (p. 246): “The Bible consistently and without exception teaches male hierarchical priority in government in texts that address the issue.” I do not believe such a discussion would be found in the Old Testament theologies written by Gerhard von Rad or by Walter Eichrodt.
At this time I do not want to address the issue of church government. The purpose of my post is to address another issue: his discussion of the Nephilim. Unfortunately, as I wrote this post, I did not have in front of me a copy of Waltke’s commentary on Genesis (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001). However, since his An Old Testament Theology was written in 2007, I took for granted that his view is the same or else, that his view in this latter book reflects a more recent perspective on the issue.
In examining Waltke’s view on the Nephilim, I presuppose that Waltke has an evangelical approach to the interpretation of the Old Testament, that is, that his view reflects the trustworthiness of Scriptures and that the flood had a global scope. This latter fact, that Waltke believes that there was a global flood I learned from reading a review of his commentary on Genesis.
In addition, I am not dealing with every aspect of the Nephilim in Genesis 6:4. I have dealt with the issue of the Nephilim and the sons of God in one article, The Anakim and the Nephilim, and several posts: The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4, Rereading Genesis 6:4: Were They Really Giants?, and The Nephilim Again: A Response to Joe Cathey and Duane Smith.
In this post I just want to deal with Waltke’s statement on the Nephilim. Genesis 6:4 reads: “The Nephilim were on the earth in those days-- and also afterward-- when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.”
Referring to this verse, Waltke wrote (p. 285, n. 2):
This interpretation is impossible. If the Nephilim existed in the time of Moses and if they were the offspring of the “sons of God,” then this means that they survived the flood. The biblical text is very clear that only Noah and his wife, their sons and their wives, eight people, survived the flood (1 Peter 3:20).
If all people died in the flood, except Noah and his family, then the Nephilim could not have survived the flood. If the Nephilim could not survive the flood, then, the Nephilim in the time of Moses could not have been the descendants of the “sons of God” since they also perished in the flood.
The interpretation that Waltke gives for the Nephilim in the time of Moses cannot be correct if only Noah and his family survived the flood. If this is so, how then must we understand the reference to the Nephilim in Numbers 13:33.
In my article on the Anakim and the Nephilim, I wrote:
Thus, the spies did not see any Nephilim for the Nephilim had died in the flood. The spies saw the Anakim, tall people who lived in Canaan at the time Israel was preparing to enter the land. Dominated by fear and superstition, the spies identified the Anakim with the Nephilim of old. There were no Nephilim in Canaan, only Anakim.
On Bruce Waltke, read: Bruce K. Waltke Resigns Over the Issue of Evolution
NOTE: My blog has moved to a new address. If you enjoyed reading this post, you can subscribe to my blog by visiting my web page or subscribing to my blog here:
Dr. Claude Mariottini
Subscription
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Anakim, Bruce Waltke, Nephilim, Giants
An Old Testament Theology is a very interesting book. Waltke is an evangelical scholar and professor emeritus at Regent College in Vancouver, British Columbia. He writes from an evangelical perspective and takes a very conservative approach to the Old Testament.
Waltke wrote that his book is more than an Old Testament theology; it is a biblical theology. If I had to classify his book, I would say that this book is a Christian perspective on the theology of the Old Testament. How else could one explain the fact that in his discussion of the creation of men and women in Genesis 1:26-28 he also discusses the role of women in ministry and issues of church government. On his discussion of Genesis 1:26-28, he wrote (p. 246):
Let us now turn to the question of whether the church should ordain women to the office of ruler/teacher (e.g. of priests, elders, and pastors in the Anglican, Presbyterian, and Baptist traditions respectively). Here we need to distinguish clearly between call to the ministry and appointment to an office since they are not the same.
He then concludes that the church should not appoint women to an office or a position in which she would have authority over her husband. He said (p. 246): “The Bible consistently and without exception teaches male hierarchical priority in government in texts that address the issue.” I do not believe such a discussion would be found in the Old Testament theologies written by Gerhard von Rad or by Walter Eichrodt.
At this time I do not want to address the issue of church government. The purpose of my post is to address another issue: his discussion of the Nephilim. Unfortunately, as I wrote this post, I did not have in front of me a copy of Waltke’s commentary on Genesis (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001). However, since his An Old Testament Theology was written in 2007, I took for granted that his view is the same or else, that his view in this latter book reflects a more recent perspective on the issue.
In examining Waltke’s view on the Nephilim, I presuppose that Waltke has an evangelical approach to the interpretation of the Old Testament, that is, that his view reflects the trustworthiness of Scriptures and that the flood had a global scope. This latter fact, that Waltke believes that there was a global flood I learned from reading a review of his commentary on Genesis.
In addition, I am not dealing with every aspect of the Nephilim in Genesis 6:4. I have dealt with the issue of the Nephilim and the sons of God in one article, The Anakim and the Nephilim, and several posts: The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4, Rereading Genesis 6:4: Were They Really Giants?, and The Nephilim Again: A Response to Joe Cathey and Duane Smith.
In this post I just want to deal with Waltke’s statement on the Nephilim. Genesis 6:4 reads: “The Nephilim were on the earth in those days-- and also afterward-- when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.”
Referring to this verse, Waltke wrote (p. 285, n. 2):
The “sons of God” are best understood as demon-possessed kings. The perverted psyches of these tyrants allowed this entrance of the demonic. The Nephilim (i.e., “fallen ones”)–who also existed at the time of Moses (Num. 13:33)–were probably their offspring, also called “heroes.” They filled the earth with violence.
This interpretation is impossible. If the Nephilim existed in the time of Moses and if they were the offspring of the “sons of God,” then this means that they survived the flood. The biblical text is very clear that only Noah and his wife, their sons and their wives, eight people, survived the flood (1 Peter 3:20).
If all people died in the flood, except Noah and his family, then the Nephilim could not have survived the flood. If the Nephilim could not survive the flood, then, the Nephilim in the time of Moses could not have been the descendants of the “sons of God” since they also perished in the flood.
The interpretation that Waltke gives for the Nephilim in the time of Moses cannot be correct if only Noah and his family survived the flood. If this is so, how then must we understand the reference to the Nephilim in Numbers 13:33.
In my article on the Anakim and the Nephilim, I wrote:
After the people of Israel left Egypt, they came to the borders of Canaan, the land that Yahweh their God had promised to them. Before they entered the land, Moses sent 12 spies to investigate the land and its people (Num. 13). In a later passage Moses seems to place responsibility for the spies being sent on the people of Israel (Deut. 1:22). With the exception of Joshua and Caleb, the spies brought back a pessimistic report of their survey of Canaan. To 10 of the spies, the fortified walls of the Canaanite cities were an overwhelming obstacle for their conquest of the land (13:28). The spies also were terrified by the size of the inhabitants of Canaan. “They said, ‘The land we explored devours those living in it. All the people we saw there are of great size. We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them’” (Num. 13:32-33 NIV). In their exaggeration of the situation, the spies spoke to the assembly of the leaders of Israel of the terrible predicament awaiting the people of Israel. The spies added that, in addition of being people of gigantic stature, the Anakim were the Nephilim, the dreadful people who lived on earth in the days before the flood.
*******
Although the spies were utterly afraid of the Anakim, the Anakim were conquered by Joshua and driven out of the land. Only a small remnant survived; they found refuge in the cities of Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod (Joshua 11:21-22). Caleb conquered Hebron, the stronghold of the Anakim and drove out the three clans of the Anakim (Josh. 15:14). Thus, it is possible to conclude that when the Israelite spies said that saw the Nephilim in the land, they were using the word as a synonym for Anakim. Both words are used to describe the imposing physical condition of the original inhabitants of the promised land. Centuries later, the prophet Amos, referring to the overwhelming size of the original inhabitants of Canaan, said that the Canaanites were as "tall as the cedars and strong as the oaks" (Amos 2:9 NIV).
Thus, the spies did not see any Nephilim for the Nephilim had died in the flood. The spies saw the Anakim, tall people who lived in Canaan at the time Israel was preparing to enter the land. Dominated by fear and superstition, the spies identified the Anakim with the Nephilim of old. There were no Nephilim in Canaan, only Anakim.
On Bruce Waltke, read: Bruce K. Waltke Resigns Over the Issue of Evolution
NOTE: My blog has moved to a new address. If you enjoyed reading this post, you can subscribe to my blog by visiting my web page or subscribing to my blog here:
Dr. Claude Mariottini
Subscription
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Anakim, Bruce Waltke, Nephilim, Giants
Sunday, May 04, 2008
Archaeology and the “Bloodline Conspiracy”
Photo of the findings
A tomb discovered near the Rennes-le-Chateau church in France contains several artifacts that date to first century Jerusalem. According to a news report, the tomb also contains a mummified corpse draped in a shroud bearing a red cross.
These discoveries are used in a new film, “Bloodline,” to challenge the death and resurrection of Christ. The movie was directed by Bruce Burgess and produced by René Barnett. The film promotes the “bloodline conspiracy.” The premise of the film is that “Jesus married Mary Magdalene and fathered a child with her. After the crucifixion, Mary escaped Roman-controlled Judea by sea along with the child and their servants, eventually ending up in modern day southern France.”
Israeli archaeologist Gabi Barkay describes the content of the tomb. According to the news report,
One of the pottery vessels, he said, is an ungentarium jar typically used for perfumes, while the other is a small bowl known as unguent ware. The glass vessel is an elongated alabastra, also known as a "tear bottle," made of blown glass. Some thirty coins were also found dating primarily to the Hasmonean, Herodian, and Byzantine Periods, with a single silver coin of the Crusader period minted in Jerusalem.
Without commenting on the validity of the "bloodline conspiracy" story of the movie, Barkay said that all of the objects found in the wooden chest, besides of course the Crusader coin, are indeed of the 1st century BCE-1st century CE and of Judean origin. He said that they are "very typical to Second Temple Period Jerusalem," and that "they can be found in large numbers in tombs in Jerusalem, but in other parts of Judea as well."
This is another attempt at contradicting the message of the Gospel. There is no evidence that these findings will be the “smoking gun” that will prove that Jesus and Mary Magdalene were husband and wife. The fact is, there is no “smoking gun.” Notwithstanding all the efforts to prove that Jesus was just a mere human, the testimony of the biblical text is that Jesus was the Son of God.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Bloodline Conspiracy, Gabi Barkay, Jesus, Mary Magdalene,
Friday, May 02, 2008
The Female Body of Akhenaten
Akhenaten was the pharaoh of Egypt best known for introducing a form of monotheism to ancient Egypt during the Amarna Age. This form of monotheism was represented by the worship of the sun god Aten . Akhenaten reigned in the mid-1300s B.C. He was married to Nefertiti and was the father of Tutankhamun, also known as King Tut.
According to Dr. Irwin Braverman, a Yale University physician, Akhenaten had “an androgynous appearance. He had a female physique with wide hips and breasts.”
Dr. Braverman said that the female form of Akhenaten’s body was due to a genetic mutation that caused the pharaoh’s body to convert more male hormones to female hormones than needed.
Read the news report here.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Amarna Age, Akhenaten, Archaeology, Irwin Braverman
According to Dr. Irwin Braverman, a Yale University physician, Akhenaten had “an androgynous appearance. He had a female physique with wide hips and breasts.”
Dr. Braverman said that the female form of Akhenaten’s body was due to a genetic mutation that caused the pharaoh’s body to convert more male hormones to female hormones than needed.
Read the news report here.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Amarna Age, Akhenaten, Archaeology, Irwin Braverman
“You Shall Not Steal,” Exodus 20:15.
In his book, Written in Stone: The Ten Commandments and Today's Moral Crisis (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2003), Philip Graham Ryken gives a broad application of the Decalogue to the moral crisis facing society in the twenty-first century.
I have selected a brief section from the book, a section in which Ryken applies the teachings of the eighth commandment, “You shall not steal” (Exodus 20:15) to some of moral issues people and society face today. It is a long section, but a section worth reading. For the sake of space, I have removed the footnotes that appear in this section. The footnotes are fully documented in the book.
In his study of the eighth commandment, Ryken wrote (pp. 170-173):
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Decalogue, Philip Ryken, Ten Commandments
I have selected a brief section from the book, a section in which Ryken applies the teachings of the eighth commandment, “You shall not steal” (Exodus 20:15) to some of moral issues people and society face today. It is a long section, but a section worth reading. For the sake of space, I have removed the footnotes that appear in this section. The footnotes are fully documented in the book.
In his study of the eighth commandment, Ryken wrote (pp. 170-173):
Everyone knows that stealing is wrong. Even people who don't read the Bible know the eighth commandment, which says, "You shall not steal" (Exod. 20:15). To steal is to take something that doesn't belong to you. The Hebrew word for stealing (ganaf) literally means to carry something away, as if by stealth. To give a more technical definition, to steal is to appropriate someone else's property unlawfully.I have read Ryken’s book and I recommend it. Right now, a Bible study group in my church is reading and discussing the book and they are enjoying it. If you are preparing a series of sermons on the Ten Commandments or if you have a study group looking for a good book to read, Written in Stone may be the book they are looking for.
What the eighth commandment forbids seems very simple. However, most people fail to understand its full meaning. Like the rest of God's law; the prohibition on stealing is comprehensive:
Ganaf-stealing-covers all conventional types of theft: burglary (breaking into a home or building to commit theft); robbery (taking property directly from another using violence or intimidation); larceny (taking something without permission and not returning it); hijacking (using force to take goods in transit or seizing control of a bus, truck, plane, etc.); shoplifting (taking items from a store during business hours without paying for them); and pickpocketing and purse-snatching. The term ganaf also covers a wide range of exotic and complex thefts ... [such as] embezzlement (the fraudulent taking of money or other goods entrusted to one's care). There is extortion (getting money from someone by means of threats or misuses of authority), and racketeering (obtaining money by any illegal means).
This is only a partial list of the countless ways people violate the eighth commandment. They pilfer public property, stealing supplies from hospitals, building sites, and churches. In fact, one hotel reported in its first year of business having to replace thirty-eight thousand spoons, eighteen thousand tiles, three hundred and fifty-five coffee pots ... and one hundred Bibles!
Citizens steal from the government by underpaying their taxes or making false claims for disability and Social Security. The government teals too. With its huge bureaucracy, the federal government commits theft on a national scale by wasting public money and by accumulating debt without fully planning to repay. Deficit spending is really a way of stealing from future citizens.
There is theft at work. Employees fill in false time cards and call in sick when they want a day off. They help themselves to office supplies, make personal long-distance phone calls, and pad their expense accounts. Sometimes they go so far as to embezzle, but a more common workplace theft is simply failing to put in a full day's work. Instead workers idle away their time, sitting in their offices and surfing the Internet, sending e-mail to friends-even playing computer games. Whenever we give anything less than our best effort, we are robbing our employer of the productivity we owe.
These are not victimless crimes. Employee theft of time and property costs American businesses and their investors more than two hundred billion dollars a year. This affects all of us. According to some estimates, as much as one-third of a product's cost goes to cover the various forms of stealing that occur on its way to the marketplace. This “theft surcharge," as analysts call it, is a drag on our whole economy.
For their part, employers often steal from their workers. They demand longer hours than contracts allow. They reorganize their workforce to improve their profits, and then the workers who still have jobs end up doing all the work that used to be done by the people who got laid off (plus their own of course)! This is just a sophisticated way for companies to steal from their best employees.
Large corporations steal from the general public. They keep some of their transactions off the books. They hide their losses in offshore accounts. They manipulate securities by providing false information. One of the worst offenders in recent history was Enron, the vast energy company whose spectacular collapse in 2001 injured the whole U.S. economy and cost some people their life savings. Enron's faIl was quickly followed by a series of others as Arthur Andersen, WorldCom, Rite-Aid, and other well-known corporations were caught cheating the public. The nefarious executives from these companies knew all the tricks, but this is hardly a recent phenomenon. Martin Luther identified certain men of his day as "gentlemen swindlers or big operators. Far from being picklocks and sneak-thieves who loot a cash box, they sit in office chairs and are called great lords and honorable, good citizens, and yet with a great show of legality they rob and steal." And John Calvin said, "It follows, therefore, that not only are those thieves who secretly steal the property of others, but those also who seek gain from the loss of others, accumulate wealth by unlawful practices and are more devoted to their private advantage than to equity"
Many common business practices are immoral, even if technically they are not illegal. This is especially true in marketing. What many business people consider good salesmanship actually violates the eighth commandment. There is price gouging, in which the laws of supply and demand are used to take advantage of helpless consumers. There is false advertising and deceptive packaging, which is designed to make a product look bigger and better than it actually is. Salesmen exaggerate the value of their products, trying to sell people things they really don't need. Before the sale, every car is touted as the finest vehicle in automotive history; but once the sale is made, and it's time to talk about a service contract, suddenly the car is going to need all kinds of repairs that ought to be paid for in advance! And so it goes.
These practices are all violations of the eighth commandment. Calvin was right when he said, "Let us remember that all those arts whereby we acquire the possessions and money of our neighbors–when such devices depart from sincere affection to a desire to cheat or in some manner to harm-are to be considered as thefts." Similarly, Luther said that we break the eighth commandment whenever we "take advantage of our neighbor in any sort of dealing that results in loss to him." How much business falls to measure up to that simple standard?
Then there is all the theft that is tied up with credit. There is usury, the lending of money at exorbitant rates of interest in order to make unjust profits. Today the most blatant offenders are the credit. card companies that charge interest at nearly 20 percent. The same sin is committed
on a larger scale when international banks hold debtor nations in fiscal bondage. This is only one small aspect of a much wider problem, which is that a small minority uses the vast majority of the world's resources– and does everything they can to protect their advantage. But the Bible teaches that the poor need our help and that they should receive loans free of interest, at least within the community of God's people (Lev. 25:35-38; Deut. 15:7-8). There is another side to this, of course, which is that some people buy on credit without ever intending to repay. No doubt this helps explain why in recent decades credit card debt has risen from five billion to more than five hundred billion dollars.
The list goes on. There is insurance fraud, the filing of false claims. There are the deliberate cost overruns that make up the difference between the estimate and the final price whenever work is contracted. There is the theft of intellectual property, the violation of copyrights, including the unlawful duplication of music and videos. There is plagiarism, the misappropriation of someone else's work. Then there is identity theft, in which personal information is stolen off the Internet and used to run up outrageous charges.
There are countless ways to steal.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Decalogue, Philip Ryken, Ten Commandments
Thursday, May 01, 2008
An Interview with Antony Flew
In his comment on my post on There Is a God, John left a link to an interview with Antony Flew conducted by Benjamin Wiker on October 30, 2007.
Wiker is a Senior Fellow at the St. Paul Center for Biblical Theology and the author of four books. The following is an excerpt from the interview:
Read the complete interview with Flew here.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tag: Antony Flew, Benjamin Wiker
Wiker is a Senior Fellow at the St. Paul Center for Biblical Theology and the author of four books. The following is an excerpt from the interview:
Benjamin Wiker: You say in There is a God, that "it may well be that no one is as surprised as I am that my exploration of the Divine has after all these years turned from denial.to discovery." Everyone else was certainly very surprised as well, perhaps all the more so since on our end, it seemed so sudden. But in There is a God, we find that it was actually a very gradual process-a "two decade migration," as you call it. God was the conclusion of a rather long argument, then. But wasn't there a point in the "argument" where you found yourself suddenly surprised by the realization that "There is a God" after all? So that, in some sense, you really did "hear a Voice that says" in the evidence itself " `Can you hear me now?'"
Anthony Flew: There were two factors in particular that were decisive. One was my growing empathy with the insight of Einstein and other noted scientists that there had to be an Intelligence behind the integrated complexity of the physical Universe. The second was my own insight that the integrated complexity of life itself - which is far more complex than the physical Universe - can only be explained in terms of an Intelligent Source. I believe that the origin of life and reproduction simply cannot be explained from a biological standpoint despite numerous efforts to do so. With every passing year, the more that was discovered about the richness and inherent intelligence of life, the less it seemed likely that a chemical soup could magically generate the genetic code. The difference between life and non-life, it became apparent to me, was ontological and not chemical. The best confirmation of this radical gulf is Richard Dawkins' comical effort to argue in The God Delusion that the origin of life can be attributed to a "lucky chance." If that's the best argument you have, then the game is over. No, I did not hear a Voice. It was the evidence itself that led me to this conclusion.
Wiker: You are famous for arguing for a presumption of atheism, i.e., as far as arguments for and against the existence of God, the burden of proof lies with the theist. Given that you believe that you only followed the evidence where it led, and it led to theism, it would seem that things have now gone the other way, so that the burden of proof lies with the atheist. He must prove that God doesn't exist. What are your thoughts on that?
Flew: I note in my book that some philosophers indeed have argued in the past that the burden of proof is on the atheist. I think the origins of the laws of nature and of life and the Universe point clearly to an intelligent Source. The burden of proof is on those who argue to the contrary.
*******
Wiker: You are obviously aware of the spate of recent books by such atheists as Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens. They think that those who believe in God are behind the times. But you seem to be politely asserting that they are ones who are behind the times, insofar as the latest scientific evidence tends strongly toward—or perhaps even demonstrates—a theistic conclusion. Is that a fair assessment of your position?
Flew: Yes indeed. I would add that Dawkins is selective to the point of dishonesty when he cites the views of scientists on the philosophical implications of the scientific data.
Two noted philosophers, one an agnostic (Anthony Kenny) and the other an atheist (Nagel), recently pointed out that Dawkins has failed to address three major issues that ground the rational case for God. As it happens, these are the very same issues that had driven me to accept the existence of a God: the laws of nature, life with its teleological organization and the existence of the Universe.
*******
Wiker: Do you plan to write a follow-up book to There is a God?
Flew: As I said in opening the book, this is my last will and testament.
Read the complete interview with Flew here.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tag: Antony Flew, Benjamin Wiker
There Is a God: A Postscript
Several days ago, when I first began publishing a review of Antony Flew’s book, There Is a God: How the World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind, both Charles Halton and Mark Goodacre called my attention to an article written by Mark Oppenheimer, “The Turning of an Atheist,” published in the New York Times Magazine on November 4, 2007 (read the comments to my post). Oppenheimer’s article was a criticism of how Flew’s book was written. The information contained in that article was very disturbing. I will say more about it below.
After I read Flew’s book, I was very impressed by the simple way Flew explained how he turned from atheism and embarked on a journey that led him back to theism. In his book, Flew mentioned how the complexity of the chromosome sequence required more than randomness to produce life. Flew said that this complexity required an intelligent designer to produce life.
Flew said that the cosmology that came out of the Big Bang Theory convinced him that the universe had a beginning. He also reflected on the constancy and reliability of the laws of nature and concluded that these laws were created by an intelligent being. All this, he said, led him to believe that behind the creation of the universe and the constancy of the laws of nature was, what he called, “the mind of God.”
The book was co-written with Roy Abraham Varghese, whom Oppenheimer called in his article a “Christian apologist.” According to Oppenheimer, Varghese is “a tireless crusader for those who believe that scientific research helps verify the existence of God.” Varghese leads the Institute for MetaScience Research and sponsors conferences and debates at colleges and universities between Christians and atheists.
When Oppenheimer interviewed Varghese, Varghese admitted that he wrote most of the book. As Oppenheimer wrote:
In retrospect, after I finished reading the book, I realized that an eighty-four years old British scholar, long retired from academic life, whose memory is failing, and who lives without an Internet connection, would probably be unfamiliar with the intricacies of the rules of baseball and not conversant with the “purpose-driven” language that appears in the book.
If Varghese wrote the book and used apologetic language to express Flew’s views, is the book without merit? According to Varghese, he consulted with Flew and used his material in the preparation of the book and then discussed the final product with Flew. Thus, it seems that the final draft of the book actually reflects Flew’s views and beliefs about science and God.
So, when I wrote my review of Flew’s book, I knew about Oppenheimer’s criticism and that Varghese was the primary writer for the book. If I knew all these things, why did I write my four posts on Flew’s book? The answer is that I agree with the arguments for the existence of God and they are presented in the book
I believe that There Is a God, whether written by Flew, Varghese, or both, presents a clear argument for the existence of God. Although the cosmological and the teleological arguments for the existence of God have been highly criticized, Flew (or Varghese) wrote that when rightly expressed, these arguments still provide strong evidence for the existence of God.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Antony Flew, Mark Oppenheimer, Roy Varghese
After I read Flew’s book, I was very impressed by the simple way Flew explained how he turned from atheism and embarked on a journey that led him back to theism. In his book, Flew mentioned how the complexity of the chromosome sequence required more than randomness to produce life. Flew said that this complexity required an intelligent designer to produce life.
Flew said that the cosmology that came out of the Big Bang Theory convinced him that the universe had a beginning. He also reflected on the constancy and reliability of the laws of nature and concluded that these laws were created by an intelligent being. All this, he said, led him to believe that behind the creation of the universe and the constancy of the laws of nature was, what he called, “the mind of God.”
The book was co-written with Roy Abraham Varghese, whom Oppenheimer called in his article a “Christian apologist.” According to Oppenheimer, Varghese is “a tireless crusader for those who believe that scientific research helps verify the existence of God.” Varghese leads the Institute for MetaScience Research and sponsors conferences and debates at colleges and universities between Christians and atheists.
When Oppenheimer interviewed Varghese, Varghese admitted that he wrote most of the book. As Oppenheimer wrote:
When I asked Varghese, he freely admitted that the book was his idea and that he had done all the original writing for it. But he made the book sound like more of a joint effort - slightly more, anyway. "There was stuff he had written before, and some of that was adapted to this," Varghese said. "There is stuff he'd written to me in correspondence, and I organized a lot of it. And I had interviews with him. So those three elements went into it. Oh, and I exposed him to certain authors and got his views on them. We pulled it together. And then to make it more reader-friendly, HarperCollins had a more popular author go through it."
So even the ghostwriter had a ghostwriter: Bob Hostetler, an evangelical pastor and author from Ohio, rewrote many passages, especially in the section that narrates Flew's childhood. With three authors, how much Flew was left in the book? "He went through everything, was happy with everything," Varghese said.
In retrospect, after I finished reading the book, I realized that an eighty-four years old British scholar, long retired from academic life, whose memory is failing, and who lives without an Internet connection, would probably be unfamiliar with the intricacies of the rules of baseball and not conversant with the “purpose-driven” language that appears in the book.
If Varghese wrote the book and used apologetic language to express Flew’s views, is the book without merit? According to Varghese, he consulted with Flew and used his material in the preparation of the book and then discussed the final product with Flew. Thus, it seems that the final draft of the book actually reflects Flew’s views and beliefs about science and God.
So, when I wrote my review of Flew’s book, I knew about Oppenheimer’s criticism and that Varghese was the primary writer for the book. If I knew all these things, why did I write my four posts on Flew’s book? The answer is that I agree with the arguments for the existence of God and they are presented in the book
I believe that There Is a God, whether written by Flew, Varghese, or both, presents a clear argument for the existence of God. Although the cosmological and the teleological arguments for the existence of God have been highly criticized, Flew (or Varghese) wrote that when rightly expressed, these arguments still provide strong evidence for the existence of God.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Antony Flew, Mark Oppenheimer, Roy Varghese
Biblical Studies Carnival XXIX
Jim West has posted his selection for the Biblical Studies Carnival XXIX. His post is laced with sarcasm and humor but the posts he selected are very good. I had not read some of his selections before. Now, I will make sure I will read them.
I hope you will visit Jim’s blog and select a few good posts to read.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
I hope you will visit Jim’s blog and select a few good posts to read.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)