Tag Archive for: Ryan Leasure

¿Cómo obtuvimos nuestra Biblia?

¿Cómo obtuvimos nuestra Biblia?

By Ryan Leasure

This article is the first in a nine-part series that will explain the story of how we got our Bible. That is, the Bible did not fall from the sky into our hands. Rather, the Bible is the result of a long process that begins in the mind of God and ends with our modern English translations.

The process involves inspiring texts, collecting certain books, rejecting others, copying manuscripts, evaluating thousands of manuscripts to recreate the originals as closely as possible, translating the Hebrew and Greek texts into English, and creating readable translations in our modern local language.

As you might have guessed, this series will deal with some of the most crucial issues surrounding the Bible: topics such as the canon, the Apocrypha, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Pseudepigraphal Gospels, textual criticism, the King James Only movement, and much more. I hope you will join me on this journey through the fascinating history of the Bible. If you are not already subscribed, please click subscribe to receive updates on future posts.

That being said, let’s start with the inspiration.

Plenary and Verbal Inspiration

Paul writes: “All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17, ESV). Here are some concepts worth highlighting.

First, the Greek word “theopneustos,” translated “inspired,” technically means “God-breathed, God-breathed, God-inspired,” so Paul is saying that God “breathes out” rather than “inspires” the text. In other words, He is the source behind all Scripture.

Second, notice that God inspires Scripture, not the authors themselves. This necessary distinction means that God’s inspiration extends to the final product of Scripture itself, not to the everyday life of the human author. That is, the authors were fallible while God-inspired Scripture was not.

Third, Paul points out that ALL Scripture is inspired, not just parts of it. Some have wrongly taught that inspiration only covers the parts that deal with faith and morals. But that is not what Paul is writing about. When he says “all,” he includes the Canaanite conquests, the talking donkey, and the Levitical code.

The biblical authors affirm inspiration

Several times throughout the Old Testament, the authors acknowledged that they were writing the words of God. Consider these examples:

“ Then the Lord said to Moses, ‘Write this in a scroll for a memorial, and tell Joshua that I will completely blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven ’” (Exodus 17:14).

“ Then the Lord put forth his hand and touched my mouth. And the Lord said to me, ‘Behold, I have put my words in your mouth ’” (Jeremiah 1:9).

“ The word of the Lord that came to Hosea son of Beeri in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam son of Joash king of Israel ” (Hosea 1:1).

“ On the fifth day of the month, in the fifth year of King Jehoiakim’s exile, the word of the Lord came to Ezekiel the priest, son of Buzi, in the land of the Chaldeans by the River Chebar; and there the hand of the Lord came upon him ” (Ezekiel 1:2-3).

Furthermore, the New Testament authors affirm the inspiration of the Old Testament:

“ All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: ” (Matthew 1:22).

“ Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit foretold through the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide for those who arrested Jesus ” (Acts 1:16).

“ David himself said through the Holy Spirit: ‘The Lord said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies under your feet ”” (Mark 12:36).

This last verse was quoted by Jesus Himself. That is, Jesus affirmed the inspiration of the Old Testament.

What about the New Testament?

When Paul writes that “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God,” he was most likely referring to the Old Testament, since the word Scripture (“graphe”) refers to the Old Testament when used in the New. We must also remember that when Paul wrote this letter, parts of the New Testament had not yet been written. Was inspiration then limited to the Old Testament? No, it was not.

Notice how Peter speaks of Paul’s letters in 2 Peter 3:15-16: “And consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you, according to the wisdom given to him. And in all his letters he speaks about this matter. In them there are some things that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable distort— just as they distort the rest of the Scriptures —to their own destruction.” Peter seems to equate Paul’s letters with the Old Testament and grant them equal authority.

1 Timothy 5:18 is another crucial text on this issue. Paul writes, “ For the Scripture says, ‘ You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain,’ and, ‘The laborer is worthy of his wages.’” Paul quotes two different passages in this verse and refers to both as Scripture. The first is found in Deuteronomy 25:4 and the second in Luke 10:7. This means that Paul thought that Luke’s Gospel was Scripture just as the Old Testament is.

We even have some clues that suggest the apostles knew they were writing God’s Word. Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 14:37, “If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is a command from the Lord .” Additionally, Paul states in 1 Thessalonians 2:13, “For this reason we also thank God continually that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as it really is, the word of God, which also works in you who believe.”

Peter also comments, “that you may remember the words spoken beforehand by the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior as declared by your apostles ” (2 Peter 3:2). The apostles, then, believed that they spoke with authority from God. And they could do so because Jesus promised them that the Holy Spirit would guide them in the process. (John 14:26; 16:13)

Mechanical dictation?

Peter points out, “But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever made by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:20-21). Some suggest that the activity of the Holy Spirit is a lot like annoying mechanical dictation. But this would be a mistake. As I mentioned earlier, inspiration extends only to the finished product of Scripture. That is, God worked in and through the abilities, personalities, and experiences of the human authors as they wrote their various works. In short, the biblical authors produced their Scriptures in different ways.

The author of Hebrews touches on this point when he tells us, “God spoke long ago, at sundry times, and in divers manners, to the fathers by the prophets” (Hebrews 1:1). Notice how he states that the prophets spoke “in many ways.” And Scripture makes abundantly clear these different ways. Consider a few examples:

  • Research/Interpretation: “ Now concerning this salvation the prophets who prophesied of the grace to come to you searched and investigated diligently, seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating when he foretold the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow ” (1 Peter 1:10-11)
  • Dictation: “ Write to the angel of the church in Ephesus… ” (Revelation 2:1)
  • Investigative Search: “ Forasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a record of the things which are most certain among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, it seemed fitting for me also, having diligently investigated everything from the beginning, to write an orderly account to you, most excellent Theophilus ” (Luke 1:1-3)

Furthermore, the biblical authors wrote poetry, wisdom literature, letters, and prophecies. And in doing so, God worked through them in such a way that did not override their unique perspective. At the same time, He oversaw the process to ensure that their message was accurate when communicated. As the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy notes: “We affirm that God, in His work of inspiration, utilized the distinctive personalities and literary styles of the writers He had chosen and prepared. We deny that God, by having these writers use the very words He chose, overrode their personalities.”

Evidence of Inspiration

Some argue that inspiration appeals to circular reasoning because we must appeal to Scripture itself to claim inspiration. While that is a fair criticism, Christians are right to appeal to Scripture because it is our highest authority. If we appeal, for example, to human reasoning, then we elevate human reasoning to a higher authority than Scripture.

That said, we do have good evidence for inspiration in fulfilled prophecies. I could list dozens of fulfilled prophecies, but I will only briefly touch on two of them. First, Isaiah 53 correctly predicts Christ’s crucifixion. Of note is the fact that Isaiah says, “He was pierced for our transgressions” (Isaiah 53:5, ESV). This method of death is significant because in Isaiah’s day, the Jewish methods of execution were stoning or hanging. How could Isaiah correctly predict the kind of death Jesus would suffer seven hundred years earlier?

Another example is Daniel 9. Although I won’t go into details, Daniel predicts the exact time of Christ’s arrival. Furthermore, Daniel says that the Messiah will be “slain” (killed) just before the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. Jesus was crucified in A.D. 30. The Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in A.D. 70.

Inerrancy

Inerrancy follows naturally from inspiration. In other words, if God is the author behind the entire Bible, then everything must be true because God always tells the truth. Consider the following texts:

“ in which it is impossible for God to lie ” (Hebrews 6:18)

“ Now therefore, O Lord God, you are God, your words are truth ” (2 Samuel 7:28)

“ Every word of God is proven; ” (Proverbs 30:5)

“ Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth” (John 17:17)

Notice that Jesus doesn’t just say that God’s word is true, but that it is the TRUTH. It is the absolute standard of truth. And lest anyone think that this idea of ​​inerrancy is a modern invention, listen to some of the church fathers:

“You have searched the Scriptures, which are true and have been given by the Holy Spirit. You know that nothing unjust or false is written in them,” Clement of Rome, 1st century.

“The statements of Holy Scripture never contradict the truth,” Tertullian, 3rd century.

“Some are of the opinion that the Scriptures do not agree or that the God who gave them is false. But there is no disagreement at all. Far from it! The Father, who is the truth, cannot lie.” Athanasius, 4th century.

In short, while Scripture does not give us exhaustive knowledge of all things (how to change a tire, for example), it does not assert anything that is contrary to fact.

The next post

In the next post we will look at how the Old Testament came into being. In particular, we will address the nature of the development of the Old Testament, its authors and editors, as well as its preservation.

Recommended resources in Spanish: 

Stealing from God ( Paperback ), ( Teacher Study Guide ), and ( Student Study Guide ) by Dr. Frank Turek

Why I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist ( Complete DVD Series ), ( Teacher’s Workbook ), and ( Student’s Handbook ) by Dr. Frank Turek  

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ryan Leasure holds a Master of Arts degree from Furman University and a Master of Divinity degree from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He is currently a Doctor of Ministry candidate at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He also serves as pastor at Grace Bible Church in Moore, SC.

Original blog source: https://bit.ly/3w9hBum Translated by Monica Pirateque Edited by Daniela Checa Delgado

/by
How We Got Our Bible: New Testament Canonical Reception

How We Got Our Bible: New Testament Canonical Reception

, ,

By Ryan Leasure  

This article is part 5 in a nine-part series on how we got our Bible. Part 1 considered inspiration and inerrancy. Part 2 looked at the unfolding of the Old Testament. Part 3 examined the Old Testament canon and the Apocrypha. Part 4 considered the canonical attributes for New Testament books. This article will unpack how the early church received the New Testament canon.

Marcion (AD 85-160)

Before diving into the the corporate reception of the canon, it’s first necessary to say a brief word about Marcion. According to church historian Henry Chadwick, Marcion was “the most radical and to the church the most formidable of heretics.”[1] What was Marcion’s heresy? He promoted Gnosticism—the belief that the god who created the world was evil, and thus the OT was evil. This belief led Marcion to reject the entire OT and most parts of the NT which spoke positively of the OT.

Therefore, Marcion’s canon included a mutilated version of Luke which left out all positive references to the OT as well as any hints that Jesus might have actually been a physical human. Gnosticism, after all, taught that the physical world was evil. Jesus, then, only appeared to be human—a view known as Docetism.

The Church universally rejected Marcion. Not one church Father has anything remotely positive to say about him. In fact, after Marcion made a sizable donation to the church in Rome, they returned it to him after they learned of his heretical views.

When did the Church Receive the Canon?

Marcion’s so-called canon suggests that the church already had some kind of functional canon by the middle-part of the second century. Which raises a significant question: When did the Church receive the NT canon? One’s answer to this question depends largely on how they define the canon. Michael Kruger gives three definitions:[2]

Exclusive Canon — The church solidified the canonical boundaries in the fourth century.

Functional Canon — The core canonical texts were functioning authoritatively by the second century.

Ontological Canon — The texts were authoritative as soon the apostles finished writing them.

The rest of this post will focus mostly on the functional canon and a little on the exclusive canon. For more on the ontological canon, see the first post in this series on the inspiration of biblical texts. In that article, I draw attention to the fact that the biblical authors were aware that they were writing authoritative Scripture.

The Reception of the New Testament Canon

In the remaining space, I’m going to argue that the church recoginzed most of the NT as authoritative by the second century. The church later affirmed the fringes of the canon in the fourth century. To support this claim, I will consider four key points.

1. Statements by Church Fathers

Several statements from the church fathers suggest that they recognized certain texts as authoritative. Irenaeus (AD 180), for example, notes, “It is not possible that the gospels can be either more or fewer than the number they are. For since there are four zones of the world in which we live and four principle winds . . . [and] the cherubim, too were four-faced.”[3] While we may scratch our heads at Irenaeus’ logic, one thing is for certain: He believed that four and only four Gospels were authoritative.

Justin Martyr (AD 150) also recognized their authority when he mentioned that the church was reading these texts in corporate worship alongside the OT. He remarks, “And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together in one place, and the memoir of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits.”[4] No one questions whether the early church recognized the authority of the OT. The fact that they were reading NT texts alongside the OT suggests they believed both were Scripture.

Ignatius (AD 110) recognizes the apostles’ authority verses his own when he said, “I am not commanding you as Peter and Paul did. They were apostles, I am condemned.”[5] Ignatius was an influential church leader in the second century. But even he recognized that Peter and Paul’s writings were on a whole other level from his own.

As you peruse the early church fathers, you will find several quotes referencing the authority of the NT texts.

2. Appeals to Texts as Scripture

Not only do the early church fathers state that the New Testament texts were authoritative, they also appeal to them as divinely inspired Scripture. The Epistle of Barnabas (AD 130), for example, uses the formula “it is written” when it quotes from the Gospel of Matthew. It’s well-noted that the NT authors frequently employ this formula when they quote an OT text. The Epistle of Barnabas reads, “As it is written, ‘Many are called, but few are chosen.’”[6]

Polycarp (AD 110) makes an even more explicit reference. He notes, “As it is written in these Scriptures, ‘Be angry and do not sin and do not let the sun go down on your anger.”[7] Interestingly, Polycarp quotes two texts and refers to them both as “Scripture.” The first text was Psalm 4:5, and the second was Ephesians 4:26.

In fact, by the middle to end of the second century, a few well-known church fathers appeal to a core set of canonical books, indicating that they believed those books were in fact Scripture. Irenaeus appeals to the following books as Scripture:

Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, and Revelation.[8]

Only Philemon, 2 Peter, 3 John, and Jude are missing.

Similarly, Clement of Alexandria appeals to the following books as Scripture:

Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thesalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews, 1 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, Jude, and Revelation.[9]

Only James, 2 Peter, and 3 John are missing.

Around AD 250, Origen gives us a complete canonical list in his homily on Joshua. Notice carefully all the books that he references:

But when our Lord Jesus Christ comes, whose arrival that prior son of Nun designated, he sends priests, his apostles, bearing “trumpets hammered thin,” the magnificent and heavenly instruction of proclamation. Matthew first sounded the priestly trumpet in his Gospel; Mark also; Luke and John each played their own priestly trumpets. Even Peter cries out with trumpets in two of his epistles; also James and Jude. In addition, John also sounds the trumpet through his epistles [and Revelation], and Luke, as he describes the Acts of the Apostles. And now that last one comes, the one who said, “I think God displays us apostles last,” and in fourteen of his epistles, thundering with trumpets, he casts down the walls of Jericho and all the devices of idolatry and dogmas of philosophers, all the way to the foundations.[10]

You’ll notice that Origen attributes fourteen letters to Paul instead of thirteen. The most likely explanation for this error is the common belief that Paul wrote the book of Hebrews.

3. Manuscript Evidence

One of the best indications that the NT books functioned authoritatively in the second and third century is the amount of extant manuscripts we have in our possession. As of right now, we have over sixty NT manuscripts from the second and third century. The Gospel of John has the most with eighteen. Matthew comes in second with twelve. By comparison, we have seventeen  second and third century manuscripts of all the apocryphal texts combined. In other words, we have more manuscripts of John than all the apocryphal books put together. The most manuscripts for any apocryphal text is the Gospel of Thomas which has three.

The amount of extant manuscripts indicates which books the church used most often. John and Matthew were apparently the two most popular books in the early church based on the number of extant manuscripts in our possession. The fact that we have hardly any apocryphal manuscripts indicates that the early church didn’t have much use for them.

Also of note is the fact that all of the second and third century New Testament manuscripts are in a codex format (precursor to modern books). None are on a scroll. That said, the scroll was the most popular book form of the second and third century. Over time, as Christianity grew, codex became the dominant book form in the ancient world.

While none of the New Testament texts are on a scroll, apocryphal texts are. Furthermore, because the codex allowed the church to conveniently place several books into a single codex, we have several codices with multiple Gospels and Paul’s letters. P46, for example, is a collection of nine of Paul’s letters. P75 contains Luke and John. P45 is a four Gospel codex. We don’t have a single codex which combines canonical and apocryphal gospels. In other words, no manuscript has Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Thomas. The manuscripts tell us all we need to know about which books the early church thought were authoritative.

4. Canonical Lists

In 1740, Lodovico Antonio Muratori published a Latin list of NT books known as the Muratorian Fragment. This fragment contains an early canonical list that most trace back to the second century church in Rome. The canon includes the following books:

Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, 1 John, 2 John, Jude, and Revelation.

Only Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, and 3 John are missing. This list, along with the lists from the early church fathers, indicates that the second century church recognized a core group of canonical books by the middle to late second century. Only a few fringe books are missing. As time progressed, the church eventually affirmed the twenty-seven book canon that we have today.

Around AD 320, church historian Eusebius gave a canonical list that he subdivided into four categories:[11]

Recognized Books: Eusebius remarks that these books were universally accepted.

Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews, 1 Peter, 1 John, and Revelation

Disputed Books: Eusebius remarked that these books were “disputed yet known by most.”

James, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, and Jude

Spurious Books: Eusebius notes that these were books that the early church found helpful, but they weren’t Scripture.

Acts of Paul, Shepherd of Hermes, Revelation of Peter, Epistle of Barnabas, Didache, and Gospel of Hebrews

Heretical Books: Eusebius says these books have been universally rejected.

Gospel of Peter, Gospel of Thomas, Acts of Andrew, Acts of John, and Gospel of Matthias

Notice that between the recognized and disputed books which were “known by most,” the entire New Testament canon is present. Also worth noting is that Eusebius believed the heretical books were utterly repulsive. Consider his words:

we have felt compelled to give this catalogue in order that we might be able to know both these works and those that are cited by the heretics under the name of the apostles, including, for instance, such books as the Gospels of Peter, of Thomas, of Matthias, or of any others besides them, and the Acts of Andrew and John and the other apostles, which no one belonging to the succession of ecclesiastical writers has deemed worthy of mention in his writings. And further, the character of the style is at variance with apostolic usage, and both the thoughts and the purpose of the things that are related in them are so completely out of accord with true orthodoxy that they clearly show themselves to be the fictions of heretics. Wherefore they are not to be placed even among the rejected writings, but are all of them to be cast aside as absurd and impious.

In other words, these books didn’t “almost” make it into the canon. The canon didn’t come down to an arbitrary vote. The church rejected these books from a very early time due to their devilish nature.

Following Eusebius, Athanasius gave a complete canonical list with all twenty-seven books in AD 367. In AD 393 and 397, the Councils of Hippo and Carthage also affirmed the twenty-seven books in the canon.

Recognized Not Determined

In closing, I want to make an important point. The church did not grant authority to any NT text. It merely recognized which books were already authoritative in the church. As J. I. Packer helpfully states, “The Church no more gave us the New Testament canon than Sir Isaac Newton gave us the force of gravity. God gave us gravity . . . Newton did not create gravity but recognized it.”

In the next post, we will transition to the preservation of the NT text. Specifically, we will take a look at the manuscript tradition and textual criticism.

References

[1] Henry Chadwick, The Early Church, 39.

[2] Michael Kruger, The Question of Canon, 29-46.

[3] Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3.11.8.

[4] Justin Martyr, First Apology, 67.3.

[5] Ignatius, Romans. 4:4.

[6] Epistle of Barnabas 4.14.

[7] Polycarp, Philippians, 12.1.

[8] Michael Kruger, Canon Revisited, 228.

[9] Michael Kruger, The Question of Canon, 168.

[10] Origen, Homily on Joshua 7.1.

[11] Eusebius, Church History, 3.25.1-7.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Why We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3 and Mp4) Jesus, You and the Essentials of

Christianity by Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide), and (DVD)       Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide

Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels by J. Warner Wallace (Book)

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ryan Leasure holds a Master of Arts from Furman University and a Masters of Divinity from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Currently, he’s a Doctor of Ministry candidate at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He also serves as a pastor at Grace Bible Church in Moore, SC

Original Blog Source: https://bit.ly/3KTGEHP

 

/by
Serpientes, dragones y la Biblia

Serpientes, dragones y la Biblia

By Ryan Leasure

If you’re from an Appalachian church that handles snakes, I’m sorry to disappoint you. This is not THAT kind of post. Instead, it’s a post about how the Bible portrays vipers, snakes, and dragons. What’s more, it’s about how a mighty warrior defeats a snake to rescue his precious bride. If this story sounds familiar, it’s because many great children’s stories of the past tell these same kinds of stories.

You see, the Bible presents three main characters: [1] 1) the serpent (the villain, Satan), 2) the damsel in distress (God’s people), and 3) the snake catcher (the hero, Jesus).

It should be noted that “Serpent” is a biblical term that includes both snakes and dragons [2] ; that is, serpent is a general category, while snakes and dragons are more specific. It should also be noted that the ancients did not think of dragons as winged, fire-breathing creatures. Rather, they thought of them as giant serpents. Throughout the Bible, snakes take one form or another depending on the situation. Biblical scholar Andrew Naselli notes, “As a rule, the form a serpent takes depends on its strategy. When a serpent in scripture attempts to deceive, it is a viper. When a serpent attempts to devour, it is a dragon” [3] .

With these anecdotes in mind, let’s start at the beginning.

The snake in the garden

The beginning was pure bliss. A perfect, holy God decided to share his goodness and created a universe ex nihilo . Like jewels in a crown in God’s creation, humans walked in fellowship with him in the garden. However, they let down their guard and allowed the serpent to enter. Genesis 3:1 notes, “Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.”

Cunning (or deceit) perfectly describes this serpent, as he immediately questioned Eve, “Did God really say, ‘You shall not eat from any tree in the garden’?” Notice the serpent’s tactic. He called God’s Word into question. He planted doubt in the woman’s mind so that she would begin to consider alternative options. As soon as the woman said that eating from the tree in the middle of the garden would lead to death, the serpent went on to contradict God’s Word completely. He declared, “you will not surely die.” And then he called God’s motives into question. “For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

The serpent was successful. Eve ate the fruit, gave some to Adam, and he ate too. And immediately everything changed. Their innocence was lost, and they knew they were naked. Because of their shame, they tried to hide from God, but it was no use. God confronted them for their disobedience. Adam blamed Eve, and Eve blamed the serpent. She commented in 3:13, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.” As a result, God banished them from His holy presence, where they would live in exile. Now let us remember that when the serpent takes the form of a viper, its primary tactic is to deceive. And this is what it has done.

However, God did not allow the serpent to have the final say. He judged the serpent and promised to one day destroy him when He stated, “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel” (Gen. 3:15). The rest of Scripture traces the ongoing battle waged between the seed of the woman (God’s people) and the seed of the serpent (enemies of God and His people). Ultimately, the unique seed of the woman (Gal. 3:16) will utterly destroy the serpent, even though the serpent wounds him in the process.

Snakes portrayed negatively

Before we look at some examples of the serpent’s seed fighting against the woman’s seed, I simply want to draw our attention to the fact that serpents are associated with evil throughout Scripture.

Let us consider the following texts:

The wicked are led astray from the womb; those who speak lies go astray from their birth. They have poison like the poison of a serpent; they are like a deaf cobra that closes its ear and does not hear the voice of enchanters, not even the most skilled enchanter (Psalm 58:3-5).

They sharpen their tongue like a serpent; the venom of a viper is under their lips (Psalm 140:3).

Snakes often symbolize God’s enemies:

The nations will see and be ashamed of all their power; they will put their hands over their mouths, their ears will be deaf. They will lick the dust like a serpent, like the creeping things of the earth. They will tremble from their strongholds; they will come to the Lord our God in terror, and they will be afraid before you (Micah 7:16-17).

The seventy returned with joy, saying, “Lord, even the demons are subject to us in your name.” And Jesus said to them, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. See, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing will hurt you” (Luke 10:17-19).

As mentioned above, the serpent takes the form of a dragon when it wants to destroy. The following texts describe the dragon as a sea monster called Leviathan and Rahab.

On that day the Lord will punish with his fierce, great and powerful sword, Leviathan, the fleeting serpent, Leviathan, the crooked serpent, and he will kill the dragon that lives in the sea (Isaiah 27:1).

He has stirred up the sea by his power, and broken Rahab by his understanding. With his breath the heavens are cleansed; his hand has pierced the fleeing serpent (Job 26:12-13).

See also Job 41, which describes God’s sovereignty over the monstrous sea serpent Leviathan.

The Egyptian Serpent

The story of Scripture presents the seed of the serpent (God’s enemies) in conflict with the seed of the woman (God’s people). Perhaps the clearest example of the seed of the serpent is Egypt and its Pharaoh. The Lord tells Pharaoh in Ezekiel 32:2, “You are like a dragon in the seas.” Recall that the dragon seeks to destroy the seed of the woman, and this is what he set out to do when he ordered the death of all Israelite baby boys (Exodus 1:15-22).

One also thinks of the episode in which Aaron’s staff turned into a serpent and swallowed the staffs/serpents of Pharaoh’s magicians (Ex 7:8-13). Most likely, Aaron’s staff turned into a cobra, which also figured on the Pharaoh’s headdress. This headdress symbolized divine power and protection and was fashioned after an Egyptian goddess named Uraeus. By wearing the cobra headdress, the Pharaoh could channel the powers of the deity.

Thus, “when Moses had Aaron cast the serpent-rod before Pharaoh,” archaeologist John Currid argues, “he was directly attacking that symbol of pharaonic sovereignty: the scene was a polemical mockery. When Aaron’s rod swallowed up the rods of the Egyptian magicians, the pharaonic deity and his omnipotence were being denounced and rejected out of hand. Pharaoh’s cobra-crested diadem was powerless against Yahweh . ” [4]

Reflecting on the exodus from Egypt, the biblical authors saw it as a victory over the serpent. Psalm 74:12-14 states:

Yet God is my King from of old, doing works of salvation in the midst of the earth. You divided the sea by your power; you broke the heads of the monsters in the waters. You crushed the heads of Leviathan; you gave him as food to those who dwell in the desert.

Although final victory still awaited, God was already foreshadowing how He would one day crush the serpent’s head.

Goliath, the serpent

One of the best-known stories in the Old Testament is that of David’s defeat of Goliath. This story presents Goliath as a giant serpent seeking to devour the woman’s seed. We know this because, as 1 Samuel 17:5 makes clear, Goliath “was clothed in scale armor” (JBS and NIV). While some translations simply translate this as “a coat of mail” (NASB), the more literal translation is “armor of scales.”

The Hebrew word for “scales” appears seven other times in the Old Testament, and each time it refers to the scales of fish—including sea dragons. [5] Notably, God also calls Pharaoh a “great dragon” with “scales” in Ezekiel 29:3-4. Pharaoh and Goliath are the only two characters in the Bible who are said to have “scales.”

In the account given in 1 Samuel 17, David proclaims that the battle is the LORD’s and then proceeds to drive a stone into the forehead of the giant serpent, which falls face downwards to the ground, eating dust like the ancient serpent (Gen 3:14). Once again, God foreshadows how He will crush the serpent’s head and free His people.

The serpent in the Gospels

We find several examples where the serpent’s seed attempts to destroy the woman’s seed. Like the ancient Pharaoh, King Herod tried to kill all the children of Bethlehem in an attempt to kill the unique seed of the woman (Matthew 2:16-18).

Repeatedly, we find the Pharisees and Sadducees portrayed as the seed of the serpent. Jesus tells them, “You are of your father the devil” (John 8:44). When John the Baptist saw them coming from afar, he cried out, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Therefore bear fruits worthy of repentance; and do not presume to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father’” (Mt 3:7-9). Likewise, Jesus cries out to the Pharisees in Matthew 23, “You serpents! You brood of vipers! How will you escape the judgment of hell?” In short, the Pharisees and Sadducees are the seed of the serpent making war on the seed of the woman.

The dragon is killed

We complete this discussion by going all the way to the end, where the book of Revelation proclaims the final destruction of the serpent. Revelation 12:3-5 states:

Then another sign appeared in heaven: behold, a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems on his heads. His tail swept a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth. Then the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she was born he might devour her child. And she gave birth to a male child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron. And her child was caught up to God and to his throne .

Here we read that this powerful dragon, thirsty for blood, seeks to devour the seed of the woman. However, God frees the seed from his persecutions.

Revelation 12:7-9 continues:

Then there was war in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon. The dragon and his angels fought, but they were not victorious, and a place was no longer found for them in heaven. Then the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world. He was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

Note that the dragon is none other than Satan himself, that old serpent and deceiver of the whole world. And he is defeated, but how? Did the archangel Michael destroy the dragon alone?

Revelation 12:11 states:

They overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony; and they did not love their lives so much as to suffer death.

Satan was finally defeated by the blood of the Lamb! It was Jesus Christ who conquered Satan. That moment on the cross, when it seemed that the serpent would prevail, his head was crushed by the seed of the woman (Gen 3:15).

Fast forward to Revelation 20, just after the Millennium, and we read in verse 10:

 And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet are also; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.

Finally, the mighty snake-catcher defeated the ancient snake and rescued his bride so that she could no longer be deceived or devoured. Or to put it another way, the prince killed the dragon and had his girl. [6]

Grades

[1] Andrew Naselli, The Serpent, and the Serpent Slayer, 18.

[2] Ibid., 18.

[3] Ibid., 18.

[4] John Currid, Ancient Egypt, 93-94.

[5] Andrew Naselli, The Serpent, and the Serpent Slayer, 90.

[6] Ibid., 15.

Recommended resources in Spanish: 

Stealing from God ( Paperback ), ( Teacher Study Guide ), and ( Student Study Guide ) by Dr. Frank Turek

Why I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist ( Complete DVD Series ), ( Teacher’s Workbook ), and ( Student’s Handbook ) by Dr. Frank Turek  

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ryan Leasure holds a Master of Arts degree from Furman University and a Master of Divinity degree from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He is currently a Doctor of Ministry candidate at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He also serves as pastor at Grace Bible Church in Moore, SC.

Original Blog Source: https://bit.ly/34fxPZ2

Translated by Monica Pirateque

Edited by Daniela Checa Delgado

 

/by
How We Got Our Bible: New Testament Canonical Grid

How We Got Our Bible: New Testament Canonical Grid

,

By Ryan Leasure

This article is part four in a nine-part series on how we got the Bible. Part 1 looked at biblical inspiration and inerrancy. Part 2 considered the development of the Old Testament. And Part 3 investigated the Old Testament canon and the Apocrypha.

In this article, we transition to the New Testament canon. Specifically, I want to answer two questions. First, would the first-century Christians have expected new Scripture in addition to the Old Testament? And second, what attributes did the church look for in canonical texts?

Would the First-Century Church have Expected New Scripture?

Biblical scholar Harry Gamble once remarked, “There is no intimation at all that the early church entertained the idea of Christian scriptures… Therefore, the NT as we think of it was utterly remote from the minds of the first generation of Christian believers.”1. What are we to make of Gamble’s assertion? Was he right? Did the early church assume that God was done inspiring Scripture after the close of the Old Testament? I believe we have good reason to reject Gamble’s claims. Let me give you three reasons why.2

1. First-century Jews regarded the Old Testament story as Incomplete

Several texts from the Gospels and Acts demonstrate that first-century Jews expected God to do something in their generation. Not only were they on the look-out for the Messiah (Luke 2:38; 2:25; John 1:41; 4:25), they expected God to usher in his kingdom and overthrow their oppressors (Acts 1:6; see Dan 2:31-45). Second Temple period (intertestamental) texts also confirm this same expectation (Tob 14:5-7; Bar 3:6-8). As N. T. Wright notes, “The great story of the Hebrew scriptures was therefore inevitably read in the Second Temple period as a story in search of a conclusion.”3

The close of the Old Testament also gives the impression that the Jews expected a Davidic King to rise up among their ranks. Keep in mind, according to Jewish ordering, Chronicles was the final book of the Old Testament. And that book starts off with a lengthy genealogy centered around King David (1 Chron 1-3). It’s no coincidence that the start of the New Testament picks up right where the Old Testament left off with a genealogy focusing on the Son of David (Matt 1). It’s as if the Gospel of Matthew brings the story of the Old Testament to its necessary fulfillment.

2. God’s Pattern of Bringing New Word-Revelation after his Acts of Redemption

According to the Old Testament pattern, God typically gives revelation deposits after his redemptive acts. We see this sequential pattern most clearly in the Exodus. God redeemed his people out of Egypt. He then followed up that redemption with Scriptural installments at Sinai to interpret his saving acts. Given this history, it’s not inconceivable that the early church would have expected more written revelation following Jesus’ act of redemption.

3. The Old Testament Predicted that the Future Messianic Age would Include Verbal Communication

Not only did the Old Testament predict a future messianic age, it predicted that communication would accompany the Messiah. Deuteronomy 18:18 predicts “I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him.” Isaiah 61:1-2  says of the Messiah that “The Spirit of the LORD God . . . has anointed me to bring good news to the poor . . . to proclaim liberty to the captives . . . to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” And of this Messianic age, we read, “out of Zion shall go the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem” (Isa 2:2-3).

In sum, those living after the close of the Old Testament recognized that the story was incomplete, that God typically gave word-revelation following his redemptive acts, and that the Old Testament anticipated a verbal Messianic age.

What Attributes did the Early Church Look for in a Canonical Text?

Now that we’ve established the early church’s expectation for more biblical texts, we must now ask what attributes they would have looked for in those new biblical texts. In the remaining space, I will consider three of these attributes—apostolic authority, marks of inspiration, and universal reception.4 Let’s consider each canonical attribute in turn.

Apostolic Authority

Going back to the New Testament, the apostles recognized that they were “ministers of the New Covenant” (2 Cor 3:6), and that the church was “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph 2:20). They also recognized that Jesus had sent them out as the guarantors and transmitters of his message to the world (John 20:21). For these reasons, the early church only received texts that could be traced back to an apostle.

Therefore, from an early time, the church received the four Gospels, Acts, and Paul’s letters. Of course, Paul makes his apostolic authority known in his letters, but the Gospels make no such claim. How then did they receive apostolic status at such an early stage in the church?

Critics argue that since the authors don’t mention their names in the body of the text, the Gospels must have been originally anonymous. It was only after some time that the church added titles to give these anonymous works some needed credibility. Yet, the critics’ assertions lack evidence. All the earliest manuscripts with titles list Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as the authors. Additionally, numerous church fathers state unequivocally that Mark wrote his Gospel based on Peter’s eyewitness testimony, and that Matthew, Luke, and John all wrote their respective Gospels.

That said, why did the church receive Mark and Luke if they weren’t apostles themselves? It’s because of their close association with the apostles. That is to say, books with apostolic authority were not limited to books that were written by the apostles. Rather, books that came from apostolic circles also came with apostolic authority. Notice Tertullian’s comment about Gospel authorship: “Of the apostles, therefore, John and Matthew first install faith into us; whilst of apostolic men, Luke and Mark renew it afterwards.”5 Tertullian affirms that Mark and Luke were “apostolic men” by nature of their close association with the apostles Peter and Paul.

This close proximity to the apostles also explain why Hebrews made its way into the canon. The author indicates he knew Timothy (Heb 13:23) and that the Gospel message “was declared at first by the Lord, and it was attested to us by those who heard” (Heb 2:3). These two texts combined indicate that the author walked in apostolic circles (probably Pauline), and therefore, his book was apostolic.

Jesus’ family (James and Jude) also received quasi-apostolic status as well based on their relationship to the Lord. We don’t know as much about Jude, but we know James became a prominent leader in the Jerusalem church and later martyr for his Christian faith.

At the same time, the church rejected books from non-apostolic sources. Commenting on the so-called Gospel of Peter, church father Serapion declared, “We receive both Peter and the other apostles as Christ, but the writers which falsely bear their names we reject.“6 Serapion asserted that the church should reject the heretical Gospel of Peter and all others that falsely bear the apostles’ names (Thomas, Philip, etc.).

The Muratorian Fragment makes a similar comment around AD 180. It notes, “There is said to be another letter in Paul’s name to the Laodiceans, and another to the Alexandrines, both forged in accordance with Marcion’s heresy, and many others which cannot be received into the catholic church, since it is not fitting that poison should be mixed with honey.”7 Again, the church rejected all forgeries. The fragment also notes that the beloved Shepherd of Hermes should not receive canonical status because it was written “quite recently, in our own times.” In other words, someone wrote this book after all the apostles had died out.

Marks of Inspiration

Second, the church looked for books that possessed marks of inspiration. If a book came from God, one would expect it to reflect God’s nature and other previously inspired texts. The text, therefore, should reflect the beauty and excellence of God (Psalm 19:7-10). As Jerome once remarked about a New Testament text, it is a “document which has in it so much the beauty of the Gospel,” which is the “mark of its inspiration.”8

Moreover, the text will be accompanied with transformative power. In other words, the text isn’t just words on a page. The text is “living and active” (Heb 4:12). Justin Martyr remarked, “For they possess a terrible power in themselves, and are sufficient to inspire those who turn aside from the path of rectitude with awe; while the sweetest rest is afforded to those who make a diligent practice of them.”9 Irenaeus also asserted that the Gospels are always “breathing out immortality on every side and vivifying men afresh.”10 That is to say, the early church recognized that certain texts brought about salvation and good works in the life of the church.

Not only will the text possess a certain beauty and power, it will be harmonious with other authoritative Scripture. For this reason, the church rejected books like 2 Maccabees which suggests we can offer sacrifices and prayers for the dead (2 Macc 12:43-46). They also rejected gnostic texts (Gospel of Philip, Gospel of Truth, Gospel of Peter, etc.) because they undermined the entire Old Testament altogether. And they rejected the Gospel of Thomas which has Jesus saying, “Look, I will guide her (Mary) to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven”—a clear repudiation of Genesis 1-2.

Thus, as Irenaeus remarked, “All Scripture, which has been given to us by God, shall be found by us perfectly consistent.”11. And as Justin Martyr declared, “I am entirely convinced that no Scripture contradicts another.”12

In short, the church only received texts which bore the marks of divine inspiration. These marks included a certain beauty, power, and harmony, indicating that God was their ultimate author.

Universal Reception

Finally, only books that were universally received by the church obtained canonical status. This means that books like 1 Enoch, which only a few small churches received, did not receive authoritative status. After all, Jesus says, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me” (John 10:27). Therefore, we could expect the universal church to come to some sort of consensus when it came to their Scriptural texts. And this is exactly what we find in the early church.

From as early as the second century, the church recognized a core group of canonical books which included the four Gospels, Acts, Paul’s letters, Hebrews, 1 John, 1 Peter, and Revelation. This consensus is reflected in several church Fathers (Irenaeus, Origen, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian) as well as the Muratorian Canon. By the fourth century, the remaining fringes of the canon were universally recognizes as reflected in Eusebius (AD 325), Athanasius (AD 367), and the Councils of Hippo (AD 393) and Carthage (AD 397).

A Canonical Grid

As one considers the three canonical attributes, it becomes clear that the early church filtered books through a sort of canonical grid to help them recognize authoritative texts. Only books possessing all three attributes achieved canonical status. Consider the following chart. Notice how both Mark and Romans possess all three attributes while the Gospel of Thomas possesses none. Also notice that the Shepherd of Hermes partially possesses one of the attributes insofar that it is an orthodox text. That said, it lacks the other two attributes:

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels by J. Warner Wallace (Book)

Why We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth by Frank Turek (mp4 Download)

The Top Ten Reasons We Know the NT Writers Told the Truth mp3 by Frank Turek

Counter Culture Christian: Is the Bible True? by Frank Turek (Mp3), (Mp4), and (DVD)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ryan Leasure holds a Master of Arts from Furman University and a Masters of Divinity from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Currently, he’s a Doctor of Ministry candidate at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He also serves as a pastor at Grace Bible Church in Moore, SC.

Original Blog Source: https://cutt.ly/1Ouq929

 

/by
How We Got Our Bible: Old Testament Canon and Apocrypha

How We Got Our Bible: Old Testament Canon and Apocrypha

,

By Ryan Leasure

This is part three of a nine-part series on how we got our Bible. Part one addressed the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture. Part two explained the formation and preservation of the Old Testament text. This post will address issues surrounding the Old Testament canon and the Apocrypha.

Canon

Before going any further, we must first establish what we mean when we say “canon.” We are not, of course, referring to the weapons of bygone eras. Rather, canon refers to an ancient measuring stick cut from a reed-like plant which was used as an infallible standard—much like a yardstick. The term was later applied to the biblical texts that the church received in its collection of authoritative books.

The Tanakh

The Jewish order of the Old Testament was and is radically different from how we typically order our books. From an early time, it appears that the Jews had a threefold division of the Hebrew canon. This threefold division is often referred to as the Tanakh based on the three divisions—Torah (Law), Nevi’im (Prophets), and Ketuvim (Writings). This final division could sometimes be called “the Psalms” since Psalms was the first and largest book among the writings and was often representative of the whole. Also, note that Jews combined several books. So while their canon contains the same content as our protestant Bibles, their Bible only has twenty-four books instead of thirty-nine. Consider the breakdown below from Genesis to Chronicles:

Bible table

The Septuagint (250-150 BC)

After Alexander the Great Hellenized the known world, Jewish scholars realized they needed to translate the Hebrew scriptures into Greek so that more people could read them. Legend has it that seventy-two Jewish translators (six from each of the twelve tribes), over the course of seventy-two days, each translated the text from Hebrew to Greek independently, and all seventy-two translations came out the exact same. The translation, therefore, came to be known as the Septuagint (from the Latin septuaginta meaning “seventy”) and is often represented by the Roman numerals LXX.

A couple of points are worth noting about the Septuagint. First, this translation changed the order of the books to the order that we are more familiar with today. That is to say, it changed from the threefold division of the Tenakh to our current order of law, history, poetry, major prophets, and minor prophets. Furthermore, the Septuagint also included the Apocrypha.

The Apocrypha

The Apocrypha consists of a dozen or so Jewish books written during the intertestamental period. These books contain history, poetry, wisdom literature, and prophecy. Probably most famous among the Apocrypha are the first and Second Maccabees. These books detail the Jewish rebellions and reclamation of the temple from the Syrians. While these works contain much historical value, they also contain disputable material. This is especially true of second Maccabees which teaches that saints in heaven intercede for people on earth (15:11-16) and that prayers and sacrifices can be offered for the dead (12:39-46). Roman Catholics us this last text to justify belief in purgatory and the practice of indulgences.

Tobit, another Apocryphal book, contains a fanciful story about a devout Jewish man in exile who is blinded by bird droppings in his sleep. His wife Sarah, also had troubles of her own. A demon had killed seven of her previous husbands on her wedding night. So God sent the angel Raphael to help Tobit and Sarah conquer the demon. Ultimately, they use a fish heart and liver to drive out the demon from the wedding chamber. Finally, Tobit’s son rubs fish gall on Tobit’s eyes to heal his blindness. This story is entirely fanciful.

Another book, known as Judith, describes God’s deliverance of the Jewish people. In this story, Judith seduces an Assyrian king only to cut off his head during his drunken stupor. We have no evidence that this story ever occurred. Moreover, this book erroneously states that Nebuchadnezzar was king of Assyria, not Babylon.

Other Apocryphal books include Sirach (wisdom literature similar to Proverbs), Baruch (not written by Baruch), Wisdom of Solomon (not written by Solomon), and additions to Daniel (Susanna and Bel and the Dragon).

Why The Bible should not Include the Apocrypha

You are probably familiar with the Protestant/Catholic/Orthodox debates over whether the Apocrypha belongs in our modern Bibles. In the remaining space, I’d like to offer five reasons why I don’t believe the Bible should include the Apocrypha.

1. The Apocrypha Acknowledges that Prophets Weren’t Speaking during its Time

Consider the following texts from 1 Maccabees:

So there was great distress in Israel, the worst since the time when the prophets ceased to appear among them (1 Macc. 9:27).

The Jews and their priests have resolved that Simon should be their leader and high priest forever, until a trustworthy prophet should arise (1 Macc. 14:41).

And laid up the stones in the mountain of the temple in a convenient place, until there should come a prophet to show what should be done with them (1 Macc. 4:46).

Notice how all three of these verses indicate God was not speaking through prophets during their time.

2. Jews Never Accepted the Apocrypha as Scripture

Consider the following quotation from first-century Jewish historian Josephus:

From the death of Moses to the time of Artaxerxes, who was king of Persia after Xerxes, the prophets who followed Moses have written down in thirteen books the things that were done in their days. The remaining four books contain hymns to God and principles of life for human beings. From Artaxerxes to our own time a detailed record has been made, but this has not been thought worthy of equal credit with the earlier records because there has not been since then the exact succession of prophets.1

Josephus indicates that after the time of Artaxerxes (465-424 BC), Jews continued to write books (the Apocrypha), but these books were not on par with Scripture, because the prophets had stopped speaking.

Moreover, the Babylonian Talmud, which is a sacred collection of Rabbinical traditions, notes that “after the latter prophets Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi had died, the Holy Spirit departed from Israel” (Yoma 98). In other words, special revelation ceased after the time of these prophets. Therefore, we should not consider the Apocrypha as Scripture since it followed after these prophets.

Finally, around the year AD 90, a council of Jewish leaders gathered at Jamnia to figure out how to reconstruct Judaism after the fall of Jerusalem and the temple. As they discussed their sacred books, they merely reaffirmed the universal practice of all Jews that the Apocrypha did not belong in their Bible.

3. The New Testament Never Refers to the Apocrypha as Scripture

The New Testament authors quote from the Old Testament hundreds of times. Often they preface their quotes with phrases such as “it is written” or “Scripture says.” Consider the following examples:

As it is written: None is righteous, no, not one (Rom 3:10).

Scripture says, They will look on him whom they have pierced (John 19:37).”

Therefore, as the Holy Spirit says, Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion (Heb 3:7-8).

Never once do the New Testament authors do something similar with an Apocryphal text. This omission is telling considering the fact that the New Testament authors usually quoted from the Septuagint which contained the Apocrypha. Meaning, the New Testament authors were well aware of the Apocryphal texts. They simply never refer to them as Scripture.

4. Jesus Affirmed the Three-Fold Division of the Tanakh

Two quotations from Luke indicate that Jesus believed in a closed Old Testament Canon that did not include the Apocrypha. Consider Luke 24:44:

Then he said to them, ‘These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.

In this text, Jesus makes a clear affirmation of the threefold division of the Old Testament—Apocrypha not included. Also consider Luke 11:51:

From the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, it will be required of this generation.

By speaking of Abel (the first biblical martyr) and Zechariah (the last biblical martyr), Jesus indicates that the Old Testament canon concluded with Chronicles (traditional order of the Tanakh). It is worth noting that several martyrs died in the Maccabees. Jesus doesn’t mention them because he didn’t consider Maccabees as part of his Bible.

5. The Catholic Church didn’t Grant Authority to the Apocrypha until Later

The earliest Old Testament canonical list from a Christian comes from Melito of Sardis (AD 170). His canon leaves out the Apocrypha. Origen’s canonical list in the mid-third century also leaves out the Apocrypha. Additionally, Athanasius, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory of Nazianzus, and the Council of Laodicea leave the Apocrypha out of their canon.

Sometime in the fourth century though, the Apocrypha started to gain acceptance in some circles as demonstrated by some of the canonical lists (St. Augustine and the Council of Hippo) and biblical manuscripts (Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus). Of course, St. Augustine also persuaded his friend Jerome to include the Apocrypha in the Latin Vulgate in AD 404. That said, Jerome prefaced the Apocryphal writings by stating:

Therefore as the church indeed reads Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees, but does not receive them among the canonical books, so let it also read these two volumes for the edification of the people but not for establishing the authority of ecclesiastical dogmas.2

Jerome made a clear delineation between Scriptural texts and the Apocrypha. Scripture established church doctrine. The Apocrypha was for mere edification alone.

For the next thousand years, the Catholic Church was hardly unified on the Apocrypha. William of Ockham, influential medieval theologian, echoed Jerome’s sentiments when he wrote that apocryphal texts “are read for the edification of the people, but not for the establishment of doctrine.3 Even Cardinal Cajetan, a chief opponent of the Protestant Reformers and appointee of Pope Leo remarked:

The Latin church is greatly indebted to Jerome on account of his separation of the canonical from the uncanonical books. . . . those books and any others there may be like them in the Canon of the Bible are not canonical in the sense of establishing point of faith; yet they can be called canonical for the edification of the faithful.4

Despite being far from unified, the Council of Trent official granted canonical status to the Apocryphal text in what can only be seen as a counter-Reformation move.

Moving On to the New

The next post will transition to the New Testament. Specifically, the post will address two key question. First, would the early church have expected more Scriptural books? And second, what clues tipped off the early church that certain books were authoritative Scripture while others were not?

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels by J. Warner Wallace (Book)

Why We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth by Frank Turek (mp4 Download)

The Top Ten Reasons We Know the NT Writers Told the Truth mp3 by Frank Turek

Counter Culture Christian: Is the Bible True? by Frank Turek (Mp3), (Mp4), and (DVD)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ryan Leasure holds a Master of Arts from Furman University and a Masters of Divinity from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Currently, he’s a Doctor of Ministry candidate at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He also serves as a pastor at Grace Bible Church in Moore, SC.

Original Blog Source: https://cutt.ly/NY40j0n

 

/by
How We Got Our Bible: Old Testament Formation

How We Got Our Bible: Old Testament Formation

By Ryan Leasure

This is the second in a series of  nine posts addressing the question of how we got our Bible. Last post dealt with the question of inspiration and inerrancy. This week we turn our attention to the formation of the Old Testament.

Introductory Matters

In the late second century, Tertullian coined the term “Old Testament” to distinguish the Hebrew from the Greek Scriptures. The word “testament” simply means “covenant.” The Old Testament, in its current form, consists of thirty-nine books and was written by dozens of authors over the course of one thousand years.

In the earliest times, biblical authors used a variety of different writing surfaces. They etched into stone (Exod 34:1; Josh 8:32), inscribed on plaster (Deut 27:2-3), engraved on metal (Exod 28:36), and scratched on waxed tablets (Isa 30:8; Hab 2:2). In order to engrave on these surfaces, they used iron pens (Job 19:24; Jer 17:1) and other styluses.

Thankfully, the Egyptians had already invented a paper-like product using papyrus plants long before Moses wrote the law. Biblical authors adopted this writing technology for practical purposes (Jer 36:23). When papyrus wasn’t available, authors would write on stretched and dried animal skins called parchments. Writers used thin-stemmed reeds (Jer 8:8) that they dipped in ink which was usually a mixture of soot and tree sap or oil. Scribes would often wear ink cases around their belts (Ezek 9:2-3).

The First Scripture

Fittingly, God himself wrote the very first Scriptural text. We read in Exodus 31:18, “And he gave to Moses, when he had finished speaking with him on Mount Sinai, the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written with the finger of God.” Those same tablets were then stored in the Ark of the Covenant along with a jar of manna and Aaron’s staff (Deut 10:5; Heb 9:4).

Moses would later compile God’s writings into the Pentateuch along with his other writings. We have indications that Moses wrote the Pentateuch in stages and not all at one time. Exodus 24:4 reads, “And Moses wrote down all the words of the LORD.” Exodus 17:14 notes, “Then the LORD said to Moses, ‘Write this as a memorial in a book and recite it in the ears of Joshua, that I will utterly blot out the memory of Amalak from under heaven.’”

Scholars debate how Moses learned the contents of Genesis. Some suggest he learned them at Mount Sinai through divine revelation. Others believe it was passed down through oral tradition. And others believe it was a combination of the two.

Stages of Writing

As was previously noted, the Old Testament was not written at one time but over the course of a thousand years. It may be helpful to think of the development of the Old Testament in four stages.

The first stage was at Mount Sinai when Moses wrote the Law. Early on, the Pentateuch functioned like the Jewish canon of Scripture. In fact, Moses commands “You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you” (Deut 4:2). Over the course of hundreds of years, other books were written, but their inclusion into the canon took some time. The Books of Moses, however, were authoritative from the get go.

The second stage of revelation deposits came during the transition from the theocracy to the monarchy. During that era, authors wrote several historical books (Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Samuels), poetry (Psalms), and wisdom literature (Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon).

The third stage was the time surrounding the Babylonian Exile. Several prophets wrote during this time period (Isaiah, Micah, Hosea, Jonah, Amos, Joel, etc.).

The fourth and final stage was the return from exile. More prophets continued to write (Zechariah and Malachi) as did historians (Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther).

Quoting the Law

Because the Old Testament developed in stages, later Old Testament writers often referred back to the Books of Moses. Perhaps the most quoted text from Moses is Exodus 34:6. The text declares, “The LORD, the LORD, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness.”

Consider how these later Old Testament texts quote Moses:

But your are a God ready to forgive, gracious and merciful, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love (Neh 9:17).

But you, O Lord, are a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness” (Psalm 86:15).

That is why I made haste to flee to Tarshish; for I knew that you are a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love, and relenting from disaster” (Jonah 4:2).

Submitting to the Law

Not only did later Old Testament writers quote from Moses, they explicitly affirmed his authority.

Only be strong and very courageous, being careful to do according to all the law that Moses my servant commanded you. Do not turn from into the right hand or to the left, that you may have good success wherever you go. This Book of the Law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it (Josh 1:7-8).

When David’s time to die drew near, he commanded Solomon his son, saying, I am about to go the way of all the earth. Be strong, and show yourself a man, and keep the charge of the LORD your God, walking in his ways and keeping his statutes, his commandments, his rules, and his testimonies, as it is written in the Law of Moses (1 Kings 2:1-3).

They told Ezra the scribe to bring the Book of the Law of Moses that the LORD had commanded Israel. . . . And he read from it . . . in the presence of the men and the women and those who could understand. And the ears of all the people were attentive to the Book of the Law” (Neh 8:1-3).

The Prophets Use of Prophets

Because the Pentateuch was authoritative from the beginning, we find far more references to Moses than any other Old Testament author. That said, the prophets still recognized the authority of other prophets who lived closer to their time. Consider Daniels words:

“In the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, perceived in the books the number of years that, according to the word of the LORD to Jeremiah the prophet, must pass before the end of the desolations of Jerusalem, namely seventy years” (Dan 9:2).

Even though Jeremiah wrote only a few decades prior, Daniel still recognized his divine authority.

Zechariah also recognizes the divine authority of his prophetic predecessors. He writes:

Then the word of the LORD of hosts came to me: Say to all the people of the land and the priests, When you fasted and mourned in the fifth month and in the seventh, for these seventy years, was it not for me that you fasted? . . . Were not these the words that the LORD proclaimed by the former prophets, when Jerusalem was inhabited and prosperous? (Zech 7:4-7).

Authors and Dates

Admittedly, we cannot be too precise on some of the authors and dates of the Old Testament books, especially some of the historical works. That said, consider the following chart which details the authors and dates of each Old Testament book.[1]

Bible Blog

Use of Sources

Inspiration does not imply mechanical dictation. While biblical authors did dictate God’s word from time to time, they also employed other methods such as researching historical sources. Consider the following examples:

Therefore it is said in the Book of the Wars of the Lord (Num 21:14).

And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? (Josh 10:13).

Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, and all that he did, and his wisdom, are they not written in the Book of the Acts of Solomon? (1 Kings 11:41).

Now the rest of the acts of Joram, and all that he did, are they not written in the Book of Chronicles of the Kings of Judah? (2 Kings 8:20).

What these texts demonstrate is that the biblical authors didn’t invent this stuff. They did careful research before compiling their works.

Editors

Inspiration does not preclude editing. In other words, God not only inspired authors, he inspired editors to modify and rearrange the text. Without exception, the New Testament writers, and even Jesus himself, affirm Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch (Matt 8:4; 19:8; Mark 7:10; 12:26; Luke 16:31; 20:37; 24:44; Acts 3:22; 15:1; 26:22; 28:23; 1 Cor 9:9; Heb 9:19). That said, we have clear indications of later editing by Jewish scribes. Consider the following texts:

Now the man Moses was very meek, more than all people who were on the face of the earth (Num 12:3).

So Moses the servant of the LORD died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the LORD, and he buried him in the valley in the land of Moab opposite Beth-peor; but no one knows the place of his burial to this day (Deut 34:5-6).

And there has not arisen a prophet since in Israel like Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face (Deut 34:10).

Did Moses call himself the meekest person on the earth and report his own death and burial? And following his death, did he report that no such prophet has arisen since the time of Moses? Doesn’t that last statement assume that some time has passed since his death? In short, while Moses penned the Pentateuch, later scribes edited his work into their present form.

Preservation

Knowing that it took a thousand years to write the Old Testament (1400-400 BC), how confident can we be in its preservation? After all, we know that there was a period of time when it seems like the text had been lost and out of use (2 Kings 22-23).

Apparently, “clans of scribes” existed during the Old Testament era to copy and preserve the Hebrew Bible (1 Chron 2:55). Since then, Jewish scribes have meticulously copied texts for the same purposes. Perhaps the most famous of these scribes are the Masoretes and the Ben Asher family from the fifth century AD. These professional copyists counted the number of words on every page and knew the number of words in every book as well as the exact middle word and letter of every book to ensure that they copied accurately.

Additionally, the Masoretes added vowel markings to the otherwise vowel-less text. Up until the 1940s, the earliest Hebrew texts in our possession were Masoretic texts dating to the 9th and 10th centuries.

Dead Sea Scrolls

In 1947, a shepherd by the name of Muhammed edh-Dhib was out looking for some of his sheep along the coast of the Dead Sea. As he passed by a cave, he tossed a rock inside hoping to hear the bleating of sheep. Instead, he heard pottery shattering. That shattered jar led to one of the most significant archaeological finds of the twentieth century. 

Archaeologists have since uncovered over a thousand ancient Jewish documents from dozens of nearby caves dating from 250 BC to AD 65. These texts belonged to the Qumran community otherwise known as the Essenes. These people functioned much like Jewish monks, isolated from much of society. The Qumran community most likely stashed their sacred texts in these caves during the war with Rome (AD 68-70) hoping to return to them once the dust settled. Unfortunately, they all died during the war, so their texts remained hidden for two thousand years.

Among these documents are every book of the Old Testament except for Esther. Perhaps the most significant text is a complete Isaiah scroll, consisting of twenty-seven sheets of parchment sewn end-to-end. It measures twenty-three feet in length. The scroll dates to 120 BC—a thousand years older than the previous oldest text. Most significantly, the Isaiah scroll hardly differs from the Masoretic text from the tenth century, demonstrating that Jewish scribes carefully preserved the original text.

Old Testament Canon

The next post will consider the Septuagint, the apocrypha, and the Old Testament Canon.

*For more on this topic, read Timothy Paul Jone’s helpful book How We Got the Bible.

References:

[1] This chart is modified from Timothy Paul Jones, How We Got the Bible, 31-33.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Oh, Why Didn’t I Say That? Does Science Disprove God? by Dr. Frank Turek (DVD and Mp4)

Two Miracles You Take With You Everywhere You Go by Frank Turek DVD, Mp3 and Mp4)

Why We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3 and Mp4)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ryan Leasure holds a Master of Arts from Furman University and a Masters of Divinity from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Currently, he’s a Doctor of Ministry candidate at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He also serves as a pastor at Grace Bible Church in Moore, SC.

Original Blog Source: https://bit.ly/30ACsei

 

/by
How We Got Our Bible: Inspiration

How We Got Our Bible

,

By Ryan Leasure

This article is the first in a series of nine blog posts that will unpack the story of how we got our Bible. That is to say, the Bible didn’t just fall from heaven into our laps. Rather, the Bible is the result of a long process that starts from the mind of God and ends with to our modern English translations.

The process involves inspiration of texts, collecting certain books, rejecting other books, copying of manuscripts, evaluating thousands of manuscripts to recreate the originals as much as possible, translating the Hebrew and Greek texts into English, and then creating translations that are readable in our modern vernacular.

As you may have guessed, this series will deal with some of the more crucial issues surrounding the Bible—issues such as canon, the apocrypha, the Dead Sea Scrolls, pseudopigraphical Gospels, textual criticism, the King James only movement, and so much more. I hope you will follow along with me as we trace the fascinating history of the Bible. If you’re not already a subscriber, click subscribe so you can get updates on future posts.

That said, we begin with Inspiration.

Verbal-Plenary Inspiration

Paul writes, “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work” (2 Tim 3:16-17). A few concepts are worth noting here.

First, Paul says that Scripture is “breathed out by God” (from the Greek word “theopneustos“). Technically, God “exhales” rather than “inspires” the text. In other words, he is the source behind all Scripture.

Second, notice that God inspires Scripture, not the authors themselves. This necessary distinction means that God’s inspiration extends to the final product of Scripture itself, not the human author’s day-to-day life. Meaning, the authors were fallible while their God-breathed Scripture was not.

Third, Paul notes that ALL Scripture is inspired, not just parts of it. Some have erroneously taught that inspiration only extends to the parts that touch of faith and morals. But that is not what Paul writes. When Paul says “all,” he includes the Canaanite conquests, a talking donkey, and the Levitical Code.

Biblical Authors Affirmed Inspiration

Several times throughout the Old Testament, authors acknowledged that they were writing God’s words. Consider these examples:

“Then the LORD said to Moses, “Write this as a memorial in a book and recite it in the ears of Joshua”(Exod 17:14).

“Then the LORD put out his hand and touched my mouth. And the LORD said to me, “Behold I have put my words in your mouth” (Jer 1:9).

“The word of the LORD that came to Hosea, the son of Beeri, in the days of Uzziah” (Hos 1:1).

“On the fifth day of the month . . . the word of the LORD came to Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi . . . and the hand of the LORD was upon him there” (Ezek 1:2-3).

Furthermore, New Testament authors affirmed the Old Testament’s inspiration:

“And this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet . . .” (Matt 1:22).

“Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David concerning Judas” (Acts 1:16).

“But what God foretold by the mouth of all the prophets, that his Christ would suffer, he thus fulfilled.” (Acts 3:18).

“David himself, in the Holy Spirit, declared, The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand, until I put your enemies under your feet” (Mark 12:36).

This last quotation is from Jesus’ lips himself. That is to say, Jesus affirmed the Old Testament’s inspiration.

What About the New Testament?

When Paul writes that “All Scripture is breathed out by God,” he was most likely referring to the Old Testament since the word for Scripture (“graphe“) refers to the Old Testament when it’s used in the New Testament. We must also remember that when Paul wrote this letter, portions of the New Testament had yet to be written. Was inspiration, then, limited to the Old Testament? No it wasn’t.

Notice how Peter speaks of Paul’s letters in 2 Peter 3:15-16: “Just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.” Peter appears to be lumping in Paul’s letters with the Old Testament and granting them equal authority.

First Timothy 5:18 is another crucial text on this matter. Paul writes, “For the Scripture says, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain,’ and, ‘The laborer deserves his wages.’” Paul quotes two passages in this verse and refers to both of them as Scripture. The first text comes from Deuteronomy 25:4. The second comes from Luke 10:7. That is to say, Paul thought the Gospel of Luke was Scripture on par with the Old Testament.

We even have some clues that suggest the apostles knew they were writing God’s Word. Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 14:37, “If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord.” Additionally, Paul declares in 1 Thessalonians 2:13, “And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God.”

Peter also remarks, “You should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles” (2 Peter 3:2). The apostles, then, believed that they spoke authoritatively from God. And they could do this because Jesus promised them that the Holy Spirit would guide them in the process (John 14:26; 16:13).

Mechanical Dictation?

Peter notes, “Knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Pet 1:20-21). Some suggest that the Holy Spirit’s activity sounds an awful lot like mechanical dictation. But this would be a mistake. As I alluded to earlier, inspiration extends only to the final product of Scripture. Meaning, God worked within and through the human authors’ skills, personalities, and experiences as they wrote their various works. In short, the dozens of biblical authors produced their Scripture in different ways.

The author of Hebrews makes this point when he begins, “Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets” (Heb 1:1). Notice how he affirms that the prophets spoke “in many ways.” And Scripture makes these different ways abundantly clear. Consider a few examples:

  • Investigation/Interpretation: “Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories” (1 Pet 1:10-11).
  • Dictation: “To the angel of the church in Ephesus write . . .” (Rev 2:1)
  • Research: “Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus” (Luke 1:1-3).

Additionally, biblical authors wrote poetry, wisdom literature, letters, and prophecy. And in doing so, God worked through them in such a way as to not override their unique perspective. At the same time, he superintended the process to guarantee that his exact message was communicated. As the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy remarks, “We affirm that God in His Work of inspiration utilized the distinctive personalities and literary styles of the writers whom He had chosen and prepared. We deny that God, in causing these writers to use the very words that He chose, overrode their personalities.”1

Evidence of Inspiration

Some argue that inspiration appeals to circular reasoning because we must appeal to Scripture itself to affirm inspiration. While that’s a fair critique, Christians are right to appeal to Scripture because it is our highest authority. If we appeal to, say human reasoning, then we elevate human reasoning to a higher authority than Scripture.

That said, we have good evidence for inspiration in fulfilled prophecy. I could list dozens of fulfilled prophecies, but I will only mention two briefly. First, Isaiah 53 correctly predicts Christ’s crucifixion. Of note is the fact that Isaiah says that he will “pierced for our transgression” (Isa 53:5). This method of death is significant because at the time, Jewish methods of execution were stoning or hanging. How could Isaiah rightly predict the kind of death Jesus would suffer seven hundred years in advance?

Another example is Daniel 9. While I won’t go into detail, Daniel predicts the exact timing of Christ’s arrival. More than that, Daniel says that the Messiah will be “cut off” (killed) just prior to the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. Jesus was crucified in AD 30. The Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in AD 70.

Inerrancy

Inerrancy naturally follows from inspiration. In other words, if God is the author behind the entire Bible, it must all be true because God always speaks truth. Consider the following texts

“It is impossible for God to lie” (Heb 6:18).

“You are God, and your words are true” (2 Sam 7:28).

“Every word of God proves true” (Prov 30:5).

“Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth” (John 17:17).

Notice that Jesus doesn’t just say that God’s word is true, but it is TRUTH. It is the absolute standard of truth. And lest anyone thinks this idea of inerrancy is a modern invention, listen to a few of the church fathers:

“You have searched the Scriptures, which are true and given by the Holy Spirit. You know that nothing unrighteous or counterfeit is written in them.” — Clement of Rome, 1st century

“The statements of Holy Scripture will never contradict the truth.” — Tertullian, 3rd century

“It is the opinion of some that the Scriptures do not agree or that the God who gave them is false. But there is no disagreement at all. Far from it! The Father, who is truth, cannot lie.” — Athanasius, 4th century

In short, while Scripture does not give us exhaustive knowledge of all things (how to change a tire for example), it does not affirm anything that is contrary to fact.

The Next Post

The next post will consider how the Old Testament came to be. Specifically, it will address the unfolding nature of the Old Testament, its authors and editors, as well as its preservation.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Why We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3 and Mp4)

Oh, Why Didn’t I Say That? Is the Bible Historically Reliable? by Dr. Frank Turek DVD, Mp4, Mp3 Download.

Cold-Case Christianity: A Homicide Detective Investigates the Claims of the Gospels by J. Warner Wallace (Book)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ryan Leasure holds a Master of Arts from Furman University and a Masters of Divinity from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Currently, he’s a Doctor of Ministry candidate at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He also serves as a pastor at Grace Bible Church in Moore, SC.

Original Blog Source:  https://bit.ly/3BXULYy

 

/by
Serpents, Dragons, and the Bible

Serpents, Dragons, and the Bible

By Ryan Leasure

If you’re from an Appalachian snake-handling church, I’m sorry to disappoint. This is not THAT kind of post. Instead, it’s a post about how the Bible portrays snakes, serpents, and dragons. More than that, it’s about how a mighty warrior defeats the serpent to rescue his precious bride. If that story sounds familiar to you, it’s because so many great children’s tales of the past echo this same story.

You see, the Bible presents three main characters:[1] 1) The Serpent (the villain—Satan), 2) The Damsel in Distress (the people of God), and 3) The Serpent Slayer (the hero—Jesus).

It’s worth noting that “Serpent” is a biblical catch-all term that includes both snakes and dragons.[2] In other words, serpent is an umbrella category while snakes and dragons are more specific. Also worth noting is that the ancients did not think of dragons as fire-breathing creatures with wings. Rather, they thought of them as giant serpents. Throughout the Bible, serpents take on either form depending on the situation. Biblical scholar Andrew Naselli remarks, “As a general rule, the form a serpent takes depends on its strategy. When a serpent in Scripture attempts to deceive, it’s a snake. When a serpent attempts to devour, it’s a dragon.”[3]

With those anecdotes in mind, let’s start from the very beginning.

The Serpent in the Garden

The very beginning was pure bliss. A perfect, holy God decided to share his goodness so he created a universe ex nihilo. As the crowning jewels of God’s creation, humans walked in fellowship with him in the garden. However, they let their guard down and allowed the serpent to enter. Genesis 3:1 notes, “Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made.”

Crafty (or deceitful) describes this serpent perfectly. For immediately, he questioned Eve, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” Notice the serpent’s tactic. He called into question God’s Word. He implanted doubts in the woman’s mind so that she began to entertain alternative options. After the woman said that eating of the tree in the middle of the garden would lead to death, the serpent went on contradict God’s Word altogether. He declared, “You will not surely die.” And then he called into question God’s motives. “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

The serpent succeeded. Eve ate the fruit, gave some to Adam, and he ate too. And immediately everything changed. Their innocence was lost, and they knew they were naked. Because of their shame, they tried to hide themselves from God but to no avail. God confronted them over their disobedience. Adam blamed Eve, and Eve blamed the serpent. She remarked in 3:13, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.” As a result, God banished them from his holy presence where they would live in exile. Now recall that when the serpent takes on the form of a snake, his primary tactic is to deceive. And this is what he has done.

God, however, would not allow the serpent to have the final word. He judged the serpent and promised to one day destroy him when he asserted, “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel” (Gen 3:15). The rest of Scripture traces the ongoing battle between the seed of the woman (the people of God) and the seed of the serpent (enemies of God and his people). Ultimately, the singular seed of the woman (Gal 3:16), will utterly destroy the serpent even though the serpent will injure him in the process.

Serpents Portrayed Negatively

Before we look at a few examples of the seed of the serpent waging battle on the seed of the woman, I simply want to draw our attention to the fact that serpents are associated with evil throughout Scripture.

Consider the following texts:

The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray from birth, speaking lies. They have venom like the venom of a serpent, like the deaf adder that stops its ear, so that it does not hear the voice of the charmers or of the cunning enchanter (Psalm 58:3-5).

They make their tongue sharp as a serpent’s, and under their lips is the venom of asps (Psalm 140:3).

Serpents often symbolize God’s enemies:

The nations shall see and be ashamed of all their might; they shall lay their hands on their mouths; their ears shall be deaf; they shall lick the dust like a serpent, like the crawling things of the earth; they shall come trembling out of their strongholds; they shall turn in dread to the LORD our God, and they shall be in ear of you (Mic 7:16-17).

The seventy-two returned with joy, saying, “Lord, even the demons are subject to us in your name!” And he said to them, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Behold, I have given you authority to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall hurt you (Luke 10:17-19).

As was alluded to earlier, the serpent takes on the form of a dragon when he wants to destroy. The following texts describe the dragon as a sea monster called Leviathan and Rahab.

In that day the LORD with his hard and great and strong sword will punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent, Leviathan the twisting serpent, and he will slay the dragon that is in the sea (Isa 27:1).

By his power he stilled the sea; by his understanding he shattered Rahab. By his wind the heavens were made fair; his hand pierced the fleeing serpent (Job 26:12-13).

See also Job 41 which describes God’s sovereignty over the monstrous sea serpent Leviathan.

The Egyptian Serpent

The storyline of Scripture portrays the seed of the serpent (God’s enemies) in conflict with the seed of the woman (God’s people). Perhaps the clearest example of the seed of the serpent is Egypt and its Pharaoh. The Lord says to Pharaoh in Ezekiel 32:2, “You are like a dragon in the seas.” Remember that the dragon seeks to destroy the seed of the woman, and this is what he set out to do when he ordered the death of all the Israelite babies (Ex 1:15-22).

One also thinks of the episode where Aaron’s staff transformed into a snake and swallowed the staffs/snakes of Pharaoh’s magicians (Ex 7:8-13). Most likely, Aaron’s staff turned into a cobra which also happened to be featured on Pharaoh’s headdress. This headdress symbolized divine power and protection and was fashioned after an Egyptian goddess named Uraeus. By wearing the Cobra headdress, Pharaoh was able to channel the powers of the deity.

Thus, “when Moses had Aaron fling the rod snake before Pharaoh,” argues archaeological scholar John Currid, “he was directly assaulting that token of Pharaonic sovereignty—the scene was one of polemical taunting. When Aaron’s rod swallowed the staffs of the Egyptian magicians, Pharaonic deity and omnipotence were being denounced and rejected outright. Pharaoh’s cobra-crested diadem had no power against Yahweh.”[4]

Reflecting back on the Exodus out of Egypt, the biblical authors saw it as a victory over the serpent. Psalm 74:12-14 declares:

Yet God my King is from of old, working salvation in the midst of the earth. You divided the sea by your might; you broke the heads of the sea monsters on the waters. You crushed the heads of Leviathan; you gave him as food for the creatures of the wilderness.

While the ultimate victory still awaited, God was already foreshadowing how he was going to one day crush the head of the serpent.

Goliath the Serpent

One of the best-known stories from the Old Testament is David’s defeat of Goliath. This story portrays Goliath as a giant serpent who seeks to devour the seed of the woman. We know this because as 1 Samuel 17:5 makes clear, Goliath “was clothed with scale-armor” (NASB and NIV). While some translations simply translate this as “a coat of mail” (ESV), the most literal rendering is “armor of scales.”

The Hebrew word for “scale” appears seven other times in the Old Testament, and each time it refers to the scales of fish—including sea dragons.[5] It’s noteworthy that God also calls Pharaoh the “great dragon” with “scales” in Ezekiel 29:3-4. Pharaoh and Goliath are the only two people in the Bible who are said to have “scales.”

As the story of 1 Samuel 17 unfolds, David proclaims that the battle is the LORD’s and then proceeds to sink a stone into the forehead of the giant serpent who then falls face-first into the ground to eat dust like the serpent of old (Gen 3:14) Once more God foreshadows how he will crush the head of the serpent and deliver his people.

The Serpent in the Gospels

We find several instances where the seed of the serpent tries to destroy the seed of the woman. Just like the ancient Pharaoh, King Herod tried to kill all the Bethlehem boys in an attempt to kill the singular seed of the woman (Matt 2:16-18).

Repeatedly, we find that the Pharisees and Sadducees are portrayed as the seed of the serpent. Jesus says to them, “You are of your father the devil” (John 8:44). When John the Baptist saw them coming from afar, he cried out, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bear fruit in keeping with repentance. And do not presume to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our Father” (Matt 3:7-9). Similarly, Jesus cries out to the Pharisees in Matthew 23, “You serpents, you brood of vipers, how are you to escape being sentenced to hell?” In short, the Pharisees and Sadducees are the seed of the serpent who wage war on the seed of the woman.

The Dragon is Slayed

We round out this discussion by going to the very end where the book of Revelation proclaims the final demise of the serpent. Revelation 12:3-5 notes:

Behold, a great red dragon, with seven heads and ten horns, and on his heads seven diadems. His tail swept down a third of the stars of heaven and cast them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she bore her child he might devour it. She gave birth to a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne.

Here we read that that this powerful, red (blood-thirsty) dragon seeks to devour the seed of the woman. Yet, God delivered the seed from the dragon’s pursuits.

Revelation 12:7-9 continues:

Now war arose in heaven, Michael and his angels fighting against the dragon. And the dragon and his angels fought back, but he was defeated, and there was no longer any place for them in heaven. And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world—he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

Notice that the dragon is none other than Satan himself—that ancient serpent and deceiver of the whole world. And he is thrown down. But how? Did the archangel Michael destroy the dragon all by himself?

Revelation 12:11 declares

And they have conquered [the dragon] by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, for they loved not their lives even unto death.

Satan was ultimately defeated by the blood of the Lamb! It was Jesus Christ who conquered Satan. That moment on the cross, when it looked as if the serpent was going to prevail, his head was crushed by the seed of the woman (Gen 3:15).

Fast-forward to Revelation 20, right on the heels of the Millennium, we read in verse 10:

And the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever. 

In the end, the mighty serpent-slayer defeated the ancient serpent and rescued his bride so that she can no longer be deceived or devoured. Or to put it another way, the prince slayed the dragon and got his girl.[6]

Notes

[1] Andrew Naselli, The Serpent, and the Serpent Slayer, 18.

[2] Ibid., 18.

[3] Ibid., 18.

[4] John Currid, Ancient Egypt, 93-94.

[5] Andrew Naselli, The Serpent, and the Serpent Slayer, 90.

[6] Ibid., 15.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

How to Interpret Your Bible by Dr. Frank Turek DVD Complete Series, INSTRUCTOR Study Guide, and STUDENT Study Guide

How Philosophy Can Help Your Theology by Richard Howe (MP3 Set), (mp4 Download Set), and (DVD Set)

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide), and (DVD)      

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ryan Leasure holds a Master of Arts from Furman University and a Masters of Divinity from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Currently, he’s a Doctor of Ministry candidate at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He also serves as a pastor at Grace Bible Church in Moore, SC.

Original Blog Source: https://cutt.ly/UEpuVT6

 

/by
What did Jesus think about the Old Testament?

What did Jesus think about the Old Testament?

,

By Ryan Leasure

It’s not uncommon for Christians to throw shade on the Old Testament. These Christians say they love Jesus, but they could do without those primitive Jewish texts. In fact, many Christians suggest that much of the Old Testament is ahistorical. Events such as the flood, Jonah being swallowed by a big fish, or the fiery judgment of Sodom and Gomorra never happened. And then there’s the infamous quote that Christians simply need to “unhitch themselves from the Old Testament” because much of it is embarrassing or difficult to understand. Why can’t we just focus on Jesus instead?

We can certainly sympathize with these sentiments. After all, the flood and Sodom’s judgment seem pretty incredible and kind of harsh to boot! Wouldn’t it just be easier to disregard this ancient corpus? This position seems reasonable until one realizes that the same Jesus these Christians adore also happens to hold the Old Testament in high regard. Not only does he affirm the Old Testament’s inspiration, he also affirms its historicity and authority.

The Old Testament is Inspired

Historically, Christians have affirmed the verbal plenary inspiration of the Bible. That is to say, they recognize that every word of Scripture is “God-breathed” (2 Tim 3:16-17). At the same time, God spoke through human agency. Therefore, Scripture not only has a divine author, it has human authors as well.

Jesus affirmed the human authors of the Old Testament. Repeatedly, he recognizes that Moses is the one who gave the Law (Matt 8:4; 19:8; Mark 1:44; 7:10; Luke 5:14; 20:37; John 5:46; 7:19). He’ll say things like “do what Moses commanded” (Mark 1:44). Or “Moses said, Honor your father and your mother” (Mark 7:10). With respect to other Old Testament authors, Jesus declares, “Well did Isaiah prophesy . . .” (Mark 7:6). Also, “David himself, in the Holy Spirit, declared . . .” (Mark 12:36). And “So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel . . .”(Matt 24:15). It’s worth noting that just about all critical scholars call into question the authorship of these individuals in clear contradiction to Jesus.

At the same time, Jesus affirms that these individuals wrote divinely inspired Scripture. As was just alluded to, Jesus noted in Mark 12:36, “David himself, in the Holy Spirit, declared, . . .” In other words, David wrote, but his writings were the result of the Holy Spirit’s work (2 Pet 1:20-21). He also declared “Well did Isaiah prophesy . . .” (Mark 7:6). The mere mention of prophecy suggests that Isaiah wrote from God. Prophecy, after all, is by definition “a word from God.” The same could be said for Matthew 24:15 when Jesus refers to Daniel as “the prophet.” Moreover, when speaking to the scribes and Pharisees, Jesus asserts, “You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men” (Mark 7:8). He then goes on to clarify that the commandment of God was what Moses wrote in Exodus 20.

As John Wenhan notes, “To [Jesus], Moses, the prophets, David and the other Scripture-writers were truly inspired men with a message given by the Spirit of God.”1

The Old Testament is Historically Accurate

While many are willing to grant the Old Testament’s inspiration, many of these same individuals deny that it’s historically accurate at every point. They might affirm its historical nature in general (God created the world, called Abraham and the Jewish people, the Jews were exiled, etc.), but they balk at some of the more challenging texts (the flood, Sodom, Jonah, etc.). That said, Jesus has no qualms about affirming the historical nature of the Old Testament—even the most difficult texts to believe. Here are a few examples:

He believed that Cain killed Abel (Luke 11:51), that God sent a flood but spared Noah in the ark (Matt 24:37-39), and that God destroyed Sodom because of their wickedness (Matt 11:23-24). He even adds, “Remember Lot’s wife” (Luke 17:32). Additionally, Jesus believed that God sent down manna from heaven (John 6:31), the Israelites were healed by looking at the serpent (John 3:14), and that Jonah was swallowed by a big fish only to be regurgitated three days later (Matt 12:39-41).

The last text about Jonah is especially significant because it demonstrates that Jesus didn’t simply view these events figuratively. For the end of the text reads, “The men of Nineveh will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here” (Matt 12:41). It’s hard to imagine how Jesus could assert that Ninevah would rise up in the final judgment against the people who rejected him if they were make-believe. The same could be said for Jesus’ statement in Matthew 24:37: “For as were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.” In other words, just as God’s judgment was poured out in the days of Noah, so it will be again in the final judgment.

Again, Wenham remarks, “It is evident that [Jesus] was familiar with most of our Old Testament and that he treated it all equally as history.”2

The Old Testament is Authoritative

Because Jesus believed the Old Testament was divinely-inspired, he also affirmed its full authority. He demonstrated this authority by appealing to the scriptures dozens of times.

When asked what were the greatest commandments, he declares that “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart with all your soul and with all your mind. . . And the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself” (Matt 22:37-39). Jesus said that these two commands (Deut 6:4-6; Lev 19:18) sum up the totality of the Old Testament and are the guide to all ethical matters.

When facing temptation, Jesus appealed to the authority of Scripture to do battle against Satan. He repeatedly declares, “it is written, it is written, it is written” (Matt 4:1-11). Even as he was facing death, the final words on his lips were words from the Old Testament (Psalm 22:1; 31:5).

Jesus appeals to Genesis 1-2 when speaking about marriage and divorce. He asks, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh?’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate” (Matt 19:4-6). By alluding to Genesis 1-2 here, Jesus asserts that his position on marriage and divorce is rooted in the authority of the Old Testament text. By contrast, Jesus’ opponents rooted their position in different Rabbis (Shammai and Hillel).

When disputing with the Sadducess about the resurrection, Jesus scolds them, “You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God” (Matt 22:29). In other words, the Scriptures give us the definitive, authoritative word about the resurrection. Jesus goes on to question them, “Have you not read what was said to you by God, I am the God of Abraham . . .?” (Matt 31-32) Again, Jesus appeals to the Old Testament text to assert God’s power over the resurrection.

Jesus goes so far as to state that “Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35). For Jesus, Scripture is so powerful, nothing can undo it.

Jesus and the Old Testament

All the evidence taken together suggests that Jesus held a high view of the Old Testament. Those who claim to hold Jesus in high regard but reject some of the Old Testament’s teachings are being inconsistent. If you hold Jesus in high regard, you must hold the Old Testament in high regard as well. As John Wenham notes:

“To Christ the Old Testament was true, authoritative, inspired. To him the God of the Old Testament was the living God, and the teaching of the Old Testament was the teaching of the living God. To him, what Scripture said, God said.” 3

*For more on this topic, see John Wenham’s book Christ and the Bible.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

Old Testament vs. New Testament God: Anger vs. Love? (MP3 Set) (DVD Set) (mp4 Download Set) by Dr. Frank Turek 

Jesus, You and the Essentials of Christianity by Frank Turek (INSTRUCTOR Study Guide), (STUDENT Study Guide), and (DVD)      

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ryan Leasure is a pastor at Grace Bible Church in Moore, SC. For more on his background and interests, click here.

Original Blog Source: https://cutt.ly/rQYMyUQ

 

/by
Why Don’t the Synoptic Gospels Mention Lazarus?

Why Don’t the Synoptic Gospels Mention Lazarus?

,

By Ryan Leasure

Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead is one of the most well-known stories in the Gospels. Yet, for some reason, Matthew, Mark, and Luke don’t mention it. This head-scratching absence has raised a lot of doubts about its historicity. After all, this story seems too significant to leave out. As you can imagine, skeptics think John made it up. But could there be a good reason that the earlier Gospels left it out?

While it does seem strange that the synoptic writers would leave out this story, I believe we have a good explanation for its absence in what Gerd Theissen calls “protective anonymity.”[1]

Pre-Markan Tradition

Protective anonymity is based on the premise that a pre-Markan tradition stands behind the passion narrative in Mark 14-16. In other words, while Mark composed much of his Gospel based on Peter’s eyewitness testimony, the last few chapters came from another source that dates much closer to the time of Jesus’ death and resurrection. While biblical scholars are somewhat divided on this issue, the evidence tilts in favor of this pre-Markan source.

For example, scholars have long noted that Mark didn’t arrange the pericopes (e.g., miracles, parables, proclamations, narratives, exorcisms, etc.) chronologically. Rather, he ordered them in ways that suited his purposes. In fact, Matthew and Luke’s orders often diverge from Mark’s. Meaning, Mark could have easily rearranged the stories in a different order without impacting the overall message. However, when one gets to the passion narrative, the entire account presupposes a chronological order. Instead of one short story after another, the entire passion account (ch. 14-16, possibly ch. 11-16) flows like one continuous narrative. Certainly, Mark could have composed these last few chapters himself. But a few features from the text suggest that it was composed earlier and in Jerusalem.

One reason for adopting this view is that Mark mentions “the high priest” but never mentions him by name (Caiaphas). This phrasing would be akin to saying “the president” instead of President Biden. If I had a conversation with someone today and mentioned “the president,” no one would think I was talking about Trump, Obama, Bush, or any other previous president. They would assume I was talking about our current president. The same could be said for Caiaphas. Since he ruled till AD 37, the passion narrative that merely refers to him as “the high priest” must have been in circulation before his tenure ended.

Another reason for thinking that the passion account is early and from Jerusalem is the mention of “James the younger” in Mark 15:40. Theissen argues, “It would have been particularly necessary in Jerusalem to distinguish a ‘James the younger’ (or ‘the less’) from the ‘older’ (or ‘greater’).”[2] He suggests that “James the younger” was the brother of Jesus, and “James the older” was the Son of Zebedee. If Theissen is right, then the need to distinguish the two James would have been necessary in Jerusalem where “James the younger” was overseer of the church. Furthermore, the need to distinguish the two James would only be necessary until AD 44 when “James the older” died.

One more reason for thinking the passion narrative is a pre-Markan tradition is the mention of “the insurrection” in which Barabbas was involved (Mark 15:7). Jews, however, were familiar with a significant uprising led by Theudas in AD 44-45 (Acts 5:36).[3] One would think that if Mark wrote this passion account in the 50s or 60s, he would have been careful to distinguish which uprising Barabbas participated in. The mere mention of “the insurrection” suggests that this narrative pre-dates the insurrection led by Theudas in AD 44-45. 

Protective Anonymity

With the pre-Markan tradition established, we are now in a position to answer the question of why Lazarus is never mentioned. Theissen argues that people are left anonymous or unmentioned because if their names got back to the Jerusalem authorities, they could be implicated as accomplices in Jesus’ “revolt.”

Consider the person who cut off the ear of the high priest’s servant in Mark 14:47. Mark never mentions him by name. He simply notes that “one of those who stood by drew his sword and struck the servant of the high priest and cut off his ear.” Mark doesn’t even make it clear if this is one of Jesus’ disciples. It’s not until John’s Gospel—written around AD 90—that we discover that the identity of this sword-wielding character is none other than Peter himself. John no longer feels the need to protect Peter’s identity because he was long dead by now. Since Peter most likely would have faced arrest for this attempted murder on the high priest’s servant, this early pre-Markan tradition kept him anonymous.

Another case of protective anonymity is the woman who anointed Jesus in Mark 14:3-9. Her actions would undoubtedly make her an accomplice in Jesus’ messianic “revolt.” Bauckham remarks,

At the time when this tradition took shape in this form in the early Jerusalem church, this woman would have been in danger were she identified as having been complicit in Jesus’ political subversive claim to messianic kingship. Her danger was perhaps even greater than that of the man who attacked the servant of the high priest, for it was she who had anointed Jesus as Messiah.[4]

It’s worth noting that Judas immediately betrayed Jesus to the authorities following the anointing. Once again, it’s John who reveals the identity of this woman as Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus, when she no longer needed protective anonymity.

Lazarus

If we are right to believe that the pre-Markan passion narrative intentionally kept people anonymous for their protection, we could understand how it would leave Lazarus out of the story altogether. After all, John 12:10-11 notes that “the chief priests made plans to put Lazarus to death as well, because on account of him many of the Jews were going away and believing in Jesus.” That is to say, Lazarus was a thorn in the side of the Jewish leaders because he was convincing Jews to become Christians by simply walking around. Because Jewish leaders continued to persecute the early church for decades, this early passion narrative had to leave him out of the story altogether for his own protection.

However, some have argued that perhaps Lazarus does sneak into Mark’s passion narrative after all. During Jesus’ arrest, we read, “And a young man followed him, with nothing but a linen cloth about his body. And they seized him, but he left the linen cloth and ran away naked” (Mark 14:51-52). Without sounding too immature, I laugh every time I read about this anonymous streaker. Yet, this account is more significant than it may appear. With all the commotion going on (Peter had just whacked off someone’s ear), none of the disciples probably observed this scene. They had already “left him and fled” (Mark 14:50). Therefore, this story must go back to the eyewitness testimony of the streaker himself.

Again, his anonymity was necessary for his protection. After all, the only reason he must have fled naked is because he resisted the guards. Once they grabbed him, he was able to slip away, leaving his linen cloth behind. Undoubtedly, the Jewish leaders would have been looking to arrest this man who fought against them.

So who was this man? Some have argued that it was Lazarus. Wanting to still acknowledge Lazarus’ importance, this early account allows him this brief and very comical appearance. Others have argued that this person is John Mark himself. Like Alfred Hitchcock appearing in one of his own films or an artist painting himself into his picture, Mark inserted himself into the narrative. I don’t think we can know for sure. Although I kind of hope it’s Mark. That just makes for a better story.

[1] Gerd Theissen, The Gospels in Context.

[2] Gerd Theissen, The Gospels in Context, 178.

[3] Josephus, Antiquities, 20.97-98.

[4] Richard Bauckham, Jesus, and the Eyewitnesses, 2nd ed. 290.

Recommended resources related to the topic:

The New Testament: Too Embarrassing to Be False by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3, and Mp4)

Why We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth by Frank Turek (DVD, Mp3 and Mp4)

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ryan Leasure holds a Master of Arts from Furman University and a Master of Divinity from the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Currently, he’s a Doctor of Ministry candidate at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. He also serves as a pastor at Grace Bible Church in Moore, SC.

Original Blog Source: https://cutt.ly/Mb80NbD

 

/by