Ethan R. Longhenry's Blog, page 8

Gifts and Purification

The Book of Numbers is better understood in terms of its name in Hebrew: Bemidbar, “in the wilderness,” for it described Israel’s preparations to depart from Mount Horeb/Sinai and their wanderings in the wilderness afterward. The events described therein would have taken place sometime around either 1450-1410 or 1250 BCE, depending on one’s view of the Exodus; Moses would have written the original text while in the land of Moab across the Jordan River from Jericho.

In Numbers 1:1-10:10, Moses set forth the preparations necessary for Israel to travel. The Israelites and the Levites were numbered and organized (Numbers 1:1-4:49). Commandments had been given regarding purity and dedication to YHWH (Numbers 5:1-6:27). Moses, Aaron, and the Israelites had proven obedient to all which YHWH had commanded them.

Moses had previously consecrated and dedicated the Tabernacle and all of its furnishings (Exodus 30:23-31); in Numbers 7:1-89, Moses set forth the gifts of the leaders of the twelve tribes of Israel, as their portion in the work of dedicating the Tabernacle of Israel and to make it their own.

The leaders brought their gifts on carts carried by oxen; the carts and oxen were given to the Levitical clans of the Gershonites and Merarites so they could use them to carry the materials of their service; the Kohathites received none since they were called upon to manually carry their burdens (Numbers 7:3-9).

Moses listed out in exact detail each leader from each tribe and what was given: each gave a silver platter and bowl full of flour mixed with olive oil, a gold pan full of incense, a bull, a ram, a lamb for burnt offerings, a goat for a purification offering, and two bulls, five rams, five goats, and five lambs for peace offerings (Numbers 7:12-83).

Why would Moses provide such an exact listing and repeat himself 12 times? The way the text has been presented emphasizes the equality of the tribes. Each tribe’s leader brings their offering, and each is listed in its fullness. None of the twelve are any closer to the Tabernacle than any other; none brings anything more or less than any other tribe. They each have the same share in YHWH and the Tabernacle. Thus the presentation of the leaders’ gifts seeks to demonstrate the equality of standing of the tribes of Israel before YHWH and His Tabernacle.

Thus all Israel by proxy participated in the dedication of the Tabernacle (Numbers 7:84-88). Moses would go into the Tent of Meeting to speak with YHWH, and he would hear the voice of YHWH speaking above the mercy seat between the cherubim (Numbers 7:89).

As Moses would enter the Most Holy Place to hear the Word of YHWH, the ministration of the Tabernacle would fall upon Aaron, his sons, and the Levites. Aaron and his sons had been consecrated in Leviticus 8:1-9:24; the time had now come to officially consecrate and dedicate the Levites for their service.

YHWH first made provision for the lampstand and its seven lamps, the menorah (Numbers 8:1-4). Then YHWH commanded Moses to separate out the Levites from Israel to purify them: they were to have purification water sprinkled on them, be completely shaven, and wash their clothes (Numbers 8:5-8). The Levites would be brought before YHWH: all Israel was to lay their hands on the Levites, and Aaron was to offer the Levites as a wave offering before YHWH (Numbers 8:9-11). How “all” Israel would lay hands on the Levites, or how Aaron would offer the Levites as a wave offering, was left unrevealed. The Levites were to lay their hands on the heads of the bulls of the grain and purification offerings to make atonement for them (Numbers 8:12).

YHWH again explained the reasoning behind the dedication of the Levites: they were chosen instead of the firstborn of every Israelite and so no plague would come upon the Israelites for improperly approaching the sanctuary of YHWH (Numbers 8:16-19; cf. Exodus 13:1-2, Numbers 3:12-13).

In this way the Levites were formally and officially separated out from among the twelve tribes of Israel and dedicated to the service of YHWH at the Tabernacle (Numbers 8:13-16, 20-22).

YHWH again set forth the career of the Levites: the Levite men would join the company of the work at the tent of meeting at twenty-five but must retire by fifty; after fifty they could assist in the tent of meeting and attend to various needs but not otherwise do the work (Numbers 8:23-26).

This exhortation stands at variance with what YHWH expected from Moses in the census of the three clans of the Levites in Numbers 4:1-49, in which the Levite men from thirty to fifty were counted. Why the change from thirty in Numbers 4:1-49 to twenty-five in Numbers 8:24? Some manuscripts of the Greek Septuagint seem to “correct” the text in Numbers 8:24 to read “thirty” as in Numbers 4:1-49, so manifestly some have concluded the Numbers 8:24 number to be a corruption. Some conclude we are witnessing divergent traditions about when Levites should begin working. A canonically more consistent but creative explanation would be progressive: perhaps there were not enough men from thirty to fifty to well serve in the Tabernacle, and so the age of service was expanded by five years between Numbers 4:1-49 and Numbers 8:24 so there would be a sufficient number of workers.

By the end of Numbers 8:26, Israel had been counted for military service and stationed around the Levites and the Tabernacle. The Levites had been counted, organized, and dedicated for service to YHWH. The people had dedicated their gifts for the Tabernacle of YHWH. Throughout it all, Aaron, Moses, and the Israelites had proven completely and entirely faithful to every command and dictate given by YHWH. May we learn from the example of Israel and seek to glorify and honor God in Christ through the Spirit!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Gifts and Purification appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Begging the Question

Making full arguments can be hard. It is always easier if you can assume the argument and convince others you have proven yourself. Such does not make it right.

In any kind of argument or discussion, an attempt to presume the truth of the conclusion within the structure of the argument or discussion represents the logical fallacy which we have come to call begging the question. It has received this name on account of the way Aristotle originally described it in his Topics: Aristotle spoke of “asking for the initial thing” as a banal and fairly uncreative way of managing within a dialectical formal debate conversation. In those conversations, there would be the “initial thing,” the thesis under discussion, and then respondents would ask yes or no questions against in an attempt to challenge the validity or consistency of the thesis. In that kind of conversation, to ask, or thus to beg for, the question itself would not prove very productive in any kind of argumentation. The Latin name for the fallacy, petitio principii, is a more or less direct translation of Aristotle’s original concern, “asking for the beginning/starting point,” and has since been understood as meaning “assuming the premise.” “Begging the question” would be more properly petitio quaesiti in Latin.

While the original Aristotelian concern would involve a questioner in the discourse, today the fallacy of begging the question tends to come from the person who would be advancing or making the argument in the discussion. Begging the question falls under the greater category of circular reasoning, which is what makes it fallacious: by assuming the proof, no actual proof is adduced or presented, and the statement or thesis simply remains an assertion.

Much of what is called “begging the question” in modern rhetorical discourse is not, strictly, “begging the question.” “Begging the question” seems to have become the catch-all phrase to point out a host of potential fallacies: dodging a question, raising the question, inviting the question, or suggesting the question. Many use it to speak of a question being left unanswered. Many have confused “begging the question” with “calling the question,” the latter of which represents a parliamentary procedure which would compel the end of discussion and voting on a motion. If someone has intentionally avoided and neglected a question or concern in an argument, they have dodged the question or left the question unanswered. If an argument in a discourse generates a new concern or interest, then it has raised, invited, or suggested the question. None of these are “begging the question,” in which someone advancing the argument has asserted their conclusion as part of their proof.

One way begging the question might take place involves a simple re-statement of a claim. Ironic examples of these can be found throughout the dictionary in those circumstances in which a word’s definition is often a re-stated form of the word, as when a nominal form of a word is described as the “state” or “condition” of its verbal form. More complicated forms of this fallacy might involve using the definition of a term as part of the evidence for a claim, as if the definition could really advance the argument. At many other times, begging the question takes place as a part of a larger effort of circular reasoning.

Begging the question quite frequently takes place in contexts and situations in which the one advancing the argument wants to rely upon the expectation the audience will understand the claim as self-evident or so consistent with common sense or common reasoning as to not require any kind of real substantive proof. If this expectation does not already exist, the one advancing the argument might well be attempting to thus suggest it, perhaps obscured by some rhetorical panache.

To this end a lot of political discourse features begging the question: politicians will frequently make all kinds of claims and repeat them endlessly as if they were self-evidently true, or as if “we all know” this is the way things are, when in fact the claim remains quite deficient in terms of evidence and poorly reflects the reality of our time and place. Those who believe the politician well advances their ideas and represents their way of looking at things will tend to uncritically agree. Those who prove critical of the politician might try to refute the claim(s) with evidence or attempt to make some other kind of rhetorical appeal, but most often for naught. There seems to be very little accountability in our current political discourse, and so politicians freely use circular reasoning and beg the question constantly without suffering any real consequences for doing so.

Religious discourse is not immune from begging the question; if anything, religious discourse ends up awash in circular reasoning in which the conclusions are asserted as part of the proof. You will rarely find anyone begging the question in matters regarding which abundant evidence can be found: whether the Apostles believed Jesus was the Christ based in what has been revealed in the New Testament, for example. We do not need to beg the question regarding whether baptism was the normative response in faith upon hearing the Gospel in the New Testament; we can point to many examples to demonstrate the truth of the proposition (e.g. Acts 2:1-41, 10:1-57, 16:31-33, etc.). Instead, the question will more likely be begged regarding those claims and propositions for which explicit evidence is lacking in the New Testament or other spiritual resources, or possibly as a result of someone having taken the truth of those claims or propositions for granted. One unfortunate example might involve the Bible as the Word of God: many will attempt to argue, with perhaps a little more rhetorical flourish, how the Bible is the Word of God because the Bible is the Word of God. A more full and complete argument would involve understanding how Jesus and the Apostles reckoned the words of Scripture as the written witness of what God had communicated to the prophets and in Jesus by means of the Apostles, involving Hebrews 1:3, Matthew 18:18, 2 Peter 1:19-21, and other passages.

As Christians, we do well to make sure we avoid begging the question as we seek to proclaim the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. We will be most tempted to beg the question in those circumstances in which there is not as much explicit Biblical evidence as we would like, and all the more so in those aspects of our faith which we have accepted as self-evident or regarding which we have never considered any kind of reasoning for its truth. We do well to further study any argument or claim in which we might be tempted to beg the question. Sometimes that study should lead us to be able to make better and more effective arguments for the truth of the matter. Sometimes that study will lead us to maintain confidence in the truth of that claim, but as one to be asserted in humility with the recognition of proof as relatively lacking. But sometimes that study will lead us to recognize we accepted an argument or claim as true when it really did not best reflect the evidence available, and we can repent and make better, more accurate arguments and claims in ways which will glorify and honor God in Christ. May we avoid begging the question and promote the Gospel of Christ to the best of our ability, and entrust ourselves fully to God in Christ through the Spirit!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Works Consulted

Begging the Question (accessed 2024/22/07).

The post Begging the Question appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Nazirite and the Blessing

The Book of Numbers is better understood in terms of its name in Hebrew: Bemidbar, “in the wilderness,” for it described Israel’s preparations to depart from Mount Horeb/Sinai and their wanderings in the wilderness afterward. The events described therein would have taken place sometime around either 1450-1410 or 1250 BCE, depending on one’s view of the Exodus; Moses would have written the original text while in the land of Moab across the Jordan River from Jericho.

In Numbers 1:1-10:10 Moses set forth the preparations necessary for Israel to travel; while we may find such information tedious, we have records of Egyptian rulers chronicling their preparations and logistics for major campaigns. Such suggests many ancient people took pride in detailing all which proved necessary to accomplish their great deeds. YHWH had commanded Moses and Aaron to take a military census of the Israelites and to organize the camp by tribe in Numbers 1:1-2:34 and then to take a count of the Levite men and assign their forms of service in Numbers 3:1-4:49. Moses, Aaron, and the Israelites had proven obedient to all which YHWH had commanded them.

In the middle of describing such events, YHWH gave commandments to Moses regarding matters of purity and wholeness among the Israelites in Numbers 5:1-31, the Nazirite vow in Numbers 6:1-21, and the Aaronic High Priestly Blessing in Numbers 6:22-27.

YHWH set forth the provisions for the nazir, the “Nazirite” (Numbers 6:1-21). The term derives from the word for “remaining aloof,” or perhaps “set apart”; it can also refer to an untrimmed vine, perhaps an association with the abstinence from grape products and maintenance of untrimmed hair which were the primary signs of the Nazirite (Numbers 6:3, 5).

Any Israelite, male or female, could make the determination to become a Nazirite for a specified amount of time: they would take the Nazirite vow to dedicate themselves to YHWH (Numbers 6:1-2). During the time of their Nazirite vow, they were to separate themselves from any products from grapes: wine, shekar, grapes, or raisins (Numbers 6:3-4). Shekar has been generically translated as “strong drink” in English for centuries; the related term in Akkadian refers to beer, and Numbers 6:2-3 would represent the strongest argument against understanding shekar as “beer” in Hebrew since association is made with the grape, although we have evidence from Egypt of beer being sweetened with wine, and such may explain the association. Some translate shekar in Numbers 6:2 as “vinegar”; some are willing to go as far as translating it as “brandy,” but evidence for distillation in the ancient Near East is lacking.

Israelites who have taken the Nazirite vow upon themselves were also to allow their hair to grow long and thus be holy before YHWH (Numbers 6:5). They must not come into contact with any dead body during their time under the Nazirite vow, even a close relative since he or she is separated out as holy before YHWH (Numbers 6:6-8). Provision was then made for the sacrifices necessary for an Israelite under a Nazirite vow who somehow became defiled by touching a dead body; he or she would have to rededicate themselves to YHWH under the Nazirite vow and would have to bring a trespass or reparation offering on account of having transgressed their vow of separation (Numbers 6:9-12).

YHWH then also made provision for the “law of the Nazirite,” the offerings and rituals necessary to bring the Nazirite vow to its completion (Numbers 6:13-20): a burnt offering, a purification or sin offering, and a peace offering, as well as grain and drink offerings, all presented by the priest before YHWH. At the tent of meeting the Nazirite would shave his head and the hair would be burnt on the offering with the peace offering. After the wave offering the Israelite under the Nazirite vow would be released and able to drink wine and otherwise participate in the life of the community.

The most (in)famous “Nazirite” of the Hebrew Bible was Samson, dedicated to YHWH from the womb (Judges 13:7); yet Samson’s story seems to feature the continual violation of the Nazirite vow, touching (and even eating from) the carcass of a lion, and eventually having his hair shorn (cf. Judges 14:8-9, 16:17-20). Hannah promised YHWH she would dedicate her firstborn son to Him and would never cut his hair (1 Samuel 1:11); for this reason Samuel seems to have also been a Nazirite.

In the New Testament, the angel Gabriel told Zechariah his son John would be filled with the Spirit in the womb and should not drink wine or “strong drink” (Luke 1:15); since Luke deliberately portrays John the Baptist as the kind of Samuel to Jesus as David, we should certainly understand John the Baptist as a Nazirite.

While these remain the most prominent examples of Israelites under the Nazirite vow, they would seem to be the exceptions to the rule, since they all seem to have been dedicated as Nazirites from the womb and remained under that vow throughout their lives. The examples of Israelites under a Nazirite vow for a specific period of time feature the Apostle Paul as related by Luke in Acts 18:18 and four otherwise unknown Jewish Christians of which Luke testified in Acts 21:23-24.

Rabbinic commentary on the Nazirite proved somewhat ambivalent. There was clearly some place for the Nazirite vow in Israel: it provided an opportunity for the regular Israelite to dedicate and sanctify themselves to YHWH, and it was the closest the average Israelite would come to being dedicated and sanctified to YHWH like the priests. The independently minded Westerner of the modern era can certainly appreciate the appeal and the option provided for the Israelites; the more communally minded rabbinic community often wondered why one would want to thus separate out from the community to be thus dedicated before YHWH. Provision for the Nazirite vow immediately followed provision for the sotah test of the jealous husband regarding his possibly unfaithful wife (cf. Numbers 5:11-31); the rabbis noted how a purification or sin offering was among the sacrifices required to relieve the Nazirite from his or her vow (cf. Numbers 6:14). Perhaps the rabbis were right in maintaining some temperance regarding over-exuberant enthusiasm for the Nazirite vow among the Israelites; maybe the reasons for dedicating oneself to YHWH as a Nazirite involved, for at least some Israelites, attempts at contrition, or re-affirmation or renewal of relationship with YHWH in a way which alienated them, to some degree for some period of time, from life of the community of the people of God.

YHWH then made provision for Aaron, the High Priest, to be able to bless the Israelites in Numbers 6:22-27. The High Priestly Blessing has since become iconic:

YHWH bless you and protect you;
YHWH make his face to shine upon you, and be gracious to you;
YHWH lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace (Numbers 6:24-26).

In Hebrew the prayer nicely was built up upon itself, with the first line as three words, the second line with five words, and the third with seven words, and each line expands and intensifies the expected blessings. The overall message represents the request for YHWH to bless and sustain His people. God’s blessings and protection, to be kept by God, represents the primary desire of every believer in God (Numbers 6:24). From beginning to end of the witness of Scripture, to stand in the Presence of God represents the greatest honor, security, and strength; thus the request for God to make His face shine upon His people and lift His countenance upon them, with the expectation God would give gifts and peace to His people (Numbers 6:25-26).

We have ancient Near Eastern analogues requesting the blessings of the various gods of the nations upon their nations which sound quite similar to this prayer. We have discovered a silver scroll amulet at Ketef Hinnom featuring the words of the High Priestly Blessings dated to around 600 BCE; such represents the earliest witness to anything written in the Hebrew Bible. It is appropriate that this prayer would be the earliest attested message of the Scriptures.

What should Christians make of the Nazirite vow and the High Priestly Blessing? Both Jesus and James have warned us about vows, encouraging Christians to live in their integrity so their yes and no would prove sufficient (Matthew 5:33-37, James 5:12). Yet we should certainly live our lives as dedicated to God and set apart for His purposes (cf. 1 Peter 1:13-16). The words of the High Priestly Blessing can still resonate for Christians; it is right and appropriate for Christians to bless one another by asking God to bless and protect them, to make His face to shine upon them and be gracious to them, and to lift His countenance upon them and give them peace. May we gain insight and edification from YHWH’s provisions for Israel, and faithfully serve God in Christ through the Spirit!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Nazirite and the Blessing appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Echo Chamber

We might enjoy hearing the resonance of the sound of our own voices in an echo chamber, but such will not prove conducive in persuading or reaching anyone else.

The idea of the echo chamber comes from any number of forms of acoustic echo chambers: an enclosed area in which sound reverberates off of many surfaces to amplify and repeat any sound uttered within it. In an acoustic echo chamber, a person could hear their voice amplified and repeated back time and time again, perhaps giving the impression the sound involved a lot more than just the efforts of one person.

By extension, therefore, an echo chamber proves to be the fruit of epistemic closure and confirmation bias: people are either closed off or close themselves off from hearing from a range of perspectives and voices, and listen only to those voices with which they agree and which reinforce their basic assumptions and beliefs. They thus close themselves off from obtaining insights from perspectives of others who would disagree, and they magnify the size and standing of those voices with which they agree.

Echo chambers do not, in and of themselves, manifest a logical fallacy, but many fallacies and an inability to well reason with others often results from living within an echo chamber. It proves almost impossible to maintain a well-reasoned and charitable framework and disposition while remaining siloed in an echo chamber.

The types of echo chambers, and reasons for finding oneself in an echo chamber, prove legion. Some echo chambers are imposed on people from those in positions of authority: an official line is taken and disseminated while forms of disagreement and dissent are silenced and suppressed. The impression is given everyone believes and accepts such things, and often grave consequences await any who would outwardly demonstrate resistance. Even if the powerful interest uses a “softer glove” approach featuring incessant propaganda but without as much suppression of outward dissent, the constant, withering barrage can still lead people to accept the authority’s framework and understanding about such matters.

Yet many voluntarily enter into echo chambers without any outward forms of coercion and in the face of plenty of disagreement and dissent. While it can occasionally happen very abruptly, most of the time people cease putting in the effort to fully consider and grapple with other perspectives and points of view. It proves easier to listen to those with whom you share fundamental assumptions and beliefs; before too long, it seems everyone with whom you are communicating basically agrees with you. At this point, receiving information that would suggest a significant percentage of people do not agree with you proves mystifying; it seems like a conspiracy or a hoax to you because you intuit far more agreement than actually exists because you’ve surrounded yourself only with people who agree with you.

We are tempted to enter echo chambers regarding many aspects of our lives, but as in all such things, rarely more so than in terms of politics and religion.

Almost everyone can see the challenges with echo chambers in politics; unfortunately, the challenges and critiques are almost invariably leveled at those on the other side. The recent shifts toward greater radical and reactionary poles of political discourse have likely been because of and fueled by echo chambers: people become alienated from those who disagree with them politically, which makes them easier targets for radicalization, leading to demonization, dehumanization, and great hostility toward those of the other side. Nothing good has ever come from such demonization, dehumanization, and hostility (cf. James 3:14-18).

Yet the tendency toward developing echo chambers remains quite alive in terms of religion as well. The Christian faith can easily be co-opted and made to be about “us” versus “them.” “We” have the truth and the answers, and “they” therefore must be in the wrong. We can justify and rationalize why we should only listen to those who share our religious presuppositions. Preaching and teaching can easily be conformed to the echo chamber, able to rally the faithful but without much critical rigor or standing. And in such echo chambers the temptation toward radicalization remains. How many horrific deeds have been perpetrated by those who professed to follow Jesus who ended up getting radicalized in a religious echo chamber?

There was hope and promise regarding the Internet: we had hoped interconnectedness would facilitate more information, insight, and exchange, and work against the echo chamber mentality. Yet the Internet has proven both a bane and a boon for the development of echo chambers. Internet algorithms can lead a person to experience selective exposure; the Internet has facilitated all sorts of people with very niche interests or views to find and support one another, for good and for ill. Therefore, it remains quite possible to ensconce oneself into a comfortable Internet bubble, receiving information only from those with whom you are predisposed to agree, and able to block, hide, or never even see material or people with opposing viewpoints. At the same time, people have often come into contact with those who had been demonized as “the other,” and they were discovered to be normal people, leading to disillusionment regarding the attitudes and ideologies in which people were raised. We see this latter trend especially prevalent among those raised in very restrictive and fear-based religious environments; such has led to not a little of the deconstruction going on in the present day.

Thus, in the end, the echo chamber ultimately proves self-defeating. You can be reinforced in your shared agreement for only so long before the group seems utterly remote and mystifying to anyone who is not a part of it. Sometimes people turn on one another in the echo chamber because of perceived deviations from what was held in agreement; many more times some have seen through the conceit of the echo chamber and no longer want to be a part of it. Those who wish to develop themselves or others in what seems to be the relative comfort and security of an echo chamber will be hard pressed to avoid any and every form of disruption which would easily shatter it all.

Arguments and ideas cultivated and developed in echo chambers painfully demonstrate their origins. They may make a world of sense to those already committed to those principles, but often seem hopelessly arcane to anyone else. Furthermore, the deeper we enmesh ourselves into an echo chamber, the more extreme and esoteric our arguments, discussions, and ideas become.

Echo chambers stand at variance with our shared work of God in Christ. Jesus called upon Christians to be the light of the world, not putting the light under a bushel, but out so all could see it (cf. Matthew 5:13-16). Jesus and the Apostles freely discussed and disputed with others from differing religious and socio-economic backgrounds. Paul could only tear down arguments and obstacles raised up against the knowledge of God by engaging with them, understanding them, and finding ways to subject them to the knowledge of God in Christ (2 Corinthians 10:4-5).

Iron sharpens iron (cf. Proverbs 27:17), and the truth never has anything to fear from exposure or discussion. Therefore, Christians should not fear engaging with people with whom they have various levels of disagreement. In fact, such engagement is required for the Christian to be able to develop a robust, healthy faith and defense for that faith.

Engagement with other ideas does not demand acceptance of other ideas. And yet no matter how significant the disagreement, and even if we have been given no reason to adapt or modify our views based on what has been presented, we will never be entirely the same after the interaction. Perhaps in it we have learned a better way of describing our beliefs, or we have a better understanding of why we strongly disagree with a given premise. That kind of engagement and interaction will be manifest in how we discuss that given issue or practice in the future.

The Gospel of Christ cannot be well preached in an echo chamber. Those in echo chambers might be continually reinforced in what they believe, but the lack of a catalyst for critical engagement or thought will invariably lead to far weaker beliefs, impatience and frustration when attempting to communicate those beliefs, a strong temptation to demonize, dehumanize, and manifest hostility to those outside of the echo chamber, and ironically, a greater chance of later disillusionment if and when the echo chamber, for whatever reason, is shattered. We can only well and truly reflect God in Christ through the Spirit to the world by engaging in and with the world and allowing those engagements and interactions to better shape and inform our arguments and presentation of the Gospel. May we resist the tendency to ensconce ourselves in echo chambers, consider a range of views and perspectives, but always ground and root ourselves in what God has accomplished in Jesus!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Echo Chamber appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Seven Trumpets

John is in the midst of a vision of Heaven; he has seen the One who sits on the throne and the Lamb as having been slain (Revelation 4:1-11). The Lamb has a scroll with seven seals and has opened the seven seals, ostensibly allowing the scroll to be opened (Revelation 5:1-8:1). As the seventh seal is opened, silence comes over Heaven for a half hour, and then seven trumpets are given to the seven angels before God’s throne (Revelation 8:1-2). Another angel takes a golden censer, fills it with the incense, the prayers of the saints, and the fire from the altar, and casts it upon the earth (Revelation 8:3-5). The time had come for the angels to sound the trumpets (Revelation 8:6).

As the first four angels sound their trumpets, John sees great environmental damage take place. Hail and fire mixed with blood destroy a third of the land, trees, and grass (Revelation 8:7). A mountain burning with fire is cast into the sea, turning a third of it to blood and killing a third of the sea creatures (Revelation 8:8-9). A star, Wormwood, falls from the sky, making a third of the freshwater brackish and poisonous (Revelation 8:10-11). A third of the stars, moons, and other lights in the sky are struck and are darkened (Revelation 8:12).

Yet this is just the beginning. An eagle cries out to warn people regarding the woes that will come with the next three trumpet blasts (Revelation 8:13).

The fifth trumpet, or the first woe, leads to the opening of the pit of the abyss, and fearsome locust creatures come out, prepared as for war, which are commanded not to attack vegetation but people, particularly those who did not have the seal of God, causing them such great pain and distress that many seek to die but will not find it (Revelation 9:1-10). Their king is the Destroyer, called Abaddon or Apollyon (Revelation 9:11).

The sixth trumpet, or second woe, leads to the releasing of the four angels at the Euphrates and a cavalry of two hundred million who kill a third of mankind with their plagues of sulfuric fire and smoke and brimstone (Revelation 9:12-19). And yet, despite all of these plagues and great devastation, those on the earth who remained did not repent of their idolatry, sorcery, murder, adultery, and theft (Revelation 9:20-21).

The second woe only fully comes to an end in Revelation 11:14, yet there seems to be some sort of an interlude between the sixth and seventh trumpet/second and third woe as there was between the sixth and seventh seals (cf. Revelation 7:1-17). John sees a strong angel coming down from heaven, standing on earth and sea, holding a little book, proclaiming that the delay shall be no longer, but the mystery shall be finished with the seventh trumpet (Revelation 10:1-7). John is then exhorted to take the little book and eat it, and it is sweet to the taste but bitter in the stomach, and he will again prophesy about peoples and nations and kings (Revelation 10:8-11). John is then given a reed to measure the temple of God, but only the inner court, since the outer court will be trampled by the Gentiles for forty-two months (Revelation 11:1-2). Two witnesses, the olive trees and lampstands before God, will prophesy to the people for 1,260 days, wearing sackcloth and having power to shut up the heavens and bring fire upon their enemies (Revelation 11:3-6). The beast from the abyss will rise up and kill them, and the people of earth will make merry and give gifts to each other, but after three and a half days God will raise them up and will go up into heaven in a cloud, leading the people to fear and give God glory (Revelation 11:7-12). A great earthquake then kills seven thousand people, and the second woe is ended, but the third woe comes quickly (Revelation 11:13-14).

When the seventh trumpet sounds, great voices in Heaven cry out that the kingdoms of the world are now the kingdom of the Lord and His Christ, and He shall reign forever; the twenty-four elders give thanks to the Almighty “who is and was,” for He has taken His power and now reigns, having poured out His wrath upon the nations and rewarded His servants (Revelation 11:15-18). John then sees the Temple, the Holy of Holies, opened up, so as to be able to see the Ark of the Covenant, followed by lightning, voices, thunders, an earthquake, and great hail (Revelation 11:19).

The seven trumpets prove more challenging and mystifying than the seven seals. All sorts of interpretations and identifications are advanced to explain John’s meaning, yet few prove very satisfying.

We do well to remember that while John sees what is in the vision, the various aspects of the vision have meaning based in the long-standing themes of the Old and New Testaments. Furthermore, the seven trumpets come forth based upon the opening of the seventh seal: as a seal is a mark of identification and surety that a document has not been corrupted, a trumpet blast proclaims a message and/or sounds a warning for war and judgment (Ezekiel 33:1-6, Hosea 5:8-9). Throwing the coals of the altar upon the earth is a sign of impending judgment and destruction of Jerusalem in Ezekiel 10:1-7; the plagues unleashed by the first five trumpets have much in common with the plagues God cast upon Pharaoh and Egypt to liberate the Israelites from the bondage of slavery, Ezekiel’s warning to Gog about what God will do to him and his land if he attacks the people of God, and Zephaniah’s declaration of what God will do to the land of Judah because of their transgression (Exodus 7:1-12:32, Ezekiel 38:18-23, Zephaniah 1:3). The fearsome locusts, beyond their association with one of the plagues upon the Egyptians, are similarly described in Joel 1:4-2:25. The “Destroyer” is as the destroying angel of God (Genesis 19:1-29, 2 Kings 19:35). The terrifying and ominous army to the east, coming to destroy, is a theme repeated throughout Israel’s history with Assyria and Babylon (cf. Habakkuk 1:6-11).

God tells Ezekiel to eat a scroll in Ezekiel 2:8-3:3, and it is sweet to the mouth but bitter in the stomach. Measuring a temple features prominently in Ezekiel 40:1-48:35, Amos 7:7-9, and Zechariah 2:1-5 to lay out the plan for the restoration of the people of God and cutting off of those who refuse and rebel; in the New Testament, the people of God are the temple (1 Corinthians 3:14-16, 6:19-20, Ephesians 2:20-22, 1 Peter 2:5, 9). Forty two months, 1,260 days, and three and a half years are roughly the same amount of time, and is heavy with symbolism: Antiochus IV Epiphanes desecrated the Temple in Jerusalem by offering pig’s flesh on the altar and that devastation lasted from 167 to 164 BCE. This time period now becomes a way of expressing a time of persecution by an oppressive power (cf. Daniel 9:27, 12:7). The integrity of the church will be maintained, but there will be distress from those who are without. The two witnesses prophesy and are described in terms of the images of the high priest and governor of Israel as well as the exploits of Moses and Elijah (1 Kings 17:1, 18:41-46, 2 Kings 1:10-14, Zechariah 4:1-14); many seek to identify them as Elijah and Enoch, Moses and Elijah, the Old and New Testaments, but they likely represent the proclamation of the Gospel according to the witness of the God in Christ through the Holy Spirit and the witness of believers. The beast features prominently in Daniel 7:21-25 and 8:23-24 as the power of the oppressive nation, and Sodom and Egypt both represent the world, iniquity, and oppression (Genesis 13:13, 19:4-11, 24, Exodus 1:1-14:31). Jerusalem is the city in which the Lord was crucified, and it is expanded to include the whole world, since all see the events taking place. Yet the witnesses are raised and ascend to heaven: the proclamation of the Gospel cannot be so easily defeated, and no matter what the oppressive power may attempt to do, God’s people will continue to proclaim it.

The seventh trumpet is described in terms of the end of time: the kingdoms of men now are the Kingdom of God, and He reigns; the time of judgment and resurrection is now seen in the past (cf. Psalm 2:1-12, Acts 17:30-31, Romans 2:5-11, 1 Corinthians 15:20-57, 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:10, 2 Thessalonians 1:5-11). The Temple is now open; the Ark can be seen; God’s promises are fulfilled.

Yet Revelation is not over; there are still eleven more chapters to go! We do well to remember that John has ingested the scroll, which is to absorb the message of God, and must now again prophesy regarding peoples, tongues, nations, and kings. Through the images of the temple, the witnesses, their death at the hand of the beast and their subsequent resurrection, we get a glimpse into what John will see more fully in Revelation 12:1-20:10. Through the seventh trumpet blast we get an idea of what will take place as described in Revelation 20:11-22:6.

In Revelation 4:1-10:11, John sees the vision of Heaven and how things look from the heavenly perspective; God in Christ directs the action, and there is no opposition. In Revelation 11:1-14 John receives an overview of the challenges which lay ahead: the persecution of believers by an oppressive, hostile power, but the promise of Revelation 11:15-19 should sustain them: they will overcome through God in Christ, for the kingdoms of the world will become the Kingdom of God in Christ. No matter how difficult or challenging the situation may seem, we do well to remember that God is in control, He will not delay, and those who oppose Him will suffer His wrath in judgment, and believers must continue to overcome all evil through the blood of the Lamb. Let us glorify and praise the Lord and His Christ!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Seven Trumpets appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Seven Seals

John has been granted a vision of Heaven, highlighting the rule of God on His throne and the glory and honor given to Him (Revelation 4:1-11). John sees that God holds a scroll with seven seals upon it, and learns that the Lamb of God, Jesus, is worthy to open the seals, and He is greatly praised by all creation and the angelic host (Revelation 5:1-14). The time has come for the Lamb to open the seals.

As the first four seals are opened, horses and their riders come forth (Revelation 6:1-8). The first horse is white and goes off to conquer (Revelation 6:1-2). The second horse is red, and its rider was given a sword to take peace away from the earth (Revelation 6:3-4). The third horse is black, and its rider carries a balance, and a voice calls out highly inflated prices for wheat and barley, while oil and wine remain, indicating scarcity (Revelation 6:5-6). The fourth horse is pale, perhaps the pallor of illness or death upon a man, and Death rides it with Hades following behind, and sword, famine, pestilence, and wild beasts bring forth death (Revelation 6:7-8).

The fifth seal is opened, and John sees souls under an altar, those slain as martyrs for God (Revelation 6:9). They cry out to God, wanting to know when their blood will be avenged; they are given white robes and told to wait a little longer until the full number of martyrs is reached (Revelation 6:10-11).

The sixth seal brings forth all sorts of momentous events: earthquakes, the sun turning black and the moon to blood, stars falling from the sky, the heavens rolled up as a scroll, and the movement of mountains and islands (Revelation 6:12-15). Everyone on earth, from kings to slaves, hide and want to find some way of escaping face of the One upon the Throne, and the wrath of the Lamb (Revelation 6:16-17).

Before the seventh seal can be opened, God’s people must themselves be sealed. John sees the angels who hold back the four winds at the four corners of the earth, and they are exhorted to do no harm to the creation until the people of God are sealed (Revelation 7:1-3). John speaks of these as 144,000 from the “tribes of Israel,” listing 12 tribes of 12,000 people each, following the standard pattern of the tribes of Israel except omitting Dan, counting Levi, and speaking of Manasseh and Joseph but not Ephraim (Revelation 7:4-8; cf. Genesis 35:22-26).

Then John sees a great multitude from every people and nation before the throne and before the Lamb, praising and glorifying God and the Lamb as seen previously in Revelation 5:9-14 (Revelation 7:9-12). They are the ones who came out of the tribulation, having washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb, and they are always before the throne of God, serving Him constantly, sheltered by His glory (Revelation 7:13-15). They do not hunger or thirst, are not oppressed by heat, and are shepherded by the Lamb who guides them to springs of living water, and God wipes every tear from their eyes (Revelation 7:16-17).

Then John sees the seventh seal opened (Revelation 8:1). All is silent for about a half an hour. Another series of events will soon take place before John’s eyes.

The opening of the seven seals has fascinated and mystified people for generations; the “Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse” is one of the most defining images of Revelation. The meaning behind these events is quite disputed, and we can understand why: these images seem quite strange.

Nevertheless, the images are consistent with many themes found throughout the Old and New Testaments. Four horses and their riders are sent out in Zechariah 1:8-10 and 6:1-8; judgment is suspended until the righteous are sealed in Ezekiel 9:1-8. We can gain some insight into the meaning of these images through their continued use throughout Scripture.

The horses and their riders evoke the hand of God among the people: the white horse and rider as conquering by the promotion of the Gospel and/or victory in battle, the red horse and rider as persecution of believers or conflict among nations, the black horse and rider as scarcity on account of famine, extortion, or mismanagement, and the pale horse and Death as the representative judgment of God against a nation: sword, famine, pestilence, and death (Revelation 6:1-8; cf. Leviticus 26:21-26, Ezekiel 4:10, 16, 14:12-21, Matthew 10:34-39).

The altar of the fifth seal is the altar of sacrifice, and since the blood of the sacrifice would collect under the altar, and life is in the blood, so the lives of the Christians who died for their faith remain under the altar (cf. Exodus 29:12, Leviticus 4:7, 18, 30, 17:11-14). Their blood must be avenged, not because of hatred or ill will against their fellow man, but on account of the divine mandate in Genesis 4:10, 9:5-6 and Numbers 35:33 regarding the pollution that comes from unavenged blood. God remains a God of justice as well as a God of love!

All of the events of the sixth seal evoke the signs of the days of judgment and reckoning in Isaiah 13:10-13, 34:4, Jeremiah 4:19-28, Hosea 10:8, Joel 2:30-32, Amos 8:8-9, and even Jesus in Matthew 24:29-34. These all speak of nations great and small falling.

Many relate the events surrounding the six seals to Israel in the days of the destruction of Jerusalem around 70 CE or to the Romans and their Empire in the first centuries CE. This is to be expected, since the referents for the images speak of judgment upon Babylon, Israel, and Judah. They are how God visits judgment upon people, and reflect God’s continued activity and presence in His creation.

Yet however God judges the nations, He has sealed His own people with His name. The “144,000” do not necessarily escape the trials and tribulations of the seals, but they have the spiritual security of being God’s people. Throughout the New Testament, Christians in the church are spoken of in terms of the people of Israel (Romans 2:28-29, 9:6, Galatians 6:15-16, Philippians 3:3): so it is with the 144,000 in Revelation 7:1-8. They are the “12 x 12 x 1000,” the very large number who are religiously complete before God; they are Christians living on earth and serving God, often called the “church militant.”

They are joined in their praise and service by the innumerable people of God who have gone on to their reward and continually stand before the Throne and the Lamb (cf. Revelation 7:9-17). They are the “church triumphant,” and they have received the wonderful promises of God. They do not hunger or thirst; they do not suffer from heat; they have living water, being shepherded by Jesus, and God wipes every tear from their eye. It is all love, joy, peace, glory, and grace, and it is wonderful!

While we will never exhaust the mysteries of the seven seals, we can gain encouragement from them. Events transpire as they have in the past: people stand for God’s Word and are persecuted for it. Nations conquer and are conquered; there are times of plenty and times of scarcity; people always find ways of making war on each other. Nations rise and fall. The people of God must endure such things as they always have. Yet they have their own seal upon them which God has given them; they are His and live to praise Him. They cherish the hope of the promise of joining that “church triumphant,” able to stand before the throne and the Lamb in love, joy, peace, glory, and grace, and receive rest. Let us stand firm for the cause of the Lord so as to obtain that wonderful inheritance, glorifying and honoring He who sits upon the throne and the Lamb!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Seven Seals appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Tobit

The people of God have often enjoyed stories of the faithful overcoming difficulties and obtaining honor and reward in their righteousness. A little bit of godly romance also never hurts.

The book of Tobit can be found within the Old Testament Apocrypha, or Deuterocanon. The Old Testament Apocrypha/Deuterocanon should be defined as texts, or expansions of texts, which were considered part of the Greek Septuagint but not reckoned as canonically part of the Torah, Prophets, or Writings of the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh). “Apocrypha” is a Greek term for “hidden away”, and “Deuterocanon” is Greek for “second canon”; these terms tend to be used interchangeably for this collection of Second Temple Jewish literature which was highly esteemed but not reckoned as inspired like the canonical books of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament. Arguments for inspiration of the Apocrypha were not advanced until the medieval era, and even then only within Roman Catholicism.

The book of Tobit can be found within the Apocrypha/Deuterocanon of all the Christian traditions which maintain such a collection. The book purports to describe events which took place in the heyday of the Neo-Assyrian Empire in the 8th and 7th centuries BCE; the overall romantic nature of the tale and a couple of Hellenisms (the month of Dystrus, payment of a drachma; Tobit 2:12, 5:15) betray authorship during the Hellenistic period, probably in the late third or early second century BCE. Tobit has been handed down to us in Greek, but patristic authors attest to its existence in Aramaic and fragments of Tobit in Aramaic and Hebrew were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls.

The book of Tobit presented the story of Tobit and his son Tobias (Aramaic and Greek forms of Hebrew Tobiyahu, “YHWH is good”), Naphtalites among the exiles to Assyria in Nineveh (cf. Tobit 1:1-2, 9-10). The book fantastically claimed Tobit was a young man when Naphtali deserted the House of David and Jerusalem (Tobit 1:4); such would have been around 923 BCE, and since the narrative would go on to suggest Tobit died at 112 years old (cf. Tobit 14:2), even the text did not maintain this claim consistently. The premise Tobit was born in Israel and personally experienced the exile of the Israelites was a bit more feasible, but he would have been quite young, and so the claim he continued to go down to Jerusalem to serve YHWH faithfully proved likewise fantastic (cf. Tobit 1:5-8).

Tobit presented himself as an Israelite who sought to faithfully honor the customs of Moses to the best of his ability while in exile: he avoided defiling foods, gave alms and support to his people, and would bury murdered Israelites, the last of which led to the confiscation of his property and his descent into poverty (Tobit 1:10-2:9). After one such burial, Tobit slept in the courtyard of his property, and the droppings of sparrows into his eyes blinded him (Tobit 2:10). His wife Anna was compelled to work; one day she received an additional benefit, and in his despair Tobit disbelieved her and accused her of theft (Tobit 2:11-14). When he recognized what he had done, Tobit prayed to God and asked Him to take away his life (Tobit 3:1-6).

In Tobit 3:7-9 Sarah the daughter of Raguel, a kinsman of Tobit, was introduced as being rebuked by a slave maid, for Sarah had been married seven times to kinsmen, all of whom were killed by the demon Asmodeus on the wedding night; on the same night Tobit prayed for his life to be taken, Sarah contemplated suicide but did not want reproach to come upon her father, and so she also prayed for her life to be taken (Tobit 3:10-15).

The narrator assured the reader of how God heard both of their prayers; the angel Raphael was dispatched to provide relief for everyone involved (Tobit 3:16-17).

The next day Tobit remembered the money he left in trust in Media, where had had previously served as a purchaser for Shalmaneser king of Assyria, and commissioned his son Tobias to go reclaim it, presenting him with many moral and ethical exhortations (Tobit 4:1-21). But Tobias was apprehensive, unsure about how he would be received or how he would get there; he went out to find a companion who could take him there, and the angel Raphael met him in the guise of his kinsman Azariah (Tobit 5:1-22).

They made it as far as the Tigris River the first day; Tobias attempted to wash his feet in the river, but a large fish tried to swallow his foot; Raphael told him to catch the fish and bring it ashore, which he did, and then counseled him to keep its gall, heart, and liver (Tobit 6:1-6). Raphael would later counsel Tobias about using them for expelling demons and healing (Tobit 6:7-9).

When they approached Ecbatana in Media, Raphael gave commands to Tobias: they would be staying with Tobias’ kinsman Raguel there, and Tobias should marry Raguel’s daughter Sarah (Tobit 6:10-13). Tobias was already aware of the fate of Sarah’s previous husbands, and Raphael made specific application of his previous counsel, advising him to burn some of the fish liver and heart with incense to ward off the demon (Tobit 6:14-18). And so it took place: Tobias and Raphael stayed with Raguel, his wife Edna, and daughter Sarah, and Tobias and Sarah were married; Tobias followed Raphael’s counsel, and he and Sarah prayed for God’s protection and provision; Asmodeus was repulsed by the incense and fish liver and heart and fled to Egypt, where Raphael met and bound him (Tobit 7:1-8:8). Raguel, not as confident, had prepared a burial place for Tobias, yet was overjoyed to hear Tobias had survived, blessing God (Tobit 8:9-18). Raguel prepared a two week feast and gave Tobias half of all his possessions (Tobit 8:19-21). Tobias asked Raphael-as-Azariah to travel on to obtain the money Tobit had commissioned them to receive from their relative Gabael, and to invite Gabael to the wedding feast; all was accomplished, and Gabael blessed God when seeing Tobias (Tobit 9:1-6).

All of these events were taking longer than would have been expected; Tobit began to wonder if all was well, but his wife Anna was convinced Tobias was dead, and always watched the road to see if he was returning (Tobit 10:1-7a). After the fourteen day feast Tobias begged Raguel to allow him to return home to his parents, and Raguel eventually relented, and provided appropriate counsel to Sarah his daughter; Tobias prayed to God that he might honor Raguel and Edna for the rest of their lives (Tobit 10:7b-13).

When approaching Nineveh, Raphael recommended to Tobias they should go ahead of Sarah to prepare the house, and they did so: after Anna saw them and went to inform Tobit, Raphael made the final specific application of his earlier counsel, exhorting Tobias to smear the fish gall on Tobit’s eyes so he might be healed, and Tobias did so (Tobit 11:1-13). Tobit was overjoyed to be able to see his son and blessed God; Tobias informed him of all which took place and his marriage to Sarah, and Tobit blessed God all the more (Tobit 11:14-18).

Tobit and family celebrated Tobias’ wedding; afterward, Tobit and Tobias intended to settle accounts with Raphael-as-Azariah, but Raphael first called to both of them and revealed to them who he was so they might bless God and give Him the glory and honor, which they did (Tobit 12:1-22).

Tobit then turned to bless and honor God, giving exhortations about faithfully serving God, blessing those who bless God, cursing those who turn way from Him, and anticipating the restoration of Jerusalem (Tobit 13:1-14:1).

Tobit was either 58 or 62 when he lost his eyesight and lived until he was 112 (textual variations; Tobit 14:2). The text presented Tobit’s final words of warning and prophecy: Tobias and his seven children should soon leave Nineveh because the word of God through Nahum against Nineveh would soon be fulfilled; he should return to live with his in-laws Raguel and Edna in Media (Tobit 14:3-4). Tobit prophesied the exile of Israel and Judah, the destruction of the Temple, the restoration of the people to the land, and the conversion of the nations (Tobit 14:4-8). He exhorted them all to faithfully serve God, and warned them to not stay overnight in Nineveh one the day they would bury him and his wife Anna; he then related what transpired with his relative Ahikar and his son Nadab, how Nadab plotted against Ahikar but ended up dying according to the mechanism he had planted for his father as a testimony to the iniquity in Nineveh and the wages of injustice (Tobit 14:9-11). Tobit would then die, as later would Anna, and Tobias buried them; he then went to live with Raguel and Edna, burying them as well, and inheriting the estates of both Tobit and Raguel (Tobit 14:12-13). Tobias himself would live to 117, having seen the destruction of Nineveh and some of its people exiled to Media by Cyaxares king of Media, rejoicing over it and blessing God (Tobit 14:14-15).

Tobit thus represented a Hellenistic romance composed for an audience of Second Temple Jewish people. Tobit looked like the kind of northern Israelite which a Judahite would want to imagine: one who lamented the division between Israel and Judah, still returning to serve God in Jerusalem, looking forward to the restoration of Jerusalem. In so doing, however, the composer well demonstrated to the fictional nature of the story: Tobit could not have been a young man in 933 BCE but die at 112 as an Israelite exile in Nineveh; for that matter, the math would remain difficult for Tobit to be able to visit Jerusalem as a young man yet only be 58 or 62 in the days of Esarhaddon king of Assyria (cf. Tobit 2:1, 14:2). Geography was also not among the composer’s strengths: the Tigris River is the opposite direction if traveling between Nineveh and Media, and his understanding of distances and topography within Media is also lacking (cf. Tobit 5:6, 10, 6:2). And then there is the matter of Ahikar and Nadab, who represent famous characters from the Story of Ahikar (or Words of Ahikar), in which Ahikar was presented as a chancellor of Sennacherib and Esarhaddon and who adopted his nephew Nadab to be his son to succeed him. Nadab would then conspire to have Ahikar executed, but the executioner had been previously delivered by Ahikar, and thus a proxy was killed and presented to Esarhaddon as if it were Ahikar. Our texts of the narrative end there, but we believe Nadab would eventually be killed and Ahikar restored; many wisdom sayings would become associated with Ahikar. This morality story seemed to have circulated widely in the ancient Near Eastern world during the Persian and Hellenistic periods, and it would seem the composer of Tobit appropriated it and incorporated its characters and moral warning.

We consider the story a Hellenistic romance since it featured two virtuous lovers presented at a different historical time who endure various trials but ultimately end up together and their honor and dignity are upheld, and so it went for Tobias and Sarah. But it is not a run of the mill Hellenistic romance, since the text also featured God’s testing of Tobit and Tobit’s vindication; wisdom sayings from Tobit; angelic intervention from Raphael and demonic visitation from Asmodeus; and Tobit’s will and testament, featuring prophecy regarding Nineveh, Jerusalem, and the ultimate restoration of God’s people.

Let none be deceived: while Israel was cast into Assyrian exile, and the kings identified did indeed rule, we have no basis upon which to believe Tobit, Anna, Tobias, Sarah, Raguel, Edna, Gabael, etc. represent actual historical personages. Raphael the angel is mentioned in 1 Enoch as well and was thus recognized as one of the seven angels who perpetually stand before God in both Jewish and Christian traditions; Asmodeus the demon might well derive, at least in part, from the Zoroastrian “aeshma-daeva,” demon of wrath, and also recognized in later Jewish traditions. Yet neither Raphael nor Asmodeus can be found explicitly in the pages of the Old or New Testaments. Therefore, we have every reason to conclude that the book of Tobit was not written as inspired Scripture and was never expected to be seen as such.

Nevertheless, we can find some encouragement from the book of Tobit according to what was its original purpose: to encourage the people of God to remain faithful to God despite personal and collective distress, and to enjoy a story of people seeking to prove faithful to God and ultimately obtaining His favor and honor. In its pages we can see how Second Temple Jewish people grappled with what it looked like to trust in God and prove faithful to Him in the midst of oppressive pagan nations. We can see how they understood the harmful effects of demons but also the advocacy and assistance they might receive from angels. We can even see how they might appropriate characters from the wisdom traditions prevalent in the ancient Near Eastern world into their own stories and thus learn from them. Above all, we can see the desire for Second Temple Jewish people to remain faithful to God and to have reason to bless and honor Him despite all they were enduring as embodied in the characters of Tobit and Anna, Raguel and Edna, and Tobias and Sarah. May we find ways to enjoy the stories of old, take encouragement from them, and faithfully serve God in Christ so we might obtain the resurrection of life in Him!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Tobit appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Purity in the Camp

The Book of Numbers is better understood in terms of its name in Hebrew: Bemidbar, “in the wilderness,” for it described Israel’s preparations to depart from Mount Horeb/Sinai and their wanderings in the wilderness afterward. The events described therein would have taken place sometime around either 1450-1410 or 1250 BCE, depending on one’s view of the Exodus; Moses would have written the original text while in the land of Moab across the Jordan River from Jericho.

In Numbers 1:1-10:10 Moses set forth the preparations necessary for Israel to travel; while we may find such information tedious, we have records of Egyptian rulers chronicling their preparations and logistics for major campaigns, suggesting many ancient people took pride in detailing all which proved necessary to accomplish their great deeds. YHWH had commanded Moses and Aaron to take a military census of the Israelites and to organize the camp by tribe in Numbers 1:1-2:34 and then to take a count of the Levite men and assign their forms of service in Numbers 3:1-4:49. Moses, Aaron, and the Israelites had proven obedient to all which YHWH had commanded them.

In Numbers 5:1-31 YHWH would provide commandments to Moses which seem to center on maintaining purity and wholeness within the camp of the Israelites and among the Israelite people.

YHWH commanded Moses to expel from the camp all who were “leprous,” who suffered from a discharge, and who had become ritually defiled because of a corpse, and Moses and the Israelites proved obedient to YHWH’s command (Numbers 5:1-4).

Hebrew tsaura’ is often translated as “leper” but does not refer to someone afflicted by Hansen’s Disease; it instead referred to people who suffered from some kind of easily spread skin condition or disease.

Thus YHWH demanded immediate compliance with the standard first declared in Leviticus 13:45-46 for those with skin conditions, and added upon it other matters involving defilement. We today recoil at such marginalizing treatment of many people who were likely suffering to some degree or another. Yet we do well to note how exclusion from the camp did not mean complete abandonment or disregard; they would still be reckoned as Israelites, would live outside the camp, and would be considered appropriate recipients of alms and other forms of aid. Those who were rendered ritually unclean from touching a corpse would have an opportunity to become clean again and thus be restored to the camp, as would anyone whose skin condition or discharge was healed.

But YHWH’s concern was made explicit in Numbers 5:3: the camp of the Israelites needed to maintain a high standard of purity because YHWH was living there in their midst, and YHWH is holy and pure. As Christians we must be careful about the conclusions we draw regarding ritual purity in light of Jesus’ exhortations in Mark 7:8-23. None of us are fully pure and require cleansing from the Lord Jesus (Ephesians 5:22-33, Titus 3:3-8); we all suffer the effects of the decay and corruption of the creation (Romans 5:12-21, 8:18-23). Nevertheless, the theological quandary of ritual purity versus the integrity and dignity of those who suffer from disability and/or disease remains.

After this YHWH gave commands for Israel regarding confession and reparation: Israelites who sin and are found guilty must confess and make reparations, paying back fully to whomever has been wrong and adding a fifth to the total (Numbers 5:5-7). Provision was made for circumstances in which no close relative existed to whom the reparations would be paid: the reparations would go to YHWH for the priest beyond the ram of atonement offered for him (Numbers 5:8). Offerings made by Israelites would belong to them save for those portions given to the priests (Numbers 5:9-10).

In just societies reparations prove important as means by which to restore those who have suffered loss, let alone as a deterrent from causing such injury toward others. To this day one can learn a lot about individuals and/or societies who resist calls for reparations and restitutions to those who have been seriously impaired or injured as a result of individual or systemic criminal behaviors, exploitation, and/or oppression. Likewise, we can maintain confidence YHWH will not look kindly on individuals and/or societies which have built their wealth on the exploitation and oppression of others and who entirely resist any and all calls for reparations and restitution.

YHWH then set forth for Moses and Israel the test for a wife whose husband has become jealous and suspects infidelity; in Hebrew this test is known as the sotah (Numbers 5:11-31). This test was not designed for circumstances in which sufficient evidence of adultery was present; it was for situations in which a husband had become jealous and suspicious of his wife’s sexual integrity, whether the wife had actually defiled herself or not (Numbers 5:11-14). The husband was to bring his wife and an offering of barley for the offering of suspicion (Numbers 5:15). The priest would lead the wife to stand before YHWH and put some dust from the ground of the holy place in some holy water to create bitter water (Numbers 5:16-17). The priest would uncover the wife’s head and have her hold the offering of the suspicion and abjure her with an oath and a curse: if she had not defiled herself, she would be free of any curse; but if she had defiled herself and had committed adultery, YHWH would cause the wife’s reproductive system to fail by means of the bitter water she would be consuming, and the wife would thus invoke the oath and curse with a twofold amen (Numbers 5:18-22). The priest would write down the curse and scrape it into the water which she would then drink after the priest had made a wave offering and a bit of a burnt offering of the grain of the offering of suspicion (Numbers 5:23-24). If she had proven faithful to her husband, she would not suffer a curse, and would be able to bear children; if she had been unfaithful, YHWH would cause her to prove infertile and thus cursed among her people (Numbers 5:25-28). This was then described as the law for cases of jealousy, in which there is no guilt for the husband, but the wife would bear her guilt if deserved (Numbers 5:29-31).

As modern readers we are often taken aback by the misogyny we perceive in this narrative: why should the wife thus suffer because of her husband’s jealousy and suspicion, especially since no consequence seems to attend to the husband in any way?

Many interpreters, ancient and modern, would understand the sotah in similar ways as the lex talionis of Exodus 21:23-25: as a principle of limitation. Thus, just as “an eye for an eye” was established to make sure the punishment did not exceed the crime, so the sotah test was put in place to provide a means by which a husband’s jealousy could be put to the test and his suspicions allayed. In this way it would be imagined the sotah test was imposed as a benefit for the wife, as a way to provide her vindication. To this day we are aware of the prevalence of “honor killings” in some societies, situations in which family members will kill female relatives who are accused of committing sexual impropriety. Without the sotah it might well have been possible that many Israelite men would have done something similar to their wives on the basis of mere suspicion of infidelity.

It should also be noted how the sotah represents the only kind of examination or test which would compel a kind of miraculous result. In no other matter is the decision so completely left up to YHWH as in the sotah. There is nothing intrinsically in consuming water with a bit of dirt in it which would lead to infertility; such would only be possible if God turned such water into a curse for the woman.

We can therefore understand why the sotah, in our perspective, seems quite problematic, but also hopefully how and why the sotah was established as a means by which the suspicions of Israelite men could be put to some kind of test. We can perceive how important YHWH reckoned purity among the people and in the camp, and how He made provision to give confidence or a lack of confidence of a woman’s purity in the marriage relationship. In Numbers YHWH was attempting to establish a holy people for Himself which He would bless as He had promised to their fathers. In Christ God has atoned for the defilement of all who would come to find cleansing in Him, and thus to obtain the blessings of eternal life in salvation. May we obtain holiness in Christ to be able to stand before the most holy God of heaven, and share in eternal life in Him!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Purity in the Camp appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Lazarus

The “disciple whom Jesus loved,” known as John, either John the brother of Zebedee (the Apostle), or John the Elder, was writing his recollections of his experiences with Jesus so that those who hear or read would believe Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and would find eternal life in His name (cf. John 20:31). He began by speaking of the Word of God, the Creator, the life and light of men, who took on flesh and dwelt among us as Jesus of Nazareth (John 1:1-18). He then described the calling of the first disciples, Jesus’ first sign at the wedding in Cana, the events which took place while Jesus was present at the Passover in Jerusalem, and Jesus’ return to Galilee via Samaria (John 1:19-4:54). John the Evangelist then set forth Jesus’ healing of a lame man at Bethesda and the storm of controversy it engendered, Jesus’ feeding of the five thousand, and His challenging description of Himself as the Bread of Life (John 5:1-6:71). John the Evangelist then described a long series of engagements and instructions of Jesus around Jerusalem during the Feast of Tabernacles, featuring the healing of the blind man and Jesus’ teachings as the Light of the world and the Good Shepherd (John 7:1-10:21). Jesus would echo similar teachings and again identify Himself with God while teaching during the Feast of the Dedication, or Hanukkah (John 10:22-42).

According to John 10:40, Jesus had retreated to the Decapolis region across the Jordan River from Judea; we imagine He was still within this region when the events of John 11 began to unfold. John the Evangelist introduced his audience to Lazarus, Mary, and Martha, and did so with a bit of forecasting: they lived in Bethany, and Mary would be the same Mary who would anoint Jesus in John 12:1-8. We have confidence these are the same Mary and Martha spoken of in Luke 10:38-42. Lazarus had become very sick, and Mary and Martha had sent word to Jesus regarding this fact (John 12:1-3). John the Evangelist informed his audience how Jesus loved Lazarus, Mary, and Martha (John 12:5); certainly Jesus loved His disciples and the world and everything, but John was attempting to convey significant intimacy in the relationship between Jesus, Lazarus, Mary, and Martha: they were very close friends, and such will go a long way to explain the ways in which Mary and Martha speak with Jesus throughout these events.

Despite hearing the news of Lazarus’ illness, Jesus did not immediately return to Judea. He waited for a couple of days, and then informed His disciples they would be returning to Judea (John 12:4-7). The disciples did not understand: Judea had become dangerous territory (John 12:8). Jesus taught them about working while it was light and suggested Lazarus had gone to sleep and He needed to go wake him up (John 12:9-11). Jesus was speaking of the sleep of death and awaking in resuscitation, but the disciples thought He meant actual sleep, and suggested Lazarus would wake up on his own (John 12:12-13). Jesus clarified the situation: Lazarus was dead, and Jesus was glad to have not been there, so they might believe (John 12:14-15). Thomas, perhaps sarcastically or sardonically, encouraged his fellow disciples to go with Jesus to Judea and die with Him (John 12:16): a bit of a premonition, for life would never be the same for any of those involved on account of what they would go on to experience in Judea and Jerusalem.

By the time Jesus arrived in Bethany of Judea, Lazarus had not only died but also had been buried for four days (John 11:17). John the Evangelist provided additional context: Bethany was not far from Jerusalem, so there had been many Jewish people who came out to grieve with and console Martha and Mary (John 11:18-19). Martha went out to meet Jesus when He arrived with an accusation and some hope: if He had come earlier, Lazarus would not have died; nevertheless, God would grant whatever Jesus would ask of Him (John 11:20-22). Jesus assured Martha her brother would live again; Martha expressed her confidence of Lazarus obtaining the resurrection of life on the final day (John 11:23-24).

Martha’s confession in John 11:24 is notable as an affirmation of the understanding of resurrection common in Second Temple Judaism. We do well to remember how there was nothing written in the Hebrew Bible which would automatically and obviously expect the Messiah to die and be raised from the dead as the firstfruits of the resurrection long before the final day; this would become evident through what God accomplished in Jesus and then in what He made known through the Spirit (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:1-58). Daniel 12:2 provided the most explicit confidence in the resurrection, and as Martha confessed, it spoke of the raising of everyone on the final day. Thus we must never interpret Luke 10:38-42 in any way which would disparage Martha’s understanding of religious matters; she has a good handle on the Hebrew Bible as well understood at the time. Furthermore, John the Evangelist worked diligently to present both Martha and Mary as friends of Jesus who had great hope and confidence in Him yet were not automatically expecting Jesus to immediately resuscitate Lazarus from death.

Jesus then affirmed for Martha how He was the resurrection and the life, and how those who believe in Him will live even if they die, and those who live and believe in Him will never die; Martha affirmed she believed as much, and also how Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God who came into the world (John 11:25-27). Thus Martha well believed in Jesus, but even then did not have a full understanding of all such implies.

Martha then called for Mary, telling her privately how Jesus was asking for her (John 11:28). Mary went out to Jesus; the crowds followed her, imagining she was going to mourn at Lazarus’ tomb (John 11:29-31). Mary repeated the same accusation as had her sister Martha, and continued weeping (John 11:32). Jesus began to be significantly emotionally affected by the outpouring of grief He perceived from Martha, Mary, and the crowds. He asked to see the tomb, and He wept (John 11:33-35). The people understood His grief as a testimony of His love for Lazarus, yet they wondered if He could have done something about it since He gave sight to the blind man (John 11:36-37).

They arrived at the tomb (John 11:38). John the Evangelist informed his audience the tomb was a cave with a stone in front of it in order to explain why Jesus asked for the stone to be taken away (John 11:38-39). The land of Judea is not large and there has never been a lot of room for tombs and whatnot; in the days of Second Temple Judaism, the Jewish people would often carve out a tomb in the rock faces around towns and villages. They would lay a recently dead relative upon the main bier within the tomb, and would return after a year or so in order to retrieve the bones. They would then place those bones in a box we call an ossuary, and would often keep the ossuaries of many family members on the ground or in caches within the tomb. It is quite likely that we have discovered the ossuary of Joseph Caiaphas who will be spoken of in John 11:49.

After Jesus told them to take away the stone, Martha warned Jesus how the body had been buried for four days, and the stench of decomposition would be present (John 11:39). Jesus intimated to her how she would see the glory of God if she believed (John 11:40). Jesus then uttered a performative prayer to His Father for the benefit of the crowd (John 11:41-42). Jesus cried out for Lazarus to come out, and behold: Lazarus came out, his hands and feet tied in cloth along with a cloth around his face, and Jesus commanded for some to remove those bindings (John 11:43-44).

While we could speak of Jesus having raised Lazarus from the dead, we generally speak of it as a resuscitation to make a distinction between Lazarus’ “resurrection,” in which he was brought back to life but would die again, and the resurrection Jesus would experience, in which He was brought back to life to never die again (cf. Romans 6:1-11). Nevertheless, it was the most significant miracle and sign which Jesus would accomplish in His ministry in the Gospel of John, and many who were there to experience it believed in Jesus (John 11:45).

Others, however, brought word to the Pharisees about what Jesus had done, and they summoned the Sanhedrin (John 11:46-47). The chief priests and Pharisees addressed the Sanhedrin: Jesus was performing many signs. If they allowed Jesus to keep doing these kinds of things, everyone would believe in Him (John 11:47-48). At perhaps no other place in his Gospel did John the Evangelist prove more ironic than in this circumstance, for indeed; the point was for people to believe Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, because of these signs which He was accomplishing! But for the chief priests and Pharisees it represented a danger: they were convinced the Romans would come and take away their place and their nation (John 11:48). “Their place” is generally and best understood as the Temple, but it would also not be wrong to perceive how the chief priests and Pharisees understood Jesus and His work to be a threat to their position and standing among the people. We can understand their logic: if word gets out to the Romans that the King of the Jews has come, and the people all believe Jesus is the King of the Jews, He might well give an order, and war against the Romans would ensue, and might lead to their ultimate disadvantage. The ultimate irony, however, is that forty years later, the Romans would come and take away their place and their nation, and the judgment was secured precisely because they had rejected Jesus as their Messiah, and the people would choose Barabbas and the way of insurrection against Rome instead.

At this point Caiaphas, High Priest in the year 30, stood up and spoke: they knew nothing, for it was more expedient for one person to die on behalf of the people than for the whole nation to perish (John 11:49-50). John the Evangelist reported how Caiaphas “prophesied” this statement of Jesus dying for the Jewish nation and in fact for all people, thus strongly suggesting the Holy Spirit inspired him to do so (John 11:51-52). We are left to conclude the Spirit would remain present with the person serving as High Priest no matter how odious said person would otherwise be.

The ultimate point, however, is that Caiaphas gave the Sanhedrin the justification and reason for wanting to put Jesus to death: as a scapegoat to allay Roman apprehensions and fears, and so that the position and standing of the Temple and thus the chief priests and Sadducees would not be challenged, as well as the standing of the Pharisees as religious authorities among the people (John 11:53). On account of this Jesus did not walk in Judea publicly but withdrew to an area called Ephraim (John 11:54).

The Passover was again drawing near, and Jewish people from around the region and the known world were going up to Jerusalem (John 11:55). The people were looking for Jesus while standing in the Temple courts, and the chief priests and Pharisees had made it known anyone who knew where Jesus was should report as much to them (John 11:56-57). Thus John the Evangelist concluded by setting the scene for the rest of his Gospel, foreshadowing the final days of Jesus and His ultimate betrayal by Judas Iscariot.

The resuscitation of Lazarus remains a potent sign of Jesus’ authority and power, and the response to this miracle said much about the condition and quality of the hearts of the various types of Jewish people of the day. Jesus indeed is the resurrection and the life, and all who believe and live in Him live and are sustained by this hope. May we trust in the Lord Jesus and obtain the resurrection of life in Him!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Lazarus appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Throne and the Lamb in Heaven

Having written down the letters to the seven churches, John is now invited to glimpse a vision of the power and majesty of the heavenly court. He is again in the Spirit (Revelation 4:1-2), and begins to describe the details of the heavenly court in ways quite reminiscent of similar scenes in Isaiah 6:1-5 and Ezekiel 1:26-28.

John begins with the throne of God (Revelation 4:2-3). He tells the reader that One sits upon the throne but provides no detail about His form: to look upon Him, John says, is like jasper, sardius, and a rainbow around the throne like emerald. These are the most precious jewels imaginable; they may also represent God’s purity, justice/wrath, and mercy. John well describes God essentially as an emanation of light (Exodus 28:17, Psalm 104:2, Ezekiel 28:13, 1 Timothy 6:16), along with the rainbow, the reminder of His covenant with all mankind (cf. Genesis 9:12-17).

John then describes the twenty-four thrones around the throne of God, and the twenty-four elders upon those thrones (Revelation 4:4). These twenty-four elders most likely represent two sets of twelve, the twelve patriarchs of the Old Testament and the twelve apostles of the New Testament, and therefore are the embodiment of the people of God throughout time. They are dressed in white garments, indicating their purity, and have golden crowns of victory. They also have harps and bowls of incense, representing the songs and prayers of God’s people (Revelation 5:8). Thus the people of God surround God’s throne in purity and triumph; they are shown constantly casting their crowns before God’s throne, prostrating before Him and declaring His worthiness as the Creator of all things (Revelation 4:10-11).

John then further sets the scene in Revelation 4:5-6a: lightning and thunder, evoking God and Israel at Sinai in Exodus 19:16, the seven torches as the seven spirits of God, representing the Holy Spirit (cf. Revelation 1:4), and something like a sea of glass, like crystal. Such details express the majesty and awesomeness of God as well as the distance between God and man.

John then speaks of four living creatures in Revelation 4:6b-9. Like the seraphim in Isaiah 6:2-3, they surround the throne of God and ceaselessly declare, “holy, holy, holy, is the Lord God, the Almighty, who was and who is and who is to come,” (Revelation 4:8). Yet much of the description is like the cherubim of Ezekiel 1:10, 18, 10:14-15, 20-22: four creatures with the heads of a lion, a calf, a man, and an eagle, likely representing nobility, strength, wisdom, and swiftness, respectively (also as leaders of their representative animal categories; others have seen in the four the four Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John). They have eyes everywhere and see all things; they obtain no rest from their ceaseless praise of God.

John then focuses on a scroll in the hand of the One upon the throne, written on both sides and sealed with seven seals (Revelation 5:1). An angel cries out asking who is worthy to open the scroll, and no one is found, leading John to weep and lament (Revelation 5:2-4). One of the elders then comforts John, declaring that there is One who is worthy: the Lion of Judah, the Root of David (Revelation 5:5).

At this time John then sees standing in the midst of the throne and of the elders a Lamb as though it had been slain, with seven horns (representing honor, strength, and power; cf. Deuteronomy 3:17, 1 Kings 22:11, Psalms 18:2, 75:4, 89:17, 112:9, 148:14, Daniel 7:24, Zechariah 1:18-21) and seven eyes (the seven Spirits of God, a representation of all sight, thus omniscience and omnipresence: Zechariah 4:10, Revelation 1:4-6), who takes the scroll from the One upon the throne (Revelation 5:6-7). John then sees a threefold set of praises and honor given to the Lamb: first, a new song of the four living creatures and the elders (Revelation 5:8-10), then an innumerable number of angels with the living creatures and elders, declaring a sevenfold declaration of the Lamb’s glory (a doxology; cf. Revelation 5:11-12), and finally all created things in the universe proclaim blessings, honor, glory, and dominion to the One on the throne and to the Lamb (Revelation 5:13-14).

The Lamb of God, which is the Lion of Judah and the Root of David, is Jesus of Nazareth, who died in order to ransom all men from the power of sin and overcame death in the glorious victory of His resurrection (cf. Romans 5:6-11, 1 Corinthians 15:1-58). We do well to note the emphasis John places on the description of Jesus as the Lamb: only in Revelation 5:5 is He described as a lion, but in Revelation 5:6, 5:12, 6:1, 16, 7:9-10, 14, 12:11, 13:8, 14:2, 4, 15:3, 17:14, 19:7, 9, 21:22-23, and 22:1-3 He is called the Lamb. This is not to deny that Jesus is the Lion of Judah, but to remind us that throughout Revelation, as throughout the whole New Testament, Jesus’ victory is won through His sacrifice. He overcame the power of sin, suffering, and death through suffering and dying. His people will overcome through Him also by dying to sin and suffering whatever they are called upon to suffer (cf. Romans 6:1-23, 1 Peter 1:3-9).

It is hard not to be overcome and awed by the majesty of the scene which John presents of Heaven with the One upon the throne and the Lamb. What John sees is not something that is yet to come; it existed in his present day, and it exists to this day and will exist for eternity. John is writing to Christians in Asia Minor who are suffering persecution and who may feel that God and His power are quite distant: through this scene they could see that the victory had already been won. Their songs and prayers surround the throne of God. As they praised, glorified, and honored the name of the One who sits upon the throne and of the Lamb while on earth, so they would also do so in heaven as it is being done in heaven. No matter how dark or difficult our days may seem while on this earth, we can be sure that God sits upon His throne, the Lamb reigns in Heaven, and if we overcome in Jesus, we also will sing the new song of redemption by the Lamb forevermore!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Throne and the Lamb in Heaven appeared first on de Verbo vitae.