Lee Harmon's Blog, page 130

Book review: Noah's Flood

by William Ryan & Walter Pitman

★★★★
"We need not try to make history out of legend, but we ought to assume that beneath much that is artificial or incredible there lurks something of fact." –C. Leonard Wooley, 1934
With this quote, the authors set the tone for the story of their exploration of the Black Sea basin. 7,500 years ago, their research determined, rising sea levels on the Mediterranean broke through a barricade and plunged into the Black Sea with a force 400 times greater than that of Niagara Falls, its thundering sound carrying at least 60 miles. Could this event have spawned the flood legends we read of in so many cultures, including the Hebrew story of Noah and the Ark? "The details given in the inscriptions describing the Flood leave no doubt that both the Bible and the Babylonian story describe the same event, and the Flood becomes the starting point for the modern world in both histories." Could it be that people driven from their villages spread advances in agriculture and irrigation throughout Mesopotamia?
Because of the impact these flood stories have had on various cultures for so long, this is a fascinating topic for me. For the most part, the research of Ryan and Pitman has been well-received, and the general theory (if not all the details) deserves to be treated seriously. More recent research validates that a sudden flood event may indeed have occurred as suggested, though perhaps not at the magnitude described in Ryan and Pitman's hypothesis.
The writing is interesting, and it reads like a scientific detective story. This isn't a new book; it's now thirteen years old, and you can pick it up used at Amazon for pennies. 
(click picture to buy on Amazon) 

Genesis 1:27, On What Day Was Adam Created?

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
//On what day did God create Adam? Anybody know? Anybody?
And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
Problem is, there is no mention whatsoever in this creation story of Adam and Eve. Just the creation of mankind in God's image, which occurs on the sixth day. The story of the six days of creation ends in Genesis 2:3, and a second creation story begins in verse 2:4. In the second story, God forms Adam "in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens." He prepares Adam before any of the plant life, in order to tend the earth he is about to create: "And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground."
So, may we assume that Adam was formed on the third day, when God plants grass, and herbs, and fruit trees? But where is Eve?
Back to the second story. Eve comes after the fruit trees, after the animals. Eve makes her appearance from the rib of Adam, but only after Adam rejects all the rest of God's creation as his "helpmeet." Eve eats the forbidden fruit, gives it to Adam, their eyes are opened to see their nakedness, and God casts them out of the Garden of Eden. To Eve, God promises, "I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children."
Which brings us back to the first story, and the creation of mankind. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. We're still trying to make sense of two legends, still trying to splice them together in a chronological pattern. So who is God speaking to when he says "Let us make man?" It can only be Adam, just after Adam has rejected all the animals as his mate.
"OK, Adam, you win, we'll make mankind in our own image."
So, God forms Eve, Eve seduces Adam, they get kicked out of the Garden and have all the world to play in with their new-found nakedness and knowledge. Along come children. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply.
Whaddaya think?

Book review: Megabelt

by Nick May

★★★★
Is this humor? I stopped laughing twenty pages into this short little story. It hit too close to home.
Megabelt, the book's title, forms a fusion between the words "mega church" and "Bible belt," but by the time you reach the end of the book, the title grows pregnant with meaning, like an antichristic leviathan rising out of the sea in the Midwest. I didn't grow up in the Bible belt, but I may as well have. I attended annual church conventions instead of summer church camps. I attended nondenominational home churches instead of Methodist buildings. But I relate.
The book traces the growing years of its main character, Gil, from a young teen through his early twenties, in an atmosphere where church trumps all and pervades every part of life. As Gil matures, he struggles to make sense of his Christian environment, simultaneously seeking escape while holding on for dear life. The autobiographical intent is rather transparent, rendering its third-person portrayal rather artificial, but by the end of the book, I got the point. Gil (or Nick, if you prefer) is Everyboy growing up in the Bible belt, just as one of the book's characters is named Everyman.
Troubling as the book becomes, it's almost impossible to avoid reminiscing as you read. The humor grows from funny to forced to sour until, finally, a bomb shell is dropped at the book's climax. Is there no escape from the Megabelt? 
(click picture to buy on Amazon)

Genesis 9:29, Noah's Death

Altogether, Noah lived 950 years, and then he died.
// Have you ever considered how long these people really lived? Like most of the first ten generations, Noah lived just under 1,000 years. With the traditional dating of the Bible, this means that when Noah died in the year 1935 BC:
* The Ziggurat of Ur has been built (coinciding with the Biblical timing of the Tower of Babel). Noah would have observed its building and the scattering of the nations.

* Noah and Abraham may have been chatting together for 60 years. In another fifteen years, Abraham will be leaving Ur and heading for the promised land.

* Noah could be wearing Indian wares. Traders from Mesopotamia have already established trade routes to India.

* If Noah travelled to Crete, he could be enjoying indoor plumbing.

* If Noah travelled to Egypt, he could be enjoying the beginnings of literature and art.

* Stonehenge has been built in England.

* The Hsai dynasty is over 200 years old in China.

* Did I say the nations had just divided from Ur? Already, corn is harvested in large scales in Peru.

Book review: The End of Christianity

by William A. Dembski

★★★★
It took me a while to get into this book, but once I did, I was hooked. Dembski is a proponent of Intelligent Design, and has written before on that topic. His conundrum is that he also is a believer in the biblical story of Genesis—the story of the Fall is particularly troublesome—and wishes to accommodate scripture into an old earth theology. But unless one refuses to recognize the evil in nature itself, evil came before the Fall, right? Evil (defined primarily as the cause of suffering) seems designed into the world. What do we make of human suffering, and how did evil enter the world? How are we to interpret the Original Sin?
In the book, Dembski methodically debunks one young-age creationism theory after another, and he's right: It's time that evolution be accepted as a given. Evolutionary geneticist Jerry Coyne defines biological evolution as follows:
There is only one going theory of evolution, and it is this: organisms evolved gradually over time and split into different species, and the main engine of evolutionary change was natural selection. Sure, some details of these processes are unsettled, but there is no argument among biologists about the main claims.
Dembski reasons that anyone without a stake in the age of the earth is unlikely to find young earth arguments persuasive. But at the same time, he holds fast to scriptural stories in Genesis, seemingly prepared to jump through hoops to preserve his belief, and that contradiction left my head spinning. I hardly find the Genesis creation stories plausible unless—as Dembski puts it—I "have a stake" in the Bible's historicity.

So how does Dembski make sense of the creation? We have in our Bibles two distinct creation stories; Genesis 1:1-2:3 forms one, and Genesis 2:4-3:24 forms the other. Proponents of the Documentary Hypothesis (see my book review at http://www.dubiousdisciple.com/2011/03/book-review-bible-with-sources-revealed.html ) explain that the two myths were written by two different authors, and collected side by side in the Bible. Dembski proposes a different solution, suggesting that the second story can be seen as a sort of second creation; the planting of a Garden of Eden billions of years after the first creation was begun. The formation of humans occurred within that Garden, by imparting a soul; the breath of life. Whatever makes humans distinctly human (thereby separating them from the rest of the animals and infilling them with God's image) happened at the precise moment when they enter the Garden. There, in a segregated tropical paradise, where natural evil is not evident, mankind's love for God could be fairly tested. And mankind still fell, as God anticipated.
If we accept that God was able to anticipate the Fall, we can accept that God built a world to accommodate that Fall. Even though the first humans dwelt in perfect, evil-less surroundings, they still sinned, and were banished to the world prepared for them over billions of years. Thus Dembski preserves the traditional view that natural evil is a consequence of the Fall, even though God—who creates outside the boundaries of time—prepared retroactively for mankind's sin.
(click picture to buy on Amazon)

Revelation 11:3-14, The Two Witnesses, V of V

These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth. … But after the three and a half days a breath of life from God entered them, and they stood on their feet, and terror struck those who saw them. Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, "Come up here." And they went up to heaven in a cloud, while their enemies looked on.
//Moses & Elijah, Peter & Paul, Ananus & Jesus. How did all these pairs get to tangled in John's head? Who are the real two witnesses? Let me bring it all together with one final comparison. John may have put coincidences together in a way that conceals an under-the-surface meaning.
1 . First, you must understand that many rabbis taught that there would be not one Messiah, but two: A prophet and a king. Today's reference of two olive trees and two lanpstands, which refers to the two witnesses, directly quotes from Zechariah, a primary text of the two-Messiah doctrine. The original "two witnesses," from the book of Zechariah, are Zerubbabel, the king, and Jesus/Joshua, the high priest (Joshua is Jesus, both names English derivations of the same Hebrew name, Yeshua).
2 . As we saw in part IV, wartime priests and martyrs Jesus and Ananus became the inspiration for Revelation's two witnesses.
3 . Merging (1) and (2), we end up with Jesus the king and Jesus the high priest, both of whom die ignominiously as the earth rumbles its displeasure and then rise from the dead after three days to ascend to heaven.  Does this sound a little like the entire New Testament theology wrapped up in one sentence?
I'm sure an entire book could be written about these two witnesses:  their fulfillment of the return of Elijah and Moses; their relation to the two-messiah doctrine spelled out in the book of Zechariah; their place in history as the priests Ananus and Jesus; the legends they helped inspire of Peter and Paul; and, finally, their merger into one, the Lord Jesus.  John certainly grinds a lot of mileage out of these few verses! John's Gospel explains further that Jesus himself is the fulfillment of the expected arrival of both Moses and Elijah.
If you'd like a further discussion of this topic and how it intertwines with the message of Revelation, it's all in my book: http://www.thewayithappened.com

Revelation 11:3-14, The Two Witnesses, IV of V

And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days … Their bodies will lie in the street of the great city, which is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified.  For three and a half days men from every people, tribe, language and nation will gaze on their bodies and refuse them burial.  The inhabitants of the earth will gloat over them and will celebrate by sending each other gifts, because these two prophets had tormented those who live on the earth … At that very hour there was a severe earthquake and a tenth of the city collapsed.  Seven thousand people were killed in the earthquake, and the survivors were terrified and gave glory to the God of heaven.
//So far, we've met Moses & Elijah, and Peter & Paul, as two pairs of candidates for the Two Witnesses of Revelation. But there are a few events in the story that just don't add up. If later tradition is any indication, the early Christians may have considered Peter and Paul the two witnesses, but who was John really writing about?
A study of the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus provides either the answer or an eerie coincidence.  In The War of the Jews, published just before the book of Revelation, Josephus heaps praise upon two priests in Jerusalem, Ananus and Jesus the son of Gamala.  He narrates long, grand speeches for both men to their enemies:  Ananus to the Zealots and Jesus to the Idumeans.  This all occurs during the war, which lasted about three and a half years (1,260 days). Then the two priests are killed, and the Idumeans, standing upon their dead bodies, ridicule them.  Eventually they cast away the bodies without burial, the ultimate way to disgrace or shame someone.  "And this at last was the end of Ananus and Jesus," Josephus wrote. Here's how it happened.
As the Zealots of Jerusalem were fighting amongst themselves, a storm brewed and the earth rumbled.  Josephus describes a great earthquake like this:
During the night a terrific storm arose; the wind blew with tempestuous violence, and the rain fell in torrents; the lightnings flashed without intermission, accompanied by fearful peals of thunder, and the quaking earth resounded with mighty bellowings.  The universe, convulsed to its very base, appeared fraught with the destruction of mankind, and it was easy to conjecture that these were portents of no trivial calamity.
Taking advantage of the panic caused by the earthquake, the Idumeans, in league with the Zealots, succeeded in entering Jerusalem, and a massacre began.  Says Josephus, The outer court of the Temple was inundated with blood, and the day dawned upon eight thousand five hundred dead.  Close enough to Revelation's number.
Curiously, just as Revelation says, this great earthquake did occur the "very hour" the Idumeans murdered, ridiculed, and left the two great priests, Ananus and Jesus, unburied in the streets of Jerusalem. Oops!  Now what should we believe about the identity of Revelation's two witnesses? Can this possibly be a coincidence?

Revelation 11:3-14, The Two Witnesses, III of V

Now when they have finished their testimony, the beast that comes up from the Abyss will attack them, and overpower and kill them. … men from every people, tribe, language and nation will gaze on their bodies and refuse them burial. … The second woe has passed; the third woe is coming soon.
//Revelation and the Gospels all indicate that the Messianic age is either upon us or just around the corner. In part II of this series, I introduced the two witnesses as a type of Moses and Elijah, how these two figures were expected to return and herald the arrival of the Messiah, and how the Gospels portray this as having happened. Revelation's wording seems to confirm this; the death of these two witnesses corresponds to the time in which Revelation switches from past tense to future tense.
But if the witnesses have already arrived, who are they? One obvious answer is John the Baptist, who is referred to multiple times in the Gospels as the new Elijah. Even Jesus makes this association. However, if you believe Revelation was written by the same author, or at least the same community, as the Gospel of John, then we have a problem, because in this Gospel, John the Baptist flat out denies that he is Elijah. He also denies he is "the prophet," the Moses-like second figure.
Who, then, does Revelation have in mind for the two witnesses? Maybe James and John, the two "sons of thunder?" They seem to fit the image. But whoever John meant his "Moses and Elijah" to be, the early church would likely think first of Peter and Paul, the two most prominent and animated leaders spearheading the Christian movement.  They are also the two apostles known for performing miracles. When both leaders died nearly simultaneously under the reign of Nero (the beast of the Abyss; see http://www.dubiousdisciple.com/2011/01/revelation-1318.html ), it would surely bring catastrophic effects upon the church. Peter was crucified, Paul beheaded.
Tradition suggests Paul's grave sits beside the Ostian Road, Peter's in the Vatican, but the Romans usually merely abandoned their crucifixion victims on the cross for the dogs to pull down or buried them in a shallow grave, which the dogs would then dig up.  Therefore, they may have left both bodies lying by the road for a time, as Revelation indicates.  I don't know how or when the tradition evolved that their bodies lay unburied, but in the sixth century, John Malalas vouches, "Nero ordered that the bodies of the holy apostles should not be handed over for burial, but should remain unburied."
Are Peter and Paul the reincarnation of Moses and Elijah, then?

Revelation 11:3-14, The Two Witnesses, II of V

And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth … If anyone tries to harm them, fire comes from their mouths and devours their enemies. … Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, "Come up here."  And they went up to heaven in a cloud, while their enemies looked on.
// John surely means for his two witnesses to fulfill the prophecy of Malachi that Moses and Elijah would make their appearance before the Messiah returned.  To this day, Jews leave a special chair empty during the Passover ritual, expressing their hope that Elijah will return and announce the coming of the Messiah, and they also once shared a widespread belief in the return of another Moses-like prophet based on Deuteronomy 18:15.  But John insists the two revered prophets have already arrived by giving his two witnesses similar powers.  These two reenact the judgment ministries of Moses and Elijah.  Fire came down from heaven at Moses' command and consumed the false worshipers who had rebelled against him, and fire fell from heaven and consumed Elijah's enemies in like manner.  Jewish tradition held that neither Moses nor Elijah died, but that God lifted both up to heaven, like these two witnesses. And a 1260-day drought occurred during the time of Elijah.
Matthew, Mark, and Luke agree with Revelation that Moses and Elijah have already returned, appearing on a mountaintop with Jesus.  When the disciples ask whether Elijah will arrive to usher in the final age, Jesus even declares Elijah has already once made his return in the form of John the Baptist.
Understanding this basic expectation, and the fulfillment in the Gospels of Malachi's prophecy, sets the stage for further analysis in part III.

Revelation 11:3-14, The Two Witnesses, I of V

One of the most fascinating passages in Revelation is the beginning of chapter 11, where two witnesses are introduced. I'd like to cover this topic in several parts; let me give just a brief introduction today, starting with the verses about these two men. Here is how the NIV reads:
//… And I will give power to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth."  These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth.  If anyone tries to harm them, fire comes from their mouths and devours their enemies.  This is how anyone who wants to harm them must die.  These men have power to shut up the sky so that it will not rain during the time they are prophesying; and they have power to turn the waters into blood and to strike the earth with every kind of plague as often as they want.
Now when they have finished their testimony, the beast that comes up from the Abyss will attack them, and overpower and kill them.  Their bodies will lie in the street of the great city, which is figuratively called Sodom and Egypt, where also their Lord was crucified.  For three and a half days men from every people, tribe, language and nation will gaze on their bodies and refuse them burial.  The inhabitants of the earth will gloat over them and will celebrate by sending each other gifts, because these two prophets had tormented those who live on the earth.
But after the three and a half days a breath of life from God entered them, and they stood on their feet, and terror struck those who saw them.  Then they heard a loud voice from heaven saying to them, "Come up here."  And they went up to heaven in a cloud, while their enemies looked on.
At that very hour there was a severe earthquake and a tenth of the city collapsed.  Seven thousand people were killed in the earthquake, and the survivors were terrified and gave glory to the God of heaven.
The second woe has passed; the third woe is coming soon.//
John writes to the seven churches of Asia, and speaks without introduction of God's two witnesses (often translated not as "witnesses" but as "martyrs"). Who are these two people, and why does John write of them as if they are already well-known to the churches? Over the next few days, I'll discuss various interpretations, none of which are "wrong," but all of which are different aspects of the same scripture. Like looking at different colors of a prism as the light shines through. I must caution you, though: It is not light reading.