Michael S. Heiser's Blog, page 36

Naked Bible Podcast Episode 166: Melchizedek in the Old Testament: Part 1A

Melchizedek is such a complicated subject we’re going to end up doing four episodes on him:

Old Testament, Part 1A
Old Testament, Part 1B
2nd Temple Judaism
New Testament

1A is now live!

Antiquities Smuggling in the Name of the Bible

This is what you call a terrible testimony: “Hobby Lobby to forfeit ancient Iraqi artifacts in settlement with DOJ.”

From the article:

Federal prosecutors say that when Hobby Lobby, which is based in Oklahoma City, began assembling its collection it was warned by an expert on cultural property law to be cautious in acquiring artifacts from Iraq, which in some cases have been looted from archaeological sites.

Despite that warning and other red flags the company in December 2010 purchased thousands of items from a middle-man, without meeting the purported owner, according to prosecutors.

A dealer based in the United Arab Emirates shipped packages containing the artifacts to three Hobby Lobby corporate addresses in Oklahoma City, bearing false label that described their contents as “ceramic tiles” or “clay tiles” and the country of origin as Turkey.

Simply disgraceful and dishonest. Sure, lets lie and break the law so we can can fill out our Bible museum. I hope this goes viral and shames the whole lot of them.

 

Audio Files from David Burnett’s Divine Council Talk in Austin, TX

Nathan Brown, a pastor at Mosaic Church in Austin, sent this link to David’s talk and subsequent Q & A to his divine council talk at Mosaic Church. Enjoy!

Naked Bible Podcast Episode 165 – Q & A # 22

The next Q & A episode is now live.

Recent Article Response to Bart Ehrman’s Views on Ancient Pseudepigraphy

The Society of Biblical Literature just released the latest issue of its Journal of Biblical Literature. One of the articles caught my attention: “Content and Form: Authorship Attribution and Pseudonymity in Ancient Speeches, Letters, Lectures, and Translations

—A Rejoinder to Bart Ehrman,” by Armin D. Baum of the Freie Theologische Hochschule in Gießen, Germany. The article is not available online, but it’s importance led me to alert those who subscribe to JBL or who can access it through a university or seminary library.

The article is, as it suggests, a response to the way Ehrman understands pseudonymity, particularly as articulated in his book Forgery and Counterforgery: The Use of Literary Deceit in Early Christian Polemics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012). Here’s the abstract to Baum’s article:

The ancient notion of authorship and forgery can be analyzed in various ancient

texts, including embedded texts (e.g., reported speeches) and independent texts,

some written under the author’s control (e.g., speeches, letters, and history

books), as well as others written independently of the author’s control (e.g., translations and unauthorized lecture publications). In all cases an authorial attribution was regarded as correct and nondeceptive if either content and wording or just the content of a particular text could be traced back to the author whose

name it carried. This prevailing principle of ancient authorship attribution, while

often taken for granted and applied without further explanation, was also stated

explicitly in several places. These ancient statements are in conflict with the most

innovative contribution of Bart Ehrman’s otherwise very useful recent book Forgery and Counterforgery (2012). Ehrman has rightly joined the growing number of scholars who have raised substantive doubts regarding the once-popular thesis of innocent ancient pseudepigraphy. At the same time, his assertion that in antiquity a text’s authenticity was assessed not on the basis of its content but always on the basis of its wording goes one step beyond what the numerous relevant ancient sources reveal.

For readers unfamiliar with the issue of pseudonymity, the authorship of certain books of the New Testament have long been questioned as to whether the person whose name the book bears. Ehrman’s work in this area has emerged as the most recent treatment of the issue, not only casting doubt on the named authorship of certain books, but even the ethics of producing books under pseudonymity (Ehrman calls it an unethical deception).

Baum’s article above pushes back on Ehrman’s view, at least with respect to the ancient view of authenticity. It’s an important article for that reason.

The last sentence of the abstract is noteworthy. It’s vintage Ehrman — affirming “X happens” and then extrapolating to an unnecessary conclusion. In this case, yes pseudonymity happens (and, as Baum points out, in a variety of ways, perceived in various ways), but the observation allows Ehrman to chastise the New Testament. Baum’s take essentially says, “not so fast” or perhaps “let’s not affirm the obvious and extrapolate to the unnecessary.” This method is characteristic of Ehrman’s work.

For those wondering about the books of the New Testament in this regard, I’d recommend Guthrie’s lengthy and detailed New Testament Introduction. It’s older but, to be honest, there’s nothing else like it between two covers. Of course scholarly commentaries will discuss a book’s authorship at length (and many would disagree with scholars characterizing some of the books of the New Testament as pseudonymous).

Jaime Maussan Is At It Again: Three-Fingered “Alien Mummy” Claim

Many readers will have seen the slick video report about an alleged “new species” mummy found in Peru.

This is a well-done video by Gaia TV, sure to appeal to the gullible. Lots of folks with white masks saying sciencey things (i.e., speculating with big words). Some of them even have degrees (which makes me wonder why no one let them use an actual lab for the “examination” — instead they did that on a roof top). Maybe some degree programs in science don’t use labs, or teach their grad students that lab conditions aren’t necessary for sound analysis. Oh, we get a CAT scan, too … one that honestly doesn’t show much. As if that can tell us anything (think about it — it’s going to detect skeletal structure and whatever is stretched over that, but not what any of that is made of, or the genetic profile). The specimen is of course unprovenanced (the video shows where it was purportedly found, but no actual extraction from said location). And conveniently there are three-fingered glyphs nearby. But I’m sure they didn’t find the glyphs first and them make a specimen to match after the fact. No, they wouldn’t do that …

Let me go out on a limb and say this will turn out to be a fake. All I really needed to know is that Jaime Maussan is at the center of it. (He of “Roswell slides” infamy — at least that was the last one). Here’s another Maussan hoax.

The Black Vault offers a succinct summary of some problems with the “specimen.” Here’s another one from Doubtful News.

I’m referenced in the Doubtful News piece. I had send them the link to the video the morning it appeared (not surprisingly, in my In Box). I offered my suggestions on how this could be faked (at least how I’d do it, based on the sort of chicanery that I suspected was behind the “demon fairy” silliness). Doubtful News didn’t get into the “how,” which I appreciate. It’ll be fun to see if I got at least some part of method right once this turns out to be a fraud. The Black Vault piece states the first and most obvious issue — this doesn’t look much like Peruvian mummies (there are a good number of them). It looks like a plaster cast … the creativity will be in what’s under the plaster.

Did Anonymous Claim a NASA Announcement About Disclosure was Imminent?

Various news outlets breathlessly reported that the well-known activist / hacktivist group known as Anonymous had posted an announcement about an impending NASA announcement that intelligent ET life was a reality. The link above leads to a video that purports to be this announcement.

The first thing I did was to check the OFFICIAL Anonymous website. After all, it would seem reasonable that, if Anonymous had insider information like this they would post it. As of this writing, there is nothing of the sort on their official website. (Go ahead … search the site for “alien” and “extraterrestrial” and “NASA”). If one clicks on the “Message for Humanity” on the official website (of the same date as the alleged ET announcement) and watches THAT video, there is nothing mentioned about ET — and the video is quite different. Here’s the video from the official site:

So, why the incongruity? Why is there nothing about a NASA ET life announcement on the official (read: real) Anonymous sites?

My guess (and it’s only a guess) is that someone wanted lots of web traffic, so they posed as Anonymous and made their own video. It wouldn’t be hard. After all, anyone can get one of those Anonymous masks (the official site runs an ad for getting yours). Sure,. this could also be a “move the herd” social experiment, too, but I’m guessing it’s about selling ads and web traffic.

 

Reversing Hermon Interview on the Jew and Gentile Show

The Jew and Gentile podcast has a connection to Ratio Christi, a well-known campus ministry. I’m grateful for the invitation, as campus ministry is so significant. Enjoy the episode!

Naked Bible Podcast Episode 164: Paul’s Ascent and Angelic Torment with David Burnett

David Burnett returns to the podcast to discuss Paul’s defense of his apostleship and his heavenly ascent in 2 Corinthians 11-12. This episode expands upon an earlier episode on Paul’s ascent, specifically linking it to Second Temple Jewish apocalyptic literature (the Ascension of Abraham) and rabbinic material that appears to draw on that earlier material. The link to Abraham in Jewish thought is important, as it informs part of Paul’s comments on being the seed of Abraham.

The episode is now live.

A Note on the September 23, 2017 Astral Prophecy Hype and Nonsense

I just wanted to put something on the blog (again) about my rejection of the idea that Revelation 12 has anything to do with the second coming or end times in general. I’ve been getting emails with links to YouTube videos like this one that use my thoughts about the astral signage being an indication of the birth of Jesus as proof that the (presumed) repetition of the signage signals the second coming, or some sort of revealing of fallen angels, Watchers, etc. September 23 is the new date for all this to happen “because the Bible tells us so.” Sigh.

As those who follow my work know, I don’t think the signs of Revelation 12 have anything to do with end times. There is no verse in the NT that tells us to look for a repetition of those signs in connection with the second coming. There is also no verse that links the signs to the “sign of the son of man” in the gospel eschatological discourses. The sign of the son of man could be several specific things, or nothing specific at all. We have ZERO scriptural reason to thing this way.

Revelation 12 is HINDSIGHT with respect to the messiah’s birth, not foresight. It is not a fulfillment of any OT prophecy. There is no OT prophecy that told readers to look for the signs given in the passage for the coming messiah of Israel. So let not your hearts be troubled. For those who remember my 2014 post on this issue, the “no one knows” answer Jesus gave to when his coming would be won’t be improved upon by astronomy software.

Anyway, just wanted to put this up. I can hardly wait until October!  One more failure to predict the second coming or the associated events. But, true to form, the date-setters will have their excuses ready.

Yes, it can be soul-crushing for me to read / watch this sort of nonsense. But the real problem is that it is faith-destroying for many. That’s the harm.