We are going alphabetically through difficult Bible stories, characters, and themes. Right now we are exploring the life of Jesus.

Of course, the most crucial question has to do with the resurrection story about Jesus. Did it happen? Let’s start with the minimal facts approach, which focuses only on those data that are so strongly attested historically that they are granted by nearly every scholar who studies the subject, even the rather skeptical ones.

So here are six of these minimal facts – Jesus died by crucifixion, Jesus’s disciples believed that he rose and appeared to them, the church persecutor Paul was suddenly changed, the skeptic James (brother of Jesus) was suddenly changed, the church started in Jerusalem, and the tomb was empty. Any theory about what happened to Jesus has to account for these six facts.

There have been plenty of alternate theories, but each seems to have problems. For example, some suggest the disciples had hallucinations, which accounted for their idea that Jesus appeared to them. But hallucinations cannot account for the empty tomb or the conversion of Paul.

Maybe the story was a legend that developed over time? But it can be established that those original disciples sincerely believed that the risen Jesus had appeared to them and taught it within a very short period of time after his crucifixion. And they started the church in Jerusalem, where Jesus was crucified, so people in that city would not join a new organization based on a lie or deception.

Then there’s the swoon theory – Jesus didn’t really die on the cross. Instead, he was taken down alive and recovered in the tomb, later appearing to the disciples. Can you see problems with that theory?

Some time in your life you probably need to reach a conclusion about this claim because it was the focal point of writers of the New Testament. There is no room for ambiguity here. Either Jesus rose from the dead confirming his claims to divinity or he was a fraud.

Jesus is the most controversial person in the Bible. Let’s take some time to examine him. Here’s the first blog post on Jesus.

There is much speculation and curiosity over many aspects of Jesus’s life. Let’s start with his birth. What was the star of Bethlehem? From the description and from what astronomers know of the skies back then, it was not a comet, meteor, or supernova.

However, in 3 B.C. there was a conjunction of Venus and Jupiter (meaning they were close to each other) in the constellation of Leo. People who studied the stars recognized Jupiter as a lucky object and a royal star and Leo as the tribal sign of Judah. In addition, the conjunction occurred near the star Regulus, which had something to do with kingship. If you put this all together, you end up with the idea of a king connected with the tribe of Judah in southern Israel. Others note that in 7 B.C. Jupiter and Saturn formed a conjunction in the sky; Saturn had special significance as a protector of the people living in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Plus, this conjunction took place in the constellation Pisces, which astrologers believed foretold important earthly events occurring in the land of the Hebrews.

But Matthew’s account is puzzling since he uses the word “star” when anyone could see that it was two planets. The account in the book of Matthew says that the star “came and stood over where the young child was.” Astronomical calculations show that these planets never stood overhead anywhere in Judea around the time of Jesus’s birth. Why didn’t Herod and his advisers, who knew astrology, understand what was going on?

James and the bone box

In the time of Jesus family members who died were put into tombs until the flesh was completely gone. Then their bones were often collected and put in a bone box.

Not too long ago an archaeologist at work in Israel uncovered a bone box which has created a sensation. It is inscribed “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus.” What made many people curious is the reference to Jesus since it was unusual to name a brother.

After 70 A.D. there were few ossuaries (bone boxes) anymore, so this one may be from the time of Jesus. There is controversy over this regarding its authenticity, so stay tuned.

Let’s move to the New Testament and look at concerns people have had over the years. Here’s a quick overview of the gospels, which have come under attack recently. For example,  Dan Brown, in his highly successful book The Da Vinci Code, says there were many other gospels, but the winners in a theological struggle outlawed some of them. By the way, Brown got sooooo much wrong in his book. You can see some of these if you go to my audio and video files on this site.

The only reason I mention this is that Dan Brown’s theories were not peculiar to him alone; other people share his ideas, which have gained traction in our cynical, suspicious era. He and others point especially to Gnostic gospels found near Nag Hammadi in Egypt. Perhaps the most famous of these other gospels is the Gospel of Thomas, which anyone can access via the internet.

However, all these other challengers to the traditional four gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John) have been dated much later. The four traditional gospels are actually the best records that we have of the life of Jesus and the only ones mentioned by early Church Fathers from the second century on.  This is not just the opinion of religious leaders but even by skeptics like Bart Ehrman, noted scholar and best-selling author of New Testament studies.

We have been looking at controversies and misunderstandings when it comes to the Bible. Right now I’m exploring the idea that the Bible urged and condoned genocide in the Old Testament (see previous blog posts). I will continue the discussion here.

In addition, we have to consider the literary use of hyperbole, which is exaggeration for effect. We see it throughout the Bible. How do we know that it applies to the stories dealing with battles in the Old Testament? Think about the verse I used above from Deuteronomy. If you go just a few chapters later (7:3-5), you encounter this: “… you shall not intermarry with them; you shall not give your daughters to their sons, nor shall you take their daughters for your sons.” Now, if all Canaanite inhabitants were dead, there’d be no need for this injunction. Then look at Judges 1:21 where it says the Israelites did not drive out Canaanites who lived in Jerusalem, and, in fact, lived near them for years. Notice Joshua 11: 22, which says there were no Anakim left in the land, and that they were utterly destroyed. But later Caleb asks permission to drive out the very same Anakites from the hill country, so they obviously had not been destroyed by Joshua.

There are a few other things to consider. According to those who have studied this, the ones who were destroyed were political leaders and army combatants, not noncombatants. The towns of Jericho and Ai, mentioned so prominently in the opening attacks by Joshua, were military forts rather than towns full of peaceful people. Some of the battles fought were defensive in nature since many Canaanites had attacked the Jewish people during their wanderings in the desert. There are also verses that tell the Israelites to give the towns a chance to surrender before attacking them. Other verses talk about “driving out” the enemy, not destroying them.

OK, next time let’s move on to another issue involving the New testament.

We’re continuing a look at the so-called genocide in the Old Testament when the Israelites were told to wipe out the Canaanites. There’s so much to this encounter. Be sure to start with my previous blog post.

Secondly, we need to realize the Israelites were not fearful of strangers (non-Israelites). After all, God told Abraham that all the families of the earth would be blessed through his offspring. Later positive stories are told about good foreigners – Melchizedek, leaders of the Egyptians in Genesis 12 and the Philistines in Genesis 20, the wife of Moses, who was dark-skinned, the gentile Rahab in Joshua. Furthermore, God also repeatedly commanded Israel to show concern for aliens who were sojourners in their midst – Leviticus 19:34, Deuteronomy 10:18-19. According to Israelite civil law, the stranger living in Israel had the same legal rights as the native Israelite – Leviticus 24:22.

Next, we may not understand what happened when the children of Israel entered their promised land. The books of Joshua and Judges suggest that taking the land included more use of infiltration and internal struggle rather than slaughter. See Judges 1:1-2:5. So, Israel’s entrance into Canaan included more than the military motif. The stereotypical model of an all-consuming Israelite army descending upon Canaan and destroying everything in its way cannot be accepted. There certainly was military action but without causing extensive material destruction.

More to follow in the next post that continues this “genocide” issue.

Let’s plunge on, considering issues in the Bible that have confused or intrigued people.

Garden of Eden

A key question here is the location for this garden. There is a reference to a total of four rivers, but two of the four are missing today. Some radar images of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers shows other rivers under the surface, so this may be a likely place for the setting of the story.

Genocide in the Old Testament

Some people, when encountering stories of the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites, are horrified at what appears to be genocide waged by the Hebrews. For example, Richard Dawkins, noted atheist, says that the killing of the Canaanites was an act of ethnic cleansing in which “bloodthirsty massacres” were carried out with “xenophobic relish.” We see verses like this from Deuteronomy 2:34: “So we captured all his cities at that time and utterly destroyed the men, women, and children of every city. We left no survivor.” But there is more to the story.

First, we need to think about the Canaanite culture that the children of Israel were encountering. They were horrified by the degradation they found. Canaanites were idolaters; they practiced incest and adultery. In addition, bestiality was part of their culture. Probably most disturbing of all to the Israelites was the use of child sacrifice, in which a Canaanite baby was placed on a red hot idol to be burned alive.

There’s much more to say here, but I’ll leave that for a future blog post.

I’m continuing a list of places/terms/people in the Bible that confuse people. Let’s look at a key event that has sparked a ton of discussion–the Flood.  Some think it’s a myth, others think it was a local event, and yet others think it was a world-wide devastation.

First, is there any evidence outside the Bible for some sort of flood? Yes, other major civilizations have stories about a horrific event like this. For example, the area of Mesopotamia has the story of Gilgamesh. — probably a local flood people remembered.

The next big question has to do with the extent of the flood. A quick reading of Genesis might suggest it was a world-wide flood since we see phrases like “the flood kept coming on the earth” and “all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered.” But keep in mind “earth” can equally be translated as “land,” and “mountains” can be translated as “hills,” while “heavens” can be translated as “sky.”

That leaves a very different feel for the story – a local flood seems more likely, especially in a flat area like Mesopotamia. In addition, one verse says the waters covered the mountains to a depth of more than 20 feet, but the word “covered” can mean “running over” or “falling upon.” Again, this would work well with a local flood.

Here’s some more info on confusing terms associated with the Bible. This one is a continuation of the last one dealing with Israel, Egypt, and the Exodus.

Secondly, there is evidence of Israel entering Canaan around 1400 BC. There’s something called the Amarna Letters which referred to the conquest of Canaan by “Habiru,” which some scholars think is a term used for Hebrew people throughout the Middle East. What is recorded in these matches the biblical record. A second piece of evidence is the Merneptah Stele, a commemorative stone that records an attack in Canaan by a pharaoh in 1209 B.C. It mentions Israel as part of the settled population of Canaan and implies that Israel was the dominant group in the area. This is an important piece of evidence since it lets us know Israel was established in Canaan and dominant by 1209 B.C.

Another Egyptian monument from around 1400 B.C. describes “nomads of Yahweh” in the specific area mentioned in the Bible for Israel’s 40 years of wandering. Then there is the Ipuwer Papyrus, an Egyptian poem, which describes events that resemble the 10 plagues mentioned in Exodus.

While the Exodus isn’t specifically mentioned in archaeological evidence, the above collection of facts is interesting because it does appear to match the biblical record in a number of ways. At least it adds up to a reasonable argument that can be made.

OK, here’s another post dealing with an extremely interesting part of the Old Testament–the Israelites in Egypt. Is it all myth?

Egypt, Israel, and the Exodus

Is there any evidence for the story of the Israelites being in Egypt? The story takes place near the end of the Bronze Age when there were major social migrations. There are three minimal facts that we know – there were Israelite slaves in Goshen before 1446 B.C. (before the biblical date for the Exodus); Israel arrived in Canaan about 1400 BC; Israel wandered from Egypt to Canaan about the time of the Exodus. Let’s look at each of these.

First, there is evidence for Israel being in Goshen prior to 1400 BC. Researchers note the style of architecture, statues, tombs, pottery, wall paintings, and artifacts that suggest people from Canaan were in Egypt during that time. Also, there are Egyptian household records listing slave names including distinctively Hebrew names. People have discovered public works building projects built by Semites, wall murals depicting Semitic slaves working, wall inscriptions in the Semitic language and written reference to Asiatic (a term used by Egyptians to refer to residents of nations east of Egypt) sheepherders who didn’t worship Ra.

I’ll cover another part of this topic in the next blog post.