Jesus and His Jewish World: a Resource That Brings First-Century Biblical Context Into the Twenty- First-Century World Through Technology Paul D

Digital Commons @ George Fox University

Doctor of Ministry Seminary

10-1-2013 Jesus and his Jewish World: A Resource That Brings First-Century Biblical Context into the Twenty- First-Century World Through Technology Paul D. Conway George Fox University

This research is a product of the Doctor of Ministry (DMin) program at George Fox University. Find out more about the program.

Recommended Citation Conway, Paul D., "Jesus and his Jewish World: A Resource That Brings First-Century Biblical Context into the Twenty-First-Century World Through Technology" (2013). Doctor of Ministry. Paper 70. http://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/dmin/70

This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Seminary at Digital Commons @ George Fox University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctor of Ministry by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ George Fox University.

JESUS AND HIS JEWISH WORLD: A RESOURCE THAT BRINGS FIRST-CENTURY BIBLICAL CONTEXT INTO THE TWENTY-FIRST-CENTURY WORLD THROUGH TECHNOLOGY

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GEORGE FOX EVANGELICAL SEMINARY IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF MINISTRY

Paul D. Conway

PORTLAND, OREGON

OCTOBER 2013

George Fox Evangelical Seminary George Fox University Newberg, Oregon

CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL ______

DMin Dissertation ______

This is to certify that the DMin Dissertation of

Paul D. Conway

has been approved by the Dissertation Committee on October 25, 2013 as fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Ministry in Semiotics and Future Studies.

Dissertation Committee:

Primary Advisor: Marc Turnage, PhD

Secondary Advisor: Derek Voorhees, DMin

Lead Mentor: Leonard I. Sweet, PhD

Expert Advisor: John Bergquist, BS

All rights reserved. No reproduction of written or visual material of this work is permitted without written permission of the author. All photographs and videos are the property of Conway and Conway Enterprises LLC.

All Scripture quotations are from the New Revised Standard Version unless otherwise noted.

All quotations of the Babylonian Talmud are from Rabbi Epstein’s edition unless otherwise noted. All quotations of Josephus are from the Bible Works 8.0 version.

All quotations of the Jerusalem Talmud are from Jacob Neusner’s Logos version unless otherwise noted.

All quotations from the Tosephta are from Jacob Neusner’s translation unless otherwise noted.

Five Gospels record the life of Jesus. Four you will find in books and one you will find in the land they call Holy. Read the fifth Gospel and the words of the four will open to you.

Saint Jerome

Send them out that they may begin to go throughout the land, writing a description of it with a view to their inheritances…

Joshua 18:4

iii DEDICATION

Marc Turnage, Ph.D. (A.B.D.), who has taught me more about the historical Jesus in three years of study than thirteen in the college setting. You are a true sage of Galilee. Flusser would be proud.

iv CONTENTS

EPIGRAPH ...... iii DEDICATION ...... iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... v LIST OF FIGURES ...... vi ABSTRACT ...... vii

SECTION 1: THE PROBLEM ...... 7 Thousands of Miles and Years of Separation ...... 7 Incarnation in Theology but Not Humanity Scholarship Rendered Scattered and Static by Anti-Semitism Geography That Is Scholarly, Scattered, and Static Language That Is Scholarly, Scattered, and Static Literature Whose Access is Scholarly, Scattered, and Static Images and Resources That Are Scholarly, Scattered, and Static

Summary of Problem ...... 19

SECTION 2: OTHER PROPOSED SOLUTIONS ...... 20 A Visual Guide to Bible Events, Edited by James C. Martin ...... 26 Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary ...... 21 The Holy Land Satellite Atlas, Vol. I & II, by Richard Cleave ...... 32 Biblical Backgrounds ...... 37

SECTION 3: THE THESIS ...... 39 Incarnation in Humanity for Theology ...... 39 Geography Reassessed ...... 48 Language Reexamined ...... 54 Literature Regrouped ...... 58 Conclusion ...... 64

SECTION 4: THE ARTIFACT DESCRIPTION ...... 66 SECTION 5: ARTIFACT SPECIFICATION ...... 66 SECTION 6: POSTSCRIPT ...... 69 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 73

v LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure

1. The Judean Wilderness, from Holman Bible Atlas 2. A Visual Guide to the Bible, Book Cover 3. A Visual Guide to the Bible, Inside Sample 4. Coin of Herod Phillip 5. Temple to Caesar at Omrit in the Region of Banias (Caesarea Philippi) 6. Petra, Nabataean Capital 7. Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary Set 8. Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary Set Map 9. Extra-Biblical Literature Expansion Window 10. Ancient Alms 11. Holy Land Satellite Atlas, Vol. 1 and 2, DVD 12. Kursi and the Eastern Shore of Galilee 13. Cartography of the Holy Land Satellite Atlas 14. Holy Land Satellite Atlas Software 15. Biblical Backgrounds 16. Biblical Backgrounds Map Work

vi ABSTRACT

THE PROBLEM

The twenty-first century Assemblies of God Christian and communicator are separated by thousands of years and miles from Christ’s first -century context. Few tools provide a three dimensional resource that converge the literature, land and language to construct a bridge that empowers learners to cross that distance independently. Many resources available are scholarly, scattered or static. Those privileged to visit the Holy

Land leave enthusiastic but fail to export large portions of the educational experience.

This often results in the traveler sharing their images and impressions for several weeks until all that remains are emotional memoirs and a dim recollection of the hermeneutical content received. THE THESIS Thousands of miles and years separate the average Assemblies of God pastor, educator, parishioner and student from the first-century world of Jesus. This distance often results in a strong theological hermeneutic that is weak in the understanding of the literature, land and language that embedded the life of Christ. I claim that producing a twenty- first century electronic resource that integrates these elements will better bridge the physical, cultural and historical distance our world and the first-century Jewish world of Jesus and occasionally improve our theological understanding of Jesus’ words and works.

SUMMARY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT

This artifact is an iBook titled “Jesus and His Jewish World.” It could be used as a tool for pre- and post-trip development for academic tours to the Holy Land. The outline is driven by tour locations and chronology, covering events and subject matter relevant to the biblical sites. This will create a three-dimensional experience both visually through

vii technology and scholastically through a unique discipline of hermeneutics found in the literature, land, and language of Christ’s first-century context is portable and user friendly delivery system.

viii SECTION 1: THE PROBLEM

Thousands of Miles and Years of Separation

Thousands of miles and years separate the twenty-first-century reader from the biblical world of Jesus. Many of the resources available are scholarly, scattered, and static. The Bible and incarnation occurred in a specific time and space of geography, culture, language, and history.1 The task of the biblical reader is to understand the message of Jesus in its first-century setting and then export it into twenty-first-century applications. The challenge is the method and material that an individual leverage to bridge that distance and make this goal achievable.

It would seem logical that the most significant step toward entering the world of

Jesus would be to attend a Holy Land tour. This assumption is contingent on the quality of the guide or agency selected and possessing the financial means to travel. To purchase a plane ticket might cross the physical chasm, but an equal distance exists in culture, history, and language. Hundreds of tour agencies exist to sell a Holy Land experience.

Purchasing a plane ticket and procuring a guide are noble and necessary steps but are incomplete without a host who has the proper understanding of the nuances contained in the Gospels and Jesus’ biblical world. Finding such a guide is more difficult than one might imagine, especially if finances are limited.

Another step to close the distance between biblical readers and the biblical world can be found in the millions of publications available in printed and digital format.

Scholars unfamiliar, under familiar, or unexposed to the physical, historical, and cultural

1 Marc Turnage, “The Historical Jesus” (lecture, George Fox University, Springfield, MO, February 2011).

1 2 setting of the Bible overcompensate by heavy reliance on theology for understanding the text. If the value of understanding Jesus through history, culture, archaeology, and language is not present, a journey may take place physically to the Holy land, or theologically in the mind, but the traveler may never fully enter the time and space of nuanced context in which the Gospels were written.

For missionaries to effectively communicate and collaborate with cultures, they must recognize the difference between their world and the one they hope to engage.

Cross-cultural understanding is not a direct line but a curve, a helix. Like missionary work, exegesis is not linear. There exist helixes of language, culture, history, religion, and more. The problem of entering the world of Jesus has been further challenged by attempts to interpret without respect to the helix needed for understanding. Like missionaries, we must study the places of difference in biblical culture that complicate understanding and delay accurate communication. It requires an assessment of challenges and problems that perpetuate misunderstanding or misdirect comprehension. The following observations focus on some of the main challenges a twenty-first-century exegete faces when attempting to comprehend and share the first-century context of

Jesus.

Incarnation in Theology and Divinity but Not Humanity

The incarnation is special not just physically but also historically and culturally.

John wrote, “The Word became flesh and lived among us” (John 1:14). The incarnation is not the problem. The problem arises when we do not respect and reflect on its contribution to understanding Jesus. As mentioned in the summary, many believersin

Western culture rely heavily on theology to understand the words and works of Jesus isolated from the cultural and linguistic context of the world He incarnated into.

Overemphasis is placed on categorically summing the wonder and world of His works by references and rants that oversimplify God and overestimate scholars’ insight.

Neibuhr’sr’s book Christ and Culture, offers four alternatives for understanding

Jesus in relationship to culture. The first perspective he offers is that Jesus is against culture. Second, Christ stands above culture. Third, He is for culture by fully supporting it. Finally, He ignores culture altogether.

All of these categories offer honest and worthy perspectives. One could see truth in each of these considering the circumstances. Leonard Sweet does a great service by opining on Neibhur incomplete. Jesus was not for or against culture nor above or ignoring it. Christ incarnated into culture.”

Jesus was a human being who lived in a land, learned its literature and respected its worldviews and cultural cues. Luke says that Jesus, “increased in wisdom and in years, and in divine and human favor” (Luke 2:52). He was part of a family, part of a village, part of a country, part of a dialect, and part of a culture. Jesus was shaped by His culture as much as we are shaped by ours. Dr. Steven Notley of Nyack College in New

York recently said, “If Jesus was an Irishman I would have studied in Dublin but He was not. He was born in first-century Israel. That is why I study first-century Judaism.”2 The

Western Church has an affinity for Jesus theologically, sometimes at the expense of who

He was historically. Studying the life of Christ requires consideration of where and when that life was lived. To enter the Holy Land of books is not enough. The physical context

2 Steven Notley, “Jesus and Judaism” (lecture, NYAC College, NYC Campus, December 2012).

4 does not cross the historic or cultural one. The Israel of the Davidic Kingdom is not the same as the Israel of the Second Temple period. The incarnation invites us to ask, what was the Israel in which Jesus dwelt and how does it affect his words, deeds, and expression of faith?

Attempts to understand the words and works of Christ have been around for centuries. Hermeneutics and theology have always been a crucial part of the church from its beginnings. To meet the challenges of their day, the early church held four great councils. More than four took place, but the four main ones gave shape to the doctrine of the church in its early development. The nature of Christ was the central subject. Some church leaders felt He was fully divine and that no aspect of humanity ruled or reigned within Him. Others considered Him God, but stripped of His divinity while on earth—in other words, fully man while in His human state. They demanded a view of Christ through the eyes of full humanity. After much reflection, heated debate, and discourse, the church ruled that the nature of Christ was both: “Full humanity, full divinity.” This became known as the Chalcedonian Creed and the doctrine of hypostatic union, or two natures.

If the position of the early Church held Jesus to be incarnated in full humanity and full divinity, then we should engage Him on both fronts for a proper understanding of His life and teachings. Examining His divinity theologically is necessary but incomplete; we must also factor His humanity into our helix of understanding.

Scholarship Rendered Scattered and Static by Anti-Judiasm

Volumes of scholarship are filled with the static of anti-Semitism that forces a divide on the cultural helix of understanding God’s word by attempting to eradicate the culture of the Jews, God’s chosen people. A stream of anti-Judaism has been a deep stain on the gown of church history from Eusebius and the French Inquisition to the Holocaust and modern scholarship In his book Meet the Rabbis, Brad Young exemplifies this with a selection from John Lightfoot’s Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and

Hebraica. His anti-Semitic statements were shocking: “The Jews themselves stink their writings stink as much amongst all. . . Of all impious men the most impious, of all cursed wretches the most cursed.”3

In the late 1800s, Emil Schürer wrote a five-volume work titled The History of the

Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ. Its original language was German and reflected the typical anti-Semitic sentiments of the time. In 1964, the work was translated into

English. Shortly after, Matthew Black, professor of biblical criticism at St. Andrews, gathered a team of Jewish scholars to revise the English edition. Relevant information and discoveries were added, along with the Jewish scholars’ insights into rabbinic literature, archaeology, and the Dead Sea scrolls. What many do not realize is that the second agenda was to remove Schürer’s anti-Semitic statements and opinions while retaining the valuable scholastic research. The team was gracious in the preface of the work that insinuates this fact: “They have not attempted to record every shade of opinion voiced since Schürer wrote, and even less to refer to every book or article expressing

3 Brad H. Young, Meet the Rabbis: Rabbinic Thought and the Teachings of Jesus (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2010), 4. Young is quoting J. B. Lighfoot’s comments on Matt. 8:30 and 11:21.

6 such opinions.”4 This was a polite way of saying that the racial slander against the Jewish people was being removed.

The ninety-five theses of Luther may have hung on the door of the Wittenberg chapel, but he also pounded anti-Semitism into the heart of reformed generations through his 65,000- word treatise entitled “On the Jews and Their Lies.” It is amazing to realize that one of the first books to hit the Gutenberg press after the Bible was a work containing perspectives of anti-Judiasm, by one of the heroes of the Reformation. Some might call the accusation unfair and unmerited, but inside its pages Luther wrote with unbridled offensive language, calling the Jews “a whoring people, full of the devil’s feces

. . . in which they wallow in like swine’s.”5

This mentality did not originate with Luther but flowed even further from the early church fathers. Melito the Bishop of Sardis, wrote, “God has been murdered . . . by the right hand of Israel.”6 Voices in the early church such as Ignatius of Antioch (98–117

C.E.) felt that “Christianity did not believe in Judaism, but Judaism in Christianity.”7 This view almost completely ignores Romans 11 and other teachings of the New Testament.

John Chrysostom (344–407 C.E.) was nicknamed “The Golden Mouth,” but his words seem to devalue the Jewish contribution:

The synagogue is worse than a brothel . . . it is the den of scoundrels and the repair of wild beasts . . . the temple of demons devoted to idolatrous cults . . . the refuge of brigands and debauchees, and the cavern of devils. It is a

4 Emil Schürer, A History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ, Vol. 1 (London, England: T&T Clark, 1973), vi–vii.

5 “On the Jews and Their Lies,” Wikipedia, available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies#cite_ref-1 (accessed January 10, 2013).

6 Geza Vermes, “From Jewish to Jesus. How the Jesus Movement Became Christianity,” Biblical Archaeology Review.

7 Yashanet, available from http://www.yashanet.com/library/fathers.htm; accessed 5 January 2013.

criminal assembly of Jews . . . a place of meeting for the assassins of Christ . . . a house worse than a drinking shop . . . a den of thieves, a house of ill fame, a dwelling of iniquity, the refuge of devils, a gulf and an abyss of perdition.”. . . “I would say the same things about their souls . . . As for me, I hate the synagogue …I hate the Jews for the same reason.8

In 1939, a group of Protestant pastors and theologians formed the Institute for the

Study and Eradication of Jewish Influence on German Church Life.9 If you were a

German in the Lutheran church, worshipping a Jewish savior was problematic. The group sought to eradicate the Jewish presence and influence on the German church. This required a de-Judaizing of the Scriptures. They initially won strong support and influence as anti-Semitism flourished and was spread by the Nazis. Walter Grundmann, a New

Testament scholar, was the institute’s leader and felt that their work was groundbreaking.

Several years earlier, in 1929, Walter Baur had published an article titled “Jesus der

Galilar” in which he claimed that the Galilee was purely Gentile, and therefore Jesus was not Jewish.10 Much of this concept came from the deportation of the Jews after the

Assyrian invasion of the north, followed by the influx of foreigners under the empire’s repopulation policies. A position was also built on 1 Maccabees 5:21–23:

21So Simon went to Galilee and fought many battles against the Gentiles, and the Gentiles were crushed before him. 22He pursued them to the gate of Ptolemais; as many as three thousand of the Gentiles fell, and he despoiled them. 23Then he took the Jews of Galilee and Arbatta, with their wives and children, and all they possessed, and led them to Judea with great rejoicing.

8 Ibid.

9 Susannah Heschel, The Aryan Jesus: Christian Theologians and the Bible in Nazi Germany (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2010), 7.

10 Roger Pearse, “Academic Integrity 2: Walter Bauer and the Early Christian Movement;” available from http://www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/2012/10/13/academic-integrity-2-walter-bauer-and- the-german-christian-movement/ (accessed January 10, 2013).

The line of logic built was that Simon deported whatever Jewish element had existed near the Sea of Galilee to Judea. The problem with this view is that it was fostered in the greenhouse that gave birth to Nazi Germany. It also ignores the geographic understanding of the Galilee in Jesus’ day on the coast by Jezreel and the city of Ptolemy.11 Their whole argument was geographically flawed, based not on the historic definition of the Galilee in the first century B.C.E. and C.E. but rather the one imagined by these rogue scholars. Josephus records that the Galilee of late B.C.E and C.E. was not the lake and the region surrounding it, but rather the land to its west stretching to the sea.

The first-century historian exposes the fundamental flaw geographically of the Arian

Jesus of Nazi Germany.

Josephus, Jewish Wars iii. 35 35 Now Phoenicia and Syria surround the Galilees,

which are two, and called the Upper Galilee and the Lower. They are bounded on

the west by the borders of the territory belonging to Ptolemais, and by Carmel;

which mountain had formerly belonged to the Galileans, but now belonged to the

Tyrians[.]

To blame the Holocaust on the ministers who formed the Institute for the Study of the Eradication of Jewish Influence on the German Church would be unfair. However,

UCLA professor Saul Friedlander believes their anti-Semitic propaganda was the

“mobilizing myth of the regime.”12 Although these scholars have died off, their written

11 Jonathan A. Goldstein, I Maccabees: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, vol. 41 of The Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2008), 300.

12 Heschel, Aryan Jesus, 7.

9 works live on, going unchecked in theological circles, including the landmark language lexicon of Kittle.

Geography That Is Scholarly, Scattered, and Static

A lack of geographic knowledge can be problematic when studying Scripture.

Anyone who says geography does not matter has not heard the story of Korean Airlines

Flight 007, which was shot down over Russian airspace on September 1, 1983. After taking off, the autopilot was set on a heading at 220 degrees; the plane kept this course for five and a half hours. What the pilots did not realize was that the setting was off by five degrees, placing them over Soviet airspace. A total of 269 people lost their lives.

The reason we originally referred to Native Americans as Indians was based on

Columbus’s geographic error. He believed his three ships had reached the country of

India. Geographic errors might not be a matter of life and death but can prove embarrassing, such as that of Caitlin Upton in the Miss Teen USA competition of 2007.

When asked why most Americans cannot identify America on the map, she proved to be one of those people by her reply.

Geography is one of the problems facing the study of the Bible today. Ironically there exist many New Testament scholars and pastors who have dedicated their lives to the Lord (Jesus) and His literature (the Bible) but remain ignorant of the space in which it all took place (the land). Many times the questions of who, what, when, and why can be understood by knowing ‘where’ events took place. John the Baptist and the “wilderness of Judea” is an example of a chasm between us and the first century. Almost every atlas identifies the region between Jerusalem and the Dead Sea as the “Judean wilderness.”

Matthew 3:1 In those days John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness of Judea, proclaiming, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.”

Figure 1 The Judean Wilderness Skyline Software Systems, Inc. and Rhor Productions Ltd.

This belief is based on several flawed presuppositions regarding geography. It assumes that the Judean wilderness is east of Jerusalem, incorrectly supported by a belief that John and Qumran are associated with one another, that the Jordan River in which

John is baptizing is the Lower Jordan, and that Bethany beyond the Jordan is in Perea, east of the river. All of these presuppositions are the result of separation by thousands of miles and years from the original setting. Many of these errors began early in the second and third centuries and have been perpetuated over the years. Section 3, “Geography

Revisited,” offers a three-dimensional solution through a consideration of ancient literature, land, and language as an example of the artifact’s thesis.

Language That Is Scholarly, Scattered, and Static

Sometimes New Testament scholars focus so heavily on Greek they miss the relevance Hebrew offers for insight. Language embeds culture.13 Many times the cultural matrix of a language provides insight into its meaning. This becomes even more complicated when dealing with bilingual and trilingual cultures. Because the current manuscripts of the New Testament are in Greek, many feel that the Hebrew language and even Hebrew texts such as the Mishnah, Tosefta, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls and so forth, are irrelevant. This could not be further from the truth. Approaching texts such as the

Gospels with this presupposition can scatter the original understanding and produce static that drowns out the message.

The late R. L. Lindsey proposed that behind the Greek texts of the Gospels rests the Hebrew language. David Flusser was a philologist, an expert in over twenty ancient and modern languages. His friendship with Lindsey brought his expertise to bear on the

Gospels. The result has been some of the greatest ground-breaking work in language studies as they relate to Gospel research. Most scholarship does not venture into textual analysis or philological studies of the Gospels because of the presupposition that Hebrew is irrelevant or because one is unfamiliar with the Hebrew language and literature.

Flusser, Lindsey, and others like them found that many problems with language are understood best through Hebrew, not Greek. Since the German theory of Galilean

Aramaic and the belief of an Israel void of Hebrew, much scholarship in this direction has been done. One first-century Judean example of the value of Hebrew and Greek

13 Marc Turnage, “Historical Backgrounds of the Time of Christ” (phone discussions for doctoral studies, Springfield, MO, and Haverhill, MA, September 10–December 17, 2010).

12 philological studies was found in Peter’s confession of Christ. Many explanations offered on this difficult passage refer to it as a name change for Peter or an insight that he will move from being unstable sand to solid rock. Section 3, “Language Reexamined,” offers a solution to this problem using the three-dimensional approach.

Literature Whose Access Is Scholarly, Scattered, and Static

Most seminaries in the United States offer courses that survey the Old and New

Testament, focusing on individual books of the Bible as well as a heavy load of systematic theology. Courses that focus on the literature outside the Bible as part of a

Biblical studies or ministerial program are not common. Recently I had the privilege of meeting Adolfo Roitman, curator of the Dead Sea scrolls in Israel. He made a statement,

“I was a Rabbi, I became the curator for the greatest archaeological discovery in the twentieth century but had never read the New Testament. After reading it I was amazed at how great of a Rabbi Jesus was.”14 This provoked the question in an opposite direction.

How many Christians could say, “I was a follower of Christ, a pastor or professor, who never read the literature outside the Bible surrounding Jesus and was amazed to see how great of a sage and how much of a product of his environment he really was”?

Texts outside the scope of canon but inside the culture of biblical studies provide a wealth of resources and insights that so many never learn about simply because access to this material is limited or because people are not being trained to see or find its relevance. Some Assemblies of God ministers and parishioners never access this material because its value has never been expressed for lack of access or understanding of

14 Adolfo Roitman, Simulcast of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Springfield, MO: Broadcast by the Center for Holy Lands Studies, www.holylandsstudies.ag.org October 2011).

13 language. Section 3, “Literature Regrouped,” helps in overcoming this problem through the Gospels record of Jesus being accused of breaking the Sabbath.

Images and Resources That Are Scholarly, Scattered, and Static

The ability to close the distance physically for people in relation to places of the

Bible has resulted in people touring the Holy Land but lacking the quality of learning necessary to successfully access the original meaning of the Bible. It is challenging to find literature that engages the world of Jesus and the Bible as it was. The situation also has given rise to resources. This has been problematic for several reasons. First, it has produced massive amounts of visual images of location divorced from scholarship that successfully crosses the distance of centuries of understanding. Second, it has produced resources paired with flawed scholarship that would fall under the categories of problems mentioned above.

Summary of Problem

Crossing the thousands of miles and years that bridge to the biblical world is not simple. It requires one to face the challenge of managing resources. Some works attempt to interpret Jesus solely through theology and ignore the humanity of Jesus embedded in the culture of his incarnation. Anti-Judaism thinking has perpetuated throughout the history of the Church resulting in an evasion of the very culture Christ incarnated into, namely, Judaism. German scholarship, which has significantly influenced and perpetuated its presuppositions into twenty-first-century scholarship, passed the problem forward unchallenged, unnoticed and unchanged. Many people who handle Biblical text

14 had no access to the land or its shape and boundaries in the time when it was written.

This has resulted in misplacing events like the beheading of John or misinterpreting cultural geopolitical and cultural dynamics such as the Galilee prior to and during the time of Christ. Presuppositions of language and literature relevant to the texts go unsearched because access is not possible as a result of lack of possession of resources or ability in translation. Some groups have attempted to bring the land to people through images and to bring people the land through travel, only to partner with information that is unable to cross the chasm of literature, land, and language. This has left a space for someone to merge these unmet needs into a resource that can enhance, enlighten, and engage people interested in studying the biblical world in its first-century setting.

SECTION 2

OTHER PROPOSED SOLUTIONS

An Opening Comment on the Critiques That Follow: Great works should be admired more than critiqued. At the same time, great authors and inventors achieve their success through always asking what could be done better next time. Therefore these evaluations are offered with the highest respect for those who have made the works being discussed and an understanding that some of these projects were not aiming for comprehensive results or even the same goal that this dissertation is attempting to achieve. With this in mind, the following observations are offered, knowing that each of the great men and woman behind these works has accomplished goals I dream to achieve long before I began to envision them. This section is offered out of requirement and with the highest respect and regard, since many are known directly to me or separated by one degree of friendship. I owe a portion of my inspiration and aspiration to each of you and am thankful for the roles you have played. You are a gift to the body of Christ.

A Visual Guide to Biblical Events, edited by James C. Martin.

James C. Martin and his editorial team are amazing scholars with powerful credentials. The work is a composite project of James Martin with John A. Beck (Ph.D.,

Trinity International University), who serves as adjunct faculty to Jerusalem University

College in Jerusalem, Israel, and David G. Hansen (Ph.D., Trinity Theological

Seminary), who serves as the associate professor in the College of Archaeology and

Biblical History at Trinity Southwest University in Albuquerque, New Mexico. He also is

15 16 an academic consultant to the Israel Defense Force and Royal Jordanian Army.15 These are individuals who have an advantage over Western scholars who have not studied or spent significant time in the land. James Martin has been conducting study tours for decades, while John Beck’s education at Jerusalem University College carries a

competence with historical geography and the land. Their

professors at the school consist of Israeli nationals and many

trained by them. David Hansen is a retired colonel with a

distinguished career of published works and participation in

archaeological digs and Middle Eastern study tours. All three

have served in education in seminar or seminary functions.

Strengths of This Work: What is appealing about this

work and others James Martin has produced is the direction of its

aim. This group understands the necessity of studying the Bible

in time, space, and the context of the era in which it happened.

Each of these men values visually engaging readers with scripture through archaeology, history, Bible geography, and cultural nuances. The outline is user friendly, since the events of scripture drive the chronology rather than historical periods such as the Copper,

Bronze, or Iron Age that only experts or well-exposed novices might understand. Eight sections engage biblical events in their scriptural chronology from Genesis through

Revelation. Any individual who has opened the Bible but not a scholastic book would find the table of contents strangely familiar. This gives it the feel of a friend for the newer student of the Bible.

15 James Martin, A Visual Guide to Bible Events: Fascinating Insights into Where They Happened and Why (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2009), back cover.

The visual layout was well thought out. Three ingredients of the visual design are juxtaposed: maps, relevant archaeological artifacts from the authors’ perspective, and live physical views such as geographic regions or people and animal life relevant to the discussion. Communication psychologist Albert Mehrabian, UCLA professor of psychology, is known for the 7-38-55 rule.16 All communications force comes from 7 percent words, 38 percent tone, and 55 percent body language. Most scholarly works place so much emphasis on the printed word that they fail to see its insufficiency to communicate. This book uses images, maps, and artifacts as its body language. This allows the information deeper association. The points the printed words make are powerfully enhanced by their visual associations. It makes the static page leap out.

Areas for Improvement: Although the methodology is to be commended, some aspects of its scholarship reach too far in some directions and not far enough in others. On page 182, for example, the event of Jesus and the disciples in

Caesarea Philippi is discussed. Only Matthew’s account of the event is mentioned. A thorough synoptic methodology should view all the accounts of the Gospels, isolate the differences, and ask why they are different.17 Mark and Luke offer a perspective of the event that might help understanding this section more (Mark 8:27–30; Luke 9:18—21).

16 “Albert Mehrabian,” Wikipedia; available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Mehrabian#cite_note-AM1971-1; accessed 2 January 2012.

17 Wave Nunnally, “Synoptic Gospels” (lecture, Central Bible College, Springfield, MO: Spring, 1992).

The point here is that the other Gospel writers are not consulted at all. The biblical chronology is good for familiarity but could have been better in merging multiple witnesses of events when they exist. Some scholars question that Jesus would ever enter a city like Caesarea Philippi since he was a devout Jew. Herod Phillips’ region was primarily Gentile. He was the only Herodian to mint coins with an image on them.

Matthew mentions that Jesus enters the “region of Caesarea Phillip” (μέρη Καισαρείας

τῆς Φιλίππου), and Mark says the “villages” (εἰς τὰς κώμας Καισαρείας τῆς Φιλίππου·), but none of the accounts suggest the city itself. This might be a place in which scholarship overreaches through assumption.

Historical geography and archaeology are strong disciplines among these authors, but some oversights in literature, language, and archaeology perpetuate some long- standing false assumptions. An archaeological error arises from time to time. One example is found in this section. The team writes, “So it was with Caesarea Philippi, which boasted a worship area dedicated to the Greek idol Pan that shared ground with a marble temple dedicated to the worship of Augustus.”18 The authors are relying on information given by archaeologist John McRay, in his book Archaeology and the New

Testament. He perpetuates the assumption and error that Caesarea Philippi was the location of the temple to Augustus built by Herod the Great. To date, not a single piece of evidence has been excavated at the location to verify this as the site for this temple. The coin of Herod Phillip did bear the image of the shrine, but this does not validate the location. A more expansive look at literature from the time of Herod’s life reveals that the temple was not built in Caesarea Philippi but in the region, which is discussed in the

18 Martin, Visual Guide to Bible Events, 182.

Banias section of the artifact.19 Josephus mentioned three temples that Herod dedicated to

Augustus in Caesarea, Scythopolis (Dothan), and Panias (Banias). The recent discovery of a temple at Omrit supports Josephus’ testimony that Herod built his temple to

Augustus and has been identified as Herod’s Agusteum.

Another area that could improve this great

work is attention to language and literature. Many

points are placed with perfection, but a few seem

misplaced by a seeming lack of knowledge of Jewish

literature and language. These blind spots affect

several conclusions and interpretations. Keeping with the example of Jesus and the disciples at Caesarea Philippi, we see that stronger emphasis on literature and language could have drawn other conclusions. The author writes,

Three qualities of this location seem particularly meaningful with regard to Jesus’s proclamation. Caesarea Philippi was a place of idolatry, the entrance into Hades, and a region associated with political control. Since Mount Hermon (9,232 feet) rises as the dramatic backdrop for Caesarea Philippi, we might expect this spot to sprout worship centers associated with idols . . . Wherever geography limits travel options, political control may be exercised. That was clearly the case with Caesarea Philippi.20

19 One reference in Josephus’ (Antiquities of the Jews xv, 364 ) described the location in detail at the foot of the cave. However, scribal alteration from pilgrim accounts may possibly be at work in this isolated example. Having so many texts refer to the “region” of Caesarea Philippi versus the city along with the discovery of the temple at Omrit seems to suggest otherwise.

20 James Martin, Visual Guide to Bible Events, 182.

The interpretation of James Martin and his co-authors for the passage of Peters confession made their point based on Jesus contrasted against the power and perverse idolatry Caesarea Philippi represented. Many scholars consider this to be one of the top controversial sections of Scripture in biblical studies.21 Archaeology and a closer examination of the Biblical text suggest another possible location for this temple discussed in James Martin’s “Visual Guide to Biblical Events”.

In 1998 a devastating fire consumed the northeastern region of Galilee. “Like many archeological sited, Omrit was discovered by accident.”22

Andrew Overman and Jack Olive (both of Macalester College) that this was a temple complex almost certainly from the Roman imperial period. In 1999 their team uncovered a bright white limestone podium in the building and, in 2000, an older podium buried inside it of ashlar construction reminiscent of Herodian architecture. Not one, but two successive temples had stood on the same spot. Pottery and coins date the earlier temple to the last quarter of the first century B.C. and the later temple to the late first or early second century A.D. The directors now believe that the beautiful imperial public building they have uncovered may be the temple Herod erected in honor of the Roman emperor Augustus in the area of Banias, as chronicled by the Jewish historian Josephus.23

As noted earlier, the Gospels clearly state Jesus visited the “region” and “villages” of

Caesarea Philippi, not the city itself (Mark 8:27–30; Luke 9:18-21). Joseph records

21 Donald A. Hagner, Matthew 14–28, vol. 33B of The Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas, TX: Word Incorporated, 1998), 470.

22 BAR 29:01 (Jan/Feb 2003), ed. Hershel Shanks (Biblical Archaeology Society, 2003).

23 Ibid.

Herod built three temples to his benefactor, Augustus (J.W. i, 403-405). The evidence from material culture partnered with the Gospels broadened the temples location and keeps it from being anchored to Caesarea Philippi. Josephus mentions the construction of the temple in relationship to the cave “near the place called Panion” not in it (Ant. xv,

363). To this day not a single piece of physical evidence for the temple to Augustus has ever been found near the cave while the discovery of the temple at Omrit invites New

Testament writers to reconsider its location.

Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary

This series is an attempt to engage scholastically both novice and noteworthy students of Scripture. Many similarities of approach exist between this and James

Martin’s work, previously mentioned.

Strengths of This Work: The flow of the work in both Old and New Testament studies follows the canonical order, making it user friendly for all levels of students, entry to expert. The extensive and expansive nature of the work is the first of its kind focusing on biblical backgrounds in a commentary fashion. The visuals are a one-of-a-kind collaboration of artifacts, illustrations, and locations throughout the biblical world. The images go beyond other works to rare pictures relevant to the discussions at hand.

The maps are crisp and contain fairly consistent and accurate locations and names. Since this work is published by a major publishing company, it leverages their network to produce high quality in high volume.

The written content takes a step beyond light discussion of biblical passages and engages literature, language, and land in directions that keep up with its title of Bible

Backgrounds Commentary. The collaboration of collective experts is the envy of any editor, especially in the area of graphic editing.

Scholars tend to speak a language levels above laity. Since the twenty-first century is fast becoming an age of language that communicates visually with the culture, it has given scholarship an edge by which to be retranslated and understood by common readers. Reading much of the technical information in scholarship is useless unless the reader already understands or at least has an idea of the subject matter. Visual aids have become a way for scholars to be interpreted and translated for the understanding of those who are engaging this material for the first time. Because the majority of Western theological

seminaries focus on Scripture theologically, a framework of history,

culture, geography, and literature is present in the mind of educated

readers, but on very limited levels. Regardless of the extent to which

these disciplines of study are covered, they tend to be theoretical and

not experiential. Zondervan has brought scholarship, language,

literature, land, and more together in one work.

One of the challenges with scholarly works is that they tend to

be scattered in their delivery of extra-biblical literature. Sources tend

to be cited by references in abbreviated form, but few people know

23 what these abbreviations refer to, let alone where to gather the original sources. Volumes of ancient Near Eastern literature and Jewish works remain in their native tongue, available only to elite philologists. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, scholarship began the work of translation.

Still, although the translations gave people access to the material, the cost placed it out of reach. Even what was translated needed the insight and input of an expert. Zondervan is one of many crossing this threshold.

Although many of the texts in the written version give citations, many pages have quotes and sidebars of translations that bring insight to the biblical text. The strength of this work is the digital form sold by Logos. If the user’s library purchases the many volumes of extra biblical literature available, the source opens when the text is rolled over. It also shares the strength of visual communication that is similar to James Martin’s “Visual

Guide to the Biblical World.” The layout is a strength since the biblical text drives the discussions, not topics or locations.

Areas for Improvement:

It seems unfair to offer a critique on such a great work of scholarship, but all endeavors can go from good to great. This particular work seems to face the same deficit as many other New Testament and Gospel research works in having a blind spot regarding Jewish literature and language.

Unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees (Matthew 5:20).

This may have been Jesus’ most shocking statement, because the Pharisees and

teachers of the law were the epitome of righteousness (dikaiosynē). The Pharisees

(see “Pharisees and Sadducees” at 3:7) were members of a sect that was

committed to fulfilling the demands of the Old Testament through their elaborate

oral tradition. Their scrupulous adherence to the written and oral law was

legendary in Israel, yet Jesus says it did not gain them entrance to the kingdom of

heaven.24

Many New Testament scholars are experts in only one language: Greek. The implications of Hebrew and even the historic etymology of language can be blind spots when considering the use of words surrounding the Bible. Often lexicons limit their analysis to words based on their use elsewhere in the Bible. Words, even in one language, change. An example of this in English would be the word ‘gay.’ Merriam-Webster’s dictionary offers three definitions: merry, bright and lively, and homosexual.25 In

England during the 1600’s, no one associated same-sex attraction with this word; similarly, in the twenty-first-century, Americans do not associate merry, bright, or lively as the first definition that come to mind.

Similarly, righteousness (dikaiosynē) changed its perceived meaning before the life of Christ seen in places like the books of Tobit and Ben Sira. It retained its new definition to the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD. In the time of Jesus, righteousness

24 Clinton E. Arnold, Matthew, Mark, Luke, vol. 1. of Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002), 37–38.

25 Merriam-Webster Dictionary (Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, 2005), 138.

25 and the giving of alms became synonymous. This is seen both in the literature of the

Bible and the pages that surround the Jewish world it was written in. In Judaism the idea of retaining or releasing wealth was associated with Proverbs 10:2: “Ill-gotten wealth is of no avail, but righteousness (δικαιοσύνη), saves from death.”

The Book of Tobit, written during the inter-testamental period, provides an example of the word for righteousness and how it was associated with the giving of alms, although other examples could be stated.

Tobit 4:6–11To all those who practice righteousness give alms from your possessions, and do not let your eye begrudge the gift when you make it. Do not turn your face away from anyone who is poor, and the face of God will not be turned away from you. If you have many possessions, make your gift from them in proportion; if few, do not be afraid to give according to the little you have. So you will be laying up a good treasure for yourself against the day of necessity. For almsgiving delivers from death and keeps you from going into the darkness. Indeed, almsgiving, for all who practice it, is an excellent offering in the presence of the Most High.

The work Ben Sira found in Greek was originally written in Hebrew around 185

BCE.26 In Ben Sira we find the word used in the same manner:27

Ben Sira 29:11–13 Lay up your treasure according to the commandments of the Most High, and it will profit you more than gold. Store up almsgiving (tsadakah) in your treasury, and it will rescue you from every disaster; better than a stout shield and a sturdy spear, it will fight for you against the enemy.

The Tosefta contains sections that were not added to the Mishnah. The word means “addition”, and preserves some of the oral teaching from first-century Judaism.

26 Ben Sira says in his prologue, “despite our diligent labor in translating, we may seem to have rendered some phrases imperfectly. For what was originally expressed in Hebrew does not have exactly the same sense when translated into another language. (Siq. 1:1). Copies in Hebrew were found in three places; The Cairo Geneziah, Qumran (The Dead Sea Scrolls) and fragments from Masada.

27 Marc Turnage, “The Pillars of Jesus’ Faith” (lecture, Center for Holy Lands Studies, Jerusalem, Israel, August 5, 2012).

Although the writings were not selected for inclusion in the Mishnah, they offer a window into first century Jewish thinking.

Tosephta Peah 4:19 Charity and righteous deeds (tsadakah) outweigh all other commandments in the Torah. Nevertheless, charity [can be given only to the] living, but righteous deeds [can be performed for the] living and the dead. Charity [is given only] to the poor people, but righteous deeds [are done for both] poor and rich people. Charity [is given as an aid for a poor person’s] finances, but righteous deeds [aid both a poor person’s] finances and physical needs.

The Jerusalem Talmud also shows the concept still maturing and moving through the mind of Judaism.

Jerusalem Talmud Ta’anit 65b Rabbi Lazarus taught: “Three actions cancel out a harsh decree [of punishment from heaven.] They are, prayer, righteousness [i.e., and repentance. All three are mentioned in one verse ,[צדקה :charity/almsgiving (2 Chron. 7:14): ‘if my people who are called by my name will humble themselves, and pray. . .’ This refers to prayer! ‘ . . . and seek my face,’ This refers to righteousness (i.e., almsgiving), as is proven by Psalm 17:15, where it is said, ‘As for me, I shall behold your face in righteousness.’ ‘. . . and turn from their wicked ways,’ This is repentance [i.e., fasting]! If an individual will do all three, the promise of Scripture is, ‘then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land’ (2 Chron. 7:14).” (y. Ta’anit 65b).

Jesus, likewise, used “righteousness meaning” meaning “charity/almsgiving” as can be seen in his statement, “Beware of practicing your righteousness (δικαιοσύνην) before other people . . . but when you give alms” (Matt. 6:1–2).

Jesus defines alms by righteousness as almsgiving.

We also find the same language as “treasures in heaven” that the rabbis used in Tobit (12:7-11), and

Ben Sira (29:11-13) used in association with alms and righteousness within the teaching of Jesus (Matt. 6:1-4 cf. 6:19-21; Luke 12:33-34). Jesus clearly connects righteousness

(δικαιοσύνην) to alms the same way Tobit, Ben Sira and the Sages were in the first- century BCE-CE.

Matthew 6:1-2 “"Beware of practicing your piety (δικαιοσύνην) before others in order to be seen by them; for then you have no reward from your Father in heaven. 2 "So whenever you give alms, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that they may be praised by others.

Jesus states the “practice of piety” or “righteousness” (δικαιοσύνην) followed by an example of its practice through alms. The two are synonymous as they were with

Tobit, Ben Sira and the Sages.

The point here is not to engage an in-depth language analysis as much as to identify the blind spot of Zondervan’s Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary set.

The treatment of the Old Testament is exceptional. However, it reveals a Western flavor of scholarship that feels that Hebrew or rabbinic literature is not very relevant to the study of the Gospels and Acts. This is probably the largest contributor to misinterpreting these kinds of passages. If something is not seen as relevant, it is not treated that way and so is never explored. The scholars on this team are experts but reveal a blind side to this perspective and therefore do not bring insight to passages where philological studies in

Greek and Hebrew with extra-biblical literature could prove to be the turnkey of interpretation as understood by first-century audiences.

The Holy Land Satellite Atlas, volumes 1 and 2, by Richard Cleave

Richard Cleave was a physician in the Royal British Army. In the early 1970s he settled in Israel, where he did freelance work for Time magazine. While in the land he cultivated friendships with established and upcoming scholars. It was during this time that Richard conceived the idea of a way to bring the physical settings of the Holy Land to the rest of the world. The atlas project contains flat maps and Kodak slide sets in two printed volumes. A DVD flight simulation program with satellite-quality images was merged with his aerial photography in the late 1990’s. Conceptually this work was ahead of its time. Past the age of 70, Dr. Cleave continues to review, reinvent, and revise his work. Currently he is securing a team to update the program to interface with iPads and other similar steps forward in technology. Of all the resources available for a visual experience, this one is well established and used across the globe by experts and amateurs interested in the physical settings of the Holy Land.

Strengths of This Work:

The visuals are by far the greatest contribution of this work to moving historical geography from a static, scattered, and scholarly endeavor to a twenty-first century source of asynchronous and visual study.

The visual strength of this work falls under three sections: photography, cartography, and software.

Photography: As a physician and photographer,

Richard has an uncanny skill at finding the proper angle or view for surgery or surveillance. With the help of the Israel

Defense Force he photographed the land of Israel and the

Sinai Peninsula in exhausting detail from the air. The angles are at altitudes that capture comprehensive regions and the crucial geographic landscape in solid single sweeps. He is an entrepreneur in this field. To date no one has captured the land visually with the same quality. In some ways they never will, since many of the photographs Richard has taken were done prior to the mass industrialization and population of the country. Landscapes capture entire sections prior to excavation by archaeologists or development by construction.

Cartography: The map resolution and quality is satellite imagery from

NASA’s Lands at 5, which is thirty-meter resolution in true color. This is also merged with the French ‘SPOT’ satellite imagery, which is accurate to ten-meter resolution.28 The maps cover the regions from the Bible’s beginnings to Ezra–Nehemiah and from Ezra–Nehemiah to Justinian, with the city names and road routes in existence at the time. The locations of these routes were the contribution of the former Israel Roll, leading expert in Roman roads in Palestine and the region.

28 Richard Cleave, The Holy Land Satellite Atlas, Vol. 1 (Nicosia, Cyprus: Rohr Productions, Ltd. 1999), Pt. 4.

Software: The greatest addition to this series is the digital software entitled 3D

Holy Land Animation CD. This part of the publication merges all aspects of the project: photography, written contributions, and maps.

The one section added is the ability to do flight simulations over Israel. This brought the project into the twenty-first century. Although Google has stunning satellite views, it does not preserve the historic matrix in layers of time relevant to the study of biblical history. One would have to mentally filter the contemporary locations and landmarks, replacing them with the ancient names and roads. A student or novice can view the land prior to ever visiting, or in lieu of a visit. Actual images of the places are welded to the biblical text. It also gives users an advantage many pilgrims do not have, in that it allows them to revisit the land over and over. Although people tend to photograph a trip, they often fail to categorize or classify what they capture or why they captured it. The atlas

has done this for them.

I hold this work in the highest regard.

It is an accomplishment visually second to

none, long before others dreamed of doing

something like this. Prior to this time, text was

the main method of transmission of the terrain.

Gordon Adam Smith’s work The Historical

Geography of the Holy Land described Israel in detail, but without visuals apart from the lithography of David Roberts in 1842. The team of contributors for the atlas included established scholars such as Amahai Mazar and

Ephriam Stern, whereas others were rising, such as James Monson, Roy Hayden,

Waverly Nunnally, and Carl Rasmussen. All are experts and excellent in their own ways.

Areas for Improvement:

The critique of this work is short because of the visual excellence it brings.

However, despite the plethora of professors, its delivery system takes aim at the land geographically, tagging scriptural and extra-biblical literature in condensed sections. The images are meant to speak loudly, with the accompaniment of light scholarship as a background. It is visually driven and text enhanced. It is not that the editorial team was unable to be more text oriented. This critique is slightly unfair in that text was not the aim of the book. The visuals drive the agenda, and rightly so. However, deeper scholarship could take this work to new dimensions.

Another area for improvement is the lack of rabbinic literature. Events are mentioned in summary passages, with occasional ancient Near Eastern texts in small sections, but the Mishnah, Talmud, Tosephta, Targums, and Midrash are rarely used and even border-line missing. Josephus stands as the primary voice, with occasional Greek and Latin authors. Much more could be written with the command of primary sources.

With a visual agenda, the written one of Scripture is displaced. Not that it is dishonored, but since the visuals drive the agenda, the text and its message is used more as a sign on the street to note where the satellite imagery and scenery is steering. Were this project to expand the historical geography of the Old Testament that it already possesses and partner it with New Testament expertise in Judaism and philology, history, and so forth, it would be untouchable. The portability already exists in the software so as to offer an in- and out-of-land engagement.

The only other area for increasing its quality is compatibility of the software. The updates and add-ins advance so rapidly that Rhor Productions seems to have been unable to keep pace with the changes. A preference for the printed page has kept this work from going viral. Its compatibility issues with Macs and tablets cripple its ability to spread in popular use.

In conclusion, the visuals silence much of the competition and opposing voices. It is designed to bring the Holy Land to people if they cannot visit. Visuals were the driving force of this project, and it has kept on task for decades. The writings are presented in summary fashion by experts who seem to be unequaled in the Old Testament, but there is room for expansion in the New Testament. Ancient Near Eastern literature and Josephus season the sections, whereas rabbinic sources are scarce in spots that could secure

Scripture’s message. Technology is the project’s greatest enhancement via the software, yet also its greatest foe since the updates are not keeping pace with the fast-changing interface of software versions or newer products such as tablets and smartphones. Should

Rhor Productions become aggressive in these areas and marketing, it could recapture the market once again as it did while dominating it for so many years.

Biblical Backgrounds

James M. Monson and Steven P.

Lancaster have produced one of the leading resources in historical Bible geography (physical settings of the

Bible). James is one of the original contributors to Richard Cleave’s Holy Land Satellite Atlas series. He is the genius behind

33 the written portions of Richard’s early works. James, having studied and taught in the land of Israel, felt the need to produce a work that made preparation for visiting the Holy

Land more interactive. Although Richard’s work is visually unequaled, James and Steven have produced a preparation program that gives pre-trip familiarization about the individual events of the Bible and how they played out on the state of the physical land where they took place. Both men have extensive time in the land and return regularly to

Israel leading groups or teaching classes on the college level. They are fully qualified as experts in their field.

Strength of This Work:

Their product is a program with pre-trip and on-site tools that ensure travelers are intimately acquainted with the land and its events. The program begins with three tools.

There are seven maps that divide the land into seven regions, moving from the big picture of the Near East to specific focused regions such as the northern, central, and southern arenas. The maps are intended for writing on in tandem with a ninety-eight-page instruction manual called “The Regional Study Guide.” The student is referred to scripture, extra-biblical literature, and a third support resource titled “Regions on the

Run.” This work weaves together historical summaries, timeline placements, and other helpful insights, bringing students to the land geographically and historically before they ever visit. An additional work has been added by Bible Backgrounds titled “Geobasics.”

Its main reason for existing seems to be for on-site use. Since carrying maps around the

Holy Land is highly inconvenient, “Geobasics” forms a simple, easy-to-carry reference guide for the land while standing there.

Areas for Improvement: Like Dr. Cleave’s work, this is a standard in the industry for introducing people to the physical setting of the Bible. Colleges and companies require regional maps in preparation for trips. Whereas the Holy Land Satellite Atlas places heavy emphasis on images, this work is void of pictures in deference to maps. Dialogue and interaction with ancient texts are present, but seem too limited in presentation when entering the world of the New Testament. Those who authored the project have areas of expertise in Old Testament and physical settings of the Bible. Therefore, a deficit is felt in relationship to Jewish literature and insight from the culture, language, and times of

Jesus.

Tedious tasks depend heavily on printed instructions. Students are given a color- coding system and are required to draw lines, boxes, arrows, and highlights in a system purely from the printed page. Students working independently tend to get lost in the meticulous details if a consultant is not accessible.

Scattered instructions make multilayered processing complicated. The student must engage the “Regional Study Guide” while referring back to the regional maps and often flipping to several sections in the “Regions on the Run” booklet. The process tends to become exhausting and confusing, rather than inspiring and enlightening. Over twenty-five hours are required to complete all the steps involved. This can tend to overwhelm people who are not taking a

35 trip for class credit. Rather than giving easy access, it complicates it. The map work is exceptional but void of visuals, and weak interaction with the language and literature that surrounded the New Testament dilutes the work’s strength when it comes to the Gospels and beyond. To their credit, online flash video presentations have been created but are not embedded in any of their productions. One would have to connect to the Internet for this, and still, they are merely dialogues working from their map systems rather than fresh new pictures of the actual places.

SECTION 3: THE THESIS

God’s revelation and the incarnation came in a specific time and place. A large portion of the Assemblies of God pastors, educators, parishioners, and students engage

Scripture with a theological and lexical understanding of the Bible divorced from the literature, land, and language. I claim that providing a resource that crosses the distance of time and space for studying the literature, land, and language and culture of Scripture will not only enhance a trip to the Holy Land but also result in a fuller, richer, and proper understanding and communication of God’s word.

INCARNATION IN HUMANITY FOR THEOLOGY

One of the challenges earlier mentioned, is the under emphasis on the incarnation of Christ in Western religious studies. If theology is the “study of God,” why should its limit be the study of His divinity when His humanity was equally important? The incarnation came in time and space between the cultural construct of first-century Israel.

It was couched and clothed in the culture and religion of Judaism. It invites us to draw closer to Jesus through Judaism with its customs, commands, conversations, and culture because this was the world that enveloped the Son of God. The Chalcedonian Creed is incomplete if we focus on His “full divinity” and pass by his “full humanity.” One example of this is the childhood of Christ. This is an area we often gloss over in order to rush toward His divine teachings, yet a closer look within the Gospel traditions shows

Jesus immersed in the Jewish traditions of family and father–son mentorship. We miss this because of our distance from the time and culture, yet a first-century Jew would have

36 37 seen the indicators of Jesus’ humanity in the life lived in Joseph’s home. This iBook offers a bridge to this world.

Was Joseph a poor, ignorant carpenter, or was there more to this man than meets the eye? Matthew makes a fascinating statement concerning Joseph that our twenty-first- century Western world overlooks. He calls him a “righteous man.” We assume this is solely an adjective of character because he was “unwilling to exposer her [Mary] to public disgrace” (Matt. 1:19). In English and Greek, the title seems to merely provide an adjective or adverb of his character. On the other hand, when conceptually translated to

another quality of Joseph’s spiritual excellence is ,(איש חסדים) Hebrew, ish hesedim possibly revealed. This phrase “righteous man” was also a title for a group of sages known as the Hasidim prior to and during the times of Jesus. They have no collection of their writings but their teachings were preserved in Rabbinic Literature (m. Berachot 5:1,

5; t. Baba Qama 2:6; b. Niddah 38a-b; b. Nedarim 10a; b. Menahot 40b-41a; y. Teramot

8, 4.46b; Tractate Derekh Eretz; and Tanna d’be Eliahu).29 They were cousins to the

Pharisees yet differed in their high value on humanity and action known through miraculous deeds (miracles). The possibility exists that Joseph was a sage. Basing this hypothesis on an isolated word would be speculative, but a closer examination of the childhood and ministry of Christ strengthens this possibility.

Most preaching describes Joseph as a poor carpenter, ignorant but kind hearted.

The Galilee is portrayed as some secluded section of the world, with little to offer in comparison to the metropolitan hubs of education like Jerusalem then or Boston now.

29 Marc Turnage Blog Article “Jesus and the Hasidim Part One. September 28, 2010 http://theshardandthescroll.com/Jesus-and-the-Hasidim-Part -One (accessed September 12, 2013).

Passages such as John 1:46, “Nazareth! Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” could be interpreted as statements of regional bias. Many preach Acts 2:7–8, “Utterly amazed, they asked: ‘Are not all these men who are speaking Galileans? How do we each hear the language into which we were born?’” as an educational judgment rather than in the context of men perplexed by the disciples from the Galilee who were communicating in multiple foreign languages under the baptism in the Holy Spirit. The Galilee was not a linguistic university, but neither was it an uneducated backland of ignorant fools. The historical record strongly suggests the Galilee may have exceeded Judea both in number and ethical quality of sages.30 Joseph may have been one of those “righteous men,” and

Jesus, his son and student.

About My Father’s Business

Luke 2:41–52 provides additional insight into the theory of Joseph as a sage.

41Now every year His parents went to Jerusalem for the festival of the Passover. 42And when he was twelve years old, they went up as usual for the festival.43When the festival was ended and they started to return, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but His parents did not know it.44Assuming that he was in the group of travelers, they went a day's journey. Then they started to look for Him among their relatives and friends.45When they did not find Him, they returned to Jerusalem to search for Him.46After three days they found Him in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions.47And all who heard Him were amazed at His understanding and His answers.48When His parents saw Him they were astonished; and His mother said to Him, “Child, why have you treated us like this? Look, your father and I have been searching for you in great anxiety.” 49He said to them, “Why were you searching for me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father's house?” 50But they did not understand what He said to them. 51Then He went down with them and came to Nazareth, and was obedient to them. His mother treasured all these things in her heart. 52And Jesus increased in wisdom and in years, and in divine and human favor.

30David N. Bivin, “Jesus’ Education,” Jerusalem Perspective, November 1, 1988, 2.

Mary and Joseph, returning from a festival in Jerusalem, realized a day later that Jesus was missing.31 When they come to the temple, Jesus was “sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions” (Luke 2:46). This was a common scene that young men like Jesus would witness and participate in, as seen in rabbinic literature:

Rabbi Ishmael says: “When one brings the second tithe to the Temple, he enters the Chamber of Hewn Stone and sees sages and their disciples sitting and engaging in the study of Torah. The sight inspires him also to study Torah.” (Midrash Tannaim to Deut. 14:23)32

The southern steps of the temple were filled with the dialogues of disciples engaging with their sages, who occasionally recruited new ones. Jesus joined the conversation and dropped the jaws of those present. It is assumed that divine wisdom flowed from His lips. Not denying His divine nature, the possibility this moment of excellence as a reflection of His humanity should not be overlooked. Western theology tends to rush His ability to astound the sages as a manifestation of His divine wisdom.

When Jesus replied to Mary, we only hear “full divinity” in the words “Didn't you know I had to be involved in my father’s affairs?”33 The common assumption is that Jesus was talking about God the Father. If Joseph was a Hasid, this statement possibly referred to

Joseph horizontally rather than His Heavenly father vertically. Although believers would

31 This appears to be negligence but was normal for these events. Shamuel Safrai has given a great presentation on pilgrimage festivals in the Jerusalem Perspective (see note 43). He notes that people would travel in clans. Community was strong. It’s also important to note that Jesus is said to be twelve, the age of manhood or Bar Mitzvah. This is not a toddler, and Mary and Joseph are far from negligent.

32 Shamuel Safrai, “Pilgrimage in the Time of Jesus,” Jerusalem Perspective, November, 1984.

33 Joseph A. Fitzmyer, vol. 28, The Gospel According to Luke I–IX: Introduction, Translation, and Notes, Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008), 443. Fitzmyer notes that although many versions read, “in my Father’s house,” the Greek phrase en tois tou patros mou could also mean “(involved) in my Father’s affairs” or even “among those people belonging to my Father,” if tois were understood as masc. pl., i.e. among the teachers of the Torah. It is not easy to say which is the best sense in the Lucan context.

40 not declare Jesus was born with the ability to do calculus and speak hundreds of languages, interpretation sometimes makes leaps of presumption that the divine nature made all things effortless for Him. As Jesus grew in “wisdom and stature with God and man” He was subject to growth and maturity like any other person. Because Jewish fathers held the responsibility of training their sons, Joseph should be worthy of credit for some of the brilliant moments of Jesus.

Another passage worth reexamining is the offense of the crowd at the Synagogue in Nazareth. The Gospels state the people “were offended” by Him. They asked, “Is this not the son of Joseph, the carpenter’s son?” One could easily conclude this statement as an insult. Perhaps the appearance of his lack of education as the son of a carpenter was their reason for being offended by his teaching. First-century language and culture suggests this may not be as negative a statement as commonly thought.

The culture of the first-century in Israel cultivated excellence in education.

Ignorance was a relative term since education was woven into the fabric of its culture from childhood. Fathers taught their sons Torah and a trade. Josephus and Philo attest to this high value of parental education in early Jewish culture.

Above all we pride ourselves on the education of our children, and regard as the most essential task in life the observance of our laws and of the pious practices based thereupon, which we have inherited. Against Apion 1:60

[F]or all men are eager to preserve their own customs and laws, and the Jewish nation above all others; for looking upon their laws as oracles directly given to them by God himself, and having been instructed in this doctrine from their very earliest infancy they bear in their souls the images of the commandments contained in these laws as sacred. Philo, Embassy 21034

34 Philo of Alexandria, The Works of Philo: Complete and Unabridged, trans. Charles Duke Yonge (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995), 776.

While the western world views carpentry as an average trade, the artisanship of this craft, in the time of Jesus, was viewed as a vocation for the gifted mind. One scholar noted from early Jewish Literature, “If a difficult problem was under discussion, they would ask, “Is there a carpenter among us, or the son of a carpenter, who can solve the problem for us?”35 While the insult is often placed on the pedigree of Jesus and Joseph’s trade, the actual place of offense was in his reading of the scroll and teaching connected to it.

The two great sages Hillel and Shammai were often engaged with questions while working. Shammai, the carpenter, often had a ruler. As discussed earlier, much can be gleaned from the Jewish proverb that said, “Is there a carpenter among us, or the son of a carpenter, who can solve the problem for us?”36 Why seek the carpenter or stoop to his son? The reason is because they most likely were sages. At the very least, they were skilled workers who had an intricate understanding of technical details. Jesus was not only a skilled laborer, He was the greatest sage of all time. Where did He get His teaching that amazed men? His father! And who was that father? Joseph, His earthly father, as much as God His heavenly Father. There was a reason God selected Joseph to raise Jesus. He was a great man who can be underestimated from the lack of what is written, but his influence on all that Jesus said and did, cannot be ignored. Joseph had as much claim to Jesus’ humanity as God the father did to His divinity.

35 David Flusser and R. Steven Notley, Jesus (Jerusalem: The Hebrew University Magnes Press, 2001), 33.

36 J. Levy, Wörterbuch über die Talmudim und Midraschim III (Berlin, 1924), 338.

Jesus’ Education Included Greek

Families taught Greek to their children through supplemental material. An example of this is found in Aesop’s Fables. If unfamiliar with the literature of that time, it would be easy to overlook Jesus’ reference to this work when speaking about John the

Baptist in Matthew 11:7: “What did you go out into the wilderness to look at? A reed shaken by the wind?”

The story of the reed blowing in the wind was contrasted to a sturdy tree. The words of Jesus were an allusion to Aesop’s fable, The Oak and the Reed.

A reed got into an argument with an oak tree. The oak tree marveled at her own strength, boasting that she could stand her own in a battle against the winds. Meanwhile, she condemned the reed for being weak, since he was naturally inclined to yield to every breeze. The wind then began to blow very fiercely. The oak tree was torn up by her roots and toppled over, while the reed was left bent but unharmed.37

The fact that Jesus was versed in this classical story suggests that His education was exceptional. David M. Carr in his work, “An Introduction to the Old Testament: Sacred

Texts and Imperial Contexts of the Hebrew Bible” notes as early as the Hellenistic

Period, Jewish “students would learn the Greek alphabet” and continue the development of their Greek by learning through the use of “Aesop’s Fables.”38 Since He was in the care of Joseph, it can be assumed that His father imparted this value of study to his son.

37 Aesop’s Fables. Translated by Laura Gibbs. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. Pg. 202.

38 David M. Carr. An Introduction to the Old Testament: Sacred Texts and Imperial Context of the Hebrew Bible (West Sussex, UK: John Wiley and Sons Ltd., 2010), 247.

Stages of Jewish Education

To juxtapose today’s education with the Jewish classroom of the first century would be difficult. Torah was central to society, law, and religion, whereas our institutions claim separation of Church and State.39 To understand their world demands an understanding that the Bible was central to the community, life, education, and promotion. This would have been Jesus’ world during the silent years of Scripture.

The Mishnah offers a glimpse into the stages and strategies of education of early

Judaism in Mishnah Avot 5:1:

He would say, “(1) At five to Scripture, (2) ten to Mishnah, (3) thirteen to religious duties, (4) fifteen to Talmud, (5) eighteen to the wedding canopy, (6) twenty to responsibility for providing for a family, (7) thirty to fullness of strength, (8) forty to understanding, (9) fifty to counsel, (10) sixty to old age, (11) seventy to ripe old age, (12) eighty to remarkable strength, (13) ninety to a bowed back, and (14) at a hundred— he is like a corpse who has already passed and gone from this world. (m. Avot 5:21)40

The average child was reading Scripture by age five, the Mishnah by ten, and entering manhood at twelve with Talmudic discussions. The Mishnaic tract mentioned above suggested that the time to wed was at eighteen years of age. Although this was true for the average male, those who showed potential for study were offered the opportunity of becoming a disciple of a sage. If given the privilege to study under the mentorship of a sage, their education would continue until the age of thirty and would become a

39 Shamuel Safrai, The Jewish People in the First Century, Vol. 2 (Fortress Press, 1988), 945.

40 Jacob Neusner, The Mishnah: A New Translation (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1988), 689. This was presented in David N. Bivins Article “Jesus’ Education.” Bivin notes this was potentially 100 years after the time of Christ, but this should not deter us from giving a general perspective of life stages. Rabbinic literature often records written evidence of oral traditions that are much older. One example of this is the naming of Jesus and John the Baptist in the Gospels. This tradition of naming the child at the time of circumcision is first recorded in the Babylonian Talmud, hundreds of years later. Yet the Gospel gives proof that this tradition was in practice much earlier.

This is reflected in Jesus’ life, as recorded in Luke 3:23: “Jesus 41.(תלמדים) ”Talmudim“ was about thirty years old when He began His work.”

The Apostle Paul’s life of celibacy and active Torah study is understood easier as

who was privileged to study with the sage “Gamaliel” yet chose (תלמדים) ”Talmudim“ not to marry at the completion of his education. Joseph may have experienced a similar path of education. While he is present at the early phase of Jesus’ life, his absence from the majority of his ministry suggests the possibility Joseph may have been at or past thirty in the Nativity. He may have married older, whereas women (like Mary) tended to wed in their early teens.

The incarnation that dwelt in the home of Joseph might seem irrelevant if all value is placed in His divinity and none in His Humanity. Joseph and Jesus represent the

Jewish father–son relationship. The cultural cues can be missed if cultural sensitivity is not exercised. The incarnation of Jesus offers profound lessons when it is viewed through the context of first-century families in Israel. Jesus was given to the care of

Joseph and Mary. The maturity and educational excellence reflected in Jesus is a credit to the family God trusted for His development. . The Gospels suggests Joseph was not a random selection but a strategic choice for someone God would trust for the development of His son. Scholastic works are scarce when it comes to the early years of Jesus and His humanity. They rush over the thirty years of preparation rarely pondering the potential lessons embedded in the narrative. Jesus did not incarnate into theology but a family and flesh. Rather than rushing past His humanity to extract theology, there is value in studying the humanity of Jesus for the purpose of fuller and richer theology.

41 Shamuel Safrai, The Jewish People in the First Century, Vol. 2, 965.

Geography Reassessed

Another problem earlier addressed was the misidentification of the Judean wilderness. This is the result of not examining the biblical and historical evidence from a three-dimensional perspective of literature, land, and language as understood in first- century Israel. Having sources and resources still requires a control and critique of them.

The iBook manual “Jesus and His Jewish World” attempts to solve this problem by bringing quality scholarship into one place rather than leaving readers to pursue scattered sources on static delivery systems with scholarly language that is difficult to understand.

Concerning the childhood of John the Baptist, Luke said, “he was in the wilderness until he appeared publicly before Israel’ (Luke 1:80). Since the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls, scholars such as Otto Benz and scroll research member John

Allegro have paired this verse with Josephus’s description of Qumran’s monastic community taking in the children of others to perpetuate the growth of the community.42

The recent series focused on accurate background studies, the Zondervan Bible

Backgrounds Commentary, states, “John appears in the barren desert area east of the

Lower Jordan River.”43 The Baptist is also paired with Qumran based on the shared- theme verse of Isaiah 40:3. The problem with pairing John with Qumran and Perea is that it is based on geographic problems. Dr. Sean Freyne was he wrote an article for Biblical

Archaeology Review titled “Jesus of History vs. Jesus of Tradition.” Despite his

42 Timothy H. Lim, Larry W. Hurtado, A. Graeme Auld, and Alison M. Jack, The Dead Sea Scrolls in Their Historical Context (London: T&T Clark, 2004), 56.

43 Arnold, Matthew, Mark, Luke, 22.

46 credentials, he perpetuates the error of placing John the Baptist in the desert in this widely read publication.44

When Matthew wrote on John the Baptist, we find him in a place called the

“wilderness of Judea,” Matthew 3:1: “In those days John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness of Judea, proclaiming, ‘Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.’”

Scholars such as Alegro or Benz have gone further and placed him with the

Essenes at Qumran during his childhood based on Luke 1:80. Add to this the theme-verse parallel of Isaiah 40:3 between the community and John’s ministry, and the argument seems secure (Isa. 40:3; cf. 1QS viii 12–14; 1QS ix. 19–20).45 Proponents of this view bring attention to the fact that the “Judean wilderness” is hostile; there was only one location in antiquity at which a child could be cared for, namely, Qumran. Josephus mentions that the community forsook marriage but took young children at an early age for discipleship.

Wars ii, 120b:

They neglect wedlock, but select other person’s children, while they are pliable, and fit for learning, and esteem them to be of their kindred, and form them according to their own manners.

44 “Jesus of History vs. Jesus of Tradition,” Biblical Archaeology Review, November/December 2010, 36–47.

45 Florentino Garc a Mart nez and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, The Dead Sea Scrolls, Study Edition (Translations), Vol. 1 (Leiden; New York: Brill, 1997–1998), 89.

Luke 1:80 The child grew and became strong in spirit, and He was in the wilderness until the day He appeared publicly to Israel.

“This is the time for making ready the path to the desert and he will teach them about all that has been discovered that they can carry it out in this moment [and] so they will be detached from anyone who has not withdrawn his path.” 1QS ix 19–20

And when these have become a community in Israel in compliance with these arrangements they are to be segregated from within the dwelling of the men of sin to walk in the desert in order to open there His path. As it is written (Isa. 40:3): In the desert, prepare the way of the Lord, straighten in the steppe a roadway for our God.” 1QS viii 12–14.

As a result, scholars placed the location of John’s ministry and Jesus’ baptism in

Perea on the southeast of Qumran, in Bethany beyond the Jordan, a city now known as

Bathabara.46 However, what seems to be a strong argument can be challenged by ancient geography and language.

To properly locate Matthew’s “Judean wilderness,” we have to first recognize that it is only mentioned in ancient literature in two places. Volumes of scholarship and Bible atlases position it to the east of Jerusalem, and tour guides point to the same region, but this is all based on Matthew 3:1. A second location of the Judean wilderness is suggested by Judges 1:16.

Judges 1:16 16 The descendants of Hobab the Kenite, Moses’ father-in-law, went up with the people of Judah from the city of palms into the wilderness of Judah, which lies in the Negeb near Arad.

A quick look at any Bible atlas will make the problem clear. Arad is in the south of Israel, near Beersheva and nowhere near the Jordan River.47 We need to recognize that a wilderness received its name from a key city adjacent to it (1 Sam. 23:14–15; 23:24–28;

23:29–24:1).

I Samuel 23:14–28 14 And David remained in the strongholds in the wilderness, in the hill country aof the wilderness of bZiph. And Saul sought him every day, but God did not give him into his hand. 15 David saw that Saul had come out to seek his life. David was in the wilderness of Ziph at Horesh.

46 Graham H. Twelftree, “Jesus the Baptist,” Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus, 2009, no. 7, Issue 2, 103-125; 23. This article reads as follows: “From what can be recovered from the sources, John located his ministry, at least initially, in southern Peraea, precisely where the prophet Elijah is said to have appeared (2 Kgs 2.4-11).” A footnote in the article points to other scholars supporting this view. “See Jn 1.28; 3.26; 10.40 and Murphy-O’Connor, ‘John the Baptist and Jesus’, pp. 359–74; Taylor, The Immerser, pp. 42–48. On the wilderness or desert setting of John’s ministry see Robert W. Funk, ‘Wilderness’, JBL 78 (1959), pp. 205–14. As the information is incidental, the Fourth Gospel can probably be relied upon in giving the impression that John the Baptist was not tied to one place but moved around the area: Bethany (John 1.28), Aenon near Salim (3.23) are specifically mentioned.”

47 Negev is the Hebrew word for ‘South.’

1 Samuel 23:24–28 24 So they set out and went to Ziph ahead of Saul. Now David and his men were in the Desert of Maon,a in the Arabah south of Jeshimon.b 25 Saul and his men began the search, and when David was told about it, he went down to the rock and stayed in the Desert of Maon. When Saul heard this, he went into the Desert of Maon in pursuit of David. 26 Saula was going along one side of the mountain, and David and his men were on the other side, hurrying to get away from Saul. As Saul and his forces were closing in on David and his men to capture them, 27 a messenger came to Saul, saying, “Come quickly! The Philistines are raiding the land.” 28 Then Saul broke off his pursuit of David and went to meet the Philistines. That is why they call this place Sela Hammahlekoth.

ESV 1 Samuel 23:29–24:1 29 1 And David went up from there and lived in the strongholds of aEngedi. 1 aWhen Saul returned from following the Philistines, he was told, “Behold, David is in the wilderness of Engedi.”

To be true to the biblical text, John’s ministry needs to be placed in the region of

Arad rather than Perea. What makes this impossible is that the Gospels are clear that the baptisms by John took place in the “Jordan River,” which is nowhere near the

“wilderness of Judea” (Matt. 3:13; Mark. 1:5; Jn. 1:28).

It is necessary to reassess John’s placement in Perea near Qumran. Early writers such as Eusebius claimed that the site was renamed Bathabara. This is the identification of Bethany by Eusebius:

Where John was baptizing, beyond the Jordan. The place is shown where even today many of the brothers still endeavor to receive a bath. (Eusebius Onomasticon 58:18)

This support deteriorates under two pressures. First, the earliest manuscripts of the Bible state “Bethany,” not Bathabara; secondly, Eusebius was simply restating

Origen’s failed attempt to locate the city.48 Eusebius became an unreliable witness for the

48 Anson F. Rainey, The Sacred Bridge (Jerusalem: Carta Publishers, 2006), 350–351.

49 location of John’s baptism.49 The Medaba map, a mosaic found in Jordan, perpetuates the error, placing it in the south. This is understandable because the map makers would have been relying on the traditions of the Byzantine Period.50

The Mishnah also presents challenges with ritual purity and the Jordan River in

Perea. Since the River Yarmuk ran through a Gentile region and poured into the Jordan, the rabbis deemed it unclean, mixed waters (m. Para 8:10).

8:10 A 3. Water of Qarmyon and water of Pugah are unfit, B because they are swamp [miry] water. C 4. Water of the Jordan and water of the Yarmuk are unfit, D because they are mixed water. E What is mixed water? F One suitable [for mixing with ashes] and one unsuitable that were mixed together. G [If] both [sources of water] are fit and they are mixed together, they are fit. H R. Judah declares unfit51

When viewing the evidence, it becomes negligent to place John’s wilderness of

Judea in Perea near Qumran. So where was John baptizing? The region that fits the description best is located above the Sea of Galilee and known as the “upper Jordan.” The

Gospels mention the Jordan River. Locals in the region are familiar with two parts of the

Jordan, upper and lower. Since the rabbis declared the lower water unclean, it forces the location north.

49 Josephus makes a similar location error when placing John in prison at Herod the Great’s fortress of Machaerus (Ant. xviii, 119). Herod Antipas had just divorced his wife to marry his brother’s. The wife he sent away was the Nabatean princess of Aretas. Machaerus was under the control of the Nabatean king. Why would Herod celebrate so close to the disgraced father-in-law, let alone the “leaders of the Galilee” (Mark 6:21)? Tiberius was Herod Antipas’ Galilean capital and most likely where John was imprisoned and beheaded.

50 Turnage, “The Wilderness of Judea” (lecture, George Fox University, Springfield, MO, June 7, 2011).

51 Jacob Neusner, The Mishnah: A New Translation (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1988), 1026.

This forces further explanation of the “wilderness.” How can John the Baptist be placed in the north if there was no desert? To answer that properly requires a Hebrew understanding of the term. For the Western mind, a wilderness is always the image of sand and sun. In the East, there are gradations of ‘deserts’ or ‘wildernesses’ seen in the different uses of the word by both Greek and Hebrew writers. A Hebrew wilderness

can be an uninhabited pastureland.52 The Greek word (מדבר) ’known as a ‘Midbar

Matthew chooses for “wilderness” is identical: “ἔρημoς” (Matt. 3:1). The concept of

‘wilderness’ is perceived as an uninhabited pastureland from the story of the demoniac, where the demon drove him into ‘the wilds’ (Luke 8:29). The region in this story was located along the northern edge of the Sea of Galilee.

29 [F]or Jesus had commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the man. (For

many times it had seized him; he was kept under guard and bound with chains and

shackles, but he would break the bonds and be driven by the demon into the

wilds.)

Matthew also described Jesus in the Galilee withdrawing to pray in a desolate or solitary place, using the same Greek word (Matt. 14:13):

NRS Matthew 14:13 Now when Jesus heard this, He withdrew from there in a boat to a deserted place by himself. But when the crowds heard it, they followed Him on foot from the towns.

In the end, Matthew’s “wilderness of the Judea” seems to be a title of his own creation to associate John with the fulfillment of Isaiah 40:3, “A voice cries out: "In the wilderness prepare the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our

God.” This is seen in his audience. Luke refers to the people as “the crowds” John

52 Turnage, “The Wilderness of Judea.”

51 encountered as he went “went into all the region around the Jordan” (Luke 3:3).”

Matthew and Mark identify them specifically as “the people of Jerusalem and all Judea”

(Matt. 3:3 cf. Mark 1:5). The Audience is reflective of the people Isaiah spoke to when he was based in Jerusalem. Matthew is using “The Wilderness of Judea” as a toponym to associate the ministry of John who fulfilled Isaiah’s cry of Isaiah 40:3. This makes sense when considering the impossibility of geographically placing the Judean wilderness and

Johns Baptism above the Dead Sea and below the Sea of Galilee.

The geographic and literary problems this were most likely not felt by the first- century readers. It did create problems for people foreign to the region, however, such as

Origen and Eusebius, as they attempted to reconstruct the story. The problems of language are solved when the term ‘wilderness’ is not simply viewed as a desert of sand and sun but simply as an uninhabited pasture land (Matt. 14:13; Luke 8:28 cf. Matt. 3:1).

Partner this with the unclean nature of the lower Jordan and a second location option of the “upper Jordan,” and the location becomes clear. John was baptizing throughout the region of the upper Jordan River, where Jesus and the majority of His ministry was based.

Language Reexamined

One of the challenges between the twenty first century reader and the Biblical world is language. Translation can be problematic because even within a single language, words can change their meanings through the years. It is also important to recognize the role of imported words from other languages. What complicates things even more is when there are three or more languages converging. This was the situation during the first

52 century when the Gospels were written. The literary and epigraphic sources suggest there was a tri-lingual (Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic) community in the Galilee region.53

Modern interest in the Aramaic language arose with the “discovery” of Aramaic- speaking churches during the sixteenth century.”54 The earliest expositions on the subject were written by de Rossi (1772) and Pfannkuche (1798).55 In 1894, the subject was re- engaged by the German scholars Gustaf Dalman and Theodor Zahn. Dalman and Zahn believed that Aramaic was the language of the Galilee during the time of Jesus. “By the end of the nineteenth century this belief had almost reached the status of infallibility.”56 It was for this reason the word “Hebrew” in the New Testament, as well as the writings of

Josephus and Philo were believed to have been always in reference to the Aramaic language.57

To be fair, these early scholars based their observations on limited resources.

They had no knowledge of the Dead Sea Scrolls or the Cairo Genizah. The Bar Kochva letters and Nahal Hever documents were still undiscovered. The Targum Neofiti and

Hebrew fragments of Ben Sira had not been found and the epigraphic evidence was

53 Marc Turnage. “The Linguistic Ethos of the Galilee within the First Century C.E.” Pre- published research, (Springfield, MO, 2010), 5.

54 Guido Baltes, “Hebrew or Aramaic? Some Evidence from Inscriptions.” Jerusalem Perspective. November 28, 2008.

55 Ibid.

56 Guido Baltes, “Hebrew or Aramaic? Some Evidences from Inscriptions.” Dalman popularized the early throughts of Avraham Geiger (1845), the German-Jewish reformer. Geiger was the one to claim Hebrew was no longer a spoken language.

57 One of the world class Aramaic scholars, Joseph A. Fitzmyer conceded that “…the way in which claims are sometimes made for the Aramaic substratum of the sayings of Jesus, when the evidence is merely, “Semitic” in general, or, worse stille, derived from some other Semitic language, e.g. Hebrew, should no longer be countenanced.” Found in Joseph A. Fitzmyer, “The Study of Aramaic Background of the New Testament” (1975), reprinted in Joseph A. Fitzmyer, A Wandering Aramaean: Collected Aramaic Essays (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1975), 5.

53 minimal to say the least.58 “Even today many New Testament scholars do not regularly read archaeological journals and excavation reports or follow the trail of linguistic studies.”59 Unfortunately, there are few comprehensive surveys of the evidence available in scholarly literature, including relevant inscriptions and documents.60

Dr. Guido Baltes notes:

Of the 2,142 inscriptions and documents catalogued… a total of 146 can clearly be identified as being written in Aramaic, while a total of 200 can be identified as being written in Hebrew. If we count only those that can be dated to the Second Temple period, the ratio will be 116 Aramaic texts to 137 Hebrew texts. These are not absolute numbers, of course, since there is a significant overlap between some of the catalogues. However, the overall ratio of Aramaic to Hebrew does not change.61

Contrary to the popularized view, the physical evidence suggests, “We cannot speak of a predominance of one language over the other.”62 No doubt Aramaic was the

58 Guido Baltes, “Hebrew or Aramaic? Some Evidences from Inscriptions.”

59 Ibid.

60 Baltes, Guido offers the following detailed sources available:

The most recent comprehensive catalogue of Jewish epigraphic material, the Corpus Inscriptionum Judaicarum, dates back to 1952.A more recent project, the three-volume Inscriptiones Judaicae Orientis covers all of the Mediterranean, but has left out the Land of Israel in view of the upcoming Corpus Inscriptionum Iudaeae Palaestinae. The projected number of inscriptions and documents in the CIIP is about 10,000, compared to 533 in the CIJ. This gives us some idea of how vastly things have changed since the time of Dalman. It should be noted, though, that the CIIP also will include material from Jordan and the whole Arabian Peninsula. For the time being, therefore, we are forced to rely on older catalogues and less comprehensive collections of Jewish material. Coming to our aid is a catalogue of 897 ossuaries compiled by L. Y. Rahmani. This catalogue is of great importance since ossuaries can be dated roughly to approximately 100 B.C. to 100 A.D. Since 1994, more than 200 additional ossuaries have been discovered, many of which have been published in a variety of publications. To these belong the ossuaries from the Caiaphas tomb in Talpiyot, from Mount Scopus, Giv’at Shapira, Akeldama,multiple sites in the Galilee, and ossuaries in the catalogue of the German Protestant Institute in Jerusalem. Other important collections of epigraphic material are those from the excavations of Masada, the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem and the City of David. The inscriptions from the Beth Shearim necropolis, only partly contained in CIJ, were later published completely in the official excavation reports, and are included in the statistics below. We also can add the papyri and letters from the Judean desert included in the Discoveries in the Judaean Desert series.

61 Ibid.

62 Ibid.

54 international language of trade dating from the Persian period. It was a competitor with

Greek as the West was rising. Today, English spans the globe, whereas tomorrow,

Chinese may potentially dominate. The fact is that international languages for commerce, politics, and trade have always been dynamic. Some Roman officials who served in the land of Israel learned Aramaic to converse with Jews in that language. However, the role of Aramaic in everyday life should not be overestimated. 63

Guido Baltes further noted:

A slight preference for Hebrew can be seen in religious contexts, while a slight preference for Aramaic can be seen in economic and administrative contexts; however, neither to the exclusion of the other… One should also note the inscriptions of Jewish coinage… the inscriptions of all Jewish coins from the Second Temple Period, with only one exception, are in Hebrew.64

Targums are Aramaic translations of the Hebrew Scriptures. Shmuel Safrai, a former Professor of Hebrew University, pointed out the Torah and the Prophets were sometimes translated into

Aramaic for the uneducated or missional intentions of reaching those unfamiliar with Hebrew.65

“…and he translates [into Aramaic] so that the rest of the people, and the women and children, will understand it” (Tractate Soferim 18:4).

While there is evidence of Aramaic translations, its provocative lack of physical evidence in Israel during the Second Temple period should be noted. Hebrew University Professor

Randall Buth, reminds the scholarly community that despite the massive cache of

63 Shmuel Safrai, “The Spoken Languages in the Time of Jesus” The Jerusalem Perspective, January 1, 2004.

64 Guido Baltes, “Hebrew or Aramaic? Some Evidences from Inscriptions.”

65 Shmuel Safrai, “The Spoken Languages in the Time of Jesus” The Jerusalem Perspective, January 1, 2004.

55 discovered material from Qumran, the only material written in Aramaic that have been accounted for are two copies of Job, fragments of Leviticus 17, and four copies of

Tobit.66

In some early Jewish literature Aramaic words are used in association with the Temple administration, the majority of language relating to daily every day life and the statements of the

Temple officials were almost always in Hebrew.67

To date all inscriptions found in the Temple area were Hebrew with the exception of two in Greek that warned Gentiles passing the Balustrade took their life into their own hands.68

The Dead Sea Scrolls reveal that Hebrew was alive and well in first-century Israel

. Scholars depending on pieces of evidence to support an Aramaic dominance in first- century Israel seem to ignore the fact that the majority of texts discovered at Qumran were not written in Aramaic, but in Hebrew.

We will find that first-century Scripture use was anchored directly in the Hebrew Bible in the land of Israel. This is certain at Qumran, very probable for the synagogue, for Pharisaic literature and the Gospels. Extensive, direct Hebrew scripture use needs to be our working paradigm for the first century. This paradigm can help gospel studies and synagogue studies regain a proper focus. 69

66 Randall Buth. “Where is the Aramaic Bible at Qumran? Scripture use in the Land of Israel.” Jerusalem Perspective, January 1, 2004.

67 Shmuel Safrai, “The Spoken Languages in the Time of Jesus.”

68 Ibid.

69 Randall Buth. “Where is the Aramaic Bible at Qumran? Scripture use in the Land of Israel.”

Some scholars note that in the Gospels, such as Matthew and Luke, Hebrew idioms are preserved behind the Greek text. Partner this with the fact that no overwhelming physical evidence for Aramaic dominance existed in the Galilee prior to the Bar Kokvah revolt of 135 CE, an Aramaic Jesus should be reconsidered. The iBook

“Jesus and His Jewish World” offers an occasional examination of issues related to language.

Literature Regrouped

Language is a bearer of culture and can provide a matrix of understanding for interpretation.70 Idioms, ideas and ideals are woven into the fabric of a culture, its literature enhances with insight and understanding. Jewish literature offers a rich perspective of Jesus and His Jewish world and contained in the Gospels are shards of

Hebrew and Jewish cultural perspectives. The shared language, religious matrix and culture stand out. Individuals familiar with works like the Mishnah, Tosefta, Talmud’s and Midrash cannot but notice the genius of Jesus as He wielded the early Jewish concepts like a master sage. The statement of Jesus about the Law in Matthew is a great example of the value extra-biblical literature offers for Gospel studies.

Matthew 5:17–20 “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish, but to fulfill. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. 19 Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”

70 Marc Turnage. “The Linguistic Ethos of the Galilee within the First Century C.E.” Pre- published research, (Springfield, MO, 2010), 3-4.

An English reader might misinterpret that Jesus’ words intended to end the law.

David Bivin notes that much of the misunderstanding with this passage is due to language. The Hebrew idioms behind the Greek language clearly reveal what Jesus meant by these words.71 Christ corrects the crowd: His intention was not to “abolish” or

“destroy” the law, but to “fulfill it.” The Hebrew word for this Greek sentiment is

This was a concept used by the rabbis in debate. When one .(לבטל) ’lavtal,’ or ‘uproot‘ teacher started a new tradition, fellow rabbis thought it to be undermining or “uprooting” a former decision of interpretation. This word and idiom is seen throughout the

Mishnah.72

m. Pes. 6:2 R. Eliezer then said to him: “Aqiba! wouldst thou then annul/uproot ”[?]what is written in the Scriptures,(לבטל) an entire (לבטל) ”m. Horayoth 1:3 If the court gave a decision “uprooting principle [in the law.]

In short, Jesus was declaring that his intention was not to nullify or uproot the former rulings of the law, but to “fulfill” them. The Mishnah also conveys this sentiment.

m. Avot 4:11 Each individual who fulfills the Torah in the midst of poverty, shall in the end fulfill it in the midst of wealth. But each individual who ‘cancels’ the Torah in the midst of wealth shall in the end cancel it in the midst of poverty.73

The word ‘fulfill’ also conveys a sentiment in Judaism that meant “to sustain by proper interpretation.”74 Young points out that only Mishnahic Hebrew uses these words

71 David Bivin, “‘Destroy’ the Law,” Jerusalem Perspective, March 31, 1988, 2. This article gets into details concerning where the Hebrew behind the Greek has caused much of the confusion.

72 Ibid.

73 Young, Meet the Rabbis, 43.

74 Bivin, “‘Destroy’ the Law,” 3.

58 in this fashion. In his opinion, and the opinion of this writer, Matthew 5:17 and Romans

3:31 show us that Mishnaic Hebrew was a living language in the first century.75 If Bivin is correct, we can read Jesus’ statement as follows.76

Literal Translation of the Hebrew Reconstruction: “Do not think that I have come to uproot the former rulings of the Torah [the five books of Moses] and the Prophets [the second section of the Hebrew canon]? I have not come to cancel, but to sustain them by proper interpretation.”

His feelings on the matter are so strong that he affirms that not so much as the smallest letter or even artistic line in the writing of the Hebrew Torah will pass away:

Matthew 5:18 18 “For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter will pass from the law until all is accomplished.”

The Greek words for ‘one letter’ and ‘one stroke of a letter’ are both the smallest Hebrew letter in the alphabet, the ‘yod,’ and the optional smallest decorative stroke on the letter called the ‘kots’, the horn. 77 That is language firm enough to understand that Jesus is not in opposition to the law but in harmony with it. Another piece of Jewish literature shows the same concept when a story is told of Solomon violating or “uprooting” the Torah.

Deuteronomy 17 is known as the law of the king. Israel’s leader was not to multiply to himself horses (chariots), wives or silver and gold. In this passage that follows Solomon

75 Young, Meet the Rabbis, 43.

76 Bivin, “‘Destroy’ the Law.” The first quotation is directly from the article. The second is a construction of this author that merges pieces of information provided within David Bivin’s writing.

77 Bivin, “‘Destroy’ the Law,” Jerusalem Perspective, March 31, 1988, 3. (Footnote 3). David Bivin gives great detail. The yod was usually written with a tiny horizontal line on the top left, the ornamental spur added to some Hebrew letters. This decoration was called a kots, which means “thorn.” In Greek, kots was translated by the word keraia, literally, “horn,” which was in turn rendered “tittle” by the translators of the King James Version. In Jesus’ day, the kots was not horizontal, as in printed modern scripts, but angled down and to the left like a fishhook or the barb of a thorn—for this reason, it was called a thorn in Hebrew. The kots often was as long as the yod itself. (See illustrations above of the yod and the lamed, with and without a kotz.)

59 removes the letter yod to change the meaning of the word “not multiply” to permit violating the Torah. The letter yod pleads his case to God:

Even if all the nations of the world gather together to uproot one word of the Torah, they would be powerless to accomplish it. How do we learn this? From Solomon because of his attempt at uprooting one letter of the Torah the accusation was brought against him. Who presented the accusation against him? . . . [T]he letter yod of the word yarbeh, “he multiplied.” Rabbi Simeon [ben Yochai] taught: The Book of Deuteronomy ascended and prostrated itself before the Holy One, blessed be He, saying to Him, “King of the Universe, Solomon has uprooted me and made of me an invalid document. After all, since a document out of which two or three letters are void is entirely invalid. King Solomon sought to uproot the letter yod out of me. It is written, ‘He should not multiply (lo yarbeh) horses to himself’ (Deut. 17:16), but he has multiplied horses to himself. It is written, ‘Neither shall he multiply wives to himself’ (Deut. 17:17), but he has multiplied wives to himself. It is written, ‘Neither should he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold’ (Deut. 17:17), but he has multiplied silver and Gold to himself.” The Holy One, blessed be He, answered, “Go! Solomon will be canceled and a hundred like him, but not even a single yod that is in you shall ever be canceled.” (Leviticus Rabbah 19:2)78

Jesus even affirms the legal authority of the Pharisees to His disciples by saying,

“The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat; 3 therefore, do whatever they teach you and follow it” (Matt. 23:2–3). It seems odd that Jesus would bother to affirm the authority of the Pharisees and Oral Torah yet advocate abolishing the entire system at the same time. It begs the question, “Are we interpreting the words of Jesus correctly?”

If one reads the synoptic Gospels through the lens of first-century Judaism, it becomes clear that Jesus was a faithful, law-observant Jew.79 The knee-jerk reaction

Western Christians have is to challenge that claim. There is not enough space to cover this topic exhaustively, but another example will hopefully open minds to the way we

78 Young, Meet the Rabbis, 44.

79 David Flusser, The Sage From Galilee: Rediscovering Jesus’ Genius (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2007), 35.

60 have viewed this subject. This would be when the disciples are plucking grain on the

Sabbath (Matt. 12:1–8; Mark 2:23–28; Luke 6:1–5).

Plucking Grain on the Sabbath:

It is important to note that in all three Gospels the disciples, not Jesus, were grabbing grain (Matt. 12:1; Mark 2:23; Luke 6:1). It was common for rabbis to live by a higher standard.80 Jesus here may have been avoiding the appearance of dispute by not joining in the grain grabbing. The conflict was based on the oral Torah’s ruling for acceptable and unacceptable work on the Sabbath (m. Shabbat 7:2).

m. Shabbat 7:2 2 The principal acts of labor (prohibited on the Sabbath) are forty less one—viz.: Sowing, plowing, reaping, binding into sheaves, threshing, winnowing. . . In the time of Christ, a division existed between the Judean rabbis and the sages of Galilee.

The Galilean sage R. Judah ruled in approval of what the disciples did, but the Judean school did not.

“And he may break it with his hand and eat of it, on condition that he not break it with a utensil. And he may crush it and eat it, on condition that he not crush a large quantity with a utensil,” the words of R. Judah. (b. Shabb 128a)81

Jesus clearly fell in with the Galilean ruling. The question then becomes, “Why then did Jesus claim lordship over the Sabbath?” What appears to be Jesus trumping the traditions does not keep with Matthew 5:17–18 and his promise not to abolish the law.

80 Marc Turnage, “Jesus and the Law” (lecture, Center for Holy Lands Studies, Jerusalem, Israel, August 4, 2012).

81 Jacob Neusner, The Babylonian Talmud: A Translation and Commentary, Vol. 2 (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2011), 592. Rabbi Judah in this passage was from the Galilean school of ruling. His opinion differed from the Judean sages, who felt that rubbing for grain was still a violation of Sabbath laws. This was in dispute in the days of Jesus and therefore not a violation of any codified ruling that he would have ‘uprooted’ by his words.

The question to ask here is who the title “Son of Man” is referring to. This phrase had several meanings. Jesus employed them all. One is a phrase used to speak of humanity.

Ezekiel is the best example of this phrase used for humans. It appears over 93 times in his book (e.g., Ezk. 2:1; 3:1; 4:1; 5:1).82 The second use is for the Passion predictions in the Gospels. This is in connection with His coming suffering. This language begins after the Mount of Transfiguration, where His glory is revealed and imminent suffering is drawing near (Matt. 17:12, 22; Mark 8:31).83 The third refers to an eschatological future figure in rabbinic Judaism who will judge the earth in righteousness (Matt. 19:28).84 The question at hand is, which of these definitions was Jesus intending His listeners to think

He meant? The answer is found in the points Jesus uses for illustration.

Jesus says, “[H]ave you not read what David did when he and his companions were hungry?” (Matthew 12:3; Luke 6:3) He notes that the human need of David and his companions superseded the ceremony of the Law. Next he mentions that “the priests in the temple break the Sabbath and yet are guiltless” (Matt. 12:5). He puts the whole rationale of the argument on the human needs of hunger and practical function superseding slavery to the law. After the illustration of the priests, He says, “one greater than the temple is here” (Matt. 12:6). Who was greater than the temple that was there?

82 Ezekiel 2:1 “Now you, son of man, listen to what I am speaking to you.” Ezekiel 3:1 And he said to me, “Son of man, eat whatever you find here. Eat this scroll, and go, speak to the house of Israel.” Ezekiel 4:1 “And you, son of man, take a brick and lay it before you, and engrave on it a city, even Jerusalem.” Ezekiel 5:1 “And you, O son of man, take a sharp sword. Use it as a barber's razor and pass it over your head and your beard. Then take balances for weighing and divide the hair.”

83 Matthew 17:12 “So also the Son of Man will certainly suffer at their hands.” Matthew 17:22 “The Son of Man is about to be delivered into the hands of men.” Mark 8:31 And He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes and be killed, and after three days rise again.

84 NAS Matthew 19:28 And Jesus said to them, “Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”

The disciples, the human beings who did something as practical as priests on the Sabbath and David’s men in need. Since we know Jesus did not rub the grain, it is clear the comment is not reflective of his actions, but of those of his disciples.

Western theology wants to rush toward the messianic title, but at the expense of the powerful lesson Jesus is trying to teach, namely, that law gives way to human need.

Matthew 12:6–8 6 “I tell you, something greater than the temple is here. 7 But if you had known what this means, ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless. 8 For the Son of Man is lord of the Sabbath.”

Notice the example Jesus uses to connect the “something greater than the temple” and the “Son of Man” who is “lord of the Sabbath.” It is the verse from Hosea demanding people be the point of piety. The Western church views Judaism as an inflexible, legalistic religion. This misapprehension is fed by our failure to fully understand the people and community that Jesus incarnated into. A Jewish Midrash titled Mekhilta De-

Rabbi Ishmael dating to the time of Christ shows that saving and caring for life always supersedes law. It is one of many examples that reveal that Judaism had a flexibility that said, “Life gives way to law.”

Mekhilta De-Rabbi Ishmael on Exodus 22:1–3 If a Thief Be Found Breaking In, etc. With what case does this law deal? With a case where there is doubt whether the burglar came merely to steal or to kill as well. You interpret it as dealing with a case where there is doubt whether the burglar came merely to steal or to kill as well. Perhaps this is not so, but it deals with a case where there is doubt whether he came to steal or not? You must reason: If even in the case where he actually steals the owner of the house is guilty of murder if he kills him, all the more so should the owner be guilty if he kills him in the case where there is doubt whether he came to steal or not.—From this you can draw a conclusion with regard to the saving of life. Since even shedding of blood, which defiles the land and causes the Shekinah to remove, is permitted in disregard of the doubt, all the more should saving of life be done in disregard of any doubt.85—Hence it is

85 The passage marked off by dashes is a sort of parenthetical remark and interrupts the argument. It assumes that the law here deals with a case in which there is doubt whether the burglar came with the

impossible for you to interpret it as in the latter version, but you must interpret it as in the former version—it deals with a case where there is doubt whether the burglar came merely to steal or to kill as well.86

In Jesus’ example, He combines the human need of David’s men to eat when fleeing from Saul as well as the daily need of the priests for practical life (1 Sam. 21:1–9; cf. 2 Chron. 23:4). Life gives way to law. He didn’t even need this line of logic, since the dispute was not over a ruling of the Law but merely a difference of opinions debating the details. Clearly Jesus and his disciples did not violate Sabbath or make a call to “uproot” it. He was saying that the needs of humans supersede law. The example from Mekhilta

De-Rabbi Ishmael shows the flexibility in Jewish thinking we miss since our focus is not on Jewish literature, but theology. The Son of Man and one greater than the temple is the human being in need. The Jewish rulings on these matters help us understand that Mark’s contribution is less about legalism and more about lordship that values people over propositions.

Mark 2:27–28 27 Then He said to them, “The Sabbath was made for humankind, and not humankind for the Sabbath; 28 so the Son of Man is lord even of the Sabbath.”

Jesus did not destroy, uproot, or abolish the law and Sabbath; He kept it. Jesus had more in common with the synagogue than the twenty-first-century sanctuary. Most misunderstanding of this passage is caused by a misguided handling of the text as a result of not knowing the first-century culture and language that Jesus incarnated into. Jesus upheld the law. intention to kill. Although there the owner is in doubt whether his life would be endangered, he may, nevertheless, as a measure of self-protection, kill the burglar. All the more should the work of saving life, even when involving the violation of a ritual law like the Sabbath, be permitted, although there be doubts as to its success in actually saving life.

86 Jacob Zallel Lauterbach, Mekilta De-Rabbi Ishmael, New ed. (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 2004), 426.

SECTION 4

ARTIFACT DESCRIPTION

This artifact is an iBook titled “Jesus and His Jewish World.” It is intended to be used as a tool for pre- and post-trip development for academic tours to the Holy Land.

The outline is driven by the tour locations and chronology, and covers events and subject matter relevant to the locations that participants visit. The expectation is to create a three- dimensional experience both visually through technology and scholastically through a unique discipline of hermeneutics found in the literature, land, and language, in the time and space of events when and where they occurred. Most importantly, this artifact is intended to enhance the user’s comprehension and bring deeper insight into the Scriptures and events they are exposed to, connecting the material so that it translates into one’s personal faith and teaching, providing deeper meaning for those who participate in the tour and offer an experience for those who do not have the opportunity to visit the Holy

Land.

64 SECTION 5

Artifact Specifications of the Written Statement

Goals and Strategies:

The goal of this artifact is to produce an iBook that engages a three-dimensional

study of the literature, language, and land of the Bible for those traveling or

desiring to travel to Israel on the “As One With Authority” trip. Apple allows

authors to present a prepublication version of an iBook. This has been used to

assess the product on an ongoing basis. A prepublication version will be

submitted for grading and additions. A public publication is the long-term goal

after expanding some sections. The long-term success of the artifact will be

measured by feedback as ministers and parishioners use the product for pre- and

post-trip interaction. Students at Northpoint Bible College will also use the book

and provide ongoing helpful feedback for continual improvement and increased

success. Updates and revisions will give way to new versions with expansions and

additions over the years.

Audience:

The primary audience for this artifact are pastors, professors, and students in the

Assemblies of God who are considering travel to the Holy Land through the

Center for Holy Lands Studies. This artifact is a twenty-first-century tool for

people to experience the Holy Land and the biblical world in context before and

after travel. The hope is to increase the quality of understanding and experience

from being able to engage topics in preparation or reflection beyond the

traditional Gutenberg system of the printed page.

65 66

The user of this product will be interacting with literature, language, and land

issues often missed by Western resources. The hope is for a synthesis of the

experience that results in deeper and clearer communication of the Scriptures in

tandem with the experience of the trip. Instead of collecting a package of pictures

that drift from memory, the iBook allows users to revisit and reflect on the

learning presented on the “As One With Authority” trip.

Artifact Scope and Content:

This artifact is an iBook outlined by the physical locations of the Holy Land Tour

titled “As One With Authority.” It is constructed in iBook Author and requires an

updated iBook author app to function. An iTunes account and device capable of

running iBook reader is required.

Budget:

The budget for this project is free. Apple requires 30% of all profit, but since it is

not a printed publication, no production fees are required.

Promotion:

Marketing will be done through Apple iTunes, the Center for Holy Lands Studies

website and trips, Facebook, Twitter, and web pages

(www.holylandsstudeis.ag.org; www.northpoint.edu; www.paulconway.info).

Standards of Publication:

The standard for publication is embedded within iBook Author. Widgets for

slides, images, video, and other creative interactions are all provided by the

company. The author possesses thousands of photographs and video segments to

fill this resource to capacity.

Action Plan: Consult, Outline, Gather, Create, Edit, Refine, Expand, Edit, Submit.

Strategy for Dissertation Development

1. Marc Turnage, Ph.D. (Chief Advisor) 2. John Berquist (Technology Advisor) 3. Melissa Salinardi (Editorial Team) 4. Sahmra Plank, Diana Conway and Cindy Cogaurt (Editorial Team) 5. One on One Apple Team (Technology Assistance) 6. Mike and Tamara Panza (Photography and Visual Advisor) 7. Jennie Finkle (Digital Graphics for Video and Pictures) 8. Rev. Andrew Murch (Homiletical Assistant) 9. Darren Dougherty, Ph.D. (Educational and Editorial Advisor) 10. Kate DeMello, Ph.D. candidate (Editorial and Educational Assistant) 11. Ray Hendrickson, CEO of Hendrickson Publishing 12. Consultation Team who have participated in past trips to the Holy Land

Key Dates, Big Picture for Strategy

1. June: a. June 1st, Work: All Syllabi due for the Academic Deans office. b. June 2nd. Meet with Andrew Murch in Vancouver WA to consult, strategize and schedule bi-monthly meetings. c. June 5-20 i. Registrar for DMIN 550 for Dissertation. ii. Review Graduation Schedule for the Spring https://foxfiles.georgefox.edu/SEM/DMin/diss/schedules/Spring13 _grad_schedule.htm iii. Solidify delivery system for dissertation and facets (Homiletical, Field Manual etc). iv. Contact all Advisors and Assistants. 1. Request their participation. 2. Frame their participation. 3. Dialog and Consult. 4. Schedule bi-monthly meetings. v. Create hard copy files for articles and bibliography. vi. Create digital copy of files for articles and bibliography. vii. Gather and archive articles for student research. viii. School. Ramp up material for Israel classes. ix. Family/Personal: Quality family time before leaving for 5 weeks. 1. Mt. Manadnok. 2. Camping in Tree House. 3. 3-4 Beach days at Hampton Beach. 4. Fix remaining house projects for Diana. 5. Finalize will. d. June 21-July 26 in Israel

2. July 1-30: a. In Israel i. Participating in classes and field trip work. ii. Meeting and detailing dissertation outline and content with Marc Turnage Ph.D. iii. Video Interviews with Summer Institute Professors. iv. Consulting Sections 1-3 of Preliminary dissertation work on the problem, existing Solutions and Thesis with Israeli professors Adolfo Roitman Ph.D. Gabi Barchai Ph.D., Yaki Ashkenazi Ph.D., Moti Avim Ph.D. Haggi Amitzur Ph.D., and Esther Eshel Ph.D. plus attempt to silicate possible book endorsements. v. Gather video, photography and academic information. vi. Outline Dissertation and Artifact. 1. Outline Rough Draft of Sections 1-9. 2. Outline Rough Draft of iBook and Online Tools. 3. Outline Rough draft of Kindle Manual. 4. Outline Rough draft of Book (Ancient Future Preaching) vii. Review and refine dissertation dimensions and outlines.

3. August: a. August 1-5 Return from Israel. i. Adjust to Time Zone ii. Sort through media, images and articles. iii. Apply all suggestions gathered in Israel from Advisors. b. August 5-11 Family trip to Block Island, Boston and Hampton Beach. c. August 12-30 i. Outline Rough Draft of Sections 1-9. ii. Outline Rough Draft of iBook and Online Tools. iii. Outline Rough draft of Kindle Manual. iv. Outline Rough draft of Book (Ancient Future Preaching). d. August 16-17 Faculty Meetings. e. August 18-26 i. Create all work for assistants to hand them and enter in calendars. ii. Gather and archive articles for student research. iii. Gather articles from Jerusalem Perspective. f. August 26-30 i. Meet with assistants and delegate tasks. ii. Gather Bibliography materials and articles. g. August 26th School Resumes for work. h. August 26th Submit current work for editing.

4. September a. September 24th My Birthday. b. September 1-30. i. Consult with advisors bi monthly.

ii. Meet with assistants bi monthly. iii. Create 1. Create dissertation sections 1-9. 2. Create manuscript for Ancient Future Preaching. 3. Create iBook with integrate technology. 4. Create Kindle Manual. c. September 30 Submit current work for editing.

5. October a. October 1-30. i. Consult with advisors bi-monthly. ii. Meet with assistants bi-monthly. iii. Create 1. Create dissertation sections 1-9. 2. Create manuscript for Ancient Future Preaching. 3. Create iBook with integrate technology. 4. iBook manual. iv. Submit current work for editing.

6. November: a. November 1st Fill out Intent to Graduate form http://www.georgefox.edu/offices/registrar/graduate/gradappdegree.html b. November 1st Hooding ceremony clothing size emailed to GFU https://foxfiles.georgefox.edu/SEM/Hooding/hooding_info.pdf c. November 1-14 i. Submit Dissertation for fuller Editing. ii. Register for DMIN 555 with George Fox University d. November 1-30 i. Consult with advisors bi-monthly. ii. Meet with assistants bi-monthly. iii. Refine and Expand. 1. Refine and expand dissertation sections 1-9. 2. Refine and expand manuscript for Ancient Future Preaching. 3. Refine and expand ibook with integrate technology. 4. Refine and expand Kindle Manual.

7. December: a. December 1 Soft Deadline for the Evaluation Draft of Dissertation to Main Advisor, Marc Turnage and George Fox University. b. December 1-30 i. Refine and Expand. 1. Refine and expand dissertation sections 1-9. 2. Refine and expand manuscript for Ancient Future Preaching. 3. Refine and expand ibook with integrate technology.

4. Refine and expand Kindle Manual. c. December 16th Mom’s Birthday d. December 23 - 31st Christmas and New Year’s break with some work in between. 8. January a. January 2-14 Finalize the Evaluation draft of dissertation to George Fox University and Main Advisors Marc Turnage Ph.D. and Artifact to John Berquist. b. January 14 Hard Deadline for submission of rough draft dissertation to Advisors and George Fox.

9. February a. February 8th Hard deadline Archival Draft for Second Advisor/Reader.

10. March a. March 1st Advisors post final evaluation (Pass with Honor, pass, pass with minor changes, conditional pass, no pass…needs too many errors to make the last few weeks). b. March 12-13 Oral Exam (9-5 PST).

Bibliography

Aesop’s Fables. Translated by Laura Gibbs. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.

Aharoni, Yohanan. The Carta Bible Atlas. Jerusalem: Carta, 2002.

Aland, Kurt. Synopsis of the Four Gospels. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2009.

“Albert Mehrabian.” Wikipedia. Available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Mehrabian#cite_note-AM1971-1. Accessed 2 January 2012.

Arndt, William, Frederick W. Danker, and Walter Bauer. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.

Arnold, Clinton E. “Matthew, Mark, Luke.” Vol. 1 of Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002.

Aviam, Mortichai. “Archaeology and the Galilee.” Lecture, Kinneret College, Galilee, Israel, July, 2012.

Avi-Yonah, Michael. The Holy Land: A Historical Geography from the Persian to the Arab Conquest 536 B.C. to 640 A.D. Jerusalem: Carta Publishers, 2002.

Avi-Yonah, Michael, et al. The Herodian Period. Vol. 7 of The World History of the Jewish People. Jerusalem: Masada Publishing, 1977.

______. Society and Religion in the Second Temple Period. Vol. 8 of The World History of the Jewish People. Jerusalem: Masada Publishing, 1977.

Bahat, Dan. The Carta Jerusalem Atlas. Jerusalem: Carta, 2011.

Bailey, Clinton. A Culture of Desert Survival: Bedouin Proverbs from Sinai and the Negev. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2004.

Guido Baltes, “Hebrew or Aramaic? Some Evidence from Inscriptions.” Jerusalem Perspective. November 28, 2008.

Ben-Sasson, H. H. A History of the Jewish People: By Leading Scholars at the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Tel Aviv: Dvir Publishing House, 1969.

Berk, Harlan. 100 Greatest Coins. Atlanta, GA: Whitman Publishing, 2008.

Biran, Avraham. Biblical Dan. Jerusalem: Exploration Society Hebrew Union College- Jewish Institute of Religion, 1994.

72 73

______. “The High Places of Biblical Dan.” In Studies in the Archaeology of the Iron Age in Israel and Jordan, general ed. Amahai Mazar. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001.

Bird, Michael F. Crossing Over Land and Sea: Jewish Missionary Activity in the Second Temple Period. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2010.

Bivin, David. “‘Destroy’ the Law.” Jerusalem Perspective, March 31, 1988.

______. “Jesus’ Education.” Jerusalem Perspective, November 1, 1988.

______. “Jesus and the Oral Torah: Blessing.” Jerusalem Perspective, January 31, 1988.

______. “Jesus and the Oral Torah: Tithing.” Jerusalem Perspective, November 12, 2012.

______. “Jesus and the Oral Torah: Written and Oral Torah.” Jerusalem Perspective, November 12, 2012.

Blaiklock, E. M., R. K. Harrison, et al. The New International Dictionary of Biblical Archaeology. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1983.

Bolen, Todd. “The Sea of Galilee.” Jerusalem Perspective, October 31, 1989.

Boring, M. Eugene, Klaus Berger, and Carsten Colpe. Hellenistic Commentary to the New Testament. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1995.

Bowder, Diana. Who Was Who in the Ancient Greek World, 776–30 BC. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1982.

Bromiley, Geoffrey W, ed. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Vol. 3. Revised ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1988.

Brooke, George J. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2005.

______. Who Was Who in the Roman World, 753 BC –476 AD. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1980.

Buth, Randall. “Jesus’ Most Important Title.” Jerusalem Perspective, March 1, 1990.

______. “The Small-Fry Herod Antipas, or When a Fox Is Not a Fox.” Jerusalem Perspective, September 1, 1993.

______. “Where is the Aramaic Bible at Qumran? Scripture use in the Land of Israel.” Jerusalem Perpective. January 1, 2004.

Charlesworth, James H. Jesus’ Jewishness: Exploring the Place of Jesus in Early Judaism. New York: Crossroads Publishing, 1991.

______. “The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha.” In Vol. 1 of Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments. 1st ed. New York: Doubleday Press, 1985.

______. “The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha.” In Vol. 2 of Expansions of the Old Testament and Legends, Wisdom and Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms, and Odes, Fragments of Lost Judeo-Hellenistic Works. New York: Doubleday Press, 1985.

______. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. 2 Vols. New York; London: Yale University Press, 1983.

Cleave, Richard. The Holy Land Satellite Atlas. Vol. 2. Nicosia, Cyprus: Rohr Productions, 1999.

______. The Student Map Manual, Historical Geography of the Bible Lands. Jerusalem: Pictorial Archive, 1982.

Collins, John J., and Daniel C. Harlow. The Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2010.

Coogan, Michael D. The New Oxford Annotated Apocrypha, New Revised Standard Version. 3rd ed. London: Oxford University Press, 2007.

Cook, Edward M. Solving the Mysteries of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994.

Conway, Paul. “Observations of Ancient Biblical Mikra for Proper 21st Century Application.” Paper presented to George Fox University, Portland, OR, November 11, 2011.

Cruse, C. F. Ecclesiastical History. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1998.

Currid, John D. Ancient Egypt and the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1997.

______. Archaeology in the Land of the Bible: A Basic Guide. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1999.

Danby, Herbert. The Mishnah. New York: Oxford University Press, 1933.

Davies, W. D., et al., eds. The Hellenistic Age. Vol. 2 of The Cambridge History of Judaism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

______. The Early Roman Period. Vol. 3 of The Cambridge History of Judaism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

DeVries, LaMoine. Cities of the Biblical World. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1997.

“Dome of the Rock, Jerusalem.” Sacred Destinations. Available from http://www.sacred- destinations.com/israel/jerusalem-dome-of-the-rock#2. Accessed 22 December 2012.

Duff, Paul Brooks. “Processions.” In Vol. 5 of the Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary. General editor David Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

Epstein, Isidore. “Babylonian Talmud.” Halakhah. Available from http://halakhah.com. Accessed 12 December 2012.

Eshel, Hanan. The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Hasmonean State. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2008.

Evans, Craig A., and Stanley E. Porter. Ancient Texts for New Testament Studies: A Guide to the Background Literature. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2005.

______. Dictionary of New Testament Background. Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 2000.

Feldman, Louis H., and Gohei Hata. Josephus, Judaism, and Christianity. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1987.

______. Josephus, the Bible and History. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1989.

Ferguson, Everett. Backgrounds of Early Christianity. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1993.

Fitzmyer, Joseph A. Romans: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2008.

Florentino, Garc a Mart nez, and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar. The Dead Sea Scrolls, Study Edition (Translations). Vol. 1. Leiden; New York: Brill, 1997–1998.

Flusser, David. Jesus. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 2001.

______. The Jewish Sages and Their Literature. Vol. 3 of Judaism of the Second Temple Period. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2009.

______. Judaism and the Origins of Christianity. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, Hebrew University, 1988.

______. “New Portrait of Salome.” Jerusalem Perspective, January 4, 2004.

______. Qumran and Apocalypticism. Vol. 1 of Judaism of the Second Temple Period. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2007.

______. The Sage from Galilee: Rediscovering Jesus’ Genius. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2007.

Francese, Christopher. Ancient Rome in So Many Words. Kindle ed. New York: Hippocrene Books, 2007.

Frankovie, Joseph. “Us and Them: Loving Both.” Jerusalem Perspective, September 30, 1999.

Freedman, Rabbi H., and Maurice Simon. Midrash Rabbah, Translated into English. London: The Soncino Press, 1939.

Fritz, Volkmar. An Introduction to Biblical Archaeology: Journal for the Study of the Old Testament. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994.

Gaebelein, Frank, et al. The Expositors Bible Commentary. Vol. 2. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing, 1990.

Goldstein, Jonathan A. I Maccabees: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Vol. 41 of The Anchor Yale Bible. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2008.

“Gospel of Nicodemus.” Wikipedia. Available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Pilate#cite_ref-4. Accessed 2 January 2013.

Gowan, Donald E. Bridge Between the Testaments: A Reappraisal of Judaism from the Exile to the Birth of Christianity. Pittsburg, PA: Pickwick Publishers, 1986.

Greenhunto, Zvi. “The Discovery of the Caiaphas Family Tomb.” Jerusalem Perspective, July 1, 1991.

Grimal, Nicholas. A History of Ancient Egypt. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 1994.

Hagner, Donald A. Matthew 14–28. Vol. 33B of The Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas, TX: Word Incorporated, 1998.

Hallo, William W., and William Kelley Simpson. The Ancient Near East, A History. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, 1971.

Harpur, James, et al. Great Events of Bible Times: New Perspectives on the People, Places and History of the Biblical World. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1987.

Haxel, John. Who’s Who in the Greek World. New York: Routledge Taylor and FrancisGroup, 2002.

Hendin, David. Guide to Biblical Coins. New York: Amphora Books, 1986.

Hennecke, Edgar. The New Testament Apocrypha. Vol. 1. Edited by R. Wilson. Translated by A. J. B. Higgins. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1963.

Herodotus. The Histories. New York: Penguin Classics, 1996. Heschel, Susannah. The Aryan Jesus: Christian Theologians and the Bible in Nazi Germany. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2010.

Hjelm, Ingrid. The Samaritans and Early Judaism: A Literary Analysis. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000.

Hoereth, Alfred. Archaeology and the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1998.

Hornblower, Simon, and Antony Spawforth. The Oxford Classical Dictionary. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1996.

Howgego, Christo. Ancient History from Coins: Approaching the Ancient World. New York: Routledge Publishers, 1995.

Instone-Brewer, David. “Jesus’ Sabbath Dispute with the Pharisees in a Cornfield.” Jerusalem Perspective, October 25, 2007.

______. Prayer and Agriculture. Vol. 1 of Traditions of the Rabbis from the Era of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2004.

______. Feasts and Sabbaths: Passover and Atonement. Vol. 2a of Traditions of the Rabbis from the Era of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2011.

“Jesus of History vs. Jesus of Tradition.” Biblical Archaeology Review, November/December 2010, 36–47.

Justin Martyr. “Dialogue of Justin with Trypho, a Jew.” In Vol. 1 of the Ante-Nicene Fathers: The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus. General editors Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885.

______. “The First Apology of Justin.” In Vol. 1 of The Ante-Nicene Fathers: The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus. General editors Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885.

Kaiser, Walter, Jr. The Archaeological Study Bible. Grand Rapids MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 2006.

King, Philip J., and Lawrence E. Stager. Life in Biblical Israel. Louisville, England: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001.

Lancaster, Steven. “The Way of the Bedouin.” Lecture, Beersheva, Israel, May, 2009.

Lauterbach, Jacob Zallel. Mekilta De-Rabbi Ishmael. New ed. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 2004.

Lawrence, Jonathan D. “Washing, Ritual.” In The Eerdmans Dictionary of Early Judaism. General editors John J. Collins and Daniel C. Harlow. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2010.

Levy, J. Wörterbuch über die Talmudim und Midraschim III. Berlin, 1924.

Lightfoot, Joseph Barber, and J. R. Harmer. The Apostolic Fathers. London: Macmillan, 1891.

Lim, Timothy H., Larry W. Hurtado, A. Graeme Auld, and Alison M. Jack. The Dead Sea Scrolls in Their Historical Context. London; New York: T&T Clark, 2004.

Livy. Books XXXVIII–XXXIX, with an English Translation. General editor Evan T. Sage. Ab urbe condita (Foster-Moore-Sage), English text. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann, 1936.

Long, A. A., and D. N. Sedley. The Hellenistic Philosophers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

Lovette, James B. Biblical Related Coins. Sherwood, AR: James B. Lovette, 2000. Magness, Jodi. The Archaeology of the Holy Land: From the Destruction of Solomon’s Temple to the Muslim Conquest. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012.

______. Stone and Dung, Oil and Spit: Jewish Daily Life in the Time of Jesus. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2011.

Maier, Paul. The New Complete Works of Josephus. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1999.

Manor, Dale W. “Laish (Place)” In Vol. 4 of The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary. General editor David Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

Manson, Steve. Josephus and the New Testament. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1992.

Marcus, Joel. Mark 1–8. Vol. 27 of Anchor Yale Bible: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2008.

Martin, James. A Visual Guide to Bible Events: Fascinating Insights into Where They Happened and Why. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2009.

Mathews, K. A. Genesis 11:27–50:26. Vol. 1B of The New American Commentary. Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2005.

Mazar, Amihai. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible: 10,000–586 B.C.E. New York: Doubleday Press, 1990.

______. Studies in the Archaeology of the Iron Age in Israel and Jordan. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001.

McInerney, Jeremy. Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic Age. DVD-ROM. Chantilly, VA: The Teaching Company, 2000.

McRay, John. Archaeology and the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2001.

Mehrabian, Albert. Silent Messages: Implicit Communication of Emotions and Attitudes. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1981.

Melville, Ronald. Lucretius: On the Nature of the Universe. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Merriam-Webster Dictionary. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, 2005.

Metzger, Bruce M. The New Oxford Annotated Apocrypha. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1990.

Meyers, Eric M., and Mark A. Chancey. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1990.

Milgrom, Jo, and Dunman, Yoel. “Visual Midrash from the TALI Education Fund Collections.” Available from http://www.tali- virtualmidrash.org.il/Articleeng.aspx?art=19#idols. Accessed 20 November 2012.

Milwitzky, William. “Antipater,” Jewish Encyclopedia. Available from http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=1599&letter=A. Citing Macrobius, “Saturnalium Conviviorum Libri Septem,” ii. Accessed 8 December 2010.

“Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi.” Wikipedia. Available from http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mohandas_Karamchand_Gandhi. Accessed 6 November 2012.

Mosley, Ron.“The Jewish Background of Christian Baptism.” Haydid. Available from http://www.haydid.org/ronimmer.htm. Accessed 30 October, 2012.

Nanos, Mark D. The Mystery of Romans: The Jewish Context of Paul’s Letters. Kindle ed. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1996.

Naso, P. Ovidius. Ovid’s Art of Love (in Three Books), the Remedy of Love, the Art of Beauty, the Court of Love, the History of Love, and Amours. Medford, MA: Calvin Blanchard, 1855.

Negev, Avraham. The Archaeological Encyclopedia of the Holy Land. 3rd ed. New York: Prentice Hall Press, 1990.

Netzer, Ehud. The Architecture of Herod, The Great Builder. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008.

Neusner, Jacob. The Babylonian Talmud: A Translation and Commentary. Vol. 2. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2011.

______. Dictionary of Judaism in the Biblical Period: 450 B.C.E. to 600 C.E. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1999.

______. The Mishnah: A New Translation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1988.

______. The Tosefta. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2002.

Nickelsburg, George W. E. Jewish Literature Between the Bible and the Mishnah. 2nd ed. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2005.

Notley, Steven. “Jesus’ Jewish Command to Love.” Jerusalem Perspective, January 1, 2004.

______. “Jesus and the Son of Man.” Jerusalem Perspective, January 1, 2004.

______. “Who Questioned Jesus?” Jerusalem Perspective, March 1, 1990.

Novak, Ralph Martin. Christianity and the Roman Empire: Background Texts. Chicago: Trinity Press, 2001.

Nun, Mendel. “Fish and the Sea of Galilee.” Jerusalem Perspective, January 1, 2004.

______. The Sea of Galilee and Its Fishermen in the New Testament. Ein Gev, Israel: Kibbutz Ein Gev Press, 1989.

Nunnally, W. E. “Synoptic Gospels.” Lecture, Central Bible College, Springfield, MO, Spring, 1992.

______. “Waverly.” Lecture: Central Bible College, Springfield, MO, Spring, 1993.

Pearse, Roger. “Academic Integrity 2: Walter Bauer and the German Christian Movement.” http:// www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/2012/10/13/academic-integrity- 2-walter-bauer-and-the-german-christian-movement/. Accessed 10 January 2013.

Philo of Alexandria. The Works of Philo: Complete and Unabridged. Translated by Charles Duke Yonge. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995.

Plato. Plato. 12 vols. Translated by Harold North Fowler. Introduction by W. R. M. Lamb. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1966.

Polybius. Histories. Medford, MA: Macmillan, 1889.

Pritchard, James. The Ancient Near East: An Anthology of Texts and Pictures, 3rd ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1969.

______. Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1969.

Rainey, Anson F., and R. Steven Notley. Carta’s New Century Handbook and Atlas of the Bible. Jerusalem: Carta, 2007.

______. The Sacred Bridge. Jerusalem: Carta Publishers, 2006.

Rapske, Brian. The Book of Acts and Paul in Roman Custody. Vol. 3 of The Book of Acts in its First Century Setting. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing, 1994.

Reich, Ronny. “Ossuary Inscriptions from the Caiaphas Tomb.” Jerusalem Perspective, July 1, 1991.

Safrai, Chana. “Jesus’ Jewish Parents.” Jerusalem Perspective, September 1, 1992. Safrai, Shamuel. “Jesus and the Hasidim.” Jerusalem Perspective, January–June 1994, 42–44.

______. “Pilgrimage in the Time of Jesus.” Jerusalem Perspective, September, 1989.

Safrai, Shamuel, et al. Historical Geography, Political History, Social, Cultural and Religious Life and Institutions. Vol. 1 of The Jewish People in the First Century. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1974.

______. The Jewish People in the First Century. Vol. 2. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1976.

______., “The Spoken Languages in the Time of Jesus” The Jerusalem Perspective. January 1, 2004.

Safrai, Shamuel, Zeev Safrai, et al. The Literature of the Sages. Second Part: Midrash, Targum, Liturgy, Poetry, Mysticism, Contracts, Inscriptions, Ancient Science and the Languages of Rabbinic Literature. Assen: Van Gorcum, 2006.

Saggs, H. W. F. The Greatness That Was Babylon: Survey of the Ancient Civilization of the Tigris-Euphrates Valley. London: Sidgwick & Jackson, 1988.

Sasson, Jack M. Civilizations of the Ancient Near East. Vols. 3 and 4. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2000.

Satlow, Michael. “Josephus.” From Israelite to Jew. Podcast, Brown University, Providence, RI, 2010.

Schalit, Abraham. Political History of Jewish Palestine from 332 B.C.E. to 67 B.C.E. Vol. 6 of The World History of the Jewish People. New Brunswick, Canada: Rutgers University Press, 1972.

Schiffman, Lawrence H. From Text to Tradition: A History of Second Temple and Rabbinic Judaism. Hoboken, NJ: Ktav Publishing House, 1991.

______. Texts and Traditions: A Source Reader for the Study of Second Temple and Rabbinic Judaism. Hoboken, NJ: Ktav Publishing House, 1998.

Schürer, Emil. The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ. 4 vols. Revised and edited by G. Vermes, F. Millar, and M. Black. Translated by T. A. Burkill, et al. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1979.

______. A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ. 5 vols. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishing, 1996.

Scott-Kilvert, Ian. Plutarch. New York: Penguin Group, 1973.

Shanks, Hershal. (2004; 2004). BAR 04:01 (March 1978). Biblical Archaeology Society.

Hershel Shanks (2003; 2003), BAR 29:01 (January 2003). Biblical Archaeology Society.

Simmons, William A. Peoples of the New Testament World: An Illustrated Guide. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2008.

Skarsaune, Oskar, and Hvalvik, Reidar, eds. The Early Centuries Jewish Believers in Jesus. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2007.

Smallwood, Mary. Josephus, The Jewish War. New York: Penguin Classics, 1981.

Smith, George Adam. The Historical Geography of the Holy Land: Especially in Relation to the History of Israel and the Early Church. London: Hodder and Stroughton, 1894.

Sparks, Kenton L. Ancient Texts for the Study of the Hebrew Bible: A Guide to the Background Literature. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2005.

Stager, Lawrence, and Philip King. Life in Biblical Israel. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001.

Stern, Ephraim. Archaeology of the Land of the Bible. Vol. 2. New York: Doubleday Press, 2001.

______. New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land. Vol. 1–4. Warsaw, IN: Eisenbrauns Publishers, 1993.

Stern, Ephraim, et al. The Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavation in the Holy Land. Vol. 1. Jerusalem: The Israel Exploration Society and Carta Press, 1993.

______. The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land. Vol. 5. Jerusalem, Israel: The Israel Exploration Society and Carta Press, 1993.

Stern, Menahem. Greek and Latin Authors on Jews and Judaism. Vol. 1–3. Jerusalem: Israel Academy of Sciences, 1974.

Stevenson, James. A New Eusebius: Documents Illustrating the History of the Church to AD 337. London: SPCK, 1987.

Stone, Michael. Ancient Judaism: New Visions and Views. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2011.

Strabo. The Geography of Strabo. Literally Translated, with Notes, in Three Volumes. General editor H. C. Hamilton. Medford, MA: George Bell & Sons, 1903.

Swanson, James. Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Hebrew (Old Testament). Electronic ed. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, 1997.

______. “Peter’s Confession of Christ.” Lecture, Center for Holy Lands Studies, Banias, Israel, July 21, 2012.

Sweet, Leonard. “Incarnational Ministry.” Lecture, George Fox University on Orcas Island, June, 2012.

Tcherikover, Victor. Hellenistic Civilization and the Jews. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1961.

“Theatre.” Wikipedia Available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theatre. Accessed 20 November 2012.

Thompson, J. A. The Bible and Archaeology. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982.

“Tiberias.” Bible-History. Available from http://www.bible- history.com/maps/romanempire/Tiberias.html. Accessed 29 November 2012.

Turnage, Marc. Bible Lands Manual. Springfield, MO: Center for Holy Land Studies, 2012.

______. “Historical Backgrounds of the Time of Christ.” Phone discussions for doctoral studies. Springfield, MO, and Haverhill, MA, September 10–December 17, 2010.

______. “Jesus and the Hasidim,” Part 1. Shard and the Scroll Blog, September 28, 2010.

______. “Jesus and the Law.” Lecture, Kinneret College, Galilee, Israel, July 4, 2012.

______. “Jesus and the Law.” Lecture, Center for Holy Lands Studies, Jerusalem, Israel, August 4, 2012.

______. Jews and Gentiles. Springfield, MO: Center for Holy Lands Studies, 2001.

______. “John the Baptist and Jesus.” Lecture, George Fox University, Springfield, MO, March, 2012.

______. “John’s Baptism.” Lecture, George Fox University, Springfield, MO, February 9, 2012.

______. “The Linguistic Ethos of the Galilee within the First Century C.E.” Pre- published research, Springfield, MO, 2010.

______. “Literary Context of the Gospels.” Lecture, George Fox University, Springfield, MO, October 14, 2011.

______. “The Man with the Withered Hand and What to Do with Jesus.” Lecture, Springfield, MO, March 9, 2012.

______. “Pilate.” Lecture, Summer Institute Center for Holy Lands Studies, Kinneret College, Galilee, Israel, July 2012.

______. “Vindication, Deliverance and Judgment.” Lecture, George Fox University, Springfield, MO, December 9, 2011.

______. “The Wilderness.” Lecture, Center for Holy Land Studies, Beersheva, Israel, July, 2012.

______. “The Wilderness of Judea.” Lecture, George Fox University, Springfield, MO, June 7, 2011.

Twelftree, Graham H. “Jesus the Baptist.” Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus 7, no. 2 (2009): 103–125.

University of Chicago website. Available from http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio/66*.html. Accessed 1 December 2012.

______. Available from http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Cassius_Dio66*.html. Accessed 2 January 2012.

VanderKam, James. An Introduction to Early Judaism. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2001.

Vermes, Geza, ed. The Dead Sea Scrolls. London: Penguin Books, 1986.

______. Who’s Who in the Age of Jesus Christ. New York: Penguin Reference Library, 2006.

Waterfield, Robin. Herodotus, The Histories. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Watson, JoAnn Ford. “Malchus (Person).” In Vol. 4 of The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary. General editor David Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

Whiston, William. The New Complete Works of Josephus. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1999.

Wilson, Marvin R. Our Father Abraham: Jewish Roots of the Christian Faith. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1989.

Wright, Paul H. Greatness, Grace and Glory, Carta’s Atlas of Biblical Biography. Jerusalem: Carta, 2008.

Yamauchi, Edwin. Persia and the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1996.

Young, Brad H. Jesus the Jewish Theologian. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1995.

______. Meet the Rabbi. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2008.

______. Meet the Rabbis: Rabbinic Thought and the Teachings of Jesus. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2010.

______. The Parables: Jewish Tradition and Christian Interpretation. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1998.

______. Paul the Jewish Theologian. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1997.