The Bible is silent on most of Jesus’ years before he began his ministry. Many theories, including more than a few strange ones, have been floated about the “missing years.” These include travels to just about everywhere in the world. Some apocryphal accounts claim to have details of his childhood, though they date long after his time (Anne Rice did conjure up an interesting novel that was in part based on these stories). One of the more plausible legends has Jesus visiting Britain with his “uncle” Joseph of Arimathea. Local legends claim Jesus was there, but the debate centers around how old those legends are and if they were created to attract pilgrims. Nevertheless, it is an interesting possibility. See Glyn S. Lewis’ book for more (even he wanders into some strange speculations at times).
Bible
Religion Came First
Believers of the Bible have long argued religion or belief in God existed from the beginning as the Bible would indicate. Others have theorized religion came later after man developed civilization. Why would they think this? Mostly it would seem because they don’t want to believe the Bible. Archaeological finds in Turkey are challenging such unfounded theories:
This theory reverses a standard chronology of human origins, in which primitive man went through a “Neolithic revolution” 10,000 to 12,000 years ago. In the old model, shepherds and farmers appeared first, and then created pottery, villages, cities, specialized labor, kings, writing, art, and—somewhere on the way to the airplane—organized religion. As far back as Jean-Jacques Rousseau, thinkers have argued that the social compact of cities came first, and only then the “high” religions with their great temples, a paradigm still taught in American high schools.
Religion now appears so early in civilized life—earlier than civilized life, if Schmidt is correct—that some think it may be less a product of culture than a cause of it, less a revelation than a genetic inheritance. The archaeologist Jacques Cauvin once posited that “the beginning of the gods was the beginning of agriculture,” and Göbekli may prove his case.
Lost Civilizations Under Persian Gulf
In the news are discoveries of civilizations that lived in areas now flooded by the Persian Gulf. This interesting for a number of reasons. One, finds in this region continue to show people were sophisticated early on. People didn’t start out dumb or animal-like. Two, past discoveries of settlements and dead rivers under the Persian Gulf have given rise to the possible location of the Garden of Eden. Others have seen the flooding of the Gulf as the source of the Noah and other flood accounts. But the flooding of the Gulf doesn’t seem catastrophic enough to be the source of those writings. We will take a look at a later date at some of those and draw out the history. For now consider that there were many millienia of history before scrolls, books and other records. We have only scratched the surface.
The Battle Over David
The current issue of National Geographic features the conflict between scholars who believe they have found a lot of evidence for David and his biblical empire and those who do not. Few doubt David existed, but how accurate is the Bible? It is an instructive read seeing scholars question each other’s bias. One side claims the other looks for David in the littlest of finds (but one guy uses a “gut feeling” to dismiss a David find). The other side claims the anti-Davids are looking for an unreasonable standard of evidence as if they need fully intact palaces and cities.
Considering that few doubt David’s existence, the thinking person might ask: Why is archaeology in this region so difficult? Could it be that the area was repeatedly overrun and attacked by foreign armies? Cities built on top of cities? The article, and some of the scholars, seem to forget the history of the region they work in.
Shroud of Turin
The authenticity Shroud of Turin has been the most debated of Christian relics in history. Many believe this is the burial shroud of Jesus. Some dismiss it out of hand because of their religious or philosophical beliefs about God. Some Protestants are wary of what they perceive as a “Catholic” relic. But what if it is real? What if it is an authentic archaeological piece?
Many people are under the impression that the shroud was dated to the Middle Ages. This is untrue, the carbon datings were done in way that defies all scientific protocol: On a part of the shroud that has been often handled and repaired. No one has been able to reproduce a similar shroud with its same properties. Just in the past year, studies have pointed to it being caused by energy — a “radiation photo” of sorts — and a “death certificate” was potentially found on the shroud.
The honest thinker is compelled to look at all the evidence. In The Truth About the Shroud of Turin, Robert Wilcox traces all of the shroud’s history, the debates and the tests. He leaves it up to readers to evaluate the evidence.
Indeed, the evidence is compelling. Many will ignore it. Others dismiss it without examination. However, if one considers it with same standards applied to all other artifacts — and leaves their personal bias behind — will they continue to pretend it doesn’t exist?
An interesting test for those who believe they are open-minded and critical thinkers.
Job’s Stars
The Book of Job is a most intriguing part of the Bible. The story of Job doesn’t fit into the sequence of Old Testament books and it seems Job is outside of the primary ancient Jewish world, perhaps not even Jewish. Difficult to date because of its lack of references to other history in the region, its date of writing could be anywhere from 700BC to 2000BC. It does seem that Job is well-traveled and educated. Job is full of references to older times and traditions or at least knowledge of them. As far back as Genesis, we see the establishment of stars for use in tracking time and the seasons. This was important in the millenia before clocks and calendars. Job mentions some of these stars in Job 38:31-32:
Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion? Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? Or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons? (KJV)
This may not mean much at first glance, but consider the following. After Job implies God is not in control, God responds (Job 38:31-32) with a series of questions concerning the star cluster Pleiades, the constellation Orion and the star Arcturus. He asks Job if he can keep the stars of Pleiades together or break apart Orion or guide Arcturus and his sons. These questions appear to reveal the actual movements of these stellar bodies. How would the writer of Job know centuries ago that Arcturus is a runaway star traveling at immense speeds or that the stars of Orion’s famous belt are moving in such a way that someday it will no longer be a straight line or that the stars of the Pleiades cluster are moving together as one unit?
[Note: Arcturus comes from a Greek word that means “Guardian of the Bear” which is why some translations use “Bear with its cubs” (or something similar) instead of the star name. Arcturus is in the constellation Boötes (the herdsman) which is near Ursa Major and Ursa Minor (the bears/dippers).]
Blind luck? Coincidence? Lost ancient knowledge? Or something else?
Scholarly Debate
Bias, agenda and lack of critical thought. These are the things one wants left out of studies of history, theology and science. It doesn’t always work out that way. Take the current issue of Biblical Archaeology Review (Nov/Dec).
In reading the letters concerning “progressive” versus “conservative” scholars, one begins to see a pattern emerge. This isn’t about whether or not the conservatives or evangelicals are scholarly enough, it’s about more people listening to them than the progressives or liberals. It seems the latter two are upset they aren’t getting enough attention so they try to discount their opponents.
There are many stellar scholars out there, but there’s a Christianity-wide (all people-wide?) problem with critical thinking and sound theological study that is not limited to any one group. Just look at some Seane Freyne’s comments in the same issue. His belief that Jesus wasn’t born in Bethlehem is based on a “sense.” He follows that with a very uncertain sounding explanation.
Instead of debating who the real scholars are, maybe everyone should return to basic critical thinking. And when someone disagrees with you, first determine if your theory is sound before claiming your intellectual superiority.
Isaiah and the Pyramids
Regardless of your beliefs, few would dispute that the Bible is one of the most important documents from antiquity. While the original autographs are lost, more copies of it exist than any other ancient writings. Some are also quite old. While not a history book per se, since its events are set in our past, the Bible does have many historical references. Understanding these passages may have been easy to the original audience, but not always for us. Granted, many people forget their elementary school comprehension skills and don’t consider: Who wrote this, when and where did they and to whom? The original context is necessary to understand what the authors meant then and what meaning it may hold for us, but I digress.
I recently came across Isaiah 19:19-20:
In that day shall there be an altar to the Lord in the midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar at the border thereof… And it shall be for a sign and for a witness unto the Lord of hosts in the land of Egypt.”
Many have argued that this is a reference to the pyramids at Giza. A “pillar” at Giza (which may mean “border” or Giza being at the border or the Nile delta). But why? Why would God be involved in the building of this structure through a non-Hebrew people? Most people have dispensed with the idea that the Hebrews built the pyramids. The timeline and biblical references don’t fit. Others have created a variety of theories that interpret the pyramids and their internal and external structures as revealing biblical truths or signs of the creator. The problem is that they all seem forced and difficult to find.
Though there is that verse. Is it a prophetic verse referring to the time Jesus spent in Egypt? The Bible is silent on his time there, but this would make more sense. Or is this one of those verses with more than one meaning?
A fascinating reference. Perhaps someone will someday solve the mystery.
Darrick Dean 