The “I” in Romans 7:14-25

April 22, 2016 randymccracken 21 Comments

The “I” in Romans 7:14-25

One of the most challenging question in Romans is, "Who is the 'I' in Romans 7?" — One of the most challenging question in Romans is, “Who is the ‘I’ in Romans 7?”

“No part of Romans, . . . has been the object of so much scrutiny and the source of so much confusion as what Paul writes in [Romans] 7:14-25” (Richard Longenecker, NIGTC, The Epistle to the Romans, p. 652). With these words, Richard N. Longenecker in his new (and much anticipated) commentary on Romans dives into this difficult passage of Scripture. Since Longenecker’s commentary is “hot off the press,” I will examine his approach to these verses and use it, as well as contributions from others, as my basis for discussing Romans 7:14-25.

Two Approaches to Romans 7:14-25

Richard N. Longenecker's commentary on Romans is available at Amazon USA / UK — Richard N. Longenecker’s commentary on Romans is available at Amazon USA / UK

Longenecker notes that there are two approaches to Romans 7:14-25. The first, which he labels, Traditional Understandings, proposes that the “I” is autobiographical, thus Paul is referring to himself. Some believe that Paul is speaking about his life under the law before he came to Christ, while others contend that Paul is speaking of the struggle experienced by the Christian whose dual nature consisting of The Spirit and the flesh battle against each other. Longenecker identifies a number of scholars subscribing to each group. The group arguing for Paul’s personal experience under the law includes “Origen and most of the Greek Fathers,” John Wesley, and more modern scholars such as C.H. Dodd and Doug Moo. Those who argue for Paul speaking about his own struggles as a Christian include “Augustine and the Latin Fathers,” as well as the Reformers Luther, Melanchthon, and Calvin, and modern scholars such as Cranfield, Dunn, Murray, Morris, and Barrett. What struck me about this list, and the reason I mention it here, is that the earliest interpreters understood Paul to be talking about his life under the law, not his struggle as a Christian. Longenecker does say, “most of the Greek Fathers,” took the view that Paul was speaking of his struggle under the law. The word “most” leaves some doubt, but does this mean that the view that Paul was talking about his struggle as a Christian, only originated with Augustine? Although one’s position on this subject must ultimately be decided by the text, the fact that earlier interpreter’s apparently did not understand Paul’s remarks in Romans 7 as referring to the Christian should at least provide a caution to later interpreters who take this view.

In A Rereading of Romans, Stanley Stowers argues convincingly that Paul used the common literary device known as "Speech in Character," in Romans 7. — In A Rereading of Romans, Stanley Stowers argues convincingly that Paul uses the common literary device known as “Speech in Character,” in Romans 7.

Although Longenecker favors the autobiographical use of “I” in Romans 7:7-13, he does not follow the “traditional understandings” noted above when it comes to Romans 7:14-25. Thus he explains a second way to view Paul’s use of “I” in Romans 7:14-25 known as a “Stilform of Speech and Writing” (italics original, p. 653). This can also be referred to as “Speech in Character” (see Stanley Stowers, A Rereading of Romans, pp. 16-21). In this case, the “I” is not autobiographical, but is a device that allows the hearer or reader to experience/identify with someone’s situation (according to Stowers, the person can be real or imaginary, p. 17). In such cases, the writer is seeking to communicate “a general truth” (Longenecker, p. 655). Longenecker points out that this device was a common way of communicating in Paul’s day. He references Jewish sources (including Philo and the Dead Sea Scrolls), as well as Greco-Roman sources (including Euripides, Ovid, and Quintilian) to illustrate this frequent usage of “I”. Most convincing, is the fact that Paul uses “I” this way in other letters, and it is clear in these contexts that his reference is not autobiographical. One example, found in Romans itself, is 3:7: “If the truth of God is enhanced unto his glory by my falsehood, why am I also still condemned?” It is clear in the context that Paul is not referring to himself, but to a hypothetical individual who is raising this objection. Other passages include 1 Corinthians 6:15; 13:1-3; and Galatians 2:18. Therefore, regarding Romans 7:14-25, Longenecker argues convincingly (in my opinion) that Paul’s usage of “I” is not autobiographical, but rather a literary device common in the ancient world used to express a general truth.

The Identity of the “I” in Romans 7:14-25

In this introductory book on Romans Doug Moo makes some good points about why Paul is not describing the Christian in Romans 7:14-25.

Whether one believes that Paul is using “I” autobiographically, or as “Speech in Character,” we are still left with the question of identifying who he means. Is Paul describing the Christian, the Jew under the law, or all people in this passage? Doug Moo’s comments are appropriate here: “Debate over Romans 7 is so lively precisely because each view has some points in the text in its favor. There is no slam dunk in the interpretive game here. So the best interpretation will be the one that produces the best overall fit with all the evidence” (Douglas J. Moo, Encountering the Book of Romans, p. 109).

One of the most popular identifications of the person in Romans 7:14-25 is that he/she is a Christian. Note in my opening paragraph above how many theologians over the centuries have advocated this view. This view is frequently subscribed to by many Christians who quote it as evidence that they still struggle with the flesh. Although it is true that Christians must “reckon themselves as dead” (Rom. 6:11), I do not think that Paul is referencing the inner struggle of a Christian. In fact, in my opinion, whoever the person is that Paul is describing, the one thing that is for certain is that it is not a Christian. I am in agreement with Moo when he observes that the description of the person in Romans 7:14 “unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin,” is “an impossible state for any believer.” Furthermore, Moo notes that being “ ‘a prisoner of the law of sin’ (7:23), . . . contradicts the situation of all Christians, who have been ‘set . . . free from the law of sin and death’ (8:2)” (Moo, p. 109). There are, in fact, a number of contrasts between the Christian and the person described in Romans 7:14-25. The chart below notes the contrasts that Paul makes in chapters 6-8. One side of the chart shows the characteristics of the person Paul calls “I,” while the other side shows characteristics of the believer.

Lecture 12, 13 & 14 Romans 6&7.001 — Going from left to right, note the contrast between the “I” and believers.

Another excellent chart along these same lines can be found in Craig Keener’s commentary on Romans. Keener states, “. . . the contrasts with the larger context are simply too great to fit the Christian life as he describes it, even had Paul thought himself an unusually weak Christian” (Craig S. Keener, NCCS, Romans, p. 92). Quoting Moo again, he states, “. . . I admit that verses 15-20, taken on their own, could describe the struggle with sin that even the best Christians continue to have. But what we must recognize is that the struggle depicted in these verses issue in defeat: imprisonment by the law of sin. This is not the outcome of the Christian’s struggle with sin” (p. 111).

Returning to Longenecker’s view, he too does not see the individual in Romans 7:14-25 as a Christian, especially in lieu of what Paul says in Romans 8. For Longenecker this person is a picture of “. . . all people who attempt to live their lives by their own natural abilities and acquired resources, apart from God” (p. 673). Longenecker’s references to Greco-Roman writings that refer to the problem of self-mastery makes a strong case for his argument that Paul’s “Speech in Character” fits “all people.” Some, like Moo, however, argue that the person Paul is referring to is “an unregenerate Jew under the law” (p. 110). I am yet undecided whether the person Paul describes is Jewish or refers to all. The context of the law in Romans 7 causes me to lean toward Moo’s interpretation of the unregenerate Jew, but I am also inclined toward Longenecker’s view because the overall context (going back to Romans 5:12-21) has to do with all who are in Adam. Furthermore, as Longenecker points out, the struggle to want to do right but to do the wrong is a universal human struggle, it is not simply the problem of the Jew under the law. And so the jury remains out on this point as far as I am concerned. I would welcome any insights from those who read this article. Please feel free to leave your comments below.

Conclusion: Who the “I” is Not

In my teaching of Romans over the years, I have found chapters 5-8 to be particularly important when it comes to believers understanding what Christ has accomplished for them and who they are in Christ. The section begins with Paul saying, “Therefore, having been justified by faith. . .” (5:1) and he continues by detailing the benefits of the Christian’s justification. In my experience, this is a message that Christians in the 21st century need. We need to know that we’ve been transferred from the realm of Adam where sin and death reign, to the realm of Christ where grace, righteousness and life reign (5:12-21). We need to hear that grace is more powerful than sin, but also that people under grace are an obedient people. We need to know that Christ has won a decisive victory over sin and in our identification with him in baptism, we too have died and been raised to walk in newness of life (6:1-6). We who are redeemed and yet feel so powerless against sin, need to know that sin has lost its power over us (6:17). We especially need the good news that there is a solution to the human dilemma of wanting to do what’s right, but instead doing what’s wrong. Paul declares that Jesus has delivered us from this body of death and that he has set us free from the law of sin and death (7:25; 8:2). I still have a number of questions about Romans 7:14-25, but one thing I am convinced of is that it is a mistake for a Christian to identify with the person Paul describes there. I am not the “I” of Romans 7:14-25. In Christ, we have all been justified, therefore our lives are not one of torment like the individual Paul describes. Instead “we have peace with God,” (5:1) and an absolute assurance that “we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us” (8:37).

For other thoughtful articles on Romans 7, see mydigitalseminary.com at this link.

Biblical names, Insights from Family Portraits, The Book of Samuel

The Importance of Biblical Names: Abner

April 6, 2016 randymccracken 2 Comments

The Importance of Biblical Names

Biblical names frequently have significance to the story in which they occur.

Although, “a rose by any other name would smell as sweet,” the same cannot be said for biblical names. Most who study the Scripture are aware that biblical names have significance. A name may say something about a character’s personality, or contribute in some way to the narrative in which that person appears. One of the most obvious examples of this is the name Jesus. Matthew relates the following instructions by the angel of the Lord to Joseph: “You shall call his name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21). Of course the name, Jesus, or in Hebrew, Yeshua, comes from the word “to save,” and means “He will save.” On a few occasions, names are purposely changed in Scripture to suggest that person’s destiny, as in the case of Abram’s name being changed to Abraham (Gen. 17:5), or Jacob’s name being changed to Israel (Gen. 32:27-28). The same is true in the New Testament, where Jesus changes Simon’s name to Peter (Matt. 16:17-18).

I have found in my own experience in Bible study that names usually have some significance for the narrative in which they are found. Sometimes the biblical authors draw attention to the significance of the name (as in the cases above), but more frequently, the reader is left to see the significance for him or herself. For those who would have originally read these texts in Hebrew or Greek, the meanings of these names and how they relate to a particular story, or carry a particular significance, would have been more obvious. But since all of us are separated from the original culture of the Bible–being some two-to-three thousand years removed from it–and since a majority don’t read the Bible in the original Hebrew or Greek, the significance of many biblical names goes unnoticed.

From time to time on this website I’ll be posting articles on biblical names whose significance might not always be clear to those reading an English Bible. I’ve decided to launch this series by looking at the biblical character Abner, and the meaning of his name. Abner was the cousin or uncle of Saul (it’s not quite clear which he was), and commander of Israel’s army. The following information consists of several excerpts from my book Family Portraits: Character Studies in 1 and 2 Samuel (the excerpts are placed in italics with a few minor alterations for the sake of this article). The excerpts are taken from the chapter entitled: “Abner: Strong Man in a Weak House.”

Abner: The King-maker

The biblical name, Abner, means, "My father is a lamp." The photo above is an example of an ancient Hebrew lamp. — The biblical name, Abner, means, “My father is a lamp.”

Abner’s name means, “my father is Ner,” (the first time Abner’s name occurs in the Hebrew text, it is spelled “Abiner.” Abi = “my father”). On nine occasions he is called “the son of Ner” (the passages are: 1 Sam. 14:50; 26:5, 14; 2 Sam. 2:8, 12; 3:23, 25, 28, 37). The name Ner, however, means “lamp,” and thus “Abner” means, “my father is a lamp.” In my opinion, it is interesting that “ner” is found in the name “Abner,” and also that he is called the “son of Ner” nine times! This seems excessive by any stretch, and suggests that the author has a deliberate reason for including it so many times. The word “lamp” is used on several occasions in the books of Samuel and Kings to refer to kingship (2 Sam. 21:17; 1 Kings 11:36; 15:4; 2 Kings 8:19), and several verses hint at the fact that Saul’s family was desirous of the kingship from the beginning (1 Sam. 9:20–21; 10:14–16). Abner is not only a powerful man, but, as we shall see, also a man who likes to wield power. Therefore, it is no accident that this man (whose name means “My father is a lamp”—think “king”) is introduced as the king’s right-hand-man, and later will fancy himself as a king-maker (2 Sam. 2:8; 3:12). The story of Abner is intimately connected with the story of the “ner ” (lamp/kingship) of Israel. (Family Portraits, pp. 136-137)

Abner Makes Ish-bosheth King (2 Samuel 2:8-9)

Following the death of Saul, David is anointed king in Hebron over Judah (2 Sam. 2:1–3). This could have been an opportunity for the entire nation to unite under David’s leadership, but instead we are informed that “Abner the son of Ner, commander of Saul’s army, took Ishbosheth the son of Saul and brought him over to Mahanaim; and he made him king” (vv. 8– 9a). Note the two ways Abner is identified in verse 8. First, Abner is called the “son of Ner”—as if we need reminding! This is the first of six uses of this appellative in 2 Samuel 2–3, its high concentration suggesting its connection with kingship. As “son of Ner” Abner acts as king-maker. Second, Abner is identified as “commander of Saul’s army.” It is his rank and the loyalty of his troops that give him the ability to make Ish-bosheth king. (Family Portraits, pp. 139-140)

Abner Seeks to Make David King of All Israel (2 Samuel 3:12-21)

After agreeing to bring Israel to David, Abner departs in peace only to be murdered by Joab.

Following a break with Ish-bosheth (probably because Abner realizes that David is much stronger and will soon rule all of Israel), Abner seeks to bring all Israel under David’s rule. After rallying the support of Benjamin, Saul’s own tribe, Abner sets off with a delegation to seal the deal (v. 19). Once again Abner regards himself as a king-maker, as he says, “I will arise and I will go, and I will gather all Israel to my lord the king, that they may make a covenant with you, and that you may reign over all that your heart desires” (my translation—v. 21). Note the triple “I” with Abner as subject, balanced by the triple “you” referring to David. Abner is proclaiming that he is the one who will make David’s dreams of kingship come true. Furthermore, it is probably not accidental that the appellative “son of Ner” is found on people’s lips four times in this section (v. 23, a soldier; v. 25, Joab; v. 28, David; v. 37, the narrator), reminding us that the “lamp man” is at work once again, attempting to put his own stamp on the kingship of Israel (Family Portraits, pp. 148-149).

Conclusion: Biblical Names Can Enhance the Meaning of a Character or Passage

In conclusion, Abner’s name contributes to his actions in the story. Just as he is constantly seeking to have a say in who will be king, so his name, Abner son of Ner, declares that he sees himself as a king-maker. The irony in Abner’s name is that he resists the real king (David) and when he finally reconciles himself to David’s kingship, it is too late. Joab’s sword puts an end to any hopes that Abner might have had of being second-in-command, or perhaps of manipulating David the way he had Ish-bosheth. Abner always backed the wrong horse. First it was Saul, then it was Ish-bosheth. This so-called “king-maker” did not recognize the real king until it was too late. And thus, Abner’s own name reveals that he is not the man he, and perhaps others, thought he was.

For more information on Abner, pick up a copy of Family Portraits. Family Portraits is available through Amazon USA / UK and WestBow Press, as well as Logos.com

Logos Products Reviewed

Are New Testament Manuscripts Reliable?

March 30, 2016 randymccracken Leave a comment

Are New Testament Manuscripts Reliable?

This New Testament manuscript known as P52 is a fragment of John's gospel dating between 120-150 A.D. — This New Testament manuscript known as P52 is a fragment of John’s gospel dating between 120-150 A.D.

A question frequently asked of Christians is, “How do you know you can trust the Bible?” After all, isn’t it true that the copies of the New Testament that exist are hundreds of years later than the original New Testament manuscripts? Noted New Testament scholar, Dr. Craig A. Evans, seeks to answer these, and similar, questions in the Logos Mobile Ed course, The Reliability of New Testament Manuscripts. You can tell from the title that Dr. Evans certainly believes the New Testament manuscripts are reliable and he produces a lot of good evidence to prove his case in this one hour video course. Even though I had a similar course in seminary many years ago, Dr. Evans reveals some new evidence that strengthens the case for the reliability of New Testament manuscripts. I’ll share some of this interesting information in this post, so keep reading!

Outline and Contents of The Reliability of New Testament Manuscripts

The course is broken down into the following 11 sections:
1. The Basics of New Testament Manuscripts
2. Finding Manuscripts in Logos
3. Examples Demonstrating the Quality of New Testament Manuscripts
4. Adding Manuscript Images to Presentations or Documents
5. Exploring Ancient Manuscripts and Resources
6. The Comparative Strength of the New Testament Manuscript Record
7. The Longevity of the Autographs
8. Researching the Works of Tertullian
9. The Number of Autographs
10. Accessing and Navigating the Textual Apparatus
11. The Preservation of the New Testament in Translations

Each section is of varying lengths (anywhere from 3-10 minutes each) and includes, not only Dr. Evans’ lectures, but also instruction on how to utilize Logos in the study of New Testament manuscripts. One advantage of Logos is that users will find that the manuscripts Dr. Evans speaks about are readily available in the Logos library, along with some photographic examples. The sections above which provide instruction on how to use features in Logos include 2, 4, 5, 8, and 10.

Dr. Evans compares the evidence of other classical documents and demonstrates the preservation of New Testament manuscripts is far superior.

One lecture compares the body of manuscripts available from classical sources, such as Caesar’s Gallic War or ancient histories by Livy or Tacitus with the body of manuscripts availlable for the New Testament. In the case of classic manuscripts, there are usually only a handful of a particular writing available, and these copies date hundreds of years, and at times over a thousand or more years, later than the originals. And yet the authenticity of these documents is never questioned (see photo above). By comparison, Dr. Evans notes that there are 5,800 manuscripts of the New Testament. These are not all complete copies, and many date from the Middle Ages. However, a few hundred “date back to ancient antiquity,” and about four dozen date to the year 300 A.D. or earlier (most of these are incomplete, and some are small fragments). This body of literature makes the New Testament the most well-preserved document of antiquity. For an excellent article on this topic which lists ancient classical documents, how many copies we have, and the length of time between the copies and original see Manuscript evidence for superior New Testament reliability.

How Long Could an Original Manuscript Last?

One of the most interesting lectures to me was section 7, “The Longevity of the Autographs.” Dr. Evans notes that when he was in seminary he once asked his professor, “How long did the autographs (original copies) last?” His professor answered that it was probably about 10-20 years. Therefore, it used to be thought that there was a great distance (2 centuries or more) between the original writing of, say a gospel or letter, and the earliest copies that we possess. If copies only lasted for 10-20 years, this would mean in the space of 200 years as many as 10-20 copies would have been made, allowing greater opportunity for scribal errors to be introduced into the text.

The life of a manuscript was not 10-20 years as previously thought, but could last 150-500 years.

The facts are actually quite different. Dr Evans notes a study in 2009 by George Houston (you can access that study here) where the remains of 53 ancient libraries were examined. These libraries ranged from a collection of 12 books to nearly 1,000. This study demonstrated that original documents were extremely well-preserved and lasted anywhere from 150-500 years! Manuscripts were written on papyrus, or animal skin (known as vellum), with durable ink. Books (or scrolls) were considered very valuable, and were thus well taken care of. The library of Qumran (known as the Dead Sea Scrolls) is an excellent example of how manuscripts were preserved. A number of the manuscripts from Qumran are anywhere from 100-300 years old. What this means for New Testament manuscripts is that the originals could easily have lasted for several centuries, overlapping some of the copies we have today.

Dr. Evans uses this chart to illustrate that the original copy of Matthew's gospel could easily have existed into the third century. See my discussion below for further information. — Dr. Evans uses this chart to illustrate that the original copy of Matthew’s gospel could easily have existed into the third century. See my discussion below for further information.

Dr. Evans uses the Gospel of Matthew as an example (see the above photo). Matthew is thought to have composed his gospel around 75 A.D. One early collection of the gospels which we possess, known as P45 (which contains about half of the 4 gospels), was composed somewhere around 210-220 A.D. If Matthew’s original lasted for 225 years (a conservative guess by Dr. Evans), this means that Matthew’s original (as well as Mark, Luke, and John) could still have been available for comparison when P45 was composed. Dr. Evans states it this way, “So the idea that there was this was wide gap, this broken link between the originals, written in the first century, and our oldest extant copies that we now possess, that you and I can go see in museums and libraries around the world—instead of a wide, 150-year gap, where who knows what changes may have taken place, we may well have had the originals lasting right on into the third century itself.” (Evans, C. A. [2014]. NT308 The Reliability of New Testament Manuscripts. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.)

Was There Only One Original of Each New Testament Manuscript?

Another interesting fact noted by Dr. Evans is that when an original manuscript was produced in ancient times, a copy was always made of it and checked against the original. In some cases 3 or 4 copies were produced. This means when we are speaking of the originals autographs of the New Testament, there wouldn’t simply be 27 (the number of New Testament books), but at least 54, and perhaps more! These extra copies of the original lend an even greater likelihood that the autographs survived for centuries.

Along these lines, Dr. Evans notes that there are at least two ancient references to New Testament autographs surviving for centuries. The Church Father, Tertullian, writing around 190 A.D. in a document entitled, Prescription Against the Heretics, “complains of the heretics who mutilate the text, and he says, ‘If you don’t believe me, then check out the autographs of Paul’s Letters,’ and he mentions a few letters by name, ‘which you can find in Hierapolis, in Asia Minor.’” In a writing of the early fourth century by Bishop Peter, the bishop mentions that the original of the Gospel of John can still be viewed in Ephesus. Above, I posted a photograph of a famous fragment of the Gospel of John which can be seen today in the John Rylands Library at the University of Manchester, England. This fragment dates to about 140 A.D., not long after John’s Gospel was penned. If Bishop Peter’s statement is accurate, the original of John’s Gospel existed at least into the early 300s A.D. This means the Gospel of John fragment (known as P52) in the library at the University of Manchester was written well within the time that the original still circulated. There is absolutely nothing like this in classical literature. As noted above, hundreds, even thousands, of years separate the originals from their copies in classical literature, not so the New Testament.

In conclusion, this is a great course and provides some wonderful evidence for the reliability of New Testament manuscripts. Dr. Evans presentation is clear and compelling.

The Reliability of New Testament Manuscripts is available at Logos/Faithlife

Bible Backgrounds

Caesarea Philippi and the Nephilim?

March 24, 2016 randymccracken 22 Comments

Caesarea Philippi and the Nephilim?

The Nephilim are first mentioned in Genesis 6:4.

My title for this article is actually greatly abbreviated. If I were to have written out the entire title it would have been something like, “What do Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ at Caesarea Phillippi, the Nephilim, the worship of Baal, and the locations of Mount Hermon and the land of Bashan all have in common? The question sounds crazy and some Bible readers may not even be familiar with places like Mount Hermon or Bashan, and probably know very little about the mysterious Nephilim. So a very natural question is, “Who knows and who cares?” If you’ll bear with me and read through this entire post, I will try to demonstrate the connection between each of these subjects and what we can learn from their connection. Personally, the connection between these subjects has opened my eyes up to things that I had never noticed in Scripture before. As a side-light, it has also increased my conviction that learning biblical geography can help one better understand and appreciate certain stories in the Bible. I will tackle each of these subjects one at a time. As I move from item to item the picture I’m seeking to convey should become more clear. Much of the insight for this post must be credited to Dr. Michael Heiser and his recent book, THE UNSEEN REALM.

Caesarea Philippi

Caesarea Philippi is famous biblically for being the place where Jesus asked his disciples, “Who do men say that I, the Son of Man, am?” (Matt. 16:13; cf. Mark 8:27). After the disciples mentioned many well-known biblical people, Jesus asked them, “But who do you say that I am?” To which Peter responded, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 16:16). Caesarea Philippi is an interesting place for this confession since, as is usually pointed out by any good commentary, it was a seat of pagan worship in a predominantly Gentile area.

The city known as Caesarea Philippi in Jesus’ time, was originally established by Alexander the Great as a countryside shrine to the Greek god Pan located in a cave that possessed an underground stream so deep, it was considered bottomless. The place was named Paneas and later during the reign of Herod the Great, Herod built a city there. In honor of the emperor, he also built a temple to Augustus. After Herod’s death, his son Philip expanded the size of the city and renamed it Caesarea Philippi in order to honor both Caesar and himself, as well as to distinguish it from the Caesarea built by Herod on the coast. Today the city retains its ancient name, being pronounced Banias (the locals pronounce “p” like “b”). Anyone who checks a good Bible commentary can discover this information, and although it is significant that Peter confesses Jesus as the Christ in this pagan city, it is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to understanding the history of this area.

Mount Hermon, Baal, and the Nephilim

Caesarea Philippi/Banias sits at the foot of Mount Hermon in this photo, a mountain believed to be the dwelling abode of Baal in ancient times.

As the photo above illustrates, Caesarea Philippi/Banias is located at the foot of Mount Hermon (see center and bottom of photo). Mount Hermon is part of a range that divided the land of Israel from ancient Syria and Phoenicia (modern Lebanon). The Phoenicians, worshippers of Baal (think Jezebel–e.g., 1 Kgs. 18:19), actually considered Mount Hermon to be the mountain of Baal. Long before Alexander the Great instituted the worship of Pan in the area, Baal was the main attraction. In fact, Mount Hermon was also known as Mount Baal-Hermon in biblical times (Judg. 3:3; 1 Chron. 5:23).

As if the worship of Baal doesn’t provide Mount Hermon with enough of a tarnished reputation, there is still a more nefarious incident associated with it. According to the Book of Enoch, and Jewish tradition, Mount Hermon was the gathering place of the rebellious angels who descended from its heights to mate with the daughters of men, resulting in the birth of the Nephilim. I have included a copy of chapter 6:1-6 of the Book of Enoch which relates the incident:

<img class=”size-full wp-image-2399″ src=”https://www.biblestudywithrandy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/1Enoch.jpg” alt=”The Book of Enoch taught that the rebellious angels of Genesis 6 descended from Mount Hermon to mate with the daughters of men and give birth to the Nephilim.” width=”255″ height=”394″ /> The Book of Enoch taught that the rebellious angels of Genesis 6 descended from Mount Hermon to mate with the daughters of men and give birth to the Nephilim.

Book of Enoch
6:1 And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. 2 And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: ‘Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.’ 3 And Semjâzâ, who was their leader, said unto them: ‘I fear ye will not indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin.’ 4 And they all answered him and said: ‘Let us all swear an oath, and all bind ourselves by mutual imprecations not to abandon this plan but to do this thing.’ 5 Then sware they all together and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it. 6 And they were in all two hundred; who descended ‹in the days› of Jared on the summit of Mount Hermon, and they called it Mount Hermon, because they had sworn and bound themselves by mutual imprecations upon it (Charles, R. H. (Ed.). (1913). Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament (Vol. 2, p. 191). Oxford: Clarendon Press.).

To assert that the Book of Enoch teaches that the Nephilim are a result of the rebellious angels who descended from Mount Hermon, is not to suggest that this is necessarily a historical fact. It is only to assert that it was taught in Jewish tradition to be the place of this event. This tradition further enhances the evil reputation surrounding this area. Jews of the 1st century would certainly have been aware of this tradition, as the Book of Enoch was well-known to them. In fact, Peter, the very one who confesses Jesus to be the Christ at Caesarea Philippi, alludes to the Book of Enoch in 2 Peter 2:4-5.

Before leaving a discussion of Mount Hermon, it’s important to point out that its name also has significance. As Heiser states, “Just the name ‘Hermon’ would have caught the attention of Israelite and Jewish readers” (The Unseen Realm, p. 201). The name Hermon is derived from the Hebrew words ḥerem (a thing devoted to God for destruction) or ḥaram (the verb form which means to devote to destruction because it is set apart to God alone). These are the words used in the Conquest narrative (Deut.-Joshua) to describe the utter destruction of the people of Canaan. Heiser believes that this word is particularly connected with the descendants of the Nephilim (e.g., Num. 13:33). Whether Heiser’s theory–that the utter destruction was aimed at the descendants of the Nephilim–is correct must wait for a future post. My point here is that the use of this word once again seems to associate Mount Hermon with the Nephilim.

Bashan–the Place of the Serpent

This map show the area of Bashan colored in green on the right. — This map shows the area of Bashan colored in green on the right.

Moving out in an ever-widening circle, Bashan is the territory in which Caesarea Philippi and Mount Hermon reside. Although one meaning of Bashan is “fertile, stoneless piece of ground,” another meaning of this root is “Serpent” (Lete, del O. G. (1999). Bashan. In K. van der Toorn, B. Becking, & P. W. van der Horst [Eds.], Dictionary of deities and demons in the Bible [2nd extensively rev. ed., p. 161]). Bashan has associations with the Rephaim, descendants of the Nephilim going way back in antiquity. Bible students should recall that Israel, under the leadership of Moses conquered this territory which belonged to Og king of Bashan. In fact, Joshua 12:4-5 says it this way:

“The other king was Og king of Bashan and his territory, who was of the remnant of the giants [Hebrew = Rephaim], who dwelt at Ashtaroth and at Edrei, and reigned over Mount Hermon, over Salcah, over all Bashan, as far as the border of the Geshurites and the Maachathites, and over half of Gilead to the border of Sihon king of Heshbon.”

Tablet like these discovered at the ancient Canaanite city of Ugarit further confirm that Bashan was known as "the place of the serpent," and the territory of the Rephaim. — Tablets like these discovered at the ancient Canaanite city of Ugarit further confirm that Bashan was known as “the place of the serpent,” and the territory of the Rephaim.

Note the references to Mount Hermon and the Nephilim in this passage. Not only does the Bible state that King Og of Bashan is a descendant of the Nephilim, according to Heiser the designation of Og as an “Amorite” associates him with Babylon. Furthermore, the dimensions of his bed (see Deut. 3:8-11) “are precisely those of the cultic bed in the ziggurat called Entemenanki–which is the ziggurat most archaeologists identify as the Tower of Babel referred to in the Bible” (Heiser, The Unseen Realm, p. 198). All the connections start to become a little mind-blowing, not to mention confusing for some. I’ll leave it to those interested in pursuing this further to read Dr. Heiser’s book. The point here is that Bashan, the territory in which Caesarea Philippi resides, has ancient associations with the Nephilim, as well as carrying the meaning of “the place of the Serpent” The association of Bashan with “The place of the serpent,” as well as being a dwelling place of the Rephaim ( a word used in the Bible for the descendants of the Nephilim) also finds confirmation in the Canaanite literature discovered at Ugarit (see photo on left).

The Gates of Hades (Hell)

This cave in Caesarea Philippi, known as the Cave of Pan was also called, "The Gates of Hades." The cave is still visible today to anyone visiting Banias. — This cave in Caesarea Philippi, known as the Cave of Pan was also called, “The Gates of Hades.” The cave is still visible today to anyone visiting Banias.

Finally, in returning to Caesarea Philippi, given the associations of this area with Greek gods, Baal, the Nephilim, and the name “place of the serpent,” it should come as no surprise that it was also associated with the realm of the dead. The Canaanites taught that the Rephaim were the dead spirits of ancient kings, thus associating Bashan with the underworld. Interestingly enough, the Cave of Pan in Caesarea Philippi was called, “The Gates of Hades.” This may be related to the idea that the cave was believed to be a bottomless pit (see comments above). Against this background, Jesus’ statement following Peter’s confession that “the gates of Hades [hell] will not prevail against it (i.e., the church),” is very illuminating!

In conclusion, the fact that Peter’s confession occurs in a pagan area is remarkable enough. But when one learns the history of the area and the traditions associated with it, Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ the Son of God takes on greater significance. This confession is declared in “the place of the serpent.” It is declared in an area associated with divine (the Nephilim), as well as human (worship of Baal) rebellion. In the darkest place possible, Jesus asked his disciples who they thought he was, and the light of God shone on Bashan through Peter’s confession.

Archaeology, Biblical Sites

The First Century Synagogue at Magdala

March 15, 2016 randymccracken Leave a comment

The First Century Synagogue at Magdala

Whenever, I have the opportunity to visit Israel, the inevitable question that is asked is, “What was your favorite place to visit?” There are always perennial favorites like, Tel Dan, the City of David, or the Garden Tomb, but I’m always excited to see something I haven’t seen on previous trips. On my most recent trip (March 4-12, 2016), I would have to say the first century synagogue at Magdala qualifies as my favorite place.

The synagogue at Magdala was only recently discovered in 2009. The discovery occurred as a result of the Magdala Project. This project was the vision of the Legionaries of Christ, a group whom Pope John Paul II had asked to take charge of the Pontifical Notre Dame of Jerusalem Center in 2004. The vision was to create a similar center in Galilee for prayer and hospitality for visitors. As with every building project in Israel, it is important to first do some preliminary archaeological investigations, so that ancient remains are not destroyed. It can be said without exaggeration that the Magdala Project hit the motherload when, not only a portion of the ancient first century town of Magdala was uncovered, but especially when a synagogue at Magdala, dating from the first century was discovered! Listen to the words of Dina Gorni, one of the directors of the archaeological excavation: “It is a kind of a miracle, I think. We didn’t know there was any ancient material on this site. We knew of material further south, where there had been extensive excavations. We were only digging here as a precautionary measure before a building project began.” (Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/stunning-find-from-time-of-jesus/#r7rL5xUJroSoJzjE.99)

The Significance of the Synagogue at Magdala

Why is the synagogue at Magdala such an exciting find? There are several reasons. First, Gorni notes that it is only one of seven synagogues in all of Israel that is dated to the 1st century A.D. Second, and more significantly, it is the oldest synagogue that has ever been found. Dates range from 50 B.C. – 68 A.D. for the life of the synagogue. Some would even date its beginnings to 1 A.D. It seems certain that the synagogue was destroyed by the Romans in 67-68 A.D. during the First Jewish Revolt. This means the synagogue dates to the time when the Second Temple (Herod’s Temple) was still standing. Third, for Christians, this means the synagogue at Magdala was in use during the life and ministry of Jesus.

Although there is no mention of Jesus teaching in the synagogue at Magdala, it seems likely for several reasons: 1) The gospels testify to Jesus preaching in the synagogues throughout Galilee (Matt. 4:23; Mark 1:39); 2) Jesus’ association with Mary Magdalene (Mary of Magdala) makes it possible that he met her in Magdala (although she could have met him elsewhere); 3) The journey from Nazareth to Capernaum (a major center of Jesus Galilean ministry) would have involved passing by (or going through) Magdala (Capernaum is 5 miles further north along the Sea of Galilee). The Lexham Bible Dictionary states: “Jesus’ two journeys between Nazareth and Capernaum also would have taken Him through Magdala, which is situated between the two locations (Matt 4:15, Luke 4:16, 31). The journey from Cana to Capernaum depicted in the Gospel of John (John 2:1, 12) could also have taken Jesus through Magdala” (Ryan, J. [2012, 2013, 2014, 2015]. Magdala. In J. D. Barry, D. Bomar, D. R. Brown, R. Klippenstein, D. Mangum, C. Sinclair Wolcott, … W. Widder (Eds.), The Lexham Bible Dictionary. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press). This means that when standing in the synagogue at Magdala, looking around at the mosaic floor (see photo immediately below), the rows of stone benches, and the frescoes still visible on the walls (see the last photo in this article), we are probably seeing the very site where Jesus would have taught, and where Mary Magdalene would have worshipped. As those associated with the Magdala Project point out, some of the worshippers at this synagogue would certainly have been witnesses to the life and ministry of Jesus, including perhaps the feeding of the 5,000, as well as other miracles he performed in Galilee. Who knows, perhaps Jesus cast seven demons out of Mary Magadalene (Luke 8:2) in Magdala. Maybe even in the synagogue itself (cf. Mark 1:21-27).

This photo shows some of the mosaic floor. A pillar of the synagogue and the Magdala Stone can be scene on the left-center.

Two Significant Finds from the Synagogue at Magdala

The Magdala Stone. The menorah, the jars, and the pillars to the Temple are clearly visible in this view.

Besides the synagogue itself, there are two other important finds. One is a coin that dates to 29 A.D. This coin was found in the synagogue and firmly dates it to the time of Jesus’ ministry. The second important discovery has become known as the “Magdala Stone” (see photo above). In the main hall of the synagogue, a square stone was found with reliefs carved on the top and all four sides (only the bottom is blank). One of the reliefs depicts a menorah surrounded by amphorae (jugs) and pillars that represent the Temple in Jerusalem. The significance of the menorah (the 7-branched candlestand that stood in the Holy Place) is that it is the oldest known carving of a menorah. Since it dates to the time when the Temple was still standing, and since it is pictured in the relief as being inside the Temple, it is thought that it is a good representation of what the menorah would have looked like.

This photo is a closeup of one of the walls of the synagogue in Magdala which still shows signs of the colorful frescoes which once adorned its walls.

For further information on the synagogue and other archaeological discoveries at Magdala, as well as the Magdala Project, click on the links to the following youtube videos: MAGDALA and Discovery at Magdala.

Also see the following articles: First-Century Synagogue Discovered, and Ancient Synagogue Unearthed at Magdala.