fbpx

Some books are a pleasure to recommend and Walking in the Dust of Rabbi Jesus is the first that I would suggest to those interested in understanding Jesus’ teaching better with the help of the historical background. I’ve enjoyed several works of Lois Tverberg in the last few years, but this one is hands-down my favorite. Here’s why:tverberg-dust-rabbi-jesus

This book brims with insights. I love to learn new things about familiar and dear subjects, and again and again I found myself writing in the margin an exclamation mark or a reminder to return to that page. For example, concerning the command to love God:

You see this in ancient treaties, when an enemy king who signed a covenant would pledge to ‘love’ the king with whom he was making peace. This meant that the enemy king would act loyally, not that he would have warm thoughts about what a great guy the other king was every time he came to mind (44-45).

This book is biblically solid. Some subjects lend themselves to subbiblical treatments of Scripture, and Jewish backgrounds of Jesus is one of them. Tverberg never compromises what the Bible teaches in favor of the latest fad or scholarly theory. I appreciated her statement about a regular abuse in studies about the Jewish background of Jesus:

Part of the reason is from what I’ve experienced as I’ve seen people get interested in their Jewish roots. Sometimes in their enthusiasm, they take on a whole new [Hebrew] vocabulary that creates barriers between themselves and others. My thinking is that if you’ve discovered insights that bring you closer to God, you’re obligated to share them. To do so you need to be a bridge, not an island. So I deliberately use a more widely known vocabulary (83).

This book is entertaining. I carried this with me on an overseas flight, expecting to read a few chapters and then pick up my “fun” book. I never put this one down. The stories are fascinating and the quotes are going into my teaching notes. For example:

Just as rain water comes down in drops and forms river, so with the Scriptures: one studies a bit today and some more tomorrow, until in time the understanding becomes like a flowing stream. –Song of Songs Midrash Rabbah 2:8 (15).

This book is well-researched. The genre of this book with its devotional emphasis and its writing style geared towards any literate Christian is not normally associated with careful scholarship. Each chapter, however, has 10-25 endnotes.

This book echoes my thinking in some of my favorite subjects. To give but one example:

Often Jesus’ words in the Gospels presuppose an intimate familiarity with the biblical text. Sometimes Jesus made bold claims about his mission as Messiah through the Scriptures he quoted. If you don’t have the text in the back of your mind, some of his powerful statements can sail right past you (146). [Yes, and this is true for all of New Testament! I re-issue my call for a law banning the reading of the NT until one masters the OT. :-)]

This book challenges my thinking in a number of areas. For example:

One sage commented: ‘It’s better to give one shekel a thousand different times than a thousand shekels all at once, because each time you give, you become a kinder person’ (76).

I agree with my friend David Bivin who writes on the dust jacket: “It is filled with great practical wisdom that you can put to work in your life immediately.” The questions at the end of the chapter make this 14-chapter book easy to use in a group study.

There are many pitfalls in studying the background of Jesus’ time, but with only a few quibbles, Tverberg has avoided them by careful research and wise analysis. If you’re like me, after you read it, you’ll think of people who would enjoy the book as a gift. I’m a better person because of this book, and, I hope, a better blogger as well.

Share:

Seven years after the trial began, a verdict is scheduled to be announced a week from Wednesday.

From Bible History Daily (BAS):

The Biblical Archaeology Society has learned that Judge Aharon Farkash of the District Court in Jerusalem will announce the verdict on the alleged forgery of the famous James “brother of Jesus” Ossuary on Wednesday, March 14 at 9 a.m. (2 a.m. EST).
After more than seven years, hundreds of exhibits and thousands of pages of testimony, the case against defendants Oded Golan and Robert Deutsch will be decided by the trial judge. The case, which includes allegations of forgery for numerous other artifacts, has accurately been described as the “forgery trial of the century.”

Anyone care to make a prediction? I’m expecting the defendants to walk.

Last year I posted a review of nine world-class scholars who testified in court that they believe the inscription on the James Ossuary is authentic or possibly authentic.

HT: Joseph Lauer

Share:

A month ago, a plan was announced to construct a 1:1 scale model of Herod’s tomb on location at Herodium. Haaretz ran a story on it with a misleading headline (later revised): “Top archaeologists condemn Israeli plan to rebuild ancient tomb.”

This weekend The Bible and Interpretation published an article by two on the planning team, giving their motivation for proposing the reconstruction. While much of the article reviews the historical importance of the Herodium, Zeev Margalit and Roi Porat conclude with the rationale for the plan that they concede is “unique, extraordinary, and unprecedented at an archaeological site.” They describe their principles as follows:

1. Construction of the model will not damage the antiquities!
2. New construction will be clearly separated from the original remains.
3. The principle of reversibility will be strictly observed at all times; after implementation is complete, the model will be able to be dismantled and the site returned to the previous state.
4. Conservation of all archaeological findings at Herodium will be carried out together with the construction of the model, including the nearby structures – the royal chamber, the theater, the monumental steps, etc.

The full article is here.

Herodium with lower pool, tb102603555

Upper and Lower Herodium from the north
Share:

There are enough items related to the “Jesus Discovery”/Talpiot Tombs that I am going to exclude those from today’s roundup. Perhaps I will catch up next week. In the meantime, you can take a look at new photos posted at the official website.

A bronze Greek warrior’s helmet was discovered off the shore of Haifa.

The City of David is the focus of this week’s Jerusalem Post column by Wayne Stiles.

I think that Jesus and His World: The Archaeological Evidence, by Craig Evans, would be a much better use of time and money than any books about Jesus discoveries. (Two dings: it’s marketed as “provocative,” and it’s only 208 pages.)

A copy of Edward Robinson’s 3-volume Biblical Researches in Palestine just became available for $75. And a copy of Picturesque Palestine (4 vols.) was just listed for $1100. (Or pick up an electronic edition for $55.)

A Jerusalem Post article lists the Top 5 Spring Activities in Jerusalem as: Ramparts Walk, Tisch Family Zoological Gardens, Bezalel Fair, Café Itamar, Sacher Park. (The article’s introduction leaves something to be desired: “When rain let up, Spring will be upon us; here are some great outdoor activities in the capital to prepare for.”)

G. M. Grena has another riddle, but this one is so easy (he claims) that he has disqualified me from answering. So what is this great discovery that is pictured?

Congratulations to Aren Maeir for sending the final proofs off for the first double volume of the Tell es-Safi/Gath excavations.

If you’re interested in the broader world of biblical studies, you might check out the March Biblical Studies Carnival with dozens of links to the latest.

It snowed in Jerusalem on Friday. (For photos of a previous snowfall, see here.) The storm also filled Caesarea’s hippodrome with water.

Snow in Jerusalem. Photo by Austen Dutton.
Share:

From The Art Newspaper:

Turkey is refusing to lend artefacts to leading British and American museums until the issue of disputed antiquities is resolved. The ban means Turkey will not lend artefacts to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, and London’s British Museum and Victoria and Albert Museum (V&A). The British Museum had asked for 35 items for the exhibition “Hajj: Journey to the Heart of Islam” (until 15 April). Although Turkish museums were agreeable to the loans, the ministry of culture blocked them, leaving the British Museum to find alternative artefacts at short notice. As part of the growing Turkish campaign, loans have been blocked to museums with disputed objects in their collections. The Met has confirmed that a dozen antiquities are now being claimed by Turkey, but would not identify the individual items. A museum spokeswoman says: “The matter is under discussion with the Turkish authorities.” This month, the Met is due to open “Byzantium and Islam” (14 March-8 July). Many loans are coming from the Benaki Museum in Athens, with none requested of Turkish museums.

The full story is here. For previous reports of a similar nature, see here and here.

Share:
by Chris McKinny

In light of the current discussion concerning the so-called
“Jesus Discovery” of the depiction of a Jonah/resurrection motif on a 1st
century CE ossuary (see here) it is probably prudent to re-examine the
typological relationship between the two prophets of Jonah and Jesus.
Besides the explicit connection of “the sign of Jonah” mentioned
in Matt. 12:38-41; 16:4; Luke 11:29-32 there are several probable connections
that can be derived through comparing the Gospels to the book of Jonah and 2
Kings 14:25 (i.e. the only Old Testament mention of the prophet outside of the
prophetic book of Jonah). 
Consider the following suggested similarities/parallels:
1. Each prophet heralded from and began his ministry in
Lower Galilee. Jonah/Gath-Hepher and Jesus/Nazareth – 2 Kings 14:25; Matt.
2:23.
2. Each prophet’s ministry occurred during a time in which
Israel’s hierarchical, wealthy members “trampled upon the poor.” Jonah/“cows of
Bashan” during the time of Jeroboam II (8th cent. BCE);
Jesus/”devourers of widow’s households” – Amos 4:1-3; 5:11-12; 8:3-7; Matt. 19:23-25; Mark 12:41-44; Luke
16:19-31; 20:46-47.
3. Each prophet preached Yahweh to Gentiles despite a desire to
primarily minister to their own Israelite/Jewish population. Jonah joined
Phoenicians on their way to North Africa (i.e. Tarshish) to avoid the goyim of Nineveh (Jonah 1:1-3) and Jesus
stated that he was sent “only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matt.
15:24). However, both eventually ministered to Gentile populations – Jonah with
Nineveh and Jesus for example with the Syro-Phoenician woman (Mark 7:25-28),
Legion of the tombs of Gadera (Luke 8:26-34), and the centurion’s servant at Capernaum (Matt. 8:5-13).
4. Each prophet slept in the bottom of a ship in the midst of a
raging storm while the ship’s sailors were wracked with fear and bewilderment
due to the prophet’s slumber (Jonah 1:4-6; Mark 4:35-38). Additionally, each
prophet was the reason for the ceasing of the storm (Jonah 1:7-16; Mark
4:39-41).
5. Explicit connection (see above) Each prophet spent
“three days and three nights” in the “heart” of the earth before being “brought
up from the pit.” Compare Jonah’s prayer (Jonah 2) and Jesus’ “sign of Jonah”
(Matt. 12:38-41; 16:4; Luke 11:29-32) to Jonah’s expulsion (Jonah 3:1) and Jesus’
resurrection (e.g. Matt. 28:1-6).
6. Each prophet, despite being from northern Israel (i.e.
Israel in the 8th cent. BCE and Galilee in the 1st cent
CE), were obedient to the Law of Moses in worshipping Yahweh at his chosen
location of Jerusalem (Deut. 12:5-7; 2 Sam. 7:13; 1 Kings 5:5). Compare Jonah’s
“worship in the temple” (Jonah 2:4, 7), despite the enduring presence of the syncrestic
temples of Dan and Bethel, to Jesus going up to Jerusalem for various feasts
(e.g. Luke 2:41; 22:1).
7. Each prophet proclaimed coming destruction upon his
audience’s capital city. Compare Jonah’s proclamation to Nineveh (Jonah 3) and
subsequent, vengeful grief over their repentance (Jonah 4:1-4) to Jesus’
prophecy of doom to Jerusalem (e.g. Matt. 24) and subsequent, knowing grief over
their rejection (Matt. 23:37; and especially Luke 19:41-44). As an aside, I
find Jonah’s statement in Jonah 4:3 to be an ironic double entendre in the vein
of Caiaphas’ statement in John 11:49-50.
Dominus Flevit – looking at Temple Mount (copyright BiblePlaces) 

8. Each prophet left the city that they had just preached in
and went to the east of the city and prayed. Compare Jonah’s selfish,
languishing prayer concerning the loss of his shade east of Nineveh and
Yahweh’s response (Jonah 4:5-11) to Jesus’ selfless, anguish-filled plea to
“let this cup pass” in Gethsemane and Yahweh’s silence (e.g. Luke 22:39-44).
More could be said about the typology of Jonah in relation
to Jesus, especially with regards to the notable differences between the two.
Nevertheless, in my opinion the above similarities undergird the connection between
Jonah and early Christian motifs (see for example Jensen’s post which mentions 4th cent. CE depictions in Rome). Whether, the Talpiot ossuary is
the first known example of this connection is an open, debatable question, but in
either case it seems clear that the motifs derive from a clear typology that is
rooted in the Gospels. 
Share: