Part 2, The Biblical Witness
When James Cameron's documentary claims that finding The Burial Cave of Jesus “is the biggest archaeological story of the century,” is this bad news for the good news? Not at all. Soon after the news of the possible find of Jesus’ bones came out, I had a non-Christian friend gloat to me: “So, this disproves Christianity, right?” This documentary gave me my first good oppor-tunity to talk to him about Jesus.
As opposed to the unfounded assertions of the documentary, the testimony of numerous eye-witnesses is clear: Jesus was bodily resurrected from a rich man’s tomb. (Thus there are no bones to find.) Jesus repeatedly (Matthew 16:21; 17:22f; 20:18f) predicted this (“the Son of Man must suffer many things ... and after 3 days will rise again.”) It was proclaimed by the angels at the tomb (“Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here. He is risen.” Lk.24:5,6). It was believed by the disciples (“It is true! The Lord has risen and has appeared to Simon.) During the 40 days the resurrected Christ met with his disciples, hundreds saw him alive. (I Cor.15:6). (Some have conjectured that the disciples so wanted Jesus to be alive again that they hallucinated his resurrection. But do 500 people have a mass, unified hallucination?!)
But what evidence do we have that the Biblical eye-witnesses are reliable? Much indeed. First, what event could have caused the dramatic change in the disciples? When Jesus was arrested, his followers fled. Peter wouldn’t even admit his allegiance to Jesus to an insignificant servant girl. But a few months later, he boldly preached a risen Christ in the streets of Jerusalem. Would the disciples have risked the murderous wrath of the Jewish officials for a rotting carcass lying in a coffin? I don’t think so. Chuck Colson has pointed out that when Richard Nixon’s presidency was sinking, his closest aides jumped ship and testified against him to save their own skins. Self-preservation is one of our strongest urges.
Furthermore, even if we grant the possibility that the disciples concocted this story about a Living Jesus, wouldn’t his enemies have exhumed the corpse and dragged it through the city streets to disprove this dangerous “heresy”? A dead body would have buried Christianity before it sprang to life.
Be prepared to “give an answer for the hope within us” when people talk about the purported burial cave of Jesus. The belief that best fits the facts is that HE IS RISEN!
2007/03/27
2007/03/07
The Tomb of Jesus?
Part 1: The Archaeological Facts
James Cameron who produced the movie, The Titanic, is trying to float a theory that a recent (1980) discovery of a tomb in Jerusalem is the tomb of Jesus’ family and one of the ossuaries (coffins) in the tomb contains his bones. But the iceberg of facts sinks this theory faster than the Titanic.
First, where would we expect to find the crypt of Jesus of Nazareth? Not in Jerusalem but in Jesus’ ancestral home of Nazareth.
Secondly, this tomb is the tomb of a wealthy family. It has a large central room surrounded by alcoves which contained the ossuaries of the different family members. Jesus was a poor man from a poor family. It is very unlikely that they could have afforded the tomb that was discovered.
Cameron’s documentary also claimed that the names on the coffins was a major piece of evidence. But even though some of the names were the same, others didn’t fit. And the names in Jesus’ family were very common. One source contends that Mary was a name that was given to nearly one-fourth of all girls born at this time!
Furthermore, the documentary claims that one of the coffins contained the remains of Mary Magdalene. What is the evidence for this? Simply that one of the coffins contained the bones of a “Mariamene” (which is the Greek name for Mary). Then the documentary suggests (much like the Da Vinci Code did last year) that Mary Magdalene and Jesus were married. And the evidence for this wild claim? DNA samples of the supposed bones of Jesus and the bones of “Mariamene” show they didn’t share any family blood. But even if “Mariamene” and “Jesua” were married, there isn’t more than a speck of evidence that they were the Jesus and Mary Magdalene of the Bible.
If all of this seems like a giant leap, it is. Israeli archaeologist, Amos Kloner, who has researched the tomb thoroughly and has written about those findings, claims that there isn’t “any proof whatsoever” for the documentary’s claims. Another researcher believes it is all “about money and headlines.”
James Cameron who produced the movie, The Titanic, is trying to float a theory that a recent (1980) discovery of a tomb in Jerusalem is the tomb of Jesus’ family and one of the ossuaries (coffins) in the tomb contains his bones. But the iceberg of facts sinks this theory faster than the Titanic.
First, where would we expect to find the crypt of Jesus of Nazareth? Not in Jerusalem but in Jesus’ ancestral home of Nazareth.
Secondly, this tomb is the tomb of a wealthy family. It has a large central room surrounded by alcoves which contained the ossuaries of the different family members. Jesus was a poor man from a poor family. It is very unlikely that they could have afforded the tomb that was discovered.
Cameron’s documentary also claimed that the names on the coffins was a major piece of evidence. But even though some of the names were the same, others didn’t fit. And the names in Jesus’ family were very common. One source contends that Mary was a name that was given to nearly one-fourth of all girls born at this time!
Furthermore, the documentary claims that one of the coffins contained the remains of Mary Magdalene. What is the evidence for this? Simply that one of the coffins contained the bones of a “Mariamene” (which is the Greek name for Mary). Then the documentary suggests (much like the Da Vinci Code did last year) that Mary Magdalene and Jesus were married. And the evidence for this wild claim? DNA samples of the supposed bones of Jesus and the bones of “Mariamene” show they didn’t share any family blood. But even if “Mariamene” and “Jesua” were married, there isn’t more than a speck of evidence that they were the Jesus and Mary Magdalene of the Bible.
If all of this seems like a giant leap, it is. Israeli archaeologist, Amos Kloner, who has researched the tomb thoroughly and has written about those findings, claims that there isn’t “any proof whatsoever” for the documentary’s claims. Another researcher believes it is all “about money and headlines.”
2007/02/15
Forgiveness: Part 7
John and Diane were close friends of ours who shared numerous family vacations with us when our kids were young. Though we saw tension in their marriage we didn’t think it was anything fatal and were shocked when John moved out of his home and eventually asked for a divorce. He had become involved with another woman and eventually married her.
Some years later we were with Diane for a few days and we asked her what she had learned about forgiveness. She explained that she had had to learn how to forgive John again and again and again. When she was lonely, she had to forgive him for deserting her. When she struggled financially, she had to forgive him for not providing security for her. When they struggled with issues related to their children, she had to forgive him for destroying the family unity.
Forgiveness is not a once-for-all-time event. It is a state which must be maintained. When Joseph’s brothers came trembling to him when their dad died, fearful that Joseph’s forgiveness had been a sham to please Dad, Joseph repeated his enduring perspective: “God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives.” Every time Joseph was tempted to become bitter for his lost years or his lost family life or his lost innocence, he probably repeated to himself: “God intended it for good.”
Therefore, to maintain our forgiveness we must be very careful how we view the past. David Augsburger explains: “You may recall the hurt but you may not relive it. No constant reviewing, no rehashing of the old hurt, no going back to sit on the old gravestones where past grievances lie buried.” There is no indication that Joseph ever relived the day he was thrown into the pit or the day he was sold as a slave or the day he was thrown into the dungeon. Instead, he diligently performed his God-given tasks--whether it was serving a prison warden or the Pharaoh.
Forgiveness, especially for life’s deepest hurts, is “a journey; the deeper the wound, the longer the journey.” May God give us the strength and grace to forgive “seventy times seven.”
Some years later we were with Diane for a few days and we asked her what she had learned about forgiveness. She explained that she had had to learn how to forgive John again and again and again. When she was lonely, she had to forgive him for deserting her. When she struggled financially, she had to forgive him for not providing security for her. When they struggled with issues related to their children, she had to forgive him for destroying the family unity.
Forgiveness is not a once-for-all-time event. It is a state which must be maintained. When Joseph’s brothers came trembling to him when their dad died, fearful that Joseph’s forgiveness had been a sham to please Dad, Joseph repeated his enduring perspective: “God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives.” Every time Joseph was tempted to become bitter for his lost years or his lost family life or his lost innocence, he probably repeated to himself: “God intended it for good.”
Therefore, to maintain our forgiveness we must be very careful how we view the past. David Augsburger explains: “You may recall the hurt but you may not relive it. No constant reviewing, no rehashing of the old hurt, no going back to sit on the old gravestones where past grievances lie buried.” There is no indication that Joseph ever relived the day he was thrown into the pit or the day he was sold as a slave or the day he was thrown into the dungeon. Instead, he diligently performed his God-given tasks--whether it was serving a prison warden or the Pharaoh.
Forgiveness, especially for life’s deepest hurts, is “a journey; the deeper the wound, the longer the journey.” May God give us the strength and grace to forgive “seventy times seven.”
2007/01/30
Forgiveness, Part 6
“The Cost of Unforgiveness”
As I have meditated on Joseph’s life, I have wondered, When did he forgive his brothers? Though not stated explicitly, I think it happened early in Joseph’s trials. Why do I believe this? Because the fruit of unforgiveness would have prevented him from successfully serving Potiphar, the prison warden, and Pharaoh.
I have a friend named Jeff who for the last 40 years has lived an unstable, alcohol-dependent life. During one of our conversations, my slightly drunk friend became riled when the subject of his dad came up. He yelled: “And when I was in 8th grade he bought me right-handed golf clubs!” Left-handed Jeff has let that bitter memory drip poison into his life for over 40 years! Does time heal wounds? Only when it is combined with forgiveness.
How many of you would willingly let the person who has hurt you do it again? Would Joseph have wanted his brothers to throw him in a pit, threaten to kill him, and sell him again into slavery? Heaven forbid! But Jeff is letting his father continue to abuse him in his memories. If Jeff doesn’t learn how to forgive, his dad will keep abusing him – even after Dad is dead!
Reliving painful memories corrodes our strength for daily living. As Jesus said, “Each day has enough trouble of its own.” If I relive yesterday’s trouble, I won’t have the strength for today’s trouble.
Unforgiveness, then, is simply too costly to me: “Hatred is self-destructive. It is cheaper to pardon than to resent. The high cost of anger, the extravagant expense of hatred, and the unreasonable interest on grudges make resentment out of the question!”
As I have meditated on Joseph’s life, I have wondered, When did he forgive his brothers? Though not stated explicitly, I think it happened early in Joseph’s trials. Why do I believe this? Because the fruit of unforgiveness would have prevented him from successfully serving Potiphar, the prison warden, and Pharaoh.
I have a friend named Jeff who for the last 40 years has lived an unstable, alcohol-dependent life. During one of our conversations, my slightly drunk friend became riled when the subject of his dad came up. He yelled: “And when I was in 8th grade he bought me right-handed golf clubs!” Left-handed Jeff has let that bitter memory drip poison into his life for over 40 years! Does time heal wounds? Only when it is combined with forgiveness.
How many of you would willingly let the person who has hurt you do it again? Would Joseph have wanted his brothers to throw him in a pit, threaten to kill him, and sell him again into slavery? Heaven forbid! But Jeff is letting his father continue to abuse him in his memories. If Jeff doesn’t learn how to forgive, his dad will keep abusing him – even after Dad is dead!
Reliving painful memories corrodes our strength for daily living. As Jesus said, “Each day has enough trouble of its own.” If I relive yesterday’s trouble, I won’t have the strength for today’s trouble.
Unforgiveness, then, is simply too costly to me: “Hatred is self-destructive. It is cheaper to pardon than to resent. The high cost of anger, the extravagant expense of hatred, and the unreasonable interest on grudges make resentment out of the question!”
2007/01/12
Forgiveness: Part 5
“Defining Forgiveness”
When Donald Trump called Rosie O’Donnell a “low-life” and a “mental midget”, what would it mean for Rosie to forgive Donald? (Understand—this is completely hypothetical!) The primary New Testament word for forgiveness means literally to “release” or “let go”. In the same way that Joseph relinquished his opportunities to punish his brothers, Rosie would have to give up her verbal counterattacks (no more comparing Don to a “snake oil salesman.”)
And this desire to return evil for evil, must be relinquished again and again. Throughout the rest of Joseph’s life, he never brought up his brothers’ sin again. In fact, many years after their reconciliation, the brothers dredged up the past when Dad died. They were afraid that Joseph had only been waiting for Jacob’s death. But Joseph still would not blame them, clinging to his enduring conviction that “God intended it for good.” And when they offered themselves as his slaves, Joseph turned them down. Complete forgiveness releases the offending person from any obligations. Joseph asked for no apologies, no reformation, no restitution. Forgiveness steps “outside the systems of law” and steps “into the world of mercy.”
If there is no God, then Rosie and Donald should exact a pound or two of flesh. But Joseph believed in a different sort of justice. When his brothers expressed fear of retaliation, he asked: “Am I in the place of God?” When he forgave, he was releasing his brothers to the True Judge who will give to each person “what is due him for things done in the body.”
Jay Adams has written that when I forgive, I am making three promises:
I will not bring the matter up to you.
I will not bring the matter up to others.
I will not bring the matter up to myself.
Trump and O’Donnell have repeatedly broken all three of these promises. (It’s sad to watch two adults humiliate themselves in such a public brawl.) Adams’ last promise—to not bring the matter up to myself—is the basis of the other two. When I don’t hold onto bitter memories, I won’t use my tongue to hurt you or your name.
When Donald Trump called Rosie O’Donnell a “low-life” and a “mental midget”, what would it mean for Rosie to forgive Donald? (Understand—this is completely hypothetical!) The primary New Testament word for forgiveness means literally to “release” or “let go”. In the same way that Joseph relinquished his opportunities to punish his brothers, Rosie would have to give up her verbal counterattacks (no more comparing Don to a “snake oil salesman.”)
And this desire to return evil for evil, must be relinquished again and again. Throughout the rest of Joseph’s life, he never brought up his brothers’ sin again. In fact, many years after their reconciliation, the brothers dredged up the past when Dad died. They were afraid that Joseph had only been waiting for Jacob’s death. But Joseph still would not blame them, clinging to his enduring conviction that “God intended it for good.” And when they offered themselves as his slaves, Joseph turned them down. Complete forgiveness releases the offending person from any obligations. Joseph asked for no apologies, no reformation, no restitution. Forgiveness steps “outside the systems of law” and steps “into the world of mercy.”
If there is no God, then Rosie and Donald should exact a pound or two of flesh. But Joseph believed in a different sort of justice. When his brothers expressed fear of retaliation, he asked: “Am I in the place of God?” When he forgave, he was releasing his brothers to the True Judge who will give to each person “what is due him for things done in the body.”
Jay Adams has written that when I forgive, I am making three promises:
I will not bring the matter up to you.
I will not bring the matter up to others.
I will not bring the matter up to myself.
Trump and O’Donnell have repeatedly broken all three of these promises. (It’s sad to watch two adults humiliate themselves in such a public brawl.) Adams’ last promise—to not bring the matter up to myself—is the basis of the other two. When I don’t hold onto bitter memories, I won’t use my tongue to hurt you or your name.
2006/12/23
“We Three(?) Kings(?) of Orient(?) ...”
... so the beloved Christmas carol begins. Unfortunately, the opening line has at least three historical errors. First, we don’t know the number of men. Second, they weren’t kings. And third, they didn’t travel from the Orient!
Who were these mysterious travelers? And what does their presence mean to the Christmas story? These travelers were “magi”. They were apparently from Mesopotamia or Persia (present day Iraq) and were “priest-sages, extremely well educated for their day, were specialists in medicine, religion, astronomy, astrology, divination, and magic.” Since these practices were strictly forbidden in the Old Testament (Deut.18:11), what are they doing in one of the most holy events in all of history?!
Their testimony (which created quite a stir in Jerusalem) was that they were looking for “the one who has been born king of the Jews” and had come to “worship him.” Wow! How did they get so right what most of God’s people got so wrong? Since these pagan worshipers were genuinely seeking the Truth, God used what they knew (the stars) to guide them to Him.
As I share the gospel with non-Christians, I frequently encourage them to ask God if my message is true or not. If there is a God who truly cares about people finding Him, then he will reveal truth to genuine seekers. Our job, then, isn’t so much to convince people that Jesus is their savior as it is get them to become seekers like the magi. If the Christmas story is true, then God will bring them to the Truth in his time and his way.
The presence of the Magi reminds us that the gospel is for the whole world. Christ came to preach peace to those who were “far away and peace to those who were near.” And sometimes the furthest, the most unlikely are the ones who find the true peace that Jesus offers.
Merry Christmas!
Who were these mysterious travelers? And what does their presence mean to the Christmas story? These travelers were “magi”. They were apparently from Mesopotamia or Persia (present day Iraq) and were “priest-sages, extremely well educated for their day, were specialists in medicine, religion, astronomy, astrology, divination, and magic.” Since these practices were strictly forbidden in the Old Testament (Deut.18:11), what are they doing in one of the most holy events in all of history?!
Their testimony (which created quite a stir in Jerusalem) was that they were looking for “the one who has been born king of the Jews” and had come to “worship him.” Wow! How did they get so right what most of God’s people got so wrong? Since these pagan worshipers were genuinely seeking the Truth, God used what they knew (the stars) to guide them to Him.
As I share the gospel with non-Christians, I frequently encourage them to ask God if my message is true or not. If there is a God who truly cares about people finding Him, then he will reveal truth to genuine seekers. Our job, then, isn’t so much to convince people that Jesus is their savior as it is get them to become seekers like the magi. If the Christmas story is true, then God will bring them to the Truth in his time and his way.
The presence of the Magi reminds us that the gospel is for the whole world. Christ came to preach peace to those who were “far away and peace to those who were near.” And sometimes the furthest, the most unlikely are the ones who find the true peace that Jesus offers.
Merry Christmas!
2006/12/12
Forgiveness: Part 4
“Forgiveness Doesn’t Whitewash Sin”
Even though Joseph knew that God had used his brothers’ sin to do good, Joseph did not disinfect their sin: You meant evil against me; but God meant it for good. Though Joseph came to understand that God had used his tragedies for good, he was under no illusion that his brothers’ actions were anything but evil. When someone has truly abused you it is important that you don’t sanitize their sin: “Oh, that’s no big deal.” You will never be able to forgive until you have analyzed and acknowledged the full scope of your brother’s sin. (Your analysis may determine that the offense wasn’t as great as you thought it was.)
Nor does a whitewash help the sinner--Joseph’s brothers needed God’s forgiveness even more than their brother’s. Walter Wangerin explains: “It may seem saintly for the wounded party to suffer his pain in silence, and it is surely easier to keep the silence than risk opening wounds; but ... it encourages no change in the sinner.” If I mute your sin and say nothing about it, it may prevent you from dealing with your sin before a Holy God. Jesus told me to remove the tree from my eye so that I can help my brother remove the irritating speck from his eye. Without my truthful but gracious words, the speck might remain.
Furthermore, even though Joseph forgave his brothers and invited them to live near him, forgiveness and reconciliation are separate matters. (The games Joseph played with his grain-seeking brothers may have been designed to see whether he could live near them. Had they changed during the past 20 years?) A wife whose husband has been abusive must forgive him. But it may not be wise to let him back into the house--not all abusers should get their jobs back.
It takes wisdom to know when and how reconciliation should be pursued. Otherwise, the forgiver may simply become a doormat.
Even though Joseph knew that God had used his brothers’ sin to do good, Joseph did not disinfect their sin: You meant evil against me; but God meant it for good. Though Joseph came to understand that God had used his tragedies for good, he was under no illusion that his brothers’ actions were anything but evil. When someone has truly abused you it is important that you don’t sanitize their sin: “Oh, that’s no big deal.” You will never be able to forgive until you have analyzed and acknowledged the full scope of your brother’s sin. (Your analysis may determine that the offense wasn’t as great as you thought it was.)
Nor does a whitewash help the sinner--Joseph’s brothers needed God’s forgiveness even more than their brother’s. Walter Wangerin explains: “It may seem saintly for the wounded party to suffer his pain in silence, and it is surely easier to keep the silence than risk opening wounds; but ... it encourages no change in the sinner.” If I mute your sin and say nothing about it, it may prevent you from dealing with your sin before a Holy God. Jesus told me to remove the tree from my eye so that I can help my brother remove the irritating speck from his eye. Without my truthful but gracious words, the speck might remain.
Furthermore, even though Joseph forgave his brothers and invited them to live near him, forgiveness and reconciliation are separate matters. (The games Joseph played with his grain-seeking brothers may have been designed to see whether he could live near them. Had they changed during the past 20 years?) A wife whose husband has been abusive must forgive him. But it may not be wise to let him back into the house--not all abusers should get their jobs back.
It takes wisdom to know when and how reconciliation should be pursued. Otherwise, the forgiver may simply become a doormat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
