Life and Land

• 16Oct

  Romans 16: A “Grocery List” of Names Or the Heart and Focus of the Apostle Paul’s Ministry? Part 1

  Profiles in Missions Comments Off on Romans 16: A “Grocery List” of Names Or the Heart and Focus of the Apostle Paul’s Ministry? Part 1

  by Gordon Franz

  Introduction
  Romans 16 is a chapter that we usually skip in our Bible studies or devotional reading because it appears to be a “grocery list” of names that we think are unimportant.  Several years ago, I was attending a Bible study that was going verse-by-verse, in detail, through the book of Romans.  When we came to chapter 16, we spent one night on this chapter looking at a couple of names, and then the teacher said we were finished with the book!  But in actuality, we were not finished because this chapter is packed with valuable insights.  The chapter shows us the heart and focus of Paul’s missionary strategy as well as the practical outworking of the theological truths Paul had set forth in his earliest epistle, Galatians 3:26-28.  In these verses, Paul states that the work of the Lord transcends all ethnic, social and gender barriers.

  Bible students should take time to study the people mentioned by the apostle Paul in this chapter.  It is a fascinating study of Paul’s missionary strategy as well as his heart for people and a unified church in Rome.  Paul knows the words of the Lord Jesus from His “High Priestly Prayer” in John 17: “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their words; that they may all be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in you; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me” (17:20, 21).  This is what Francis Schaffer in his book The Mark of a Christian called the “final apologetics”, the world will believe if they see believers unified.

  The church in Rome was divided along ethnic, religious and social lines.  They were marginalizing Jewish believers as well as women and slaves in the church.  Paul’s desire in his final greetings was to bring these people together so they would become one in Christ.

  Apparently, a few believers in the church were bringing pork roasts that had been sacrificed in a pagan temple to the Agape meal (love feast) in the local assemblies.  They were arrogantly flaunting that, and causing offense and division at the Lord’s Supper (16:17).  This action marginalized one segment of the church.

  The Apostle James, the son of Zebedee, already addressed this issue in the second chapter of his epistle.  He called it “showing partiality.”  The example he used was partiality based on one economic status, whether rich or poor.  Some in the church, meeting in the synagogue, were showing favoritism to a rich person over a poor person, but the lesson also applies to ethnicity, gender and social status.

  The book of Romans was written in the city of Corinth during the Apostle Paul’s visit at the time of his third missionary journey in AD 57-58.   In the epistle, he expresses his desire to visit the believers in Rome on his way to Spain (1: 7, 11-13; 15: 20-24).  His “grocery list” of names in Romans 16 includes both Jewish believers as well as Gentile believers in the Lord Jesus, male and female, slaves and freedmen.

  A brief overview of the beginning of Emperor Nero’s reign should be recounted in order to put the Book of Romans in its historical context.  At the tender age of 15, Nero married his step sister, Claudia Octavia in AD 53.  A year later, as a lad of 16, Nero had come to the throne when his uncle (and some say, father), the Emperor Claudius, died from being poisoned with mushrooms by Nero’s mother, Arippina the Younger.  In February of AD 55, when Nero was 18 years old, he or his mother, poisoned his step brother Britannicus.  Soon after, Nero expelled his mother from Rome.  Now the throne was secure and Nero was the sole ruler.  At the beginning of his reign, Nero had two good advisors in his court: Seneca, his tutor, and Burrus, the praetorian prefect, whose guidance led to a peaceful and productive government (Vagi 1999: I: 165, 166).  During the first five years on his reign, called the “golden age” by some Roman writers (Seneca, Apocolocyntosis 4; LCL 443-447), the epistle to the Roman church arrived (AD 57-58).

  The Apostle Paul Commends Sister Phoebe to the Saints in the Church in Rome.  16:1, 2
  Paul begins this chapter by commending Phoebe, one of the sisters from the church in Cenchrea, to the love and care of the believers gathered to the Name of the Lord Jesus in Rome (16:1).

  Cenchrea was one of two harbors for the ancient city of Corinth and was located on the Soronic Gulf, east of Corinth.  If Paul had taken a ship from Athens to Corinth during his second missionary journey, the ship would have docked in the harbor at Cenchrea.  The walk from the harbor to the city of Corinth was about 7 or 8 miles.  Paul, Silas and Timothy ministered in Corinth for 18 months (Acts 18:11) during this missionary journey (Acts 18:1-18).  More than likely, Paul became acquainted with Phoebe during this stay in Corinth.  When Paul departs for Ephesus with Aquila and Priscilla, they left from this harbor (18:18).

  Several years later, during Paul’s second visit to Corinth, Phoebe was journeying to Rome, possibly on business or to visit family and friends.  Paul took advantage of this opportunity to send a letter to the saints who were in Rome expressing his desire to visit them on his way to Spain (Rom. 1:7; 15:23, 24).

  Phoebe had in her possession an epistle in which Paul had laid out many important, foundational, doctrinal truths, making it one of the most important epistles he would ever write.  These doctrinal truths should change the way the believers in Rome behaved toward each other.  A brief outline of the book might be: Romans 1-3, he addresses the sinfulness of all humanity before a holy God.  Paul states that “all (Jews and Gentiles, men and women, slaves and freedmen) have sinned and come short of the glory of God” (3:23).  In Romans 4 and 5, he sets forth the doctrinal truth of justification by faith alone in the Lord Jesus Christ alone.  Again he writes, “Therefore, having been justified by faith, we (Jews and Gentiles, men and women, slaves and freedmen) have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (5:1).  In Romans 6-8, he presents the sanctification, or setting apart, of the believer to a holy life of service for the Lord.  Notice the pronouns that Paul uses, “we” and “us”.  He concludes this section by asking the question, “Who can separate us from the love of God?” (8:35). The logical question that readers should ask at this point is: “What about ethnic Israel?”  In Romans 9-11, Paul addresses the issue when he presents the past, present and future of ethnic Israel.  In Romans 12-15, Paul elaborates on the practical outworking of the Christian life.  He begins this section by beseeching the brethren, in light of the mercies of God, to present their bodies to the Lord as living sacrifices (12:1, 2).  He concludes in Romans 16 with an admonition to the believers to greet one another on his behalf and the believers in Corinth.

  The opening lines of Chapter 16 are Phoebe’s “letter of commendation” to the church in Rome.  While a few in the church knew Phoebe personally, most did not.  Paul states that she is a sister (believer) and requests that the saints in Rome help her out with whatever business she has in that city because she is a worthy person.

  A pattern surfaces in the New Testament that is followed when a believer goes from their home assembly to an assembly in another city.  Believers took a letter of introduction as they went on their journey.  In Acts 18:27, Apollos left Ephesus with a letter from the brethren in that city exhorting the disciples in Achaia, and Corinth in particular, to receive him.  Paul exhorts the believers in Philippi to receive Epaphroditus (the letter carrier) “in the Lord with all gladness” (Phil. 2:29).  Paul did not need a letter of commendation when he returned to Corinth because the believers there were his letter (II Cor. 3:1-4).

  The early church, at least into the 4th century AD, followed this practice.  At least nine papyrus letters have been found in Egypt, dating from the late 3rd century AD to the early 4th Century AD that commended believers to a church in a different location (Llewelyn 1998: 169-172).

  Letters of introduction were common in the Greek world.  The teacher would give a letter to his student who was traveling to another city.  A case in point is Eudoxus from Cnidos (ca. 407-357 BC).  He was a student of Plato while he studied in Athens.  Upon his return to Cnidos, he decided to study in Egypt.  Diogenes Laertius, writing in Lives of Eminent Philosophers states: “He (Eudoxus) proceeded to Egypt with Chrysippus the physician, bearing with him letters of introduction from Agesilaus to Nectanabis, who recommended him to the priests” (8:87; LCL 2: 401-423).

  In “Plymouth Brethren” circles, this practice is considered an “assembly distinctive” because it is still followed.  I came into “Plymouth Breathren” fellowship while I was doing graduate studies in Jerusalem (1978-79).  At the end of my studies I returned to the States and sought out an assembly near my home in New Jersey.  Before I left Israel, I was given a “letter of commendation” by one of the elders.  I was glad I had it when I attended Valley Bible Chapel for the first time.  Some in the congregation were looking at me thinking, “Who is this strange bearded fellow sitting there?!”  [In 1979 I had more hair on my chin then most men in this assembly had on the top of their head!].  At the beginning of the breaking of bread meeting, one of the elders, Mr. Les Campbell, got up to read my letter.  He remarked, “It is not too often that a church receives a letter from the church in Jerusalem.  Today we have such a letter,” and proceeded to read it.

  The letter, dated September 9, 1979, said, “Greetings.  May Grace, Mercy and Peace be yours from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.  This is to commend to your love and fellowship our dear young brother Gordon Franz who has been in happy fellowship with the Believers here in Jerusalem for the past months and is now leaving for his home.  Receive the dear brother as becometh Saints, even as God has received us in Christ Jesus, His Son.  The Believers gathered to our blessed Lord in Jerusalem send greetings and salute you all in Christ Jesus our Lord.  Maranatha.”  It was signed by Mr. George Wald, a long time missionary in the Middle East, now enjoying his rewards with the Lord in Glory.  After the meeting, I was made very welcome, partly because the letter helped them know who I was and that I was “kosher”.

  Phoebe was commended to them as a “sister.”  This implies a family relationship.  Every person in this world is in one of two families, either the Devil’s family or in God’s family.  We all begin in Satan’s family, but “[God] has delivered us [believers in the Lord Jesus] from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love, in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins” (Col. 1:13, 14).  The Apostle John tells us: “But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become the children of God, to those who believe in His name:  who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God” (John 1:12, 13).

  Phoebe was also characterized as “a servant (diakonon) of the church.”  She was apparently exercising her spiritual gift of ministry (diakonian), or service (Rom. 12:7).  William McRae says of this gift: “The person with the gift of service has an unusual capacity to serve faithfully behind the scenes, in practical ways, to assist in the work of the Lord and encourage and strengthen others spiritually” (1976: 47).  D. Edmond Hiebert notes: “Paul calls her not a servant ‘in the church’ but a servant ‘of the church.’  This would indicate that the ministries of Phoebe were no mere private effort but were carried on under the approval and authorization of the church” (Hiebert 1992: 195).

  Paul instructs the church in Rome to “receive her in the Lord in a manner worthy of the saints” (16:2).  The word “receive” has the idea of opening ones home and showing hospitality to a traveler.  Phoebe would have known at least Pricilla, Aquila, and Epaenetus from Corinth and most likely she stayed with them at the beginning of her stay.  Paul also instructs them to “assist her in whatever business she has need of you.”  Some have even suggested that she was going to prepare the way for Paul’s visit to Rome (Jewett 1988).  The reason Paul commends her to the believers in Rome is because she was a helper of many, including Paul, and was worthy of their support.

  There are two reasons why Phoebe was an excellent choice to deliver the letter.  First, she saw first hand the division in the church at Corinth along religious lines and between personalities.  She would be an excellent witness to the church in Rome because she saw the church come together as one and could testify that unity was possible.  The conflict in Corinth was apparently solved.  When Paul entered Corinth, there were two groups: Jews and Gentiles.  When he left, there was a distinctively third group: the Church of God made up of Jewish and Gentile believers in the Lord Jesus (I Cor. 1:2; 10:32; II Cor. 1:1).

  Second, she could model the use of spiritual gifts to the believers in the church in Rome.  Paul had already addressed this issue (Rom. 12:3-8), but she could add some practical lessons while she was in Rome.

  Romans 16: A “Grocery List” of Names Or the Heart and Focus of the Apostle Paul’s Ministry? Part 2

  __________________________________________________________________________________________________

  [1] There are some who have suggested that the list of names in Romans 16:3-16 are greetings to believers in Ephesus, not Rome.  This idea has been refuted by Peter Lampe 2003: 153-164.
• 15Oct

  Yahweh Inscription Discovered at Mount Sinai!

  Cracked Pot Archaeology Comments Off on Yahweh Inscription Discovered at Mount Sinai!

  By Gordon Franz

  Introduction
  Dr. Robert Cornuke, the founder of the BASE Institute, claimed at the 2007 Promise Keepers events to reveal what would be an astonishing archaeological discovery.  He has photographs of what he claims is an ancient stone artifact from Mount Sinai that is inscribed with the name of the LORD, “Yahweh,” on it!  If the inscription on this stone is what he claims it is, then the headline of every archaeological publication and newspaper should state: “YAHWEH INSCRIPTION DISCOVERED AT MOUNT SINAI!”  But has he really revealed a monumental discovery of biblical significance?

  A concerned Christian contacted the Associates for Biblical Research (ABR) and inquired as to the validity of this claim, which was forwarded to me for a response.  This individual had watched the six Promise Keepers video clips on the BASE Institute website.  On one of the videos, two pictures are shown of the stone object with the inscription (see line drawing below).  The discussion of the “Yahweh inscription” begins at 5:17 minutes into the video and goes for about a minute.  In order to find the video in question on the website, the duration of this video is labeled 6:16 minutes.

  http://www.baseinstitute.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=109&Itemid=64

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFxyPGtq0bY&feature=player_embedded#

  The Claim about the “Yahweh Inscription”
  Here is what is stated on the video about this ancient stone artifact:  “This, this particular stone — now I have not shown this before publicly.  This is a, ah, this particular shot I mean.  This is – You see this stone here?  This is found around the mountain [Jebel al-Lawz].  Why is this important?  Because if this is the real Mount Sinai, we have these different letters inscribed on rocks over there.  And this particular rock, umm, has a very unique appearance to it.  You can see the front of it?  That’s a, ah, that’s a ‘Y’ ‘H’.  And in the back side has a ‘W’ ‘H’.  O.K., that spells Yahweh [YHWH].

  This is an ancient stone with ‘Yahweh’ on the face.  What did Moses have when he came down from Mount Sinai?  The glory of God was on his face.  These stones are crying out today.  Can we prove this with DNA and fingerprints?  No.  But the evidence is starting to mount slowly.”

  The claim, if I understand it correctly, is either that this is a portrait of Moses that is inscribed with the name of “Yahweh” on it in order to represent the “glory of God … on his face” (cf. Ex. 34:29-35), or it is the face of Yahweh.

  Illustration: Line drawing of the “Yahweh Stone.”  The obverse side (left) has the face of Moses or Yahweh with two South Semitic letters on it.  On the reverse (right) there are two more South Semitic letters.  This drawing was traced from a screen capture of the stone with the inscription.

  Critique and Analysis of this Claim
  A vigorous critique and scholarly analysis of this discovery is in order.  First, there is no discussion of the initial discovery or provenance (where it was found) of the inscription.  Nor is the identity of the individual revealed who found this stone at Jebel al-Lawz in Saudi Arabia, the mountain that Cornuke believes to be Mount Sinai.  Did Cornuke himself find the stone, or did somebody else actually find it there?  If the latter is the case, we are not told if the actual stone was given to Cornuke or he just received the photographs of the stone.  Assuming the stone was given to Cornuke by somebody else, that individual is not identified, nor are we told how or where it was obtained by this other party.  Was the stone actually found at Jebel al-Lawz or somewhere else?

  Second, little is said about the stone itself.  We have no idea from the picture how big or small this object is.  Was it a hand held stone, or a standing stele?  There was no scale in either picture.  What is the geological make-up of the stone?  Is it made of basalt or something else?
  A word of caution is in order.  Unless an artifact is found in situ (in place in a controlled scientific archaeological excavation), there is always the possibility that it is a modern-day forgery, something that is very common in the Middle East these days.  Proper scientific protocol should be followed and this stone should be inspected by a professional epigraphist for authenticity and a public report from the epigraphist should be issued, as to whether it is authentic or not.

  Third, where is the present location of this object?  Was it deposited with the Saudi Arabian Department of Antiquities, as required by Saudi law?  Or, was it bought on the antiquities market and now held in a private collection, or is it on display in a museum?  If so, which museum?  Also, when, and in what scientific journal will this inscription be published?

  Fourth, and most importantly, how was this text deciphered and translated?  To my knowledge, Bob Cornuke has no training in Middle Eastern field archaeology or Semitic languages, so we are not told how he arrived at the identification of these letters.  Did he identify them and translate the word himself?  Or did somebody else identify the letters and translate them as a single word?  If somebody else did, who was that individual?
  I am a field archaeologist and a Biblical geographer but not a Semitic language expert, so I contacted two Semitics scholars and an archaeologist who worked for the Saudi Department of Antiquities.  I shared with them contents of the video published on the Internet.

  Michael Macdonald, a Semitics scholar, is a research associate at the Oriental Institute at the University of Oxford.  He has had over 30 years of field experience, recording and cataloging tens of thousands of inscriptions from Syria, Jordan and the Arabia Peninsula.  In other words, he is very familiar with ancient rock graffiti and with the forms of letters in ancient scripts.  He once published a comparative chart of South Semitic alphabetic scripts (1992: 3: 419).  Thus readers can now compare the script on the “Yahweh stone” with what is known from archaeological excavations and field research.  But note his words of caution when using the chart: “The stance and shape of many letters in Safaitic and Thamudic may vary considerably.”

  The second Semitics scholar I consulted with was Dr. K. Lawson Younger Jr., Professor of Old Testament, Semitic Languages and Ancient Near Eastern History at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.  Both Semitics scholars, independently of each other, concluded that this unprovenanced sculpture is most likely a crude modern day forgery.  In personal correspondence with the author, Macdonald wrote: “I am almost certain that the sculpture is a fake. Quite a lot of these very crude carvings are appearing on the market nowadays but they bear no relation to the types of ancient Arabian sculptures found in scientific archaeological excavations.  The two letters [on the obverse side] have genuine shapes, but this is not a surprise since published script tables of the ancient scripts are widely distributed in Saudi Arabia and Yemen. I have come across small boys in remote villages able to write their names in the ancient scripts!”

  The third person consulted was Dr. Majeed Khan, an archaeologist retired from the Saudi Department of Antiquities.  He is a specialist in the rock art of Saudi Arabia and worked on the comprehensive archaeological survey of the Jebel al-Lawz region for the Saudi Department of Antiquities.  Dr. Khan also believes that the stone with the inscription is a recent forgery.  He says, “Such false stones are on sale in Yemen and Najran area [of Saudi Arabia].  You can buy many stones like these particularly in Yemen.  All are false and recently sculptured.”  Dr. Khan personally worked on the comprehensive survey of the Jebel al-Lawz area, where this sculpture is said to have come from, and he never saw anything like this sculptured rock.

  It is claimed that the inscription has the Divine Name “Yahweh” (yhwh) on the rock.  Is this a valid claim?  The side with the face on it (the “obverse”) is presumably the beginning of the inscription.  As with many Semitic languages, South Semitic scripts included, the inscription should be read from right to left.  The first letter, to the right of the nose, is transliterated as a “w”, not a “y.”  The second letter, to the left of the nose, is an “h with a dot under it” (?)  Macdonald points out that this is an entirely different letter from the “h” in “Yahweh.”

  On the reverse side of the stone are two more letters.  The letter on the right is transliterated as “h with a line under it” (?).  Macdonald observes that it is pronounced as a “kh” (like the last sound in Scottish “loch”).  This letter is not present in the name “Yahweh” and is not a “w.”  The last letter, to the left of the “?”, is a “y” and not an “h.”

  If these letters did form a single word, which is highly unlikely, it would be spelled “w??y”, and not “yhwh.”  Macdonald points out that “the letters would make no sense as a single word or name in a Semitic language since the sounds ‘kh’ and ‘h with a dot’ cannot occur in the same word.”  Younger further comments: “This is an impossible word in any Semitic language which would never have these two gutturals in a row.”  He continues, “This is absolute proof that the inscription is a forgery!”  On a lighter note, Younger says, “It yields a word that could not be pronounced!  It would ruin someone’s throat trying!”

  Younger sums it up this way: “I can say most emphatically this is not the Hebrew divine name Yahweh (yhwh).  There is an obvious wrongness to the order of the consonants, and the consonants themselves are wrong!”  Macdonald and Khan concur.

  These are very important questions and serious objections that need to be answered by the BASE research team.  It is hoped that an answer will be posted to all these questions and objections, as well as a report from a professional epigraphist as to the stone’s authenticity in the very near future.  A good place to share the answers to these questions and objections would be under the “Investigations” category of the BASE Institute website.  There is no article in the “Inscriptions” file, except four short paragraphs.  The last one says: “Continue to check back here at the Institute for further information release.”  This statement has been up for about two years.  Now (October 2009), would be the time to add a report about the “Yahweh Inscription.”

  Another important question raised is that the inscription was alleged to be found at a site other than a mountain in the Sinai Peninsula.  Mount Sinai is located in the Sinai Peninsula according to all the biblical data, and not at Jebel al-Lawz in Saudi Arabia where the discovery was allegedly made.  Ancient writers included the Sinai Peninsula within the province of Arabia in the first century AD.  The Apostle Paul was perfectly consistent with these ancient writers when he stated in Galatians 4:25, “Mount Sinai in [first century AD] Arabia.”  Mount Sinai is named in accordance with the Sinai Peninsula (not Arabia), and thus does not lie in the boundaries of modern Saudi Arabia, which excludes the Sinai Peninsula (Franz 2000: 101-113).

  Conclusions
  To sum up: the sculpture of the bearded man or deity is thus more than likely a modern-day forgery carved thousands of years after the Exodus.  It was also not written in genuine paleo-Hebrew and can not be translated “Yahweh.”  The facts surrounding the chronology and paleography of this inscription would negate this artifact as being clearly connected with the visit of the Children of Israel to Mount Sinai.
  The men that attended the Promise Keepers events and heard this presentation, or those who view the video clip, should not share this information with others as proof that the Bible is true.  The Bible is true regardless of whether this discovery has any biblical significance.  The assertion that Mount Sinai is at Jebel al-Lawz in Saudi Arabia still lacks credible and verifiable historical, geographical, archaeological, or biblical evidence.

  For further reading:

  MT. SINAI IS NOT AT JEBEL EL-LAWZ IN SAUDI ARABIA – part 1

  MT. SINAI IS NOT AT JEBEL EL-LAWZ IN SAUDI ARABIA – part 2

  MT. SINAI IS NOT AT JEBEL EL-LAWZ IN SAUDI ARABIA- part 3

  Bibliography

  Franz, Gordon
  2000    Is Mount Sinai in Saudi Arabia?  Bible and Spade 13/4: 101-113.

  Macdonald, Michael
  1992    Inscriptions, Safaitic.  Pp. 418-423 in Anchor Bible Dictionary.  Vol. 3.  Edited by D. N. Freedman.  New York: Doubleday.
• 02Oct

  THE LORD IS MY MASADA

  Life of King David Comments Off on THE LORD IS MY MASADA

  by Gordon Franz

  Introduction
  I should preface my comments about the passages on Masada in the psalms by recounting a story.  While teaching at the Institute of Holy Land Studies in Jerusalem, I was invited to speak to a Christian tour group in one of the local hotels.  The tour host never took his groups to Masada because, as he put it, “The site is post-resurrection [of Jesus], thus unimportant.”  One elderly lady in the group asked me quite piously and condescendingly, “You don’t take your groups to Masada, do you?”  I knew where that question was coming from.  I smiled and said, “Of course I do, it’s a very important Biblical site.  King David visited the site on at least three occasions and composed several psalms that mention Masada!”  The shocked look on her face was one of those priceless Kodak moments! J  She told the group leader of our conversation.  He examined the passages and from that point on, he took his groups to Masada.
  
  David at Masada
  The word “Masada” in the Hebrew Bible is generally translated “stronghold” or “fortress” in the English Bibles.  The French geographer, F. M. Abel, associates Masada with this Hebrew word (1938:2:380).  David visited the site on at least three occasions.  The first time he saw it was when he was fleeing from Saul.  After his family joined him in the cave of Adullam (I Sam. 22:1, 2), David decided to take them to the Land of Moab and ask the king of Moab to let them stay under his protection in his land.  David and his entourage would have gone past Masada as they forded the Dead Sea at the Lisan (“tongue”).

  As David passed by, he would have noted the strategic and military value of Masada.  The mountain plateau was situated 360 meters above the plain floor on the southeastern edge of the Wilderness of Judah, opposite the Lisan of the Dead Sea.  Strategically, from the top of the site, David would have a commanding view of the Dead Sea region and the eastern slopes of the Wilderness of Judah.  If there was any large troop movement by Saul, or even the Philistines, he could quickly escape across the Lisan to Moab.  Militarily, he also noticed the site had steep sides all around it with only one accessible path to the top on the eastern side of the mountain, today called the “Snake Path.”  It was easily defensible from any attackers because of its elevation and the single path to the top.  The defenders on top could easily roll down boulders of rocks to stop any attackers.

  David made good on his observations and stayed at the “stronghold” (Masada) after he left his parents in Moab.  As long as there was water on top of the mountain, David felt safe and secure and did not want to leave.  It was not until the prophet Gad came and told David to leave, that he left for the Forest of Hereth in the Land of Judah (I Sam. 22:4, 5).

  The second time David and his men went to Masada was after he spared Saul’s life at Ein Gedi.  The Bible says, “And Saul went home, and David and his men went up to the stronghold” (I Sam. 24:22).  Here was the “parting of the ways” between Saul and David.  Saul goes northwest, back to his palace at Gibeah of Saul, and David goes south to the stronghold situated 18 km to the south of Ein Gedi.

  The third time we know of David at Masada is after he was anointed king of all Israel in Hebron.  The Bible says, “All the Philistines went up to search for David.  And David heard of it and went down to the stronghold” (II Sam. 5:17).  Notice the topographical indicators in this passage.  Hebron (Tel Rumeida) is situated 944 meters above sea level.  The base of Masada is 300 meters below sea level.  David literally went down to Masada.

  Masada was extensively excavated by Professor Yigael Yadin in the early 1960’s.  Most of the excavations concentrated on the Early Roman period remains built by Herod the Great and used by the Sicarii at the end of the First Jewish Revolt in AD 73.  Yadin, however, also found 10th century BC, Iron Age pottery scattered on the surface (1966:202).  Perhaps some of the 10th century pottery was left by David and his men.  Yadin, however, is unconvinced by this idea (1965:115).  One of his field supervisors, on the other hand, considers the possibility that David and his men did stay at Masada (Meshel 1998: 48; Yadin 1966: 6).

  Masada in the Book of Psalms
  David composed at least four psalms in which he mentions Masada.  The first psalm is Psalm 18.  This psalm was written on the “day that the LORD delivered him from the hand of all his enemies and from the hand of Saul” (18: superscription).  In it he sings, “I will love You, O LORD, my strength.  The LORD is my rock and my fortress (Masada) and my deliverer; My God, my strength, in whom I will trust; My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold (lit. “high tower”)” (18:1, 2; see also II Sam. 22:2-3).

  The second psalm is Psalm 31.  Again David sings, “In You, O LORD, I put my trust; Let me never be ashamed; Deliver me in your righteousness.  Bow down Your ear to me, Deliver me speedily; Be my rock of refuge, a fortress (Masada) of defense to save me.  For you are my rock and my fortress (Masada); Therefore, for Your name’s sake, Lead me and guide me” (31:1-3).

  The Hebrew word “Masada” is also used in Psalm 66:11 and is translated into English as “net” (NKJV; NASB) or “prison” (NIV).

  The third psalm that uses Masada is Psalm 71.  It is uninscribed, but most likely written by David.  In it he sings: “In You, O LORD, I put my trust; Let me never be put to shame. … Be my strong refuge, To which I may resort continually; You have given the commandment to save me, For you are my rock and my fortress (Masada)” (71:1, 3).

  The fourth psalm composed by David that mentioned Masada is Psalm 144.  In this psalm he sang: “Blessed be the LORD my Rock, Who trains my hands for war, and my fingers for battle –  My loving-kindness and my fortress (Masada), My high tower and my deliverer, My shield and the One in whom I take refuge, Who subdues my people under me” (144:1, 2).

  One other psalm mentions a “stronghold.”  Psalm 91 is uninscribed, but some commentators attribute it to Moses and suggest it is a continuation of Psalm 90.  The superscription of that psalm says: “A Prayer of Moses the man of God.”  In Psalm 91 it starts out: “He who dwells in the secret place of the Most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.  I will say of the LORD, ‘He is my refuge and my fortress (Masada), My God, in Him I will trust” (91:1, 2).

  This would have been a psalm David knew by heart.  He understood theologically that the LORD was his fortress / stronghold and his trust was in God.  Perhaps when he saw Masada for the first time, it reminded him of the Lord.  After staying there on several occasions, he came to realize, as secure as this rocky plateau may seem, the Lord truly was his Masada!
  
  Bibliography

  Abel, F. M.
  1967    Geographie de la Palestine.  Vol. 2.  Paris: Librairie Lecoffre.

  Meshel, Ze’ev
  1998    Governments-in-Exile.  Biblical Archaeology Review 24/6: 46-53, 68.

  Yadin, Yigael
  1965    The Excavation of Masada 1963/64. Israel Exploration Journal 15/1-2: 1-120.

  1966    Masada.  Herods Fortress and the Zealots Last Stand.  Jerusalem: Steimatzky.  Reprinted 1984.
• 24Sep

  ONESIPHORUS: A Cool Breeze and a Courageous Brother

  Profiles in Missions Comments Off on ONESIPHORUS: A Cool Breeze and a Courageous Brother

  by Gordon Franz

  Introduction
  In the early 1990’s, I was teaching the Wheaton in the Holy Land short-term program at the Institute for Holy Land Studies in Jerusalem.  The Wheaton program was hosted by Dr. and Mrs. James Hoffmeier.  On our Negev field trip we visited the Timnah Copper Mines, just north of Eilat.  In the month of June, southern Israel gets hot … very hot.  Dr. Hoffmeier had a watch with all the bells and whistles on it.  Not only did it give the time, it also gave a whole host of other things including the outside temperature.  As we stood over the deepest copper mine in the park, Jim showed us his watch.  The afternoon temperature registered 136 degrees Fahrenheit!  When we finished our hike we refilled our water bottles and drank plenty of water.  We were very appreciative of our bus driver for aligning the back of the bus to the sun, pulling down all the shades and keeping the air-conditioner on full blast so it was a cool 75 degrees Fahrenheit when we got onto the bus.  We were refreshed by the considerate act of the bus driver.

  The Apostle Paul states that Onesiphorus, one of the less-spoken about Christians in the New Testament, “often refreshed me” (II Tim. 1:16).  The acts of kindness that Onesiphorus performed on behalf of the apostle, both in Rome and Ephesus, were like our bus driver being concerned for our “creature comfort”.  After a blazingly hot hike we were able to return to a refreshingly cool air-conditioned bus.

  Onesiphorus and his household are mentioned only twice in the Bible, both times in Paul’s second epistle to Timothy.  We read: “This you know, that all those in Asia have turned away from me, among whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes.  The Lord grant mercy to the household of Onesiphorus, for he often refreshed me, and was not ashamed of my chain; but when he arrived in Rome, he sought me out very zealously and found me.  The Lord grant to him that he may find mercy from the Lord in that Day – and you know very well how many ways he ministered to me at Ephesus” (II Tim. 1:15-18).  “Greet Prisca and Aquila, and the household of Onesiphorus” (4:19).

  Theological Context
  The Apostle Paul, when he penned the second epistle to Timothy, was concerned that his son in the faith might follow the ways of many of the church leaders in Asia Minor.  These leaders abandoned Paul because he was in prison and called an evil doer by the Imperial Roman government (II Tim. 1:15; 2:9).  Some church leaders were ashamed of Paul and did not want to be associated with a state criminal.
  In the first chapter of this epistle, Paul uses the word “ashamed” three times.  The first time he uses the word he admonishes Timothy not to be ashamed of the Lord or of Paul because he was in prison (1:8).  Previously, Paul had reminded Timothy of his genuine faith (1:5), the spiritual gift that was bestowed upon him (1:6), and that God has not given him the spirit of fear, but of power, love and a sound mind (1:7).

  The second time the word is used, Paul states that even though he is suffering persecution and in prison, he is not ashamed of the Lord because he knows the Lord Jesus is the One in whom he has believed and is persuaded that the Lord will keep him secure until the Judgment Seat of Christ (1:12; cf. 4:6-8).

  In the third usage, Paul contrasts his dear friend with the leaders of the churches of Asia who abandoned Paul and says Onesiphorus is not ashamed of Paul’s chains (1:16).  This dear friend was the example that Paul wanted Timothy to emulate.

  The Chronological and Historical-Geographical Context of the Life of Onesiphorus
  While Onesiphorus and his household are mentioned only twice in the Bible (II Tim. 1:15-18; 4:19), they are mentioned several times in church tradition that might have some historical validity.

  According to the second century AD apocryphal book, the Acts of Paul and Thecla (Schmeemelcher 1992:2:213-270), Onesiphorus is living in Iconium when Paul, apparently on his first missionary journey with Barnabas in AD 47, approaches the city.  Onesiphorus and his wife Lectra and their two children, Simmias and Zeno, met Paul on the “royal road to Lystra” [the Via Sebaste] and invited Paul and his traveling companions to stay at their home in Iconium (Acts of Paul and Thecla 2-3).  Paul accepts their invitation and hospitality and uses their house for home Bible studies.

  The book includes a sermon given by the Apostle Paul in Iconium.  Most likely it is a “Reader’s Digest” version, or a sermon outline, of a much longer message.  Much of what is recorded is from the Sermon on the Mount, including “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy” (Matt. 5:7; Acts of Paul and Thecla 5-6).  It is also recorded that: “Onesiphorus had left the things of the world and followed Paul with all his house” (Acts of Paul and Thecla 23).  In other words, he and his household probably gave up the local entertainment scene, i.e. the gladiatorial games, the theater and the symposiums (drinking parties) in order to follow Paul and minister to his needs (cf. Josh. 24:15).

  This apocryphal book was not inspired by the Holy Spirit, but its lack of Divine inspiration does not mean that it is not important or that it does not have a defined historical core and some historical validity.  Some scholars have objected to its validity concerning Onesiphorus because the Acts places Onesiphorus’ home in Iconium, but the Second Epistle to Timothy places his residence in Ephesus (II Tim. 1:18; 4:19).  I do not think, however, this objection is valid.  It is very plausible that Onesiphorus and his household moved from Iconium to Ephesus.  I suspect, but can not prove, that Onesiphorus moved to Ephesus after Paul established his teaching center in the School of Tyrannus (Acts 19:9) during his third missionary journey (AD 52-55).

  An example of New Testament believers that moved around the Roman world for the sake of the gospel are Aquila and Priscilla.  Aquila was originally from Pontus, on the southern coast of the Black Sea (Acts 18:2) and possibly came to Rome with the Apostle Peter in AD 42.  Most likely he met and married Priscilla in Rome and both were expelled from the Eternal City by the decree of Emperor Claudius in AD 49 (Acts 18:2).  They met the Apostle Paul in Corinth in AD 50 and ministered with him in that city until he departed, and took them with him to Ephesus in AD 52 (Acts 18:18, 19).  There they had a church meeting in their home (I Cor. 16:19; cf. Acts 18:26).  Most likely they ministered in Ephesus until after the death of Emperor Claudius in AD 54 at which time they returned to Rome.  By AD 58, there is a church meeting in their home in Rome (Rom. 16:3-5).  Most likely they returned to Ephesus after the Great Fire in Rome during AD 64 when Emperor Nero blamed the Christians for the disaster and began to persecute them.  The Apostle Paul greets them when he writes to Timothy in Ephesus in AD 65 (II Tim. 4:19).  Aquila has moved at least six times within a 25 year time-frame.  It is very plausible that Onesiphorus could have gone from Iconium to Ephesus in order to help Paul while he was teaching at the school of Tyrannus.

  I believe that Onesiphorus resided and ministered in Ephesus for the next ten years until AD 65 when he visited Paul in prison in Rome.  Scripture is silent as to what happened after his trip to Rome.  Some have conjectured, based on verse 18: “The Lord grant to him that he may find mercy from the Lord in that Day” that Onesiphorus was dead.  They suggest he was arrested in Rome because of his association with Paul and then executed.  It has also been suggested that verse 18 is actually a prayer for the dead.

  There is, however, another possibility.  According to the Acta Sanctorum, Onesiphorus visited Spain, apparently after Paul’s fourth missionary journey, and was eventually martyred with Porphyrius, a member of his household, “at Parium, a city of Mysia, situated near the western end of the Sea of Marmora, where it narrows to the Hellespont” between AD 102 and 114 during the reign of Emperor Trajan (Ramsey 1897-98: 495).

  If this is historically accurate, and I suspect it is, then Onesiphorus was not dead, but very much alive and ministering in Spain when Paul sent this wish-prayer to the Throne of Grace.  Thus this is not a prayer for the dead, but rather, a prayer that Onesiphorus would find mercy from the Lord at the Judgment Seat of Christ (cf. 4:8).
  
  An Exposition of II Timothy 1:15-18
  Paul has encouraged Timothy not to be ashamed of the Lord Jesus or Paul himself.  He sets forth two examples of people with whom Timothy was very familiar.  The first example was negative and demonstrated people who were cowards (1:15).  The second example was positive and showed someone with courage (1:16-18).  The positive example consists of three verses that contain two wish-prayers for Onesiphorus and his household and four acts of mercy displayed by Onesiphorus.

  All Asia Deserted Paul – 1:15
  One of the saddest verses, penned by the Apostle Paul was: “Demas has forsaken me, having loved this present world” (II Tim. 4:10).  And an equally sad verse is: “This you know, that all those in Asia have turned away from me, among whom are Phygellus and Hermogenes” (1:15).
  There are several things to notice in this verse.  First, all those in Asia did not turn away from the Lord and abandon their faith, rather, they deserted Paul.  “All those in Asia” can not mean 100% of the believers deserted Paul because at least Timothy and Onesiphorus and his household were still loyal to Paul.  More than likely it means all the leaders in the churches of Asia deserted Paul (Plummer nd: 323; Lenski 1964:772).  A possible scenario is that when Paul was imprisoned he wrote to the church leaders in Asia and invited them to come to his defense and be character witnesses for him before Nero.  They said to Paul, “Nothing doing, you are a state criminal and we will have nothing to do with you!”  He singles out Phygellus and Hermogenes because they might have been from Ephesus and could exert some negative influence on Timothy.  Paul probably also expected them to show more loyalty to him.

  Wish-pray for the Household of Onesiphorus – 1:16a
  Paul now turns Timothy’s attention to Onesiphorus as a positive example of one who is not ashamed of Paul’s chains.  He begins with a wish-prayer: “The Lord grant mercy to the household of Onesiphorus.”  (On wish-prayers, see Towner 2006: 482).

  Mercy, in this context, “envisions God … seeing someone’s suffering and being moved (by compassion) to share in it, bringing help in time of need, when people are incapable of helping themselves” (Towner 2006: 482).

  Apparently Onesiphorus’ household was loyal to the apostle Paul and in full support of Onesiphorus’ trip to Rome.  They probably assumed that Onesiphorus would go to Rome, find Paul, refresh his physical and spiritual needs and then return home.  Paul, however, had other ideas.  According to the Acta Sanctorum, Onesiphorus went to Spain.

  It would make sense that Paul sent Onesiphorus to Spain to follow-up on his church planting activities during his fourth missionary journey right before he was imprisoned in Rome a second time.  This was more “time away from home” than expected by Onesiphorus’ household, so Paul prays that the Lord would grant mercy to the household while the head of the that household was away.  The implication of that prayer is that the Lord would provide for their daily needs while the bread winner was way.

  Onesiphorus was merciful towards the Apostle Paul by being a cool breeze – 1:16b
  Paul now states the first merciful act of kindness that Onesiphorus shows to Paul: “for he often refreshed me.”  This is the only place in the New Testament where the word refreshed is used.  However, contemporary papyri use the word as a “cool, refreshing breeze for a man about to faint” (Hiebert 1992:181).  The Septuagint (LXX), the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, uses the word four times (Ex. 23:12; I Sam. 16:23; II Sam. 16:14; Ps. 39:13).  The use in Exodus 23 is very instructive.  The text states: “Six days you shall work, and on the seventh day you shall rest; that your ox and your donkey may rest, and the son of your female servant and the stranger may be refreshed” (23:12; Seekings 1914:170).  As Jesus would later state: “The Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath” (Mark 2:27).  The purpose God gave Shabbat to His people was so they could rest, relax and rejuvenate their bodies and be ready for another week of work.

  Roman prisons are not like prisons in the United States where prisoners are respected by law and have numerous rights, comforts and conveniences.  Roman prisons were dark and damp, and the prisons did not provide meals to their prisoners.  That was the responsibility of the family and friends of the person who was incarcerated.  Dr. Luke was in Rome and helped out Paul, but they were both relieved when Onesiphorus showed up.  Not only did he provide for Paul’s physical needs, but also much needed fellowship which he did on a number of occasions.

  What exactly Onesiphorus did for, or to Paul to refresh him, we are not told.  Perhaps Paul deliberately did not tell Timothy, and us, so that we might draw broad applications for our own lives.  How can we minister to someone in order to refresh them?

  Onesiphorus was merciful towards the Apostle Paul by being a courageous brother – 1:16c
  The second merciful act of kindness that Onesiphorus showed to Paul was that he was not ashamed of Paul’s chain.  Sometimes Paul uses the word chain / chains in a metaphorical sense for his imprisonment, but in the historical context he is referring to literal chains (1:16; 2:9).  Towner has observed: “Paul wore the chains on his hands, a mark of shame in society, as a badge of honor earned by his solidarity with Jesus Christ and refusal to “be ashamed” of the cross” (2006: 483).

  Paul was a state criminal, chained to a Roman guard, and treated as an evil-doer (2:9).  Onesiphorus did not care what other people thought of his friend; he showed a tremendous amount of courage and remained loyal to his brother in the faith, Paul.

  Herbert Seekings states: “That eager searching involved greatest peril, for it implied an acknowledged identification with one who was accused as a teacher of heresies and a traitor to the emperor.  But Onesiphorus did not shrink from the test.  He was neither ashamed of Paul’s chain nor afraid for his own safety” (1914: 172).

  Perhaps Onesiphorus had a copy of the epistle to the Hebrews and sought to apply two verses that he had read.  The first was a promise of God which stated: “For both He [the Lord Jesus] who sanctifies and those who are being sanctified are all of one, for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren” (2:11).

  If he had that copy, perhaps Onesiphorus knew that God was working in his life, taking the rough edges off of him as he was being sanctified and conformed to the image of His Son, yet Onesiphorus also knew he still had a sin nature, could stumble and fall, and embarrass the Lord and His work.  Yet the promise of God was: “The Lord Jesus was not ashamed to call him a brother!”  Since the Lord Jesus was not ashamed of Onesiphorus, even with his faults and rough edges, this encouraged Onesiphorus not be ashamed of his friend and brother in the Lord, even if the imperial state labeled him as an evil-doer.

  The second verse was a command: “Remember the prisoners as if chained to them – those who are mistreated – since you yourselves are in the body also” (13:3).  Onesiphorus was probably as closed to being chained to the Apostle Paul as one could get without actually being chained.  He courageously visited him and “often refreshed him.”
  
  Onesiphorus was merciful towards the Apostle Paul by being a consummate bloodhound – 1:17
  Bloodhounds were bred for their extremely sensitive nose that could follow a faint scent until they were successful in finding the object that they were tracking.  This makes them the canine of choice for police and law enforcement when they want to track on-the-loose criminals or to find lost children.  Onesiphorus was a consummate bloodhound when it came to tracking down the Apostle Paul while he was imprisoned in Rome.  Verse 17 states: “but when he arrived in Rome, he sought me out very zealously and found me.”

  The text does not record why Onesiphorus came to Rome in the first place.  It could be that he was in Rome on business and heard that Paul was in prison.  Or, perhaps he was on vacation and wanted to do some sight-seeing in the Eternal City.  But most likely, word had gotten back to Ephesus of Paul’s imprisonment and he specifically went to Rome to find the Apostle Paul and minister to him.

  Unlike Paul’s first imprisonment where he was under house arrest in a rented apartment and had access to visitors (Acts 28:16, 23, 30), his second imprisonment found him chained and in an undisclosed location.  This made it very difficult for Onesiphorus to find him.  Most likely he had never been to Rome before so he did not know his way around the city which a year or so before had been burned and a large portion of the city was in ruin.  The fire, blamed on the Christians, caused those believers who survived the subsequent persecution to flee the city, thus information on Paul’s whereabouts from Christians was scarce.  Those Christians who did remain in the city might be suspicious of this stranger and unwilling to share any information about the apostle with Onesiphorus (Hendricksen 1957:239).  Perhaps he was finally able to track down the apostle because he had a chance meeting with Dr. Luke.  Somehow, like a bloodhound on an almost cold trail, he found Paul!

  When Onesiphorus first arrived in Rome, he could have been discouraged by the daunted task of finding Paul and said to himself, “There is absolutely no way I am going to find Paul.”  He may have wanted to give up and go home.  Yet he remembered the words of Paul when he was preaching in Onesiphorus’ home in Iconium, “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy” (Matt. 5:7; Acts of Paul and Thecla 6).  This encouraged him to continue the search so he could minister to the physical and spiritual need of the Apostle Paul.
  
  Wish-pray for Onesiphorus – 1:18a
  The Apostle Paul was keenly aware of the demands of the Christian life and the fact that believers in the Lord Jesus still have their sin nature.  In fact, he wrote to the believers in Corinth and reminded them of the potential of being disqualified from the Christian race (I Cor. 9:24-27; cf. II Tim. 4:6-8).  Paul was not saying, however, that believers could lose their salvation.  That, he clearly states, was eternally secure in Jesus Christ (II Tim. 1:12).  What Paul was saying is that they would not be used of the Lord and would suffer the loss of rewards at the Judgment Seat of Christ.

  Paul makes it clear that all believers in the Lord Jesus, and only believers, will appear at the Judgment Seat of Christ (II Cor. 5:10).  The unsaved, those who have rejected the Lord Jesus as their Savior, will appear at the Great White Throne Judgment to determine their degree of punishment in Hell forever (Rev. 20:11-15).

  At the Judgment Seat of Christ, however, the issue of sin is not brought up because they had been dealt with by the Lord Jesus on Calvary’s cross where He died in order to pay for all our sins (John 1:29; I John 2:2; Heb. 10:1-18).  At this judgment, however, believers works are judged (I Cor. 3:12-15).

  Thus, Paul’s prayer for Onesiphorus is that God would grant mercy to him so that he would remain faithful to the Lord and continue in His work, by His grace, in His strength and for His glory.  If he does, when his works are tested by fire, they will endure and Onesiphorus will be rewarded by the Lord.  If, on the other hand, his sin nature gets the better of him, his works are burned up and he will suffer the loss of rewards.  But Paul is quick to add: “but he himself will be saved, yet so as through the fire” (I Cor. 3:15).  In other words, he will be saved by the skin of his teeth, but will have nothing to show for it, so he will be ashamed at the coming of the Lord (I John 2:28).
  
  Onesiphorus was merciful towards the Apostle Paul by being a caring benefactor – 1:18b
  Paul now records the fourth, and final, merciful act of kindness that Onesiphorus showed to Paul.  He writes: “And you know very well how many ways he ministered to me at Ephesus.”

  Paul does not enumerate the many things that Onesiphorus did to minister to Paul in Ephesus; Timothy knew what they were from personal experience.  Perhaps Paul and his fellow workers were the recipients of Onesiphorus’ hospitality and ate meals with the household.  Or, perhaps Onesiphorus labored with them in the School of Tyrannus and helped pay the monthly rent.  We can only speculate because Scripture is silent on this matter.

  Personal Applications
  There are at least three lessons we can learn from the life of Onesiphorus and hopefully apply them as we grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

  First, Paul wanted Timothy to emulate and follow the examples of Onesiphorus and not to be ashamed of the Lord and Paul’s chains like the church leaders in Asia Minor.  Onesiphorus was a “cool breeze” refreshing the Apostle Paul when he was in need.  He was a “courageous brother” who was not afraid of Paul’s chains.  He was a “consummate bloodhound” who zealously sought out Paul while he was imprisoned even though it seemed a hopeless task.  He was a “caring benefactor” ministering to the needs of the apostle while he was laboring in Ephesus.  Paul gives little details of the merciful acts of kindness that Onesiphorus showed toward Paul because Timothy was well aware, from first hand experience, of the things this “cool breeze”, “courageous brother”, “consummate bloodhound”, and “caring benefactor” did for Paul.  This should encourage us to be creative in the ways we can emulate and follow Onesiphorus.

  Second, Paul was keenly aware of the demands of the Christian life so he uses athletic metaphors to describe that life as a race, a boxing match, and a wrestling match.  He presents himself as an athlete who brings his body into subjection and disciplines his life so he will not be disqualified from the athletic contests.  When Paul penned these words to Timothy he knew for him, that the contest was over and he was about to be martyred.  He also knew he had kept the faith and won the athletic contest and would be rewarded by the Righteous Judge, the Lord Jesus Christ, at the Judgment Seat of Christ (II Tim. 4:6-8).

  Paul, however, still prayed for Onesiphorus and his household, that the Lord would grant mercy to them.  First, because they showed mercy to Paul and there was no way he could humanly speaking return their kindness; and second, because they were still engaged in the spiritual athletic contest and there was a possibility of being disqualified from that contest.  Paul’s prayer would be for their faithfulness in the work and it would be done by the grace of God, in His strength and for His glory.

  Do we pray for individual believers?  I do not mean a general: “God bless everybody in the church!” but specific prayers for individuals.  Awhile back I observed a young Christian who was struggling in her walk with the Lord.  The Lord impressed upon me to pray for this individual on a daily basis.  My prayers for the spiritual life of this person were threefold: First, the Lord would draw this person close to Himself.  Second, the Lord would work in this individual’s life to conform them to the image of His Son (Rom. 8:28-29).  And finally, the Lord would give this person a desire to study His Word, the Bible, and apply it to this individual’s life.  I also pray for some specific personal and physical needs as well.  This was how Paul prayed for Onesiphorus and his household.

  Third, the prayer that Paul prayed for Onesiphorus was not a prayer for the dead because he was very much alive.  In fact, the Bible does not teach that believer can, or should, pray for the dead because their eternal destiny was determined by them in this life.  Did they trust the Lord Jesus Christ as their Savior or not?  If they did, when they died, they would go into the presence of the Lord (II Cor. 5:1-8).  If they did not trust Christ as their Savior, they would spend all eternity separated from God in Hell.  Have you trust the Lord Jesus Christ as your Savior?
  
  Bibliography

  Hendriksen, William
  1957    New Testament Commentary.  Exposition of the Pastoral Epistles.  Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

  Hiebert, D. Edmond
  1992    In Paul’s Shadow.  Friends and Foes of the Great Apostle.  Greenville, SC: Bob Jones University.

  Lenski, R. C. H.
  1964    The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians, to the Thessalonians, to Timothy, to Titus and to Philemon.  Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg.

  Plummer, Alfred
  1888    The Pastoral Epistles.  New York: A. C. Armstrong and Son.

  Ramsay, William
  1897-98    Notes on the “Acta of Martyrs.  Expository Times 9:495-497.

  Schneemelcher, Wilhelm
  1992    The Acts of Paul.  Pp. 213-270 in New Testament Apochrypha.  Vol. 2.  Edited by W. Schneemelcher.  Trans. by R. Wilson.  Louisville, KY: Westminster / John Knox.

  Seekings, Herbert S.
  1914    The Men of the Pauline Circle.  London: Charles H. Kelly.

  Towner, Philip
  2006    The Letters to Timothy and Titus.  Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans.
• 28Aug

  Reflections on the 2009 Season at Hazor

  Excavations at Hazor Comments Off on Reflections on the 2009 Season at Hazor

  By Gordon Franz

  This year the Hazor archaeological excavation was conducted from June 21-July 31, 2009 under the able leadership of the co-directors: Professor Amnon Ben-Tor and Dr. Sharon Zuckerman.  Most of our efforts for this season were concentrated in Area M on the northern slopes of the Upper City overlooking the Lower City.  In charge of this area were the co-area supervisors: Sharon Zuckerman and Shlomit Becher.
  There were about 35 volunteers from 14 countries (Israel, USA, Canada, Russia, Spain, England, Germany, Holland, Belgium, France, Denmark, Sweden, Australia, and Ireland).  Some participated for the three week session, but a number of volunteers were there for the entire six weeks.  We also had local Israelis join us for a day or two here and there.

  Our accommodations this year were at the holiday village of Kibbutz Kfar Ha’Nassi.  We were the only group in the holiday village for the entire six weeks so it created a nice community atmosphere.  This was unlike previous seasons at Kibbutz Mahanaim and the Etap Galil Hotel where there were other groups as well and they made all kinds of noise at all hours of the night!  Kfar Ha’Nassi had a pleasant and quiet atmosphere and the kibbutzniks were very friendly.

  The meals at the holiday village were excellent and there was plenty of food.  The evening cook, Zohar, would make us fresh, tasty pizza (it wasn’t NY style thin crust pizza but it was close enough for any connoisseur of fine pizza)!  He also made a variety of ravioli dishes and cooked eggs anyway you wanted them.  Normally one’s weight drops on a dig, but that was not the case this summer.  There were a lot of happy campers this season.

  Weekends were free to do whatever you wanted.  Those who were in Israel for the first time wanted to see as much as they could so they took off by bus or car to see and experience as much as possible.  Usually they came back Sunday night exhausted, but satisfied because they accomplished their goals.  The veterans usually lounged around the kibbutz, read a good book, did laundry the old fashion way, went swimming in the kibbutz swimming pool, visited the kibbutz pub, or enjoyed a spectacular view of the Golan Heights from an overview at the eastern end of the kibbutz.  On some weekends, I had the opportunity to travel in the vicinity of Hazor and the Sea of Galilee in order to explore and take pictures of various sites for an article that I am working on entitled “Jesus at Hazor.”  My thanks to Curtis, Steve, Jay and Brian for driving, I appreciate it.

  The only downside of staying at Kfar Ha’Nassi was that it was 7 km east of the junction on the main road and Rosh Pinna, and there was no bus service to or from the kibbutz.  In order to get out of the kibbutz, one had to ask somebody for a ride to the junction.  Fortunately some of the volunteers rented cars for the season, or at least on weekends.  In previous years we could walk to the main road and catch a bus to wherever, or walk to Hazor Ha-Gelilit in order to shop for things.  Kfar Ha’Nassi, however, did have a well stocked supermarket for basic needs and food to supplement ones eating and drinking habits!

  So, what happened this season at the excavations?  The bottom line is that we moved a lot of dirt and rocks out of Area M.  I was the Dump Master again this year, but was delighted to have the Dump King, Robin from Canada, back again so he could advise me from his vast storehouse of knowledge on dumps.  In previous seasons he taught me everything I needed to know about building a great dump!  An executive decision was made by the powers that be to begin and refill Area A-5.  So this season that is where all our dirt was deposited.  At the beginning of the season it was a bit depressing for Robin and me to dump dirt into A-5 because we had spent at least three summers of our lives hauling dirt out of that area.  I nicknamed the dump, Mizpeh David (the overlook of David) in honor of my friend and the area supervisor of A-5, David Ziegler.
  Our goal for the season in Area M was to get through the 8th century level and into the 9th century, the time of King Ahab (I Kings 16:28-22:39).  We were almost successful, but there are still a few walls and floors that remain from the 8th century.  These, I am sure, will disappear at the beginning of next season.

  The current thinking among the staff is that since Area M is outside the Solomonic city of Hazor there should be no 10th century remains in the area.  Thus, after the 9th century level is removed, it should be smooth sailing to the Late Bronze age level and hopefully the LB archive.
  This season we were approaching floor levels, or were on floor levels, so there were lots of small finds.  The square in the southwest corner of the area was known as the “magic square” because of all the goodies that were found there.  Shaul the Younger (14 years old) found an intact cooking pot.  Fortunately, his square mate, Big John from California, had loosened up the dirt in the area with a pickax but did not break the vessel before Shaul found it!  After Shaul carefully excavated around it, the vessel was finally removed and stored in the office until the end of the season.  Then I sifted and floated the content of the dirt inside the cooking pot to see what the last meal was.  The only bone I recognized was a single fish bone.  We await the lab analysis.  When Shaul the Younger left, he was replaced by James from Michigan who found an intact juglet in the square.  Big John also found a stand for the cooking pot and an intact bowl in the magic square.  There is even a picture on the Facebook site of him eating cereal from the bowl! 🙂

  This was Dr. Curtis from Florida’s fourth season digging at Hazor.  In previous seasons he had not discovered anything of real importance.  This summer was different; he found a beautiful small three legged basalt incense burner and also a bird figurine in the sewer he was working in.  Like they say, “One persons junk is another person’s treasure!”

  Terra from Hawaii found a zoomorphic figurine as well as a basalt roller for the grass on the roof of the house.  During the Iron Age, houses had thatched roofs covered with mud / dirt and grass growing on top (Ps. 129:6; Isa. 37:27).  The rollers were used to pack down the dirt.
  Wolfgang, a colonel in the German army, found a beautiful Egyptian pendant in the room he was working in.  Two others of the same type were found in an alley by Dr. Sharon and Ryan from Georgia.

  Dan from Upstate NY had very keen eye-sight and spotted a small gold ear-ring, most likely worn by a child.  Other exciting finds include three scarabs.  Two were made of semi-precious stone and one had an inscription on it.  Other finds by different volunteers can be seen on the “Hazor 2009” Facebook page.

  So what did I do and what did I find this season?  Besides taking care of the dump, I was promoted (at least I think it was a promotion) to doing dry sifting, preparation for wet sifting and floatation.  I would like to think it was because of my experience sifting at Ketef Hinnom and the Temple Mount Sifting Project and I knew what to look for.  This summer I found 3 or 4 arrowheads, a circular lead object which is probably a pendant, and a lead weight that could be attached to a fishing net that was used to catch fish in nearby Lake Huleh.  Interestingly, in the excavations and in the sifting there were a lot of fish bones discovered indicating that fish were part of the Hazor diet.

  Floatation is a process whereby dirt is put into water and the organic matter floats to the surface and is caught.  Later the organic matter is analyzed in the labs by archaeo-botanists to see what things were present on the floor of a house in antiquity.  The excavation had a fancy machine that did the floatation process but it took 25-30 minutes per bucket to float the organic matter.  Once I understood the process, I developed a technique with everyday kitchen objects so we could cut down the floatation time to 10 minutes or less.  That was my main contribution for this year.

  Shlomit’s MA thesis at Hebrew University is on analyzing the content of the floor of one of the Iron Age houses in Area M.  She and some of the volunteers did a meticulous job of excavating the floor.  I had the opportunity and privilege to do some of the sifting and all of the floatation for her project.  I hope she gets good results from the labs because this thesis will be an important contribution to our understanding of daily life at Hazor during the 8th century BC.

  One day I worked with Robin and Ido from Jerusalem and helped them clean out an “installation” (bathtub?) in the floor in the corner of an Iron Age house.  There were lots of large body shards that could be restored to make complete vessels.  Robin also found a lead weight in the installation.

  Several nights a week we had very informative lectures after dinner by Amnon, Sharon, and Shlomit on various aspects of the Hazor excavations.  We even had a guest lecture by Nimrod from Haifa University on bones and what they can tell an archaeologist about how people lived in the past.  One evening, Tommy, the 82 year old kibbutznik who dug with us, gave a fascinating talk on the history of the Kibbutz Kfar Ha’Nassi and the surrounding region.  He was basically telling his life story because he lived the history of the modern State of Israel!

  I promised Sharon I would be at Hazor until the Late Bronze Age (that’s like “Back to the Future”).  Join us next year as we move more dirt and rocks and work our way down to the that period.  Check out the Hazor website for the details on the dates and cost of the excavation.  It’s a great experience.

  http://micro5.mscc.huji.ac.il/~hatsor/hazor.html
• 23Aug

  The Pleasure of Dust!

  Jerusalem Comments Off on The Pleasure of Dust!

  By Stephanie Hernandez

  Nineteen people, most of them strangers to each other, descended on Jerusalem in the last weeks of June. Most met at Newark Airport in New Jersey, others joined the group in the coming days. There were the usual questions: “Where are you from?”; “Is this your first trip to Israel?”; “What do you do for a living?” and the occasional “What was your name again?” But by the end of our two-week journey, friendships were forged that are sure to last a lifetime, with the common bond of Israel and the Lord at there center.

  The Associates for Biblical Research’s Temple Mount Sifting Project group participants came from all over America, and even all over the world. But we all shared one common desire: to know the city of Jerusalem where the Lord chose to set as His capital, a place where the grace, wrath, love, hope, and faithfulness of the Lord was revealed to mankind in the past and will continue well into the future. It was the chance to hold Biblically-related history in our hands that interested many in the program. With the exception of a few people, most of the group members had no experience in archaeology or even sifting. Yet by the time they left, each person had a firm grasp of the immense importance of the very soil of the Temple Mount and the land of Israel. “My personal discovery about archaeology,” participant Scott Astbury remarks, “was that it first and foremost provides you with undeniable evidence of existence.”

  Our typical day would begin around 7AM with a great breakfast prepared by the kitchen staff at the comfortable and welcoming Gloria Hotel, situated just inside the Jaffa Gate of the Old City of Jerusalem. Gathered around the table, we would talk about the previous day’s events and speak with excitement of what was to take place that day. Most days we toured the city of Jerusalem in the morning and then proceeded to the Temple Mount Sifting Site in the eastern part of Jerusalem, but there were a few days when we went first to the sifting site, and then explored the city in the afternoon. Although the option of a taxi was available to anyone who needed it, almost all of the participants chose to walk to the sifting site every day, through the winding, and sometimes confusing, streets of the Old City. Once outside the gates, we walked along the walls of the Old City, passed people who live in the midst of this multi-religious center, those who have made their homes in the most contentious city in the world. The last stretch of the walk to the site was a difficult one, with a steep climb to the Zurim Valley National Park, where the Temple Mount Sifting Project is established.

  No doubt a few were surprised when we were greeted by the sight of an armed guard standing watch over the Palestinian section of eastern Jerusalem, himself responsible for guarding the contended soil from the Temple Mount, which was at the center of an intense legal battle beginning in 1999. On our arrival, we were greeted by Zachi Zweig, who in 1999 called a press conference to bring to light the illegal removal of soil from the Temple Mount by the Islamic Waqf and the subsequent dumping of the soil in the Kidron Valley and elsewhere. We were given an introductory presentation in which the history of the project and some interesting finds were revealed. On another day, Assaf Avraham who is the day-to-day supervisor, gave us a brief lecture on one of the most interesting finds, various-size stone fragments that were used as pavement on the Temple Mount called opus sectile, mentioned by the Jewish historian Josephus in the his epic work The Jewish Wars. Afterwards, we delved into the archaeological matrix that hid millennia-old history in its dust with the help of the Temple Mount Sifting staff.

  Sifting the dirt involved dumping a bucket of water-soaked dirt onto a screen, then spraying the dirt with water in order to remove the dirt from the materials, which is often referred to as wet-sifting.  Others helped with the dry screening, or the sifting of dry dirt through mesh screens, while others worked the “T-4” pile, a large pile of oversized rocks and debris taken from the Temple Mount. It is in this pile that the pieces of opus sectile were found. After we were finished sifting a bucket, a staff member would check the screen to make sure nothing was missed. By the second week, the staff felt we had a firm grasp of sifting and no longer checked our screens for overlooked artifacts. On several occasions the members would find more uncommon artifacts, such as coins, Roman jewelry, and even a die. These special finds were then given to Tali, one of the staff members, who would tag and register the artifact. Materials such as mosaic tiles, small pieces of ceramics and bone, and pieces of glass were found on a regular basis. Yet although the common site of broken pottery was not an extraordinary find, it reminded us of the words of Isaiah the Prophet, who, in Isaiah 30:14, spoke of a time when Israel’s sin would “break into pieces like pottery, shattered so mercilessly that among its pieces not a fragment will be found for taking coals from a hearth or scooping water out of a cistern.”

  I believe that it was during the sifting that we all got to know each other a little better.  Bent over dripping screens, the group members began to get to know each other.  Be it religion, politics, music, movies, or personal experiences, there was no topic that did not help us to become better acquainted with those whom we shared this amazing experience. Participant Sandy Souza observes, “I agree heartily with [archaeologist] Gabriel Barkay that the best discovery is the people, the ABR team in particular, and also the old and new friends we met in Jerusalem”. Our talks would continue outside the sifting site, usually on the strenuous walk back to our hotel, up the ancient hills of Jerusalem, back through the winding corridors of the Old City. We often stopped along the way, with Gordon pointing out a historical part of Jerusalem and discussing the always important relation to the Bible. Participant Paula Owen agrees, stating, “Gordon successfully created both picturesque and cherished lessons and memories that ultimately left an unforgettable impact on us all!”

  Weekends were a little more relaxed than the weekdays. On Shabbat, a bus would be chartered that took us around to the different sites outside Jerusalem, to Lachish, the Elah Valley, Masada and the Dead Sea. Taking in the passing Israeli countryside was met with awe and wonder. The mixture of beauty and peace and glimpses of the wall separating Jerusalem from the West Bank reminded us all that the time has not yet come for Divine peace in this region. But with this realization came the excitement and assurance of knowing the final outcome, where there will be no more tears, no more death or mourning or crying or pain. With that, we sat back and enjoyed the ride.

  But there was always time to sit and reflect. Whether it was walking silently through the Muslim Quarter, staring off into the distance on the shore of the Dead Sea, taking in the bustling of Ben Yehuda Street, or listening to the bells from the churches in the Christian Quarter, we came to see the rarity of the city of Jerusalem and the frustration of an imperfect world were the City of Peace does not yet exist. The true Jerusalem, the true Israel, is something that must be experienced for oneself. Words cannot do it justice, and pictures do even less. Through this project we agreed with the Psalmist that “her stones are dear to your servants; her very dust moves them to pity” (Ps 102:14).  The Temple Mount Sifting Project and touring of the land of Israel made every single participant come away from the experience with a new, profound understanding and appreciation for the words of the prophets, the kings, and the Lord Himself concerning Jerusalem and Israel, as well as the very stones of Israel itself. It almost leaves me, well, speechless.

  Stephanie Hernandez graduated with a BA in archaeology and anthropology from Biola University. She has done field archaeology in California and was the ABR hostess for the 2009 Temple Mount Sifting Project. She has also participated in the Hazor excavations.  She will be the ABR hostess for the January 2010 Temple Mount Sifting Project.  For more information, see the ABR website.

  www.biblearchaeology.org/outreach/event.aspx?id=101

  Bibliography

  Josephus
  1978    Jewish Wars.  Books 4-7.  Vol. 3.  Trans. by H. Thackeray.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.  Loeb Classical Library 210.

  This article first appeared in the Winter 2009 issue of Bible and Spade, Vol. 22, no. 1, pages 9-11.
• 15Jun

  “Hazor is Number One …”: An Interview with Professor Amnon Ben-Tor

  Excavations at Hazor Comments Off on “Hazor is Number One …”: An Interview with Professor Amnon Ben-Tor

  By Gordon Franz and Stephanie Hernandez

  A self-proclaimed “Jerusalemite”, Amnon Ben-Tor was born, raised, educated and lives in Jerusalem.  With an MA (1961) and a PhD (1968) from Hebrew University, much of Dr. Ben-Tor’s archaeological focus has been on Hazor and Masada.  Besides these two sites, Amnon has directed excavations at Azor, Tel Yarmuth, Tel Yokneam,  Tel Qashish, Tel Qiri and Athienou (Cyprus).  He was educated under Professor Yigael Yadin and has numerous publications to his credit.  He has written extensively on Tel Hazor and has a soon to be released book on Masada.

  This interview was conducted at Hazor in July, 2008.
  
  Gordon Franz: It has been said that Hazor is one of the most important archaeological sites in the Land of Israel.  Why is it so important?

  Amnon Ben-Tor: It is the most important for various reasons.  One is because it says so in the Bible!  To quote a few passages for you: the book of Joshua states that Hazor is the “head of all those kingdoms” (11:10).  So one, the Bible recognized that Hazor was the number one Canaanite city.  The king of Hazor, in the book of Judges, is also the king of Canaan.  Jabin lives in Hazor, but he is the king of Canaan (4:2, 23, 24).  So again, Hazor is number one.  In the conquest of the Land, the decisive battle was fought at Hazor (Jos 11:1-15).  After Hazor was conquered the land was open for the Israelites to settle, from Mount Hermon all the way down to the Aravah (Jos 11:16-12:24).  The beginning of the end of the Israelite kingdom is also connected with Hazor:  In 732 BC the Assyrians take Hazor along with most of the Galilee all the way down to Megiddo (2 Kgs 15:29).  Ten years later, Samaria falls and that’s the end of the Kingdom of Israel.  So, if you look at it from this perspective, Hazor is number one in the Bible.  But this is not enough.

  Number two: If you look at historical records, Hazor is the only site in the country that is mentioned in about twenty documents found in the archive at Mari.  From these documents, we learn that Babylonian ambassadors were living in Hazor and caravans were coming and going.  Hazor is the only one mentioned: not Dan, not Megiddo, not Lachish, not Jerusalem.  No other site, just Hazor.

  If you go to the Late Bronze Age, the 14th century BC, there is the Amarna archive.  The king of Hazor is the only one that has the title “king” in all the correspondences.  Not only does he refer to himself as king, but also others.  Some of them are his rivals, but still they refer to him as king.  The king of Tyre writes to Pharaoh, “the king of Hazor has done so and so”.  Number two: the historical records.

  Number three: the archaeological record.  Canaanite Hazor is the biggest site in the country, covering some 200 acres with a population between 15,000 and 20,000 people.  So I am talking about something like New York or Paris of today.  It was a huge site.

  Further are the finds.  We have exquisite finds.  I know everybody comes and talks about the archives, which will be found in time.  But by now we already have more documents than any other site in the country.  Other than this, we have magnificent finds.  Unlike any other site, archaeology shows us that Canaanite Hazor was number one.  Then, when Canaanite Hazor was destroyed, it was no longer number one in this sense.  Israelite Hazor was much, much smaller, confined only to the acropolis, with a population of between 1,000 and 1,500 people.  Then Jerusalem is number one, and Samaria is number two.  Then we have Dan, Hazor, Megiddo, Gezer, Lachish, and Beer Sheva.  These are important cities.

  Hazor is number one even now from another point of view.  This again has to do with the Bible and the value of Biblical historiography.  Does the Bible reflect historical reality?  Is the Bible only theology?  Or is it only fantasy?  Hazor was continuously occupied from around 950 BC to around 732 BC, and we have more strata from this time frame than any other site in the country.  We have a very dense stratigraphy.  So if you talk about the problem of the conquest of the land, of Joshua if you wish: Hazor.  The period of the Judges: Hazor.  The United Monarchy, say Solomon: Hazor.  Ahab: Hazor.  Jeroboam II: Hazor.  Tiglath-Pileser III, king of Assyria: Hazor.  So you can walk with the Bible in one hand, and – at the same time looking at the relics.  I don’t say that you have to accept everything, but the argument or the discussion should be held, could be held, can be held, here at Hazor.

  Gordon: You had the privilege of working closely with Professor Yigael Yadin.  Please tell us something about Yadin the person.  What was he like?  What made him tick?

  Amnon: Yadin was a great man.  You don’t get to meet many great men, maybe one in your lifetime.  There are only three peaks anyone can reach: in the military, in politics and in culture.  In the military, Yadin was the Chief of Staff.  The politicians asked him, as a military authority in his twenties, if he thought we could withstand the invasion of Arab armies, certain to happen once a state was declared, and he said “yes.”  He took upon himself, at that young age a tremendous responsibility!  This is something.  He became Chief of Staff after the war.  So that’s one peak.
  Second, in the 50’s and 60’s, if you ask anyone which figure they think about in terms of Israeli culture, it would be Yadin.  Yadin was Masada.  Yadin was Hazor.  Yadin was the “Dead Sea Scrolls.”
  Number three is politics, where he became Deputy Prime Minister, although I advised him not to get involved in politics.  Tell me, how many people do you know who became Chief of Staff, Deputy Prime Minister, and such an important person in the history of the country?  This was Yadin.

  So he was a great person.  He was the best lecturer.  He could fill halls with thousands of people.  He was very quick.  Whenever something came up, he was the one who could point out where the weak spot was and the good arguments.  He was a great man.

  Gordon: What influence did Yadin have in getting you involved in archaeology in general and Hazor in particular?

  Amnon: First of all, he was my teacher, and he was the best of my teachers.  Second, he gave me my first job which I had in archaeology.  He wrote the book, The Art of Warfare in Biblical Times which was one of the first books on the subject in this part of the world.  It appeared in 1963.  He gave me the job to collect the bibliography, the pictures, this and that.  I worked for him by the hour and this was the first job in archaeology that I had.

  Third, field work:  In 1958 I was working here at Hazor.  My first real excavation was here under Ruth Amiran, but Yadin was the head of the excavations.  Then, he invited me to join him in the excavation of Masada, where I spent the best three years of my life, ever.  So this was Masada.  Then I went with him in 1968 to excavate Hazor again.
  Yadin was a very important figure in archaeology.  When he died [June 28, 1984], he named three people to be in charge of his scientific legacy because there were so much of his publications that he didn’t have time to finish because of his involvement in the Agranat Commission after the Yom Kippur War, his involvement in politics and eventually the government.  So a lot was left undone.  He named Joseph Aviram – the head of the Israel Exploration Society, Professor Nahman Avigad of the Hebrew University and me to publish his scientific material.  I was to do Hazor.  So again, I came back to Hazor through Yadin’s legacy.  I worked on the publication of the volumes of Hazor III and IV, and also Hazor V.  It was during that time that I decided to come back to Hazor.  So you see Yadin is the pivot of everything that I am doing.
  
  Gordon:  When Yadin died in 1984 he had plans to return to Hazor and continue his excavations.  Why did he want to return?

  Amnon: He had a very, very specific goal in mind.  In 1958, a corner of a huge building was discovered in Area A.  Yadin was convinced that this was the corner of the palace of Jabin, the king of Hazor, who was known from the Mari archive as Ibni-Addu.  He was sure that in this building the archive of Hazor would be found.  This was his main goal.  He wanted to come back and look for the archive.  There were other things, but his main goal was this.  But he died, and he did not have time to come back.  I came back instead.

  Gordon: You returned to Hazor in 1990.  Why did you return and what were your objectives for the renewed excavations?  What questions did you want to answer?

  Amnon: I had three objectives: first – to deal with the issues that were controversial.  For example, the date of the six-chambered gate found at Hazor in the 50’s.  Hazor is where the “dogma” of the archaeology of the United Monarchy was formulated.  The six-chambered gate and the casemate wall were dated by Yadin’s expedition to the time of Solomon.  The Biblical passage (I Kings 9:15) attributes the construction of Hazor and Gezer to King Solomon, all of this drew a lot of fire on the one hand and a lot of support on the other.  The focus of the debate was over the date of the gate.  So one objective was to return and excavate and deal with these issues.
  Second was to deal with issues that where left unresolved by the previous excavations.  For example, what is the date of the construction of the Lower City?  When did it become a real city in the Middle Bronze Age?  It was a controversial issue.  Another issue was the question of who destroyed Hazor and when.  Yadin thought he knew.  He had the date and he had the culprit, so to speak.  But it was, and still is, a controversial issue.  He did not have enough data, so the idea was to find the evidence.  We also hope to find the archive.  Yadin did not find it.  Maybe we can find it.  So maybe the palace, or what Yadin thought was the palace, is where the archive will be found.  So let’s excavate this particular palace.  So this was the second reason.
  The third reason I returned to Hazor is that Hazor is the most important Biblical site.  Unfortunately not too many people come to visit the site for a number of reasons.  It is far away, it has no water, it has no shop, and it has no restaurant.  So people don’t come and tour guides don’t take people to Hazor.  They would rather take them to nearby Tel Dan where there is water and a restaurant.  We have other problems.  We have no real interest for Christians who are interested in the New Testament.  The only large groups of Christian visitors are the Koreans who are interested in the Old Testament.  They realize that Hazor is the place to be.  So I think it is important to make Hazor attractive to people.  If we can restore the place so that it “speaks” to the common person, not only to the archaeologists, I think we are doing something very important.  So we restore, we invest millions of shekels for reconstruction to put Hazor on the map.  I think it has helped.  We are already a World Heritage site on UNESCO’s list.  Unfortunately not too many school children come, but the number of tourists is rising.  There is a lot of work to be done with the teachers, with the ministry of education.  I have tried to work with three of them already, but so far, no success.  Let’s see what is going to happen in the future.

  Gordon: What are the most important discoveries you have made at Hazor?

  Amnon: This is more or less like asking which of your children you love the most!  It’s very difficult, you know.  The results are cumulative.  It is not one thing, but it’s this and this and the other.  So if we are talking about the Iron Age it is the excavation that we did next to the casemate wall in order to determine the date of the entire system, which we managed to place in the 10th century BC.  I think it is very, very important.  Almost everything we are finding contributes to the general picture.
  When you come to the Bronze Age it is the palace, no question about it.  The documents that we find are important as well.  The latest one that we found is the first time that Mari is mentioned in a document found at Hazor.  So far we only had Hazor mentioned on tablets found in Mari.  Now we have them both ways.  So it is this and that and the other.  All of this contributes to the picture.
  Not the least, I found my wife at Hazor.  She was a student.  We get first year students here for three weeks, to train them in field archaeology.  She was one of them and here is where I found her some 40 years ago.  So that was another important find …

  Gordon: Are you still happily married?

  Amnon: Yes, I am.  And we are talking now about 40 years.
  
  Gordon: How does one go about volunteering for the excavations at Hazor?
  
  Amnon: Sometimes you get the most interesting people coming to Hazor.  Including this season, we have had people from more than 27 different countries participate in the excavation.  Some of them you would never think about.  We had someone from Tasmania, the island south of Australia.  All kinds of strange / exotic countries with very, very interesting people.  Number one, we have a website.
  http://micro5.mscc.huji.ac.il/~hatsor/hazor.html
  Number two: the January / February issue of Biblical Archaeology Review lists the sites that are excavating that summer.  We are listed there.  Number three and I think number three is the best:  It is when a friend brings a friend, brings a friend, and brings a friend.  We have people who come every year and they bring their own friends.  We have some people that are with us for fifteen seasons.  We have a woman from Sweden who has been with us for nineteen seasons.  We have a volunteer from Spain who came to Hazor 18 years ago, stayed in the country, married a local girl and is now a member of the Hazor excavations staff!  So it is by word of mouth, it is by the website.  We have groups and we have individuals.  We had the ABR group that was with us three times.  We have groups from different universities; we have our own Hebrew University students.  We have individuals from here, there and everywhere.

  Gordon:  You recently retired from active teaching at Hebrew University.  What do you hope to accomplish in your retirement?

  Amnon: It’s a cliché.  I’ve heard many people say it but I’ve never believed it but it is true.  I don’t have time to do anything!  I don’t know how I found time to teach.  There is so much to do.  Hazor takes up most of my time.
  I just finished writing a book on Masada which will appear very soon, both in Hebrew and in English.  This takes up a lot of my time.  It’s finished, it’s done.  Now we are putting in the pictures, the captions, all this technical work.  By the end of the year I hope it will appear, but we’ll see.  You never know how long it will take in the press.
  We are now busy writing the final report on the results of the Hazor excavations 1990-2008: two teams are working simultaneously on two volumes: one on the Iron Age, the other on the Bronze Age.  There are so many things I want to do.  I want to write a popular book about Hazor.  There’s no end.  There is no time to do anything.  I want to study more about Jerusalem.  I want to improve two languages, Spanish and French.  No time, no time.
  
  Gordon: Amnon, thank you for your time, I appreciate it.  I wish you all the best in the seasons to come.  I hope you find the archive sooner, rather than later.  And I hope I will be there with you when you find it.  All the best.

  For further information concerning the Hazor Excavations, please visit their website:

  http://micro5.mscc.huji.ac.il/~hatsor/hazor.html
• 15Jun

  “Where is the archive at Hazor?”: An interview with Dr. Sharon Zuckerman

  Excavations at Hazor Comments Off on “Where is the archive at Hazor?”: An interview with Dr. Sharon Zuckerman

  By Gordon Franz and Stephanie Hernandez

  Born, raised and educated in Jerusalem, archaeologist Sharon Zuckerman has been excavating at Tel Hazor since 1990.  Along with being the Area M supervisor, Dr. Zuckerman teaches archaeology at Hebrew University.  Her doctoral dissertation was on “The Kingdom of Hazor in the Late Bronze Age – Chronological and Regional Aspects of the Material Culture of Hazor and its Settlements.”

  This interview was conducted at Kibbutz Mahaniam in July 2008.
  
  Gordon Franz: The last three years the Hazor Excavation has concentrated on Area M.  First, how did this area become known as Area M?  Second, what were Yigael Yadin’s objectives in opening up this area?
  
  Sharon Zuckerman: The origin of the name for Area M comes from the first excavation on the northern side of the tel in 1968 by Yadin’s team.  Legend says it’s called Area M because the area supervisor was named Malka Hershkovich.  So this is why the area is called Area M.  I still do not know if this is the real reason.  The objectives of Yadin were to trace the line of the casemate wall going from the six-chambered gate all the way to the northern slope of the tel and see if the wall encircled the entire tel or only part of it.  He found in Area M that the casemate wall only encircled half of the tel.  What he did find is that the 9th century solid wall, shows that the city was enlarged.  The new wall, a solid wall, that intersects the offset wall, was built to encompass the whole surface of the tel.  So the city of the 9th century, which Yadin concluded was at least twice as large as the 10th century.

  Gordon: You began to excavate just east of Yadin’s area in 1990.  Why did you open up this area and what were your objectives?

  Sharon: The first reason to open the area was to check Yadin’s conclusions.  We wanted to open an area a little to the east of his area M and to try to see if his conclusions regarding the 10th century, the 9th century and even the 8th century, are still valid.  Another goal, which might be even more important, is the fact that exactly at this point there was a flat area half way up the slope of the tel and we assumed that this was due to some type of man-made architectural feature that was built there.  This is exactly the point where we would expect to find a connection point in between the lower and upper cities during the Late and Middle Bronze Age.  We expected to see a very large staircase or some type of gate or something like that.  This is why we opened the section on the northern slopes at exactly this point.

  Gordon: What did you find in Area M that was significant?
  
  Sharon: Well, first of all we have full and interesting stratigraphy of the Iron Age, ending in the last destruction of Hazor in 732 BC by Tiglath-Pileser III.  This is one of the few places where we have the destruction layer on or within buildings of the 8th century.  We have several phases of domestic buildings of the 8th century down to the beginning of the period.  Underneath we have a public area of the 9th century, which hints that Hazor was a very important administrative center at this time.  Below that is the Late Bronze Age, which is a very interesting complex which we assume was a part of the upper acropolis during the Late Bronze Age.  There was no 10th century and apparently no 11th century levels.  This is interesting.  No settlement period or remains in this area.

  Gordon: Area M was the basis for your doctoral dissertation at Hebrew University.  What were your conclusions?

  Sharon: My conclusions were that this same complex that we are talking about might be interpreted as a palace, similar in plan and other architectural features to other palaces that we know at this time at other Canaanite sites, for example, Ugarit and Megiddo.  I assume that the destruction of this area is probably earlier than Yadin assumed, sometime during the beginning of the 13th century rather than towards its end.  So in a sense, these were the two major conclusions.

  Gordon: These are important conclusions.  When and where will this material be published so the scholarly community can interact with it?

  Sharon: Soon, as soon as possible!  But these conclusions will probably be incorporated into the report of Hazor which is currently in the process of being published.  I did publish several articles in English, in The Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology (2007), Levant and The Journal of Near Eastern Studies (forthcoming).

  Gordon: When Dr. Ben-Tor gives lectures on Hazor, inevitably the question is asked, “Have you found the archive yet?”  Why do you think the archive is in Area M?

  Sharon: If my assumption is correct and we are digging the residential palace of Late Bronze Hazor, then this is the most logical and natural place to find the archive from the Amarna Period, which is the period that we are dating it to.  So usually we find archives in the ancient periods in palatial buildings, in palaces, or sometimes in temples.  This is also a possibility.  Also, sometimes in residential houses of influential people, like traders, people like that.  But we have excavated a large building on the acropolis.  We know that there were cuneiform tablets that attest to the existence of an archive.  But no archive was found there and no archive will be found there because we have excavated the entire building.  So it must be somewhere and I believe this somewhere is in the palatial building on the northern slope of the tel (2006:28-37).
  
  Gordon: How many more seasons do you think it will take to get down to the Late Bronze Age?

  Sharon: I would assume between three and five years, three to five seasons from today (July 2008).

  Gordon: Sharon, it has been my privilege to work with you the past three seasons in Area M at Hazor.  It has been a pleasure working with you because you are an excellent area supervisor.  You lead by example: you are in the bucket chains, you are pushing wheelbarrows, and you are teaching the volunteers proper archaeological techniques and are ever so patient in pottery reading for those who do not grasp the fine distinction between a krater, storage jar, a bowl or a juglet.  Thank you for your patience and for leading by example.  I wish you all the best in the future seasons and am looking forward to working with you until the Late Bronze Age!

  Sharon: Thank you, thank you very much.
  
  Bibliography

  Zuckerman, Sharon
  2006    Where is the Hazor Archive Buried?  Biblical Archaeology Review 32/2: 28-37.

  2007    Anatomy of a Destruction: Crisis Architecture, Termination Rituals and the Fall of Canaanite Hazor.  Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 20/1: 3-32.

  2008    Fit for a (not-quite-so-great) King: A Faience Lion-Headed Cup from Hazor.  Levant 40/1: 115-125.

  For further information concerning the Hazor Excavations, please visit their website:
  
  http://micro5.mscc.huji.ac.il/~hatsor/hazor.html
• 15Jun

  “It is the Best Job in the World!”: An Interview with Conservator Orna Cohen

  Excavations at Hazor Comments Off on “It is the Best Job in the World!”: An Interview with Conservator Orna Cohen

  By Stephanie Hernandez and Gordon Franz

  Introduction

  Born and raised in the Upper Galilee, conservator Orna Cohen has had an accomplished career.  Currently restoring the Late Bronze Age palace at Tel Hazor, Cohen has used her expertise on the ancient Galilee boat and has given her expert opinion to the Israel Antiquities Authority regarding the James Ossuary.  Educated at Hebrew university and the London University – Institute of Archaeology, Cohen is also responsible for cleaning artifacts found at the Temple Mount Sifting Project.

  This interview was conducted at the “ceremonial palace” at Hazor.  For a more technical account of the excavation of the palace, see Ben-Tor and Rubiato 1999:22-39.

  Stephanie Hernandez: Why is it important for archaeologists to restore the structures that they have excavated?

  Orna Cohen: It’s very simple.  As with a modern or new building, you have to take care of it.  Just think of a building that’s been covered for thousands of years.  After you have excavated it, there are a lot of unstable structures that you have to stabilize.  There are elements like broken stones and things that you have to fix.  Also, not just stability, but you also have to show it to the public, to visitors.  You have to share it with others and restore it in such a way that visitors can understand the structures that were uncovered during excavation.

  Stephanie: What is a conservator?  How does one learn to be a conservator?  What kind of education do you need?

  Orna: It is the best job in the world!  It is the most interesting thing.  The archaeologists are excavating and dealing with all the stuff, with pottery, but the interesting thing, the sugar / cherry on the cake that I have to deal with, are the small finds.  I have to prepare them for exhibition, or publication.  If it is the structure on the site, it is the most fascinating and challenging part of the excavation.  I feel very lucky to have an opportunity to do this thing.  Basically I started as an archaeologist.  I studied archaeology, then I studied chemistry and then there are special courses on conservation.  But still you need a lot of experience to be a good conservator, to understand the value, the meaning, and the rules.  It means a longer period of experience and education.  I went to Hebrew University in Jerusalem, but when I decided to specialize in conservation I had to go and study in England at the London University – Institute of Archaeology and then some courses in Norway and Italy.

  Stephanie: You have almost single-handedly, along with Ina from Sweden, restored the “ceremonial palace” near the top of the acropolis of Hazor.  Please tell us about the excavation of this structure, the objects found in the excavations and the burn layer of the violent conflagration that brought the palace to its end.

  Orna: I was lucky to start working on this project when they started digging the main hall of the palace.  So they called me when they found a few broken statues and it was the most exciting excavation I have ever visited and took part in.  It was amazing.  They excavated a layer of about one meter of thick ash all burned.  The people used to come out like a coal miner at the end of the day.  They were dark, but with big smiles on their faces because they were so happy to take part in this experience.  Every minute someone would find something, a seal, a big statue, fragments of pottery, of course cuneiform tablets.  It is the most rich excavation.  So it was very exciting.  Of course later I had to treat all the objects for publication so I twice had the pleasure of dealing with these objects.  But the excavation itself was amazing.  Everyone was very excited.  It was a sure thing you’d find many figurines.  On the corner of the treasure room were two beautiful bronze statues that were buried so they were intact.  The other statues, the large stone ones, were mutilated.  Whoever burned down the palace cut off the heads and hands of the statues.  Early on, it was a really special experience, very exciting.

  Stephanie: How intense was the fire?  How do you know this?

  Orna: The temperature reached at least 1300 degrees centigrade (2350 degrees Fahrenheit), which is huge.  But just imagine, it melted pottery and some of the mud brick, so they ran like water. You can see this material running on the walls.  For this kind of fire you need a lot of organic materials.  We know there was a lot of wood in this palace, all cedars of Lebanon, according to the charcoal that was tested.  But it is a huge room.  We have not found remains of any pillars that supported the roof.  You need a lot of large beams of cedar to roof it.  Also, there was wood combined in the walls, and of course, the very rare and unique find of the wooden floor.  These are all charcoal remains that we are talking about.  All these helped to accumulate this one meter thick layer of ash which is very rare.  The most you see on an excavation is one or two centimeters.  One meter is very unusual.  There was no need to bring in wood from the outside for this fire.  There was enough organic material.  Beside that, all the large pottery jars in the area also contained organic material, probably oils, which are expected in such a place.  Altogether, with the strong wind that we have here in the afternoon can bring the fire to this degree.  That’s what cracked all the stone panels at the bottom of the walls.  The orthostates were all cracked and crushed because of the fire.  Also, it caused me a lot of work to puzzle and glue them together!

  Stephanie: Who burned the place?

  Orna: We can not tell exactly.  But the only historical evidence is from the Bible that tells about how Joshua conquered Hazor and since the king of Hazor organized all the cities against the Israelites, they gave the order to burn it down to ashes (Jos 11:11).  Here we see it, is it this story or not, we don’t know.
  
  Gordon Franz: Permit me to change the subject.  You have made some excellent replicas of objects that have been found at Hazor for various museums.  How easy, or hard is it to make a replica?  What is the process?

  Orna: It depends on what the object is.  Today there are excellent materials for making replicas.  If you know how to do it right, it is a lot of work, but you can get beautiful replicas that almost look the same.  As a professional who does it for museums, I always make sure I made a difference and mark down that it’s a replica, so we won’t find it on the market later in Jerusalem (which already happened once!).  I did some kind of bronze keys from the Second Temple period and I saw them later on the market.  They were sold to the Tower of David.  So I have to be very careful.  I label them as replicas.  It’s something I make and it is difficult to see but I mark them as replicas.  If it’s the same material I always put “R” or replica somewhere on it.

  Gordon: Could someone make a fake archaeological artifact and sell it on the antiquities market?
  
  Orna: It’s been done for many years.  We have heard stories about that.  It is possible, but to do it you have to know what you want, but today it is all possible.  There are the materials and there is information that you can find everywhere.  It’s possible and it happens.  Some of it is good, so people should not buy antiquities on the free market.  There is no need to deal with antiquities.  I think today if you want to show antiquities you can show beautiful professional replicas in museums.  If you want to make your own collection, make a collection of replicas because collecting antiquities means you are sending someone to rob them, to steal them, to destroy knowledge from archaeological sites.  So we are against all these fakes and I wish people would stop buying them and start going to replicas.  I only do replicas for museums, not for the open market.
  
  Gordon: How easy is it to fake patina?
  
  Orna: It is possible, but it is not easy to fake patina.  You need the knowledge, but it has been done.  There is research going on about it for historical buildings.  For instance when you are renewing part of a building you want to repeat the patina, so there is research about these things.  I had the pleasure of looking at and checking the James Ossuary and I gave my comments on it.  I think the ossuary is authentic and a real one, but the inscription on it, I am convinced there are two hands that wrote the inscription.  To my opinion, part of the inscription is faked, part is original.  Of course, there are things that go on in trial now.  They are still trying to figure out what is faked and by whom it was made.  To my opinion, the name Joshua [on the ossuary] is real.  The inscription reads: “Ya’acov bar Yosef achi Yehoshua.”  [Translation: Jacob, or James, the son of Joseph, the brother of Jesus].  So the first part, I think is added.  My professional opinion is almost against all the others that think the last name [on the inscription]; “brother of Jesus” (Joshua) is a fake.  So my opinion was against the others [at the trial].  I checked and it’s according to the patina in the letters.  There was a fake patina of just dirt that was put in these letters on purpose so I cleaned part of it and underneath there was the original, yellowish patina that based on my experience, was the original one.  It was not on the first part of the inscription but it was on the last part of the inscription.  That is what I gave as my opinion.
  
  Gordon: How prevalent are fakes on the antiquities market today and can a discerning eye spot one?

  Orna: I do not deal with the market much.  I do not go into these stores of course.  But from time to time, I have been asked [about possible fakes].  Working in the Bible Lands Museum I saw many fakes that these expert people bought.  There are fakes and you can fool the experts for a while.  But eventually people figure it out with the new ways of testing and inspecting of things like that.  I think all the fakes are coming out as fakes.  So it is better not to buy from the market in my opinion.
  
  Stephanie: Thank you for your time.

  Orna: Thank you.
  
  Bibliography

  Ben-Tor, Amnon; and Rubiato, Maria Teresa
  1999    Excavating Hazor.  Did the Israelites Destroy the Canaanite City?  Biblical Archaeology Review 25/3: 22-39.

  For further information concerning the Hazor Excavations, please visit their website:
  
  http://micro5.mscc.huji.ac.il/~hatsor/hazor.html
• 15Jun

  WHERE ARE THE ISRAELITE BURIALS FROM THE WILDERNESS WANDERINGS?

  Archaeology and the Bible Comments Off on WHERE ARE THE ISRAELITE BURIALS FROM THE WILDERNESS WANDERINGS?

  By Gordon Franz

  Some have raised the objection that Mount Sinai could not be in the Sinai Peninsula because millions of Israelites died during the Wilderness Wanderings and no graves of any of these Israelites have been discovered in the Sinai Peninsula from this period.  Recently we received such an inquiry at the Associates for Biblical Research (ABR) website by an anonymous individual identified only as “Curious.”

  This individual states: “How can it be logical to say the Israelites wandered in the Sinai Peninsula for 40 years, and the older ones all died, and kept the younger ones very busy burying their older generation (all the millions of adults who came out of Egypt), and yet archaeology in that location never has found a single gravesite from the entire time of the wilderness wanderings?  I don’t think the Sinai Peninsula is the right location for the 40 years of wanderings because there should be millions of graves there if that is where the Israelites wandered” (Italics by Gordon Franz).
  Is this a valid objection to Mount Sinai being in the Sinai Peninsula?

  First, we should start with the hermeneutical questions: Does the Bible interpret the archaeological finds?  Or, do the archaeological finds interpret the Bible?  In “Curious’” case, archaeology is used to interpret the Bible (see italics quote).  That is a very dangerous precedent to follow because archaeology is not an exact science and it is always changing with new excavations and new interpretations.  Views held by archaeologists today may be passé tomorrow due to new evidence.  So I would reject “Curious’” underlying presupposition.

  I believe that the Bible is divine revelation and it should interpret the archaeological finds.  The Bible is clear, Mount Sinai is in the Sinai Peninsula, and so the Bible has to dictate how we interpret the archaeological finds (Har-el 1983; Rasmussen 1989:86-92).

  Second, to say that there are no graves in the Sinai from the period of the Exodus / Wilderness Wanderings is very misleading.  One should first ask the question: In what archaeological period was the Wilderness Wanderings (Cohen 1983:16-39; for surveys of Sinai, see Meshel 2000)?  Does a preconceived idea of which archaeological period to look at happen to eliminate all your evidence?

  Third, what kind of graves would Israelites have been buried in?  If the Israelites buried their dead in a simple trench burial in the ground, would they have even left a marker on top of the grave?  There would be no reason to mark the grave because they were heading to the Promised Land, the Land of Canaan, and not returning back to visit the graves of their ancestors as Bedouin in Sinai, the Negev, Jordan and Saudi Arabia do today, thus the markers on their graves so they can visit their ancestors!

  Fourth, how do we know that most of the Israelites were even buried in Sinai?  The Apostle Paul wrote to the Corinthian believers that: “But with most of them God was not pleased, for their bodies were scattered in the wilderness” (I Cor. 10:5 NKJV).  “Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them; their bodies were scattered over the desert” (NIV).  One gets the distinct impression from this passage that most of the bodies were just left in the Wilderness, exposed to the elements … and the vultures, hyenas and jackals!  If that is the case, there will be very few graves at all, thus “no gravesites in Sinai” would be a dead objection.

  Fifth, another possibility that should be pursued is the Hebrew practice of secondary burial.  In this practice, the dead would be buried in a cave for a year and then the bones would be gathered for “secondary burial.”  In the case of the First Temple period, the bones would be placed into a repository in the cave.  During the Second Temple period, the bones would be placed in an ossuary.  The phrase in the Bible that is connected with this practice is: “and he slept with his fathers,” or more literally, “he was gathered to his fathers.”

  This practice began with the Patriarch Abraham when he bought a cave near Hebron and buried his wife Sarah in it (Gen. 23).  He was later interned there, as was his son Isaac and his wife Rebecca.  Jacob and one of his wives, Leah, were buried there as well (Gen. 49:28-33; 50:5, 13).  When Jacob died in Egypt, he wanted to be gathered to his fathers in the Promised Land.

  Abraham, and later Jacob, bought plots of ground near Shechem and this was later used as a burial plot for others of their descendents, including Joseph (Gen. 33:19; cf. Acts 7:15-16).  Joseph clearly instructs the Children of Israel to rebury his bones in the Promised Land (Gen. 50:24-25; cf. Heb. 11:22; Ex. 13:19; Josh. 24:32).

  The Bible places the burial of Rachel in the tribal territory of Benjamin (Gen. 48:7; I Sam. 10:2; cf. Jer. 31:15; Neh. 7:26).  Interestingly, in the territory of Benjamin, there are six or seven megalithic structures clustered together and preserve the Arabic name Qubur Bani Israil, translated “tombs of the sons of Israel” (Finkelstein and Magen 1993: 63*, 371-372, site 479; Hareuveni 1991: 64-71).

  When the Wilderness Wandering narratives are examined, there are only three accounts of burials recorded.  The first is those who died of the plague at Kibroth Hattaavah [“the graves of craving”] after the LORD sent quail to their camp (Num. 11:31-34).  The second burial that is recorded is that of Miriam, the sister of Moses, at Kadesh Barnea (Num. 20:1).  The final burial is at the death of Aaron, the brother of Moses, on Mount Hor that is on the border with Edom (probably Mount Rimon, Har-el 1983:273-274).   Interestingly, in the account of Aaron’s death, there is no mention of his burial (Num. 20:23-29), but there is mention of him being “gathered to his fathers” (20:24, 26).  In the book of Deuteronomy, however, his burial is mentioned (10:6).

  The fact that Aaron would be “gathered to his fathers” indicates secondary burial was practiced, at least with him, during the Wilderness Wanderings.  As was noted with the Patriarchs, their desire was to be buried in the Land of Israel (“Eretz Yisrael”).  It is a distinct possibility that the Israelites gathered the bones of their relatives who died in the Wilderness and carried them to the Promised Land and buried them in the Land of Israel (Gonen 1985: 53 [sidebar], 54 [map]).  If that is the case, there would be no graves of the Israelites in the Wilderness because they would be in Israel!

  Finally, the tables should be turned on those who reject Mount Sinai and the Wilderness Wanderings in the Sinai Peninsula.  What is the nature of their “evidence” for graves at their theorized sites?  Again, the questions that need to be answered are these: (1) Where are these “Israelite” graves outside of the Sinai Peninsula?  (2) How does one know they are Israelites burials and not recent Bedouin burials?  (3) What archaeological period are you looking for the Wilderness Wanderings?  (4) What archaeological remains (if any) were excavated at these graves and are they from the period of the Wilderness Wanderings?  (5) Were these human remains carbon dated to determine the possible dates of the bones?  If so, are these dates consistent with the Biblical date for the Wilderness Wanderings?  (6) Were DNA tests done on the bones to determine the ethnic origin of those buried in these graves?  Were the DNA tests results compared to the local Bedouin in the area to see if it matched their DNA?

  I think we should pursue other avenues of inquiries before we allow archaeology to interpret the Bible, thus abandoning the clear statements of Scripture and removing Mount Sinai from the Sinai Peninsula and placing it in Saudi Arabia or somewhere else.  Mount Sinai belongs in the Sinai Peninsula, right where the Bible places it!

  Bibliography

  Cohen, Rudolph
  1983    The Mysterious MB I People.  Does the Exodus Tradition in the Bible Preserve the Memory of Their Entry into Canaan?  Biblical Archaeology Review 9/4: 16-29.

  Finkelstein, Israel; and Magen, Yitzhak, eds.
  1993    Archaeological Survey of the Hill Country of Benjamin.  Jerusalem: Israel Antiquities Authority.

  Gonen, Rivka
  1985    Was the Site of the Jerusalem Temple Originally a Cemetery?  Biblical Archaeology Review 9/3: 44-55.

  Har-el, Menashe
  1983    The Sinai Journeys.  The Route of the Exodus.  San Diego, CA: Ridgefield Publishing Company.

  Hareuveni, Nogah
  1991    Desert and Shepherd in Our Biblical Heritage.  Trans. by Helen Frenkley.  Kiryat Ono: Neot Kedumim.

  Meshel, Ze’ev
  2000    Sinai.  Excavations and Studies.  Oxford: BAR International Series 876.

  Rasmussen, Carl
  1989    Zondervan NIV Atlas of the Bible.  Grand Rapids: Zondervan.

« Previous Entries   Next Entries »