Thursday, 4 February 2016
The Phoebe Ministy in some Churches in Africa
copyright(2016) njoka m dom. Phoebe-ism in the pastoral ministry- pastoral reflections today, unpublished work.
The Phoebe Ministry in some Churches in Africa
This ministry is informal but a custom in Malawi and Zambia, that pastors when on duty outside the parish, a single woman of means is set aside to accompany and pastor the pastor, euphemistically described as 'washing the feet of the Apostle'.It is derived from mis-presentation(or over- presentation) of the epistle to the Romans, 16: 1ff. Let the reader bear with my prejudice ,if any, in this respect.
In the Hebrew culture, the word feet has many meanings, among them being the 'shorter leg'. At first I thought that these Church communities were suffering a native cultural lag, but it later dawned unto me that even in our local set up there are women who are so concerned with pastors and the vicarage welfare. Nobody appoints them but they are always available for volunteer cleaning, washing of clothes, cooking for the Vicar's visitors and other chores. When the Vicar raises the concern that his official residence needs some attention, other women appoint the Phoebe to attend to the situation..
It may take a Vicar several months to know their 'unseen' interests, and when he fails to know, or ignores their advances, then chaos begin. They may be married, single, or widowed but have one thing in common, namely, being very influential in the local secular and Church politics. They can even influence the transfers of the clergy from the backyard. They have very efficient underground networking and experience to cause the desired effects. On the other hand, if the Vicar falls into their designs, the pastoral office suffers a lack of moral authority.
The issue is a review of our inherited view of single mothers as women. Whether we admit it or not, women and their generic power of healing individuals and communities, imbue a definitive bearing upon the pastoral ministry and the Church theology. The priest who apparently succeed are those 'swallowed '' up by these Phoebes, but as far as ones spirituality is concerned, they live as women slaves.
The way out is to present oneself to the congregation as its spiritual father but not a potential lover. This delicate balancing of spirituality against pastoral risks and hazards, needs a concerted training of the ministerial candidates in the training colleges.
Many do not realize, that it as a professional hazard in the ministry, and only realizes the innate power of a woman when the shameful fruit is already in the mouth.
Within the whole frame work of the pastoral ministry, God is ever aware about this inevitable entanglements. A synthesis is to act in the 'via media'- the Anglican way . Any conflict between women sexuality and the pastoral seriousness ends up in the individual pastor losing the pastoral grip with the congregation. The moral position is the application of the'' principle of double effect''- it postulates, that among two inevitable evils as the consequence of either of the moral choice, choose the lesser one. Moral integrity is the ideal choice, unless one converts ones divine ministry to social work per se, resulting to what today may be called pastoral secularism. This should be so carefully and prayerfully tailored, so as to hold and avoid losing any soul. After all, a woman is a human being created by God, and a rightful beneficiary of the divine grace. It is indispensable to keep on remembering that a priest is also a human being, set aside(legitimate holiness) to serve God through other human beings, and that he is not necessarily above the flock in righteousness, having been as weak as the flock, and equally called to repentance (spiritual holiness).Strangely enough, the spiritual mean-score of the flock reflects that of the pastor. Thus, the principle is true, that 'prayer, meditation and temptation', is the lifestyle of a pastoral minister, whether or not ordained as a ministerial priest
There is no salvation outside the caring of women as women, and this means translating motherhood as the substance of the pastoral ministry. Any other pastoral activity revolves round this 'unseen' fact. Do you know why politicians and community leaders tend to have an exodus of female friends?The pastoral ministry is no different, only that the priest is moderate in mingling with the world, and that there are other stake-holders to cushion him from these professional entanglements.
On the other hand, if an individual pastor feels that his ministry cannot escape the feminine traps, and that he desires to hold his conscience, then he better move to other church ministries, such as teaching, chaplaincy, counselling , clerical work etc. targeting the male clients exclusively, as much as this would be functional. Realistically, pastoral ministry has to go the God's way, you cannot avoid ministering women and legitimately claim to be called by God to serve Him. Let infantile spirituality remain shelved for the sake of God and our ministerial vocation.
I personally do not support the phoebe ministry in the Malawian way, but this does not stop the congregations from having them. Each case on its own merit, God being our Helper.
The author is an AC clergy- contact for feedbacks- email domphilo@yahoo.com
22nd January 2016.
Are females begotten males?
Copyright 2015, dom m njoka. Mwea West, Kirinyaga County
Women are not 'misbegotten males', as Aristotle(384-322 BC) put it.
..''femina est mas occasiantus''..?
In his effort to explain the soul power difference between males and
females, Aristotle contends that a male soul has superior power of
reason than a female. Thus, he observes, that women bear lower soul
for lower reason, while males bear superior soul for superior reason
Developing from Aristotle, but with some deviations, St Thomas said,
that the feminine character of affectivity, due to their physiological
constitution, factor the influence of their reasoning process. It means
that a sick male would have a similar difficulty in the reasoning as much
as a woman would in her natural state. Aristotle went a bit too far, at
least as far as courtesy, but not honesty, is concerned, that the soul of
a woman has the same power mean-score as that of a seven year old
boy, or a mad adult male. However, exceptions were not excluded in
both sexes.
More over, Aristotle said that females were not intended by nature to
be, but a malfunction occurred which resulted in their existence. Thus,
using the Christian terms, St Thomas put it, that God did not intend to
create them, but something went wrong and the intended male
developed to a female.He justified this by contending that the superior
soul of God would not have intended to create a lower soul, but that of
the superior character as His. Could we also get an impression that a
male is a misbegotten deity, going by the thought of St Thomas?
In addition, in an attempt to justify the existence of females, Aristotle
said that the causative perimeters of a female begins and ends with the
bearing of a male baby. This belief factors very challenging ideological
hang-ups in the socio-political history of the world.
Notably, the traditional black African cultures have similar, if not
identical, impression upon women, save the Greek philosophical style
of expressing it. I do not know how to save this parallelism of ideas
from races suffering such a geographical distance, not mentioning that
it took several centuries for the West to access the interior Africa. In
Page 2 of 6
Are females misbegotten males as Aristotle said?.rtf 2015/12/26 12:46 PM
other words, the universal impression of women upon themselves, and
as also shared by the males, has been true, that there exist superior
and also lower souls depending on the sexes.
Naturally, if Aristotle is right, a lower soul means a lower character of
will, and thinking powers, among the four soul faculties, namelymemory,
imagination, thinking and will, inherent in all human minds.
Experience has demonstrated, that women have more superior
imagination, and memory, than men. Conversely, males have superior
will, and thinking power, more than females. This is not a weakness of
the either, but a sure foundation of sex and gender complementarity.
In reference to the family customs of Africa, polygamy is a pragmatic
testimony that one superior soul, in the person of the male husband, is
capable or holding, directing and safeguarding the multitude of lower
rational souls in the persons of the wives, and in the same household.
The reverse has not been experienced, that one female can keep
custody of several males in the same household, except in the casual
group sex, but in this case not for marriage.
While polygamy had been a social mechanism for containing females
in a family structure till recently when the economic factors proved
unfavourable to this custom, the monogamy custom has had a definite
share of the gender monopoly, if not imperialism. There has been
notable 'hard-headedness' among the wives of the monogamous
marriages, and this tendency has been attributed to the weakness of
the social structures in the management of the natural femininity.
Today, husbands have no state houses. Each resides with his wife,
and has therefore to conform to her individual tastes and preferences,
having been in her custody. As a single wife, with the multiple roles of
housekeeping, securing food for her children, and nurturing them
according to her tastes and preferences, the husband would have very
thin freedom to control the husbanding of his household. Multiple wives
attract a healthy competition, expressed in conformity if not obedience
to the husband, inter-wives consultation, and the fear of losing
'employment' as a wife, if not for some private privileges.
Without some fear of being punished, any person would tend to take
ones personal course regardless of the other peoples rights. As the
'sole wife' feels being in total charge of her house, and with a man
Page 3 of 6
Are females misbegotten males as Aristotle said?.rtf 2015/12/26 12:46 PM
without a house, the internally displaced person( i d p ), in the person
of the husband, cannot help to be an un- anchored.
As a matter of fact, the wife having been brought up in the custom of
mothers having their own houses, and with the father residing
independently in the same household, the modern monogamous
custom calls for a definite social syllabus to train both young men and
women on how to share the same residence with their husbands, 'till
death put' them sunder.
The hostility exhibited by these 'sole wives', is a regression to the prepolygamous
era in Africa, and this will necessarily call for a recall of the
same functional solution which our ancestors had devised.
It strongly appears that a polygamous household, with a wide
democratic space of the siblings, and the inevitable sharpening of the
problem solving process, is more suitable than the monogamous one
in the training and production of the political as well as the
entrepreneurial leadership. Most of the African statesmen are direct
products of the polygamous families.
With an eroded husband authority, and the concomitant expansion of
the authority of the wife, the male has a narrow democratic voice. This
is not a new thing in the male-female gender play, but polygamy had
been introduced as a gender programme to emancipate the male folk
from the feminine imperialism
In the first place, the African cultures distinguishes between house and
household, such that while every wife had her own' residential house
with her daughters, the husband had also his own 'state house'.
Women are numerically more than the males in any society. Since
politics is numbers, and that the majority tend to have the final say on
matters pertaining policy and leadership, there is no doubt that the
males superior reason has been hand-capped by the majority lower
souls in the socio-political day to day life.
I would want to believe, but I find it contradicted by the real life
situation, that the grace of God works upon the nature of a female to
transform her lower reason to that of a superior male soul ,
automatically. I equally do not get convinced that the female 'lower
Page 4 of 6
Are females misbegotten males as Aristotle said?.rtf 2015/12/26 12:46 PM
'soul was not predestined by God with a purposive rationale. God
created everything and saw that all was good. In other words, while
man was for management and security of the female folk, the latter
was primarily designated to motherhood. Therefore, to endow the
same folk with the duo identical designations would have been a
misbegotten divine design in the human creation. Otherwise, a male
would also be said to be a misbegotten female, deprived of the power
of pregnancy, and the actual child delivering character. May the Lord
forbid!
To be honest, this is more of my sentiments than reasoning with the
fathers of classic philosophy. Am also suffering from the 'mother- child
relationship' with my mother., whom I would hate to see being
diminished in value. But this is not the point here. The character
impression has been that a woman is inherently of a lower soul than
that of a male, diplomatic and Sunday sermon flatteries not
withstanding.
In this alone, several reported cases of women causing grievous harm
to their husbands' genitals have reached the social media. Very few
women raise any condemnation of these heinous acts, but the culprits
raise highest voices in support of their evil actions.
Conversely, when any of them is done a similar harm by a male, the
females go mad calling for concerted measures to deter such crimes,
and preferably to 'chop' off the genitals of this males. So paradoxical,
that women seem to suffer a mental condition of ' male genital-osis', if
not an obsessive male genital maniac depression. Sorry, we are
'playing around ' with the Creator, if this is believed to be an acceptable
mental condition of a female maniac jealous for the unattainable sex
value addition.
This is not new in history, 'women madness' has been reported in the
whole of Africa. Kikuyu call the hurricane wind, 'ngoma cia aka'-
literary, the spirits of dead women.
Time has come to face the phenomena as it is, without
misappropriating the grace of God. Since He created women as they
are, to invoke God to change their nature is, therefore, contrary to His
character. Instead, the society should appropriate them. Otherwise, so
far the females, dear as they are, are grossly misappropriated,
Page 5 of 6
Are females misbegotten males as Aristotle said?.rtf 2015/12/26 12:46 PM
following the so called Beijing.. Christian grace.. law of the land.., to an
extent of alienating the female nature, character and contextual
propriety, then there lies an active gender cor-ruption( heart rupture),
in the pragmatic psycho-social play of males and females. Humanity
suffers the consequent chaos, which threatens the very gender survival
As Alfred Tennyson, the 19th Century poet put it, when a woman
unsexes herself she becomes most heartless, hateful and
disgusting. They naturally and chronically crave for protection by the
male figure, irrespective of the latter's physical ability. She needs a
superior soul as much as a male needs a lower soul supplement, to
complement humanity. Humanity is both spiritual and corporal, and the
sexual difference is in no way a defect, unless God is also crazy for
having created crazy males and females.
They are not 'misbegotten males', but the society has unsexed them,
reducing them to the most heartless, hateful and disgusting humans.
Men are to blame for the misappropriation of this female human
resource, within the conventional religious, and legal framework. They
have sidelined the feelings of women for 'too long', and women in their
effort to liberate themselves end up playing the game 'without knowing
the rules', resulting in hateful, heartless and disgusting behavioural
exhibitions.
The gender emancipation is still on the process, and will be attained
when all the societies shall recognize the precise nature, character and
the pragmatic tendencies of women.
The issue is not sex equality, but each sex to exploit its potentiality in
full, and for the building of the society. Otherwise, a man will never be a
mother, and neither a woman a seed donor. Each has a respective
natural and character specifications, with a temporal purpose of mutual
service. Otherwise, equality should not be mistaken for identity.
Females and males are distinctly different in mode and purpose, but
both are destined for a common destiny- the fullness of humanity.
This fullness of humanity may remain a discrimative dream to some
population of females, owing to the explanation that as long as
marriage and motherhood are doctrinally inseparable, at least as far as
the missionary christianity is concerned, and that marriage is not
always workable in every willing woman, not to mention that the
Page 6 of 6
Are females misbegotten males as Aristotle said?.rtf 2015/12/26 12:46 PM
mathematical sex distribution is uneven, females being more than
males as in all animal, insect and even aqua kingdoms, it naturally
follows that motherhood is conventionally threatened. It is desirable
that motherhood should be contained in marriage. But when this is not
functional in respect to specific female cases, then the individual
woman is at liberty to realize herself within the given environment. This
is where conscience takes the lead.
This appears to be the women position in the current wake of the
single mother sub-culture. It also indicates that no extent of human law
has ever succeed in frustrating the feminine disposition to motherhood.
A woman has always been herself, before and after the institution ofsocial structures, missionary religions notwithstanding.
On the otherhand, they have a moral and intellectual duty to assert
their identity without begging males to 'approve' them, or even fighting
for the male inclined character and occupation so as to look as ' also
able as men'. We see women in male attires today, but not males in
female clothes.
Who taught that a woman is only complete when in personified
masculinity? If there is a point at which I can agree with Aristotle, it is in
their copying of the behaviour of males so as to look like them. The
very denial of ones nature would lead one to be misbegotten both in
character and behaviuor, whether one is a male or female.
Women are not misbegotten males, but are women as women, and do
act according to their nature. God created them as they are, and they
do not deserve such disgrading and dehumanizing attacks on the basis
of their composite specifications and designation.
The writer is a clergy and a social worker, an observer of
feminism philosophy as well.
20-11-2015, dom - 0724-017-568- for critical comments.
Friday, 22 April 2011
11 Things The Bible Bans, But You Do Anyway...
Here are 11 things that are technically banned by the Bible. (All quotes are translations from the New American Standard Bible, but, because I’m actually trying to maintain serious journalistic integrity here, I cross-referenced several other translations to make sure I wasn’t missing the point.)
Round haircuts. See you in Hell, Beatles… and/or kids with bowl cuts, surfer cuts or (my favorite) butt cuts. Leviticus 19:27 reads “You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard.”
Football. At least, the pure version of football, where you play with a pigskin. The modern synthetic footballs are ugly and slippery anyways. Leviticus 11:8, which is discussing pigs, reads “You shall not eat of their flesh nor touch their carcasses; they are unclean to you.”
And you’re doubly breaking that if you wake up, eat some sausage then go throw around the football. Or go to the county fair and enter a greased pig catching contest.
Fortune telling. Before you call a 900 number (do people still call 900 numbers, by the way?), read your horoscope or crack open a fortune cookie, realize you’re in huge trouble if you do.
Leviticus 19:31 reads “Do not turn to mediums or spiritists; do not seek them out to be defiled by them. I am the Lord your God.” The penalty for that? Check Leviticus 20:6: “As for the person who turns to mediums and to spiritists, to play the harlot after them, I will also set My face against that person and will cut him off from among his people.”
Seems like a lifetime of exile is a pretty harsh penalty for talking to Zoltar.
Pulling out. The Bible doesn’t get too much into birth control… it’s clearly pro-populating but, back when it was written, no one really anticipated the condom or the sponge, so those don’t get specific bans.
But… pulling out does. One of the most famous sexual-oriented Bible verses… the one that’s used as anti-masturbation rhetoric… is actually anti-pulling out.
It’s Genesis 38:9-10: “Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife, he wasted his seed on the ground in order not to give offspring to his brother. But what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord; so He took his life also.”
Yep — pull out and get smote. That’s harsh.
Tattoos. No tattoos. Leviticus 19:28 reads, “You shall not make any cuts in your body for the dead nor make any tattoo marks on yourselves: I am the Lord.”
Not even a little butterfly on your ankle. Or Thug Life across your abdomen. Or even, fittingly enough, a cross.
Polyester, or any other fabric blends. The Bible doesn’t want you to wear polyester. Not just because it looks cheap. It’s sinfully unnatural.
Leviticus 19:19 reads, “You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together.”
Check the tag on your shirt right now. Didn’t realize you were mid-sin at this exact second, did you? (Unless you checked the tag by rolling off your neighbor’s wife while you two were having anal sex in the middle of robbing a blind guy. Then your Lycra-spandex blend is really the least of your problems.)
Divorce. The Bible is very clear on this one: No divorcing. You can’t do it. Because when you marry someone, according to Mark 10:8, you “are no longer two, but one flesh.” And, Mark 10:9 reads, “What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”
Mark gets even more hardcore about it a few verses later, in Mark 10:11-12, “And He said to them, ‘Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.’”
Letting people without testicles into church. Whether you’ve been castrated or lost one or two balls to cancer isn’t important. The Bible doesn’t get that specific. It just says you can’t pray.
Deuteronomy 23:1 reads (this is the God’s Word translation, which spells it out better), “A man whose testicles are crushed or whose penis is cut off may never join the assembly of the Lord.”
Oh, and the next verse says that if you’re a bastard, the child of a bastard… or even have a great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandchild of a bastard, you can’t come to church or synagogue either. Deuteronomy 23:2 reads, “No one of illegitimate birth shall enter the assembly of the Lord; none of his descendants, even to the tenth generation, shall enter the assembly of the Lord.”
Wearing gold. 1 Timothy 2:9 doesn’t like your gold necklace at all. Or your pearl necklace. Or any clothes you’re wearing that you didn’t get from Forever 21, Old Navy or H&M.
“Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments.”
Shellfish. Leviticus 11:10 reads, “But whatever is in the seas and in the rivers that does not have fins and scales among all the teeming life of the water, and among all the living creatures that are in the water, they are detestable things to you.” And shellfish is right in that wheelhouse.
Leviticus 11 bans a TON of animals from being eaten (it’s THE basis for Kosher law); beyond shellfish and pig, it also says you can’t eat camel, rock badger, rabbit, eagle, vulture, buzzard, falcon, raven, crow, ostrich, owl, seagull, hawk, pelican, stork, heron, bat, winged insects that walk on four legs unless they have joints to jump with like grasshoppers (?), bear, mole, mouse, lizard, gecko, crocodile, chameleon and snail.
Sorry if that totally ruins your plans to go to a rock badger eat-off this weekend.
Your wife defending your life in a fight by grabbing your attacker’s genitals. No joke. Deuteronomy actually devotes two verses to this exact scenario: Deuteronomy 25:11-12.
“If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.”
That’s impossible to misinterpret. Ladies, if your husband is getting mugged, make sure to kick the mugger in the pills. Do not do the grip and squeeze (no matter what “Miss Congeniality” might advise). Or your hand needs to be cut off.
As a final note, I know that nine of these 11 cite the Old Testament, which Christianity doesn’t necessarily adhere to as law.
To which I say: If you’re going to ignore the section of Leviticus that bans about tattoos, pork, shellfish, round haircuts, polyester and football, how can you possibly turn around and quote Leviticus 18:22 (“You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.”) as irrefutable law?
But that’s me trying to introduce logic to religious fanaticism (or, at least, trying to counter some mix of ignorance, bigotry and narcissism with logic). And I should probably know better.
Round haircuts. See you in Hell, Beatles… and/or kids with bowl cuts, surfer cuts or (my favorite) butt cuts. Leviticus 19:27 reads “You shall not round off the side-growth of your heads nor harm the edges of your beard.”
Football. At least, the pure version of football, where you play with a pigskin. The modern synthetic footballs are ugly and slippery anyways. Leviticus 11:8, which is discussing pigs, reads “You shall not eat of their flesh nor touch their carcasses; they are unclean to you.”
And you’re doubly breaking that if you wake up, eat some sausage then go throw around the football. Or go to the county fair and enter a greased pig catching contest.
Fortune telling. Before you call a 900 number (do people still call 900 numbers, by the way?), read your horoscope or crack open a fortune cookie, realize you’re in huge trouble if you do.
Leviticus 19:31 reads “Do not turn to mediums or spiritists; do not seek them out to be defiled by them. I am the Lord your God.” The penalty for that? Check Leviticus 20:6: “As for the person who turns to mediums and to spiritists, to play the harlot after them, I will also set My face against that person and will cut him off from among his people.”
Seems like a lifetime of exile is a pretty harsh penalty for talking to Zoltar.
Pulling out. The Bible doesn’t get too much into birth control… it’s clearly pro-populating but, back when it was written, no one really anticipated the condom or the sponge, so those don’t get specific bans.
But… pulling out does. One of the most famous sexual-oriented Bible verses… the one that’s used as anti-masturbation rhetoric… is actually anti-pulling out.
It’s Genesis 38:9-10: “Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife, he wasted his seed on the ground in order not to give offspring to his brother. But what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord; so He took his life also.”
Yep — pull out and get smote. That’s harsh.
Tattoos. No tattoos. Leviticus 19:28 reads, “You shall not make any cuts in your body for the dead nor make any tattoo marks on yourselves: I am the Lord.”
Not even a little butterfly on your ankle. Or Thug Life across your abdomen. Or even, fittingly enough, a cross.
Polyester, or any other fabric blends. The Bible doesn’t want you to wear polyester. Not just because it looks cheap. It’s sinfully unnatural.
Leviticus 19:19 reads, “You are to keep My statutes. You shall not breed together two kinds of your cattle; you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor wear a garment upon you of two kinds of material mixed together.”
Check the tag on your shirt right now. Didn’t realize you were mid-sin at this exact second, did you? (Unless you checked the tag by rolling off your neighbor’s wife while you two were having anal sex in the middle of robbing a blind guy. Then your Lycra-spandex blend is really the least of your problems.)
Divorce. The Bible is very clear on this one: No divorcing. You can’t do it. Because when you marry someone, according to Mark 10:8, you “are no longer two, but one flesh.” And, Mark 10:9 reads, “What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”
Mark gets even more hardcore about it a few verses later, in Mark 10:11-12, “And He said to them, ‘Whoever divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her; and if she herself divorces her husband and marries another man, she is committing adultery.’”
Letting people without testicles into church. Whether you’ve been castrated or lost one or two balls to cancer isn’t important. The Bible doesn’t get that specific. It just says you can’t pray.
Deuteronomy 23:1 reads (this is the God’s Word translation, which spells it out better), “A man whose testicles are crushed or whose penis is cut off may never join the assembly of the Lord.”
Oh, and the next verse says that if you’re a bastard, the child of a bastard… or even have a great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandchild of a bastard, you can’t come to church or synagogue either. Deuteronomy 23:2 reads, “No one of illegitimate birth shall enter the assembly of the Lord; none of his descendants, even to the tenth generation, shall enter the assembly of the Lord.”
Wearing gold. 1 Timothy 2:9 doesn’t like your gold necklace at all. Or your pearl necklace. Or any clothes you’re wearing that you didn’t get from Forever 21, Old Navy or H&M.
“Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments.”
Shellfish. Leviticus 11:10 reads, “But whatever is in the seas and in the rivers that does not have fins and scales among all the teeming life of the water, and among all the living creatures that are in the water, they are detestable things to you.” And shellfish is right in that wheelhouse.
Leviticus 11 bans a TON of animals from being eaten (it’s THE basis for Kosher law); beyond shellfish and pig, it also says you can’t eat camel, rock badger, rabbit, eagle, vulture, buzzard, falcon, raven, crow, ostrich, owl, seagull, hawk, pelican, stork, heron, bat, winged insects that walk on four legs unless they have joints to jump with like grasshoppers (?), bear, mole, mouse, lizard, gecko, crocodile, chameleon and snail.
Sorry if that totally ruins your plans to go to a rock badger eat-off this weekend.
Your wife defending your life in a fight by grabbing your attacker’s genitals. No joke. Deuteronomy actually devotes two verses to this exact scenario: Deuteronomy 25:11-12.
“If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.”
That’s impossible to misinterpret. Ladies, if your husband is getting mugged, make sure to kick the mugger in the pills. Do not do the grip and squeeze (no matter what “Miss Congeniality” might advise). Or your hand needs to be cut off.
As a final note, I know that nine of these 11 cite the Old Testament, which Christianity doesn’t necessarily adhere to as law.
To which I say: If you’re going to ignore the section of Leviticus that bans about tattoos, pork, shellfish, round haircuts, polyester and football, how can you possibly turn around and quote Leviticus 18:22 (“You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.”) as irrefutable law?
But that’s me trying to introduce logic to religious fanaticism (or, at least, trying to counter some mix of ignorance, bigotry and narcissism with logic). And I should probably know better.
S***** BIBLE VERSES!
Women listed among property.
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his *manservant nor his *maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.
-- Exodus 20:17 (AV), The Tenth Commandment
Christian women: be silent.
Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
-- I Corinthians 14:34-35 (NIV)
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his *manservant nor his *maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour's.
-- Exodus 20:17 (AV), The Tenth Commandment
Christian women: be silent.
Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
-- I Corinthians 14:34-35 (NIV)
Ten Verses Never Preached On.
Then he went up from there to Bethel; and as he was going up the road, some youths came from the city and mocked him, and said to him, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!” So he turned around and looked at them, and pronounced a curse on them in the name of the LORD. And two female bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the youths.
Comments: George Costanza envokes the wrath of God.
9. Mark 14:51-52 NASB
A young man was following Him, wearing nothing but a linen sheet over his naked body; and they seized him. But he pulled free of the linen sheet and escaped naked.
Comments: Possibly the first streaker in history.
8. Deuteronomy 23:1 ESV
No one whose testicles are crushed or whose male organ is cut off shall enter the assembly of the Lord.
Comments: We can’t just be letting anyone in. We have to draw the line somewhere.
7. Genesis 38:8-10 NASB
Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform your duty as a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife, he wasted his seed on the ground in order not to give offspring to his brother. But what he did was displeasing in the sight of the LORD; so He took his life also.
Comments: Not only do you have to carry the body out, but you have to mop the floor too.
6. 1 Samuel 18:25-27 ESV
Then Saul said, “Thus shall you say to David, ‘The king desires no bride-price except a hundred foreskins of the Philistines, that he may be avenged of the king’s enemies.’” Now Saul thought to make David fall by the hand of the Philistines. And when his servants told David these words, it pleased David well to be the king’s son-in-law. Before the time had expired, David arose and went, along with his men, and killed two hundred of the Philistines. And David brought their foreskins, which were given in full number to the king, that he might become the king’s son-in-law. And Saul gave him his daughter Michal for a wife.
Comments: How do you present a gift like that? Do you tie a bow on the box?
5. Exodus 4:24-25 NASB
Now it came about at the lodging place on the way that the LORD met him and sought to put him to death. Then Zipporah took a flint and cut off her son’s foreskin and threw it at Moses’ feet, and she said, “You are indeed a bridegroom of blood to me.”
Comments: I imagine the son was screaming in pain and Moses just kinda stared at it in disgust.
4. Ezekiel 16:17 NIV
You also took the fine jewelry I gave you, the jewelry made of my gold and silver, and you made for yourself male idols and engaged in prostitution with them.
Comments: What did she do with her gold and silver idols?
3. Ezekiel 23:19-20 NET
Yet she increased her prostitution, remembering the days of her youth when she engaged in prostitution in the land of Egypt. She lusted after their genitals as large as those of donkeys, and their seminal emission was as strong as that of stallions.
Comments: Can’t wait to hear this taught from a pulpit.
2. Judges 3:19-25 ESV
And Ehud reached with his left hand, took the sword from his right thigh, and thrust it into his belly. And the hilt also went in after the blade, and the fat closed over the blade, for he did not pull the sword out of his belly; and the dung came out.
Comments: Apparently the sword pierced all the way through and something unexpected came out the other side. The author felt this was a necessary detail to include.
1. Deuteronomy 25:11-12 NASB
If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.
Comments: George Costanza envokes the wrath of God.
9. Mark 14:51-52 NASB
A young man was following Him, wearing nothing but a linen sheet over his naked body; and they seized him. But he pulled free of the linen sheet and escaped naked.
Comments: Possibly the first streaker in history.
8. Deuteronomy 23:1 ESV
No one whose testicles are crushed or whose male organ is cut off shall enter the assembly of the Lord.
Comments: We can’t just be letting anyone in. We have to draw the line somewhere.
7. Genesis 38:8-10 NASB
Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform your duty as a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife, he wasted his seed on the ground in order not to give offspring to his brother. But what he did was displeasing in the sight of the LORD; so He took his life also.
Comments: Not only do you have to carry the body out, but you have to mop the floor too.
6. 1 Samuel 18:25-27 ESV
Then Saul said, “Thus shall you say to David, ‘The king desires no bride-price except a hundred foreskins of the Philistines, that he may be avenged of the king’s enemies.’” Now Saul thought to make David fall by the hand of the Philistines. And when his servants told David these words, it pleased David well to be the king’s son-in-law. Before the time had expired, David arose and went, along with his men, and killed two hundred of the Philistines. And David brought their foreskins, which were given in full number to the king, that he might become the king’s son-in-law. And Saul gave him his daughter Michal for a wife.
Comments: How do you present a gift like that? Do you tie a bow on the box?
5. Exodus 4:24-25 NASB
Now it came about at the lodging place on the way that the LORD met him and sought to put him to death. Then Zipporah took a flint and cut off her son’s foreskin and threw it at Moses’ feet, and she said, “You are indeed a bridegroom of blood to me.”
Comments: I imagine the son was screaming in pain and Moses just kinda stared at it in disgust.
4. Ezekiel 16:17 NIV
You also took the fine jewelry I gave you, the jewelry made of my gold and silver, and you made for yourself male idols and engaged in prostitution with them.
Comments: What did she do with her gold and silver idols?
3. Ezekiel 23:19-20 NET
Yet she increased her prostitution, remembering the days of her youth when she engaged in prostitution in the land of Egypt. She lusted after their genitals as large as those of donkeys, and their seminal emission was as strong as that of stallions.
Comments: Can’t wait to hear this taught from a pulpit.
2. Judges 3:19-25 ESV
And Ehud reached with his left hand, took the sword from his right thigh, and thrust it into his belly. And the hilt also went in after the blade, and the fat closed over the blade, for he did not pull the sword out of his belly; and the dung came out.
Comments: Apparently the sword pierced all the way through and something unexpected came out the other side. The author felt this was a necessary detail to include.
1. Deuteronomy 25:11-12 NASB
If two men, a man and his countryman, are struggling together, and the wife of one comes near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who is striking him, and puts out her hand and seizes his genitals, then you shall cut off her hand; you shall not show pity.
Top 10 Mysteries of the Bible.
This list looks at some of the historical mysteries and even some of the theological mysteries contained in the Bible. These are all topics which fascinate biblical scholars and laymen alike.
10
Holy Grail
The mystery: Where is the Holy Grail?
According to Christian mythology, the Holy Grail was the dish, plate, or cup used by Jesus at the Last Supper, said to possess miraculous powers. The connection of Joseph of Arimathea with the Grail legend dates from the late 12th century in which Joseph receives the Grail from an apparition of Jesus and sends it with his followers to Great Britain. Belief in the Grail and interest in its potential whereabouts has never ceased. Ownership has been attributed to various groups (including the Knights Templar, probably because they were at the peak of their influence around the time that Grail stories started circulating. There are cups claimed to be the Grail in several churches, for instance the Saint Mary of Valencia Cathedral, which contains an artifact, the Holy Chalice (pictured above – note, only the top “cup” portion is original), supposedly taken by Saint Peter to Rome in the first century, and then to Huesca in Spain by Saint Lawrence in the 3rd century. The Valencia chalice does hold some merit as a contender for the true grail as it has been scientifically asserted to have been created between the 4th century BC and the first century AD in the Middle East. Other stories claim that the Grail is buried beneath Rosslyn Chapel or lies deep in the spring at Glastonbury Tor. Still other stories claim that a secret line of hereditary protectors keep the Grail, or that it was hidden by the Templars in Oak Island, Nova Scotia’s famous “Money Pit”.
9
Ark of the Covenant
The mystery: Where is the Ark of the Covenant?
The Ark of the Covenant is a container described in the Bible as containing the tablets of stone on which were inscribed the Ten Commandments as well as Aaron’s rod and manna. The ark was kept in Jerusalem until the Babylonians plundered and destroyed the temple. From then, the Ark entered the domain of legend as it vanished forever. Some of the theories for where it may be are: Intentional concealment by the priests under the Temple Mount; Intentional removal from Jerusalem in advance of the Babylonians; and Removal of the Ark by the Ethiopian prince Menelik I. Modern excavations near the Temple Mount in Jerusalem have found tunnels, but digging beneath the Temple Mount is heavily restricted. One of the most important Islamic shrines, the Dome of the Rock, sits in the location where the First Temple of Solomon is alleged to have stood. According to the Bible, King Solomon, when building the temple, had the Ark of the Covenant put on a platform which could be lowered down into a tunnel system if the Temple were ever overrun. This would make it a plausible location.
8
Sodom and Gomorrah
The mystery: Were they real cities and if so where are they?
For the sins of their inhabitants Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboim were destroyed by “brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven” (Genesis 19:24-25). In Christianity and Islam, their names have become synonymous with impenitent sin, and their fall with a proverbial manifestation of God’s wrath. The historical existence of Sodom and Gomorrah is still in dispute by archaeologists. The Bible indicates they were located near the Dead Sea. Possible candidates for Sodom or Gomorrah are the sites discovered or visited by Walter E. Rast and R. Thomas Schaub in 1973, including Bab edh-Dhra, which was originally excavated in 1965 by archaeologist Paul Lapp. Other possibilities also include Numeira, es-Safi, Feifeh and Khanazir, which were also visited by Schaub and Rast. All sites were located near the Dead Sea, with evidence of burning and traces of sulfur on many of the stones and a sudden stop of inhabitation towards the end of the Early Bronze Age.
7
Garden of Eden
The mystery: Where is the Garden of Eden?
While the majority of Biblical scholars and theologians consider that the story of the Garden of Eden is most likely not literal, some people do believe that the place existed in reality. Furthermore, the Bible gives directions to the location. This has led to many attempts to locate the garden. The creation story in Genesis relates the geographical location of both Eden and the garden to four rivers (Pishon, Gihon, Tigris, Euphrates), and three regions (Havilah, Assyria, and Kush). There are hypotheses that place Eden at the headwaters of the Tigris and Euphrates (northern Mesopotamia), in Iraq (Mesopotamia), Africa, and the Persian Gulf. While the true location is a mystery, there is a particularly fascinating twist to this tale: Ethiopia is mentioned as being near or surrounding the Garden of Eden in Genesis 2:13 (“And the name of the second river is Gehon: the same is it that compasseth all the land of Ethiopia.”). Since 1974 Paleontologists have excavated six million years of life and conclude that Ethiopia is the scientific location of human origin, a scientifically true Garden of Eden.
6
Bible Codes
The mystery: The Bible appears to contain coded messages; is this a coincidence?
The Bible code, also known as the Torah code, is a series of messages alleged to exist within the Bible text, that when decoded form words and phrases supposedly demonstrating foreknowledge and prophecy. The study and results from this cipher have been popularized by the book The Bible Code.
The primary method by which purportedly meaningful messages have been extracted is the Equidistant Letter Sequence (ELS). To obtain an ELS from a text, choose a starting point (in principle, any letter) and a skip number, also freely and possibly negative. Then, beginning at the starting point, select letters from the text at equal spacing as given by the skip number. For example, the bold letters in this sentence form an ELS. With a skip of -4, and ignoring the spaces and punctuation, the word SAFEST is spelled out backwards. Bible codes proponents usually use a Hebrew Bible text. The use and publication of “predictions” based on Bible codes has succeeded in bringing about popular awareness of the codes, most notably based on the work of journalist Michael Drosnin. Drosnin’s most famous prediction, in 1994, was the 1995 assassination of Israeli Prime Minister, Yitzhak Rabin, using a Bible code technique.
5
The Lost Tribes
The mystery: What happened to the lost tribes?
The phrase Ten Lost Tribes of Israel refers to the ancient Tribes of Israel that disappeared from the Biblical account after the Kingdom of Israel was destroyed, enslaved and exiled by ancient Assyria. Many groups of Jews have doctrines concerning the continued hidden existence or future public return of these tribes. This is a subject that is partially based upon authenticated and documented historical fact, partially upon written religious tradition and partially upon speculation. There have been some bizarre claims about who may be descended from the lost tribes. Some claims include the Irish, Native Americans, British, and the Japanese. The Kaifeng Jews (pictured above) in China claim to be descended from one of the lost tribes.
4
The Pharaoh of Exodus
The mystery: Who was the pharaoh of the Exodus?
The Pharaoh of the Exodus is the pharaoh (king) who ruled over ancient Egypt at the time of the Exodus. More precisely, it is the question of who this pharaoh might have been. The story of the enslavement of the Children of Israel in Egypt, the plagues by which God forces their release, and their subsequent escape from a pursuing army at the Crossing of the Red Sea, is told in the opening chapters of the Book of Exodus. The pharaoh of the story is not named – he is referred to simply as “pharaoh” – and the question of his identity has been the subject of much speculation among those who believe the Exodus to be a real event. The most commonly imagined figure in popular culture is Ramesses the Great, although there is no documentary or archaeological evidence that he had to deal with the Plagues of Egypt or anything similar or that he chased Hebrew slaves fleeing Egypt. There is also an account made by Merneptah, in the form of a poem from the so-called Israel Stele, which makes reference to the supposed utter destruction of Israel in a campaign prior to his 5th year in Canaan: “Israel has been wiped out…its seed is no more.” There is basically no evidence to strongly support the view of any specific Pharaoh as the one mentioned in Exodus.
3
Noah’s Ark
The mystery: Where is Noah’s Ark?
From at least the time of Eusebius (c. 275 – 339 AD) to the present day, the search for the physical remains of Noah’s Ark has held a fascination for Christians, Jews and Muslims. Despite many rumours, claims of sightings and expeditions no scientific evidence of the ark has ever been found. The search for the ark has been called a “wild goose chase” by some archaeologists. Ark searchers have had little to guide them to the Ark beyond Genesis’ mention of the “mountains of Ararat”. By the middle of the 19th century, archaeologists had identified a 1st-millennium BC kingdom and region of Urartu, contemporaneous with the Assyrian empire and the early kingdoms of Judah and Israel, located in the mountains of present-day Armenia and eastern Turkey. Not until the 19th century was the region settled enough, and welcoming enough for Westerners, to make it possible for significant expeditions to search for the Ark. By the beginning of the 21st century, two main candidates for exploration had emerged: the so-called Ararat anomaly (pictured above) near the main summit of Ararat (an “anomaly” in that it shows on aerial and satellite images as a dark blemish on the snow and ice of the peak), and the separate site at Durupınar near Dogubayazit, 18 miles (29 km) south of the Greater Ararat summit. Here is an interesting article on the most recent discovery of petrified timber purported to be part of one of the walls of the boat.
2
The Beloved Disciple
The mystery: Who was the Beloved Disciple?
One of the biggest mysteries in biblical scholarship concerns the identity of “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” According to the Gospel of John, this was the disciple who leaned on Jesus during the Last Supper, and the only male disciple present at the crucifixion. In addition, John 21:24 implies that the entire Gospel of John is based on this disciple’s memories. Yet, oddly, it never gives his name. The other three gospels don’t give his name either. In fact they never even mention this “Beloved Disciple” (as he is often called). They also say nothing about any disciple leaning on Jesus during the Last Supper or witnessing the crucifixion. Their total silence on the matter only adds to the mystery. A number of scholars have argued that the Beloved Disciple was Lazarus, the brother of Mary and Martha of Bethany, and the man that Jesus raised from the dead. The reason for this is the fact that when the sisters summoned Jesus to help Lazarus, they said: “Lord, the one you love is sick.” Some modern theories even claim that Mary Magdalene was the Beloved Disciple – an idea which would certainly impress Dan Brown. [Source]
1
Authorship of the Gospels
The mystery: Who wrote the Gospels?
The gospels are probably the most important part of the New Testament and until the 18th century their authorship was generally not regarded as a mystery. But as modern biblical scholars investigated the history of the four books, they began to question the fact that they were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. There is much speculation (mostly based on the order of the writing of the books) that the gospels were written by people who know the apostles, but not by the apostles directly. This is a mystery that is unlikely to be solved unless a “master” source document for the common quotes in the gospels is discovered which would explain the anomalies which are spoken of in support of the non-apostolic author theories.
10
Holy Grail
The mystery: Where is the Holy Grail?
According to Christian mythology, the Holy Grail was the dish, plate, or cup used by Jesus at the Last Supper, said to possess miraculous powers. The connection of Joseph of Arimathea with the Grail legend dates from the late 12th century in which Joseph receives the Grail from an apparition of Jesus and sends it with his followers to Great Britain. Belief in the Grail and interest in its potential whereabouts has never ceased. Ownership has been attributed to various groups (including the Knights Templar, probably because they were at the peak of their influence around the time that Grail stories started circulating. There are cups claimed to be the Grail in several churches, for instance the Saint Mary of Valencia Cathedral, which contains an artifact, the Holy Chalice (pictured above – note, only the top “cup” portion is original), supposedly taken by Saint Peter to Rome in the first century, and then to Huesca in Spain by Saint Lawrence in the 3rd century. The Valencia chalice does hold some merit as a contender for the true grail as it has been scientifically asserted to have been created between the 4th century BC and the first century AD in the Middle East. Other stories claim that the Grail is buried beneath Rosslyn Chapel or lies deep in the spring at Glastonbury Tor. Still other stories claim that a secret line of hereditary protectors keep the Grail, or that it was hidden by the Templars in Oak Island, Nova Scotia’s famous “Money Pit”.
9
Ark of the Covenant
The mystery: Where is the Ark of the Covenant?
The Ark of the Covenant is a container described in the Bible as containing the tablets of stone on which were inscribed the Ten Commandments as well as Aaron’s rod and manna. The ark was kept in Jerusalem until the Babylonians plundered and destroyed the temple. From then, the Ark entered the domain of legend as it vanished forever. Some of the theories for where it may be are: Intentional concealment by the priests under the Temple Mount; Intentional removal from Jerusalem in advance of the Babylonians; and Removal of the Ark by the Ethiopian prince Menelik I. Modern excavations near the Temple Mount in Jerusalem have found tunnels, but digging beneath the Temple Mount is heavily restricted. One of the most important Islamic shrines, the Dome of the Rock, sits in the location where the First Temple of Solomon is alleged to have stood. According to the Bible, King Solomon, when building the temple, had the Ark of the Covenant put on a platform which could be lowered down into a tunnel system if the Temple were ever overrun. This would make it a plausible location.
8
Sodom and Gomorrah
The mystery: Were they real cities and if so where are they?
For the sins of their inhabitants Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboim were destroyed by “brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven” (Genesis 19:24-25). In Christianity and Islam, their names have become synonymous with impenitent sin, and their fall with a proverbial manifestation of God’s wrath. The historical existence of Sodom and Gomorrah is still in dispute by archaeologists. The Bible indicates they were located near the Dead Sea. Possible candidates for Sodom or Gomorrah are the sites discovered or visited by Walter E. Rast and R. Thomas Schaub in 1973, including Bab edh-Dhra, which was originally excavated in 1965 by archaeologist Paul Lapp. Other possibilities also include Numeira, es-Safi, Feifeh and Khanazir, which were also visited by Schaub and Rast. All sites were located near the Dead Sea, with evidence of burning and traces of sulfur on many of the stones and a sudden stop of inhabitation towards the end of the Early Bronze Age.
7
Garden of Eden
The mystery: Where is the Garden of Eden?
While the majority of Biblical scholars and theologians consider that the story of the Garden of Eden is most likely not literal, some people do believe that the place existed in reality. Furthermore, the Bible gives directions to the location. This has led to many attempts to locate the garden. The creation story in Genesis relates the geographical location of both Eden and the garden to four rivers (Pishon, Gihon, Tigris, Euphrates), and three regions (Havilah, Assyria, and Kush). There are hypotheses that place Eden at the headwaters of the Tigris and Euphrates (northern Mesopotamia), in Iraq (Mesopotamia), Africa, and the Persian Gulf. While the true location is a mystery, there is a particularly fascinating twist to this tale: Ethiopia is mentioned as being near or surrounding the Garden of Eden in Genesis 2:13 (“And the name of the second river is Gehon: the same is it that compasseth all the land of Ethiopia.”). Since 1974 Paleontologists have excavated six million years of life and conclude that Ethiopia is the scientific location of human origin, a scientifically true Garden of Eden.
6
Bible Codes
The mystery: The Bible appears to contain coded messages; is this a coincidence?
The Bible code, also known as the Torah code, is a series of messages alleged to exist within the Bible text, that when decoded form words and phrases supposedly demonstrating foreknowledge and prophecy. The study and results from this cipher have been popularized by the book The Bible Code.
The primary method by which purportedly meaningful messages have been extracted is the Equidistant Letter Sequence (ELS). To obtain an ELS from a text, choose a starting point (in principle, any letter) and a skip number, also freely and possibly negative. Then, beginning at the starting point, select letters from the text at equal spacing as given by the skip number. For example, the bold letters in this sentence form an ELS. With a skip of -4, and ignoring the spaces and punctuation, the word SAFEST is spelled out backwards. Bible codes proponents usually use a Hebrew Bible text. The use and publication of “predictions” based on Bible codes has succeeded in bringing about popular awareness of the codes, most notably based on the work of journalist Michael Drosnin. Drosnin’s most famous prediction, in 1994, was the 1995 assassination of Israeli Prime Minister, Yitzhak Rabin, using a Bible code technique.
5
The Lost Tribes
The mystery: What happened to the lost tribes?
The phrase Ten Lost Tribes of Israel refers to the ancient Tribes of Israel that disappeared from the Biblical account after the Kingdom of Israel was destroyed, enslaved and exiled by ancient Assyria. Many groups of Jews have doctrines concerning the continued hidden existence or future public return of these tribes. This is a subject that is partially based upon authenticated and documented historical fact, partially upon written religious tradition and partially upon speculation. There have been some bizarre claims about who may be descended from the lost tribes. Some claims include the Irish, Native Americans, British, and the Japanese. The Kaifeng Jews (pictured above) in China claim to be descended from one of the lost tribes.
4
The Pharaoh of Exodus
The mystery: Who was the pharaoh of the Exodus?
The Pharaoh of the Exodus is the pharaoh (king) who ruled over ancient Egypt at the time of the Exodus. More precisely, it is the question of who this pharaoh might have been. The story of the enslavement of the Children of Israel in Egypt, the plagues by which God forces their release, and their subsequent escape from a pursuing army at the Crossing of the Red Sea, is told in the opening chapters of the Book of Exodus. The pharaoh of the story is not named – he is referred to simply as “pharaoh” – and the question of his identity has been the subject of much speculation among those who believe the Exodus to be a real event. The most commonly imagined figure in popular culture is Ramesses the Great, although there is no documentary or archaeological evidence that he had to deal with the Plagues of Egypt or anything similar or that he chased Hebrew slaves fleeing Egypt. There is also an account made by Merneptah, in the form of a poem from the so-called Israel Stele, which makes reference to the supposed utter destruction of Israel in a campaign prior to his 5th year in Canaan: “Israel has been wiped out…its seed is no more.” There is basically no evidence to strongly support the view of any specific Pharaoh as the one mentioned in Exodus.
3
Noah’s Ark
The mystery: Where is Noah’s Ark?
From at least the time of Eusebius (c. 275 – 339 AD) to the present day, the search for the physical remains of Noah’s Ark has held a fascination for Christians, Jews and Muslims. Despite many rumours, claims of sightings and expeditions no scientific evidence of the ark has ever been found. The search for the ark has been called a “wild goose chase” by some archaeologists. Ark searchers have had little to guide them to the Ark beyond Genesis’ mention of the “mountains of Ararat”. By the middle of the 19th century, archaeologists had identified a 1st-millennium BC kingdom and region of Urartu, contemporaneous with the Assyrian empire and the early kingdoms of Judah and Israel, located in the mountains of present-day Armenia and eastern Turkey. Not until the 19th century was the region settled enough, and welcoming enough for Westerners, to make it possible for significant expeditions to search for the Ark. By the beginning of the 21st century, two main candidates for exploration had emerged: the so-called Ararat anomaly (pictured above) near the main summit of Ararat (an “anomaly” in that it shows on aerial and satellite images as a dark blemish on the snow and ice of the peak), and the separate site at Durupınar near Dogubayazit, 18 miles (29 km) south of the Greater Ararat summit. Here is an interesting article on the most recent discovery of petrified timber purported to be part of one of the walls of the boat.
2
The Beloved Disciple
The mystery: Who was the Beloved Disciple?
One of the biggest mysteries in biblical scholarship concerns the identity of “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” According to the Gospel of John, this was the disciple who leaned on Jesus during the Last Supper, and the only male disciple present at the crucifixion. In addition, John 21:24 implies that the entire Gospel of John is based on this disciple’s memories. Yet, oddly, it never gives his name. The other three gospels don’t give his name either. In fact they never even mention this “Beloved Disciple” (as he is often called). They also say nothing about any disciple leaning on Jesus during the Last Supper or witnessing the crucifixion. Their total silence on the matter only adds to the mystery. A number of scholars have argued that the Beloved Disciple was Lazarus, the brother of Mary and Martha of Bethany, and the man that Jesus raised from the dead. The reason for this is the fact that when the sisters summoned Jesus to help Lazarus, they said: “Lord, the one you love is sick.” Some modern theories even claim that Mary Magdalene was the Beloved Disciple – an idea which would certainly impress Dan Brown. [Source]
1
Authorship of the Gospels
The mystery: Who wrote the Gospels?
The gospels are probably the most important part of the New Testament and until the 18th century their authorship was generally not regarded as a mystery. But as modern biblical scholars investigated the history of the four books, they began to question the fact that they were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. There is much speculation (mostly based on the order of the writing of the books) that the gospels were written by people who know the apostles, but not by the apostles directly. This is a mystery that is unlikely to be solved unless a “master” source document for the common quotes in the gospels is discovered which would explain the anomalies which are spoken of in support of the non-apostolic author theories.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)