There seems to be so much division in our world today with many trying to find ways to make us all against each other rather than us finding common ground so we can build a relationship with each other. Yet, what does the Bible say about this? You will find that the God of the universe wants a personal relationship with everyone. How amazing is that?

Now the Bible does make distinctions between us as citizens of the world. Yet, it seems to only look at people in two ways: Jews and Gentiles. Is that significant?

It seems this is very significant because while the Bible provides these distinctions, it really is a way for God to provide inclusion rather than exclusion. I did several blog posts on this point of inclusion. We find that God cares for both sets of people. While, yes, he chose Jews as “his chosen people” (Ex 19:5; Dt 14:2), this phrase means something different than most tout. It wasn’t that Jews were more special, but that Jews had a greater responsibility to point the world to their God, Yahweh. You see, God had a plan from the very beginning of the world for inclusion of all people on Earth into His plan.

My book Why is a Gentile World Tied to a Jewish Timeline? covers this topic and helps you to see that the Bible has a plot just like any other book. Really? you may be asking. There’s a plot? Yes, there really is. But there is a lot of “stuff” in there you may be thinking. And, yes. Yes, there is. But isn’t there “stuff” in your life also? What does this “stuff” do? It distracts us from what is truly important. We often need to look through the “stuff” to find the truly important things in life. So, if you get to “stuff” in your reading and that bogs you down, just plow through because something amazing is on the other side of it.

You will find that the Bible is really a unique book. It has mystery, intrigue, subterfuge, action, adventure, and peril. You can even find what almost seems like science fiction. It presents a plan that incorporates all these elements into a timeline that, although Jewish in nature, incorporates everyone on Earth into it. You see, God is way more inclusive than most give him credit. So, give the book a try. It’s a little more scholarly than my other books, but is written in a very conversational style, so you will find it easy to read. You may just find something about God and the Bible that will reveal a fact you likely haven’t yet realized. So, give it a try and read what a great future can await you.

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

It is not just the topic of time of which we are concerned, but the Bible’s perspective of time that is of consequence. In order to understand the topic of which someone is writing, it many times helps to understand something about the author as well.

All of the writers of both the Old Testament and New Testament of the Bible were Jewish, with very few exceptions. It is believed that Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon during the time of Daniel the prophet, wrote the fourth chapter of Daniel. While tradition has claimed that Luke, the physician who was a companion of the apostle Paul and who wrote the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts, was a Gentile, there is probably more evidence which supports he was more likely a Jew. Therefore, most of the ideas and teachings would be from a Jewish perspective. The idea of time would be no exception.

A day is defined in the Bible, and by Jewish teaching, as “an evening and a morning” (Gn 1). Of course, this then begs the question of whether the days mentioned in the first chapter of Genesis are literal days. There are four main reasons to believe that they are literal days:

i) There is nothing to suggest that it was not a literal day. If we use Occam’s razor principle, i.e., the simplest solution tends to be the right one, then it is less complicated to see it as a literal day.

ii) This is how Moses, the believed author of Genesis, and other Jews throughout history defined “a day.”

iii) In Exodus 20:11 and 31:17, where the importance of the Sabbath is described, each passage states that the earth and heavens were created in six days and that God rested on the seventh. Since the emphasis in these two verses was on the seventh day of each of our weeks, if God rested on the seventh day and it was a literal day as implied here, then the other six days should be literal days.

iv) Since Moses was the author of both Genesis and Exodus, then if he taught in Exodus that these were literal days, then he probably meant them to be literal days in Genesis as well.

Why is it important to understand this? Paul stated that the Jews were entrusted with the words of God (Ro 3:2); therefore, it is important to understand the Jewish perspective of life and time. It is unclear why God chose the Jews, but scripture is clear that God chose Abraham and made an everlasting covenant with him (Gn 15:17-21). Somehow, God made an impression on Abraham. It is possible that Noah was still alive in Abraham’s early years [then known as Abram (Gn 11:27)] and had an influence on him.  God’s covenant to Abraham was not only for Abraham but for his descendants through the line of Isaac (Gn 17:19) and Jacob (Gn 28:13-15; 35:9-13). This covenant included promises of blessings, having a great name, becoming a great nation, and being a blessing to others and the whole world (Gn 12:1-4). Abraham believed in the Lord and it was credited to him as righteousness (Gn 15:6). Because the covenant was everlasting and unconditional (Gn 15:17), its fulfillment was entirely in God’s hands and not in the hands of Abraham, or his descendants, the Israelites. Although they would reap consequences of their actions (Lv 26; Dt 28), God has promised to keep his part of the covenant regardless of their actions (Jr 31:36) because He is faithful (Dt 7:9). All through history, even through judgments of captivity and sword, God has, and will, ensure that a remnant remains (Is 10:22, Jr 23:3).

Because of this relationship with the Jewish people which God initiated, it is important to understand the hows and whys of His interactions with them. It was God who initiated the Jewish calendar (Ex 12:2), often referred to as the Mosaic calendar, and the festivals to which the Israelites were to follow (Lv 23). The calendar we have today, known as the Gregorian calendar, was devised by an Italian doctor named Aloysius Lilius and adopted by Pope Gregory in 1582. Prior to this was the Julian calendar, issued by Julius Caesar in 45 AD, which had a year as 365 days and added an additional day every 4 years making a year being 365.25 days. The true value is 365.242 days for the length of the earth’s orbit around the sun. This little error of 0.008 days per year had added up to almost 10 full days by 1582 and was making the first day of spring very close to the beginning of summer. The Gregorian calendar skips the leap years in 3 out of every 4 century years which makes each year 365.2425 days and keeps the spring equinox on either March 20 or 21 of each year. These calendars are based upon the sun as its reference point whereas the calendar instituted by God in the Bible is a lunisolar calendar which uses the moon as its reference for seasons (Ps 104:19). A lunisolar calendar is probably more apt for an agrarian society which is highly dependent upon knowing the stars and ends of seasons (and the reason it was used up to the Roman era), but as we have evolved to more of a financially-dependent society, the Gregorian calendar has become more useful. Although God referred to the months of the calendar as numerals, over time and due to influence of surrounding nations (Dt 16:1, 1Ki 6:1, 37; 8:2) and Babylonian captivity (Er 6:15; Ne 2:1, 6:15; Es 2:16, 3:7, 8:9; Zc 1:7, 7:1), names used by other nations were sometimes used. Often, they would cross-reference them to the Mosaic calendar (e.g., Es 8:9).

The timeline in the Bible is always related to the Jews. Although Gentile nations are described, events are always presented from the Jewish perspective. A few examples are the timeline for the Egyptian bondage (Gn 15:13), the Babylonian captivity (Jr 25:11), and the death of Messiah (Dn 9:26). These types of timelines are not provided for Gentile events. Prior to the Church Age (Ac 2), Gentiles were the minor component of God’s salvation plan, whereas during the Church Age (modern times), Gentiles are the major component of God’s salvation plan. Therefore, the time of the rapture is not provided. Yet, as we have stated in other posts, even the Rapture is from a Jewish wedding perspective. After the rapture of the Church, God’s timeline for the Jews will again be started (Dn 9:27).

Time and prophecy are interrelated, but are they intricately connected? A prophet’s message was considered from God if the prophet’s words came true (Dt 18:21-22). However, no timeframe is specified. How do we know all the prophecies in the Bible are literal and true? One is the belief that the Bible is God’s word (2Tm 3:16). Another is to see what has already come true and see if that gives enough credence to the validity of other prophecies. Future posts will give some examples to consider.

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

It was not the difference between being Jewish and Gentile and how to combine these cultures under the umbrella of Christianity that caused the final division between the two, but the expression of anti-Semitism that developed. Probably one of the earliest writings that set this tone was the Epistle of Barnabas (80-120 AD):

…give heed to yourselves now, and not to liken yourselves to certain persons who pile up sin upon sin, saying that our covenant remains to them also. Ours it is; but they lost it in this way for ever, when Moses had just received it. (Barnabas 4:6, 7)

The main tenet of this author was that the Jews did not receive the covenant from God as they claimed because Moses broke the stone tablets that contained that covenant; therefore, it was not received until Jesus Christ came and it was received by the Gentiles who believed in Him. This thought pattern may have been the genesis to many other writers who went even further into these anti-Semitic beliefs and teachings.

While many of the early church fathers had very good Biblical teaching for which we all have benefitted, they could not seem to get over the stumbling block of Jews and their rejection of Jesus Christ as their Messiah. However, they did not seem to distinguish the difference between individual Jews and the Jewish nation. The national leaders rejected Jesus as their long-awaited Messiah; individual Jews, however, were accepting Him as their Savior. Yet, this distinction seems to be missed in their writings. Here are just a few:

• Ignatius of Antioch was a disciple of the apostle John and was bishop of the church in Antioch, Syria, when Trajan was Emperor and sentenced him to a martyr’s death by beast in the arena. This is an excerpt from one of his writings to Magnesia, one of the regional units, or territories, in Greece (writing between 105-115 AD):

It is absurd to profess Christ Jesus, and to Judaize. For Christianity did not embrace Judaism, but Judaism Christianity, that so every tongue which believeth might be gathered together to God. (Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians, Chapter X)

• Justin Martyr was a second century Christian apologist. He also wrote against Marcion who held that Christianity was in discontinuity with Judaism. This is an excerpt from his third apology (writing between 150-160 AD):

For the circumcision according to the flesh, which is from Abraham, was given for a sign; that you may be separated from other nations, and from us; and that you alone may suffer that which you now justly suffer; and that your land may be desolate, and your cities burned with fire; and that strangers may eat your fruit in your presence, and not one of you may go up to Jerusalem. (St. Justin Martyr Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter XVI)

• Origen was a theologian in Alexandria, Egypt. He refuted Gnosticism and was a critic of many pagan philosophies of his day. He is noted for developing Christian Neoplatonism which combined many of the philosophies of Plato with those of Old Testament scripture. This is an excerpt from one of his responses to the pagan philosopher Celsus’ attack on Christianity (writing between 203-250 AD):

…on account of their unbelief, and the other insults which they heaped upon Jesus, the Jews will not only suffer more than others in that judgment, which is believed to impend over the world, but have even already endured such sufferings. For what nation is in exile from their own metropolis, and from the place sacred to the worship of their fathers, save the Jews alone? And these calamities they have suffered, because they were a most wicked nation, which, although guilty of many other sins, yet has been punished so severely for none, as for those that were committed against our Jesus. (Origen Against Celsus: Book II, Chapter VIII)

• John Chrysostom (344-407 AD) was a priest at Antioch in Syria as well as archbishop in Constantinople and was noted as the early church’s greatest preacher. He was blunt in his preaching which won him notoriety as well as got him into trouble. He was later falsely accused of heresy, deposed, and sentenced to exile. However, his health was so poor he died on the journey. The following are excerpts from some of his sermons:

The synagogues of the Jews are the homes of idolatry and devils, even though they have no images in them [Sermon I:3; based on Jer. vii:11]. They are worse even than heathen circuses [Sermon I:3]. The very idea of going from a church to a synagogue is blasphemous [Sermon II:3]; and to attend the Jewish Passover is to insult Christ. To be with the Jews on the very day they murdered Jesus is to ensure that on the Day of Judgment He will say 'Depart from Me: for you have had intercourse with my murderers' [Sermon III:5 and VI:8]. The Jews do not worship God but devils [Sermon I:3, based on John 8:19], so that all their feasts are unclean [Sermon I:6]. God hates them, and indeed has always hated them. But since their murder of Jesus, He allows them no time for repentance [Sermon VI:1]. It was of set purpose that He concentrated all their worship in Jerusalem that He might more easily destroy it [Sermon IV:6].

It is likely that most of these early theologians would state that they were not condoning the systematic killing of Jewish people and their words have been taken out of context. While that may be true, they also likely did not consider how much weight their words would be taken by those who would come after them or how long-lasting their statements would endure and be such a catalyst for a much more aggressive form of anti-Semitism which still persists today. While their intentions may have been pure and slated at non-Christian Jews and not wanting their congregation to be confused with non-Christian Jewish thinking, it became the focal part of the wedge that started to drive the separation of the church from all Jews and not just those who had not accepted Jesus as their Messiah.

During this time of church history through the teachings of Origen, Clement, and others who were influenced by Greek philosophy and allegorical scripture interpretation like the Jewish scholar Philo, was the use of allegory to explain scripture from a Christian perspective. This method of interpretation allowed them to make leaps that the Christian church was now the continuation of God’s covenant with Israel in the Old Testament. This in itself is not anti-Semitism, but does lay the groundwork for that to develop: if indeed true, then how would, or could, Israel fit into God’s future plans?

This sentiment has continued over the centuries by many. Under the rise of Constantine and the Counsel of Nicaea, further separations were made. As one example, Easter was made the official Christian holiday for celebrating the resurrection of Christ rather than Passover week (Passover, Feast of Unleavened Bread and First Fruits). Also, the rights of Jews were severely reduced, and the Jews were later treated very severely, were blamed for plagues that occurred, and were harassed relentlessly. This anti-Semitism was a catalyst for the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, and much persecution. Unfortunately, Paul’s statement that salvation had come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious (Ro 11:11) was not considered, but rather the Jews were made to hate instead. Even Martin Luther in the fifteenth century had disparaging remarks against the Jews. So much so that Hitler stated his atrocities against the Jews were simply finishing what Luther had started.

The separation between Jew and Christian has become so far removed that it is likely any mainstream Jew or Christian today would be unable to express any connection between their two faiths. Most Christians today have no real understanding that Jewish holidays have a Christian relevance.

Because of this separation, there is now also a separation between Christian Gentiles and Christian Jews (usually called Messianic Jews) which is unfortunate since they both are followers of Jesus Christ. It seems that these Messianic Jews are the only ones who currently blend the messages of the Old and New Testaments into their liturgical church operations. As an example, there are very few Gentile Christian churches that even mention Communion comes from the last Passover meal Jesus had with his disciples. Even if this aspect is mentioned, the symbolism of the bread and cup within the Passover meal are usually not explained. The argument continues in that Messianic Jews can get too legalistic as did the Jews in the days of old while Gentile Christians can be accused of not understanding the Old Testament meaning in their New Testament practices. It seems everyone can get caught up in tradition rather than understanding. All Christians, whether Jew or Gentile, should remember Paul’s words to the Colossians that whatever one does, it should all be done in the name of Jesus Christ and to the glory of God the Father (Cl 3:17). Praise and recognition should also not be the motivators as that can instead hinder the gospel message (3Jn 1:5, 10), and one’s thought pattern must change to recognize the worth in others that God sees (Pm 1:15-16).

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

The Parthian Empire extended from India in the east to Turkey in the west, with its western border being the Euphrates River, and from the Persian Gulf in the south to the Caspian and Black Seas in the north. The following modern-day countries would have been encompassed within Parthia: all modern Iran, Iraq and Armenia, parts of Turkey, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Tajikistan. During the New Testament era it was well known that there were Jews who existed within Parthian territory, and it seems they were also aware of their fellow Israeli descendants who lived in Armenia.

Likely because of Christ’s earlier command to his disciples to go to the “lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Mt 10:5-6) and to “teach all nations” (Mt 28:19), many of them went to the Jews in Parthian territories to spread the gospel, just as Paul reached the Gentiles within the Roman sphere of influence (Ga 2:8). One such evidence of this is that Peter wrote his first epistle from Babylon (1Pt 5:13). Some claim that this is a code word used for Rome which was done similarly by the apostle John when he wrote the book of Revelation (Rv 17:5; 18:2). However, this type of analogical comparison was not prominent until many years later. In addition, Peter was writing to those in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia (1Pt 1:1) – all places in the northern part of Asia Minor near the Black Sea whose territory today is in the country of Turkey. There was a large contingent of Jews in this Gentile territory. It also seems that Peter was stating that those from where he was writing from had similar connections to those to whom he was writing, i.e., “elected together with you” (1Pt 5:13). This could suggest that Peter was with other Jews or those of Israeli descent since he was in Parthian territory and therefore had a connection to those in Asia Minor who were of Jewish descent. There was a synagogue in Babylon all the way through the middle of the first century AD. Therefore, it is likely that Peter was indeed within Parthian territory when he wrote his epistle. Since Peter was a leader of the Jerusalem church and of the apostles, it would seem logical that the other apostles would follow his example. The apostles reached out to Jews in what today are the following countries: Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, India, Iran, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Parts of Russia, Tajikistan, parts of Turkey, Turkmenistan, and Parts of Ukraine.

There were at least three main areas visited by these apostles most often: Babylon, Armenia/Scythia, and India. This would suggest there must have been a large group of Jews and/or Israelis who lived in these areas, although there were other areas visited. It has already been stated that many people of the Northern Kingdom of Israel migrated to the area in and surrounding Armenia. It is not surprising there would be a large contingent of Israeli descendants here as God had prophesied through Hosea they would increase to great numbers after they left their homeland (Ho 1:6-10). This also indicates that the Jews in Judaea knew they were Israeli descendants and never considered them “lost.”

It would also not be surprising to find pockets of Jews in Babylon and throughout the Parthian Empire as this was where Judah was taken captive by Nebuchadnezzar, and most Jews did not return to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel, Ezra, or Nehemiah. While the Jews in Judaea had a sense of nationality, they never lost connection with those who had not returned to their native homeland.

It would also seem that these peoples were not considered Gentile at this point in history. The disciples had to have started their missionary efforts outside Judea soon after Christ’s ascension since James was an early martyr and yet he was noted to have visited areas at the extremes of both the Parthian and Roman Empires before his untimely death. This would mean that these people were practicing Judaism since the debate over how Gentiles were becoming Christians did not occur until later after Paul started his ministry. However, going forward in history, it appears that these Israeli descendants blended into the nationalities into which they migrated when the Parthian Empire fell in the early third century AD. After that point, they became indistinguishable from the Gentile people into which they settled. From that point on they were considered Gentiles as there were no longer any distinguishing ethnic characteristics that could identify them as being of Israeli descent, even though it may be true. In contrast, it seems the Jews were able to keep their ethnic identity throughout the centuries by not blending into the societies into which they migrated.

Since God’s prophecies always come true, it will be quite miraculous how He will one day bring together both Jews and Israelis into one nation again and they will have a heart to serve the Lord (Ek 36:24-28). How this will come about is not yet known but is a topic of much debate. It will be so miraculous when Israel will no longer talk about how God brought them up out of Egypt but how God brought them together from all of the countries of the world where they had been scattered (Jr 16:14-15). It sounds like there will be many surprised Gentiles to know they are of Israeli descent and will not be considered Gentile going forward.

Aren’t you glad you serve a God that can do impossible?

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

With Paul being so against Gentiles becoming Jewish proselytes in order to become Christians, we have to wonder if the apostle Paul became a Gentile. Although Paul was adamant about what made one a follower of Jesus Christ, it is not that he threw away his Jewish heritage. He was actually quite proud of it (Ro 11:1). At times, however, he did set aside his Jewishness, for he did not want it to be a stumbling block to others and confuse them (1Co 9:20-22). But for the most part, he kept a lot of the Jewish customs. On his second missionary journey, he hurried back to Jerusalem to keep the Passover (Ac 18:21). On this journey he also seemed to have kept a Nazarite vow (Ac 18:18). On his third missionary journey, he observed the Feast of Unleavened Bread in Philippi (Ac 20:6) and wanted to get to Jerusalem in time for Shavuot [Pentecost] (Ac 20:16). Paul, therefore, did not live like a Gentile in every aspect. Yet, he was not bothered by blending the two. Paul’s main emphasis was that Jesus Christ came and died for the sins of mankind and everyone needed to hear about Him, accept Him, receive salvation through Him, and receive the Holy Spirit in order to live a life pleasing to God. Everything else was just tradition. The Law of Moses had shown them their sin (Ro 3:20); keeping it did not save them (Ro 3:23, 28). Salvation through Jesus Christ is for all, both Jew and Gentile (Ro 3:21-31).

Paul saw no problem with keeping the Jewish traditions/customs or even the Law itself as long as it was kept in its proper context. It is something one chooses volitionally to do but not committed to do. Therefore, there was no need to impose this on Gentiles as it was not necessary for salvation. However, anyone, either Jew or Gentile could decide to keep the Jewish feasts and any other customs as long as they knew this was not making them any better than anyone else (1Co 8:8). After all, the Jewish feasts were just as important to Gentile Christians as to Jewish Christians: Pesach (Passover) was a reminder of the crucifixion of Jesus and thereby forgiveness of sins (1Co 5:7), Matzah (Feast of Unleavened Bread) was a reminder that Jesus Christ was a sinless sacrifice for them and that accepting Him they were now also dead to the power of sin (Ro 6:3), Bikkurim (First Fruits) was a reminder of Jesus’ resurrection from the dead and thereby a promise for their future resurrection (Ro 6:4), and Shavuot (Pentecost) was a reminder of the gift of the Holy Spirit and the union of both Jewish and Gentile believers (Ro 10:12). Even the other feasts would be an important reminder for their future: Rosh Hashanah (New Years’ or Feast of Trumpets) would represent God not forgetting the nation of Israel as He remembers His covenant with them (Ro 11:25-26) and demonstrating that God always remembers His promises; Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement) would represent the promise of Christ’s Second Coming and the salvation of the nation of Israel (Zc 13:1; Ro 11:27); and Sukkot (Feast of Tabernacles) would represent the promise of Jesus Christ, their Messiah and Savior, setting up His earthly reign on David’s throne and dwelling with His people (both Jewish and Gentile Christians) on earth (Zc 8:3, 14:9; Rv 20:4).

While Paul was mainly focused on Gentiles, he did not forget about the Jews and would often first preach in their synagogues wherever he went (Ac 14:1, 17:2). The other disciples focused more on the Jews but also did not forget about Gentiles entirely. Much of this information is not found in the scriptures but from the Roman historian Eusebius, the Christian theologian Clement, as well as others. From these sources we find the other places that the disciples preached the gospel message. These places are countries we know today as Albania, Algeria, Crete, Cyprus, Egypt, France, Gavdos, Great Britain, Greece, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, Malta, Morocco, Sicily, Spain, Tunisia, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia.

The apostles, other than Paul, concentrated their gospel message to the Jews who lived in Jewish colonies throughout the Roman Empire. Many of the places overlap with where Paul preached, which is not really that remarkable when one finds even in the New Testament scripture that the churches were composed of both Jews and Gentiles.

It is interesting to note that one of the main areas where there is no overlap is northern Africa. However, it makes sense for the apostles to concentrate here as this was once part of the Israeli-spawned Carthaginian Empire before being defeated by Rome at least a century earlier. Shortly before Israel was taken by Assyria, many of the Israelites fled to Carthage, which was then known as Kirjath-Hadeschath, and became a significant part of Carthage’s rise to power. Therefore, it is likely that a large contingent of Jews still lived in these areas of North Africa. This is just part of the total Jewish/Israeli population that existed in the first century AD.

From this we see that God has always cared for both Jews and Gentiles and has a plan for both.

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

There were two empires which existed in New Testament times: Roman Empire and Parthian Empire. More is known about the Roman Empire from a Biblical perspective because much of the New Testament comes from Paul’s writings, and he did his traveling within the confines of the Roman Empire. However, although Judaea was part of the Roman Empire, it seems this did not preclude travel between these two empires. There is evidence of this fact in Acts 2 where Jews and Jewish proselytes from Parthia were present in Jerusalem for Shavuot, or Pentecost (Ac 2:9).

In addition, the Bible states that while Paul was an apostle to the Gentiles, Peter was an apostle to the Jews (Ga 2:8). There is evidence that many of the original apostles took many trips into Parthian territory to spread the gospel by ministering to those of Jewish and Israeli descent.

The end of Paul’s first missionary journey within the confines of the Roman Empire marked the first big controversy. It seems Paul and Barnabas were not the only ones going throughout Asia Minor (Turkey today) teaching about Jesus Christ. However, these other groups were stating that one had to first become a Jewish proselyte before becoming a Christian and had to keep the Law of Moses as a perquisite for salvation (Ga 2:16). Paul wrote the book of Galatians to address this issue as well as to defend his authority and credibility. Indeed, there were those coming from Jerusalem to Antioch preaching this same doctrine (Ac 15:1). Paul and Barnabas strongly admonished them which then led to a trip to Jerusalem for a discussion with what has become known as the Jerusalem Council (Ac 15:2). Titus also accompanied Paul and Barnabas He was used as an example of a Gentile being a Christian but not being circumcised (Ga 2:1-3). There were believers from the Pharisee sect which strongly believed in keeping the Law of Moses for salvation and so, again, much debate ensued. However, Peter got up and told of his encounter of how God accepted Gentiles without circumcision and so everyone was then more willing to hear of Paul and Barnabas’ account (Ac 15:7-12).

Afterward, James reminded everyone of the prophecy in Amos (Am 9:11-12) which speaks of the temple of David being restored and even Gentiles worshipping God with Israel (Ac 15:13-18). It seems James recognized the current age would focus on the Gentiles. However, God would not forsake Israel, but would return and fulfill all his promises to them. The council and all those present then wrote a letter to the believers in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia to admonish them to abstain from meat sacrificed to idols, from blood and things strangled, and to be sexually pure (Ac 15:29).

Although the Jerusalem Council made this statement, this did not end the debate. Paul had to deal with this issue continually. Paul consistently taught that keeping the Law did not lead to salvation; therefore, Gentiles did not need to be circumcised or follow other outward manifestations of being a Jew to be saved (Ro 8:1-4; 1Co 15:56; Ga 2:16; Pp 3:9; 1Tm 1:8-11). Paul also taught that from a spiritual point of view, there was no longer any difference between Jews and Gentiles (Ro 10:12) because God had now brought the two together spiritually as one body (Ep 2:14-18). He taught that the mark of a Christian is the circumcision of the sin nature and not anything physical (1Co 7:19; Cl 2:11). Teaching otherwise was ruinous to one’s faith (Tt 1:10-11).

Although this was an area of controversy in the early church, it really was not the major divisive force which drove Christian Jew and Christian Gentile apart. There is evidence that many Jews (Christian or not) and Gentile Christians were living together as late as the fourth century. This implies there was a blended culture which developed between the orthodox Jew and the Christian Jew. These Jewish believers were called “minim” by the orthodox Jews. Its Hebrew meaning is “believers,” but has been translated as “heretic” by later Jewish authorities. Owen Chadwick, a historian who has extensively studied early church history, as well as others, have often used the Jewish liturgy, “May the Nazarenes and the heretics be suddenly destroyed and removed from the Book of Life,” as evidence of the final separation of the orthodox and Christian Jews. However, it is likely that this was evidence of a resurgence of the Christian Jew and not the reverse.  Both Christian and orthodox Jews fought together in 132 AD to fight Emperor Hadrian’s push to abolish circumcision. However, the Christian Jews abandoned their support when Rabbi Akiva declared their military leader, Bar Kochba, to be the Messiah.

It’s always interesting how man is the one to create the derision which God never intended. We can’t seem to keep our biases at bay. If only we could look at everyone else as God sees them. It would change not only our lives, but those of the entire world. One day, it will happen. Are you looking forward to it?

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

It’s a surprise to many, both Gentiles and Jews, that the Church was originally Jewish, composed of only Jews and Jewish proselytes. When the Holy Spirit descended on that first Shavuot (Pentecost) after Christ’s ascension, all who believed and received the Holy Spirit were either Jews or Jewish proselytes (Ac 2:1-4, 41, 47). This continued as more and more people believed. It seems that the Christian Jews were very accepting of Jewish proselytes becoming Christians and were treated as equals. Nicholas, a Gentile and Jewish proselyte, was made a deacon of the church in Jerusalem (Ac 6:5). Philip preached to many in Samaria who accepted Christ as their Savior (Ac 8:12-17). Normally, Samaritans were not accepted by the Jews because they were considered half-breeds. Therefore, these were either Samaritans who had become Jewish proselytes prior to their acceptance, or the current Christian Jews were willing to accept them because of the similarity in their religious beliefs since no one challenged their becoming Christians. Even Philip preaching to the Ethiopian eunuch was not challenged since this eunuch was already a Jewish proselyte (Ac 8:26-39).

When God, through a vision, lead Peter to preach to a Roman Centurion and his household and they believed and received the Holy Spirit, it caused quite a stir. The Jewish Christians in Jerusalem had a hard time accepting that true Gentiles – not proselytes – had received the Holy Spirit. However, when Peter explained how God had orchestrated the whole thing, they accepted it and rejoiced (Ac 11:1-18). After that, other Jewish believers started telling other Gentiles (i.e., non-Jews) about Jesus Christ and they believed (Ac 11:19-21). During this time, Saul, who was a very zealous Pharisee, had received permission from the Sanhedrin to charge and arrest any Jew who had converted to what was then called “The Way” so they could be brought to trial for conviction of heresy (Ac 8:3, 9:1-3). This persecution first started with the stoning of Stephen. Stephen had been a deacon of the Jerusalem church and very outspoken about Jesus Christ (Ac 6:8-15, 7:57-58). Saul was adamant about finishing the job. This persecution caused many Christians to flee Jerusalem to other nearby areas – one being Damascus. Word got to Saul that The Way was spreading its teachings in that area. There has been much criticism of this passage of scripture with some saying that neither Saul, the high priest, nor the Sanhedrin would have any clout in Damascus to carry this out. However, since the letters from the high priest were to the synagogues, it is likely Saul would solicit their help in finding the correct suspects, ask their help with getting judicial authority or going under the radar of judicial authority, or help in securing the necessary means for carrying out the arrest. Also, the letters would carry the weight of the high priest’s authority and may have had financial implication to their synagogue for not helping. In addition, Jerusalem and Damascus would both have been considered part of Syria at this time of history. However, on the way to Damascus, Saul encountered Jesus Christ, had a change of heart, became part of The Way, and then poured his zeal into spreading the gospel (Ac 9:1-22). Later Saul’s name was changed to Paul (Ac 13:9).

Barnabas was part of the delegation from Jerusalem to go and investigate what was going on in Antioch where Gentiles were becoming believers. He saw that it was a good thing and of the Holy Spirit. He later went and got Paul from Tarsus where he was staying at that time and brought him to Antioch (Ac 11:22-26). From there, Paul and Barnabas went on their first missionary journey (Ac 13:1-3). This started many debates about how one should become a Christian, and how Jews and Gentiles could be part of the same group identifying with Jesus Christ.

For some reason, debate has always been a part of the Church – probably because we don’t all look at things from God’s point of view. Unity only comes from a single point of view, and that point of view must be God’s. Let us all strive to find and keep that unity.

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

Jesus had come to his people, the Jews, but how did Jesus respond to Gentiles he encountered. There are several passages where Gentiles came to Jesus that on the surface looks like he was not very receptive of them. However, he turned these seemingly awkward encounters into teaching opportunities:

Jesus traveled to the region of Tyre and Sidon (Mt 15:21). These are cities in Phoenicia which was considered part of Syria at that time. Therefore, Jesus was in Gentile territory. It would be uncommon for a Gentile woman to approach him. However, the woman was quite desperate. Jesus at first did not speak to her and ignored her. The English translation of scripture sounds as if He was being rude. Yet, He was likely forcing an awkward situation to draw attention to it so that it could be a teachable moment. His words seem harsh, but the woman is persistent and seemed to understand his point. Jesus stated that his current mission was to Israel. The woman replied that she understood that and sticking to Jesus’ analogy stated that even dogs get to eat crumbs. Jesus commended her on her faith and, as requested, her daughter was healed (Mt 15:22-28).

Surprisingly, it seems the Gentiles were more anxious to receive the message Jesus had come to preach to his own people. Christ’s gospel message at this time was to repent because the Kingdom of God was nigh, meaning their acceptance of him would usher in His reign on earth with them which many of the Old Testament prophets spoke about and which all Jews were looking forward to. They believed in the prophecy, just not that it would come true in their lifetime. That would mean they had to decide to change; many were not prepared to do so. It is likely Jesus was using these Gentile conversions at this time to bring his own people to be envious and see the truth (Mt 11:20; Ro 10:19, 11:11).

To understand why the Gentiles were eager to accept, one needs to understand why the Jewish leaders were not. The Jewish leaders were at odds with Jesus because, to them, Jesus' teachings were radical. They may at first seem opposed to the Jewish laws of the day, but upon closer inspection they were not as radical as one may think. Jesus spoke about the heart; the Jewish leaders spoke about action and deed. Many of the Jewish leaders would tithe not only what the Law required but also tithed from the very spices they had (Lk 11:42). Jesus taught that getting the heart right gets the deed right. Jesus criticized them of neglecting justice and love when they obeyed the letter of the law (Lk 11:42). The Jewish leaders ignored the heart and focused on the deed. Jesus understood that getting the deed right does not necessarily get the heart right. Many Old Testament prophets had also taught similarly:

• to obey is better than sacrifice (1Sa 15:22);

• the sacrifices of God are a broken spirit (Ps 51:17)

• rend your heart and not your garments (Jl 2:13)

• I hate, I despise your feast days (Am 5:21)

• Oh, that one of you would shut the temple doors, so that you would not light useless fires on my altar! I am not pleased with you (Ml 1:10).

The truth stung because it meant they had to change their world view and how they measured their own righteousness. They had a hard time with that. The Gentiles, however, did not have a pre-established sense of righteousness and so Christ’s words rang true to them, and many were ready for its acceptance. That is likely why the gospel spread so quickly once it reached the Gentiles.

However, this is not to say that Christ ignored the Gentiles. He loved them. After all, he told Nicodemus that he came because God loved the world (Jn 3:16). He often visited the predominant Gentile areas: in Gadara he healed demoniacs (Mt 8:28-34; Mk 5:1-16), he went through the Decapolis healing and teaching (Mk 7:31-35), as well as in Syria (Mt 15:21-28). People from these regions also sought him out for healing and listened to him speak (Mt 4:24-25; Mk 3:8).

I think this shows how inclusive Christ was of everyone. The Jews believed themselves to be God’s people, and rightly so, but they believed it to the exclusion of everyone else. Christ came for the Jews but did not reject the Gentiles. His true mission was our heart. Changing the heart changes everything. It still does.

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

Chaos ruled as the New Testament opened. Everyone missed the calm which passed through their midst. When chaos becomes ordinary, calm seems too out of character to be pleasing. Having Roman control in Jerusalem had an effect on Jewish worship, thereby changing many things from a religious point of view. While the priests, temple, and Sanhedrin functioned almost the same as always, there were major differences. For one, the high priest became a political position, and a distraction. When Herod Archelaus was deposed, Quirinius, the Syrian governor, appointed Annas as high priest. However, the newly appointed prefect Coponius held the vestments of the high priest in his quarters at the Antonia Fortress which was next to the temple. The prefect then held the power of when the high priest could perform his official duties. In addition, the act of capital punishment was given to the prefect and taken from the Sanhedrin (Jn 18:31).

Annas was able to maintain his position as high priest for approximately ten years. Within the next three years, the prefect Valerius Gratus instituted and deposed three high priests before instituting Annas’ son-in-law Caiaphas as high priest who maintained the position for the next eighteen years. Caiaphas was high priest during the crucifixion of Jesus Christ (Mt 26:57). Yet Annas still had much power and persuasion on how things went (Lk 3:2) and why he could hold an audience with Jesus even though not being the high priest (Jn 18:13). Because the position of high priest could be bought, this could be why Annas was able to get seven family members to become high priests in future years as well. He and his family had a corner of the market, so to speak. They had money changing stalls on the Mount of Olives to turn pilgrims’ money into temple shekels since that was the only coinage the temple would take. This allowed him to charge high exchange rates. They also had these stations in the temple courtyard as well as stations where people could buy animals for sacrifice rather than carry them great distances when they traveled – again at high prices. This allowed his family to become very rich, very influential, as well as very corrupt. They were also very much disliked by the common people. However, this affluence allowed them to be better known in society circles. While this did not necessarily endear them to the Romans, or vice versa, it allowed them to play the political game to stay in power and maintain their social prestige.

Therefore, many of the Sadducees embraced the Greek, or Hellenized, lifestyle and pandered to the Romans as needed. This kept them aligned with the aristocracy of the day and enabled them to maintain their accustomed status. The Pharisees, on the other hand, liked neither the actions of the Sadducees nor the Romans. They identified more with the common people and were the ones who taught at the synagogues. The Sadducees served only at the temple in Jerusalem and so were somewhat out of touch with the common people. Although the Sadducees outnumbered the Pharisees in the Sanhedrin, the Pharisees spoke for the people, so the Sadducees had to listen to them or suffer the reprisal of the people. It was a delicate balance. The Pharisees brought the ear of the common Jew while the Sadducees brought the ear of Rome to which they were held accountable. Therefore, the Sanhedrin had to find the middle ground that would not be too unfavorable for both sides. Not an easy task.

Therefore, all eyes were diverted from what was really important. The people’s eyes were on Rome and their oppression. The priests’ eyes were on their position and stature, and how to maintain it. The Jewish leaders were trying to preserve their heritage and way of life at the very time the one to whom their heritage and way of life pointed was already in their midst. May we not follow suit but keep our eyes focused on the one who really matters.

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

As the New Testament opens, chaos ruled with not just one dominant force in the world, but two: Rome and Parthia. They were considered equal in strength and as much as Rome tried, it never took Parthia. A détente had been established between the two, but this was always tenuous. As stated earlier, the border between the two was the Euphrates River and Syria was the Roman border state to help keep that peace.

It is interesting that these tenuous times was when God decided to fulfill his promise to Adam and Eve (Gn 3:15). There was always potential war between Rome and Parthia. If war had broken out, then Jesus would not have been able to accomplish what he did. Also, there was much tension between Rome and the Jews in Judaea. The prefect in Jerusalem had to be on high alert during Passover, Shavuot (Pentecost) and Sukkot (Tabernacles) as there was a large influx of Jews during these feast times. This was a time when Jewish Zealots would often try to incite the crowds against Rome. Then there was the clash between the Greek/Roman and Jewish cultures which was like mixing oil and water – they did not mix well. The Jewish culture was very conservative, modest and would display no images as that was considered against the Law of Moses (Lv 26:1). However, the Roman and Greek cultures had no issues with public displays of nudity at athletic events and believed their gods wanted public displays of images to show their devotion. Therefore, the Romans had a very tough time keeping peace and order in such an environment.

By New Testament times, there were congregated Jews not only in Judaea but also in Egypt, Syria, Greece, Rome, and other prominent cities throughout the Roman Empire. Their religion was protected by Roman law, but they usually formed tight-knit groups because they did not blend in well with the surrounding cultures. Also, because an orthodox Jew could only travel certain distances on the Sabbath, they had to be close to their synagogue which almost invariably created “Jewish Quarters” in whatever city they lived. Many of the synagogues were treated as colleges so as to get around the Roman law that forbade secret societies. Unless in large cities, many Jews probably did not see Roman soldiers that often, yet the presence of Roman authority was known and ever present. This was especially true at the time of Passover, Shavuot, and Sukkot when many Jews and Jewish proselytes would attend in person in Jerusalem for these pilgrimage feasts. Then Rome’s present was quite evident. Rome made it quite clear who was in charge.

Although Herod the Great had his flaws and his agendas, he probably was one of the last rulers who really understood the Jews’ actions and thought process. It became very apparent that his son, Archelaus, did not since the Jews in both Judea and Samaria demanded he be removed from office. The prefects who ruled Judaea were also not often sympathetic to the Jews and considered them irritating. Most of the prefects did not reside in Jerusalem but in Caesarea Maritima on the Mediterranean coast in northern Samaria which had more of a Roman atmosphere. They would usually come to Jerusalem only during feasts times as they knew they would need an extra vigilant watch for the potential of a Jewish insurrection. There were often anti-Semitic attitudes that prevailed. Some of them were the following:

• Worshipping one God was often held against the Jews. Because the Jews worshipped only one God and not the pantheon of gods as did the Greeks and Romans, they were often considered responsible for any disasters that befell a community. However, at the same time, many Greeks and Romans were fascinated by the radical idea of monotheism which they found philosophically elegant.

• The privacy of the temple was held against the Jews. Because what went on inside the temple in Jerusalem could only be observed by the priests, rumors started that the Jews sacrificed human beings. For example, it was widely believed that when the Roman general Pompey took the city and entered the temple, he liberated a Greek prisoner who was being fattened for the sacrifice.

• Keeping the Sabbath was held against the Jews. Because the Jews maintained that no work was to be done on the Sabbath, Jews were considered to be lazy by many Greeks and Romans. This thought can be found in the Fourteenth satire of the Roman poet Juvenal (c.67-c.145).

• Jewish customs were held against the Jews. The customs, laws and dietary restrictions of the Jews were regarded as strange and often led many Greeks and Romans to make jokes, sometimes good-natured, but usually not.

• Keeping the Law of Moses was held against the Jews. Many considered them to be ignoring the laws of the state in which they resided. Of all accusations against the Jews, this one is the oldest; this is what Haman accused the Jews of in the story of Esther (Es 3:8).

• Jewish society was held against the Jews. Jews were believed to be antisocial. Most Jews lived in close proximity to each other and to their synagogue. However, orthodox Jews could only travel certain distances on the Sabbath and so they had to be sure they were in walking distance to their synagogue. This did not mean they were antisocial, but likely became so when received with anti-Semitic attitudes from the surrounding peoples.

• The practice of circumcision was held against the Jews. It was considered “mutilation of genitals” and barbarous. The Greeks and Romans thought the Jews circumcised their boys to prevent them from assimilating into society. Greek philosophy considered the body the vehicle of the soul and so many Greeks and Romans could not understand this “lack of integrity” of one’s body.

Pontius Pilate was one such prefect who had these views. He was appointed prefect of Judaea about the same time that Tiberius Caesar let Lucius Aelius Sejanus rule as his regent. Sejanus was very anti-Semitic in his policies. Pontius Pilate ruled with the same attitude. No previous prefect had brought images into Jerusalem because of the Jews’ beliefs. However, Pilate brought effigies of Tiberius Caesar on ensigns into the city of Jerusalem under the cover of darkness and created quite an uproar of opposition. Pilate threatened to have all the complainers killed, but rather than back down they bared their throats and stated they would gladly die for the cause. This caused Pilate to rethink the situation and he backed down instead.

On another occasion, Pilate had votive shields bearing the emperor’s image on them attached to his palace in Jerusalem. After much complaining, the Jews finally appealed to Tiberius Caesar in Rome who then requested Pilate to remove them and take them to his palace in Caesarea.

A third occasion was when Pilate used money from the temple to fund the construction of an aqueduct. Many Jews were again outraged about this. However, this time, Pilate had his soldiers dress like, and scatter throughout, the thousands of protestors who had gathered to complain to him. At his signal, the soldiers drew knives and killed as many as they could before the others fled. These may have been the ones killed whose blood Pilate had mingled with the temple sacrifices (Lk 13:1-2) to further infuriate the Jews.

So, this was the world into which Christ came. Seems strange, doesn’t it? But isn’t that when we need him the most? Don’t we need someone in the midst of our confusion, chaos, and turmoil to bring perspective and right thinking? Isn’t that why we still need him today?

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

Over time the Jewish mindset and word view changed. In our last post, we discussed how there were many different cultures within what the Romans called Syria, their border state between themselves and the Parthian Empire. Rome was used to parceling out areas of one state into another to gain favors, to increase revenue, and to gain tighter power. The areas which the rulers of the Hasmonean Dynasty had gained for Israel were now just areas for Rome to use as favors. What those who Rome allowed to rule these areas didn’t realize were that Jews were different from other cultures. In their mind, a Jew was a Jew. They didn’t try to understand their, to them, nuisance differences. Yet these differences led to many clashes, both within Israel and between Israel and Rome. The Jewish leaders at the time had to work hard to keep Rome from removing their positions and wiping them out of existence. Unfortunately, to do that, many compromises were made. Let’s see how Israel got to this point in the first place.

Rome didn’t occupy Judea until the mid-first century BC – and by invitation. Prior to the Maccabean Revolt, Antiochus Epiphanes deposed the high priest Onias in 174 BC and installed Jason, the brother of Onias, as the high priest which broke the tradition of the first-born becoming the succeeding high priest. Onias fled to Egypt. In 171 BC Menelaus bought the high priesthood from Antiochus and became high priest. Up until this point, all high priests from the time of Solomon were descendants of Zadok’s line (1Ki 2:35). Therefore, the Zadok high priest lineage ceased from 171 BC until 23 BC when Herod the Great appointed Simon son of Boethus (a descendant of Onias V from Zadok’s lineage) as high priest due his love for Simon’s sister Mariamne II. Simon rules as high priest from 23-4 BC. Menelaus was determined to bring Judaism into the modern world and helped Antiochus to Hellenize the Jews: bringing in athletic games (where competitors competed nude) to Jerusalem and established an idol of Zeus in the temple. Conservatives were in an uproar and led to the Maccabean Revolt which we have discussed previously.

The priests started to fall into two camps: (1) those who favored and adopted Greek ways – Hellenizers – who became the Sadducees, although they were not as extreme as the Hellenizers themselves. These were also more of the aristocratic group who usually held the high priesthood; (2) those who wanted to stay loyal to Judaism – called Hassidim, or “Pious ones.” These had strict observance of the law and were called Separatists and later came to be the Pharisees.

Simon Maccabee became high priest in 141 BC when Parthia overcame Seleucid control and gave autonomy back to Judea. Simon was recognized by the priests and elders as high priest, military commander, and ruler of Israel. He began the Hasmonean dynasty but was assassinated in 135 BC. John Hyrcanus became high priest and ruler after his father Simon Maccabee from 135-104 BC. He forced Idumea, or Edom, south of the Dead Sea, to become Jewish proselytes. Herod’s grandparents were of this forced conversion – they outwardly portrayed to be Jewish but did not live that way. John Hyrcanus also destroyed the temple in Mt. Gerizim in Samaria. The Qumran settlement (northwest shore of Dead Sea) began at this time. The Essenes were of the line of Zadok and formed as a group to study scripture because they wanted no part in the secularization of the high priest role by the Hasmoneans.

Aristobulus I (Jewish name Judah and son of Hyrcanus) reigned for one year. He pushed Judah’s borders to include Galilee. He was the first to assume the title of king. His brother, Alexander Jannaeus ruled from 103-76 BC. He brought the Golan Heights (east and northeast of the Sea of Galilee) to be within the Judean borders. He established Gamla which became a town of zealot activity (where five-thousand Jews committed suicide rather than being taken by the Roman army). He hated Pharisees, was immoral, and not well liked. He once had eight-hundred Pharisees crucified at a banquet and he massacred six thousand Jews at a Feast of Tabernacles because they pelted him with citron leaves to show their disfavor of him when he attended the feast.

Salome Alexandra (76-67), the wife of Alexander Jannaeus, was the antithesis of her husband. After his death in 76 BC, education and peace spread – called the Golden Age. She died in 67 BC.

Hyrcanus II was the son of Alexander and Salome and was favored by the Pharisees. Aristobulus II, also the son of Alexander and Salome, was favored by the Sadducees. Civil war broke out between the two sons. They both went to Pompey, a Roman military leader to seek assistance. Pompey favored Hyrcanus II. For a price of giving up the independence of the Judean kingdom to Rome, Pompey helped Hyrcanus II overcome his brother, and Aristobulus II was put into Roman prison. Judea then became a Roman province attached to Syria, and Hyrcanus II became the high priest from 63 to 40 BC.

Antipater, the father of Herod, was governor in Idumea. He supported Hyrcanus II and became procurator In Judea. He made his son Phasael the military head of Judea and made Herod the military governor of Galilee. When Aristobulus II was released from prison, his son Antigonus overthrew Hyrcanus II and cut off Hyrcanus’ ears. Therefore, Hyrcanus II was no longer able to be high priest because the Law forbade a priest with a physical deformity to serve (Lv 21:16-21).

Antigonus had genealogical right to be high priest. He got Parthia to dislodge all power of Hyrcanus II and Herod. Herod fled to Masada and later went to Rome to seek assistance. Parthia ruled Palestine for three years (40 BC to 37 BC). Herod got the Roman senate to make him officially “king of the Jews” and allowed to take the land back by force. With Roman forces, Mark Antony led an invasion to drive the Parthians back east of the Euphrates River. Antigonus was captured, taken to Rome, and executed. Mark Antony tried to drive the Parthians back further and attacked them in Armenia; however, he was severely defeated and barely escaped with his life. Détente lasted between Rome and Parthia from 36 BC to 58 AD.

Herod the Great was the son of a Jewish proselyte and a Gentile mother who was Nabataean. His religion was Jewish, his race was Idumean (Edomite), culturally he was Greek, and politically he was Roman. This is where things stood as the New Testament opened. Although Herod had his faults, many of them, he was probably the last one who understood the Jews. After him, clashes only escalated, and Rome became even more brutal. As you can see, a King of Peace was really needed. Odd how we often reject the very thing we really need. We haven’t really changed as human beings, have we?

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

How did God reach out to Gentiles before New Testament times? First, we need to understand the succession of Gentile powers which occurred millennia before. How did these Gentile powers influence Israel? And how did God use these Gentile powers to his advantage – and to theirs?

Previous posts have discussed how the kingdom of Assyria took the Northern Kingdom of Israel captive in 722 BC, Babylon conquered Assyria in 606 BC, and then took the Southern Kingdom of Judah captive in 586 BC. Yet, there were a series of sieges of Jerusalem before this final destruction. The first siege occurred in 605 BC, just a year after defeating Assyria. Daniel was one of those taken captive during this first siege (Dn 1:1-7). God gives King Nebuchadnezzar a dream about a statue (Dn 2), and he later builds an actual statue of his vision demanding all to worship it (Dn 3:1-6). Daniel’s four friends refused to bow down to the statue and are thrown in a fiery furnace, but no harm comes to them (Dn 3:7-27). Nebuchadnezzar then proclaims no one in his realm should say anything derogatory against the God of Daniel or they would be destroyed (Dn 3:28-29). God used the arrogance of Nebuchadnezzar to display His power and God received glory throughout his entire kingdom. No one knows how many proselytes were achieved because of this, but I’m sure it gave the Jews throughout the kingdom an opportunity to proclaim their God to many Gentiles in Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom.

Later, God struck Nebuchadnezzar with boanthropy because of his arrogance (Dn 4:32). This is a mental disease where a person thinks of himself as an ox and where one’s hair lengthens and one’s fingernails become very coarse and thickened. When Nebuchadnezzar’s senses returned to him, he admitted God was the Most High (Dn 4:34, 37). This is the second time, recorded anyway, that God made the citizens of the Babylonian Empire hear about God. The Jews throughout the kingdom could then help their Gentile neighbors understand more about their God.

Next, once the Persian Empire conquered Babylon, Jews were allowed to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple. This occurred in the first year Cyrus conquered Babylon. This was actually prophesied by Isaiah over one-hundred and fifty years prior to the event (Is 44:24-45:13). Through a series of circumstances, God allowed Daniel to be thrown into a lion’s den because of his worship of God. Yet, God preserved Daniel (Dn 6:22). Cyaxares II (Darius) then gave a proclamation to the entire kingdom that everyone should respect the God of Daniel (Dn 6:26-27). God was now proclaimed to an even larger Gentile audience, as the Persian Empire was much larger than the Babylonian Empire. It stretched from India to the west coast of Turkey.

Then, once King Xerxes I ruled the kingdom, a prominent person within the kingdom, named Haman, was embittered against the Jews and made a plot to achieve their destruction. His deception was found out by a Jew named Mordecai whose niece, named Esther, who had recently been named Queen, told of his plot to Xerxes (Es 4:7-8, 7:3-6, 8:3-4). Xerxes allowed Mordecai and Esther to draft a letter with his seal which was sent to all of the provinces of the Persian Empire. It allowed the Jews to fight back without restraint against any who would attack them as Haman had ordered (Es 8:9-10). If nothing else, this caused many within the empire to at least fear or have a respect for the God of the Jews. I’m sure it made many question who this God the Jews served was and wanted to know more about him.

Many years later, Alexander the Great came on the scene and conquered all the land from Greece all the way to India, including all the land of the Persian Empire. When he approached Jerusalem, Jaddua, the priest in Jerusalem, showed Alexander the prophecy about him in the book of Daniel (Dn 11:1-3). Alexander believed this confirmed a vision he had received earlier. Alexander then allowed Jerusalem to be saved from attack, and the Jews were allowed to abide by their own laws. Many Jews went with him on his campaign. This further allowed many within Alexander the Great’s army, and many throughout the kingdom, to hear about the God of the Jews.

We can know many proselytes were created because in Acts 2 many of all these areas, now part of the Roman and Parthian Empires, were present in Jerusalem for Shavuot (i.e., Pentecost). This again helps us see how God has always been inclusive of everyone. Isn’t our God wonderful!

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

Before we can see how God has worked with and through Gentiles, we should cover how the definitions of Gentiles, Israelis, and Jews have led to some opposing world views. Many have tried to develop an overarching theme of how God is working or has worked throughout history. It’s interesting how viewing the same data can lead to different results.

There may be others, but the two main views have Israel as the key distinguisher. One group feels that Israel is an Old Testament symbol or allegory for the Church (or true believers) and thereby forms a continuous continuity throughout the Bible. Yet, this is dependent upon how one views how God is working. If one only looks at the salvation of mankind as the only Biblical theme, then it is easy to see how a theory of God implementing salvation would be the key. God being all knowing would know mankind would sin, so the Godhead decided even before creation how mankind would be saved. Because mankind would become disobedient, God would institute grace to mankind to save it. Yet is this the real theme, or the only theme? Is mankind the real focus of the Bible? And if there are other themes, how can they be incorporated into such a theme without creating other allegories?

Let’s look at another view. This view sees Israel as a nation whom God would use to reveal Himself to the world. As a nation, they failed in that respect. Yet, that did not thwart God’s plan. God still revealed Himself greater and made a way for the salvation of mankind. Although the two views sound similar, this one puts God as the main focus rather than mankind. It allows other Biblical themes to be incorporated because it is about revealing who God is. The salvation of mankind is only one of the ways God reveals aspects of Himself.

In our last post, we saw how many of the Northern Kingdom of Israel (the ten tribes) escaped Assyrian captivity by fleeing to the area between the Black and Caspian Seas, as well to other parts of the known world at that time. Many, but not all, of the Southern Kingdom of Judah (2 tribes) returned from Babylonian captivity to rebuild Jerusalem and surrounding areas. At the turn of the first century, there were pockets of Israelis and Jews throughout both the Roman and Parthian Empires. Once Parthia fell, many of the Israeli descendants who had been part of the Parthian Empire fled across the Caucasus Mountains into Europe, and some believe eventually into the United States. Those who remained in Armenian territory became known as Khazars. Over time, Edomites were pushed by the Nabateans into prior Israeli territory and became known as Idumea (the Greek name for Edom). These were assimilated into Jewish society by the Hasmonean Dynasty. Later, Rome further invaded and destroyed both Jerusalem and the temple spreading Jews further throughout the known world. Over time, the area was under rule by many different geographic kingdoms. Today, it is now a nation again – ever since 1948.

The first world view we mentioned sees this as inconsequential because God’s plan is not about Israel at all but true believers (mainly Jewish/Israeli in the Old Testament; mainly Gentile in the New Testament). Or some go further to say that Israel dispersed throughout the world is the true elect who have become the Church. Again, this leads to being somewhat exclusionary and doesn’t seem to leave room for other themes of Scripture.

The second world view sees all of this in line with God’s plan of not only salvation for the entire world, but the salvation of Israel as a nation as well. It seems to blend well with such scripture where Paul states God will deal with Israel as a nation again and Israel will be saved (Ro 11:1-36). This view blends well with scripture which states our current salvation is but a deposit, or a guarantee, to the fuller inheritance that will occur when Christ returns to set up his earthly kingdom (Ep 1:13-14). And this view seems to fit nicely with the defined covenants in the Bible (Abrahamic Covenant, Gn 15:7-21; Deuteronomic Covenant, Dt 29:10-13; Davidic Covenant, 2Sa 7:8-16; and the New Covenant, Jr 31:31; 32:39-40; Ek 36:26) which are about promises concerning both land and monarchy. This view doesn’t need to allegorize to make this view fit into a theory of salvation for mankind, as this view is all part of God revealing His entire plan for mankind, for Israel, and for the world. We find Him to be very inclusive.

Now that we see He has a plan for everyone, let’s now begin to see how he has worked with Gentiles.

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

In the previous post, we talked about the definitions of Israeli, Jew, and Gentile. Once both the nations of Israel and Judah were taken captive, the definitions start to get more complicated. The nation of Israel was taken captive first by Assyria (2Ki 17:1-23) in 722 BC and then Judah by the Babylonians some 136 years later (2Ch 36:15-21) in 586 BC. In both cases, not all people from either nation were taken captive, but a certain number of nationals were left in the land (2Ki 17:24-41; Jr 40:6). Even before Judah was taken captive, it seems that there were still some faithful Israelites who remained and worshipped God. One example of this occurred during the time of King Josiah when Passover was celebrated during the eighteenth year of his reign: it was for all Israel (2Ch 35:3) and Israelites were present (2Ch 35:17). Also, even after Judah was taken into captivity, Jeremiah records that eighty Israelites came to Jerusalem during the time of Gedaliah, the appointed governor of the area, to offer sacrifice (Jr 41:4-5). Since this was during the autumn feasts, it would have been in the seventh month indicating likely the Feast of Tabernacles. This feast was one of the ordained Jewish pilgrim festivals (Ex 23:14-16, 34:23; Dt 16:13-17) and therefore was not a one-time event but a yearly occurrence for these individuals. Even though they still shared a commonality in their worship of God, they still kept their national identification as Israelite and Jew.

It is unclear what happened to these faithful Jews and Israelites. It is known that those who returned from Babylonian captivity with Zerubbabel to rebuild Jerusalem were from Judah, Benjamin and Levi (Er 1:5). Later it is recorded that more Levites came with Ezra (Er 7:7). Perhaps some of these faithful Jews and Israelites were still present at this time as those coming with Zerubbabel received no opposition when they first arrived in Jerusalem (Er 2:68). These faithful Israelites and Jews left in the land likely became incorporated into those classified as Jews from that time forth.

There were some nationals who had been left in the land of Israel and Judah who, over time, intermarried with those brought in from other areas or who lived in the area. These were excluded from helping with the reconstruction and from their temple worship (Er 4:2-3). The main reason was their alliances had led them away from the worship of God. Although they had a form of worship (Er 4:2), God was not the only god they worshipped (2Ki 17:32-34) and, by God’s standards, were not truly worshippers of God Himself (2Ki 17:35-41). These were therefore considered Gentiles even though they had Israeli or Jewish roots.

There were other pockets of Jews or Israelites who also have to be considered: those of the kingdom of Judah who remained in Babylonian territories rather than returning to Jerusalem, those of the kingdom of Israel who were spread to many areas just before and during their Assyrian captivity, those Judeans who settled in Egypt after the assassination of Gedaliah (Jr 43:4-7), and an Israelite community in the land of Ammon during the time of the Restoration. It seems when Tobiah was thrown out of the temple in Jerusalem by Nehemiah (Ne 13:4-9), he went back to Ammon and built a similar temple.

Prior to the Northern Kingdom of Israel being taken into captivity, the threat of captivity by Tiglath-pileser of Assyria and the drought that had occurred earlier during the time of Elijah caused a mass exodus of Israelis to other areas prior to the nation’s final captivity. Many fled to Kirjath-Hadeschath, which later became known as Carthage (in present-day Tunis in North Africa), and others fled over land to Armenia and the land north of the Black Sea. This created several pockets of Israelis throughout the known world. Those who migrated into the areas around Armenia later became the leaders of the kingdom of Parthia which became a nation as powerful as, and a rival of, Rome. The national Jews in the first century knew of these Jews and Israelis who were not part of national Judea, as noted by the Jewish historian, Josephus.

It is likely that none of these groups, except those who may have gone with Tobiah, would have been considered “Gentile” by these Jews who returned to Jerusalem. Even during the time of Christ, these other Jewish settlements were well known to the national Jews. Actually, at that time, Jews resided all over the known world. However, those in the Roman Empire were mainly Jewish while those in the Parthian Empire were both of Jewish and Israeli descent. Even at that time, these would likely not be considered Gentile. It would not be until the defeat of the Parthian Empire and the exodus of these Israeli descendants into Europe that the term Gentile would be applied to anyone outside those of national Judea who did not maintain their national heritage. Those who blended in with these other nations into which they lived seem to slowly lose their identity with those of national Judea and, over time, had no real connection with their original national heritage. It seems the classification for being Jewish decreased over time as the classification for being Gentile increased over time.

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens

I thought it would be good to start a new series about how the Bible addresses Gentiles. However, before we do, I think we should look at a few definitions.

A simple definition would be, a Gentile is one who is not a Jew. After all, the apostle Paul used this definition when he explained that the gospel is for the whole world: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile (Ro 1:16). He was making a generalized comment as there were pockets of not only Jews, but Israelis throughout both the Roman and Parthian Empires of his day, of which Paul was aware. Yet, to understand all Scripture, I think we need to dig a little deeper.

We probably can’t really make any distinction between Jew, Israeli, or Gentile before the Exodus. Although God did work through specific individuals from the time of Adam to the time of Moses (i.e., the patriarchs), a specific ethnic group was not necessarily singled out before that time. One could say that he did starting with Abraham, but not necessarily exclusively. Remember Job? It is believed he was a contemporary of Abraham. He believed in God, made burnt offerings, and God blessed him. So, it wasn’t really until God called the Children of Israel out of Egypt and made a covenant with them at Mt. Sinai that Israel became a nation before God and were instructed to be a kingdom of priests to the world (Ex 19:5-6). What does that mean? Israel was to be the standard – a holy nation – which served God and pointed other nations to God. Israel would receive God’s blessings (Dt 28) and other nations would see that blessing and be drawn to Him. How? Well, there were at least three trade routes which went through the land of Canaan which became Israel: Way of the Sea (Is 9:1); King’s Highway (Nu 20:17), and the Ridge Route which went through the Galilee region. Israel would have plenty of opportunity to have that influence. We see that both Solomon (2Ch 32-33) and Isaiah (Is 55:6-7) understood this and asked for special provision for the Gentile (the non-Israelite) to worship God.

This really had nothing to do with ethnic purity, but obedience to God. Remember, even some of the sons of Jacob (whose name was changed to Israel by God [Gn 32:28]) were through his two wives’ servants (Bilhah and Zilpah). Servants were usually not of the family, but foreigners. In addition, Judah married Tamar, possibly a Canaanite (Gn 38:1-30), and Joseph married Asenath, an Egyptian (Gn 41:45; 50:22). In addition, Rahab was a Canaanite from Jericho who was spared even though the whole city was designated for destruction because of her belief in Jehovah (Js 6:22-23). She became part of the lineage of Christ (Mt 1:5) and the great-great grandmother of King David. Her son was Boaz. Ruth was a Moabitess. Moab was a country that had not let Israel pass through their land on their way to the Promised Land (Jd 11:17) and had hired Baalam to curse Israel (Nu 22:4-5). Ruth believed in Jehovah, and she became part of the lineage of Christ (Mt 1:5). She married Boaz and became the grandmother of King David (Ru 4:13-17). Both women were integrated into the nation of Israel and their children were deemed Israelites. There were also times in Israel’s history where Gentile women were incorporated into Israel. These were many times as wives (Dt 21:10-14), but not always (Nu 31:18). These captives were expected to be taught to serve Jehovah. So, it seems God was more interested in a devoted people rather than an ethnically pure one.

The term ‘Israelite’ could not occur before the birth of Jacob. Yet, it was not really used until Israel itself was divided and the term Israel was the name for the Northern Kingdom of Israel (composed of ten tribes). In the same way, the term ‘Jew’ could not occur before the birth of Judah. Yet, again, this was not really used until Judah became a nation, the Southern Kingdom of Judah (composed of Judah and Benjamin). The term ‘Jew’ is not used in the Bible until the exiles returned from Babylon to Jerusalem to rebuild it (Er 4:12). Therefore, technically, Jew and Israelite cannot be interchanged.

As we said earlier, the concept of ‘Gentile’ did not strongly come into play until God made his covenant with the children of Israel at Sinai and they became an ordained nation before God.

Next time, we’ll look to see what happened post-exile and how these definitions became a little more complicated.

____________

Visit Books & Words to Inspire by Randy C. Dockens