Personal Bible Reflections

PERSONAL BIBLICAL REFLECTIONS
Personal Biblical Reflections

2014

2014
COMPILATION OF BIBLICAL RESEARCH
JOEL JOSOL
Personal Reflections
1 | P a g e

Table of Contents

1. GENESIS .................................................................................................................................................................... 3
2. EXODUS .................................................................................................................................................................. 15
3. DEUTERONOMY ...................................................................................................................................................... 16
4. JOSHUA ................................................................................................................................................................... 17
5. JUDGES ................................................................................................................................................................... 19
6. RUTH ....................................................................................................................................................................... 20
7. FIRST SAMUEL ......................................................................................................................................................... 22
8. SECOND SAMUEL ......................................................................................................................................................... 25
9. FIRST KINGS ................................................................................................................................................................. 28
10. SECOND KINGS .......................................................................................................................................................... 31
12. FIRST AND SECOND CHRONICLES ............................................................................................................................... 38
13. NEHEMIAH ................................................................................................................................................................. 39
14. ESTHER ..................................................................................................................................................................... 40
15. JOB ............................................................................................................................................................................ 41
16. PSALMS ..................................................................................................................................................................... 43
17. ECCLESIASTES ............................................................................................................................................................ 44
18. SONG OF SOLOMON .................................................................................................................................................. 45
19. ISAIAH ....................................................................................................................................................................... 46
20. JEREMIAH ................................................................................................................................................................. 49
21. DANIEL ....................................................................................................................................................................... 51
22. HOSEA ....................................................................................................................................................................... 53
23. JOEL ........................................................................................................................................................................... 57
24. AMOS, OBADIAH, JONAH, MICAH, NAHUM, HABAKKUK, AND ZEPHANIAH. ............................................................. 60
25. AMOS ........................................................................................................................................................................ 63
26. OBADIAH ................................................................................................................................................................... 67
27. JONAH ...................................................................................................................................................................... 70
28. MICAH ....................................................................................................................................................................... 72
29. NAHUM ..................................................................................................................................................................... 75
30. HABAKKUK ................................................................................................................................................................ 78
31. ZEPHANIAH ................................................................................................................................................................ 81
32. HAGGAI ..................................................................................................................................................................... 85
2 | P a g e

33. ZECHARIAH ................................................................................................................................................................ 88
34. MALACHI ................................................................................................................................................................... 91
35. MATTHEW ................................................................................................................................................................. 93
36. MARK ...................................................................................................................................................................... 107
37. LUKE ........................................................................................................................................................................ 116
38. JOHN........................................................................................................................................................................ 130
39. MORE COMPARISON OF THE GOSPELS .................................................................................................................... 139
40. PAULINE LETTERS ..................................................................................................................................................... 143
41. ACTS OF THE APOSTLES ..................................................................................................................................... 156

3 | P a g e

1. Genesis

1.1
Reading chapter 1 is one of the most controversial chapter in the Bible because it says the following

1. Our material world had a beginning
2. God started the material world
3. The sequence of creation is basically identical to what science has revealed

Just reflecting on chapter 1 opens up a wealth of knowledge of its own category. What were the views on this
account?

1. Moses was rejected as the author and instead it was compiled and edited by so many others
2. Bible critics claimed Genesis could not have been written in the time period claimed because people don't
know how to write at the time
3. There is no God therefore Genesis is a myth

Where would Moses or even the so-called compilers derived the concept of the Genesis beginning of the universe
and the correct sequence of the appearance of life forms? There are many ancient creation myths.

(http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/creationmyths/tp/090808CreationMyths.htm)

But none is as simple as the Genesis story. None comes close with the simplicity Genesis presents. Moses was
schooled by the Egyptians. The Egyptians believed that everything started from an egg from two gods! The other
neighbor, the Babylonians believed that earth and heaven were from a goddess who was killed by another god
and split in two (earth and heaven).

Scientists acknowledge at least the parallelism in Genesis and in science with respect to the appearance of life
forms.

The Genesis story is rejected because it has been popular to claim in the scientific field that there is no God.
Surprisingly, many so-called hard atheists turned to be agnostics at worse. What is the difference? Agnostics
don't care if God exists or not. Atheists are solid in their belief that there is no God.

But the study of DNA and information theory have driven many atheist scientists to tone down their rhetoric. A
very famous atheist, Anthony Flew, made headlines when he announced that DNA study made him renounce his
atheism and published a book about it (http://www.amazon.com/There-Is-God-Notorious-
Atheist/dp/0061335304)

Also, archaeology disclosed that writing was already known at the time Moses is supposed to be writing Genesis.
The document hypothesis has now been shown to be defective in its position that instead of Moses there were
other compilers who wrote the books very much later when supposedly writing has become known.

For those who would like to investigate further about the reasonableness of Creation based on the Bible, I invite
you to check the two publications

1. The Origin of Life - Five Questions Worth Asking
(http://www.jw.org/download/?output=html&pub=lf&fileformat=EPUB%2CPDF%2CBRL%2CRTF%2CMOBI&allla
ngs=0&langwritten=E&txtCMSLang=E&isBible=0)

4 | P a g e

2. Was Life Created?
(http://www.jw.org/download/?output=html&pub=lc&fileformat=EPUB%2CPDF%2CBRL%2CRTF%2CMOBI&allla
ngs=0&langwritten=E&txtCMSLang=E&isBible=0)

But, what about supposed contradictions in Genesis? Let me explore that in the next posting.

1.2

What about supposed contradictions in the book of Genesis? Let us take two examples

1. Critics claim there are two contradicting stories of creation (chapter 1 and chapter 2) to support multiple
compilers rather than Moses
2. Where did Cain get his wife?
3. How could all the animals fit into the ark?

The book, "The Bible- God's Word or Man's?" offer this explanation on item 1:

"Additionally, the way a narrative is constructed can lead to an apparent contradiction. At Genesis 1:24-26, the
Bible indicates that the animals were created before man. But at Genesis 2:7, 19, 20, it seems to say that man
was created before the animals. Why the discrepancy? Because the two accounts of the creation discuss it from
two different viewpoints. The first describes the creation of the heavens and the earth and everything in them.
(Genesis 1:12:4) The second concentrates on the creation of the human race and its fall into sin.Genesis 2:5
4:26.

18 The first account is constructed chronologically, divided into six consecutive days. The second is written in
order of topical importance. After a short prologue, it logically goes straight to the creation of Adam, since he
and his family are the subject of what follows. (Genesis 2:7) Other information is then introduced as needed. We
learn that after his creation Adam was to live in a garden in Eden. So the planting of the garden of Eden is now
mentioned. (Genesis 2:8, 9, 15) Jehovah tells Adam to name every wild beast of the field and every flying
creature of the heavens. Now, then, is the time to mention that Jehovah God was forming from the ground all
these creatures, although their creation began long before Adam appeared on the scene.Genesis 2:19; 1:20,
24, 26."

On item 2

"Often, apparent inconsistencies can be resolved if we just look at the context. Consider, for example, the often-
raised problem about Cains wife. At Genesis 4:1, 2 we read: In time [Eve] gave birth to Cain and said: I have
produced a man with the aid of Jehovah. Later she again gave birth, to his brother Abel. As is well known, Cain
killed Abel; but after that, we read that Cain had a wife and children. (Genesis 4:17) If Adam and Eve had only
two sons, where did Cain find his wife?

The solution lies in the fact that Adam and Eve had more than two children. According to the context, they had a
large family. At Genesis 5:3 we read that Adam became father to another son named Seth and then, in the
following verse, we read: He became father to sons and daughters. (Genesis 5:4) So Cain could have married
one of his sisters or even one of his nieces. At that early stage of human history, when mankind was so close to
perfection, such a marriage evidently did not pose the risks for the children of the union that it would today."

On item 3, one reference work states this
5 | P a g e

"These estimates may seem too restrictive to some, especially since such sources as The Encyclopedia Americana
indicate that there are upwards of 1,300,000 species of animals. (1977, Vol. 1, pp. 859-873) However, over 60
percent of these are insects. Breaking these figures down further, of the 24,000 amphibians, reptiles, birds, and
mammals, 10,000 are birds, 9,000 are reptiles and amphibians, many of which could have survived outside the
ark, and only 5,000 are mammals, including whales and porpoises, which would have also remained outside the
ark. Other researchers estimate that there are only about 290 species of land mammals larger than sheep and
about 1,360 smaller than rats. (The Deluge Story in Stone, by B. C. Nelson, 1949, p. 156; The Flood in the Light
of the Bible, Geology, and Archaeology, by A. M. Rehwinkel, 1957, p. 69) So, even if estimates are based on
these expanded figures, the ark could easily have accommodated a pair of all these animals."

1.3

Spiritual treasures I found for Genesis 2: 1.
1. The Hebrew tense indicated in verse 2 shows that Jehovah God has not yet completed the rest for the
7th day - "he proceeded to rest." Many other English Bibles failed to capture this by using "rested" as the
translation. The other supporting references is Genesis not concluding the 7th day by saying, just as in
previous creative days, "there came to be evening and there came to be morning".
2. God making the 7th day sacred or holy carries the meaning of being separated for a purpose and not
purity or holiness as in character or attribute of a person.
3. Verse 4 use of 'a history' or as rendered by other Bibles as 'geneses' (Rotherham), 'births' (Young's
Literal Translation), 'generations' (Bible in Basic English) can be understood simply as a divider between
sections of Genesis the book.
4. Verse 4 use of 'in the day' which summarizes the six days of creation supports the fact that the Bible
offers various meanings based on usage of the word 'day' and not necessarily 24 hour-day.
5. Verse 4 introduces for the first time in the Bible God's holy name - Jehovah.
6. 'Out of dust' in verse 7 is supported by the fact that 41 chemicals found in the human body are found on
the ground. Incidentally, there are 100 trillion cells in the body and 7 octillion atoms.
7. 'Man came to be a living soul' (similar rendering by Bible in Basic English, World English Bible,
Rotherham Emphasised, Darby's). The word 'soul' came from the Hebrew 'nephesh' (a breather).
8. Verse 18 uses 'a complement of him' referring to Eve or literally 'counterpart', to complete what Adam
lacked. So, it came to mind the expression 'you complete me' :-)
9. The first man (Heb. adham), Adam, came from the dust (Heb. adhamah).
10. The sources of Moses for writing Genesis - revelation, oral tradition, and existing documents of his
time.

1.4

6 | P a g e

1. Because I am now reading then studying the Bible verse by verse this time around, I discovered
something new to me at least about Genesis 7:2 and how different English Bibles translated the
literal Hebrew expression "seven seven". "seven and seven" (American Standard Version, Douay-
Rheims) "seven pairs" (World English Bible, English Standard Version) The impression which I even
understood before is seven pairs or 14, all in all. Well, if you take time to research this too you will
discover a new gem. The correct understanding is illustrated by the number of 'sheep' (clean
animal) in the Noah's ark illustration in the My Book of Bible Stories. It was there all the time :-)
2. Genesis tells us that the human race came from one common ancestor- Adam and Eve. Is this idea
scientific? At least the concept is. There is a field of research in fact among evolutionists in this field of
common ancestry of all humans.
3. How about Eve being created from Adam's rib? Humans via cloning technology can actually do something
similar today.

4. A talking serpent? Today ventriloquists do this with their puppets as if those puppets have vocal cords.
The last book of the Bible calls God's chief enemy Satan as the "original serpent". He is the spirit person
doing the talking unseen by Eve.

1.5

What is noteworthy about the size of Noah's ark? It is 300 cubits (length) by 30 cubits (width or beam), a ratio of
10:1.

A check on wikipedia on the ratio of big ships, it says this measure

"Using the formula beam (width) = square (cube root (length))

For a 741 ft (226 m) long ship: the cube root is 9, and 9 squared is 81, plus 1. The beam will usually be around
82 ft (25 m), e.g. Seawaymax." That ratio is 9:1.

How about the ship Titanic? 9.5 (c. 882ft (L) and c. 92 ft (W)).

1.6

One important feature to understand with the first chapters of Genesis is the misunderstanding that a creative
day is a 24-hour day. No it is not.

Examine how the word 'day' is used in the first chapters and see how the meaning is different each time

Gen 1: 5 "God called the light Day" - a 12-hour day

Gen 1: 5 "And there was evening and there was morning, a first day" - the first creative day which let us keep
the meaning undefined for now

Gen 2: 4 "in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven" - Earth was already existing before the six
7 | P a g e

creative days began (Gen 1:1) and so 'day' here summarizes a long period of time

From just these verses alone, there is no definite or dogmatic assertion that can be made that each Creative day
is a 24-hour day. As a sanity check, the apostle Paul or also known as St. Paul was talking about the 7th day, in
his letter to the Hebrews. The way he explained it, the 7th day has not yet ended in his time. Note his words

"Therefore, since a promise of entering into his rest remains ..." (Hebrews 4:1)

This would mean the 7th day has been going on almost 4,000 years by St. Paul's time. Therefore, there is no
basis to assert that each Creative day is a 24-hour day.

1.7

Some important highlights in the first chapters of Genesis that is of value to us are

1. Change in human diet from vegetarian to carnivorous with the exclusion of blood as food. Filipinos are
apparently unaware of God's forbidding blood as part of the diet

"Only flesh with its life - its blood - you must not eat." (Gen 9:4)

2. The Lord Jesus pointed to Noah's time as a warning. The people of Noah's time ignored the warning Noah
sounded to them because they were so busy with their ordinary lives. The lesson here is that it will happen again
in our time. "For just as the days of Noah were, so the presence of the Son of man will be." (Matthew 24: 37) A
classic case of history repeating itself.

3. There are about ten instances of the word "this is the history of" in Genesis. In Hebrew, the word used is
toledoth. Bible scholars believe that these might refer to tablets of data passed on to Moses from records of the
patriarchs which he compiled to be part of Genesis.

4. Archaeology has vindicated Genesis a lot. In 1933, in Tell Hariri, 20,000 clay tablets were dug. The details
from the tablets talked about life that covered the time period of the lives of Abraham and his family:

a. adopting sons to be heir in the case of childless couple like Abraham (Eliezer)

b. selling of birthright as in the case of Bible's Esau

c. the keeping of family gods as title deed for property as in the case of the teraphim that Rachel kept hidden
(31: 19)

d. camels were already domesticated at the time of Abraham (12:16)

e. The Egyptian life as depicted in the story of Joseph are all attested to by Egyptian records as accurate as
reported in New Light on Hebrew Origins, by J. G. Duncan (1936), something a writer in a much later period of
time would find difficulty to present as claimed by believers of documentary hypothesis

This means the Genesis account is truthful and accurate. It is not myth or fairy tales.

5. The most important message from Genesis is how Jehovah God responded to the falling away of man from
8 | P a g e

him. That set the tone for the story of the entire Bible.

a. God made a promise in chapter 3 verse 15 about the appearance of an "offspring" who will destroy the
enemy, Satan, as represented by the serpent

b. Satan already knew then his future - death

c. What Satan organized was a rebellion against God's sovereignty over man, God permitting his enemy to
expand his authority and rule the world

d. Fallen man chose to be independent of God; God is no longer a factor in their lives or decisions

c. As this promise or prophecy unfolded, God has used Abraham and his family to be the conduit through whom
this "offspring" will appear

d. God repeated this promise to Isaac and then to Jacob

e. We now know today that that "offspring" is the Lord Jesus Christ

f. The Lord Jesus will undo everything that the enemy Satan has built against God and God's sovereignty will
once again dominate the Earth as reflected in the prayer "Thy kingdom come".

6. To comfort us, Genesis offers to us examples of faith from Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and
Joseph. It presented Jehovah God as someone who is always there with us whether in our joys or sorrows. He is
someone who keeps his word and promises. If we wait on God who sees what is happening, in his own schedule,
God will act on our behalf.

Genesis presents to us Jehovah as a communicating God. He is never remote, aloof, nor a snob. During the days
of the patriarch, God used his angels a lot to transmit those messages. Jehovah God dealt with imperfect men
and reading the Bible offers us a glimpse of how God worked out his purpose despite the imperfections of these
men and their families.

But, in all of them, he simply asks what he asks of us today - to obey. God told Abraham to leave Ur, he left Ur in
his old age. Although Isaac preferred Esau, Isaac obeyed God's will that His choice is Jacob. And so Isaac blessed
Jacob. God reassured Jacob that He will bring him back to the land He promised Abraham and Isaac. And he did.
All these men suffered injustice but they waited on God to right things. The most dramatic is Joseph.

Genesis is a wonderful record of God's loyal love to his loyal servants. It is a comfort to us in these difficult times
that although life sometimes throw at us a curve ball, making obeying God a difficult thing, God takes notice and
those of us who persevere in obeying, receives the blessing of God's loving care.

Isn't that what Jehovah God wanted to bring across to us?

1.8

These are some technical notes on my readings of Genesis comparing the changes across 1984 NWT and 2013
NWT versions.

Verse_1984 NWT____2013 NWT_________Hebrew (English)

9 | P a g e

3:15__seed_________offspring__________zera (seed, offspring)
4:1___intercourse___sexual relations_____yada (to know, know carnally)
6:2___good-looking__beautiful__________towb (good, beautiful)
6:6___hurt_________saddened_________atsab (hurt, grieve)
6:17__deluge_______floodwaters_______mabbool (deluge, flood)
21:9__poking_______mocking__________tsachaq (mock, make sport)
21:15_child_________boy_____________yalad (child, boy)

It is evident to us as readers why the 2013 NWT was revised with these changes. The effort is to make the
Bible easier to understand and more accurate in its rendition.
Take the case of Ishmael who was 19 years old at the time of 21:9, 15. He was no longer a child. He was a
teen-ager. So a boy is more appropriate. And what Ishmael was doing to Isaac is no child's play. It was mean.
He was mocking.

'Offspring' is definitely easier to grasp than 'seed' because the reference is to a son. Other English Bibles already
use that word in that verse.

I am already enjoying this new journey.

1.9
"The idea that the bible is a divine revelation and authentic record must go."

Thus claims one reference work in the field of Higher Criticism. It claims that the work of historical criticism
by the exponents of HC (higher criticism) has proven that the Bible is not God's Word but rather a product
of human activity in history. It is claimed that this has been successfully demonstrated by proving that the
first five books - Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy - were not really written by
Moses, were not really written on the time frame claimed, and the things written on it are myth. Instead of
Moses, it was written by several hands, compiled and edited during the 6th century BC rather than on the
15th century BC (as the Bible claims to be).

And the mass media is now the main vehicle that the higher critics are targeting to get this message
through. That explains the appearance and hyped discussions of other books that are not originally part of
the Bible but are claimed to be parts of the Bible but were arbitrarily removed by men controlling the
content of the Bible. They have destroyed Moses as a historical person o so they claimed. Their next
project is to destroy Jesus as a historical person. The root of this development started from the days of
Enlightenment when Reason became the chief lens in examining things and displaced God out of the
picture.

In the field of archaeology, the camp of the so-called "minimalists" are of the same principle- these
archaeologists do not believe that the Bible is divine and that it is fiction. The history in the Bible is not
really history but "historiography" based on religious projections.

There used to be a time when their position appeared to be unassailable. But times have changed. This
position is not as solid as its advocates claim to be. On the history front, several references have cited
archaeology as going against the HC position.

An often cited discovery at Nuzi (or Nuzu) excavated in 1925 threw light on the culture narrated in the book
of Genesis about the patriarchs. The Nuzi tablets disclosed the culture of the times (2nd millenium BC) so
close to the period referred to in Genesis as patriarchal times.
10 | P a g e

Kenneth A. Kitchen, in his book Ancient Orient and Old Testament cited this discovery and he writes

Patriarchal customs of inheritance find close parallels in the Nuzi archives from the Mesopotamia, c. 1500
BC.

Important details in Genesis are also corroborated by the practices of Near Eastern cultures at the time
contemporaneous with Genesis, says Kitchen.

Finally, the price of twenty shekels paid for Joseph in Genesis 37:28 is the correct average price for a
slave in about the eighteenth century BC: earlier than this, slaves were cheaper (average, ten to fifteen
shekels, and later became steadily dearer. This is one more little detail true to its period in cultural history.

Garnett Reid in his article Minimalism and Biblical History writes

Minimalists claim that no "conquest" of Canaan ever occurred. However, Kitchen has demonstrated that
the archaeological support for such a conclusion is shaky at best and that archaeological evidence actually
fits the Conquest model quite well. Theories that presume a peasant revolt or infiltration instead of the
biblical conquest find little support from the "objective" data of archaeology or sociology. Similarly, a
minimalist view of the pre- and early monarchy in Israel and the figures of David and Solomon as pure
fantasy hardly squares with evidence outside the biblical text.

In fact, as recent as the 1980s, more diggings in Palestine showed the name of a Bible personality, king
David who is supposedly a myth, in two different tablets found in different places. The discovery became
controversial because it supports the authenticity of the Biblical record.

I can understand this from the statement below by Reid

Another reason for minimalists' discounting of the biblical text is their conjecture that the documents
themselves originated in the fifth century B.C. or later; therefore they cannot speak with accuracy about a
period several centuries earlier.

But the facts speak otherwise as illustrated.

But, the most damaging data against HC is the theorys evolutionary development of religion from
simplistic form of worship (animism) to a more complex form of worship (monotheism, temples, laws). Here
again, archaeology threw the light on facts.

Colin Smith in A Critical Assessment of the Graf-Wellhausen Documentary Hypothesis writes about this
theory of evolution of religion

It is also evident from archaeological discoveries that it was entirely possible for monotheism to exist in
the time of Moses, and even before that time. Evidence for this can be seen in the practice of
contemporary pagan religions of the same time. For example, a Babylonian find from around 1500-1200
B.C. identifies all the major Babylonian gods as Marduk.

Today, even the scholars in the HC camp are divided in their interpretations. Wellhausen started with the
theory that the books of Moses were written by four editors (code-named J, E, D and P). Today, his
followers believed there are more writers than this four. How did they arrive with that idea? When the
writing style changes, they conclude it must be a different author assuming that the same author is so rigid
in style and diction.

11 | P a g e

The sad fact is that literary criticism has abandoned this approach with respect to other works of literature.
But the HC chose to champion it.

In conclusion, Bernhard Anderson sums up the two contrasting positions today, in his article The Problem
of Old Testament History believed history and factual history. The HC rejects the history in the Bible
as manufactured history (believed history). Their task, they claim, is to unravel the real history (factual
history). But, their approach is shown to be inadequate and wanting. They have not proven as claimed
boldly in the introductory quote that the Bible is neither divine nor authentic.

Jehovah God is glorified in this reversal of things. The Bible has stood the attack of secular biblical
scholars as it survived the atheism of modern science.

In the beginning God words that has been vindicated by modern scientific discoveries.

I will make all things new- words that will vindicate Jehovah God as a loving Sovereign as He asserts his
rule on this Earth and transform this into a global Paradise. We are now into the 100th year of the reign of
his Messianic Son, Lord Jesus.

More on http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102004242?q=Wellhausen&p=par

1.10

I have seen in the popular media books that are easy to read about the Bible but promote the theory of
Documentary Hypothesis or the thinking of critical scholars which deny the role of God in history as recorded in
the Bible.

However, I do not find as much material in the mass media that are easy to read that opposes such viewpoints.
Apparently, the more controversial it is, the more appealing to read.

One such book that I got hold of is the Isaac Asimov volumes, "Asimov's Guide to the Bible- The Old and New
Testaments". Although in his introduction, Asimov writes

"I cannot pretend that in writing this book I am making any significant original contributions to Biblical
scholarship; indeed, I am not competent to do so."

but in its pages he echoed in the 1960's and in this 1981 combined volumes, then mainstream scholarly view of
the Bible's history. However, he did so along with the traditional scholarship view.

For example, with respect to Moses as author of the first five books of the Bible, he writes

"By ancient tradition, the first five books of the Bible were written by Moses."

Then, he adds

"Modern scholars are convinced that this theory of authorship is not tenable and that the early books of the Bible
are not the single work of any man. Rather, they are combined and carefully edited version of a number of
sources."

The paragraph above is in layman's terms what the DH is all about. It is an important note that up to this day
these theoretical "number of sources" that was supposedly later compiled by an editor are nowhere to be found.
12 | P a g e

That Asimov is well versed in DH theory, is demonstrated by another comment in the book of Genesis when he
writes about the Hebrew word for God, "Elohim" (literally when translated is "gods")

"It is possible that in the very earliest traditions on which the Bible is based, the creation was indeed the work of
a plurality of gods."

Does the Hebrew language support this idea?

The online Jewish Encyclopedia writes

"The most common of the originally appellative names of God is Elohim, plural in form though commonly
construed with a singular verb or adjective. This is, most probably, to be explained as the plural of majesty or
excellence, expressing high dignity or greatness."

Note that when "Elohim" is used the verb is singular although the word in Hebrew is plural because as the
encyclopedia notes it denotes majesty or excellence. Filipinos have an identical concept when using the plural
pronoun "kayo" or "niyo" to express respect to a single individual.

So, what "very earliest traditions" was Asimov referring to? The DH promoted the idea of the evolution of religion
as first simple (animism) then developed into more complex religion (monotheism). In this view the Bible was
written not in the 15th century BC as claimed by the Bible. The DH is convinced that the five books were written
a thousand years later, in the 5th century BC.

It is a good thing that Asimov offers another view about "Elohim" and other references to Genesis about God
talking about "us" or with someone else in heaven

"It is possible to argue that this is not true evidence of early polytheism. God might be viewed as using the royal
"we"; or as speaking to an angelic audience".

However, Asimov came back strongly to endorse this theory when discussing the Creation story in Genesis. He
writes

"It is widely accepted these days that the creation tale received its present shape after the Babylonian creation
myth, purified of polytheism and grossness, and put into the loftiest and most abstract terms of which the Jewish
priesthood was capable."

He then adds

"the first few books of the Bible that were put into final form by priestly hands soon after the time of the Exile.
Such portions are part of the "Priestly document" and are usually designated as P by Biblical scholars."

When I reached his commentary on chapter 2 of Genesis, he writes

"The use of the term "the Lord God" ("Yahveh Elohim") in place of God ("Elohim") is characteristic of a particular
early strand of tradition which was incorporated into the Hexateuch. This strand is known as the "J document"
because of its characteristic use of "Jehovah" ("Yahveh") in connection with God."

What is the state of this scholarly view today? One article written by Baden who himself wrote a book about the
subject writes

"Moreover, the shift in European scholarship away from the Documentary Hypothesis happened very quickly:
13 | P a g e

one can almost draw a line at the publication of Rendtorffs Problem of the Process of Transmission in the
Pentateuch in 1977, with pre-Rendtorff scholarship being largely documentary and post-Rendtorff scholarship
being almost entirely non-documentary."

He further adds

"The result is that, for many, what is known is that the documentary model we learned in school has been
discarded, but we have not accepted its ostensible replacement."

But, Baden is trying to revive this theory with his book. No wonder, articles have been written claiming this once
popular theory is now in crisis.

One article sums up the development this way, written by David Stern

"The mid-eighties and the early nineties witnessed a resurgence of biblical scholars challenging, revising, and
even rejecting the documentary hypothesis. First and foremost, scholars relinquished claims to a scientific
methodology. In Empirical Models for Biblical Criticism, Jeffery Tigay insists that "The degree of subjectivity
which such hypothetical [source critical] procedures permit is notorious." In fact, Tigay characterizes these
procedures as "reading between the lines." Moreover, Edward Greenstein maintains that source critical analysis
is analogous to the blind men and the elephant: "each of five blind men approaches a different part of an
elephant's anatomy. Perceiving only part of the elephant, each man draws a different conclusion as to the
identity of what he encounters." According to the preceding remarks, not only are source critical methods
subjective, they also account for only a fraction of the total evidence. Especially when analyzing a literary corpus
"as bulky and complex as an elephant," a system which fails to consider all the evidence and wherein "scholars
shape the data into the configurations of their own imagination" hardly warrants the label scientific.

While surveying many conflicting proposals for the nature of the hypothetical sources, Gerhard Larsson gives a
more specific account of the methodological shortcomings. He says that "there is no sound objective method for
recognizing the different sources, there is also no real consensus about the character and extant of sources like
J and E, [and] no unity concerning limits between original sources and the insertions made by redactors." Rather
as Greenstein says: "each scholar defines and adapts the evidence according to his own point of view." Such an
approach not only yields results which are, as Tigay highlights, "hypothetical (witness the term 'documentary
hypothesis')," but, as David Noel Freedman declares, allows and encourages, "the pages of our literature [to be]
filled with endless arguments between scholars who simply reiterate their prejudices."

The lack of a sound and rigorous methodology leads scholars to produce varying and even contradictory
theories, which ultimately undermine the enterprise as a whole."

JW.org has published online articles that discuss the above issues in an easy-to-read article that present both
sides and defends the Bible's authenticity. Anyone who believes in the God of the Bible and trusts God's Words
needs to know the answers.

The Bible offers hope of a better future in an Earth turned into a global Paradise. The hope was opened up for us
through the death of God's own Son, the Lord Jesus, which the Bible calls a ransom to neutralize the effects of
human sin originating from Adam. Finding the truth glorifies the true author of the Bible, Jehovah God.

One such article can be found here under the article "When Was the Bible Written?"

http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2011410?q=bible+scholars&p=par

14 | P a g e

1.11

Joseph, son of Jacob, was described in the Bible as "well-built and handsome". Turns out it runs in the family.
Her mother, Rachel, grandma Rebekah and grand-grandma Sarah are all described as pretty. But, it's not the
physical appearance that made him special to Jehovah God. It's his courage to stand for righteous principles
while isolated from family in Egypt.
Biblical Joseph is a role model for me. He is no complainer. When his Dad sent him out for an errand, in behalf
of his brothers, from Hebron to Shechem, on foot, that is about 80 km, he went, knowing he is going to meet
hostile territory. When Joseph got sold, at 17 years old, to an Egyptian equivalent of the head of the PSG,
separated from his brother and father, in a foreign land, he did not whine his life away. He adapted to the new
circumstances. When his life got better, he extended forgiveness to the ones who caused him all that pain.

15 | P a g e

2. EXODUS

2.1
This time, of the many English Bible versions, King James Version got it right on Exodus 12:40 and is in harmony
with Galatians 3: 16-18. Other English Bible versions translate it as if the time spent by the sons of Israel in
Egypt was 430 years, when in fact, it was only 215 years. The apostle Paul made it clear that 430 years counted
from Abraham entering Canaan (1943 BCE) to the Exodus (1513 BCE).
The New World Translation has the same translation
"And the dwelling of the sons of Israel, who had dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years." (NWT)
The King James Version "Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and
thirty years." (KJV)

2.2

Reading the details of the construction of the tabernacle in the wilderness and the materials used with the help
of WOL, gave me insight on how useful it turned out to be for Israelites to be 'stripping the Egyptians' of what
they have when they left Egypt. The tabernacle eventually costed $13M in today's values for all the gold, silver,
copper, animal skins, acacia wood and other materials used to to build it.

16 | P a g e

3. DEUTERONOMY

3.1

When I was reading Deuteronomy chapter 24, I wondered how was it possible for the Israelites to hear
Joshua speaking from the valley when half of them were in Mt. Gerizim and half of them were in Mt. Ebal. A
practical test was done on location (see link below). The valley where Joshua stood and the surroundings
offered a natural amphitheater. Plus with the repetition of the Levites of what Joshua said (Deut 27:14),
Joshua's words of blessing and malediction would be distinctly heard. This feature of the place was
recognized in "Insight on the Scriptures" encyclopaedia, discussed in the June 15, 1993 issue of "The
Watchtower" magazine, and in the "Benefit" book in chapter 17.

http://blog.bibleplaces.com/2008/12/acoustics-of-mounts-gerizim-and-ebal.html

17 | P a g e

4. JOSHUA

4.1

We take for granted that what we read in the Bible book of Joshua is true history. Yet, in the field of Biblical
archaeology, there are two camps that opposed each other with respect to the historicity of Biblical accounts
such as the one we read in Joshua.

One camp is called Minimalist. They belong to the group that believe in the Documentary Hypothesis. They
believe that the Bible was written during the time the Greeks were the world power, long after the events it
narrates. Hence, they conclude it is not true history but a literary invention.

The other camp is called Maximalist. These are Bible believing archaeologists.

The differences lie in how they date what they find in the places the Bible book of Joshua said things happened.
Minimalist promote the "Low Chronology" theory while the Maximalist promote the "High Chronology" theory. The
difference in their dating is about 200 years. And that is a wide gap.

For a while, for lack of data, the Minimalist have had a good time trouncing the Bible especially the fall of Jericho
and Ai, and the claim that Joshua and the Israelites conquered Canaan. Their position was that no such event
happened. No such places existed at the time the Bible said it did.
^^^^^^^
If you search the Internet that is what you will find. Their glory days peaked during the 1980's. But, new finds
raised issues against what seemed to be a very strong position. It now appears that Maximalists have the upper
hand with the archaeological discoveries supporting the existence of King David on the time the Bible said it did.
The Bible is proven to be true after all.

The question is not whether what the Bible describes ever happened. The sites of Jericho reflect the kind of
destruction mentioned in the Bible. The issue is the timing of the event. How did they determine that? By looking
at surviving potteries and other artifacts.

What is a Christian to do with these competing positions and developments? The research web site WOL.jw.org
has this to say on the subject of Jericho:

"For this reason numerous scholars date the fall of Jericho on circumstantial evidence, and suggested dates span
a period of about 200 years. In view of such uncertainty, Professor Merrill F. Unger fittingly observes: Scholars
also must be extremely wary of attaching undue authority to archaeologists estimates of dates and interpretation
of data. That the fixing of dates and the conclusions drawn from archaeological findings often depend on
subjective factors is amply demonstrated by the wide divergences between competent authorities on these
matters.Archaeology and the Old Testament, 1964, p. 164

http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002426#h=13:0-16:441

18 | P a g e

4.2
As I completed the book of Joshua, the 48 cities for the Levites and the 6 cities of refuge were finally
awarded to the Levites. I noted that Anathoth, where the prophet Jeremiah came from, was one of the 48
Levite cities. However, the city where David fled and met Ahimelech, the high priest, the city of Nob, was
not listed among the 48. So, I wondered why was Nob called a city of priests when it was not listed. I
checked Insight from the Scriptures :-) I found out that probably says the reference, that the sanctuary
originally at Shiloh was moved to Nob after Jehovah God condemned the sons of Eli. Hence, the high priest
would be at the city of Nob where the sanctuary was relocated.

19 | P a g e

5. JUDGES

5.1

How long was the history recorded in the book of the Judges? According to one reference, this is how it is
calculated

"How long a period does Judges cover? This can be calculated from 1 Kings 6:1, which shows that Solomon
began to build the house of Jehovah in the fourth year of his reign, which was also the four hundred and
eightieth year after the sons of Israel came out from the land of Egypt. (Four hundred and eightieth being an
ordinal number, it represents 479 full years.) The known time periods included in the 479 years are 40 years
under Moses in the wilderness (Deut. 8:2), 40 years of Sauls reign (Acts 13:21), 40 years of Davids reign (2
Sam. 5:4, 5), and the first 3 full years of Solomons reign. Subtracting this total of 123 years from the 479 years
of 1 Kings 6:1, there remain 356 years for the period between the entry of Israel into Canaan and the start of
Sauls reign. The events recorded in the book of Judges, extending largely from the death of Joshua down to the
time of Samuel, cover about 330 years of this 356-year period."
^^^^^^
Archaeologists divide the timeline where the Bible events have happened from the time of Moses to the period of
the Judges to be in the Bronze Age period, followed by the establishment of the kingship with David in the Iron
Age period. The on-going debate is whether Joshua and the Judges record took place in the Middle Bronze age
or in the Late Bronze age. This is where the term "High Chronology" and "Low Chronology" is derived.

Since the period of Joshua and the Judges introduced a change of culture in Canaan by the wiping of the existing
Baal culture with the Israelite culture, archaeology should be able to show through their diggings and the
artifacts excavated (pottery for example) that there was indeed a transition in culture.

Several reports found on the internet show this transition.

http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2008/04/02/from-ramesses-to-shiloh-archaeological-discoveries-bearing-
on-the-exodus-judges-period.aspx#Article

5.2

The book is rich with examples of men who made themselves available in the service of their God Jehovah. Each
men, despite their frailties and imperfection, were used by Jehovah God to accomplish his purpose.

Of all the judges, the most poignant story is with Samson. Judges 16: 20 reports

"But he didnt realize that the Lord had left him" (The Living Bible)
"But he did not know that Jehovah had left him." (The New World Translation)
"But he did not know that Yahweh had left him." (Lexham English Bible)

With his hair cut off, his Naziriteship was defiled. His love for Delilah who was willing to sold him for 1,100 silver
pieces or for USD 1,000 ruined him spiritually. That must have been a painful realization for Samson and he
20 | P a g e

suffered the unhappy consequences. Not only did he lose his super-human strength. But that he lost his precious
relationship with God.

But, knowing the kind of God Jehovah is, Samson worked on recovering his relationship with God. He prayed for
Jehovah to remember him who gave him once more the super-human strength he once had.

We can picture Jehovah as described in the book of the Judges his feelings for his repentant servants, Judges 2:
18

"for Yahweh was moved by their groaning because of their persecutors" (Lexham English Bible)
"for Jehovah was moved to pity over their groaning caused by those who oppressed them" (New World
Translation)

Samson must have groaned to Jehovah with his broken heart. And Jehovah who loved Samson from infancy
responded.

5.3

The book ended with an extra-ordinary story that inspires reflections at many layers. This was the case of mass
rape in the city of Gibeah. The punitive action taken by the rest of the Israelites met defeat twice, with the loss
of 40,000 faithful Israelites, apparently without getting any blessing from Jehovah God, despite seeking His
guidance. Finally, Jehovah granted them victory against the perpetrators of the crime, leading to the burning of
the city of Gibeah.

Sometimes, we don't understand how God acts in certain instances and they don't map neatly with our
understanding of justice. With our limited knowledge and insight, we are perplexed by such developments.

Was it truly just to allow the loss of 40,000 faithful Israelites to the wicked of Gibeah? I can relate to the weeping
that took place among the faithful Israelites for their loss. The loss is actually temporary if we recall God has the
power of resurrection.

But the loss did not discourage the Israelites to pursue justice and righteousness. Though the wicked were more
capable warriors than they are, Jehovah finally blessed their zeal and led to the burning of Gibeah.

To do the right thing sometimes incur cost, great cost to ourselves. But just like the Israelites, on the book of the
Judges, there is no turning back. In the end, God sees everything. He steps in to do what we cannot do
ourselves.

6. Ruth

21 | P a g e

This is indeed one of the shortest books in the Old Testament (Hebrew Bible). I also agree that as Bible scholars
noted that it deviates from the format of story telling of the history of Israel. From stories of powerful leaders like
Moses, Joshua, and then the Judges, I encounter a sweet story of love and loyalty.

But, others look to the book of Ruth as a book of fiction. Just like their position with the books of Moses, Joshua
and the Judges, these scholars believe that the book was written after the Babylonian exile. Hence, in their
explanation of its content they position it with the inter-marriage episode in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah.

But their position is problematic. A line of reasoning is mentioned in the encyclopaedia, "Insight on the
Scriptures",

"Moreover, it is inconceivable that a Hebrew writer would have deliberately invented a foreign maternal ancestry
for David, the first king in the royal line of Judah."

http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200003777

There are other sources that think exactly in the same way. For example, in the book "An Introduction to the Old
Testament", page 340, we find

"The very fact that Ruth, the ancestress of David, was a Moabitess, is in itself an argument for the historicity of
the book."

This book debunked the position of the other critical scholars that the book was written after the Babylonian
exile, in the 5th century, based on two words that are supposedly Aramaic. (Daniel, a Bible book written after the
Babylonian exile, was written in Aramaic.)

It is true that the style of writing between Judges and Ruth are different. But style alone is not sufficient ground to
discredit the recognition that Samuel wrote the two books.

22 | P a g e

7. First SAMUEL

7.1

Bible critics consider the two books of Samuel as part and parcel of the same author/redactor who
wrote/compiled the books from Genesis-Joshua-Judges up to this book after the Babylonian exile. Bible critics
call this author/redactor a Deuteronomist.

My previous note showed the weaknesses of this theory and variations of this theory have already been
abandoned.

Textual analysis in the body cited by these critics as proof are commented by this online Bible-based
encyclopaedia

"The fact that Hannah and an unnamed man of God used the expressions king and anointed one years
before a king actually ruled over Israel does not support the argument of some that these passages date from
a period later than indicated in the book. (1Sa 2:10, 35) The idea of a future king was by no means foreign to
the Hebrews. Gods promise concerning Sarah, the ancestress of the Israelites, was that kings of peoples
would come from her. (Ge 17:16) Also, Jacobs deathbed prophecy (Ge 49:10), the prophetic words of
Balaam (Nu 24:17), and the Mosaic Law (De 17:14-18) pointed to the time when the Israelites would have a
king."


7.2

The characters in the first book of Samuel offer lots to reflect on - their lot in life, how they coped with it, how
their relationship with God played a role in their success or failure as individuals, and puts divine action in a
context that we can relate to.

Take the couple Elkanah and Hanna. Hanna remained childless, a very negative and painful lot in Israelite
culture. Add to that the maltreatment she gets from Peninnah, the other wife. It went on for years but that
has not stopped Hanna from performing her obligations to Jehovah her God by joining the entire family when
going to Shiloh. Worse was, when she arrived in Shiloh, the high priest there, Eli, mistook her for a drunkard
while praying. Think of adding insult to injury.

Would your sad lot in life stop you from clinging to God and His people because some of your peers are
discouraging you? Would you consider God has left you in your sad plight? Would you think that God is the
source of your problem? That's where we are encouraged by the example of Hannah. She brought her
problem to Jehovah God and offered God a deal. Once she gave the problem to Jehovah, she was no longer
sad.

How Jehovah God must have appreciated from the heavens how loyal Hannah was. And when she prayed, it
must have warmed Jehovah's heart. Here is someone He loves to help. And so God did.

How about me? What if a similar painful lot falls on my lap down the road? How will I handle it? What if the
source of that pain are from my fellow worshipers of Jehovah? How will I cope? It is a good thing to reflect on
the example of Hannah because folks like her gets Jehovah's favor.
23 | P a g e

7.3

If you want to get to know God with clarity, you have to reflect on how Samuel, Saul and David interacted
with Jehovah God and how God interacted with them.

Jehovah is an appreciative God. We saw this in his choice of Samuel to be his prophet or representative. God
has seen how as a young boy, separated from his parents at an early age, without the nurturing of loving
parents, and surrounded by evil adult examples right in the holy place, Samuel was strong and whole enough
not to absorb the evil around him. Unlike other adults, he did not say that when he arrived at the sanctuary
this is the way it is and that everybody's doing it. He stood his ground and God took noticed. When he grew
up, he maintained that devotion to God's righteous standards and was no respecter of persons in that regard.

Jehovah God does not practice favoritism. We saw this in how he interacted with Saul and David. In the
beginning, Saul has positive qualities of humility, diligence and industriousness. Physically, he was like no
other in appearance - height, build, and attractiveness. Yet, he did not manifest any conceit for having such
gifted physical appearance. God chose him as the first king of Israel. (My initial curiosity here the first time I
read the Bible was why God chose someone from the tribe of Benjamin rather than someone from the tribe of
Judah as first king when it is clearly the prophetic line of kings.)

Saul's serious flaw was that he lost his humility when he became king. When he made a mistake, he could
have ask God's forgiveness. Instead, he tried his very best to excuse himself, minimizing the mistake, blame
others for it, but not him making the mistake. For an imperfect human, pride has replaced humility and Saul
should have known God hates proud folks. And in the end, Saul was more concerned what people would
thought of him rather than how he stands before God over the mistake. Jehovah God saw no further reason
to continue supporting King Saul. All that physical attractiveness did nothing to appease God. And how sad it
is that Saul never worked back to regain that friendship.

In contrast was a young, equally good-looking man, David. David showed how strong his relationship is with
God and how much he appreciated it. It was very customary for David to inquire of God before taking any
actions on matters. He was zealous for his God Jehovah, unwilling to bring reproach to the name of his God,
and not even from someone like Goliath.

David's humility is astounding considering how many times he had the opportunity to kill King Saul who
chased after him, to have him killed, but he recognized that King Saul's is God's responsibility. He deferred to
God's time table when to remove King Saul. He patiently worked with his Jehovah God and took evasive
measures to avoid confronting the king. And God blessed David's humble efforts.

David was also open to corrections. When a woman met up with him to expose his error, giving way to anger,
to do a violent act, David allowed himself to be corrected by a woman at that. David praised Abigail, in fact,
for taking such bold action. He listened to the counsel of a woman.

David's strong relationship with his God prevented him to blame God for having the city of Ziklag burned
down and his family and the family of his fellow 600 soldiers kidnapped. Of course, David and his men wept
out of frustration. They lost everything - their properties, their family, and the city where they lived. David
accepted what God permitted and inquired from God of his next steps or actions to take. Jehovah God must
have appreciated David's reactions that Jehovah restored to David and his 600 men everything that was lost
to them and more.

Yes, in the lives of these three men we see a God who cares, who watches over, who takes notice of our
24 | P a g e

reactions, decisions, and flaws. He is also a God who sticks to us if we stick to him and who will abandon us if
we choose to leave him. We need God and not the other way around. We cannot be like Saul who after losing
God's friendship, pride stood in the way to his reconciliation. We should be more like David, always dependent
on God, humble and open to correction, and trusting that his God although He permits bad things to happen,
He is always there to help out.

For some of us, especially, the young folks, there is Samuel to emulate who started young in serving God and
maintained loyalty to his old age. His service record is possibly one of the longest service record in the Bible.

25 | P a g e

8. Second SAMUEL

8.1
Reflections on the second book of Samuel. Part 1.

Many supposedly intellectual folks sneer at reading the Bible, dismissing it as a book of myths and legends.
Many of these so-called intellectuals simply parrot what others say and has never read the Bible for
themselves. They presume that these Bible critics know what they speak of. Unfortunately for them, relying
on human wisdom, they deny to themselves the better wisdom of God.

For years, personalities in the book of Samuel has been considered legends and myths. Archaeologists who
have never believed the Bible has jumped to the conclusion that there never was a king called David. He was
legend like king Arthur.

Then, in the late 1980's, two different stone fragments of monuments were dug by archaeologists (these are
called stela), containing the name of a Jewish king, David. All of a sudden, what was myth and legend was
true after all!

Regarding the role of archaeology with respect to affirming or denying the truthfulness of the Bible as the
content of the books of Samuel, an article from the New York Times writes

"The foregoing discussion shows that archaeological evidence is subject to interpretation just as the Bible is.
Archaeology has not yet proved David's historical existence. But it has not disproved it either. The evidence is
interpreted differently by different people. The assumption that David was a real person remains a viable and
defensible one. The references to his name in inscriptions add some weight to this assumption."

"http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/m/mckenzie-david.html

8.2

Since David is an important personality whose examples Christians today can learn a lot from, this book is an
important read. It also teaches us about how Jehovah God interacts with individuals like David.

What did I personally learn from David?

1. Jehovah does not always intervene to stop or prevent us from suffering. He certainly DOES NOT cause
human suffering to force us to cling to Him. That is completely opposite to His personality. God is love, the
Bible says.

Although David was chosen by Jehovah God as the successor king to King Saul, God did not prevent King Saul
from hunting down David his enemy and designated successor. This made life difficult for David. He has to
hide in the Judean wilderness, in caves, in mountains, always on the run.

The patience that David exercised all this time, waiting for God to act in His appointed time, and asking God's
blessing for his creative ways to evade his enemy, is something I can learn from. David knew and believed
26 | P a g e

that God cares for him.

At one point in his life, when they left their families and properties in the city of Ziklag, and were some place
else, marauder bands of Amalekites attacked the city of Ziklag. When David and his 600 men returned, the
city was burned down. All their family were missing. No dead bodies around either of humans or animals.
Their families were kidnapped and their flock of cows, goats and sheep were taken away.

David must have felt disappointed with Jehovah God that He allowed such a thing to happen. His men were
so mad that they wanted to punish David for this tragedy.

In this lowest point in his life, David knowing Jehovah God more intimately, knew that it was not the worse.
Their families are still alive. That is the best news. He sought God's help. For his unwavering faith, God
rewarded him that he will be able to recover not just their families but their properties and more.

As a Christian, we must think like David. But to think like David, we need to improve our knowledge of God,
and dismiss lies that even religious leaders promote about God, such as suffering is from God.

2. Jehovah knowing that we are sinners can quickly distinguish genuine repentance from one that is feigned.

King Saul was rejected by Jehovah for disobedience. King David was not rejected by Jehovah for
disobedience. What made the difference?

King Saul when he was confronted for his error, did what most of us imperfect individuals would commonly
mistakenly do - minimize our mistake, deny responsibility for the mistake, and save face. Jehovah was not
pleased by the failure of Saul to come to true repentance, that is, humbly acknowledge that he made a
mistake, not someone else, and is willing to face the consequences of the mistake.

King David was different. The moment he realized the error - he did three things that were completely
opposite of Saul. He admitted the error, took the responsibility for the error, and was not concerned about his
personal reputation over the mistake but instead, how it impacted his relationship with God.

Jehovah God, who can read human hearts, quickly saw in David genuine repentance. And God forgave him
for his grievous error. But, God did not prevent or protected David from the consequences of his mistakes. He
suffered from his error until his death.

8.3


Besides David, there are many personalities whose conduct we can learn a lot from - either to avoid their
mistakes and the attitude that led to such mistakes or copy their positive examples and the reward they got
for such examples.

In the second book, we are introduced to the prophets Nathan and Gad. We are introduced to the other
women in David's life, primarily Bathsheba, Michal, and her daughter Tamar. We are introduced to sons who
perished in his lifetime - Amnon and Absalom. We are introduced to his cousins, the brothers Joab, Abishai
and Asahel and their cousin Amasa. These personalities were introduced to us at a time when David was
reaping what he has sown - for temporary enjoyment of sin, David paid dearly with turmoil and confusion, not
27 | P a g e

only in his family but in his kingdom as well.

We are introduced to examples of loyalty and betrayal as well. There were loyal Hushai and Ittai the Gittite.
The old but wealthy man Barzillai. There was humble Jonathan. Then there is the traitor Ahithopel, David's
former adviser.

Notably, in the coup d'etat that Absalom his son orchestrated, David's original 600 men stayed loyal to him.

This was not just a simple issue of political intrigue. The kingship of Israel is not a human kingship. Human
kings sit on God's throne in Jerusalem according to the Bible. David was a messiah, God's appointed human
representative. Anyone who would de-throne him without Jehovah God's permission is rising up against God
himself. This explains why David did not organize a coup d'etat against King Saul. He waited for God to de-
throne Saul.

All these personalities teach Christians about loyalty and obedience to theocracy or God's rule.

This is an important point of reflections by Bible readers because the Lord Jesus is also called in the Bible, as
son of David. This is significant because Jehovah God designated the Lord Jesus as the Messiah, or the
successor to the dynasty of King David. Jesus has royal blood. But Jesus will not sit on an earthly throne in
Jerusalem. His kingdom will be from heaven and it's rule will soon dominate the earth. As its future king, the
Lord taught us all to pray, Thy kingdom come.

28 | P a g e

9. First KINGS

9.1
Reflections on the first book of Kings. Part 1.

Just like the other books of the Bible, Bible critics have never accepted this book as containing true history.
They dismissed the first five books of Moses as never written in the time it was supposed to be written. The
popular view is that the books were produced much later by others and those others promoted the claim that
it was from Moses. One of the key proof claimed is as below

"Not only is it true that the Hebrew language did not exist, but it is urged by critics that no written language,
as we understand it, existed in Western Asia in the time of Moses. Prof. Andrew Norton says: "For a long time
after the supposed date of the Pentateuch we find no proof of the existence of a book or even an inscription
in proper alphabetical characters among the nations by whom the Hebrews were surrounded." (The
Pentateuch, p. 44) Hieroglyphs were then in use, and it cannot be imagined that a work as large as the
Pentateuch was written or engraved in hieroglyphics and carried about by this wandering tribe of ignorant
Israelites."

But are the assertions above still holds with contemporary archaeological discoveries related to the Hebrew
language and its script? The book, "A History of Hebrew: Its Language and Philosophy" by Jeff Benner has
this to say about the origin of writing related to Hebrew:

"The early Semitic alphabet existed between the 20th and 12th centuries B.C. However, note that the 20th
century date is based on the oldest inscriptions found thus far and it is possible that future discoveries may
push the date of the Semitic alphabet back even farther into history. To date, the Wadi El-Hhol inscriptions
found in southern Egypt, are the oldest Semitic inscriptions found and date to between the 19th and 20th
centuries B.C. The Sinaitic inscriptions from the Sinai peninsula date to about the 15th century B.C.

The middle Semitic alphabet, the Phoenician and old Hebrew, was in use between the 12th and 4th century
B.C. The Gezer calendar, Mesha Stele, Siloam inscription, the Lachish inscription and the Phoenician
sarcophagus date to this time period.

The late Semitic alphabet, the square Aramaic script, was in use between 4th century BC and into modern
times with the modern Hebrew alphabet that is used to this day."

How do Bible critics react to this development? This news report captures the prevailing attitude.

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/07/31/3000-year-old-inscription-translated-biblical-history/

The Bible wins while the Bible critics wobble into a "maybe or maybe not". Why is this important to reflect on?
Every time the Bible is vindicated, the stronger the value it has for us as God's communication to mankind.
You can study the Bible and learn more about what it says on the more important things in life.

29 | P a g e

9.2


This book is controversial because it tells the story of a united kingdom under David and Solomon. To Bible
critics these are legends and mythical personalities. So what happens when archaeology finds some artifacts
that bolster the Bible story? Furious debate.

One such archaeological find is the Ophel Inscription. The dating and implication of the find help establish
that there was an existing kingdom as the Bible narrated. The report below illustrates the kind of controversy
it can generate.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/roger-isaacs/the-ophel-inscription-deb_b_4922401.html

Other discoveries tend to validate pieces of information recorded in this Bible book

King Solomon's mines
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130903141356.htm

King Solomon's temple
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/10/khirbet-qeiyafa-archaeology_n_1504722.html

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/insideisrael/2013/June/Did-David-Solomon-Exist-Dig-Refutes-Naysayers/

9.3


King Solomon was loved by Jehovah God, enough to give him the wisdom that made him famous, famous
enough to attract 1,000 women. And that's his fall from grace. He allowed his love for women to be more
than his love for his God. There are only 365 days in a year and Solomon has 1,000 women!

His story demonstrates how deceptive our hearts can be. It has powerful motivations that can override our
minds. Christians should learn from his fall. We cannot allow our hearts to dictate what we should follow.
"Sundin mo ang sinasabi ng puso mo" or "kung saan ka maligaya doon ka" are recipes for disaster.

All the kings that followed King Solomon followed their hearts. And they brought national disaster to Israel.

The book also highlighted that Jehovah God will not allow himself to be disrespected. Those He chose to be
kings when they became disloyal to him, He deposed. He gave them the opportunity to be loyal, a privilege
that an imperfect man should have valued. But they allowed personal ambitions to cloud their decisions.

Just as Jehovah God was loyal to David because David was loyal to God, Jehovah God did the same for the
kings who chose to be loyal to him. This is an important lesson for Christians. God reciprocates our loyalty to
him.

30 | P a g e

The book also introduces us to a powerful prophet Elijah. His life story demonstrated that Jehovah God
supports, protects and takes care of His loyal servants. He takes notice of our emotional state, and acts to
encourage and strengthen us. What a powerful testimony it was when in the contest between Baal, an idol
god, and Jehovah, He demonstrated that He is the only true God.

31 | P a g e

10. Second KINGS

11.1

The books of Kings mention many international personalities from then world powers - Egypt, Assyria, and
Babylon. And the concurrence of archaeology, history and the records of these other powers confirm that the
Bible is not a book of legend or myths.

It reports real people, places and events. Here are the names of these personalities

1. Pharaoh So
2. Pharaoh Shishak
3. Pharaoh Necho
4. Assyrian Shalmaneser
5. Assyrian Tiglath-Pileser
6. Assyrian Sennacherib
7. Assyrian Esarhaddon
8. Babylonian Berodach-Baladan
9. Babylonian Nebuchadnezzar
10. Babylonian Evil-merodach

Archaeologist has this to say regarding Pharaoh Shishak

"Levin points out that if the Egyptian Pharaohs records on the Bubastite Portal match those from 1 Kings, this
would be the earliest event in Biblical history for which we have a contemporaneous reference in an extrabiblical
source. Moreover, Egyptian records of Sheshonqs rule between 945 and 925 B.C.E. could be used to date the
reigns of Rehoboams father, Solomon, and his grandfather, David."

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/hebrew-bible/did-pharaoh-sheshonq-attack-jerusalem/

Scholars have found corroborating evidence in the land of Israel of this conquest that led them to conclude that
the this pharaoh's attack in Judah is "beyond reasonable doubt."

Regarding the other names, the web site Biblical Archaeology Review, has the archaelogical proof points that
history validates the truthfulness of the Bible record

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/50-people-in-the-bible-
confirmed-archaeologically

One of the dramatic discoveries in modern times to support the Bible record is the archaeological finds in the
land of Nineveh of Assyria which showed many corroborating data on the Sennacherib campaign in the land of
Israel.

One source reports

"Layard found the walls of this room covered with limestone 8 feet tall and 80 feet long wrapping around all
four walls. Every inch of the rooms walls powerfully depicted only one scene in history, Sennacheribs defeat of
the southern kingdom city of Lachish. Remember in 2 Kings 18:17, The king of Assyria sent his supreme
commander, his chief officer and his field commander with a large army, from Lachish to King Hezekiah at
Jerusalem."
32 | P a g e

http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2010/07/top-ten-biblical-discoveries-in-archaeology-10-assyrian-lachish-
reliefs/

One publication listed the top ten archaeological finds that support Bible history. One can browse the PDF
version here

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AgcYgFsT-em-68ATObk3Rd-
1zSBABIDGosX6opBniLSrI3ghIYAsQ0i4AofX/edit?usp=sharing

11.2

The leadership of the kings of Judah were mostly by faithless men. Their history is both a blessing and a
warning example of how Jehovah responds to our effort to be close to Him.

33 | P a g e

11.3

34 | P a g e

11.4

35 | P a g e

11.5

There are many rich experiences in this book that demonstrated the truthfulness of the words of our Lord Jesus
that when we put God's kingdom interest and his righteousness first, God will add or provide for the things that
we need.

Take the case of several women whom Jehovah God blessed and supplied for their needs:

1. The mother at Zarepath
2. The wife of the dead prophet
3. The rich but childless wife at Shunem

In each instance, Jehovah had ask for a demonstration of faith before the actual blessing was given.

In the case of the mother at Zarepath who was down to the last meal with her child, Elijah asked her to feed
him first. Only then will Jehovah God take care of her. That was certainly not looking logical nor reasonable. The
mother had to choose between what is practical or faith in God's ability to provide. This mom decided to put her
faith in Jehovah God and fed Elijah with their last meal. The Bible reports, "the large jar of flour did not run out,
and the small jar of oil did not run dry" all the time the famine was going on around her.

In the case of the dead prophet's wife, she appealed to the prophet Elisha to help her financially, particularly
paying off the family's debt. Instead of just granting her wish, Jehovah God asked her to do a practical gesture.
She was asked to collect jars from everyone she knew. Then, she started pouring oil from her own jar to the
collected jars. Finally, she filled up all the jars that she collected and there were no more empty jars. Her own
source jar did not run empty as she used it to fill up the rest. The Bible reports, "Go sell the oil and pay off your
debts, and you and your sons can live from what is left."

In the case of the rich wife at Shunem, her generosity was rewarded. The prophet Elisha used to frequent
Shunem. This rich wife offered her home as a base for the prophet whenever he visits. She even made an
additional room built complete with furnishings for the prophet for his privacy. Jehovah took notice of her
hospitality and blessed her with a son.

The experiences of Elijah and Elisha demonstrated God's ability to provide. He knows how to take care of
people who serve Him sincerely and with dedication.

One interesting experience that pre-dated the miracle of Jesus feeding thousands, is the feeding of 100
prophets with only 20 loaves. The man who brought the loaves knew that he cannot feed 100 men with 20
loaves. But the prophet Elisha instructed him just to feed them with the 20 loaves and that there will be even
leftovers. And that exactly happened. The Bible reports, "and they ate and they had some leftover, according to
the word of Jehovah."

That is why I find the books of Kings such a faith strengthening read. In times when the economy appears to
tank, the equivalent of famine in Bible times, God knows how to provide for those who trust in Him for as long
as we put God's kingdom interest first. How much more will Jehovah God provide for those who make self-
sacrifices in behalf of the ministry of the good news of God's kingdom!

36 | P a g e

11.6

What have I learned about Jehovah from these two books? I learned that Jehovah God, our heavenly Father, is
an appreciative God but He does not tolerate disrespect.

Take a look at how much support he gave King Solomon. He granted Solomon's wish for wisdom. Being
appreciative, God did more than that. He was willing to give Solomon more. However, it was not a sky's the
limit thing. It was tied to Solomon's continued loyalty through obedience to His laws. But Solomon, despite
being a wise man, chose to belittle God's laws. He started to disobey them, one by one. It became a habit until
it reached a point, obedience no longer mattered. So, Jehovah's feelings changed towards Solomon. He cannot
tolerate disrespect.

Jeroboam was a skilled organizer. Jehovah being an appreciative God, He chose him to be the king of the
separate kingdom of Israel. God offered to sustain his kingdom if Jeroboam sticks to God's laws through
obedience. Jeroboam though once he became king, completely abandoned Jehovah God. He misused his free
will to promote apostasy for political reason - ensure the continuity of his kingdom. It was something that
Jehovah already promised but he had no faith in God. So, Jehovah declared that he would abort the kingship of
Jeroboam.

Jehovah God offered the kingship of Israel to other men. He also offered them continuity for as long as they
comply and obey with God's laws. Nearly all of them took the path of Jeroboam. They did what they thought
would ensure their continuity. And so Jehovah aborted the kingship of such men.

There was only one special guy, Jehu, who Jehovah rewarded with four generations of kings under him for
being obedient to Him initially. Again, being an appreciative God, Jehovah rewarded Jehu generously by
allowing four generations of his line to sit as kings of Israel. But his son and grandsons chose the path of
Jeroboam. Once His promise was completed, Jehovah aborted the kingship from the family of Jehu.

These books offered us the insight that Jehovah God does not pre-judge a man. He allows individuals to show
what was in their heart. Only when they have demonstrated who they really were does God react to remove
them or keep them in his favor.

The case of Ahab is an interesting one. Ahab had the baddest reputation of all the kings of Israel. Once Jehovah
God sent his prophet to rebuke Ahab for his bad activities. Ahab took the rebuke seriously and repented.
Jehovah God recognizing that it was a genuine act of repentance, He was quick to forgive Ahab - despite being
the baddest king of the kings of Israel! However, Ahab reverted back to his bad ways. This time around,
Jehovah allowed Ahab to be killed during a battle.

A similar case but with a different ending is Manasseh, a king of the kingdom of Judah. Manasseh is the baddest
of all kings both from Judah and from Israel. He has no equal in badness. He installed inside Jehovah God's
temple idols of different sorts. He caused the death of so many people even his own children. Jehovah allowed
Manasseh's kingdom to be defeated by foreigners and he was captured and brought to Babylon. There
Manasseh humbled himself before Jehovah. Again, Jehovah seeing the genuineness of his repentance, forgave
freely. Manasseh never returned to his former bad ways. But his damage was so extensive that Jehovah
required an accounting from the kingdom of Judah. In time, Jerusalem was burned down by Babylonians.

How do we want Jehovah God to treat us? That depends a lot on what we do with Jehovah God's laws. He
entrusts to us privileges and work because He saw in us the will and capability to execute. If we do right with
Jehovah, He will reward us generously being an appreciative God that He is.
37 | P a g e

38 | P a g e

12. First and Second CHRONICLES

Note the comparative accounts between the Kings and Chronicles in a separate chart.

39 | P a g e

13. NEHEMIAH

Of all the books of the Old Testament, the easily accepted as historical are the books of Ezra and Nehemiah.
According to references, originally, they were just one scroll. Why are these books easily accepted as historical?
Because Bible critics assert that Bible writing only began after the exile from Babylon.

Both books wrote about Persian rulers when the Persian empire dominate the Middle East. All the personalities,
policies, laws and decrees mentioned in those Bible books agree with what has been found about the Persians.

An archaeological find, the Cyrus Cylinder, confirm the Bible references by several prophets that there really was
a Persian king with that name and that he restored peoples into their homelands and help re-establish their
worship. (http://www.bible-history.com/archaeology/persia/cyrus-cylinder-photo1.jpg)

All other Persian kings mentioned in the book of Nehemiah are all confirmed. They were not myths nor legends.

But, as I have previously found by works of other Bible scholars, all the other books leading to the book
Nehemiah have been validated as historical via the archaeological discoveries. This encompasses all the way
back to Genesis.

Why is this important to me? Because the Bible claims to be God's Word. For such an important extraterrestrial
communication from the spirit world, the book deserves our attention and time.

40 | P a g e

14. ESTHER

Bible scholars have the opinion that the details in this book are historically accurate. But the story itself is not real
history. So, what do they call such a book that is historically accurate but is not itself true history? A historical
novella!

Another criticism they find in the book is that not once is God's divine name "JEHOVAH" ever mentioned. And it
was never quoted by any of the writers of the New Testament.

However, a closer examination of the book of Esther shows that it is in harmony with the entire Bible. What
lessons do we learn from the book that is echoed in the entire Bible?

1. God's requirements and standards are higher than man's, superceding any human law and its requirements
for obedience

2. Trusting in God to bless our individual efforts

3. Using human agencies to overcome legal obstacles

From the loyal example of Puah and the other Hebrew midwives who chose God as authority first rather than a
man like Pharaoh down to the apostles who defied the Sanhedrin authorities in stopping their preaching work,
the example of Mordecai in defying the Persian law to bow to Haman is clearly consistent with this pattern.

Our loyalty to God demands our complete obedience. We will not allow any human authority to impose their will
on us when it comes in conflict to God's will. No parent, husband, or civil authority can demand our obedience at
the expense of obedience to God. Mordecai showed a fine example in this regard.

The pattern of trusting in God when taking the initiative to do His will is a familiar pattern in the Bible - from Noah,
with his ark-building, to the patriarchs who left Ur and dwelt as nomads in Canaan, to the apostles who traveled
the ancient world in preaching the good news of the Kingdom.

Servants of God used human agencies and its legal system to try to overcome legal obstacles thrown their way
hampering their service. We saw this in the rebuilding effort of the Second Temple. We also saw this in the effort
of the early Christians to spread the good news of God's Kingdom.

41 | P a g e

15. JOB

I am now reading the book of Job. I cannot help wonder why our religious leaders - ministers, pastors and
priests- fail to articulate the message of this book about the behind-the-scenes story on human suffering. The
book crystallizes the fact that human suffering is not caused by God, nor willed by God.

Job is caught up between a debate (Jehovah God versus Satan) on the issue of the nature of human loyalty to
God. Satan asserts that Jehovah God is bribing humans to stay loyal by blessing them so much materially. In the
case of Job, he was a multi-millionaire, perhaps a billionaire by our standards. Just for the 3,000 camels alone
that costs around $1,000-$ 2,000 each today, he is worth $6M, besides his cows, sheep, goats, staff, real estate,
etc.

I get the picture that God is generous. But, Satan twisted God's generosity to make it look like that He is bribing
humans like Job to stay with Him. The only way to disprove this is for God to allow Satan to inflict suffering by
withholding His blessings for a short time. Job, or for that matter, any human must prove his case before God's
enemy.

I also get the picture of how cruel and evil Satan is. I also get the picture how much patience God has to even
allow his presence in the heavens when God calls for a meeting of his angels. In the book of Job, I read how
determined Satan is to make suffering the reason a human will leave God. Job felt let down, he was depressed,
in pain, grieving for his children who died, for the bankruptcy of his livelihood, while enduring criticisms from so-
called friends who were forcing him to confess some secret evil he was accused of to have done.

Anyone can empathize with Job's words below

"For sighing has become my daily food;
my groans pour out like water.
What I feared has come upon me;
what I dreaded has happened to me.
I have no peace, no quietness;
I have no rest, but only turmoil.

It must have pained God in the heavens to see someone loyal suffer this way. It was not God testing his faith. It
was Satan. Job was seeking audience with God to understand why he feels abandoned, why God has made him
suffer despite his integrity

"If only there were someone to mediate between us,
someone to bring us together,
someone to remove Gods rod from me,
so that his terror would frighten me no more."

While still reading through the book of Job, I am encouraged and comforted with the thought found in the Bible
book of James, regarding the conclusion of the story of Job, that gives me an accurate picture about God and
about human suffering

"You have heard about Jobs patience. You know that after all his troubles, the Lord helped him. This shows that
the Lord is full of mercy and is kind.." (James 5:11)

I prefer the rendering of the 2013 New World Translation Bible

42 | P a g e

"You have heard of the endurance of Job and have seen the outcome Jehovah gave, that Jehovah is very tender
in affection and merciful."

And with respect to Satan, the last book of the Bible is accurate to describe him after his eviction from heaven
(where he stayed for a long time)

"For the accuser of our brothers and sisters has been thrown down to earth
the one who accuses them before our God day and night." (Revelation 12:10)

43 | P a g e

16. PSALMS

One of the longest book ever to complete in the Bible, if not the longest, is the book of Psalms. It took according
to one reference 1,000 years to complete. How is that? Well, Moses contributed to the book. Most are of David.
And it contained psalms about the Exile in Babylon. That's a period that ran from 1513-537 BCE approximately.

According to the Masoretic Text (MT), the Psalms follows it five divisions or books. The 2013 NWT in its
appendix talks about the Masoretes. If you have a copy of that Bible, it is good information.

To appreciate the format of the chapters in this book, it is useful to review the section of Hebrew poetry under the
subject Hebrew, in references like "Insight on the Scriptures" Vol. 1, an encyclopedia which has an online
version available in JW.org (http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200001953)

In that reference you will be able to identify synonymous, antithetic, synthetic, emblematic, stairlike, and
introverted parallelism. Getting a background on these poetic parallelisms help you understand how the format
reinforces the message.

A prominent feature of the book is the superscription. Some scholars question the authenticity of these
superscriptions, thinking these are late additions to the book. But, the fact is that the superscriptions are ancient,
given that the book is a 1,000 years old in the making.

The book celebrates the blessings of nurturing one's relationship with Jehovah God (Hebrew Yahweh). Unlike
the previous historical books, I have to read the chapters slowly to capture the ambiance, the context, the spirit,
and the feelings of the inspired writer for God.

It highlights love for the Bible, even though at that time, it only consisted of some books of Moses, and the other
historical books. The book encourages me to read the Bible every day. It encourages communion with Jehovah
God through prayers. It invites readers to find time to praise God publicly and in the congregation. It offers hope
of forgiveness from Jehovah God when we make mistakes or sins against God. It makes our faith strong by
reading the many prophecies that would later be fulfilled in the Lord Jesus Christ. It celebrates faith that Jehovah
God will not forget our works of faith and devotion, even when we have grown old and weak. It provides the
promise that God will end wickedness and evil and usher in a new world of a global earthly Paradise.

What a treasure the book of Psalms is for the one who values his relationship with God. It does not just move his
emotions. It moves him to act with faith. And it does these using beautiful poetry full of images and parallelisms.

44 | P a g e

17. ECCLESIASTES

Bible critics have never for one moment accepted that any of the books of the Bible are really from God. Hence,
just like other books, they deny Solomon as its author. And just like the other OT books, this book must have
been written after the Babylonian exile.

Others criticized the book for not mentioning God's name not even once, for being too cynical about life. Even
the Jewish authorities were reportedly took a while to accept the book as part of the Hebrew canon of the Old
Testament.

However, there are now many research published on the language, grammar and style of the book that refutes
the claim that it was written after the Babylonian exile. The research deals with specific phrases and words
common with the Phoenicians during the time of Solomon. The form of the hand-written copies of the book also
shows its age. Scholars note that written Hebrew with vowels are late books while written Hebrew without vowels
are earlier Hebrew. Ecclesiastes fall in the latter category.

The report, "The Linguistic Evidence for the Date of 'Ecclesiastes'", summarized the various positions for and
against the dating of the book. The favored one is post-Babylonian Exile. However, the report notes in page 167,
"It is not true that the Solomonic authorship of Ecclesiastes has been universally abandoned, at least in some
Conservative circles... There are very solid linguistic grounds for rejecting the verdict of spuriousness. This
evidence is abundantly available even from the writings of some scholars who reject Solomonic authorship."

The reference book "Insight on the Scriptures", available online, shows that its contents are in harmony with the
rest of the Bible.


45 | P a g e

18. SONG OF SOLOMON

Bible Textual Critics investigate a Bible book to establish the date of the book, its author, its authenticity. They
look at the language it was written, the words used, whether there are foreign words used from the same era or
another era, the phrases employed, whether those phrases are similarly used by neighboring countries, and
other small details.

In that respect, the Song of Solomon is problematic for many Bible scholars because their theories don't exactly
fit to define the features of the book. Although some Textual Critics claim that most if not all Bible scholars have
rejected Solomon to be its author, this is not truly the case.

An example of this debate is the abundance of so-called Aramaisms in the book. The Old Testament was first
written in Hebrew, later parts with Aramaic. Hence, some textual critics are inclined to believe that it could not
have been Solomon as author if there was an abundance of Aramaic since this language was used by Bible
writers during the Exile or post-Exile (when the Jews finally returned to Jerusalem from Babylon).

Another issue is the presence of foreign words or "loan words" supposedly of Persian origins.

Other scholars in their published work has this to say about the issue: "Their analysis leads them to conclude
that there is no necessity for a late dating of the Song of Songs. The apparently late features are not indicative
of chronology but rather regional particularity. As such, Noegel and Rendsburg see the Song of Songs as a
literary work written in northern Israel."

Getting into the content, scholars are divided on what the book is all about. Some textual critics see in the book,
sensual and erotic love. They don't see the book as an allegory about God and Israel or about Christ and his
congregation.

The online encyclopedia, "Insight on the Scriptures", hints at an allegorical application as well
(http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200004181)

46 | P a g e

19. ISAIAH

19.1

Another set of Bible books that Bible critics, the secular textual critics, are hard pressed to destroy the
authenticity are the prophetic books. Books that foretell the future hundreds of years in advance. Bible critics say
that that is just impossible.

So, how do Bible critics go about disproving that the Bible book of Isaiah is just an ordinary human book? The
core reasoning of Bible critics is that most of the Bible was written after the Jews were exiled in Babylon around
the sixth century BCE. But Isaiah's book was attested to have been written in the eight century BCE! So, they
came up with this theory that the book was actually authored by more than one Isaiah. The chapters 1-39 was
penned by the original Isaiah and the latter 40-66 were penned by others. The first set was written in the 8th
century BCE and the other set after the Babylonian exile. But why? Precisely because the second so-called set
is full of prophecies that actually happened. To the Bible critics, it was actually a record of real events that was
made to appear as prophecy.

However, literary textual criticism, the main tool, to support this theory is challenged by the single theme or unity
of language across the entire book. In all the old hand-written copies (manuscripts) there is only one book and
not two. The NT writers who quote from the book do not suggest that they are quoting several Isaiahs.

These same Bible critics, or secular scholars, have tried to address this challenge. The essay "How Many
Isaiahs" recognized this shift: "Those familiar with the legacy of Duhm in Isaianic studies may be surprised to
learn that, for nearly two decades the dominant emphasis in the historical-critical study of Isaiah has been on the
"unity" of the book. Marvin Tate calls this the new "one book interpretation in contrast to the older "one author
interpretation. In the past, critical scholars have largely overlooked or undervalued the numerous intertextual
connections and thematic continuities between Isaiah 139 and Isaiah 4066 . Recently, however, these
striking features have led a growing number of scholars to posit an intentional relationship, even an
interdependence or a mutual influence between what is popularly known as First and Second Isaiah."

The Insight on the Scriptures, an online bible encyclopedia, lays out the issues and proofs in an easy to read
language - http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200002205:

"Those who would credit the book to more than one writer do not feel that it was possible for Isaiah to have
foretold nearly two centuries in advance that a ruler named Cyrus would liberate the exiled Jews; consequently
they speculate that this was written at a later time, at least after Cyrus began his conquests. (Isa 44:28; 45:1) But
they fail to grasp the import of this entire portion of the book, because the material specifically deals with
foreknowledge, with the ability of God to tell in advance what would happen to his people. Nearly 200 years in
advance this prophecy recorded the name of one not yet born who would conquer Babylon and liberate the
Jews. Its fulfillment would definitely prove that it was of divine origin. It was not Isaiahs estimate of the future,
but, as he himself wrote, this is what Jehovah has said. (Isa 45:1) Ascribing the writing of this portion of Isaiah
to a writer in Cyrus time would still not solve the problem for the critics. Why not? Because this portion of the
book also foretold in detail events in the earthly life and ministry of the Messiah, Jesus Christthings even
farther in the future. The fulfillment of these prophecies seals the prophecy of Isaiah as divinely inspired and not
a collection of the works of impostors."

47 | P a g e

19.2

This prophetic Bible book offers hope of a better future. It is full of the promise of a restored Paradise and
restored mankind made possible by the sacrificial death of the future Messiah.

The fact that many of the prophecies in the book saw fulfillment, despite efforts of the followers of Documentary
Hypotheses to discredit its divine inspiration, makes my faith stronger that a God exists in the invisible heavens
that declares his name to be Jehovah, and is interested to restore mankind to a better life.

Who will not be encouraged to read the following prophecies of better times, or what the Bible calls Paradise
Earth restored

"And no resident will say, I am sick". (Isaiah 33: 24 New American Standard Bible)

"Then the eyes of the blind will be opened so that they can see, and the ears of the deaf will be opened so that
they can hear. Crippled people will dance like deer, and those who cannot speak now will use their voices to sing
happy songs." (Isaiah 35: 5,6 Easy to Read Version Bible)

"Then wolves will live at peace with lambs, and leopards will lie down in peace with young goats. Calves, lions,
and bulls will all live together in peace. A little child will lead them. Bears and cattle will eat together in peace,
and all their young will lie down together and will not hurt each other. Lions will eat hay like cattle." (Isaiah 11: 6,7
Easy to Read Version Bible)

"They will build houses and inhabit them; they will also plant vineyards and eat their fruit. They will not build and
another inhabit, they will not plant and another eat; for as the lifetime of a tree, so will be the days of My people."
(Isaiah 65: 21,22 New American Standard Bible)

These promises run across the so-called three books of Isaiah (1-39), (40-55) and (56-66). Bible critical scholars
recognize this unity of theme despite their insistence in three authors for the book. They invent theories to
explain their disparities and contradictions.

How can we trust that these prophecies will come true? Because other prophecies from the book of Isaiah has
already saw fulfillment. This is one reason why critical Bible scholars wanted to divide the book into three and
penned by three authors. They made it appear that the prophecy was actually real history given a spin as
prophecy, or a so-called prophecy after the fact.

But they are dead wrong. When Isaiah prophesied that the city of Babylon will no longer be inhabited ever, the
prophecy was fulfilled long after the writer disappeared from the earth. Today, the city is still in ruins, completely
uninhabited. (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-
DSw9sx025MA/UTsAoz9EyQI/AAAAAAAAAs8/M5L2rdQ0bs0/s1600/1James+Gordon+Flickr+CC+COM.jpg)

There is no way this could be discredited. It is a clear proof of prophecy fulfilled:

"Babylon will never be inhabited again. It will remain empty for generation after generation." (Isaiah 13: 20 New
Living Translation Bible)

The prophet also prophesied of the sufferings of the Messiah when he arrives. And it happened exactly as he
prophesied about it

48 | P a g e

"People made fun of him, and even his friends left him. He was a man who suffered a lot of pain and sickness.
We treated him like someone of no importance, like someone people will not even look at but turn away from in
disgust.

The fact is, it was our suffering he took on himself; he bore our pain. But we thought that God was punishing him,
that God was beating him for something he did. But he was being punished for what we did. He was crushed
because of our guilt. He took the punishment we deserved, and this brought us peace. We were healed because
of his pain." (Isaiah 53: 3-5)

The book of Isaiah provides us solid reason to believe in God's prophecies of better times ahead, a time when
the planet Earth is restored back to Paradise.

49 | P a g e

20. JEREMIAH

Jeremiah is personally the most intriguing book I ever did research on so far of the books of the Old Testament
or the Hebrew Scriptures. Why? For one, I noticed that there is little information presented on the book "All
Scriptures" on the introduction compared to other books. But, the "Insight" book provided the new information
perhaps not available to the authors of the "All Scriptures" book at the time.

What are these new information? A key characteristic of the book is that it was not written in chronological order.
The kings covered by the book were Josiah and his three sons (Jehoahaz, deposed by Pharaoh and replaced by
his brother Jehoiakim who was deposed by Nebuchadnezzar who installed Jehoiakim's son Jehoiachin who also
rebelled, and was replaced by Nebuchadnezzar by another son of Josiah, uncle of Jehoiachin, Zedekiah). This is
evident if one reviews the outline from the "All Scriptures" book which presents the book chapter-by-chapter.

However, the "Insight" presents the outline differently, sticking to what the reference identified as the topics of
Jeremiah.

Another key characteristic brought up by "Insight" is that two copies of the same book, one in Hebrew (Masoretic
Text) and one in Greek (Septuagint LXX), differed by 2,700 words. One article I found on the Net covered this
topic and identified those portion as the Jeremiah prophecies against the nations. The article concluded this way

"To summarize: The case has been made that most of the differences between the MT and the LXX's Vorlage of
Jeremiah are best explained as the work of a single individual, because they fall into a limited number of
categories and are applied with considerable regularity, if not complete consistency. This conclusion is supported
by the above analysis of the OAN (oracles against the nations) in relation to chap. Since a single scribe with
identifiable interests was responsible for the changes, these differences between the LXX's Vorlage and the MT
can legitimately be labeled "redactional." This description of the order and position of the MT's OAN as
redactional in nature does more than simply require modern scholars to make an editorial choice between rival
editions regarding their placement in modern Jeremiah commentaries and translations; it carries with it an
enhanced evaluation of the OAN's role within the book. The OAN should no longer be dismissed as a secondary
scribal addition, but should be taken into account in descriptions of the composition and editing of Jeremiah as
an integral part of the book's second edition, and perhaps its first. This, in turn, means that these oracles should
also be integrated into interpretations of the message of the book as a whole and given the attention which their
prominent positions in both the LXX and MT suggest they deserve."

"Insight" offers this explanation regarding the position of Bible scholars on this matter:

"The majority of scholars agree that the Greek translation of this book is defective, but that does not lessen the
reliability of the Hebrew text. It has been suggested that the translator may have had a Hebrew manuscript of a
different family, a special recension, but critical study reveals that this apparently was not the case."

I found another Net material that followed this thought process cited from "Insight":

"Since the Qumran text of Jeremiah was parallel in content and organization to the Septuagint version, here was
tangible evidence that at one time, for at least two centuries, a shorter, differently arranged version of the book
existed. Hence, variations from the Masoretic text in the Septuagint version of Jeremiah resulted not from
careless translation but from a radically different Hebrew text that the translators had before them. More
interested in scholarship than the defense of pet theories, Fitzmyer said this about the Cave Four discoveries:
Such ancient recensional forms of Old Testament books bear witness to an unsuspected textual diversity that
once existed; these texts merit far greater study and attention than they have been accorded till now. Thus, the
differences in the Septuagint are no longer considered the result of a poor or tendentious attempt to translate the
50 | P a g e

Hebrew into the Greek; rather they testify to a different pre-Christian form of the Hebrew text, (Ibid., p. 302,
emphasis added)."

Does this detract from the message of Jeremiah as a whole? Certainly not. The fulfillment of his divinely inspired
prophecies attest its authenticity.

The Appendix A3 of the 2013 New World Translation Bible brings up this fact - "While the Dead Sea Scrolls
contain some variations in wording, none of those variations affect the message itself." Then, it lays out the
process in layman's terms how textual criticism reconstructed and traced the original words of the Bible from the
many manuscript copies available.

The faithful and discreet slave has delivered in simple English to ordinary Bible readers what thousands of
scholars are doing in their work in textual criticism in figuring out the original words of the Bible by comparing the
variations across the ages, flushing out what turned out to be additions, spurious texts and keeping the
authentic.

For those who had the patience and interest to explore this tract, an often quoted book is available on the Net,
Sir Frederic Kenyon's "The Story of the Bible".

http://www.bible-researcher.com/kenyon/sotb.html

JW.org has an article from a February 15, 2001 The Watchtower magazine article that explains what this
development means (the Dead Sea Qumran Cave 4 scrolls made available publicly after several decades)

"Although the scrolls demonstrate that the Bible has not undergone fundamental changes, they also reveal that
to some extent there were different versions of Hebrew Bible texts used by Jews in the Second Temple period,
each with its own variations. Not all the scrolls are identical to the Masoretic text in spelling or wording. Some are
closer to the Greek Septuagint. Previously, scholars thought that the Septuagints differences might be the result
of mistakes or even deliberate inventions by the translator. Now the scrolls reveal that many of these differences
were actually due to variations in the Hebrew text. This may explain some cases in which early Christians quoted
Hebrew Scripture texts using wording different from the Masoretic text.Exodus 1:5; Acts 7:14.

Thus, this treasure trove of Biblical scrolls and fragments provides an excellent basis for studying the
transmission of the Hebrew Bible text. The Dead Sea Scrolls have confirmed the value of both the Septuagint
and the Samaritan Pentateuch for textual comparison. They provide an additional source for Bible translators to
consider for possible emendations to the Masoretic text. In a number of cases, they confirm decisions by the
New World Bible Translation Committee to restore Jehovahs name to places where it had been removed from
the Masoretic text."

The complete list can be found in the 1984 New World Translation Reference Bible in Appendix 1B.

51 | P a g e

21. DANIEL

And one of the exciting fields of study is the book of Daniel. After reading both sides of the debate, I re-visit
chapter 2 of the book "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy". The chapter is aptly titled, "Daniel- A Book on Trial".
It was an easy-to-absorb presentation of the current scholarly positions and why the camp of biblical higher
critics are wrong. It is also a sort of compilation of materials and updated information from the discussion on the
book of Daniel in "All Scriptures" and "Insight".

Many individuals who took the side of the higher critics were basically just repeating the arguments, citing on the
strength of the scholars as authority rather than on evidence.

How did the enemies of the Bible got their pet theories overthrown? Archaeology and Bible manuscripts.

The critics claim that Daniel was completed about 164 BC during the Maccabean period, a time when Alexander
the Great's Greek empire was already reduced to two competing kingdoms, one based in Syria, north of Israel,
and the the other based in Egypt, south of Israel.

However, Bible believing scholars accept at face value that the book was written in the 6th century as the book
claims.

21.1
One important bombshell against the Bible critics was the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. The manuscripts
were dated as far back as 250 BC. In an article entitled "New Light on the Book of Daniel from the Dead Sea
Scrolls", the author, Dr. Gerhard Hasel writes

"For those supporting the historical-critical date of the book of Daniel new issues are being raised. Since there is
a manuscript of Daniel that supposedly dates within 50 years of the autograph, is there enough time for the
supposed traditio-historical and redaction-critical developments allegedly needed for the growth of the book?
Supporters of the Maccabean dating hypothesis of Daniel will be hard put to explain all of this in their
reconstructions. To express it differently, do the early dates of the fragments from Cave 4 leave enough room for
the developments, editorial and redactional as well as others, that are so often proposed (e.g., Koch 1986:20
24)? The verdict seems to be negative, and an earlier date for Daniel than the second century is unavoidable."

21.2
Another point is that the book of Daniel was already in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures
(commonly known as Old Testament) known as the Septuagint LXX. When was the LXX produced? In the third
century! How can Jews translate a book that was yet to be produced in the 2nd century?

However, the critics would not accept defeat. Their revised position is that chapters 1-6 were written much earlier
(6th century) but the prophetic content (their main target to discredit) was later put in during the 2nd century.

This theory of multiple authors and editors fall apart with the unity of the book of Daniel recognized by most
scholars, even bible critics.

21.3
52 | P a g e

The other bombshell was the rejection of critics of the existence of Belshazzar, who according to the book of
Daniel was the last king of Babylon.

Archaeology came to the rescue of the book of Daniel. What is amazing about this discovery is that Greek
historians who lived so close to the time of Belshazzar - Herodotus (5th century) and Xenophon (4th century) -
don't know him. If the Jewish writer of the book of Daniel wrote it in the 2nd century, 400 years away, as claimed,
how come he knew Belshazzar but historians who are just 100 years away did not?

But the critics won't accept defeat. They still maintain that Daniel was wrong in two counts - describing
Belshazzar as the "last king" and the "son of" Nebuchadnezzar. They claim the truth was he was just a "crown
prince" and was really son of Nabonidus, not Nebuchadnezzar.

The book "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy" easily discounted this desperate position

"Neither the Hebrew nor the Aramaic language has words for grandfather or grandson; son of can mean
grandson of or even descendant of."

How about the position that Belshazzar was never king as claimed in the book of Daniel? The online resource,
JW.org, has this to say about an archaeological discovery under the subject "BELSHAZZAR"

"An archaeological discovery in northern Syria suggests why this may be the case. In 1979, a life-sized statue of
a ruler of ancient Gozan was unearthed. On its skirt were two inscriptions, one in Assyrian and the other in
Aramaicthe language of the Belshazzar account in Daniel. The two almost identical inscriptions had one
outstanding difference. The text in the imperial Assyrian language says that the statue was of the governor of
Gozan. The text in Aramaic, the language of the local people, describes him as king."

In the book "Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy", there is a picture of what is known as "The Verse Account of
Nabonidus" (there is a translation in Wikipedia for this cylinder) where Nabonidus, the father, entrusted the
kingship to his son, Belshazzar.

These alone are very strong defense that the book of Daniel is inspired by Jehovah God. Other online sources
have listed nearly a 100 minor details that bible critics continue to hold on to to discredit the book but were
shown to be baseless.

What does this mean for Bible readers? It means that the future that was revealed to Daniel is sure of fulfillment.

53 | P a g e

22. HOSEA

22.1

As my research into the Bible's story of its production, transmission, translation, and textual criticism, I have
learned many things from many references that enhanced greatly my appreciation for God's Word.
For example, only now did I appreciate why the English Bible's table of content is the way it is. When I open my
Bible, the Hebrew Scripture books (or popularly known as Old Testament) are grouped into the following

1. The Pentateuch (the five books of Moses)
2. Some historical books (from Joshua-Nehemiah)
3. Poetry books (Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Eccelsiastes, Song of Solomon)
4. The Major Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah/Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel)
5. The 12 Minor Prophets (Hosea-Malachi)

I found out that the original grouping was not like this. This grouping was based from the Greek translation of
the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) known as Septuagint (LXX). This translation was completed in the 2nd
century BC in Alexandria, Egypt.
In Palestine, the original Hebrew Bible was grouped differently. This is how the Hebrew Scriptures (the Old
Testament in original Hebrew) was grouped

1. The Law or in Hebrew Torah (or the Pentateuch)
2. The Prophets or Nevim (with thre sub-divisions)
a. The Former Prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuels and Kings)
b. The Latter Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel)
c. The 12 Minor Prophets (Hosea-Malachi)
3. The Writings or Ketuvim
a. Psalms, Proverbs and Job
54 | P a g e

b. The Scrolls (Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, and Esther)
c. Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, and Chronicles

In our present Bibles, our last OT book is Malachi (based on the Septuagint). In the Jewish Hebrew Bible, the
last book is Chronicles. I also noticed that Daniel was not in the list of the Prophets but in the Writings. As a
scroll, the 1 and 2 Samuels were one book, just like the 1 and 2 Kings were one book, as the 1 and 2 Chronicles
were.
This is an important context to understand Jesus' statement in Luke 11: 50 where he mentioned from Abel to
Zechariah. Abel is from the book of Genesis and Zechariah is from the book of Chronicles (2 Ch 24:20-22).
This context also helps understand another Jesus' statement in Luke 24:44 where he mentions the grouping as
the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms (first book in Writings).
Howevers, most Bibles today has dropped another set of books that were not recognized as originally part of
the Bible. These books are known as apocryphal books. The Hebrew Scriptures in original Hebrew does NOT
have them but the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (or Septuagint) does.
There were several apocryphal books some of which were added to the books of Jeremiah and Daniel. The
Christian Greek Scriptures (or New Testament) also has its own apocryphal books - Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of
Judas, and others.
These apocryphal books were recently hyped in the media as though they contain special messages and
knowledge that were arbitrarily removed from the Bible. But the fact is these books have literally removed
themselves out of the Bible because their content are inferior to the 66 books already accepted, recognized
and used by both the Jewish and Christian communities. This special discipline of determining what is and what
is not part of the Bible is called canon study.
Without a doubt, the 66 books we read from our Bible are the inspired ones because of their content, accuracy,
authenticity and truthfulness. And in my BIble reading, I have begun the last part of the Old Testament (based
from the Septuagint model), with the book of Hosea.

22.2

What stands out with me from reading the book of Hosea are two things which have been highlighted by many
references
1. Jehovah God's love for his people Israel
2. Worship acceptable to God is not based on rituals
55 | P a g e

In Hosea 2: 14, I was touched by the inspired expression Jehovah used to decribe his effort to regain
disobedient Israel
"But then I will win her back once again.
I will lead her into the desert
and speak tenderly to her there." (New Living Translation)

Here God is describing himself as a suitor and Israel the maiden whose favors he is trying to secure. God
contnues in verse 19
"I will make you my wife forever,
showing you righteousness and justice,
unfailing love and compassion."

How tender is the heavenly Father's love for humans, like the love of a future husband to his future wife! But,
alas, God's love was not returned. This was demonstrated by God using Hosea the prophet as a life drama.
Hosea's wife is Gomer who bore to him one son, Jezreel. But the next children were children out of adultery -
Loruhamah and Lo-ammi. Despite this, to demonstrate the Father's love to Israel, Jehovah God instructed the
prophet in 3: 1
"Go and love your wife again, even though she commits adultery with another lover. "
That must be a painful thing to do for Hosea. So it was to Jehovah God.
God told Israel what he wanted to happen (6:6)
"This is because I want faithful love,
not sacrifice.
I want people to know God,
not to bring burnt offerings." (Easy to Read Version)

The form of the verse above is an example of poetry often used by the prophets not just Hosea. It is a form of
parallelism where the two parallels are
56 | P a g e

This is because I want faithful love I want people to know God
not sacrifice not to bring burnt offerings

This declaration of Jehovah God belies the claim of the Northern Israelites (8:2)
"They yell out at me, My God, we in Israel know you!" (Easy to Read Version)

In another verse, God continues his counsel not to focus on rituals of worship (10:12)
"f you plant goodness, you will harvest faithful love.
Plow your ground, and you will harvest with the Lord.
He will come, and he will make goodness fall on you like rain." (Easy to Read Version)

In this other verse, Jehovah God let us feel his compassion and love (11:8) in a burst of poetry
"Ephraim, I dont want to give you up.
Israel, I want to protect you.
I dont want to make you like Admah.
I dont want to make you like Zeboiim.
I am changing my mind.
My love for you is too strong."

The Hebrew word used here for "love" is "nichumim". It also denotes compassion or mercy.
But, as we know despite the efforts of a loving God, Israel stood rebellious and experienced the day of
retribution. Admah and Zeboiim were cities that were destroyed with Sodom and Gomorrah.
I learned a lot about Jehovah God, our loving heavenly Father, from Hosea.

57 | P a g e

23. JOEL

23.1

This time around when I read the Bible, I pay attention to what textual critics call formula or phrases often
used and associated with specific Bible writer. Since I have now been reading into the section of the prophets, I
took notice of the formula or phrase the word of Jehovah that occurred.
I first saw this in Jeremiah (1:2) where it says the word of Jehovah occurred.
Again in Ezekiel (1:3) where it says the word of Jehovah occurred.
Again in Hosea (1:1) where it says the word of Jehovah occurred.
And so again in Joel, Micah, Zephaniah, Haggai and Zechariah. It is a formula associated with the prophets.
This tells me that what they are about to write are not their thoughts but Gods.
Based on Appendix A6 of the 2013 New World Translation Bible, the prophet Joel, serving in the South (Judah)
is contemporaneous with the prophets Jonah, who was in Nineveh, and Amos, as prophet in the North (Israel).
This is an important detail because the online encyclopedia Insight on the Scriptures has this to say about the
date that the book was completed
A date after the Babylonian exile would be indicated if Joel (2:32) quoted Obadiah (17). On the other hand, not
only Obadiah but even the much earlier prophet Amos (compare Joe 3:16 with Am 1:2) may have quoted from
Joel.
What struck me from my Bible reading of Joel are the following
1. The imagery of the locust attack
2. The day of Jehovah as illustrated by the valley of Jehoshaphat
The prophet Joel announces the day of Jehovah this way (1: 15)
Woe because of the day!
For the day of Jehovah is
near,
And it will come like a
destruction from the
Almighty!
58 | P a g e

And he repeats this in (2:1)
Let all the inhabitants of the
land tremble,
coming! It is near!

These proclamations were finalized at the last chapter with the valley of Jehoshaphat message
Crowds, crowds are in the
valley of the decision,
near in the valley of the
decision.

According to the book Keep Jehovahs Day in Mind, published by Jehovahs Witnesses, regarding this theme
and the prophets
In reading the 12 prophets, you will find that they all, directly or indirectly, spoke of the day of
Jehovah. Thus, before considering in the following chapters the valuable information that these
prophets delivered, think of the recurring theme: the day of Jehovah. Six of the prophets directly used
that expression or similar terms. Joel graphically described the great and fear-inspiring day of
Jehovah. (Joel 1:15; 2:1, 2, 30-32) Amos told the Israelites to get ready to meet their God, for the day
of Jehovah would be one of darkness. (Amos 4:12; 5:18) Later, Zephaniah spoke the words quoted in
paragraph 1. And near the time of the destruction of Jerusalem, Obadiah warned: The day of Jehovah
against all the nations is near.Obadiah 15.

One imagery that reminds of another prophets work is found in (3: 18)
Out of the house of Jehovah
a spring will flow

Joels vision predates that of Ezekiel and later in the book of the Apocalypse.
59 | P a g e

A language similar to Hosea can be found in this verse where the prophet promotes spirituality rather than just
ritual of worship (2: 13)
Rip apart your hearts,
and not your garments,
And return to Jehovah
your God.
For he is compassionate
and merciful, slow to
anger and abundant in
loyal love.
And he will reconsider the
calamity.

Ripping apart the garment is an ancient custom of expressing sadness and grief. Here the prophet Joel is
emphasizing the spiritual rather than the physical expression of grief.
In the Christian Greek Scriptures (or New Testament), this theme recurs again the proclamation that the day
of the Lord is near. More information can be gleaned from this source about this topic in the New Testament
http://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/bible-teach/are-we-living-in-the-last-
days/#?insight[search_id]=452ec8ea-9854-461b-9961-ee6e001a4430&insight[search_result_index]=0

60 | P a g e

24. Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah.

24.1

A common formula or phrase found in the books of the prophets is "this is what Jehovah says". This formula
appears in various forms, as illustrated by the following examples

"this is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah says" (Amos 3:8; 5:3; Obadiah 1:1; Isaiah 49: 22; Ezekiel 3:27; 5:7;
6:11; 7:5; 11:16, 17; 12:10, 28; 13:8, 20; 14:6)

"this is what Jehovah the God of armies, Jehovah says" (Amos 5: 16)

"this is what the Sovereign Lord, Jehovah of armies, says" (Isaiah 22: 15)

"this is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, says" (Isaiah 30: 15)

"this is what Jehovah the God of Israel says" (Isaiah 37:21; 25: 15; Jeremiah 32: 36; 33: 4; 34: 2, 13; 42: 9; 45:
2)

"this is what Jehovah of armies, the God of Israel says" (Jeremiah 7:3, 21; 16: 9; 19:3; 27:4; 29:4; 31: 12; 35: 19;
39: 16; 44: 11)

"this is what Jehovah of armies says" (Jeremiah 9: 17; 23: 15, 16; 25: 32; 27: 19; 33: 12)

"this is what Jehovah, the God of armies, the God of Israel, says" (Jeremiah 35: 17)

The list below reflect the titles accompanying God's pronouncements, identifying a specific aspect of Himself

1. Sovereign Lord
2. Holy One of Israel
3. God of Israel
4. God of armies

The theme of God being chief sovereign is common among all the prophets but notably Ezekiel was consistent in
associating this with God. Only Isaiah up to this point identifies Jehovah as Holy One of Israel. And Jeremiah
was consistent in addressing Jehovah as God of armies or Jehovah of armies.

I will make it a further assignment to explore the significance of such associations with respect to the message
they deliver. Jehovah God has chosen to identify himself with specific aspect of his personality for a reason to
each prophet and with a specific message and a specific reaction or reception is expected by God.

61 | P a g e

24.2

1. The expression "Sovereign Lord Jehovah" is a translation from the Hebrew of "Adhonai Yehwih". In the Old
Testament, it appears 285 times according to the online encyclopedia "Insight". That reference talks about God's
supreme authority "Jehovah God is the Sovereign of the universe (sovereign of the world, Ps 47:9, Mo) by
reason of his Creatorship, his Godship, and his supremacy as the Almighty. (Ge 17:1; Ex 6:3; Re 16:14) He is
the Owner of all things and the Source of all authority and power, the Supreme Ruler in government. (Ps 24:1;
Isa 40:21-23; Re 4:11; 11:15) The psalmist sang of him: Jehovah himself has firmly established his throne in the
very heavens; and over everything his own kingship has held domination. (Ps 103:19; 145:13) "

And with respect to the Hebrew word, the same reference writes

"The ending ai added to the Hebrew word adhohn is a different form of the plural of excellence. When
Adhonai appears without an additional suffix in Hebrew, it is used exclusively of Jehovah and indicates that he
is the Sovereign Lord. According to The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (1986, Vol. 3, p. 157), the
form highlights the power and sovereignty of Yahweh as Lord. Its use by men in addressing him suggests
submissive acknowledgment of that great fact.Ge 15:2, 8; De 3:24; Jos 7:7."

2. The expression "Holy One of Israel" is used 25 times by the prophet Isaiah to Jehovah God. It was in the
writings of Isaiah that one reads the vision extolling Jehovah as holy three times.

3. The reference to Jehovah as the "God of Israel" have been taken by some Bible scholars as an indication that
Jehovah is a tribal god. In May 2001 issue of the Awake! magazine, the following was cited

"This expression has led some to believe that he was merely a local tribal god whom the Hebrews either
borrowed from another culture or invented for themselves. [Jehovah] began life as a very aggressive tribal deity
of the Israelites, claims Karen Armstrong, writer of the book A History of God. Later, the prophets of Israel . . . ,
in about the seventh and sixth centuries B.C., made this tribal God a symbol for the absolutely indescribable
reality."

It continues the point

"The Bible acknowledges the intimate association of Jehovah with the Israelite nation. But this is no reason to
consider him a mere tribal god. The Christian apostle Paul asked: Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also
of people of the nations? Pauls clear answer? Yes, of people of the nations also. (Romans 3:29) Who was the
God that Paul referred to? Well, in this same letter to the Romans, the name Jehovah appears 19 times. The
apostle, quoting the ancient Hebrew prophet Joel, noted that not just the Jews but everyone who calls on the
name of Jehovah will be saved.Romans 10:13; Joel 2:32.

4. The expression "God of armies" is expounded on by the same reference

"Jehovah is a manly person of war, the God of armies, and mighty in battle. (Ex 15:3; 2Sa 5:10; Ps 24:8, 10;
Isa 42:13) Not only has he the right as Creator and Supreme Sovereign of the universe but he is also obligated
by justice to execute or authorize execution of the lawless, to war against all obstinate ones who refuse to obey
his righteous laws. Jehovah was therefore just in wiping out the wicked at the time of the Flood, in destroying
Sodom and Gomorrah, and in bringing destruction upon Pharaohs forces.Ge 6:5-7, 13, 17; 19:24; Ex 15:4, 5;
compare 2Pe 2:5-10; Jude 7."

62 | P a g e

From the book "Draw Closer to Jehovah" it writes about this title

"Nearly three hundred times in the Hebrew Scriptures and twice in the Christian Greek Scriptures, God is given
the title Jehovah of armies. (1 Samuel 1:11) As Sovereign Ruler, Jehovah commands a vast army of angelic
forces. (Joshua 5:13-15; 1 Kings 22:19) The destructive potential of this army is awesome."

When Isaiah identified God as the Sovereign Lord, Jehovah of armies, God was declaring a judgment against
Shebna,

"I will depose you from your position and throw you out of your service."

Compare with Jeremiah, the judgment pronouncement from God who identified himself as "Jehovah of armies,
the God of Israel" with

"Reform your ways and your actions, and I will allow you to keep residing in this place."

In another strong condemnation, Jeremiah introduces God's judgment as coming from "Jehovah of armies" these
words

"Here I am making them (the false prophets) eat wormwood, and giving them poisoned water to drink. For from
the prophets of Jerusalem apostasy has spread throughout the land."

Most of the prophets have proclaimed condemnation against several nations, Bible scholars call this "oracles to
the nations".

Of the prophets, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Amos were the main prophets. They delivered condemnation against
many nations and peoples - Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Syria, Tyre (Phoenicia), Edom, Ammon, Moab, Israel
(North) and Judah (South).

Other prophets were more focused on their judgment proclamations. Obadiah prophesied only against Edom.
Nahum, Zephaniah and Micah mainly against Assyria and Judah/Israel.

Today, the fulfillment of their prophecies are testified by archaeology of the long gone, disappeared civilizations.

63 | P a g e

25. AMOS

In my effort to understand the prophecies and judgments in Amos, I consulted for background the Appendix A6
of the 2013 NWT Bible and saw that his prophesying was way before the fall of Samaria and Judah or pre-exilic.
Yet, in 1:6, Amos passed judgment on Gaza for turning over a group of exiles over to Edom. A check on the
JW.org web site yielded this information, citing the online encyclopedia, "Insight"
"Although the exiles are not specifically identified as Hebrews, likely the allusion is to captives taken by the
Philistines in raids on Judah.Compare 2Ch 21:16, 17; Joe 3:4-6."
The Chronicles account reports the incursions of Philistines into Israelite territory and Joel, a contemporary
prophet of Amos, reports judgments against the Philistines invasions into Israelite territory. That makes sense.
In 1:9, Tyre was chastised for "not remembering the covenant of brothers". A check again on the JW.org web
site yielded for me this information
"Why was Tyre destroyed? On account of three revolts of Tyre, . . . on account of their handing over a
complete body of exiles to Edom, and because they did not remember the covenant of brothers. And I will send
a fire onto the wall of Tyre. (Amos 1:9, 10) In earlier times, King Hiram of Tyre showed goodwill toward David
and supplied materials for Solomons temple. Solomon made a covenant with Hiram and gave him cities in
Galilee. Hiram called Solomon my brother. (1 Kings 5:1-18; 9:10-13, 26-28; 2 Samuel 5:11) When Tyre did
not remember the covenant of brothers and sold some of Gods people into slavery, Jehovah took note of
Tyres dealings."
This was citing the information from the book "Keep Jehovah's Day in Mind".
Many of his other prophetic declarations are not yet confirmed today from the point of view of archaeology
such as the reference to Moab burning "the bones of the kings of Edom for lime" (2:1)
I found the judgments on parents against their attitude towards the choice of their sons to be Nazirites and
prophets illustrative of similar attitudes today. Amos wrote that Jehovah God raised up some of the sons to be
Nazirites and prophets but it was the parents who kept the sons from taking up the call. Amos writes (2:11,12)
"But you kept giving the
Nazirites wine to drink.
And you commanded the
prophets: "You must not
prophesy."
Apparently materialism has captured the hearts of the prosperous Israelites, enjoying what Amos referred to as
"houses of hewn stone" and "beds of ivory". JW.org pointed me to an article on the Highlights of Amos, and
commented on this verse
64 | P a g e

"We should not discourage hardworking pioneers, traveling overseers, missionaries, or members of the Bethel
family by urging them to give up their full-time service for a so-called normal way of life. On the contrary, we
should encourage them to keep up their good work."
This comment was actually sourced from a previous study article of the Watchtower dated Nov. 15, 2004.
Another important verse familiar to me is in (3:7) where Jehovah God does not go ahead and does whatever He
wanted without first coordinating with his prophets. This has been God's pattern since the days of Abraham. In
Genesis, Moses wrote about Jehovah (18:17)
"Am I keeping hidden from Abraham what I am going to do?"
Then, later, Jehovah discloses his purposes regarding Sodom and Gomorrah.
The messages of Amos are just like his contemporary, the prophet Joel, in encouraging the Israelites to return
to Jehovah (5:6)
"Search for Jehovah, and
keep living,
So that he does not burst
out like a fire on the house
of Joseph."

The same global educational work today is carried out by Jehovah's Witnesses voluntarily in various ways to
help bring back people back to God.
Otherwise, the day of Jehovah will be upon them. Amos describes the day of Jehovah this way (5:18, 19)
"It will be darkness, and not
light.
It will be like a man who
flees from a lion and is
confronted by a bear.
And when he enters his
house and leans his hand
against the wall, a snake
bites him."

65 | P a g e

Just like other prophets, Amos faced opposition. This is the only portion that contained prose in his prophetic
book. Most are in poetic format which is presented in the 2013 NWT Bible, a major change from the 1984 NWT
edition.
Amos said that he was not a prophet or a son of a prophet.
One article made this commentary on the different English translations and what they imply
That raises a translation question. The question has to do with what Amos is saying here and how are we to
understand what he is saying, which brings up an ambiguity in the Hebrew text. Theres no verb there. Amos
answered and said to Amaziah, lo nabi anni. Literally, Not prophet I. Not prophet I and not son of a
prophet I. Now if you look at translations of that, you have to supply the verb to be. Do you supply the verb
to be in the present tense or the past tense? The New American Standard is present tense. I am no
prophet, neither am I a prophets son, but I am a herdsman and a gatherer of sycamore fruit. But if you look
at the King James and the NIV they translate it past tense with the verb to be. For the supplied verb I was no
prophet, neither was I a prophets son, but I was a herdsman, a gatherer of sycamore fruit. The Berkley
Version has both there. I am neither a prophet nor a son of a prophet but I was a herdsman, a gatherer of a
sycamore tree. Whats the difference in meaning in what Amos is saying if you translate it with the present
tense or the past tense? That may appear to be inconsequential in what they were saying. I think it makes a
significant difference in meaning. Those who suggest a past tense like King James and NIV understand Amos to
be saying he has not made himself a prophet, but God called him to the task. I was not a prophet, I wasnt a
prophets son, I was a herdsman, and then you go down to verse 15, But the LORD took me from tending the
flock and the LORD said to me, Go, prophesy. So I wasnt a prophet but the Lord called me and I became a
prophet. Thats basically what he says. So Amos is not denying hes a prophet, hes only saying I wasnt that
originally. Originally I was a farmer.
But if you translate it present tense that puts a different meaning on what Amos is saying. Remember,
Amos is really responding to that statement of the priest in verse 12: Earn your bread there. Go back to the
land of Judah. Earn your bread there and do your prophesying there. Amos isnt receiving anything, and hes
responding to that. If you translate it in the present tense sense, I am not a prophet, I am not a prophets son
I think then what Amos is saying to Amaziah is, I am not a prophet in the sense that you understand. That is
I am not a prophet in the sense that I am somebody who prophesies in order to earn my livelihood. As far as
Amaziah is concerned, thats what a prophet is: somebody whos in it for what he can get from it. But Amos
responds I think by saying, I am not that kind of, prophet, and Im not the son of a prophet. Im not the
member of one of these prophetic companies. Because I dont need to do that for my livelihood. I am a
herdsman. Im a gatherer or grower of sycamore figs; I can sustain myself. I dont prophesy for material
advantage. But the Lord came to me and said, Go take this message up there, go prophesy. Now if you
translate it like that then in that present tense I think what is going on here is Amaziah has made this statement
that clearly presupposes that prophets are in the business for money. Go back to the land of Judah. Earn your
bread there and do your prophesying there. And Amos responds, Im not that. Im a herdsman, I dont need
to earn my living by prophesying. I dont prophesy for monetary gain.
Now if thats the way you read this it suggests a couple of things. I think it suggests that in those days
prophesying had come to be understood as a certain type of profession or livelihoodseems to me thats what
Amaziah understood there. Secondly, I think its suggesting that Amos wanted to make it very clear: Im not
that kind of a prophet. Amos is not denying hes a prophet in the proper sense of the word, but what he is
saying is, I have nothing to do with the prophets with which both he and Amaziah were familiar with: these
kinds of people that prophesied what the king or somebody else wanted to hear in order to get whatever
66 | P a g e

benefit they could derive from that.
Here the NIV uses the past tense. There is whats called the TNIV out now if any of you are familiar
with thatthat is a revision of the NIV. It still is past, but the TNIV reads, I was neither a prophet, nor the
disciple of a prophet. In other words I was neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet, the prophets son. It
now says, I was neither a prophet nor the disciple of a prophet, but I was a shepherd, and I took care of
sycamore fig trees. So theyre still in the past tense with the TNIV.
The Jewish Publication Society version is present tense. Its like the NASB. And I think thats to be
preferred. It says, I am not a prophet and I am not a prophets disciplethey use that same expression,
prophets disciple. I am a cattle breeder. There ishave any of you ever come across the Oxford
University Press Jewish Study Bible? Theres a Jewish Study Bible out much like the NIV Study Bible but from a
Jewish perspective published by Oxford Press. The note in the Jewish Study Bible which uses the Jewish
Publication Society Version for the translation says, Amos maintains he is not a professional prophet that he
may be hired for his services and thus bought. Now I think they got it right. In verse 12 when he says, I am
not a prophet nor the son of a prophet, Amos maintains he is not a professional prophet who may be hired for
his services and thus bought. So the canonical prophets are distinguished from these companies. You have no
reference of any of the canonical prophets being a part of one of these companies and it seems to me that
Amos is making this explicit. He does not want to be a family with the company of the prophets or with a kind
of prophet who was in it for profit.

And just like the other prophets that will follow after him, his prophecy ended with promise of restoration, the
bringing together again of the captives back into Israel.
An earthquake was mentioned by Amos before he started prophesying. An online article, "The Scientific and
Scriptural Impact of Amos' Earthquake" by Steven Austin, Ph. D, says about this earthquake
"Earthquake evidence is seen prominently at Hazor, Israel's largest ancient city. In excavations beginning in
1955 by archaeologist Yigael Yadin, twenty-two successive cities were discovered to have been built on top of
each other. Excavations in Hazor's Stratum VI revealed tilted walls, inclined pillars, and collapsed houses. In the
Iron Age building called "Ya'el's House" within Stratum VI, objects of daily use were found beneath the fallen
ceiling. General southward collapse within Stratum VI argues that the earthquake waves were propagated from
the north. After more than 50 years of excavations at Hazor, earthquake damage continues to be revealed in
even some of the strongest architecture."
The earthquake is estimated to be intensity 7.8 or more likely 8.2 citing the International Geology Review
article.

67 | P a g e

26. OBADIAH

Obadiah was a prophet during the fall of Jerusalem. Samaria has already fallen and is already history. His is one
of the shortest prophetic writing with one chapter and focused only on the judgment on Edom. Many other
prophets before him, already prophesied against Edom - contemporaries Joel and Amos, and Obadiah
contemporaries Ezekiel and Jeremiah.
He writes about Edom (1:3)
"The presumptuousness of
your heart has deceived
you,
You who reside in the
retreats of the crag.
Dwelling in the height,
saying in your heart,
'Who will bring me down to
the earth?"

And Obadiah writes about the reason (1:10)
"Because of the violence done
to your brother Jacob."

Amos wrote about this too (1: 11, 12)
"Because he pursued his own
brother with the sword,
And because he refused to
show mercy."

Obadiah details some of the things that Edomites did against the Israelites during the fall of Jerusalem - they
gloated over the fall, they participated in ransacking the wealth, he slaughtered the escapees, and handed over
68 | P a g e

some of them to the Babylonians.
The judgment has been passed for Edom (1: 18)
"And there will be no survivor
of the house of Esau."
Just like the other prophets, restoration prophecy is also included for Judah.

Edom is an important study and their historical confirmation is a source of conflict between the Minimalist
archaeologists (like Israel Finkelstein) and the Maximalists (Bible believing) archaeologists. Just as the Graf-
Wellhausen critical scholars found their theory lost its shine, the Minimalists continue to face refutations from
new finds.
One archaeological discovery reported in 2009 was hailed as a milestone in proving the Bible's authenticity and
historicity with respect to Edom. In one news report from The Globe and Mail, it says about the discovery in the
site Khirbat en-Nahas
"They firmly established that occupation of the site began in the 11th century BC and a monumental fortress
was built in the 10th century BC, supporting the argument for existence of an Edomite state at least 200 years
earlier than had been assumed.
What is particularly exciting about their find is that it implies the existence of an Edomite state at the time the
Bible says King David and his son Solomon ruled over a powerful united kingdom of Israel and Judah."
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/archeologist-unearths-biblical-controversy/article868167/
In another report, the Minimalist reponse was given
"Israel Finkelstein, an archaeologist at Tel Aviv University and a leading proponent of the low-chronology
model, has said the new research does "not shed new light on the question of state formation in Edom." He
argues that perhaps the copper operations were controlled by chieftains in Beersheba, to the west, and
supplied material for urban centers west and north of Edom.
Levy and Najjar said their excavations showed that "this image of external control is not convincing."
http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/21_edom.html
Thomas Levy, the lead archaeologist of the site Khirbat en-Nahas (KEN) responded to criticisms against his work
"From our understanding, this single seal impression (referring to the basis for the likes of Finkeltein to claim
that Edom does not exist on the time the Bible says they did-comment mine), which can apparently be dated
absolutely based on Assyrian epigraphic data, served as the single chronological anchor for dating the Iron Age
pottery of Edom. We would suggest that one anchor is not sufficient and that radiocarbon dating projects, like
the one at KEN can provide a more objective framework for establishing the much needed chronological ladder
to test theories about history and anthropology in Edom."
http://www.wadiarabahproject.man.ac.uk/titlepage/news/Antiquity/Response-KEN.pdf
69 | P a g e

That was the source of the controversy here, the use of radiocarbon dating. Levy cited this in his technical
report
"The excavations at Khirbat en-Nahas, the largest Iron Age copper production centre in the southern Levant,
have provided the first stratified radiocarbon dates from the Biblical region of Edom. "

70 | P a g e

27. JONAH

According to historical timeline as listed in the Appendix A6 of the 2013 NWT, Jonah appeared as a prophet just
after the lifetime services of Elijah and Elishah. He is one of the first prophets to write his "book" of all the
prophets after Moses in the Bible.
For some readers, the book of Jonah is an incredible story that it is easy to dismiss it as fiction rather than a
true story. The key issues are
1. Nineveh repenting on the call of a foreign prophet
2. The dimension of the city of Nineveh is exaggerated by Jonah
3. Jonah surviving inside a great fish

1. On Ninevites repenting, the JW.org has this to say
"Some critics think it incredible that the Ninevites, including the king, responded to Jonahs preaching. (Jon 3:5-
9) In this regard the remarks of commentator C. F. Keil are of interest: The powerful impression made upon
the Ninevites by Jonahs preaching, so that the whole city repented in sackcloth and ashes, is quite intelligible,
if we simply bear in mind the great susceptibility of Oriental races to emotion, the awe of one Supreme Being
which is peculiar to all the heathen religions of Asia, and the great esteem in which soothsaying and oracles
were held in Assyria from the very earliest times . . . ; and if we also take into calculation the circumstance that
the appearance of a foreigner, who, without any conceivable personal interest, and with the most fearless
boldness, disclosed to the great royal city its godless ways, and announced its destruction within a very short
period with the confidence so characteristic of the God-sent prophets, could not fail to make a powerful
impression upon the minds of the people, which would be all the stronger if the report of the miraculous
working of the prophets of Israel had penetrated to Nineveh.Commentary on the Old Testament, 1973, Vol.
X, Jonah 3:9, pp. 407, 408."
2. On Jonah walking for three days across Nineveh, the JW.org has this to say
"This Biblical description is not controverted by archaeological evidence. Observed Andr Parrot, Curator-in-
Chief of the French National Museums:
Just as today, that part of London which lies within its ancient boundary is very different from what is called
greater Londona term which includes the suburbs and denotes a much larger areaso it may be that
people who lived far away from Assyria understood by the word Nineveh what is now known as the Assyrian
triangle . . . , which stretches from Khorsabad in the north to Nimrud in the south, and, with an almost
unbroken string of settlements, covers a distance of some twenty-six miles. . . .
Felix Jones estimated that the population of Nineveh might have numbered 174,000 persons, and quite
recently, in his excavations at Nimrud, M. E. L. Mallowan discovered a stele of Ashurnazirpal on which it is
71 | P a g e

recorded that he invited to a banquet the fabulous number of 69,574 guests. Mallowan considers that, allowing
for foreigners, the population of Kalakh (Nimrud) might have been 65,000. But Nineveh is twice the area of
Nimrud, and thus it may be reckoned that the figure in Jonah 4.11 is indirectly confirmed.Nineveh and the
Old Testament, 1955, pp. 85, 86; see JONAH No. 1; JONAH, BOOK OF.
3. On Jonah getting swallowed by a "great fish", JW. org web site has this to say citing the online encyclopedia,
"Insight"
"Of course, it should be remembered that the Bible simply states that Jehovah appointed a great fish to
swallow Jonah, the kind of fish not being named. (Jon 1:17) There definitely are sea creatures capable of
swallowing a man, among them being the white shark and the sperm whale."
Another reference cited in the site said this
"Its mouth can be up to four feet [1.4 m] wide, easily capable of swallowing a man. But far from being a
ferocious predator of other large sea creatures, this gentle giant feeds on tiny plankton and small fish.
The whale sharks unusual digestive anatomy, reported National Geographic magazine, lends itself to Jonah
stories, referring to the Biblical incident about the prophet Jonah being swallowed by a great fish. Whale
sharks have a nonviolent way of getting rid of large objects of dubious digestibility they swallow
accidentally.Jonah 1:17; 2:10
The story of Jonah shows the merciful and compassionate aspect of Jehovah God's personality. He was willing
to continue using a prophet that went away from before him instead of doing the task he assigns, even
teaching him to be merciful as well.
It also illustrates how Jehovah God is not a tribal god, god only of the Israelites. He is the Sovereign Lord of all.
I also noticed that Jonah used the barest form of formula using "the word of Jehovah came to", without
combining it with other titles as the other prophets do. He uses the very basic "Jehovah said".

72 | P a g e

28. MICAH

The prophet Micah was contemporary of the prophets Hosea and Isaiah.
His prophecy opens with a judgment against Samaria (1:6)
"I will make Samaria a heap
of ruins in the field."

But the problem is not Israel (North) exclusively, Micah writes (1:9)
"The plague has spread to
the gate of my people,
to Jerusalem."

So the judgments were to both Israel (North) and Judah (South).
He prophesied during the reign of one of the wicked kings of Judah, Ahaz. JW.org citing an online encyclopedia,
"Insight", writes about Ahaz
"Despite the fact that Isaiah, Hosea, and Micah all actively prophesied during Ahaz time, rank idolatry marked
his reign. He not only allowed it among his subjects but also personally and regularly engaged in pagan
sacrificing, to the extent of offering up his own son(s) in fire in the Valley of Hinnom. (2Ki 16:3, 4; 2Ch 28:3, 4)"

The leaders of Israel and Judah were described by Micah as (3:11)
"Her leaders judge for a
bribe,
Her priests instruct for a
price,
And her prophets practice
divination for money."

73 | P a g e

Thus, the resulting judgment (3:12)
"Zion will be plowed up as
a field,
Jerusalem will become
heaps of ruins."

But, Micah has beautiful prophecies too about restoration of worship "in the final part of the days". He shares
with his contemporary Isaiah the words below
"They will beat their swords
into plowshares
And their spears into
pruning shears.
Nation will not lift up sword
against nation.
Nor will they learn war
anymore."

It is heart-warming to see this prophecy fulfilled today with lovers of Jehovah from various nations.
Micah also contributed to one of the many Messianic prophecy. His was the prophecy of the birthplace of the
Messiah, in Bethlehem.
Just like the other prophets, Micah promoted spirituality over rituals. It was his words (6: 8) we find the
following
"He has told you, O man,
what is good.
And what is Jehovah
requiring of you?
Only to exercise justice,
to cherish loyalty,
74 | P a g e

And to walk in modestly
with your God!"

His words are also alluded to by Jesus when he later spoke about "a man's enemies are the men of his own
household" (7:6).
Micah also owned the powerful picture of God's forgiveness in his words (7:19)
"He will again show us
mercy; he will conquer
our errors.
You will throw all their
sins into the depths of
the sea."

One article citing an archaeological study of the city of Hazor, citing "Socioeconomic stratification in an Israelite
city: Hazor VI as a test case", Levant 31, no. 1 (1999) pages 179-190, writes
"Avraham Faust believes that archeological evidence found at Hazor Stratum VI indicates that there was
socioeconomic stratification in 8th Century BCE Israel. By analyzing houses using various criteria, such as area
of the houses, quality of construction, use of common walls, and location of the dwellings, Faust is able to
identify three types of structures that existed in this village. The first is the luxurious buildings that were
inhabited by the rich. The second type is the typical Israelite four room structure, which were likely the houses
of the bourgeois. The last type is the small, poorly constructed houses, built without any cohesive construction
plan, and maximizing the use of every single wall and room, likely inhabited by a poor class. Faust proposes the
existence of three social classes in Hazor, each living in their own area with their own type of house."

75 | P a g e

29. NAHUM

Nahum would be remembered most for his prophecy against Nineveh, the capital of the Assyrian empire.
Samaria has long fallen at the hands of the Assyrians. Judah is experiencing the dominance of this powerful
empire with Manasseh even captured and brought to Babylon.
Nahum has internal data to based the date of his writing although the Graf-Wellhausen scholars would like to
put him just like the others in post-exilic time. Regarding this data, JW.org cites this
"Sometime after the Egyptian city of No-amon (Thebes) suffered humiliating defeat in the seventh century
B.C.E. (3:8-10), the book of Nahum was committed to writing, being completed before Ninevehs foretold
destruction came in 632 B.C.E."
It would have been comforting to hear from Nahum at this time word like the ones below (1:7)
"Jehovah is good, a strong-
hold in the day of distress.
He is mindful of those
seeking refuge in him."

And with the reassuring words below (1: 15) regarding their future relative to Assyria
"Look! On the mountains are
the feet of one bringing
good news,
The one proclaiming peace.
Celebrate your festivals,
O Judah, pay your vows,
For the worthless one wo;;
never pass through you
again.
He will utterly be destroyed."

Nahum described some of the ways Nineveh will be destroyed (3: 13, 15)
76 | P a g e

"Fire will consume the bars
of your gates...
Even there fire will consume
you."
JW.org adds this detail about the fulfillment of Nahum's prophecy
"Their prophecies were fulfilled when the combined forces of Nabopolassar the king of Babylon and of
Cyaxares the Mede besieged and captured Nineveh. The city was evidently subjected to burning, for many
Assyrian reliefs show damage or stain from fire and accompanying smoke. With reference to Nineveh, a
Babylonian chronicle reports: They carried off the vast booty of the city and the temple (and) *turned+ the city
into a ruin heap. (Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, by A. Grayson, 1975, p. 94; PICTURE, Vol. 1, p. 958) "
But the words of Nahum are bold in an era when the Assyrians don't take lightly blasphemy against their gods
and themselves. One article about them refers to an inscription on the palace walls
"One Particular relief would have caught his attention. On it, Elamite captives are shown being tortured. The
caption above stated, Mr. (blank) and Mr. (blank) spoke great insults against Assur, the god, my creator. Their
tongues I tore out, their skins I flayed (Russell 1999:180; Gerardi 1988:31). These two individuals are identified
in Ashurbanipals annals as Mannu-ki-ahhe and Nabuusalli (Russell 1999:163)."
http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2009/05/28/nahum2c-nineveh-and-those-nasty-assyrians.aspx#Article
Regarding their wealth this same site writes
"Nineveh was the Fort Knox of mid-seventh century BC Mesopotamia. On every Assyrian campaign they
removed the silver, gold and precious stones and other items from the cities they sacked. When they bragged
about the booty that was taken, silver and gold always topped the list. As an example, after the fall of No-Amon
(Thebes), Ashurbanipal bragged that he took:
Silver, gold, precious stones, the goods of his palace, all there was, brightly colored and linen garments, great
horses, the people, male and female, two tall obelisks...I removed from their positions and carried them off to
Assyria. Heavy plunder, and countless, I carried away from Ni *Thebes+ (Luckenbill 1989, 2:296, 778)."
This reminds us of the word of Nahum (2: 9)
"Plunder silver, plunder gold!
There is no end to the
treasures.
It is stocked with all sorts
77 | P a g e

of precious things."
Regarding lions and the mention of them in Nahum, the site comments
"The book of Nahum sets forth an ironic reversal of the Assyrian usage of the lion motif. Gordon Johnston has
observed.
"The extended lion metaphor in Nahum 2:1113 includes the two major varieties of the Neo-Assyrian lion
motif: the depiction of the Assyrian king and his warriors as mighty lions, and the royal lion hunt theme. While
the Assyrians kept these two motifs separate, Nahum dovetailed the two, but in doing so he also reversed their
original significance. While the Assyrian warriors loved to depict themselves as mighty lions hunting their prey,
Nahum pictured them as lions that would be hunted down. The Assyrian kings also boasted that they were
mighty hunters in royal lion hunts; Nahum pictured them as the lions being hunted in the lion hunt. By these
reversals Nahum created an unexpected twist on Assyrian usage. According to Nahum the Assyrians were like
lions, to be sure; however, not in the way that they depicted themselves; rather than being like lions on the
prowl for prey, the hunters would become the hunted! (2001:304)."

78 | P a g e

30. HABAKKUK

Habakkuk is one of those prophets that have freely asked Jehovah God a series of 'Why' questions. And JW.org
site infers from the internal text of the book of Habakkuk that the book was written before the fall of Jerusalem
in this way
"The statement Jehovah is in his holy temple (Hab 2:20) and the note that follows Habakkuk 3:19 (To the
director on my stringed instruments) indicate that Habakkuk prophesied before the temple built by Solomon in
Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 B.C.E. "
A key prophecy of Habakkuk begins with his mention of Chaldeans (1:6)
"For here I am raising up
the Chaldeans,
The ruthless and impetuous
nation.
They sweep through vasts
stretch of the earth
To seize home not theirs."
It is interesting to note that the Graf-Wellhausen scholars think the word "Chaldeans" is really a corruption and
some scholars from that camp think it should be the "Greeks" precisely because to them all OT books were
written during the Greek's domination of Palestine. But this has no evidence to back it up. This position was
criticized in one article in Biblica Vol. 8 No. 2 under the title "Chaldeans or Macedonians?: A Recent Theory on
the Prophecy of Habakkuk".
But before Habakkuk mentioned this, he already got a preview of how his countrymen will receive this, so (1:5)
"For something will happen
in your days
That you will not believe
even if it is told to you."

Jw.org citing the online encyclopedia, "Insight", has this to say
"On the other hand, in the early part of Jehoiakims reign, Judah was within the Egyptian sphere of influence (2Ki
23:34, 35), and this could also be a time when Gods raising up of the Chaldeans to punish the wayward
inhabitants of Judah would be to them an activity they would not believe, though it was related. (Hab 1:5, 6)
Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar defeated Pharaoh Necho at Carchemish in 625 B.C.E., in the fourth year of
King Jehoiakims reign. (Jer 46:2) So, Habakkuk may have prophesied and recorded the prophecy before that
79 | P a g e

event, possibly completing the writing thereof about 628 B.C.E. in Judah. The use of the future tense regarding
the Chaldean threat evidently indicates a date earlier than Jehoiakims vassalship to Babylon (620-
618 B.C.E.).2Ki 24:1."
One reference work, Expositor's Bible Commentary agrees
"Kleinert and Von Orelli date it before the battle of Carchemish, 605, in which the Chaldean Nebuchadrezzar
wrested from Egypt the Empire of the Western Asia, on the ground that after that Habakkuk could not have
called a Chaldean invasion of Judah incredible. [Habakkuk 1:5] But Kuenen, Driver, Kirkpatrick, Wildeboer, and
Davidson date it after Carchemish. To Driver it must be immediately after, and before Judah became alarmed at
the consequences to herself."

Habakkuk waited on Jehovah like a watchman for he says (2:1)
"And I will station myself
on the rampart.
I will keep watch to see
what he will speak by
means of me
And what I will reply when
I am reproved."

This is just before Jehovah God responded back on the vision of the Chaldeans (2:3)
"For the vision is yet for its
appointed time,
And it is rushing toward its
end, and it will not lie.
Even if it should delay,
keep in expectation of it!
For it will without fail come
true.
It will not be late!"

And as we know by 607 BC, Jerusalem was destroyed by the Babylonians (Chaldeans). A 1977 Watchtower
80 | P a g e

article comments
"There was no question about the fact that the Chaldeans would be the means for executing judgment upon
unfaithful Judah. What had been revealed to Habakkuk was panting or eagerly moving forward to its
fulfillment."

There are many important Bible truths found in his book
1. Jehovah does not die (1:12)
2. The righteous will live by his faithfulness (2:4)
3. He shares the word of Isaiah (2:14)

And despite fearing the approaching trouble, Habakkuk who lives byhis faith, resolved to trust in Jehovah no
matter what. This is an important attitude that Christians today needs to learn to adopt as per biblical prophecies
we are already living in a period of time the Bible calls "the last days". When this "last days" end, the "day of
Jehovah" begins. Just like in Habakkuk, the vision of the "day of Jehovah" will without fail come true.

81 | P a g e

31. ZEPHANIAH

Zephaniah and Nahum were probably contemporaries at a time when the Assyrians are declining from the
world scene and before King Josiah has started his reform. At this time, the kingdom of Israel (North) is already
gone, destroyed by the Assyrians.
Of all the prophets, Zephaniah traces his lineage from the royal family of Judah.
His pronouncement of judgments exposes the spiritual condition in Judah (1:4)
"And I will wipe out from
this place every vestige
of Baal,
The name of the foreign-god
priests along with the
priests."

Zephaniah then declares the "day of Jehovah" (1:7)
"Be silent before the Sover-
eign Lord Jehovah, for the
day of Jehovah is near."

and he adds (1:12)
"At that time I will carefully
search Jerusalem with
lamps,
And I will call to account
the complacent ones,
who say in their heart,
'Jehovah will not do good.,
and he will not do bad.'"
82 | P a g e

Towards the end of his book, Zephaniah lists some of the evil things, Judean leaders are doing against Jehovah
(3:3, 4)
"Her princes within her are
roaring lions.
Her judges are wolves in the
night;
They do not leave even a bone
to gnaw until morning.
Her prophets are insolent,
treacherous men.
Her priests defile what is
holy.
They do violence to the law."

Zephaniah describes what the "day of Jehovah" will mean for those who rebel against God (1: 15)
"That day is a day of fury,
A day of distress and
anguish,
A day of storm and
desolation.
A day of darkness and
gloom,
A day of clouds, and thick
gloom."

83 | P a g e

Zephaniah noted Judean wealth, silver and gold, will not save them in that day. What then is the safe way? He
writes (2: 3)
"Seek Jehovah, all you meek
ones of the earth,
Who observe his righteous
decrees,
Seek righteousness, seek
meekness.
Probably you will be
concealed on the day
of Jehovah's anger."

Zephaniah also prophesied against specific peoples, including Moab, Ammon,Philistines, Ethiopians, and
Assyria. With respect to Assyria, he writes (2:13)
"He will stretch out his hand
toward the north and
destroy Assyria,
And he will make Nineveh
desolate, as dry as a
desert."

His book ends with restoration prophecies just like the other prophets.
One of the most beautiful prophecy in his book is as follows (3:9)
"For then I will change the
language of the peoples
to a pure language,
So that all of them may call
on the name of Jehovah,
84 | P a g e

To serve him shoulder to
shoulder."

Some scholars, like Susan Pearson who wrote the article, "Zephaniah: A Plagiarist or a Skilled Orator?,
commented about the prophet
"What he lacked in grace and charm, he in some measure atoned for by the vigour and clarity of his speech. He
realized the approaching terror so keenly that he was able to present it vividly and convincingly to his hearers.
No prophet has made the picture of the day of Yahweh more real."
Her objective for writing this article was
"We will attempt to show that Zephaniah borrowed from other sources for legitimate reasons, not because he
did not know how to produce an original piece of effective communication, and that precisely by borrowing, he
succeeded in producing a masterful piece of communication."
At JW.org, citing the online encyclopedia, "Insight", this feature of Zephaniah's material was noted
"Often the thoughts expressed in this book find a parallel in other parts of the Bible. (Compare Zep 1:3 with Ho
4:3; Zep 1:7 with Hab 2:20 and Zec 2:13; Zep 1:13 with De 28:30, 39 and Am 5:11; Zep 1:14 with Joe 1:15; and
Zep 3:19 with Mic 4:6, 7.) It harmonizes completely with the rest of the Scriptures in emphasizing vital truths. For
example: Jehovah is a God of righteousness. (Zep 3:5; De 32:4) Although providing opportunity for repentance,
he does not indefinitely allow transgression to go unpunished. (Zep 2:1-3; Jer 18:7-11; 2Pe 3:9, 10) Neither silver
nor gold can deliver wicked persons in the day of Jehovahs fury. (Zep 1:18; Pr 11:4; Eze 7:19) To be favored
with divine protection, a person must conduct himself in harmony with Gods righteous judgments.Zep 2:3; Am
5:15."

85 | P a g e

32. HAGGAI

Haggai was the first of the last three prophets of the Bible period, post-exilic, that is after the Jews returned to
Judea from Babylon under the program of Cyrus of Persia.
His prophesying began in 520 BC, "the second year of King Darius" per Haggai 1:1.
According to some references, before Darius Hystaspis came to the throne, the Persian empire was in trouble
due to the "chaotic reign of Cambyses", the son of Cyrus. That reference wrote regarding the ascension of
Darius
"His mysterious death was followed by an attempted usurpation of the Persian throne by Gaumata, an official
who claimed to be a brother of Cambyses hitherto thought to be dead. Before Gaumata could seize control he
was assassinated by Darius Hystaspes and some collaborators, and Darius placed himself in power on
September 29, 522."

According to the reference, Darius enforced a Pax Persiaca (Persian Peace), across the empire. This provided an
opportunity for the rebuilding of the temple.
This same reference questions the Graf-Wellhausen approach in sub-dividing the text and attributing it to many
"hands" (or editors or redactors that compiled the book)
"His (Wolff) efforts to isolate its stages and the specific contributions of each hand smack of the kind of special
pleading inherent in source analysis of any kind. There is nothing in the style, form, vocabulary, and content of
the book of Haggai that precludes it from having come entirely as it stands from the prophet himself."

In terms of the content ever changing over time because of the numerous copying across centuries, the
reference says
"The study of Haggai is largely unencumbered by the problem of textual variation since the ancient manuscripts
and versions differ little from the Masoretic tradition."

The prophet Haggai frequently uses the formula "Jehovah of armies" just like the other prophets before him. In
fact, he uses it 12X in his book and as well as using God's name "Jehovah" 35X.
His four messages (as explained in the online reference at JW.org, "Insight") begins with (1:2)
"This is what Jehovah of armies says, "These people say,"The time has not yet come for the house of Jehovah to
be built".

The 2013 NWT edition showed that Haggai did not use poetic form in his writings but were all in prose.
86 | P a g e

Haggai is noted to be precise on dating his prophecies. This pattens appears to be true for most Persian-time
prophets. As to why this is the case, another reference "Notes on Haggai" wrote
"The precision in dating prophecies that marks Haggai and Zechariah reflects the annalistic style of history
writing that distinguished Neo-Babylonian and Persian times. Ezekiel, who was probably an older contemporary
of these prophets, was the third most precise in dating his prophecies, and Daniel, another contemporary, also
was precise but not as detailed. Likewise Ezra and Nehemiah, who wrote after Haggai and Zechariah, showed
the same interest in chronological precision. "

Haggai specifically assigned dates on the prophecies (1:1, 15; 2:1, 10, 20) I went back to check on Ezra (3:1, 8;
6:15; 7:8,9; 10:9, 16,17) and Nehemiah (1:1; 2:1; 5:14; 6:15).
The sense I get from Haggai is the urgency to get up and build the temple of Jehovah. His insistence in his
prophesying to get this done is felt strongly in his book (1:8)
"'Go up to the mountain and bring in lumber. And build the house, so that I may take pleasure in it and I may
be glorified,' Jehovah says."

While this work resumes, Jehovah assured them of his blessing and loyalty to the covenant (2:4)
"'For I am with you', declares Jehovah of armies."

Jehovah repeatedly told the returned Jews through Haggai these words (1:7; 2: 15, 18)
"Set your heart on this"

These words have raised to the consciousness of the Jews who were busy building their own homes and
settling in them and neglecting why they were allowed to return to their homeland. The Cyrus decree
specifically mentioned to "rebuild the house of Jehovah the God of Israel." (Ezra 1: 2)
In the same spirit, there is a parallel in Christian times, on the urgency of completing the global preaching work
versus focusing on our personal goals in life.
An interesting verse refers to Zerubabbel, the governor of Judea, as a "seal ring". JW.org using the online
encyclopedia writes about this
"In ancient times a signet ring seems to have become proverbial of a valued object or person. Jeremiahs
prophecy indicated that Judean King Coniah (Jehoiachin) would not be spared calamity even if he were a seal
ring on Jehovahs right hand. Jehoiachin was dethroned after a very brief rule. (Jer 22:24; 2Ki 24:8-15) Also,
Jehovah said with respect to faithful Zerubbabel: I shall take you, . . . and I shall certainly set you as a seal ring,
because you are the one whom I have chosen. (Hag 2:23) Zerubbabel, who was serving Jehovah in an official
capacity in connection with the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem, was precious to Jehovah, like a signet
ring on Gods own hand. Zerubbabel had fearlessly obeyed Jehovahs encouragement through the prophets
87 | P a g e

Haggai and Zechariah and had taken up the temple-building work in spite of a ban by a misinformed king of
Persia. (Ezr 4:245:2) Jehovah would continue to use Zerubbabel to fulfill His declared purpose, and no human
ruler would be able to remove him from that honored service."

Haggai is often quoted for the words in (2:7) of Jehovah shaking all the nations (2013 NWT) so that the precious
things of the nations will come in. But, there is a different kind of shaking Jehovah will do (2: 22) and this is
definitely connected to the "day of Jehovah".

88 | P a g e

33. ZECHARIAH

An obvious thing that one would notice when reading the book of Zechariah is when you reach chapter 9 and
onwards. This is evident visually because of the differences in form. But this is true of content as well. The
online encyclopedia in JW.org, "Insight" has this to say

"From chapter 9 onward the subject matter found in the book of Zechariah appears to differ considerably from
the earlier section. No further reference is made to angels and visions or to Governor Zerubbabel and High
Priest Joshua. There is no mention of the temple-rebuilding work, and not even the name of Zechariah appears.
In view of this and the nature of the prophecies contained in the latter chapters of the book, a number of critics
maintain that this section could not have been written by Zechariah. However, it should be noted that Zechariah,
like other prophets, wrote according to divine inspiration and did not receive all revelations at the same time or in
the same manner."

Just like in the book of the other prophets, the prophecy of Zechariah is introduced as "the word of Jehovah
came to the prophet Zechariah."

Of all the prophetic books, this is one tough book for me to consume. There are many symbolisms in the book. I
also quickly noticed that many things from his book have been quoted in the Christian Greek Scriptures.
Regarding this feature of internal harmony of the book with the rest of the Bible, the same reference says

"The book of Zechariah is in complete harmony with the rest of the Scriptures in identifying Jehovah as the
Protector of his people. (Zec 2:5; compare De 33:27; Ps 46:11; 125:2.) He rewards or punishes individuals or
nations according to their dealings and returns to those who repentantly return to him. (Zec 1:2-6; 7:11-14;
compare Isa 55:6, 7; Jer 25:4-11; Eze 33:11; Mal 3:7; 2Pe 3:9.) Jehovah requires that those who desire his favor
must speak truth and manifest obedience, justice, loving-kindness, and mercy. (Zec 7:7-10; 8:16, 17; compare
De 24:17; Ps 15:1, 2; 82:3, 4; Pr 12:19; Jer 7:5, 6; Eph 4:25.) He does not respond to calls for aid from those
who do not obey him.Zec 7:13; compare Isa 1:15; La 3:42-44."

Just as is true with prophet Haggai, another post-exilic prophet, Zechariah is precise in his timing of events
following the format of day, month, and year as in "on the 24th day of the 11th month, that is, the month of
Shebat, in the second year of Darius" (1:7).

One curiosity I had was with (1:12)

"O Jehovah of armies, how long will you withhold your mercy from Jerusalem and the cities of Judah with whom
you have been indignant these seventy years?"

The mention of 70 years indeed brings back to me the fall of Jerusalem in 607 BC, where the 70 years began
and ended in 537 BC when the Jews were allowed to return to Judah by Cyrus the Persian. At the time of
Zechariah, in the second year of Darius, that was already about 519 BC. So, what was the angel talking about in
referring to "these 70 years"?

The online index at JW.org pointed to this

"Be it remembered, also, that those unforgettable seventy years were the first seventy years of the Gentile
Times, the appointed times of the nations. So, when those seventy years ended in 537 B.C.E., the Gentile
Times still continued on for Jerusalem to be trampled on by the Gentile nations. (Luke 21:24) Apparently, then,
89 | P a g e

the angel who cried out, O Jehovah of armies, how long? was referring back to that former period of seventy
years as an illustration of Jehovahs denunciation of his chosen people. He was asking whether Jehovahs
denunciation of them was being renewed because of their long neglect toward His temple. And so the angel was
asking how long it would yet be before Jehovah would show mercy to Jerusalem and the other cities of Judah.
The prophet Zechariah was also interested in knowing this. We, also!"

Another document by scholar wrote about this

"Stop and think about this statement. Doesn't it seem odd that the angel would ask Jehovah how long, when
the exact length of time had already been determined, namely 70 years? The only possible reason to ask such a
rhetorical question is because the 70 years had already ended. Yet, by all appearances Jerusalem was still in a
partially desolated and ruined place in desperate need of rebuilding, indeed the temple was still not completed!

In other words, were the 70 years of desolation not enough? Will Jehovah continue withholding his favor, just as
he did during the 70 years of desolation? Indeed, O Jehovah, how long...?"

With the mention again of 70 years in (7:5), the footnote form the book "Paradise Restored" says this

"The seventy years of observing fasts could not have begun after the first deportation of the Jews by the
Babylonians in the year 617 B.C.E., for that would have been about nine years before King Nebuchadnezzar
began the final siege of Jerusalem and also about eleven years before the breaching of the walls of the city (on
Tammuz 9) and the destruction of the city (on Ab 10) and the assassination of Governor Gedaliah in the seventh
month (Tishri), these mournful events being observed by the fast periods. Hence the seventy years of fasting
began after these last three mournful calamities had taken place, in the year 607 B.C.E. This proves that the
desolation of the land lasted for seventy years and that these seventy years began in 607 B.C.E. and ended in
537 B.C.E.See Flavius Josephus book Antiquities of the Jews, Book 10, chapter 9, paragraph 7."

It is noteworthy that Jehovah God calls the Judean cities, now under Persian rule, "my cities" (1: 17), he being
the Sovereign Lord.

Another important feature of the prophecy, is the used of number "four" in verses 18 and 20. The book "Paradise
Restored" explains (this will be the primary source for helping me understand the prophetic book of Zechariah)

"These craftsmen or artisans by being four in number offset the four horns. Their number would have the same
significance as that in the case of the four horns. They would picture all the craftsmen involved in the matter
and organized in a balanced, fully adequate way. Being craftsmen or artisans, they were not destructionists.
Primarily they were constructionists. But they could be used in an operation of destruction, and they could use
their working utensils to that end. This was their mission in the vision. But whose craftsmen were they, or who
sent them? Evidently Jehovah of armies, for they came to destroy the power of the four horns that had dispersed
Jehovahs people, Judah, Israel and Jerusalem. What they used in order to do this were doubtless the hammers
of their trade. Woe, then, to the persecuting horns! There was to be divine judgment executed against those
persecutors."

What is the significance of the number? The book explains

"The prophet Zechariah knew that in the inspired Hebrew Scriptures a horn is used to symbolize a governmental
power of a nation or empire. Those four symbolic horns would not necessarily picture four individual nations or
empires that had till then dispersed the peoples of Judah, Israel and Jerusalem and ruined their cities.... So not
just Egypt, Assyria and Babylon as world powers had been implicated with dispersing Judah, Israel and
Jerusalem, but others like the nation of Edom and other national allies or collaborators in such wicked nation
90 | P a g e

against Jehovah's people."

This insightful explanation differs greatly from published commentaries who are having a hard time figuring this
out. The book adds

"In Scripture, the number four has a symbolic meaning. For example, in using four with respect to the winds, the
four winds of the heavens would refer to all parts or quarters of the heavens. Or just the four winds would refer to
all directions of the earth. (Ezekiel 37:9; Daniel 7:2) The four wheels belonging to Jehovahs celestial chariot as
seen by the prophet Ezekiel would suggest a well-balanced riding base for the divine chariot. (Ezekiel 1:15, 21)
Four horns could accordingly mean all the governmental powers that were concerned or involved, and not just a
literal four of such, operating from all directions and leaving no imbalance because of having omitted any
quarter."

One of the frequently quoted verses in his book is in (2:8)

"Whoever touches you touches the pupil of my eye"

A footnote in this verse can be alternatively translated "touches my eyeball". It is a powerful expression from God
to indicate his care for His chosen people.

The book is also full of other symbolisms - horses of various colors, the befouled appearance of the High Priest
Joshua, the Sprout, the lampstand and the two olive trees, flying scroll, the woman named "Wickedness" sealed
inside a container, copper mountains, and crowned Priest-King Joshua.

The book ends the same way as other prophetic books with restoration prophecies and the "day of Jehovah".
Zechariah writes (14:3)

"Jehovah will go out and war against those nations as when he fights in the day of a battle."

Zechariah also echoes other visual prophecies similar with other prophets here (14: 8)

"In that day living waters will flow out from Jerusalem"

This reminds us of the vision of Ezekiel (47:1) and Joel (3:18) before him and is also echoed in the last book of
the Bible.
91 | P a g e

34. MALACHI

His is the last book in the set of the 12 Minor Prophets, and the last book of the Hebrew Scriptures or Old
Testament in modern English Bibles. (The last book of the Old Testament in the Hebrew Bible is the Chronicles).
The Graf-Wellhausen critical scholars believe that Malachi is not really a name, hence his book is anonymous. In
Hebrew, Malachi means "my messenger". Hence, some scholars promote the idea that it was a title rather than
a personal name. These scholars also claim that this book is part of other materials, the other material going to
the book of Zechariah starting from chapter 9 based on the similarity of Malachi 1:1 and Zechariah 9:1 using the
common phrase "the word of Jehovah".
In a 1987 paper by Klein, he wrote about the lack of ancestry and birth place of Malachi
"For instance, Obadiah's lineage and Habakkuk's place of birth are unknown, with both of these books
mentioning the name of the prophet only in the superscription."
He goes on to address the key issues of the Graf-Wellhausen critical scholars and their position that this book
has an anonymous writer.
Malachi's book wrote about worship on the temple and sacrifices made in the temple. This means the temple
has already been rebuilt. The JW.org online encyclopedia has this to say
"Israels neglect of true worship and its failure to adhere to Gods law appear to fit conditions existing when
Nehemiah again arrived at Jerusalem sometime after the 32nd year of King Artaxerxes (c. 443 B.C.E.). (Compare
Mal 1:6-8; 2:7, 8, 11, 14-16; Ne 13:6-31.) Therefore, like the book of Nehemiah, the book of Malachi may well
have been committed to writing after 443 B.C.E."
It is notable that God complained about the failure of the priests to uphold true worship using a dialogue
format on the poor quality of their sacrifices, non-compliant to the requirements of the Law of Moses.
Malachi declares Jehovah God's judgment (1: 14)
"Cursed is the cunning one who has a sound male animal in his flock, but he makes a vow and sacrifices a
blemished one to Jehovah."
Malachi declares Jehovah God's expectation of the priests (2:7)
"For the lips of a priest should safeguard knowledge, and people should seek the law from his mouth, because
he is the messenger of Jehovah of armies."
In addition, Jehovah was complaining about the practice of divorce in the returned exiles as a form of treachery
(2: 14)
"It is because Jehovah has acted as a witness between you and the wife of your youth, with whom you have
dealt treacherously, although she is your partner and your wife by covenant."

92 | P a g e

Then Jehovah God declares (2:16)
"For I hate divorce."
The book ends with a prophecy about a future cleansing of God's people and God's willingness to bless those
who respond positively to promote true worship.
It also contains an important prophecy that during the time of Jesus, people awaited its fulfillment (4:5)
"Look! I am sending to you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and awe-inspiring day of
Jehovah."

93 | P a g e

35. MATTHEW

As I study the gospel of Matthew, for my initial phase, I am focusing on the following

1) use of God's name in the NT
2) the use of Matthew of OT quotes to support the Messiahship of Jesus
3) according to Matthew, where Jesus spent his ministry (geography)
4) words of Jesus that Matthew repeated in other occasions
5) the illustrations of Jesus as his primary way of teaching
6) the miracles of Jesus
7) the identity of Jesus as he was perceived by people around him

35.1 Use of Divine Name
One profound aspect that a Bible reader will note when reading most English translations of the New
Testament "books", including the gospel of Matthew, which according to tradition is the first gospel to be
written, is the lack of God's Divine Name in them.
It is a known fact that God's Divine Name, JEHOVAH, or in Hebrew, YAHWEH, as represented by the four letters
(tetragrammaton) YHWH, appeared in the Old Testament, or Hebrew Bible, about 7,000 times.
Then, God's Name completely disappeared in the Christian part of the Bible, or New Testament, or Christian
Greek Bible.
For a while, it was thought because the Bible used by Christians (the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible,
known as The Septuagint, represented by the symbol LXX) has replaced the name YHWH with "Lord". Hence,
the Christian Bible writers when quoting from the Old Testament in Greek (LXX), they copied what was there,
"Lord" for God's name.
However, this practice turned out to be false. There are now older LXX Bible fragments that have been
discovered and they show God's Divine Name written in Hebrew surrounded by Greek text. What does this
mean? This means the Greek Old Testament used by the Lord Jesus and his apostles contain God's name.
How does this change the translation of the Greek New Testament in today's English Bibles?
Let us compare how Matthew 4: 10 containing the quote and the source of the quote Deuteronomy 6: 13 were
translated. Let us compare several English Bibles.

94 | P a g e

1. King James Version Bible
QUOTE "Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve."
SOURCE "Thou shalt fear the LORD thy God, and serve him."
Notice that the source from Deuteronomy uses "LORD" in all caps because that was used to substitute for
God's divine name, Jehovah (Latin/English) or Yahweh (Hebrew). Interestingly, in the quote, the "Lord" lost its
all caps.

2. New Living Translation Bible
QUOTE "'You must worship the LORD your God and serve only him."
SOURCE "You must fear the LORD your God and serve him." (source)

Note that unlike the KJV, the NLT is consistent with its quote and source when referring to God's divine name
as represented by the substitute "LORD".

3. American Standard Version Bible
QUOTE "Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve."
SOURCE "Thou shalt fear Jehovah thy God; and him shalt thou serve."

Note that the ASV just like the KJV is not consistent with God's name from the source and quote.

4. New World Translation
QUOTE " It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.
SOURCE "Jehovah your God you should fear, and him you should serve."

Note that the NWT, it is consistent in using God's name from the source and quote and did not use a substitute
for God's divine name such as "LORD".
But, what about the assertion that no ancient Christian Greek manuscript was ever found that contains God's
divine name? In Appendix A5 of the 2013 NWT, it offered 9 different bullets and one including the absence of
extant manuscripts
"Since the Christian Greek Scriptures were an inspired addition to the sacred Hebrew Scriptures, the
sudden disappearance of Jehovahs name from the text would seem inconsistent. About the middle of the
first century C.E., the disciple James said to the elders in Jerusalem: Symeon has related thoroughly how God
for the first time turned his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name. (Acts 15:14) It
would not be logical for James to make such a statement if no one in the first century knew or used Gods
name."
95 | P a g e

And apparently, many of the second century Christians, in their writings rejected the idea that God has a name
despite its appearance 7,000 times in the Hebrew Bible. In the second century, the gap between the Jews and
Christians became pronounced. This is probably the time when the LXX use of God's name written in Hebrew
was replaced abruptly with the Greek word for "Lord", kurios. But, it was not always the case.
Is the New World Translation Bible, the only Bible in the world that used God's divine name "Jehovah" in the
New Testament? The same appendix notes many other Bible versions.
"Many African, Native American, Asian, European, and Pacific-island languages use the divine name liberally.
(See the list on pages 1742 and 1743.) The translators of these editions decided to use the divine name for
reasons similar to those stated above. Some of these translations of the Christian Greek Scriptures have
appeared recently, such as the Rotuman Bible (1999), which uses Jihova 51 times in 48 verses, and the Batak
(Toba) version (1989) from Indonesia, which uses Jahowa 110 times."
One essay mentions this

"In his book, The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, author Geza Vermes writes, The Tetragram (the divine
name YHWH) is rendered semi-phonetically as Iao, and is not replaced, as was customary later, by the Greek
Kurios (Lord)."

and also this

"In the deserts of Egypt from the Oxyrhynchus collection, a few first century Old Testament manuscript
fragments were uncovered. One such manuscript is a Greek text from the book of Job, dated to around 50AD.
And as with the Habakkuk scroll found at Qumran, in this first century Greek Old Testament, the name of God is
not replaced with the Greek word kurios, but rather, the name of God appears, in Paleo Hebrew Script (see
below)."

What happened with the disappearance of God's Divine Name in the Septuagint (LXX), that happened without
any commotion, and became the norm forward, could be the same case with the NT. The parallels are the same.
The earliest manuscript copy of the NT is from the 4th century. We don't have manuscripts from the 1st century
to show conclusively that God's Divine Name was not really there.

The issue was raised why the LXX copies with God's Divine Name on it were already found but no first century
NT manuscripts. There are several possibilities Christian copyists were not as professionals as the Jewish
scribes in the preservation of copies as reported by scholars. And when the Bar Kochba revolt in 135 AD
happened, the Jews and the Christians finally went their separate ways. The Jew produced a new Greek
translation of the Hebrew Bible and left alone the LXX to the Christians. And the Christians who don't believe
God has a name, avoided the Divine Name altogether and replaced it with 'Lord' first with the LXX and then on
the NT itself.

I agree with the translators of the NWT that it is completely contradictory that God who had his Name written
nearly 7,000 times in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) would inspire new writers to drop off His Name from the
Christian Greek Bible.

When NT writers quoted from the OT, as Vermes says, they will find God's Divine Name on their LXX Bible.

The number of time the 2013 NWT rendered Gods Divine Name for Lord (Greek Kyrios) is 32 times.

96 | P a g e

35.2 The OT quotes of Matthew to support the Messiahship of Jesus

Aside from quoting from the OT where God's Divine Name, Jehovah, appears, Matthew also quoted from the
OT to prove that a prophecy has been fulfilled with Jesus. He uses the formula "to fulfill what was spoken by
Jehovah through his prophet". I decided to compare some of the NT quotes of Matthew with the potential OT
sources:

Matthew 1: 23 and Isaiah 7: 14
QUOTE "Look! The virgin will become pregnant and will give birth to a son"
SOURCE LXX Isa 7: 14 "Behold, a virgin in the womb will conceive and shall bear a son"
SOURCE MT Isa 7: 14 "Look! The young woman will become pregnant and will give birth to a son

(Matthew was quoting from the LXX. The OT-LXX translation uses the word "virgin". The Jews who abhorred
the Christian use of the LXX to support the virgin birth of Jesus, stopped using the LXX, calling the LXX a poor
translation. The new OT work on the Greek language translated the original Hebrew language to "young
woman" rather than "virgin".)

Matthew 2: 15 and Isaiah 11:1
QUOTE "Out of Egypt I called my son"
SOURCE LXX Isa 11: 1 "From out of Egypt I called out his children"
SOURCE MT Isa 11: 1 "Out of Egypt I called my son"

(Clearly in this verse, Matthew is not using the LXX as source.)

Matthew 2: 18 and Jeremiah 31:15
QUOTE "A voice was heard in Ramah, weeping and much wailing. It was Rachel, weeping for her children"
SOURCE LXX Jer 31: 15 "A voice in Ramah was heard- wailing, and weeping, and grieving; Rachel was weeping
for her sons"
SOURCE MT Jer 31: 15 "A voice is heard in Ramah, lamentation and bitter weeping: Rachel is weeping over her
sons"

Matthew 2: 23 "He will be called a Nazarene"
(This quote has no direct source from the OT. The NWT translators believe this is a reference to different
prophecies about the "Sprout". These two Greek words (Nazarene and Sprout) I have to research their origins.)

Matthew 3:3 and Isaiah 40:3
QUOTE "A voice of one calling out in the wilderness: 'Prepare the way of Jehovah! Make his roads straight."
SOURCE LXX Isa 40: 3 "A voice yelling in the wilderness, Prepare the way of YHWH! Make straight the roads of
our God!"
SOURCE MT Isa 40:3 "A voice of one calling out in the wilderness: "Clear up the way of Jehovah! Make a
straight highway through the desert for our God.

(This is evident that Matthew is quoting from the LXX rather than from the Masoretic text.)

97 | P a g e

Matthew 4:4 and Deuteronomy 8:3
QUOTE "Man must live, not on bread alone, but on every utterance coming forth through Jehovah's mouth."
SOURCE LXX Deut 8:3 "Not by bread alone shall live a man; but by every word going forth through the mouth of
God shall live a man."
SOURCE MT Deut 8:3 "Man does not live by bread alone but man lives by every expression from Jehovah's
mouth."

(The quote is not clear from which version Matthew quoted Jesus as saying.)

QUOTE "O land of Zebulun and land of Naphtali, along the road of the sea, on the other side of the Jordan,
Galilee of the nations!"
SOURCE LXX Isa 9: 1 "O place of Zebulun, the land of Naphtali, and the rest on the coast, and on the other side
of the Jordan, Galilee of the nations!"
SOURCE MT Isa 9: 1 "When one treated with contempt the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali and when
at the later time one caused it to be honored-the way by the sea, in the region of the Jordan, Galilee of the
nations."

(Here it is quite clear which OT version Matthew is quoting.)

Matthew 8: 17 and Isaiah 53:4
QUOTE "He himself took our sicknesss and carried our diseases."
SOURCE LXX Isa 53:4 "This one our sins bore, and on account of us he was grieved."
SOURCE MT Isa 53:4 "Truly our sicknesses were what he himself carried; and as for our pains, he bore them."

(Not sure if Matthew is paraphrasing here.)

QUOTE "Look! My servant whom I chose, my beloved, whom my soul has approved!"
SOURCE LXX Isa 42:1 "Israel, my chosen, my soul has favorably received him."
SOURCE MT Isa 42:1 "Look! My servant, on whom I keep fast hold! My chosen one, whom my soul has
approved!"

(Clearly Matthew is quoting a non-LXX text.)

QUOTE "By hearing, you will hear but by no means get the sense of it; and, looking, you will look but by no
means see."
SOURCE LXX Isa 6: 9 "Hearing, you shall hear, but in no way shall you perceive; and seeing you shall see, but in
no way shall you know."
SOURCE MT Isa 6: 9 "Hear again and again, O men, but do not understand; and see again and again, but do not
get any knowledge."

(The quote is closer to the LXX.)
98 | P a g e

35.3 According to Matthew, where Jesus spent his ministry (geography)

The geography of Israel where Jesus performed his ministry can be pictured in the way Matthew described the
journey of Jesus initially at Galilee then later on to Jerusalem, a city in the mountains of Zion and Moriah.
After coming out of his baptism in the Jordan River, Matthew reports
1. 4:1 Then Jesus was led by the spirit up into the wilderness

Wikipedia has this interesting entry on this part of Jesus travel

There is no evidence of what specific wilderness area is being referred to, other than that it was at a
higher level than the river. Jones reports that the wilderness mentioned here has since the 5th century
been believed to be the rocky and uninhabited area between Jerusalem and Jericho. A spot on Mount
Quarantania is traditionally the exact location, and a Greek Orthodox monastery exists on the spot
today.

2. 4:13 Further, after leaving Nazareth, he came and took up residence in Capernaum.
3. 4: 23 Then he went throughout the whole of Galilee.
4. 5:1 When he saw the crowds, he went up on the mountain

One textbook commented on this verse

The scene is one of the most memorable in Bible history: Jesus seated on a mountainside, delivering
his famous Sermon on the Mount. The site is near the Sea of Galilee, probably close to Capernaum.

So, he gave the Sermon not far from his home base.

5. 8:1 After he came down from the mountain, large crowds followed him.
6. 8: 5 When he entered Capernaum, an army officer came to him, pleading with him.
7. 8: 28
28
When he came to the other side into the region of the Gadarenes.

Where is this place of the Gadarenes? Again, the online encyclopedia, Insight reports

Both countries are shown to lie on the other side, that is, the E side, of the Sea of Galilee. The
designation country of the Gadarenes possibly applied to the district radiating from the city of Gadara
(modern Umm Qeis), situated about 10 km (6 mi) SE of the Sea of Galilee.

8. 9: 1 So boarding the boat, he traveled across and went into his own city.
9. 9: 35 And Jesus set out on a tour of all the cities and villages.
10. 13: 54 After coming into his home territory.
11. 14:34 And they crossed over and came to land in Gennesaret.

According to our online encyclopedia
A small, somewhat triangular plain bordering on the NW shore of the Sea of Galilee.

12. 15: 21 Leaving there, Jesus now went into the region of Tyre and Sidon.

99 | P a g e

13. 15: 29 Departing from there, Jesus next came near the Sea of Galilee, and after going up on the
mountain, he was sitting there.

This scene is nearly identical to the opening ministry of the Lord Jesus when he gave the Sermon on the
Mount near Capernaum.

14. 17: 1 Six days later Jesus took Peter and James and his brother John along and led them up into a lofty
mountain by themselves.

One Bible-based magazine, the April 1, 2000 issue of The Watchtower comments on this scene

This awesome event likely took place on one of the ridges of Mount Hermon, where Jesus and the three
apostles spent the night. The transfiguration evidently occurred at night, making it especially vivid.

But where is Mount Hermon? The online encyclopedia, Insight, says

Mount Hermon became the northern limit of the Promised Land.

15. 17: 24 After they arrived in Capernaum.
16. 19: 1 When Jesus had finished speaking these things, he departed from Galilee and came to the
borders of Judea across the Jordan.
17. 20: 17 While going up to Jerusalem.
18. 21:1 When they got close to Jerusalem and arrived at Bethphage on the Mount of Olives.
100 | P a g e

35.4 Words of Jesus that Matthew repeated in other occasions

There are four statements that the Lord Jesus has spoken and based on Matthew he repeated again on a
different occasion. It would be interesting to find out if the other gospel writers had done the same thing.
Tear it out
The first time the Lord Jesus has spoken these words was when he spoke this on the Sermon on the Mount
near Capernaum, in the context of committing adultery and the individual effort to keep oneself from adultery
If, now, your right eye is making you stumble, tear it out and throw it away from you. For it is better for you to
lose one of your members than for your whole body to be pitched into Gehenna. (Matthew 5: 29)
The second time Matthew reported this, Jesus was in Capernaum, and the context of his dialogue was about
stumbling one of the little sheep.
Also, if your eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it away from you. It is better for you to enter one-eyed
into life than to be thrown with two eyes into the fiery Gehenna. (Matthew 18: 9)

Notice the differences between the two similar statements
your right eye/your eye
is making you stumble/makes you stumble
For it is better for you/It is better for you
to lose one of your members/to enter one-eyed into life
than for your whole body to be pitched/than to be thrown with two eyes
into Gehenna/into the fiery Gehenna
The other statements of the Lord Jesus was on the same subject of divorce. The first occurrence was on the
Sermon on the Mount
However, I say to you that everyone divorcing his wife, except on account of sexual immorality, makes her a
subject for adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. (Matthew 5: 32)

The second instance was when the Pharisees were asking the Lord Jesus about divorce
I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except on the grounds of sexual immorality, and marries another
commits adultery. (Matthew 19: 9)
Notice that even though the statements were nearly identical, the Sermon on the Mount focused on sin of the
man who marries the divorced woman. The second instance, the focus narrowed down on the man divorcing his
wife and marries another. The Sermon on the Mount is about the sin of a third-party man and the female partner
(the divorced woman). The second instance focused on sin of the male partner (divorced husband) and a third
party woman.

101 | P a g e

The third statement of the Lord Jesus that Matthew repeated is about endurance
And you will be hated by all people on account of my name, but the one who has endured to the end will be
saved. (Matthew 10: 21
Those words were given as part of the instructions in carrying out the ministry and the hardships they may face
in performing that ministry.
The second instance Matthew repeated those words was when the Lord Jesus was talking about the his second
parousia (Greek parousia, English presence)
Then people will hand you over to tribulation and will kill you, and you will be hated by all the nations on
account of my name. Then, too, many will be stumbled and will betray one another and will hate one
another. Many false prophets will arise and mislead many; and because of the increasing of lawlessness, the
love of the greater number will grow cold. But the one who has endured to the end will be saved. (Matthew
24: 9-13)

The fourth statement of the Lord Jesus was about the sign of Jonah
In reply he said to them: A wicked and adulterous generation keeps on seeking a sign, but no sign will be given
it except the sign of Jonah the prophet. (Matthew 12: 39)
Here the Lord is responding to the demands of the Pharisees for Jesus to show them a sign. The second
instance, the Pharisees and the scribes were demanding again that Jesus show them a sign
A wicked and adulterous generation keeps seeking a sign, but no sign will be given it except the sign of Jonah.
With that he went away, leaving them behind. (Matthew 16: 4)
The only minor difference is that on the second instance, Matthew drops the the prophet at the end. Not only
that, Matthew does not include the following words which were part of the first instance
For just as Jonah was in the belly of the huge fish for three days and three nights, so the Son of man will be in
the heart of the earth for three days and three nights. Men of Nineveh will rise up in the judgment with this
generation and will condemn it, because they repented at what Jonah preached. But look! something more than
Jonah is here. The queen of the south will be raised up in the judgment with this generation and will condemn it,
for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon. But look! something more than
Solomon is here. (Matthew 12: 40-42)

102 | P a g e

34.5 Illustrations of Jesus as his primary way of teaching

Illustrations or comparisons is declared by Matthew as the Lord Jesus primary vehicle of communications as a
teacher. And his gospel is full of them.
He used some of the following illustrations or comparisons
1. Salt of the earth (5: 13)
2. Lamp (5:15; 6: 22)
3. Birds of heaven, sparrows (6:26; 10: 29)
4. Lilies of the field (6: 28)
5. Pearls/swine (7: 6)
6. Narrow gate/cramped road, Broad gate/spacious road (7: 13, 14)
7. House on the rock/house on the sand (7: 24, 26)
8. New wine/old wineskins (9: 17)
9. Love enemies/pray persecutors (5:44)
10. Saying Lord/Doing the will of the Father (7: 21, 22)
11. Serpents/doves (10: 16)
12. Yoke (11: 30)
13. Rocky ground, fine soil (13: 18-23)
14. Wheat/weeds (13: 30)
15. Lost sheep (15: 24)
16. Slaves/debts (18: 23-35)
17. Camel/needle, rich man/Kingdom of God (19: 24)
18. Marriage feast (22: 1)
19. Tax coin (22: 19)
20. Whitewashed graves (23: 27)
21. Wise and foolish virgins (25: 1)
22. Talents and business (25: 14)
No wonder, Matthew wrote about the Lord Jesus, All these things Jesus spoke to the crowds by illustrations.
Indeed, without an illustration he would not speak to them. (Matthew 13: 34)

103 | P a g e

35.6 The miracles of Jesus

Critical Bible scholars deny that the miracles reported by Matthew are true. They do not believe that miracles
happen. To them, this is myth-making. One online article reports that the word miracle was never used in
the Bible. In Matthews gospel, he uses the Greek word dynamis and semeion (powerful works and sign
respectively).
The JW.org online article says
YOU may be surprised to learn that the Bible accounts of Jesus life on earth never use the original-language
word for miracle. The Greek word (dynamis) sometimes translated miracle literally means power. (Luke
8:46) It may also be rendered ability or powerful works. (Matthew 11:20; 25:15) According to one scholar,
this Greek term emphasizes the mighty work that has been done, and, in particular, the power by which it was
accomplished. The event is described in terms of the power of God in action.
Another Greek term (teras) is usually rendered portent or wonder. (John 4:48; Acts 2:19) This
expression highlights the effect on observers. Quite often, the crowd and the disciples were amazed and
astounded at Jesus powerful works.Mark 2:12; 4:41; 6:51; Luke 9:43.

A third Greek term (semeion) referring to Jesus miracles denotes a sign. It focuses upon the deeper
meaning of the miracle, says scholar Robert Deffinbaugh. He adds: A sign is a miracle which conveys a truth
about our Lord Jesus.

The article also adds on the authenticity of the gospel record this

As already noted, Jesus miracles were performed in public, before many eyewitnesses. The earliest Gospels
were penned at a time when most of those eyewitnesses were still alive. Regarding the honesty of the Gospel
writers, the book The Miracles and theResurrection notes: To accuse the gospel evangelists of indiscriminately
submerging historical fact in a flood of miracle-mongering to serve the interests of theological propaganda
would be outright injustice. . . . They meant to be honest recorders.

Jewish opponents of Christianity never challenged the powerful works described in the Gospels. They
questioned only the power by which these were performed. (Mark 3:22-26) Neither could later detractors
successfully deny Jesus miracles. On the contrary, during the first and second centuries C.E., there were
references to miraculous works performed by Jesus. Clearly, we have every reason to view the Gospel accounts
of his miracles as authentic.

Source: http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2004521

104 | P a g e

35.7 The identity of Jesus as he was perceived by people around him

What sort of person is this? This question came from the Lords own disciples after he calmed the storm then
raging while he and his disciples were on the boat.
Indeed, what did Matthew reveal as to how people perceived Jesus in his day? I decided to extract those
declaration or confession of identity the people associated with Jesus.
When the crowds saw this, they were struck with fear, and they glorified God, who gave such authority to men.
(Matthew 9: 8)
This is Matthews assessment of the crowds who just witnessed a miracle. Note Matthews statement toward the
end gave such authority to men. Here was Jesus, a man who received authority from God.
Well, all the crowds were astounded and began to say: May this not perhaps be the Son of David? (Matthew
12: 23)
The coming Messiah is known by Jews to be a son of David who will restore the kingdom of Israel. So, they are
associating the Messiahship to the Lord Jesus.
Then those in the boat did obeisance to him, saying: You really are Gods Son. (Matthew 14: 33)
This is the first time we read in Matthews gospel the association of Jesus of being Son of God. This is different
from the phrase God the Son. In the Old Testament, the son of David is considered Gods Son too. So some
scholars are saying that with this phrase his disciples are linking him up to the Messiahship.
Simon Peter answered: You are the Christ, the Son of the living God. (Matthew 16: 16)
For the first time in Matthews gospel, the Messiahship is stongly asserted and is associated with being Son of
God.
And when he entered Jerusalem, the whole city was in an uproar, saying: Who is this? The crowds kept
saying: This is the prophet Jesus, from Nazareth of Galilee! (Matthew 21: 10,11)
Here we find the publics perception of Jesus confessed. The crowds identify Jesus as the prophet. Moses
prophesied that there will rise a prophet in Israel to whose voice or authority the Jews should listen to.

So the high priest said to him: I put you under oath by the living God to tell us whether you are the Christ, the
Son of God! Jesus said to him: You yourself said it. (Matthew 26: 63, 64)
This is the first instance where Jesus himself confessed before his enemies that indeed he is the Son of God
which led to his getting accused of blasphemy with a penalty of death.
In the same way also, the chief priests with the scribes and the elders began mocking him, saying: Others he
saved; himself he cannot save! He is King of Israel; let him now come down off the torture stake, and we will
believe in him. He has put his trust in God; let Him now rescue him if He wants him, for he said, I am Gods
Son. (Matthew 27: 41-43)
Here his enemies associate in the Lord Jesus both the claim to Messiahship, King of Israel and being Gods
Son. His enemies clearly differentiate him from God. He was never perceived by them, with these statements as
God himself.
105 | P a g e

So, from the gospel of Matthew we find the following identities associated with the Lord Jesus
1. Son of David
2. Son of God
3. Christ or Messiah (tied with being Son of David)
4. The prophet
5. King of Israel

In Matthew, we dont find a confession from the Lord Jesus himself about his being God himself. The public
clearly distinguish him from God, whether the public are his admirers or enemies.

106 | P a g e

35.8 Others

There are other items worth studying in the gospel for further study. These items are the following

1. Comparing the genealogy of Matthew 1:1-16 to 1 Chronicles 3: 10-24, it is interesting to include Jehoash,
Amaziah, and Azariah between Uzziah and Jotham. He also skipped Jehoiakim between Josiah and Jeconiah,
and Pedaiah between Shealtiel and Zerubabbel. After Zerubabbel, there are no more parallels in the Old
Testament, from Abiud to Joseph.

2. The record of sexual intercourse between Joseph and Mary as recorded in Matthew 1: 25.

"But he did not have sexual relations with her until her son was born."
New Living Translation Bible

"But he did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son."
New International Version Bible

This explains why Jesus had step-brothers and step-sisters by Joseph. (Matthew 12: 46) That this is the case,
Jesus contrasted them with his disciples as his true brothers and sisters.

A JW.org article cites the New Catholic Encyclopedia on this topic

"The New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967, Vol. IX, p. 337) admits regarding the Greek words adelphoi and
adelphai, used at Matthew 13:55, 56, that these have the meaning of full blood brother and sister in the
Greek-speaking world of the Evangelists time and would naturally be taken by his Greek reader in this sense.
Toward the end of the 4th century (c. 380) Helvidius in a work now lost pressed this fact in order to attribute to
Mary other children besides Jesus so as to make her a model for mothers of larger families."

3. Matthew reports that three astrologers (magoi) rather than three kings went to Jerusalem first, guided by a
star, to King Herod, God's enemy. (Matthew 2: 1, 9) Only after this meeting, and disclosing that the future king of
Israel was to be born in Bethlehem, did the star guide the three magoi to Bethlehem.

4. Matthew reports that the three magoi met Jesus no longer in a manger but in a house, and that Jesus was no
longer an infant but a "young child" (Greek paidion). The Greek word for "baby" is "nepios". (1 Corinthian 13:11)

107 | P a g e

36. MARK

1) use of God's name in the NT
2) parallelism with Matthew
3) according to Mark, where Jesus spent his ministry (geography)

36.1 Use of Gods Divine Name and other OT quotes
The first and only instance that Gods divine name, Jehovah, was quoted from the Old Testament by Mark
himself, is in Mark 1:3, when he introduces the prophecy of Isaiah the prophet.
Mark 1:3 and Isaiah 40:3
QUOTE A voice of one crying out in the wilderness: Prepare the way of Jehovah! Make his roads straight.
SOURCE LXX A voice yelling in the wilderness, Prepare the way of YHWH! Make straight the roads of our God!
SOURCE MT A voice of one calling out in the wilderness: Clear up the way of Jehovah! Make a straight
highway through the desert for our God.

The NWT decided to render Gods Divine Name as it originally appeared in the Septuagint (LXX). Also, Isaiah
(Septuagint) and Mark (NT) here uses the same Greek word for yelling and crying out.
However, Mark attributes also the words below with Isaiah but is actually a quote from Malachi.
(Look! I am sending my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way.)

108 | P a g e

The NWT uses Jehovah also in Mark 5: 19; 11: 9; 12:11, 29, 30, 36; and in 13:20. Of those in this list, Jesus is
reported quoting from the OT in 12:11, 29, 30, and in 36.

36.1.1 Mark 12: 11
QUOTE The stone that the builders rejected, this has become the chief cornerstone. This has come from
Jehovah, and it is marvelous in our eyes
SOURCE MT The stone that the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone. This has come from
Jehovah, it is wonderful in our eyes.
SOURCE LXX The stone which the builders rejected, this one became for the head of the corner. By YWHW
this happened, and it is wonderful in our eyes.

It is obvious to me that the gospel writers (first Matthew, now Mark) are quoting from the Septuagint (LXX).
36.1.2 Mark 12: 29, 30
QUOTE Hear, O Israel, Jehovah our God is one Jehovah, and you must love Jehovah your God with your
whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind and with your whole strength.
SOURCE MT Listen, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah. You must love Jehovah your God with all your
heart and all your soul and all your strength.
SOURCE LXX Hear, O Israel! YHWH our God is one Lord. And you shall love YHWH your God with your entire
heart, and with your entire soul, and with your entire power.

Notice the quote includes and with your whole mind which does not appear in both the Masoretic Text (MT)
and in the Septuagint (LXX). Mark must be quoting another source for the phrase and with your whole mind.

36.1.3 Mark 12: 36
QUOTE Jehovah said to my Lord: Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies beneath your feet.
SOURCE MT Jehovah declared to my Lord: Sit at my right hand until I place your enemies as a stool for your
feet.
SOURCE LXX YWHW said to my Lord, Sit down at my right hand until whenever I should make your enemies a
footstool for your feet.
Notice the word footstool or stool was not included by Mark which appeared in the MT and LXX. Again, Mark
is quoting a different source here.

36.1.4 Mark 1:2
Mark writes "as it is written in Isaiah the prophet." If you check the cross-margin references identified with
letter "a", the quote is from Malachi 3:1 (NWT). How did that happen?
In Matthew 27: 9, 10, Matthew writes "what was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet". But the cross
margin-references identified with letter "a" gives Zechariah 11: 12, 13 (NWT). Again, how did that happen?
JW.org has an answer for the Matthew problem. It does not have a published answer for the Mark problem.
The other issue for Mark 1:2 is that NWT and King James Version Bible do not say the same thing in this verse.
The NWT (New World Translation) Bible is based on the NT Greek master text of Wescott and Hort while the
King James Version Bible is based on the NT Greek master text known as Received Text (Textus Receptus).
"Just as it is written in Isaiah the prophet: (Look! I am sending my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare
your way.)" - NWT
109 | P a g e

"As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way
before thee." - KJV
Notice while the NWT reads "in Isaiah the prophet", KJV reads "in the prophets".
One reference site on the Net offered this scholarly explanation for the first issue on Mark 1:2
"Combining of similar Old Testament passages WAS A REGULAR FEATURE OF RABBINIC STUDY OF THE
SCRIPTURES. (Fenton, Saint Matthew (The Penguin New Testament Commentaries) [Penguin Books, 1963],
p. 46; bold and capital emphasis ours)
This is also referenced
"1:2-3. Jewish teachers often combined several texts or parts of texts, especially if they had a key word or words
in common (here, prepare the way). Because they were so well learned in the Scriptures, they did not have to
say which texts they were quoting and often assumed the context without quoting it. Thus Mark cites both Isaiah
(40:3) and Malachi (3:1) here, although he mentions Isaiah only. Isaiah refers to preparing the way for God, who
is coming to restore his people. Malachi refers to God coming in judgment to set matters straight among his
people. Mark applies these texts about God to Jesus. (Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary:
New Testament [InterVarsity Press, Downers Grove, Il.; February 1994], p. 135; underline emphasis ours)"
According to this reference the Jewish rabbis call this method gezera shewa. In Latin, this is called catena of
testimonia.
For Matthew, this is the explanation of JW.org and has something to do with how the Hebrew Bible is organized
"The fulfillment of prophecy recorded by Matthew is based on what was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet.
Jeremiah was at times listed as first of the Latter Prophets, and this section of prophecies therefore included
not only Jeremiahs writings but also those of Zechariah. (Compare Lu 24:44.) The quotation made by Matthew
appears to be drawn principally from Zechariah 11:12, 13, but para-phrased by Matthew and applied to the
circumstances fulfilling it, this under inspiration by Gods spirit. As a potters field the land would be considered
as worn out and of little value, worth only the price of a slave."
What about the differences in NWT and KJV for Mark 1:2? Both Bibles are English translations. Each Bible relied on a
separate NT Greek master texts. The Wescott and Hort NT Greek master text used very old Greek NT manuscripts from the
fourth century. These manuscripts are written in large Greek capital letters without any spacing between words, known as
uncials. The Isaiah reference was in that Greek manuscript. This was the one translated to English in NWT.

The KJV used Textus Receptus that used late or young Greek NT manuscripts. What appeared in their copy is the reference
to just prophets.

Older manuscripts are closer to the autographs (or originals). Hence NWT used Wescott and Hort.

110 | P a g e

36.2 Parallelism with Matthew
Matthew, Mark and Luke are call synoptic gospels because they present similar stories about the Lord Jesus
Christ. But, the three did not just copy from each other. I verified this as I compared similar events they
reported. There were many identical events but I chose to illustrate with some.
36.2.1 Mark 2: 18-22 and Matthew 9: 14-17 Fasting issue
Mark Now Johns disciples and the Pharisees practiced fasting. So they came and said to him:
Matthew Then Johns disciples came to him and asked:

Mark Why do Johns disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees practice fasting, but your disciples do not
practice fasting?
Matthew Why do we and the Pharisees practice fasting but your disciples do not fast?

Mark So Jesus said to them: While the bridegroom is with them, the friends of the bridegroom have no
reason to fast, do they?
Matthew At this Jesus said to them: The friends of the bridegroom have no reason to mourn as long as the
bridegroom is with them, do they?

Mark As long as they have the bridegroom with them, they cannot fast.
20
But days will come when the
bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast on that day
Matthew But days will come when the bridegroom will be taken away from them, and then they will fast.

Mark Nobody sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old outer garment. If he does, the new piece pulls away
from the old, and the tear becomes worse.
Matthew
16
Nobody sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old outer garment, for the new piece pulls away
from the garment and the tear becomes worse.

Mark Also, no one puts new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the wine will burst the skins, and the
wine is lost as well as the skins.
Matthew Nor do people put new wine into old wineskins. If they do, then the wineskins burst and the wine
spills out and the wineskins are ruined.

Mark But new wine is put into new wineskins.
Matthew But people put new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.

Identify the differences:
a. It was Mark who reported that there were two groups who asked Jesus a question.
b. Both reported the same question referring to two groups
c. Both used the same response from Jesus but both of them switching the phrases
d. Mark has words to the response not present in Matthew
e. It was Matthews turn to have words not present in Mark

111 | P a g e

36.2.2 Mark 3: 34, 35 and Matthew 12: 46-50 Physical and spiritual families
Mark - Now his mother and his brothers came, and standing outside, they sent someone in to call him.
Matthew While he was yet speaking to the crowds, his mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking
to speak to him.

Mark As there was a crowd sitting around him, they said to him: Look! Your mother and your brothers
are outside asking for you.
Matthew So someone said to him: Look! Your mother and your brothers are standing outside, seeking to
speak to you.

Mark But he replied to them: Who are my mother and my brothers?
34
Then he looked at those sitting
around him in a circle
Matthew In reply he said to the one who spoke to him: Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?
49
And
extending his hand toward his disciples

Mark and said: See, my mother and my brothers!
35
Whoever does the will of God, this one is my brother
and sister and mother.
Matthew he said: Look! My mother and my brothers!
50
For whoever does the will of my Father who is in
heaven, that one is my brother and sister and mother.

I identified the differences:
a. It was Matthew who reported that he was still speaking when he was interrupted.
b. It was Mark who reported that someone was sent to call Jesus attention.
c. It was Mark who gave us the picture that there were people around him, seated in a circle.
d. Marks question combined in one plural verb are the subject mother. Matthew separated it, applying
the plural verb are only with the subject my brothers.
e. It was Matthew who reported that Jesus extended his hands in the direction of his disciples.
f. Mark said that Jesus spoke about the will of God while Matthew spoke about will of my Father.

This helps us complete the entire scenario:
1. Jesus was speaking to a crowd of his disciples, seated around him in a circle
2. His family came and sent someone to get his attention
3. Jesus responded with a question
4. Then, he pointed, extending his hand, toward his disciples
5. Jesus then declares that who does the will of his God and his Father are his true relatives

112 | P a g e

36.2.2 Mark 14: 3-9 and Matthew 26: 6-9 Perfumed oil incident
Mark And while he was at Bethany dining in the house of Simon the leper, a woman came with an alabaster
jar of perfumed oil, genuine nard, very expensive.
Matthew While Jesus was in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, a woman with an alabaster jar of
costly perfumed oil approached him

Mark She broke open the alabaster jar and began pouring it on his head. At this some said to one another
indignantly
Matthew and she began pouring it on his head as he was dining. On seeing this, the disciples became
indignant and said

Mark Why has this perfumed oil been wasted? For this perfumed oil could have been sold for more than
300 denarii and the money given to the poor! And they were greatly annoyed with her.
Matthew Why this waste? For this could have been sold for a great deal of money and given to the poor.

Mark But Jesus said: Let her alone. Why do you try to make trouble for her? She did a fine deed toward me.
Matthew Aware of this, Jesus said to them: Why do you try to make trouble for the woman? She did a fine
deed toward me.

Mark For you always have the poor with you, and you can do them good whenever you want to, but you
will not always have me.
8
She did what she could
Matthew For you always have the poor with you, but you will not always have me.

Mark ; she poured perfumed oil on my body beforehand, in view of the burial
Matthew When she put this perfumed oil on my body, she did it to prepare me for burial.

Mark - Truly I say to you, wherever the good news is preached in all the world, what this woman did will also be
told in memory of her
Matthew Truly I say to you, wherever this good news is preached in all the world, what this woman did will
also be told in memory of her.

Identifying the differences
a. Mark reported that Jesus was dining at the house of Simon the leper
b. Mark added the detail that it was a genuine nard and very expensive costing 300 denarii (roughly an
ordinary laborers one year wage)
c. Mark reported that the unidentified woman broke open the jar
d. Mark also reported the words let her alone
e. Matthew reported that while Jesus was dining she poured the perfume oil
f. Mark also reported the words and you can do them good whenever you want to and she did what
she could
g. Both reported the reference to burial and her story to be told as part of the good news

113 | P a g e

36.3 According to Mark, where Jesus spent his ministry (geography)
Just like in the gospel of Matthew where he illustrated the places where Jesus went, mountains were often
cited in his gospel. Mark also did the same reporting but I noticed it was mostly associated around or near a
body of water. Mountains would later be associated with his ministry during his Judean travel.
1. 1: 21 And they went into Capernaum.
2. 1: 39 And he went, preaching in their synagogues throughout the whole of Galilee
3. 2: 1 However, after some days he again entered into Capernaum
4. 2: 13 Again he went out alongside the sea
5. 3:7 But Jesus departed for the sea along with his disciples
6. 3: 13 He ascended a mountain and summoned those whom he wanted
7. 4: 1 Again he began teaching beside the sea
8. 5: 1 Then they came to the other side of the sea into the region of the Gerasenes.
9. 5: 21 After Jesus had crossed again by boat to the opposite shore
10. 6: 1He departed from there and came into his home territory.
11. 6: 45 to the opposite shore toward Bethsaida
12. 6: 46 But after saying good-bye to them, he went to a mountain to pray.
13. 6: 53 When they got across to land, they came to Gennesaret
14. 7: 24 He rose up from there and went into the region of Tyre and Sidon.
15. 7: 31 , he went through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, through the region of Decapolis.
16. 8: 10 Immediately he boarded the boat with his disciples and came into the region of Dalmanutha.
17. 8: 27 Jesus and his disciples now left for the villages of Caesarea Philippi.
18. 9: 2 led them up into a lofty mountain by themselves.
19. 9: 30 They departed from there and went through Galilee.
20. 10: 1 From there he got up and came to the borders of Judea across the Jordan.
21. 10: 32 Now they were going on the road up to Jerusalem.

114 | P a g e

36.4 The illustrations of Jesus
Here is a list of some of the illustrations used by Jesus as reported by Mark
1. Divided Satan (3: 23)
2. Rocky ground, fine soil (4: 3-9)
3. Lamp (4: 21)
4. Seeds (4: 26, 30)
5. Young child (9: 36)
6. Salt (9: 50)
7. Vineyard (12: 50)
Just like Matthew, Mark reports that with respect to teaching the public using illustrations is the norm (4: 34)
Indeed, without an illustration he would not speak to them.

Here are some of the reports miracles Jesus was involved with
1. Expelled an unclean spirit (1: 23-28)
2. Simons mother-in-law with fever (1: 31)
3. Leper (1: 41)
4. Paralytic (2: 5)
5. Withered hand (3: 1)
6. Violent sea storm (4: 39)
7. Fed 5, 000 (6: 35-44)
8. Expelled another demon-possessed (5: 1-20)
9. Jairus daughter (5: 21-24)
10. 12 years flow of blood (5: 25-29)
11. Walked on sea (6: 48)
12. Deaf (7: 29, 34)
13. Fed 4,000 (8: 9)
14. Blind (8: 22)
15. Possessed with speechless demon (9: 25)

115 | P a g e

36.6 The identity of Jesus
Who really is this? was a question popped in the gospel of Mark with regards to the identity of the Lord Jesus.
The following are the confessions around the identity of the Lord Jesus
1. Son of God (1: 1)
Mark opened his gospel with this confession, The beginning of the good news about Jesus Christ, the
Son of God. This confession is supported by Gods own confession at the baptism of Jesus where the
Father declares, You are my son. God would later repeat this at the transfiguration.

2. Christ (1: 34 )
The first occurrence of the title of the Lord Jesus. Mark reports, for they knew him to be Christ
referring to the wicked spirits. This title and association with Jesus is repeated at his illegal Sanhedrin
trial. Mark reports there the critical question by the high priest Are you the Christ the Son of the Blessed
One? Jesus confessed, I am. (4: 61, 62)

3. Son of man (2: 10)
It was Jesus himself, according to Mark, who used this title to describe himself. This phrase son of
man must be referring to Daniels prophecy in Daniel 7: 13, 14.

4. Lord of Sabbath (2: 28)

116 | P a g e

37. LUKE

I studied the gospel of Luke using the same parameters I did the first two gospels
1) use of God's name in the NT and other OT quotes
2) parallelism with Matthew and Mark
3) according to Mark, where Jesus spent his ministry (geography)

117 | P a g e

37.1 Use of Gods Divine Name and other OT quotes

The NWT rendered Gods Divine Name, Jehovah, in the gospel of Luke per my count 32 times. The following
verses are where God Divine Name is rendered instead of the word Lord (Greek Kyrios)
1. 1:6 walking blamelessly in accord with all the commandments and legal requirements of Jehovah.
2. 1: 9 it became his turn to offer incense when he entered into the sanctuary of Jehovah.
3. 1: 11 Jehovahs angel appeared to him, standing at the right side of the incense altar.
4. 1: 15 for he will be great in the sight of Jehovah
5. 1: 16 and he will turn back many of the sons of Israel to Jehovah their God.
6. 1: 17 in order to get ready for Jehovah a prepared people.
7. 1: 25 This is how Jehovah has dealt with me in these days.
8. 1: 28 Greetings, you highly favored one, Jehovah is with you.
9. 1: 32 and Jehovah God will give him the throne of David his father
10. 1: 38 Look! Jehovahs slave girl!
11. 1: 45 for there will be a complete fulfillment of those things spoken to her from Jehovah.
12. 1: 46 My soul magnifies Jehovah
13. 1: 58 And the neighbors and her relatives heard that Jehovah had magnified his mercy to her
14. 1: 66 For the hand of Jehovah was indeed with him.
15. 1: 68 Let Jehovah be praised, the God of Israel
16. 1: 76 for you will go ahead of Jehovah to prepare his ways
17. 2: 9 Suddenly Jehovahs angel stood before them, and Jehovahs glory gleamed around
18. 2: 15 which Jehovah has made known to us.
19. 2: 22 they brought him up to Jerusalem to present him to Jehovah
20. 2: 23 it is written in Jehovahs Law: Every firstborn male must be called holy to Jehovah (Exo 13:2)
21. 2: 24 according to what is said in the Law of Jehovah
22. 2: 26 he would not see death before he had seen the Christ of Jehovah
23. 4: 8 It is written, It is Jehovah your God you must worship (Deut. 6: 13)
24. 4: 12 It is said, You must not put Jehovah your God to the test (Deut. 6: 16)
25. 4: 18 it was written: Jehovahs spirit is upon me (Isa. 61: 1,2)
26. 4: 19 to preach Jehovahs acceptable year.
27. 5: 17 and Jehovahs power was with him to do healing
28. 10:27 In answer he said: You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart (Deut. 6: 5)
29. 13: 35 until you say: Blessed is the one who comes in Jehovahs name! (Ps. 118: 26)
30. 19:38 saying: Blessed is the one coming as the King in Jehovahs name (Ps. 118: 26)
31. 20: 37 when he calls Jehovah the God of Abraham and God of Isaac and God of Jacob (Ex. 3: 6)
32. 20: 42 in the book of Psalms, Jehovah said to my Lord: Sit at my right hand (Ps. 110: 1)
See section in Matthew why NWT restored the Divine Name in the NT text.

118 | P a g e

Of the 32 instances, 10 are quotations from the Old Testament (OT). Now, I will examine the approximately
13 OT quotes all in all.
The other quotes are the following
1. 3: 4 (quote)/ Isaiah 40: 3-5 (source)
2. 4: 4 (quote)/ Deuteronomy 8: 3 (source)
3. 4: 10 (quote)/ Psalms 91: 11,12 (source)
4. 7: 27 (quote)/ Isaiah 40: 3 (source)
5. 20: 17 (quote)/ Psalms 118: 22 (source)
6. 19: 46 (quote)/ Jeremiah 7: 11 (source)
I will examine the list above comparing the Septuagint (LXX, OT in Greek) and the Masoretic Text (MT, OT in
original Hebrew):
Luke 4: 4 and Deuteronomy 8:3
QUOTE Man must not live on bread alone.
SOURCE LXX Deut. 8: 3 Not by bread alone shall a man live
SOURCE MT Deut. 8:3 Man does not live by bread alone
In the Greek, Luke uses the same Greek word for must live/shall live as the LXX.

Luke 4: 10 and Psalms 91: 11, 12
QUOTE He will give his angels a command concerning you, to preserve you
SOURCE LXX Ps. 91: 11, 12 For to his angels he gives charge concerning you, to guard you
SOURCE MT Ps. 91: 11, 12 For he will give his angels a command concerning you, to guard you
In the Greek, Luke uses the same Greek words in the Psalms of the LXX for command/charge and for
preserve/guard.

119 | P a g e

37.2 Parallelism with Matthew and Mark
Of Lukes gospel, there are the following statistics that I was able to gather
a. 33 unique thought units on top of nearly three whole chapters unique to Luke
b. 35 similar thought units with Matthew only
c. 5 similar thought units with Mark only
d. 61 similar thought units with Matthew and Mark

37.2.1 Luke-only material

The first two and last chapters are unique to Luke. This covers the background story of John the Baptist, the
visit to Mary of angel Gabriel, the travel to Bethlehem, the visit of the shepherds, Simeon and Ana meeting up
the baby Jesus, Jesus being left behind in Jerusalem, and the introduction to the baptism of John. The last
chapter is on the resurrection and appearance of Jesus to the two disciples in Emmaus and his showing the
marks of his wounds in one appearance to the disciples.
Below are the other unique material in Luke
1. The reading of Isaiah 61: 1, 2 in a Nazareth synagogue (4: 16-21)
2. Student like his teacher (6: 40)
3. The dead son of Nain (7: 11-17)
4. The woman with alabaster jar of perfumed oil in the home of a Pharisee (7: 36-50)
5. The request to divide the inheritance between brothers (12: 13-21)
6. The little flock statement (12: 32)
7. Treasure and heart statement (12: 34)
8. The Galileans killed by Pontius Pilate (13:1-5)
9. The unfruitful fig tree on the vineyard (13: 6-9)
10. A woman with 18 years of spirit of weakness (13: 10-17)
11. Exert vigorously to enter narrow door (13: 22-30)
12. A man with dropsy (14: 1-6)
13. When invited to a marriage feast (14: 7-11)
14. Who to invite on a dinner (14: 12-14)
15. Grand evening meal (14: 15-24)
16. Calculate the cost (14: 28-33)
17. The lost drachma coin (15: 8-10)
18. Prodigal son (15: 11-32)
19. Rich mans steward (16: 1-15)
20. Rich man and Lazarus (16: 19-31)
21. Good-for-nothing slave (17: 7-10)
22. Ten lepers (17: 11-19)
23. Kingdom of God in your midst (17: 20-21)
24. Unrighteous judge (18: 1-8)
25. The prayers of the Pharisee and tax collector (18: 9-14)
26. Zacchaeus (19: 1-10)
120 | P a g e

27. Jesus weeps over Jerusalem (19: 41-44)
28. The Passover meal (22: 14-18)
29. Kingdom covenant (22: 28-30)
30. Carry sword (22: 35-38)
31. With Herod for investigation (23: 8-12)
32. Statements of Jesus to the women on his way to Golgotha (23: 26-31)
33. The conversation of the two impaled thieves (23: 39-43)

37.2.2 Common material for both Luke and Matthew

The common material for both Luke and Matthew are as follows
1. Produce fruits that befit repentance (3: 7-9 and Matthew 3: 7-10)
2. Speaking with authority (4: 32 and Matthew 7: 28, 29)
3. Praying in the mountain (6: 12 and Matthew 14: 23)
4. The Beatitudes, love your enemies, loving not just those who love you , stop judging (6:20-38 and
Matthew 5:2,3,6,10-12,39,40,42,44-48; 6:2,14;7:1,2,3-5,12)
5. Blind man leading another blind man (6:39 and Matthew 15: 14)
6. The rafter and straw in ones eyes (6: 41-42 and Matthew 7:3-5)
7. Fine tree and rotten fruit (6: 43-45 and Matthew 7: 16-18)
8. Not everyone calling Lord (6:46-49 and Matthew 7: 21, 22)
9. An army officers slave (7: 1-10 and Matthew 8: 1-13)
10. Disciples of John asked whether Jesus were the Coming One (7:18-30 and Matthew 11: 2-11)
11. Comparing generation to children playing (7: 31-35 and Matthew 11: 16-19)
12. Woes to Chorazin and Bethsaida (10:13-15 and Matthew 11: 20-24)
13. Jesus overjoyed with the holy spirit (10: 21, 22 and Matthew 11: 25-27)
14. Our Father model prayer (11: 1-4 and Matthew 6: 9-13)
15. Persistence (11: 5-13 and Matthew 7: 9-11)
16. Sign of Jonah (11: 29-34 and Matthew 12: 38-42)
17. Hypocrisy of the Pharisees (11: 39-44 and Matthew 23: 6,7, 25-28)
18. Acknowledging Jesus (12:8 and Matthew 10: 32, 33)
19. Stop being anxious (12: 22-31 and Matthew 6: 25-33)
20. Stop storing (12: 33 and Matthew 6: 20, 21)
21. Keep on the watch (12: 35-40 and Matthew 24: 43, 44)
22. Faithful slave (12: 42-48 and Matthew 24: 45-47)
23. Family divided (12: 49-53 and Matthew 10: 34-36)
24. Weather assessment (12: 54-56 and Matthew 16: 1-3)
25. Settle disputes quickly (12:57-59 and Matthew 5: 25, 26)
26. Mustard seed, tree (13: 18-21 and Matthew 13: 31-33)
27. Loves other more than Jesus (14: 26, 27 and Matthew 10: 37-39)
28. Lost sheep (15: 1-7 and Matthew 18: 12-14)
29. Law and Prophets until John (16: 16, 17 and Matthew 11: 12, 13)
30. Days of Noah (17: 26-30 and Matthew 24: 37-39)
31. One taken, one abandoned (17: 31, 34, 35 and Matthew 24: 40, 41)
121 | P a g e

32. Where eagles gather (17: 37 and Matthew 24: 28)
33. The minas (19: 11-27 and Matthew 25: 14-30)
34. Rebuke your disciples (19: 39 and Matthew 21: 15)
35. Report of the empty tomb (24: 9 and Matthew 28: 8)

I would like to illustrate how the parallel accounts are similar using # 18, Luke 12: 22-31 and Matthew 6: 25-33
but different in their subtle way
Luke
22
Then he said to his disciples: That is why I say to you, stop being anxious about your lives as to what you
will eat or about your bodies as to what you will wear.
23
For the life is worth more than food and the body more
than clothing.
Matthew

25
On this account I say to you: Stop being anxious about your lives as to what you will eat or what you will
drink, or about your bodies as to what you will wear. Does not life mean more than food and the body than
clothing?
NOTE: Luke omits Matthews what you will drink. Luke makes a declarative statement where Matthew uses
question statement.

Luke
24
Consider the ravens: They neither sow seed nor reap; they have neither barn nor storehouse; yet God
feeds them. Are you not worth much more than birds?
Matthew
26
Observe intently the birds of heaven; they do not sow seed or reap or gather into storehouses, yet your
heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not worth more than they are?
NOTE: Luke is more specific, ravens. Luke uses God where Matthew uses Father.

Luke
25
Who of you by being anxious can add a cubit to his life span?
26
If, therefore, you cannot do such a small
thing, why be anxious about the remaining things?
Matthew
27
Who of you by being anxious can add one cubit to his life span?
NOTE: Luke adds a question statement over Matthews.
Luke
27
Consider how the lilies grow: They neither toil nor spin; but I tell you that not even Solomon in all his glory
was arrayed as one of these.
Matthew
28
Also, why are you anxious about clothing? Take a lesson from the lilies of the field, how they grow; they do
not toil, nor do they spin;
29
but I tell you that not even Solomon in all his glory was arrayed as one of these.
NOTE: Luke does not use the question of Matthew.

122 | P a g e

Luke
28
Now if this is how God clothes the vegetation in the field that today exists and tomorrow is cast into an
oven, how much more will he clothe you, you with little faith!
Matthew
30
Now if this is how God clothes the vegetation of the field that is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the
oven, will he not much rather clothe you, you with little faith?
NOTE: Note the difference in the presentation for these statements.

Luke
29
So stop seeking what you will eat and what you will drink, and stop being in anxious suspense;
30
for all
these are the things the nations of the world are eagerly pursuing, but your Father knows you need these things.
Matthew
31
So never be anxious and say, What are we to eat? or, What are we to drink? or, What are we to wear?
32
For all these are the things the nations are eagerly pursuing. Your heavenly Father knows that you need all
these things.
NOTE: Luke takes a different emphasis from Matthew. Matthew continues to use questions. Now, Luke adds
what you will drink.

Luke
31
Instead, keep seeking his Kingdom, and these things will be added to you.
Matthew

33
Keep on, then, seeking first the Kingdom and his righteousness, and all these other things will be added to
you.
NOTE: Luke omits first, and his righteousness, all and other.

It will be a big project in itself to work out all the other parallels listed in this reflection.

123 | P a g e

37.2.3 Common material between Luke and Mark

The common material between Luke and Mark as I have identified
1. Dont prevent others (9: 49,50 and Mark 9: 38-40)
2. Whoever disowns Jesus (12: 9 and Mark 8:38)
3. Plans to kill him when in the temple (19: 47, 48 and Mark 11: 18)
4. The widows contribution (21: 1-4 and Mark 12: 41-44)
5. Empty tomb (24: 3 and Mark 16: 5)

Here is one of the parallel account, the widows contribution Luke 21:1-4 and Mark 12: 41-44
Luke
Now as he looked up, he saw the rich dropping their gifts into the treasury chests.

Mark
41
And he sat down with the treasury chests in view and began observing how the crowd was dropping money
into the treasury chests, and many rich people were dropping in many coins

NOTE: Mark is more detailed in his report compared to Luke, saying where he sat down and that coins were
being dropped as gifts.
Luke
2
Then he saw a needy widow drop in two small coins of very little value,

Mark
42
Now a poor widow came and dropped in two small coins of very little value.
NOTE: Luke describes the widow as needy (Greek penechros the working poor) while Mark describes him as
poor (Greek ptochos, helpless, beggar). The difference between the two descriptions is that Luke sees the
widow as earning a living while Marks widow is someone completely dependent on somebody else, a beggar.
Luke
3
and he said: Truly I say to you that this poor widow put in more than they all did
Mark
43
So he called his disciples to him and said to them: Truly I say to you that this poor widow put in more than all
the others who put money into the treasury chests.
NOTE: Luke omits the part to whom Jesus is saying his message but Mark lets us know who the audience was.
Luke also omits the extra words of Mark.
Luke
For all of these put in gifts out of their surplus, but she, out of her want, put in all the means of living she had.
Mark
For they all put in out of their surplus, but she, out of her want, put in everything she had, all she had to live on.

NOTE: Luke uses the phrase means of living (panta ton bion hon eichen) referring to her available resources
while Mark uses the same Greek phrase to live on (holon ton bion autes).
124 | P a g e

37.2.4 Common material among all three gospel writers
The following is a list of the common material among the three
1. Johns role relative to Jesus (3: 16-17 and Matthew 3:11, 12 and Mark 1: 7,8)
2. Tempted by the Devil (4: 1-13 and Matthew 4: 1-11 and Mark 1: 12, 13
3. Return to Galilee (4: 14 and Matthew 4:12 and Mark 1:14)
4. Reception at Nazareth (4:22-30 and Matthew 13: 53-58 and Mark 6: 2-6)
5. Invites Peter to fish (5:4-10 and Matthew 4:18-22 and Mark 1: 16-20)
6. Healing of Leper (5:12-14 and Matthew 8:1-4 and Mark 1: 40-45)
7. Healing of paralytic (5: 18-26 and Matthew 9:1-8 and Mark 2: 3-12)
8. Matthew (5: 27-32 and Matthew 9:9-13 and Mark 2: 14-17)
9. Criticism for not fasting (5:33-39 and Matthew 9:14,15 and Mark 2:18-22)
10. Plucking ears of heads of grain (6:1-5 and Matthew 12:1-8 and Mark 2: 23-28)
11. Choosing of the 12 (6:13-16 and Matthew 10:2-4 and Mark 3:16-19)
12. Sower and types of soil (8:4-8 and Matthew 13:3-9 and Mark 4:2-9)
13. Demon-possessed man from Gerasenes (8:26-29 and Matthew 8: 28-34 and Mark 5:1-17)
14. Jairus daughter (8: 40-42, 49-56 and Matthew 9:18, 23-26 and Mark 5: 21-24, 35-43)
15. Woman with 12 year flow of blood (8: 43-48 and Matthew 9: 20-22 and Mark 5: 27-29)
16. Instructing 12 for the ministry (9:1-6 and Matthew 10: 5-23 and Mark 6: 35-44)
17. Fed 5,000 (9:10-17 and Matthew 14: 14-22 and Mark 6:35-44)
18. Transfiguration (9: 27-36 and Matthew 16: 28; 17:1-9 and Mark 9:1-8)
19. Expelled Unclean spirit (9:37-43 and Matthew 17: 14-20 and Mark 9:14-29)
20. Sent out the 70 (10:1-12 and Matthew 10:5-15 and Mark 6: 7-13)
21. Expelled speechless demon (11: 14-20 and Matthew 12: 22-30 and Mark 3: 20-30)
22. Leaven of the Pharisee (12:1 and Matthew 16:5,6 and Mark 8: 14, 15)
23. Nothing is secret (12:2 and Matthew 10: 26, 27 and Mark 4:22)
24. Thrown into Gehenna (12: 10 and Matthew 12:31,32 and Mark 3: 28,29)
25. Salt (14: 34,35 and Matthew 5:13 and Mark 9:50)
26. Divorce (16:18 and Matthew 19:9 and Mark 10: 11,12)
27. Tie a millstone around ones neck (17: 2 and Matthew 18:6 and Mark 9:42)
28. Blessed children (18:15-17 and Matthew 19:13-15 and Mark 10:13-16)
29. How to get eternal life (18: 18-30 and Matthew 19:16-29 and Mark 10:17-22)
30. The death of the Messiah disclosed (18:31-33 and Matthew 20:17-19 and Mark 10:32-34)
31. Blind beggar (18:35-43 and Matthew 10: 29-34 and Mark 10: 46-52)
32. Entry to Jerusalem (19: 28-35 and Matthew 21:1-9 and Mark 11:1-11)
33. Cave of robbers (19:45, 46 and Matthew 21:12, 13 and Mark 11:15-17)
34. Authority of Jesus (20:1-7 and Matthew 21:23-27 and Mark 11:27-33)
35. Vineyard (20:9-16 and Matthew 21:33-41 and Mark 12:1-9)
36. Pay Caesar, God (20:19-26 and Matthew 22:15-22 and Mark 12:13-17)
37. Sadducees and resurrection (20:27-38 and Matthew 22:23-28 and Mark 12:18-23)
38. Psalms 110:1 question (20:41-44 and Matthew 22: 41-46 and Mark 12: 35-37)
39. Scribes love best seats (20:45-47 and Matthew 23: 2,6,7 and Mark 12: 38-40)
40. Temple and the sign (21:5-11 and Matthew 24:1-9 and Mark 13:1-13)
41. The siege of Jerusalem (21:20-24 and Matthew 24: 15,16,19 and Mark 13:14, 17)
42. Sign in sun, moon (21:25-28 and Matthew 24:29, 30 and Mark 13: 24-26)
125 | P a g e

43. Keep awake (21:34-36 and Matthew 24:42; 25:13 and Mark 13: 33-35)
44. Judas Iscariot arranges Jesus capture (22:3-6 and Matthew 26:14-16 and Mark 14: 10,11)
45. Getting the Passover room (22:7-13 and Matthew 26:17-19 and Mark 14: 12, 13, 16)
46. The Memorial (22:19, 20 and Matthew 26: 26-30 and Mark 14: 22-26)
47. Revealing a betrayer (22:21-23 and Matthew 26: 21, 22, 24 and Mark 14: 18,19)
48. The greatest (22:24-27 and Matthew 20: 25-27 and Mark 10: 42-44)
49. Abandoning Jesus foretold (22:31-34 and Matthew 26:31-33 and Mark 14: 27-30)
50. At Gethsemane (22:39-46 and Matthew 26: 30, 39-41 and Mark 14: 36-38)
51. Arrival of Judas (22: 47-53 and Matthew 26: 47-58 and Mark 14: 43-49)
52. Denial of Peter (22: 54-62 and Matthew 26: 57,58,69-75 and Mark 14: 53,54,66-72)
53. The mocking of Jesus by the Jewish authorities (22:63-65 and Matthew 26: 67,68 and Mark 14: 65)
54. Accused of rebellion to Pilate (23: 1-7 and Matthew 27:2, 11 and Mark 15:1)
55. Pilate gives in to the mob (23: 13-25 and Matthew 27:20, 21 and Mark 15:11, 12-15)
56. Impalement (23:32-38 and Matthew 27:35-38,42,43 and Mark 15: 26, 31, 34)
57. One of robbers mock Jesus (23:39 and Matthew 27:44 and Mark 15:32)
58. Jesus dies (23:44-49 and Matthew 27:45, 50, 54-56 and Mark 15: 33, 40, 41)
59. Joseph of Arimathea claims Jesus body (23:50-56 and Matthew 27:56-61 and Mark 15:43-47)
60. Women return to tomb, discovers it empty (24:1,2 and Matthew 28: 1,2 and Mark 16:1,2)
61. Angel spoke to women (24: 5 and Matthew 28:5-7 and Mark 16:5-7)

I sampled for illustration the parallel story of the resurrection which all three reported, items 60 and 61.
Luke
But on the first day of the week, they came very early to the tomb, bringing the spices they had prepared.
Matthew
After the Sabbath, when it was growing light on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other
Mary came to view the grave.

Mark
So when the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices
in order to come and apply them to his body. And very early on the first day of the week when the sun had
risen, they came to the tomb.

NOTE: All writers agree that this was after the Sabbath (Friday night-Saturday night) and that women came,
with Luke and Mark more specific in saying that it was first day of the week. Only Mark and Luke added the
detail that the women came very early or growing light (Matthew). Matthew added the detail that there
were two Marys that came. Mark added Salome. Luke did not specify the women who came.
Matthew also uses a Greek word epiphosko which meant growing light, dawn. This is interesting because
Luke also used it but with reference to the burial of Jesus (Luke 23: 45, rendered epiphosko there as was
about to begin.) Jesus died before the Sabbath (Thursday night-Friday night).

126 | P a g e

Luke
2
But they found the stone rolled away from the tomb,
3
and when they entered, they did not find the body of
the Lord Jesus.
4
While they were perplexed about this, look! two men in shining garments stood by them.
Matthew
.
2
And look! a great earthquake had taken place, for Jehovahs angel had descended from heaven and had
come and rolled away the stone, and he was sitting on it
Mark
But when they looked up, they saw that the stone had been rolled away, although it was very large
5
When
they entered into the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a white robe, and they
were stunned.

NOTE: Luke just reports that the stone is rolled away and that the men they met wore shining garments
implying angels. Matthew added the detail of why or who rolled it away- an angel. Mark simply reported that
the women came in to an open tomb and saw a young man wearing a white robe (Greek stole a stately
robe reaching down to the feet. Insight page 653). Matthew reports that the man they saw was an angel.

Luke
5
The women became frightened and kept their faces turned toward the ground, so the men said to them:
Why are you looking for the living one among the dead?
6
He is not here, but has been raised up. Recall
how he spoke to you while he was yet in Galilee,
7
saying that the Son of man must be handed over to
sinful men and be executed on the stake and on the third day rise.
Matthew
But the angel said to the women: Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus who was
executed on the stake.
6
He is not here, for he was raised up, just as he said. Come, see the place where he
was lying.
7
Then go quickly and tell his disciples that he was raised up from the dead, for look! he is going
ahead of you into Galilee. You will see him there. Look! I have told you.
Mark
6
He said to them: Do not be stunned. You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene who was executed on the
stake. He was raised up. He is not here. Look, here is the place where they laid him.
7
But go, tell his
disciples and Peter, He is going ahead of you into Galilee. You will see him there, just as he told you.

NOTE: All accounts report that the women had a conversation. Luke and Mark reports that they spoke with
men. Matthew reports that these men were angels. All used the phrase He is not here, but has been raised
up with some variations. In Matthew and Mark, the women received instruction about going to Galilee. Luke
did not mention this but it was only Luke who referred to Jesus rising on the third day.
Some Bible critics point out that Jesus was not raised literally after three days as in the sign of Jonah. It
might help to read 2 Chronicles 10: 5 where the expression after three days is used and 10: 12 where the
expression on the third day is used. See the parallel usage in 1 Kings 12: 5 and 12, Esther 4: 16 and 5:1.

127 | P a g e

37.3 According to Luke, where Jesus spent his ministry (geography)

The list below shows the locations where Jesus spent his ministry according to Luke
1. 4:1 he was led about by the spirit in the wilderness
2. 4:14 Jesus returned in the power of the spirit into Galilee
3. 4:16 He then went to Nazareth
4. 4:31 He then went down to Capernaum
5. 4:44 So he went on preaching in the synagogues of Judea
6. 5:1 he was standing by the lake of Gennesaret
7. 6:1 Now on a sabbath he was passing through grainfield
8. 6:12 On one of those days he went out to the mountain to pray
9. 7:1 he entered Capernaum
10. 7:11 Soon afterward he traveled to a city called Nain
11. 8:1 Shortly afterward he traveled from city to city and from village to village
12. 8:22 Let us cross to the other side of the lake
13. 8:26 And they put in to shore in the region of the Gerasenes
14. 9:10 withdrew privately into a city called Bethsaida
15. 9:28 he took Peter, John, and James along and climbed up the mountain to pray
16. 9:51 he resolutely set his face to go to Jerusalem
17. 10:38 he entered into a certain village (Martha, Mary, and Lazarus)
18. 11:1 he was in a certain place praying
19. 13:22 teaching and continuing on his journey to Jerusalem
20. 17:11 While he was going to Jerusalem, he was passing between Samaria and Galilee
21. 18:31 Look! We are going up to Jerusalem
22. 18:35 Now as Jesus was getting near to Jericho
23. 19:1 He then entered Jericho and was passing through.
24. 19:28 he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem.
25. 19:45 Then he entered the temple

128 | P a g e

37.4 The illustrations of Jesus as his primary way of teaching
Below is a list of the illustrations used by Jesus as recorded by Luke
1. 5:31 physician
2. 5:34 friends of the bridegroom
3. 5:37 new wine, old wineskin
4. 6:39 blind man leading another blind man
5. 6:40 student, teacher
6. 6:41 straw, rafter
7. 6:43 rotten tree, fine fruit
8. 6:48 house on rock
9. 7:33 children playing in the marketplace
10. 7:41 two debtors
11. 8:5 sower of seeds, types of soil
12. 8:16; 11: 34 lamp
13. 9:58 foxes, dens
14. 9:62 hand, plow
15. 10:30 good Samaritan
16. 11:5 friend, bread
17. 11:18 divided Satan
18. 12:15 rich man
19. 12:24 ravens
20. 12:27 lilies of the field
21. 12:35 attendants
22. 13:19 mustard grain
23. 13:21 leaven
24. 13:24 narrow door
25. 14:8 invited to feast
26. 14:16 grand evening meal
27. 15:5 lost sheep
28. 15:8 lost drachma coin
29. 15:11 prodigal son
30. 16:1 rich mans steward
31. 16:19 rich man, Lazarus
32. 17:2 millstone tied on neck
33. 17:10 good for nothing slave
34. 17:26, 28 days of Noah, Lot
35. 18:1 wicked judge
36. 18:9 Pharisee, tax collector
37. 18:17 young child
38. 18:25 camel, needle
39. 19:11 minas
40. 20:9 vineyard, cultivators
41. 20:24 tax coin
129 | P a g e

The list below shows the miracles performed by Jesus as recorded by Luke
1. 4:35 expels demon
2. 4:39 Simons mother-in-laws fever
3. 5:13 leper
4. 5;24 paralytic
5. 6:10 withered hand
6. 7:10 officers slave
7. 7:14 Nains dead son
8. 8:33 expelling Legion
9. 8:40 daughter of Jairus
10. 8:43 woman with 12 years flow of blood
11. 9:14 fed 5,000
12. 11;14 expels speechless demon
13. 13:13 bent-down woman
14. 14:4 dropsy
15. 17:11 10 lepers
16. 18:35 blind man
17. 22:51 restored cut-off ear

37.6 The identity of Jesus as he was perceived by people around him
Who really is this? and who then is this? are questions that popped up in the record of Luke with respect to
the quest for the identity of Jesus. The list below are titles or descriptions associated with Jesus during his
earthly ministry, either attributed to him or he himself said so:
1. Son of the Most High
2. King
3. Christ
4. Son of God
5. Holy One of God
6. Son of man
7. Prophet
8. Son of David
The angels were the first to identify who Jesus was. They introduced him as Son of the Most High and that
Jesus will rule as king, Christ the Lord (1: 32, 33 and 35; 2: 11) The demons or wicked angels also attributed to
Jesus this expression using the variation Son of the Most High God (8: 28) , Holy One of God (4:34), and
Son of God (4:41). God himself declared from the heavens, You are my Son. (3:22) Jesus himself at the
night of his trial confessed of being the Son of God (22: 70).
The title Son of man is one that Jesus used to describe himself several times (5:24; 22: 69). This special
expression is a reference to the book of Daniel 7: 13, 14. There the Son of man was enthroned and given
rulership and kingdom at the heavenly court. This implies royalty in the person of Jesus. Hence, another term
that has royalty is Son of David (18: 38). Even the angels disclosed this future role as being an heir of David.
Most people recognized Jesus as The Prophet (7: 16). Even his own disciples after his death but before his
resurrection recognized him as such (24: 19).
130 | P a g e

38. JOHN
In this study of John, I explored the following areas
1. use of God's name in the NT
2. the use of John of OT quotes to support the Messiahship of Jesus
3. according to John, where Jesus spent his ministry (geography)
4. the illustrations of Jesus as his primary way of teaching
5. the miracles of Jesus
6. parallelism with the other gospels
7. the identity of Jesus as he was perceived by people around him

38.1 Use of Gods Divine Name in the NT
There are three places in the gospel of John where the NWT rendered Gods divine name Jehovah in the
gospel of John. The list below includes
1. 6: 45 They will all be taught by Jehovah (Isaiah 54: 13)
2. 12: 38 Jehovah, who has put faith in the thing heard from us? And as for the arm of Jehovah, to whom
has it been revealed? (Isaiah 53: 1)

38.2 OT Quotes in the gospel of John
There are 11 OT quotes in the gospel of John. The list below includes
1. 1: 23 quoting Isaiah 40: 3
2. 2: 17 quoting Psalms 69: 9
4. 12: 15 quoting Zechariah 9:9
5. 12: 38 quoting Isaiah 53:1
7. 13: 18 quoting Psalms 41: 9
8. 15: 25 quoting Psalms 35: 19 and 69: 4
9. 19:24 quoting Psalms 22: 18
10. 19:36 quoting Psalms 34: 20
11. 19: 37 quoting Zechariah 12: 10

131 | P a g e

Here are some illustrative examples of the quotes and their source
John 1:23 and Isaiah 40: 3
QUOTE I am a voice of someone crying out in the wilderness, Make the way of Jehovah straight
SOURCE LXX A voice yelling in the wilderness, Prepare the way of YHWH! Make straight the roads of our
God!
SOURCE MT A voice of one calling out in the wilderness: Clear up the way of Jehovah! Make a straight
highway through the desert for our God.

Note: Interestingly, John the Baptists quote is not exact to the words of the original but more like an
abridgement of the original.

John 2:17 and Psalms 69: 9
QUOTE The zeal for your house will consume me.
SOURCE LXX For the zeal of your house devoured me
SOURCE MT Zeal for your house has consumed me

Note: Here, interestingly, the source was using a past tense whereas John is using a future tense for
consume. John could be using a different source other than these above.

John 6:45 and Isaiah 54: 13
QUOTE They will all be taught by Jehovah.
SOURCE LXX And all your sons instructed of God
SOURCE MT And all your sons will be taught by Jehovah

Note: Here, we find a variation in the manuscripts used for Isaiah of LXX (a translation) and Isaiah of MT (original
Hebrew).

John 12: 15 and Isaiah 62: 11 and Zechariah 9: 9
QUOTE Have no fear, daughter of Zion. Look! Your king is coming, seated on a donkeys colt.
SOURCE LXX Behold, your king comes to you, righteous and delivering. He is gentle and mounted upon a best
of burden, even a young foal.
SOURCE MT Look! Your king is coming to you. He is righteous, bringing salvation, humble and riding on a
donkey, on a colt.

Note: John has apparently abridged the verse on his quote. Check Section 36.1.4.

132 | P a g e

38.3 Where Jesus spent his ministry (geography)
The list below shows the travels of Jesus in his ministry
1. 1:43 to leave for Galilee
2. 2: 1 did this in Cana of Galilee
3. 2: 12 went down to Capernaum
4. 3:22 went into the Judean countryside
5. 4: 3 left Judea and departed again for Galilee
6. 4: 5 he came to a city of Samaria called Sychar
7. 4: 43 he left there for Galilee
8. 4: 46 he came again to Cana of Galilee
9. 5: 1 went up to Jerusalem
10. 6: 1 set out across the Sea of Galilee
11. 7: 1 continued traveling about in Galilee
12. 7: 14 went up into the temple
13. 10: 40 went away again across the Jordan
14. 11: 18 Bethany was near Jerusalem
15. 11: 54 he departed from there to Ephraim
16. 12: 1 arrived at Bethany
17. 12: 12 Jesus was coming to Jerusalem

38.4 The illustrations of Jesus
The list below shows the illustrations or comparisons that Jesus used in teaching
1. 3:8 wind
2. 4: 10 living water
3. 6: 27 food
4. 6: 35 bread
5. 8: 12 light
6. 10: 9 door
7. 10: 16 sheep
8. 10: 11 shepherd
9. 15: 1 vine
10. 16:21 giving birth

133 | P a g e

The list below shows some of the specific miracles of Jesus
1. 2: 7 wine in Cana marriage feast
2. 4: 50 sick son
3. 5: 9 sick man at pool
4. 6: 10 5,000 fed
5. 6: 19 walking on sea
6. 9: 7 blind beggar

38.6 The parallelism with the other gospels
I will compare some of the accounts that John reported as well as the others. I will use the feeding of 5,000
story first.
1. The setting of the story

John 6: 1,2
After this Jesus set out across the Sea of Galilee, or Tiberias.
2
And a large crowd kept following
him.

Matthew 14: 13
13
At hearing this, Jesus departed from there by boat into an isolated place to be alone. But the crowds,
getting to hear of it, followed him on foot from the cities.

Mark 6: 30-33
The apostles gathered around Jesus and reported to him all the things they had done and taught.
31
And he said to them: Come, you yourselves, privately into an isolated place and rest up a little.
33
But
people saw them going and many got to know it, and from all the cities they ran together on foot and got
there ahead of them.

Luke 9: 10-11
When the apostles returned, they reported to Jesus all they had done. With that he took them along and
withdrew privately into a city called Bethsaida.
11
But the crowds, getting to know it, followed him.

NOTE: Mark and Luke reports that the apostles just returned from their ministry and that Jesus planned
to give them a break. Matthew and John does not tell us why he set out to sea but Mark and Luke does.
However, Mark and Luke does not tell us that they did by sea. Matthew and John did. And only John
reports that upon arriving in Bethsaida, they went up a mountain.

134 | P a g e

2. Arrival

John 6: 3
3
So Jesus went up on a mountain and sat down there with his disciples.

Matthew 14: 14
When he came ashore, he saw a large crowd, and he felt pity for them, and he cured their sick ones.

Mark 6: 34
Well, on getting out, he saw a large crowd, and he was moved with pity for them, because they were as
sheep without a shepherd. And he started to teach them many things.

Luke 9: 11
And he received them kindly and began to speak to them about the Kingdom of God, and he healed
those needing a cure.

NOTE: Matthew and Luke reported that Jesus upon arriving performed his ministry of curing their sick
ones. Only Mark and Luke reported that Jesus also taught them many things, including about the
Kingdom of God.

3. The problem

John 6: 5-7
5
When Jesus raised his eyes and saw that a large crowd was coming to him, he said to Philip: Where
will we buy bread for these people to eat?
6
However, he was saying this to test him, for he knew what
he was about to do.
7
Philip answered him: Two hundred denarii worth of bread is not enough for each
of them to get even a little.

Matthew 14:15-16
15
But when evening fell, his disciples came to him and said: The place is isolated and the hour is
already late; send the crowds away, so that they may go into the villages and buy themselves food.
16
However, Jesus said to them: They do not have to leave; you give them something to eat.

Mark 6: 35-37
By now the hour had grown late, and his disciples came up to him and said: This place is isolated, and
the hour is already late.
36
Send them away, so that they may go off into the surrounding countryside and
villages and buy themselves something to eat.
37
He replied to them: You give them something to eat.
At this they said to him: Should we go off and buy 200 denarii worth of bread and give it to the people
to eat?

Luke 9: 12,13
12
Then the day was coming to a close. The Twelve now came up and said to him: Send the crowd
away, so that they may go into the surrounding villages and countryside to find lodging and provisions,
because out here we are in an isolated place.
13
But he said to them: You give them something to eat.

NOTE: Matthew, Mark and Luke reported the time of day. The three also reported that all the apostles
presented the problem to Jesus about the challenge of feeding the crowd. Only Mark and John reported
the money that was not even enough to buy bread. Only John reported that Jesus had asked Philip
about a solution. Matthew, Mark and Luke all reported Jesus response feed the crowd.
135 | P a g e

4. Organizing the 5,000

John 6: 8,9
8
One of his disciples, Andrew, Simon Peters brother, said to him:
9
Here is a little boy who has five
barley loaves and two small fish. But what are these among so many?
10
Jesus said: Have the men sit
down. As there was a lot of grass in that place, the men sat down there, about 5,000 in number.

Matthew 14: 17-19
17
They said to him: We have nothing here except five loaves and two fish.
18
He said: Bring them
here to me.
19
And he instructed the crowds to recline on the grass.

Mark 6: 38-40
38
He said to them: How many loaves do you have? Go see! After finding out, they said: Five, besides
two fish.
39
And he instructed all the people to recline in groups on the green grass.
40
So they reclined
in groups of 100 and of 50.

Luke 9: 13-15
They said: We have nothing more than five loaves and two fish, unless perhaps we ourselves go and
buy food for all these people.
14
There were, in fact, about 5,000 men. But he said to his disciples:
Have them sit down in groups of about 50 each.
15
And they did so and had them all sit down.

NOTE: Luke and John reports that Jesus instructed to have the crowd sit down. Matthew and Mark
reports that Jesus instructed the crowd to recline on the green grass. Only Mark and Luke reported that
they were organized in groups of 50. Mark adds also a group of 100. All of the gospel writers agree that
there were only five loaves and two fish. John was specific that these were five barley loaves and a little
boy has them.

136 | P a g e

5. The miracle

John 6: 11-13
11
Jesus took the bread, and after giving thanks, he distributed it to those who were sitting there; he did
likewise with the small fish, and they had as much as they wanted.
12
But when they had eaten their fill,
he said to his disciples: Gather together the fragments left over, so that nothing is wasted.
13
So they
gathered them together and filled 12 baskets with fragments left over by those who had eaten from the
five barley loaves.

Matthew 14: 19-21
Then he took the five loaves and two fish, and looking up to heaven, he said a blessing, and after
breaking the loaves, he gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the crowds.
20
So they
all ate and were satisfied, and they took up the leftover fragments, 12 baskets full.
21
Now those eating
were about 5,000 men, as well as women and young children.

Mark 6: 41-44
41
Taking now the five loaves and the two fish, he looked up to heaven and said a blessing. Then he
broke the loaves up and began giving them to the disciples to place them before the people, and he
divided up the two fish for all.
42
So they all ate and were satisfied,
43
and they took up 12 baskets full of
fragments, aside from the fish.
44
Those who ate the loaves were 5,000 men.

Luke 9: 16-17
16
Taking now the five loaves and the two fish, he looked up to heaven and blessed them. Then he
broke them up and began giving them to the disciples to set before the crowd.
17
So they all ate and
were satisfied, and they took up the leftovers, 12 baskets of fragments.

NOTE: Matthew, Mark and Luke agree that Jesus looked up to heaven and blessed the provision. John
simply says Jesus gave thanks. Matthew, Mark and Luke reported that Jesus broke the loaves and then
gave them. John just reported that they were distributed. John did not report of Jesus breaking the
loaves. Notice how close Matthew, Mark and Luke were in detail up to eating, getting satisfied and the
12 baskets. Only John reported that Jesus has specific instructions to gather the leftover.

137 | P a g e

38.7 The identity of Jesus according to John
John opened his gospel by declaring that the Word was a god. In his introduction to his gospel, John
introduced Jesus as the Word (1:1), only begotten god (1: 18), son of God (1:34), Messiah (1: 41), king
of Israel (1: 49) and the means by which creation existed (1:3)- all in one chapter.
John is unique in introducing Jesus as the only begotten god. This is not present in the other gospels.
The list below identified who Jesus was
1. A god (1: 1; 10: 33)
2. Word (1: 1)
3. Only begotten god (1: 18)
4. Son of God (1: 34; 11:4, 27; 19:7; 20: 31)
5. Messiah or Christ (1: 41; 4: 25; 7: 41; 9: 22; 10: 24, 25; 11: 27; 17: 3; 20: 31)
6. King of Israel (1: 49; 12: 13)
7. Good man (7: 12)
8. Son of man (3: 13; 9: 35, 37; 13: 31)
9. Prophet (4: 19; 6: 14; 7: 40; 9: 17)
10. Light (12: 46)
Unlike the other gospels, there is no pop-up question of who Jesus really was from his disciples. Rather, the
popup question came from his enemies, If you are the Christ, tell us plainly. (10:24) John did not have the
confrontational question of the Sanhedrin, recorded by the other gospels of whether Jesus is the Son of God.
Instead, we find Pontius Pilate repeatedly asking him, Are you the king of the Jews?
There are key prophecies from the Old Testament (OT) about the coming of Jesus
1. Moses prophesied a future prophet to rise in Israel to whom they should listen to (Deut. 18: 15)
2. Prophet Daniel prophesied about a son of man who will receive a kingdom (Daniel 7: 13)
3. Gods promise to keep Davids dynasty to continue, king of Israel, Messiah or Christ (Psalms 132:11)
All these roles fold into Jesus, as confessed by his disciples
1. Samaritan woman, I know that Messiah is coming, who is called Christ. Whenever that one comes, he
will declare all things to us openly. (4: 25)
2. Mary, sister of Lazarus, Yes, Lord, I have believed that you are the Christ, the Son of God, the one
coming into the world. (11:27)
Jesus has confessed not only that he is the Christ or Messiah but that he is also the Son of man
3. Are you putting faith in the Son of man?
36
The man answered: And who is he, sir, so that I may put
faith in him?
37
Jesus said to him: You have seen him, and in fact, he is the one speaking with you.
38
He said: I do put faith in him, Lord. (9: 35-38)

138 | P a g e

However, his enemies continue to distort Jesus identity and twist his words. Notice this exchange between
what his enemies say and what Jesus says
His enemies: (5: 18) but he was also calling God his own Father, making himself equal to God.
His enemies: (10:34) you, although being a man, make yourself a god.
His enemies: (19: 7) According to the law he ought to die, because he made himself Gods son.
What his enemies is saying is not that Jesus himself said that he is God but rather that claiming to be the Son of
God is making himself equal to God, his Father. How his enemies came to this conclusion, the gospel does not
show. But, is their understanding correct? Or are they misrepresenting Jesus?
Let us take a look at statements of Jesus about God
(6: 27) for on this one the Father, God himself, has put his seal of approval. (Father = God)
(17: 3) their coming to know you, the only true God (Jesus praying to the Father, the only true God)
(20: 17) my Father and your Father and to my God and your God. (after the resurrection)
Jesus consistently painted a clear picture of who the Father is and who God is before and after his resurrection.
Some Bible readers got confused with the statement of Jesus where he said I and the Father are one (10:30).
They should not be. Compare the statements of Jesus below with how he uses the idea of being one with the
Father
(17: 11) so that they may be one just as we are one
(17: 22 in order that they may be one just as we are one
How can his disciples be one just as the Jesus and the Father are one? It couldnt be about being the same God
or same person. Jesus is using the idea of being one as in harmonious relationship, united in purpose. It is not
about being the Father himself.

139 | P a g e

39. More Comparison of the Gospels

39.1 Statistics on the Gospels

If a reader wants to learn more about Jesus' many teachings, Matthew and Luke are the ones to read because they contain
most of the illustrations.

If a reader wants to learn more about who Jesus is, John is the gospel to go to. It contained the most number of references to
the key prophetic titles of Jesus from the Old Testament.

If a reader wants a quick view of Jesus in action in his short 3.5 years ministry, Mark is the gospel to go to.

140 | P a g e

39.2 Who Said What About Jesus

141 | P a g e

39.3 Contradictions in the Gospel accounts?
In our Family Worship, we had this project to use Appendix B12 "The Final Week of Jesus' Life on Earth". We
read and compared the accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John of what happened in the final week.
If you take the approach the critic-scholar approach, and believe that Mark was the first gospel writer, and that
Matthew and Luke used his account as basis for their own and edited their versions to be different from Mark,
and compare that with John, we will end up with a picture of a report that is full of contradictions.
For example, Matthew and Mark agree that Jesus went to the house of Simon the leper. John, however, reported
that he went to the house of Lazarus.
Matthew and Mark agree that an unidentified woman with an alabaster jar of expensive perfume oil was on the
scene. John reported that woman was Mary, Lazarus' sister.
Matthew and Mark reported that the apostles complained about what they perceived was a wasteful use of an
important and potential source of funds. John reported that it was only Judas Iscariot.
Matthew did not report the cost of the perfume oil. Mark reported it was more than 300 denarii. John reported
that it was 300 denarii.
Critic-scholars take on this reporting as unreliable due to the apparent contradictions.
I found this position echoed in the book "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart Ehrman, a self confessed, critic-scholar and
an agnostic. I am now reading another book, "Can We Trust the Gospels? Investigating the Reliability of
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John" by another scholar Mark D. Roberts. He wrote about these so-called
contradictions as promoted by his own professor at the time this way
"Though the Gospels were not written by one author, it seemed that Professoar MacRae had rushed to judgment
about the contradictory nature of the Gospels without considering how varying Gospel accounts might have been
complementary."
When he studied the Gnostic gospels which the media later popularized as the unpublished stories about Jesus,
he re-discovered his respect for the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. He writes
"During this second class with him I began to see the Gospels are more reliable than I had once thought, in part,
as I compared them to the WILDLY FICTIONAL portraits (emphasis is mine - Joel) of Jesus in the Gnostic
Gospels."
What was the problem with the critic-scholars for concluding that the New Testament is not historical but
promotional, religious material? He writes again
"I also discovered how rarely my professors entertained perspectives by scholars who didn't share their
naturalistic worldview."
What is his conclusion over the years of his exploration as an NT scholar?
"My point in this book is that if you look squarely at the facts as they are widely understood, and if you do not
color them with pejorative bias or atheistic presuppositions, then you'll find that it's reasonable to trust the
Gospels."
The book "The Bible- God's Word or Man's?" published by Jehovah's Witnesses wrote about this
"What does this mean? Albright concludes: All we can say is that a period of between twenty and fifty years is
too slight to permit of any appreciable corruption of the essential content and even of the specific wording of the
sayings of Jesus. Professor Gary Habermas adds: The Gospels are quite close to the period of time which they
record, while ancient histories often describe events which took place centuries earlier. Yet, modern historians
are able to successfully derive the events even from these ancient periods of time.
142 | P a g e

In other words, the historical parts of the Christian Greek Scriptures are worthy of at least as much credence as
secular histories. Certainly, in the few decades between the events of early Christianity and their being recorded
in writing, there was no time for myths and legends to develop and be universally accepted."
Why are these important information? Some critic-scholars seriously believed that the Gospels were written 100
years after Christ's death! But the facts don't support their ideas.
Similar to what Dr. Roberts was writing about his fellow scholars who are critical about the Bible, the book "The
Bible- God's Word or Man's?" quotes a scholar
"In this skeptical 20th century, such things are incredible. Regarding miracles, Professor Ezra P. Gould notes:
There is one reservation which some of the critics feel themselves justified in making . . . that miracles do not
happen. Some accept that Jesus may have effected healings, but only of the psychosomatic, mind over matter,
type. As for the other miracles, most explain them away either as inventions or as real events that were distorted
in the telling."
These pre-conceived ideas serve as a filter in their minds and prevents them from recognizing the historicity of
not just the Gospels but the entire Bible.
The Bible is God's gift to us. We should read it every day. We should study it too.

This video shows you how
http://www.jw.org/en/video-bible-study/

143 | P a g e

40. Pauline Letters

Of this set, Bible scholar-critics question the idea that the apostle Paul was the author of 2 Thessalonians. The
other disputed letters were to the Ephesians and Colossians, the pastoral letters to Timothy and Titus, and
Hebrews. They claim that these other letters were written by someone else in his name (pseudonymity or
pseudepigrapha).

Once I have completed all the letters of the apostle Paul, I would create a chart that compares the following, first
within the undisputed letters and then across the disputed letters
1. Use of God's Divine Name in his letters (2013 NWT)
2. Old Testament quotes
3. How Paul referenced God's identity
4. How Paul referenced Jesus
5. His counsel across subjects like
a. Brotherhood
b. Ministry and preaching
c. Faith and prayers
d. Ransom and Memorial
e. His apostleship and conversion
f. Resurrection
g. Congregation order and theocracy
h. Use of illustrations as teaching aid
i. Christian conduct
j. The End times (eschatology)
k. Israel
l. Women in the congregation
m. Donation and contribution arrangement

To enhance my background of the letters of the apostle Paul, I did some notes on the places where the
congregations where.
Thessalonica - a city named after the sister of Alexander the Great and wife of Cassander, one of the four
generals of Alexander the Great. It is the capital city of one of four Macedonian districts.
Galatia - a Roman province in Asia Minor, in what is now Turkey. Galatians are a people of Celts or from Gaul.
Romans expanded Galatia to include other places. The cities of Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe are
part of Galatia.
Corinth - one of the oldest and prominent cities of ancient Greece. Today, it is located 5km SW of modern
Corinth. It is strategically located connecting mainland Greece to the southern peninsula of Peleponnesus. Under
the Romans it became the capital of Achaia; the other province was Macedonia. Paul wrote his first letter
included in the Bible here, to the Thessalonians. He returned to this city about 5 years later from where he wrote
to the letter to the Romans. It could have been here as well where he wrote the letter to the Galatians.

144 | P a g e

40.1 Statistical Analysis of the Pauline letters

145 | P a g e

40.2 References to God and Gods Divine Name in the Pauline letters

146 | P a g e

One goal I wanted to accomplish in my Bible reading of the letters of the apostle Paul is to get a quick glance on
how he presents God, the Father, Jehovah, in relation to the Christ, the Son, Jesus.
I noted the following observations based on the Biblical data
1. Whenever he writes about God, he always associates it with the Father and never with the Son
"God our Father"
"God and Father"
"God the Father"

2. When he writes to show the relationship between God and Jesus, he uses the preposition "of" and combines
"God" and "Father" as a dual relationship to Jesus. It appears from the biblical data that this is a standard
formula or definition for the apostle Paul
"God and Father of the Lord Jesus"
"God, the Father of our Lord Jesus"

This phrase appears regularly, in fact, in 5 of his letters. In the letter to the Hebrews, the apostle Paul wrote
with reference to Jesus
"that is why God, your God, anointed you" (1: 9)

3. If we combine the above observations with the confessions of the apostle Paul, he never confuses us about
God and Jesus. In his letters, he wrote the following
"there is actually to us only one God, the Father" (1 Corinthians 8:6)
and compare that with what he wrote in another letter
"one God and Father of all, who is over all" (Ephesians 4:6)
Compare how other English Bible translations render the two verses
1 Corinthians 8:6
"for us believers, there is one God the Father." (Common English Bible)
"For us there is only one God, and he is our Father." (Easy to Read Version)
"yet for us there is one God, the Father" (New English Translation)
"But to us there is but one God, the Father" (King James Version)

Ephesians 4:6
"one God and Father of all, who is over all" (Common English Bible)
147 | P a g e

"There is one God and Father of us all, who rules over everyone" (Easy to Read version)
"one God and Father of all, who is over all" (New English Translation)
" One God and Father of all, who is above all" (King James Version)

148 | P a g e

40.3 OT Quotes in his letters
The apostle Paul is obviously well-versed with the Hebrew Bible. His letters are full of quotations from the so-
called Old Testament. Of his undisputed letters, the Thessalonians do not have a direct quote from the OT. His
letters to the Romans is the one packed with OT quotes at 52 quotations. The first letter to the Corinthians
comes in at second with 17 quotations.
Here are some of the quotations of the apostle Paul from the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament (OT)

Galatians
QUOTE Galatians 3: 6 "put faith in Jehovah, and it was counted to him as righteousness"
SOURCE LXX Genesis 15: 6 "trusted in God, and it was imputed to him for righteousness"
SOURCE MT Genesis 15:6 "put faith in Jehovah, and He counted it to him as righteousness"
The Greek used by the LXX and the NT is the same - episteusen. Lexicons provide the definition of think
something to be true, have confidence in, conviction, trust. The variation is in the second part of the quote. In the
NT, the apostle Paul uses "it", the LXX uses "it" while the MT uses "He". The apostle Paul's quote is closer to the
LXX.

1 Corinthians
QUOTE 1 Corinthians 1: 19 "I will make the wisdom of the wise men perish, and the intelligence of the
intellectuals I will reject"
SOURCE LXX Isaiah 29: 14 "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; and the understanding of the discerning I will
hide"
SOURCE MT Isaiah 29:14 "And the wisdom of their wise men will perish, and the understanding of their discreet
men will be hidden."
The opening part of the quote starts with an "I" in the NT and in the LXX. The MT has no "I" in the beginning.
However, the second part of the NT quote does not have any semblance with both LXX and MT. The NT quote
ends with "reject" while the LXX the closer reading ends with "hide".

2 Corinthians
QUOTE 2 Corinthians 4: 6 "Let the light shine out of darkness"
SOURCE LXX Genesis 1: 3 "Let there be light"
SOURCE MT Genesis 1: 3 "Let there be light"
The NT phrase does not resemble any of the sources.

Romans
QUOTE Romans 4: 17 "I have appointed you a father of many nations.
SOURCE LXX Genesis 17: 5 "father of many nations I have appointed you"
SOURCE MT Genesis 17: 5 "I will make you a father of many nations"
Here, the apostle Paul's quote is clearly from the LXX.

149 | P a g e

Ephesians
QUOTE Ephesian 6: 1,2 Honor your father and your mother that it may go well with you and you may remain a
long time on the earth
SOURCE LXX Exodus 20:12 Esteem your father and your mother! That good should happen to you and that a
long time you may be upon the earth
SOURCE MT Exodus 20:12 Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live a long time in the land
Here, the apostle Paul's quote is clearly from the LXX.

1 Timothy
QUOTE 1 Timothy 5:18 You must not muzzle a bull when it is threshing the grain.
SOURCE LXX Deuteronomy 25:4 You must not muzzle an ox threshing.
SOURCE MT Deuteronomy 25: 4 You must not muzzle a bull when it is threshing out grain.
Here, it looks like the apostle Paul quoted from an MT text.

2 Timothy
QUOTE 2 Timothy 2:19 Jehovah knows those who belong to him.
SOURCE LXX Numbers 16:5 God knows the one being his.
SOURCE MT Numbers 16:5 Jehovah will make known who belongs to him.

Hebrews
QUOTE Hebrews 1:6 I will become his father, and he will become my son.
SOURCE LXX 2 Samuel 7:14 I will be to him for father, and he will be to me for son.
SOURCE MT 2 Samuel 7:14 I will become his father, and he will become my son.

150 | P a g e

40.4 Pauls References to Jesus

I simplified my notes from plain footnotes to embedding the verse reference itself where the phrase is found in the Bible book.
Saved me an additional full page.

From a quick glance of how the apostle Paul referenced the Lord Jesus in his set of undisputed letters, I find three important
words that are associated with Jesus

1. Lord
2. Christ
3. Son

The first two titles are inter-related in the sense of the role of Jesus as the prophesied Messiah (the equivalent of the Greek
word 'Christ' in Hebrew). The Messiah is a future king, indeed a Lord, majestic and powerful and soon to wipe out evil off the
earth. The Messiah who was prophesied to suffer, die and rise again to acquire power and to his future revelation destroy all
of God's enemies.

The last title, Son, I find that the apostle Paul envelops with it God's loving role in authoring the salvation of humans through
the sacrifice of his beloved Son. The word itself, implies not equality with God but subordination to Him. I realize that the
apostle Paul does not paint the picture of Jesus as God himself but as someone who is subordinate to Him.

This is more pronounced in the use of the title Son. For example, if you look at the chart, and note how he used "Son" in 1
Corinthians 15: 28, the apostle Paul writes about Jesus, the full verse is shown below

"But when all things will have been subjected to him, then the Son himself will also subject himself to the One who subjected
all things to him, that God may be all things to everyone." (2013 NWT)

This how the New Living Translation Bible renders the verse

"Then, when all things are under his authority, the Son will put himself under Gods authority, so that God, who gave his Son
authority over all things, will be utterly supreme over everything everywhere."

The Amplified Bible renders the verse this way

"However, when everything is subjected to Him, then the Son Himself will also subject Himself to [the Father] Who put all
things under Him, so that God may be all in all [be everything to everyone, supreme, the indwelling and controlling factor of
life]."

The Easy to Read Version Bible renders it this way

"After everything has been put under Christ, then the Son himself will be put under God."

Clearly, the apostle Paul is teaching us about the subordination of the Son to God his Father, rather than implying equality or
oneness in Godship.

This is doubly reinforced if we go back some four verses back in verse 24

"Next, the end, when he hands over the Kingdom to his God and Father"

The New American Bible Revised Edition renders this verse this way

"then comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to his God and Father"

151 | P a g e

When I compare the phrase "his God and Father" with the phrase "the God and Father of", it seals the subordination of the
Lord Jesus to God. One cannot get any other meaning especially when the apostle Paul defined the boundary this way in 1
Corinthians 8: 6 as rendered by New International Version Bible

"yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live;"

Note the definition is terminated by a semicolon. There is no other person in God - only the Father as clarified by the apostle
Paul.

The New Living Translation renders it this way

"There is one God, the Father, by whom all things were created, and for whom we live."

Note the statement is terminated with a punctuation, period.

This study of the apostle Paul's words and language, and statistically measuring their instances across this initial set which
are his early writings, paints a clear distinction on who the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ has become. The apostle certainly
had never associated the Lord Jesus or confused him with God.

152 | P a g e

40.5 Why the Disputed Letters of the apostle Paul are authentic
The letters that are rejected by critic-scholars are to the Ephesians, to the Colossians, letters to Timothy, Titus
and to the Hebrews.
1. About the letter to the Ephesians.
When examining the authenticity of the books of the Bible, I always encounter references to ancient copies or
manuscripts (hand-written copies of the Bible books). According to an online encyclopedia from JW.org, it
reports one of the reasons why critic-scholars question the letter to the Ephesians
"A Chester Beatty papyrus (P46) as well as the original readings of Vatican Manuscript No. 1209 and the Sinaitic
Manuscript omits the words in Ephesus in chapter 1, verse 1. However, the words are found in other
manuscripts and in all ancient versions. Moreover, early church writers accepted it as the letter to the
Ephesians. Though some have thought this letter to be the one mentioned as sent to Laodicea (Col 4:16), it
must be noted that no old manuscripts contain the words to Laodicea, and Ephesus is the only city ever
mentioned here in any of the manuscripts of this letter."
What is Chester Beatty papyrus (P46) and the Vatican Manuscript No. 1209 and Sinaitic Manuscript? These are
very old hand-written copies of the Bible. P46 is from second century CE while the other two are from the
fourth century CE. I decided to read more about them in the subject heading "Manuscripts of the Bible" in the
online encyclopedia in JW.org.
There is a rule among bible scholars that the older the manuscript the closer to the original it is. But, it is not a
hard and fast rule. In this case, it appers the omission of "in Ephesus" in the opening of the book is a valid
application of the rule to reject it as an original Pauline letter.

2. About the letter to the Colossians
The online encyclopedia in JW.org makes this assessment
"There is quite a similarity between Colossians and Ephesians, another of Pauls letters. While this may be due
to the closeness in the time of composition and the possibility that similar circumstances prevailed in each of
these cities, such correspondency would also mean that if Paul is accepted as the writer of Ephesians, he must
also be acknowledged as the writer of Colossians."
The book, "All Scriptures is Inspired", cites an important proof of the authenticity of the two letters, to the
Ephesians and Colossian
"Arguments against Pauls writership have come to nothing. The Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P46), believed
to be from about 200 C.E., has 86 leaves out of a codex containing Pauls epistles."
In addition, it says
'Early ecclesiastical writers confirm that Paul wrote the letter and that it was To the Ephesians."
The same ecclesiastical writers confirm the letter to the Colossians.

153 | P a g e

3. About the letters to Timothy
Regarding its authenticity, the book "All Scripture is Inspired" notes
"The two letters to Timothy have been accepted from the earliest times as written by Paul and as being part of
the inspired Scriptures. The early Christian writers, including Polycarp, Ignatius, and Clement of Rome, all agree
on this, and the letters are included in the catalogs of the first few centuries as Pauls writings. One authority
writes: There are few N[ew] T[estament] writings which have stronger attestation . . . Objections to
authenticity must therefore be regarded as modern innovations contrary to the strong evidence from the early
church.
The online encyclopedia in JW.org adds this
"The authenticity of First and Second Timothy is well established. All outstanding ancient catalogs, starting with
the Muratorian Fragment of the second century C.E., list both letters as canonical. Most important, these
letters are in complete agreement with the rest of the Scriptures and quote from them."

4. About the letter to Titus
Regarding its authenticity, the book "All Scripture is Inspired" notes
"The weight of evidence for the authenticity of the letter to Titus is the same as for the contemporary letters to
Timothy, the three Bible books often being termed Pauls pastoral letters. The style of writing is similar.
Irenaeus and Origen both quote from Titus, and many other ancient authorities also testify to the books
canonicity. It is found in the Sinaitic and Alexandrine Manuscripts. In the John Rylands Library there is a papyrus
fragment, P32, which is a codex leaf of about the third century C.E. containing Titus 1:11-15 and 2:3-8."
The online encyclopedia in JW.org adds this
"The letters authenticity is attested by all outstanding ancient catalogs of the Christian Greek Scriptures,
starting with the Muratorian Fragment of the second century C.E."

5. About the letter to the Hebrews
Regarding its authenticity, the book "All Scriptures is Inspired" notes the reason of critical scholars in rejecting
the letter to the Hebrews
"However, some critics doubt Pauls writership of Hebrews. One objection is that Pauls name does not appear
in the letter."
Another reason cited is a change of style in writing. The online encyclopedia offers this explanation
"The writer of Hebrews does not identify himself by name. Even though all his other letters do bear his name,
this lack of identification of the writer would obviously not rule out Paul. Internal evidence in the letter strongly
points to Paul as its writer and to Italy, probably Rome, as the place of writing. (Heb 13:24) It was in Rome,
evidently during the years 59 to 61 C.E., that Paul was first imprisoned. Timothy was with Paul in Rome, being
mentioned in the apostles letters to the Philippians, the Colossians, and Philemon, written from Rome during
154 | P a g e

that imprisonment. (Php 1:1; 2:19; Col 1:1, 2; Phm 1) This circumstance fits the remark at Hebrews 13:23 about
Timothys release from prison and the writers desire to visit Jerusalem soon."
The book "All Scriptures is Inspired" adds this
"The discovery in about 1930 of the Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P46) has provided further evidence of Pauls
writership. Commenting on this papyrus codex, which was written only about a century and a half after Pauls
death, the eminent British textual critic Sir Frederic Kenyon said: It is noticeable that Hebrews is placed
immediately after Romans (an almost unprecedented position), which shows that at the early date when this
manuscript was written no doubt was felt as to its Pauline authorship. On this same question, McClintock and
Strongs Cyclopedia states pointedly: There is no substantial evidence, external or internal, in favor of any
claimant to the authorship of this epistle except Paul.

40.6 Pseudonymity and Pseudepigrapha in the disputed Pauline letters
As I continue to research the position of scholars on the their so-called disputed letters of the apostle Paul -
letters to the Ephesians, Colossions, to Timothy and Titus - those who evaluate the reasons citing pseudonymity
or pseudepigrapha found flaws on the critical-scholar positions.
One article, "Observations on the Authenticity of the Pastoral Epistles" cited reasons I already found in the
book "All Scriptures is Inspired" published by Jehovah's Witnesses. In addition, one response has something to
do with statistical analysis of the disputed set, for the writing style, choice of words, sentence lengths, etc.
"As to the third claim: the quantitative analyses of the Pastoral's [Timothy and Titus - my clarification, Joel]
language that fueled opposition to the Pastoral Epistles' authenticity for much of the twentieth century seem
now to be thoroughly discredited. In support of this not uncontroversial assessment, we offer three examples
of authors whose work tends to undermine the stylometric case against the authenticity of the Pastoral
Epistles."
The writer, Dennis Jowers, cites the work of the following
1. Thomas Arthur Robinson in his "Grayston and Herdan's 'C' Quantity Formula and the Authorship of the
Pastoral Epistles"
2. Anthony Kenny and his "Stylometric Study of the New Testament", and
3. Kenneth Neumann and his "The Authenticity of the Pauline Epistles in the Light of Stylostatistical Analysis"
The work of such scholars show that the statistical-mathematical approach is inadequate to disprove the
authorship of the apostle Paul on the three letters - Timothy and Titus.
This gives us only external evidence to count upon for authenticity of authorship - quotations of the epistles,
opinion of early authorities, etc.
The claim or theory that these disputed NT "books" as pseudonymous has no strong basis. What is the
implication of pseudonymity or pseudepigraphy if this were true with respect to the other letters of the apostle
Paul?
The article "The Authenticity of the Pastoral Epistles" by Alvin Lam explains
"Mounce writes: "if the writer was a pseudepigrapher, he was attempting to deceive his audience into thinking
that Paul had actually wrote the PE [pastoral epistles - Joel]. But if the author felt the need to deceive, then
pseudepigraphy could not have been an acceptable practice!"
155 | P a g e

Some Bible scholars supporting this theory that it is possible that to deceive is not their primary intention. But,
as shown by other scholars, this position has no strong basis. All of the Pauline books in the NT were written by
him.

156 | P a g e

41. Acts of the Apostles

41.1 Dating the book
While reading the book of Acts, I chanced upon a verse that I found interesting. I am used to reading quotes
from the Hebrew Scriptures or Old Testament in the Gospels and the Letters of the apostle Paul. But in Acts
13:25, this is the first time I read a Christian Greek Scriptures book or NT book, Acts, quoting another NT book.
The apostle Paul is quoting John the Baptist
QUOTE: "What do you suppose I am? I am not he. But look! One is coming after me the sandals of whose feet I
am not worthy to untie."
SOURCE: "but the one stronger than I am is coming, the lace of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie." (Luke
3:16)
I checked the Table of the Bible books and there Acts was listed as completed in 61 CE. This means for Luke to
be able to cite his own Gospel as source, the Gospel of Luke should have been written before 61 CE. And in the
table, it is dated as completed sometime 56-58 CE.
Why is this important? A paper by Matt Slick notes the answer
"The dating of the book of Acts is important because Acts was written after Luke. If Acts was written in, say,
A.D. 60, this would mean the Gospel of Luke was written before that period and would add credence to the
claim that the gospels were written early, close to the events, by the eyewitnesses."
However, critic-scholars have a differen viewpoint around the dating of the book Acts of the Apostles. A paper
by Prof. Joseph Tyson summarizes the
"A great deal rides on decisions about the date of Acts, which unfortunately cannot be determined with
certainty. But judgments about the probable time of its composition inevitably affect the ways we read the
book. If we think it was an early eye-witness account, it may be read as a basically reliable story of the first
Christian generation. If we think it was written toward the end of the first century, we might read it with an
effort to assess the authors understanding of Christianity as a Gentile movement with Jewish roots but without
Jewish believers. If we think it was a second-century text, we might regard it as an effort to counteract
historical and theological teachings that challenged what the author believed to be basic to the Christian
movement."
Another paper by Matt Slick pointed to the many different datings and why
"There are scholars who affirm late dates as well as early dates. Scholars are not all in agreement nor are they
without their prejudices and agendas that govern how they interpret data. As more and more people become
antagonistic to the Gospel, we must expect that so-called scholars who openly deny the miraculous will
conclude that Acts was written late. But since the debate rages on, it is best to look at the internal evidence, as
done above, to see what best fits the evidence."
157 | P a g e

Each group of dates have their own justifications and scholars backing them up. The Catholic Encyclopedia
identified some of these scholars
"Baur, Schwanbeck, De Wette, Davidson, Mayerhoff, Schleiermacher, Bleek, Krenkel, and others have opposed
the authenticity of the Acts. An objection is drawn from the discrepancy between Acts 9:19-28 and Galatians
1:17-19. In Galatians 1:17-18, St. Paul declares that, immediately after his conversion, he went away into
Arabia, and again returned to Damascus. "Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas." In
Acts no mention is made of St. Paul's journey into Arabia; and the journey to Jerusalem is placed immediately
after the notice of Paul's preaching in the synagogues. Hilgenfeld, Wendt, Weizcker, Weiss, and others allege
here a contradiction between the writer of the Acts and St. Paul. Their charge is vain: There is here verified
what is the usual fact when two inspired writers narrate synchronistic events. No writer of either Testament
had in mind to write a complete history. Out of the great mass of words and deeds they grouped together
those things which they deemed best for their scope. They always concur on the great lines of the doctrines
and the main facts; they differ in that one omits certain things which another relates."
Other critic-scholars claim that Luke used Josephus records as his source. Josephus, a Jewish historian,
completed his records towards the close of the 1st century.
The web site JW.org has a notable proof-point citing that the book of Acts was quoted by Christian writers
during the early part of the 1st century
"The book of Acts was quoted from by Polycarp of Smyrna about 115 C.E., by Ignatius of Antioch about 110
C.E., and by Clement of Rome perhaps as early as 95 C.E. Athanasius, Jerome, and Augustine of the fourth
century all confirm the earlier listings that included Acts."
This tends to debunk the position that the book was completed by 100 CE or even past 100 CE. In other words,
the date completed in the Table of Bible Books found in page 1663 holds.

158 | P a g e

41.2 Profiling the book of Acts
After completing the book of Acts, I profiled it using the same key terms used with the Pauline letters with a few
additional key words. With this new profile, I did some revision - highlighting the New Testament or Christian
Greek Scripture book with the most usage of a keyword in bold red.
With that change, I can now quickly conclude why certain NT books have the highest usage of a keyword. The
following are my quick conclusions

1. Interestingly, in the Gospels, Jesus never used the expressions, "God the Father" "God and Father", and "God
our Father". Why? His disciples knew that he is the Son of God. To Jesus, God and Father are interchangeable.
(John 8:42, 54; 20:17) There is no other person in God except the Father based on profiling the Gospels and
these other NT books.
In fact, the rest of the New Testament (NT) agrees and reinforces Jesus' teachings in the Gospel. The apostle
Paul writes often of the "God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father".
159 | P a g e

2. The book of Romans, Hebrews and Acts have the highest number of quotations from the Old Testament (OT)
or Hebrew Scriptures. This is understandable because in Acts, the apostles were proving that the OT prophecies
were fulfilled in Jesus. The book of Hebrews used the sanctuary arrangement and the wilderness experiences of
the Israelites to show those things are a shadow of the reality and as warning examples for Christians. In the
book of Romans, the needs for Christ ransom was established by first quoting the background of sin from the
OT.
3. The book of Acts has the highest number of usage of the expression "Kingdom of God". I understand this now
because it reports the zealous preaching campaign of the apostles and the early Christians featuring the
message of the "Kingdom of God". Acts 17:7 reminds us of the very accusation that led to Jesus' death - being a
king.
4. The books of 1 Timothy and Titus, disputed by critic-scholars as truly from the apostle Paul, are corroborated
by the book of Acts and the undisputed letters in their reference to elders and ministerial servants. Critic-scholars
claim that elders and ministerial servants were late development in Christianity. Hence, their mention in the
letters to Timothy and Titus could not be from the apostle Paul. But, the profiling debunks that.
5. The book of Acts has the most references to the resurrection. This is also understandable as this is the new
message of the early Christians about the reality of the Kingdom of God. It's appointed ruler or Messiah is alive
and back from the dead.
Just glancing at this table, a Bible reader can quickly relate the statistics with what he already knows from the
Bible.

160 | P a g e

42. The Petrine Letters

42.1 The Authorship of the Second Peter letter

The apostle Peter have two letters as part of the Bible. The first one is undisputed but the second one is
disputed. Bible scholar-critics question the authorship of the apostle Peter on the second book on the following
grounds as summarized by Michael J. Kruger in his paper The Authenticity of 2 Peter
Why all the difficulty? The argument against the authenticity of 2 Peter turns on three
main problems: (1) problem of external attestation in the early church; (2) stylistic and literary
problems with 1 Peter and Jude; and (3) historical and doctrinal problems that seem to
indicate internal inconsistency and a late date.
Due to the above reasons, the Bible scholar-critics consider the book should not be part of our Bible. The
second letter is considered pseudonymous. On this point, Kruger offers this explanation
This rejection of pseudepigraphy by the early church can be determined from several factors. First, the
apostle Paul himself speaks out against such a practice in his correspondence with the Thessalonians:
[Dont] become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come
from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come (2 Thess 2:2; see also 2 Thess 3:17).
Second, we see that Tertullian actually removed the author of The Acts of Paul and Thecla from his
position as a presbyter for passing off his work under Pauls name. Despite the fact that this author had
the best intentions and was even essentially orthodox, Tertullian disciplined him for augmenting
Pauls fame from his own store. Third, Serapion, Bishop of Antioch (c. 180), wrote a work entitled,
Concerning the so-called Gospel According to Peter. This was a refutation of the Gospel According to
Peter which was being circulated in certain areas of the church. Upon examination of the gospel he
determined that Peter did not write it and said, We receive both Peter and the other apostles as Christ,
but the writings which falsely bear their names (yeudepivgraf) we reject.

Kruger offered a reconsideration of the points raised by the critic-scholars for rejecting the second letter. He
cites for reason #1, the case of Origen
Despite the fact that Origen recognizes that some had doubts about the epistle, he himself certainly did
not. He quoted the epistle six times23 and clearly regarded it as Scripture. It is evident that he considers
2 Peter as equal in authority with 1 Peter.

He also cites Eusebius and the fact that Eusebius did not lump the 2 Peter with other spurious and
questionable books

Eusebius (c. 265339) makes it clear that the majority of the church accepted the epistle as authentic
although he himself had certain reservations about it. He mentions that his doubts stem from the fact
that writers he respected did not affirm its canonicity and that it was not to his knowledge quoted by the
ancient presbyters. But it is interesting to note that despite his reservations he lists 2 Peter along with
James, Jude, 2 and 3 John as the Disputed books which nevertheless are known to most. So even
Eusebius does not place 2 Peter in with the spurious writings such as the Apocalypse of Peter.
161 | P a g e

He concludes his arguments on the first reason with this

Thus, if the epistle of 2 Peter held such a firm position in the fourth-century canon, then perhaps the
burden of proof should fall on those who suggest it does not belong there.

On the second reason, Kruger cites other scholars findings

Bauckham observes that in comparison to 1 Peter, the author of 2 Peter is fond of rather grandiose
language. J. N. D. Kelly says that the author of 2 Peter is at times pretentiously elaborate. Indeed,
there seems to be a definitive difference between the dignified style of 1 Peter and the high-
sounding words of 2 Peter. This is seen in the many rare and unusual words used in 2 Peter such as
oizhdn (3:10) and tartaron (2:4). In fact, out of the 399 words in 2 Peter, 57 are hapax legomena
(14%). Although 14% is the highest percentage of hapax legomena in the NT, it is surprising to
note that out of the 543 words in 1 Peter, 63 are hapax legomena (12%). Thus, both epistles
appear similar in this respect.

Hapax legomena refer to words or forms of words that occur once only. On the level of profiling and
statistics, Kruger compares the two letters with the letters of the apostle Paul

1 Timothy has 537 words, Titus 399, and they have 161 in common. Thus, of the words used in Titus,
40.4% are shared by both epistles and 59.6% are unique to Titus. Furthermore, when comparing 1
Corinthians and 2 Corinthians (both commonly held to be Pauline) we see that of the words used in 2
Corinthians, 49.3% are shared by both epistles, whereas 50.7% are unique to 2 Corinthians81figures
not very different from those of 1 and 2 Peter. Thus the linguistic argument against 2 Peter proves to
be less than conclusive.

Kruger also provided an explanation why the two letters are dissimilar

At points it seems the critics almost expect Peters second epistle to be simply a rehash of the same
material so that identical vocabulary and themes would reappear. However, this expectation is certainly
unreasonable considering the very different circumstances and purposes behind each epistle. 1 Peter
deals with the church facing persecution and 2 Peter is battling false teachings. Thus 1 Peter is
designed to encourage and foster hope, whereas 2 Peter is designed to warn and inform.

These are just examples why the rejection of 2Peter does not rest on solid ground. The reference book
All Scriptures is Inspired of God published by Jehovahs Witnesses summarizes the issues thus

However, some critics have pointed to the difference in style of the two letters as a reason for discounting the
second letter as the work of Peter. But this should pose no real problem, for the subject and the purpose in
writing were different. In addition, Peter wrote his first letter through Silvanus, a faithful brother, and if Silvanus
were given some latitude in formulating the sentences, this could account for the difference of style in the two
letters, since Silvanus apparently did not have a part in writing the second letter. (1 Pet. 5:12) Its canonicity has
also been disputed on the grounds that it is poorly attested in the Fathers. However, as may be observed from
the chart Outstanding Early Catalogs of the Christian Greek Scriptures, Second Peter was regarded as part of
the Bible catalog by a number of authorities prior to the Third Council of Carthage.

162 | P a g e

42.3 The Authorship of the Second Peter Letter Part 2

In my previous reflection, the reference book "All Scripture" referred to a writer in behalf of the apostle Peter.
Scholars refer to this technically as "amanuensis". I checked a dictionary to figure out what word is. One
dictionary defines it as "one employed to write from dictation or to copy manuscript". Fancy word for a secretary
ha.
One professor Harrison raised some questions regarding the use of an amanuensis in his book "The Problem of
the Pastoral Epistles"
"Did he, as in the case of other epistles, use an amanuensis? If so, who or what manner of person filled this;
what degree of latitude did he receive, or take ; and in
what respects, if any, did he modify the original words and thoughts of his master?"
He recognizes that critical scholars do commit mistakes
"After seeing so many experienced and competent scholars arrive at what must be a false conclusion, apparently
without being troubled by the shadow of a suspicion that they might after all be quite mistaken, it would be
inexcusable, however natural,
to let oneself fall into the very same error."
Interestingly, the information on this book was already discredited as cited by another paper on the Pastoral
Epistles (spefically Pauline rather than Petrine)
"Thomas Arthur Robinson, first, debunks a mainstay of the linguistic-mathematical case against the Pastorals
authenticity in his Grayston and Herdans C Quantity Formula and the Authorship of the Pastoral Epistles.
Specifically, Robinson demonstrates: a) that Kenneth Grayston and Gustav Herdan, in their classic 1959 article
on the Pastorals authorship, artificially inflate the C quantity of the Pastoral Epistles by treating the Pastorals
as a literary whole rather than three, individual epistles; and b) that, when one treats the Pastorals as discrete
units, their C quantities do not diverge dramatically from those of the undisputed Pauline Epistles."
Another paper responded to this work by Harrison, entitled "The Authenticity of the Pastoral Epistles" by Alvin
Lam
"Responding contrary to Harrisons work, Hitchcock testified that Harrison gave a false impression by citing only
the latest rather than the earliest appearances of the words in the PE in an attempt to prove that these epistles
are of a second century period. The truth is that all but a few words occurred in works originating before AD
50.Cook also contends that the language of an author is not simply to be equated
with his word-stock; at least equally significant are his use of those words, his preferences in syntax. Studies
conducted have shown that the various criteria adduced revealed that Pauline epistles do not present any
consistent pattern at all, and therefore arguments based on style are incorrect. Thus O Rourke asserts that
stylistic differences mean nothing in determining questions of authorship. After a broad base study, Kenny finds
no differences between PE and the rest of the Pauline epistles, with the exception of Titus."
On 2 Peter, another reference work writes
"Though 2 Peter is the least attested book in the New Testament, its external support far surpasses that of many
of the other Bible books. The absence of early church tradition supporting 2 Peter certainly could have been due
to the letters brevity and the lack of communication among Christians during times of heavy persecution.
Consequently the silence of the second century and the caution of the third century posed no insurmountable
problems for the careful scholarship of the canonical councils of the fourth century."
Discussions about what should be in the Bible is an important topic in the light of the sensationalism in the media
of so-called other Christian books that were excluded arbitrarily. Such books as the Gospel of Judas, Gospel of
Thomas, Gospel of Peter and the likes.
163 | P a g e

Those other books were excluded primarily because of their content and false authorship. What is now in the
Bible went through a very close scrutiny for inspiration and divine authorship. The other books who the media
hype us should have been part of the Bible must have not read the books themselves.
The reference book "All Scripture is Inspired" has this to say regarding the other books - apocryphal,
pseudepigrapha, and pseudonymous books
"Internal evidence confirms the clear division that was made between the inspired Christian writings and works
that were spurious or uninspired. The Apocryphal writings are much inferior and often fanciful and childish. They
are frequently inaccurate. Note the following statements by scholars on these noncanonical books:
There is no question of any ones having excluded them from the New Testament: they have done that for
themselves.M. R. James, The Apocryphal New Testament, pages xi, xii.
We have only to compare our New Testament books as a whole with other literature of the kind to realize how
wide is the gulf which separates them from it. The uncanonical gospels, it is often said, are in reality the best
evidence for the canonical.G. Milligan, The New Testament Documents, page 228.
As my journey this year near its conclusion, with my reading, reflection and research of the entire 66 books of the
Bible, it has made my conviction stronger and my faith more secure that the Bible is really Jehovah God's written
communication to man.
Everyone should find time to read, study, reflect and live by its Bible principles.
How can you possibly study the Bible conveniently? See the short video below
http://www.jw.org/en/video-bible-study/
164 | P a g e

43. General NT Reflections

43.1 A Second Look at the Histori-Critical Method
Just as in the 1980's the Graf-Wellhausen theory of the Bible, particularly, in reference to the Old Testament,
which reduces the Bible to a mere cultural, human artifact devoid of any divinity fell apart and disrepute among
scholars, the same has happened to the critics of the New Testament.
In one forum, I am sharing one poster's extracts of some of the key ideas exposed by one of the advocate but
turned convert to Christian faith, Eta Linnemann, who wrote the book "Biblical Criticism on Trial"
"In her chapter 6, The Study of the Historical-Critical Theology, she stated that research is conducted ut si
Deus non daretur (as if there were no God). That means the reality of God is excluded from consideration from
the start. The standard by which all is assessed is not Gods Word but scientific principle (Linnemann
1990:84).
2. Underlying the historical-critical approach is a series of prejudgments which are not themselves the result of
scientific investigation. They are rather dogmatic premises, statements of faith, whose foundation is the
absolutizing of human reason as a controlling apparatus (Linnemann 1990:111).
3. Whoever maintains that the Bible can only be made understandable with the methods of critical
historiography is putting a thoroughly atheistically conceived science in charge of the treasures of divine
revelation. This atheistic, anti-Christian science is recognized by historical-critical theology as furnishing the
only proper access to Gods Word, so everyone who wishes to be regarded as theologically educated should
endorse this outlook (Linnemann 1990:116).
4. Kummels[6] historical-critical statement is that the Bible must be historically investigated as the work of
human authors in order to understand its actual meaning. Linnemanns assessment of this statement is: That is
not first demonstrated; it is, rather, presupposed from the outset. And that is not the private opinion of Kummel; it
is, rather, the common assumption of historical-critical theology. They are not permitted to cross-examine in
any meaningful way the assumptions of historical-critical theology (1990:118, 119).
5. Kummel, using his historical-critical theology, stated, It is easy to see that it is basically impossible to confront
the writings of the New Testament as a man making judgments in research and at the same time as one who
hears in faith (in Linnemann 1990:122).
6. Since the inspiration of Scripture is not accepted, neither can it be assumed that the individual books of
Scripture complement each other (Linnemann 1990:86).
7. Since the content of biblical writings is seen as merely the creations of theological writers, any given verse is
nothing more than a non-binding, human theological utterance (Linnemann 1990:86).
8. The undeclared yet working basic principle of Old Testament and New Testament science is: What the text
clearly states can, by no means, be true (Linnemann 1990:87).
9. For historical-critical theology, critical reason decides what is reality in the Bible and what cannot be reality;
and this decision is made on the basis of the everyday experience accessible to every person. Nothing is
accepted as fact unless it is generally held to be possible. That which is spiritual is judged using fleshly criteria.
Experiences of Gods children are totally disregarded. Due to the presuppositions that are adopted, critical
reason loses sight of the fact that the Lord, our God, the Almighty, reigns. As for miracles, the theologians write
them off as popular religious drivel (Linnemann 1990:88, 89).
10. In its own eyes, historical-critical theology wants to lend assistance to the proclamation of the gospel through
an interpretation of the Bible that is scientifically reliable and objective. There is, however, a monstrous
165 | P a g e

contradiction between what it says it wants to do, on the one hand, and what it actually does on the other. In the
light of all I have already said, it should be patently obvious that the manner in which historical critical theology
handles the Bible does not further the proclamation of the gospel, but rather hinders it in fact, it even prevents
it (Linnemann 1990:89).
11. But worse yet, it is by no means clear that we are dealing here with an approach that yields objective and
scientifically reliable interpretation of the Scripture as it claims. It is simply not true that historical-critical theology
has replaced subjective impressions with a well-grounded discovery of the truth through careful weighing of
arguments (Linnemann 1990:89).
12. If one assumes that the parable of the ten virgins (Matt. 25:1-13) was not spoken by Jesus himself, but
rather that it arose in the early church, then one places it in a different context. It gives information, not about
Jesus, but about the early church. To analyze it one compares it to what is known of the early church, not to
what is known about Jesus (Linnemann 1990:93).
13. If one assumes, on the basis of the differences between Johns Gospel and the three other Gospels, that the
author of John is not John the disciple of Jesus, then a series of inferences naturally flows: In this case the
author himself did not personally experience what he asserts about Jesus. He must have modeled his
presentation on earlier sources. This raises the questions about the nature of these earlier documents. And this
in turn raises the further question of how Johns Gospel is distinct from the sources it is based upon (Linnemann
1990:93).
14. Basic assumptions are placed on the same level as fact, not theory, of course, but certainly in practical
application. That is, one makes use of them as if they were facts. Anyone who incorporates these basic
assumptions into his thinking is influenced and ultimately changed by them (Linnemann 1990:96).
15. For these historical-critical scholars, Christian literature from Bible-believing authors is practically taboo. The
productions of some publishers are not taken seriously and cannot be listed in the bibliography of a formal term
paper, unless one is prepared to get a lower grade for doing so. The professor is not really familiar with these
works either (Linnemann 1990:97).
16. As for the prophetic future, for historical-critical scholars, there is no such thing as a knowledge of future
things given by God (Linnemann 1990:110).
17. Linnemanns assessment, based on her many years of indoctrination by the historical-critical method, is that
Kummels compromise solutions do not justify his groundless contention that it is a fact that believing reception
of the New Testament message can occur only through the hearing aid of historical-critical theology. But
Kummel subsequently sets forth the thesis once more: Hence there is no other access to the understanding of
the New Testament writings than the method of historical research, which is valid for all antiquity (Linnemann
1990:122).
18. Linnemanns assessment of her genuine Christian conversion from the historical-critical liberalism is: I am so
grateful that Jesus blood has washed away my errors! I was no better; in fact I was worse, and I likewise made
such irresponsible statements. And whoever gets involved in historical-critical theology will end up in a similar
situation. One can no more be a little historical-critical than a little pregnant (Linnemann 1990:123).
Eta Linnemann who has already died, wrote this testimony on her journey with the bible scholar-critics
"For many years I had taught my students the historical-critical theory that there is a synoptic problem, whose
only solution is the two-source theory. I taught that Matthew and Luke copied Mark, and then added their own
information from another source. Now I found this had no basis. It is nothing but a hypothesis, though it is
considered by many to be a fact. I began to examine these things, studying the arguments one by one. I
concluded that there is not the slightest proof of it, and the arguments for it are based on secular reasoning.
Then I was led to the question of whether or not there non-genuine letters in the New Testament. The historical-
critical theologians say that of the thirteen letters attributed to Paul, only seven are really written by him, although
166 | P a g e

it is plainly written in the Bible that Paul wrote them all. In fact, these theologians say that the writers were lying
when they said the letters were from Paul. Thus, they call these Scriptures pseudepigraphs, falsely inscribed
writings. I began to investigate and after much time found that none of the arguments for doubting Paul's
authorship was valid.
So I found out you can trust your Bible. You cannot trust historical critical theology or higher criticism. It is not
trustworthy. I praise God for bringing me out of it, and pray that he will use me to bring others from criticism to
Christ."
That is just amazing. The series of reversals Bible critics are getting are piling on them one after another.
This gives us a substantial reason to read, study, reflect and live by Bible principles.
Check out this short video why anyone should study the Bible
http://www.jw.org/en/video-why-study-the-bible/

167 | P a g e

43.2 A Look at the Textual Manuscripts Study
This latest journey has opened up new roads that I have not traveled before, encountered in-depth the issues
surrounding each Bible book as raised by Bible scholar-critics, got a handle on the field of textual criticism, text
transmission, manuscripts and material used in writing and copying the Bible, appreciated that the Hebrew
Scriptures of the prophets were mostly poetic expressions (and the good thing is that the 2013 NWT reflects the
formatting of the prophetic books accordingly, shying away from paragraph-prose format), appreciated more the
language behind the Bible -both Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek- helping me understand the criticisms against the
book of Daniel, surveyed the history and present status of biblical criticism of both the Hebrew Scriptures (Old
Testament) and the Christian Greek Scriptures (New Testament), read scholarly materials from both camps
(anti-Bible and pro-Bible), which in the end strengthened my conviction that the Bible is really God's Word.
Now, I still have time to study the facts behind the Westcott and Hort Greek master text used in the NWT. I was
able to compare the output of the Greek Old Testament known as the Septuagint (LXX) as translated in English
with the output of the Masoretic Text as translated in English in the Hebrew Scriptures part of the NWT. An
important raging issue in the field of the Bible manuscript study is the dogmatic allegiance of some Bible
translators with the King James Version Bible which was based on the Received Text of Erasmus, also known as
Textus Receptus. The King James Version Bible represents the English translation of what is known as the
Majority Text (or Byzantine) of Greek manuscripts. The NWT represents the English translation of what is known
as the Critical Text of Greek manuscripts. This is another exciting field of study.
It is truly a labor of love to read through the Bible from beginning to end. The author of the Bible, Jehovah God,
wanted every one to get to know Him and His purpose by wading through the pages of the book. If we love God,
we will find and spend the time to do so, in order to get closer to Him.
The Bible opened up with a very simple verse - "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." Who
would have known that men like Albert Einstein would later theorize and get confirmation that the universe does
have a beginning? Who would have known that atheists would scramble for new explanations to diffuse this
recognition? Who would have known that some of the famous atheists of modern times would humble
themselves and recognize that there is an Infinite Mind that governs the universe?
For hundreds of years, the humanists and critical scholars would try weaving one theory after another to remove
God from the Bible. First, by denying that Moses wrote the five books of the Bible, and inventing a theory called
Documentary Hypothesis to explain God has never been involved with the production of the Bible. Then, the NT
scholars would reduce the Gospels to myth-making, that the Jesus in the Gospels is an invented Jesus, created
by his followers.
Who would have known that in the late 80's, the Documentary Hypothesis built by Graf and Wellhausen would
fall apart, leaving OT critical scholars scrambling for a new theory? Who would have known that a former NT
critical scholar would expose the lack of science in the history-critical method of studying the Gospels?
Jehovah God has won the battle. His Word remains supreme over the so-called wisdom of men. It is a testimony
to God's love for humanity that he took the effort to communicate with us and explain his purpose, to give us
hope, a reason to love Him more.
Some Bible translators have removed God's divine name from the Bible. Generations of people grew up
confused what Yahweh or Jehovah is. They were never informed or educated that Yahweh is God's name in
Hebrew while Jehovah is the English translation (much like Yeshua is the Son of God's name in Hebrew and
Jesus is the English translation).
In the New Testament, the Lord Jesus Christ prayed twice about God's name. First in the 'Our Father' prayer,
where he mentioned 'Hallowed be thy name'. The second is in another prayer where he mentioned, "Father,
glorify your name." (Jo 12:28)
168 | P a g e

Learn more about God's name here
http://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/good-news-from-god/who-is-god/video-gods-name/

169 | P a g e

43.3 A Second Look at the Pauline epistles
I continue to read some of the literature on why bible critic-scholars reject the authorship of the apostle Paul on
some of his letters or epistles - for example Colossians and Ephesians.
I chanced upon a research paper by Jerry Reed for submission to his professor in Gardner-Webb University
which summarizes the issues nicely
"While there are a large number of modern scholars who reject Colossians as an authentic Pauline epistle, the
evidence they cite in support of their view is circumstantial at best, and overall not convincing. In fact, the
majority of the evidence used to oppose Pauline authorship is quite easily refuted. There is very little external
evidence used to oppose Pauline authorship, and the majority of the evidence that is used relies more on what is
not found than on what is. Because Colossians is not explicitly mentioned before the writings of Iraneaus does
not mean that it was not truly a Pauline text, it simply means that references to it were far more subtle or that we
simply do not have any existing records. While it might cast doubt, it does not disprove Pauline authorship.
Secondly, the internal evidence used by scholars to oppose Pauline authorship is once again easily explained
away. A large portion of the body of internal evidence which has been used in promoting non-Pauline authorship
has been the grammar and vocabulary of Colossians in comparison to other definitively Pauline texts. There are
two major points of opposition to this argument. The first, and most significant, is the role of the letter in the
ancient world. The author and the writer were usually two separate entities, meaning that the wording and
grammar
would change depending on the scribe assisting the author. Secondly, why does it surprise us that a learned and
educated man like Paul would be incapable of having a wide vocabulary and occasionally switching up his style
of delivery?
Overall, the argument against Pauline authorship brings some interesting research to Pauline studies, but it does
not prove anything."
The web site JW.org highlights the similarity of the two letters - Colossians and Ephesians
"There is quite a similarity between Colossians and Ephesians, another of Pauls letters. While this may be due
to the closeness in the time of composition and the possibility that similar circumstances prevailed in each of
these cities, such correspondency would also mean that if Paul is accepted as the writer of Ephesians, he must
also be acknowledged as the writer of Colossians."
Then, it goes to cite why the letters could not be from the second century
"Furthermore, the inclusion of the letter to the Colossians with other letters of Paul in the Chester Beatty Papyrus
No. 2 (P46, of about 200 C.E.) clearly shows that the early Christians viewed Colossians as one of Pauls
inspired writings."

170 | P a g e

43.4 The Reliability of the New Testament
Some Bible critics use the popular media to cast doubt on the integrity of what we read in our New Testament.
The claim is that because we don't have the original copies of what the apostles wrote, plus the errors committed
by copyists during the first 200 years of Christianity, what is in our Bible are not the things Jesus really said. In
fact, worse, the Jesus that we read in the Bible is an imaginary Jesus, created by the early Christians. The real,
historical Jesus cannot be recovered from the Bible because of the so many myths embedded in it.
Daniel Wallace, one of the many Bible scholars who defends the integrity of the Bible (and is quoted in one of
the online articles in JW.org), specifically, the New Testament wrote about this issue (emphasis is mine via
UPPER CASE letters)
"Wallace writes in regard to the comparative wealth of NT manuscripts with other ancient literature: One often
hears the line, We really dont know what the New Testament originally said, since we no longer possess the
originals and since there could have been tremendous tampering with the text before our existing copies were
produced. Is this an accurate assessment of the data? Is that kind of skepticism true to the facts? Not exactly.
If this supposition is true, then we MUST DENY that most facts of ancient history can be recovered, because
whatever doubts we cast on the text of the New Testament MUST BE CAST A HUNDREDFOLD on virtually any
other ancient text. The New Testament manuscripts stand closer to the original and are more plentiful than
virtually any other ancient literature. The New Testament is far and away the BEST-ATTESTED WORK of Greek
or Latin literature in the ancient world. (ibid. 70-71; emphasis original)"
Not many readers are aware that when they read something about ancient Greece, we read about them based
on documents that are hundreds of years away from the actual event, in a handful of ancient copies. The NT
books are not of that sort. Our oldest NT book is less than a hundred years away from the original. There are not
just a handful but thousands of ancient copies of the NT.
Today, English Bibles belong to two camps - either for the Critical Text family of ancient Greek manuscripts of
the NT or for the Majority Text family of ancient Greek manuscripts of the NT. The 2013 NWT is sourced from
the Critical Text camp (uses the Alexandrian Egyptian text) based on the work of Wescott and Hort (and Alands)
while the King James Version of 1611 is sourced from the Majority Text (Byzantine Imperial text). Regarding
these two manuscripts, one paper cited this assessment
"it is all too easy to overlook the fact that the Byzantine Imperial text and the Alexandrian Egyptian text, to take
two examples that in theory are diametrically opposed to each other, actually exhibit a remarkable degree of
agreement, perhaps as much as 80 percent!"
Regarding the remaining 20%, the paper comments
"While it remains technically accurate to state that the text is only certain (per the UBS critical edition and the
calculations of Saifullah et al) in approximately 83.5% of the verses of the NT, many of the remaining 16.5% can
hardly be classified as corrupted texts."
What is important as well is that they don't change the meaning of the verse. For example, in the 2013 NWT, we
find this information (emphasis in UPPER CASE is mine)
"Some other wording has been adjusted to incorporate what scholars generally accept as the most authentic
reflection of the original writings. For instance, according to some manuscripts, Matthew 7:13 reads: Go in
through the narrow gate because broad is the gate and spacious is the road leading off into destruction. In
previous editions of the New World Translation, is the gate was not included in the text. However, further study
of the manuscript evidence led to the conclusion that is the gate was in the original text. So it was included in
this present edition. There are a number of similar refinements. However, these adjustments are minor, and
NONE OF THEM CHANGE the basic message of Gods Word."
http://www.jw.org/en/publications/bible/nwt/appendix-a/how-the-bible-came-to-us/

171 | P a g e

43.5 A Second Look at the Quest for the Historical Jesus
That biblical critic-scholars have flimsy but arrogant ideas that are more like fads that come and go is illustrated
by their assessment of Jesus of Nazareth.
One paper made this statement on the current trend on the quest for the historical Jesus, titled "Assessing
Progress in the Third Quest for the Historical Jesus" by Craig Evans
"Building on the work of Salvador, Geiger, Montefiore, and others, and moving beyond this early work with
remarkable sophistication, Klausner himself concludes that Jesus was convinced of his messiahship; of this
there is no doubt; were it not so he would have been nothing more than a deceiver and imposterand such men
do not make history. In my opinion, this sensible conclusion has been vindicated."
Amazing that it would take scholars years to come and accept the presentation that is so clear in the Bible itself -
Jesus is the Messiah and he knows it.
The German bible critic-scholars who rejected the Gospels as the authentic source for the historical Jesus was
described this way
"During the decades in which the German New Quest got under way, lost momentum, and finally foundered,
Jewish scholars rediscovered Jesus."
The discovery of manuscripts from the Dead Sea Scroll contributed to this reversal of the German scholarly
position. Evans add
"Perhaps the most influential Jewish scholar to turn his attention to the historical Jesus has been Geza Vermes
(1924). Vermes trilogy of works, beginning in 1973 with Jesus the Jew, has influenced a generation of scholars
and has placed Jesus in a Jewish setting once and for all."
Then,he went discussing another theory about Jesus that is no longer taken seriously - that he was a Cynic
"The upshot of these discoveries is that the intriguing hypothesis that Jesus was influenced by Cynic
philosophers resident in Sepphoris is greatly weakened. It is not altogether ruled out, but its plausibility is
seriously diminished. Moreover, recent excavations in Nazareth itself suggest that the assumption that Jesus
and members of his family would in all probability (and perhaps of necessity) have worked in nearby Sepphoris is
no longer so obvious. It appears that Nazareth had its own thriving economyincluding building, if the evidence
of the stone quarries tells us anything. The commercial and economic activities of Nazareth were more than
adequate to keep the local residents fully occupied, with little need to seek out-of-town employment."
The real source of who really Jesus was is really from the Bible.
What is interesting in this paper is that it realizes that the main title or designation that Jesus gave himself is the
title "son of man". In all the Gospels, we find Jesus identifying who he is 12 times. Of the 12 instances, in 9
instances Jesus himself identified himself as "son of man". Twice recorded in Matthew, Mark and Luke. Three
times in John. The other three instances, Jesus identified himself as "Son of God" (2X) and "Christ" once, all
recorded in John.
Regarding this frequent association of Jesus with the title "son of man", the paper says
"From these passages and from others, it seems apparent that the son of man self-designation is not simply
Aramaic idiom, a way of saying a human, as opposed to an animal or an angel. Now it is true that the son of
man is an Aramaic idiom (bar enosh) that is a way of referring to a human. But Jesus habit of referring to the
sobriquet with the definite articlethe son of manis meant to call to mind a particular son of man figure. The
definite article does not suggest in itself a title, nor does it in itself suggest that the idiom is messianic. Jesus
says the son of man (Greek, lit. the son of the man), in order to allude to a specific figure, in a specific passage
of Scripture: that is, the son of man figure described in Daniel 7, the figure who is presented to God and from
God receives kingdom and authority."
On the association of the "son of man" with the title "Christ", the paper continues
172 | P a g e

"It is far better to think that the universally held opinion following the resurrection that Jesus was the Messiah
was due to what Jesus himself taught and encouraged his disciples to believe. There is, of course, specific
evidence for this, as seen especially in Jesus appeal to Isa. 61.1-2 (the Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because
he has anointed to preach . . .), explicitly in his Nazareth sermon (Lk. 4.16-30) and implicitly in his reply to the
imprisoned and discouraged John the Baptist (Mt. 11.2-5 = Lk. 7.18-22).35 The messianic import of these
allusions to words and phrases from Isaiah 61 and other Isaianic passages has now been dramatically clarified
and confirmed by a fragmentary text found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. According to 4Q521, when Gods
Messiah appears, the sick will be healed, the dead will be raised, and the poor will have good news preached to
them."
This displaces the group called Jesus Seminar who are often hyped by the media on their theories of who Jesus
was. The paper concludes about this group
"Notwithstanding the eccentricities and skepticism of the Jesus Seminar, which in my opinion is not really part of
todays Third Quest, but an atavism harking back to the older New Quest (and perhaps even to the Old Quest
itself), the persistent trend in recent years is to see the Gospels as essentially reliable, especially when properly
understood,53 and to view the historical Jesus in terms much closer to Christianitys traditional understanding,
i.e., as the proclaimer of Gods rule, as understanding himself as the Lords anointed, and, indeed, as Gods own
son, destined to rule Israel."
JW.org has an informative discussion about this group
http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2000360?q=Jesus+Seminar&p=par

173 | P a g e

43.6 The Shema and Jesus as a Jew
I chanced upon an online article that claims that Jesus claimed that he is God. Now, after reading through all the
New Testament for the nth time, I am curious how the writer arrived at his conclusion.
First off, the writer made this disclaimer (caps are the writer's not mine)
"We do NOT, of course, find the direct claim: "I AM GOD." That would have been a little too confusing to Jesus'
hearers."
Let us pause for a moment to digest what the writer's message here is. What is he trying to say in the first
statement? There is no direct claim by Jesus that he is God. I am not surprised at all with that. Any reader of the
Gospels will not find a statement made by Jesus that he is God. None.
What does he mean by his second statement that had Jesus made a claim that would be confusing to his
hearers? Who are his hearers? His hearers are Jews. What do Jews believe in? They believe that there is only
one God and that God is only Jehovah. Up to today, the Jews call this declaration of faith in one God and one
Jehovah as The Shema. In the Old Testament, it is found in Deuteronomy 6:4 where we read using the
American Standard Version Bible
"Hear, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah."
To the Jews, there is only one God and ONE person in God, and he is Jehovah. Jesus is a Jew. He also
believes in The Shema. How do we know this? According to the gospel of Mark, Jesus as a Jew quoted The
Shema in Mark 12: 29 again using the American Standard Version Bible
"Jesus answered, The first is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God, the Lord is one."
"The Lord" in the quote is a substitution for God's name Jehovah as we can see in the original verse of
Deuteronomy 6:4.
The writer is correct that Jesus will confuse his Jewish audience if he had made such a claim. The writer admits
that Jesus never made such claim that he is God. Not once. And the simple reason is as a Jew he believes The
Shema himself.
If that is the case, how did the writer arrive in the statement that Jesus claimed that he is God? Let us read his
statement
"The claims, as we shall see, are more precisely fitting to the proclamation: "Jesus is God the Son; the Wisdom
and Word of God"".
Now, again, having read the entire Gospels, I have never encountered the term "God the Son". Not once.
Instead, we do find the term "Son of God". The writer appears to have a major problem here with his claim.
Let us continue with his note
"The most plausible explanation is that in the earliest stage of Christianity the Old Testament heritage dominated
the use of the title 'God'; hence 'God' was a title too narrow to be applied to Jesus. It referred strictly to the
Father of Jesus, to the God whom he prayed."
Now, here is an important realization. The audience of Jesus were Jews, believers of The Shema. What the
writers call "the earliest stage of Christianity", is the period when Jesus was still on earth and the period his
apostles were still preaching the gospel of the resurrection to both the Jews and non-Jews. What was then the
understanding about God? The writer himself said it - "it referred strictly to the Father of Jesus, to the God whom
he prayed."
So, our writer acknowledges that Jesus himself has never made the claim that he is God, that God was strictly
referring to the Father in the early days of Christianity. So, how did Jesus ended up being God if that were the
case?
174 | P a g e

"Gradually (in the 50s and 60s?), in the development of Christian thought, 'God' was understood to be a broader
term. It was seen that God had revealed so much of Himself in Jesus that 'God' had to be able to include both
Father and Son."
Now, we have a problem with the ambiguous statements above. First, who understood that 'God' was a broader
term? Is that an assumption masquerading as fact? He did not elaborate. Why would God revealing himself
through Jesus make it mandatory that the term 'God' "had to be able to include both Father and Son" when the
Son himself never made such claims when he was on earth and his early disciples understood strictly that God is
only Jehovah because they are Jews believers of The Shema?
Then, he went outside the Bible and surveyed the history of early Christianity and one of the critics of early
Christianity, Celsus
"As we noted previously, the earliest known pagan critic of Christianity to address the issue, Celsus, argued that
Jesus did apply the title "Son of God" to Himself, but wrongly [Wilk.ChrRom, 109]; only much later did those
critics deny that Jesus made such claims."
By reading the Bible, we know that Jesus made such claim as "Son of God" but he never used the term "God the
Son".
After enumerating the key points and challenges, he summarized
"Jesus claimed to be God the Son. No matter how hard we try to dissect it or explain it away, the evidence points
directly to that most special claim made by Jesus."
We have a big problem here. "Son of God" is not the same as "God the Son". The Jews don't have this idea of a
multi-person God. As seen in Mark's gospel, Jesus as a Jew believes in The Shema himself.
There are 12 instances where Jesus said, "I am <title>." 9 of those titles, he used "son of man". 2 of those he
used "Son of God" and once "Christ". The writer is correct in his disclaimer that we will never find a direct claim
by Jesus as God. Our key witness, Jesus, has never made the statement the writer insists he did.
Early Christianity also never deviated from the teachings of Jesus about God. On the night of his arrest, Jesus
prayed to his Father this way in John 17:3
"Eternal life is to know you, the only true God".
The "you" here is his Father, the God of the Jews - Jehovah, the only true God per Jesus. Jesus repeated this to
John in the book of the Revelation 3:12
"The one who conquersI will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he will by no means go out from it
anymore, and I will write upon him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the New Jerusalem
that descends out of heaven from my God, and my own new name."
How many times did the glorified Jesus use the term "my God" to John? Four times. If you were John what
conclusions would you get from the glorified Jesus hearing him say that? John, as a Jew, who believed in The
Shema, that is what is to be expected.
The apostle Peter who confessed when Jesus asked 'who do you say I am' that Jesus is the son of God' wrote in
his epistle (1 Peter 1:3)
"Praised be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."
The apostle Paul who saw the glorified Jesus in the heavens would later write to the Ephesians (Ephesian 1: 17)
"the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the
accurate knowledge of him."
The apostle Paul teaches that the Father is the God of our Lord Jesus. Again, this writer is correct when he
mentioned that in early Christianity (that is within the New Testament), God is strictly the Father. That is precisely
what The Shema teaches and what Jesus taught as well as a Jew.
175 | P a g e

Personal Bible Reflections

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Personal Bible Reflections

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PERSONAL BIBLICAL REFLECTIONS

Personal Biblical Reflections

You might also like