A Biblical Study Of The Sequence Of End-time Events

A Biblical Study of the Sequence of End-time Events

How Credible is the Evidence for the Historical Jesus?

By Author Eli Kittim

I recently had a discussion with a Christian apologist who, in reaction to our conversation, posted on his blog a list of 9 sources outside the New Testament and a series of texts composed in subsequent centuries to prove the existence of Jesus.

He mentions Josephus, who is writing roughly 70 years after the purported events, and whose references to Jesus have been the source of much controversy in that they may have been subject to Christian redaction (interpolation/expansion/alteration). Incidentally, the scholarly consensus concerning the historicity of Jesus is largely influenced by the writings of Josephus. But Josephus was presumably familiar with some of the early gospels and other NT writings. So, why should his reference to John the Baptist be considered as constituting factual history? The same could be said about his references to Jesus!

Next, he mentions Phlegon who is writing in the second century about a rumored eclipse that allegedly occurred in 29 AD.  Then he mentions a group of people like Suetonius, Thallus,  Mara Bar Serapion, all of whose writings are considered ambiguous with regard to Jesus (we’re not sure if the references are to Christ or not), and which range from the late 1st to the 3rd century CE.

Some of these writings refer to Christian superstitions, such as the virginal conception of Christ, including those of Celsius (whom the blogger cites) who defends paganism and actually refers to Jesus as a person born to a Roman father. Celsius is not only writing 150 years later, but he’s also embellishing the story with anti-Christian sentiment.

Firstly, these are not independent eyewitness accounts. Secondly, some of these writers have obviously been influenced by the gospels—as is the case with Celsius who is probably drawing on Matthew and Tacitus who is presumably drawing on Luke—and, thirdly, they are writing approximately 70 to 200 years after the purported events.

In other cases, we are either dealing with explicit historical inaccuracies, or with authors who are known for sometimes embellishing a story with myth. For example, Josephus is also known for his expansion on the Moses story, as we find in the Midrash, making it difficult for us to ascertain what is real and what is mythical in some of his works. Take Justin Martyr, for example, whom the blogger cites. Writing in the second century, he proved to be historically inaccurate. In his “Apology” (1.31), for instance, he incorrectly claimed that Ptolemy, under whom the Septuagint had been translated, was a contemporary of Herod. Given his inattention to historical detail, how credible is his reference to the trial of Jesus? Not to mention his reference to the census under Quirinius, which did not exist, or at least not in the way that Luke describes it. So, he’s obviously drawing on the gospel of Luke, and he is, after all, a Christian apologist.

Despite all these discrepancies and historical inaccuracies, this Christian blogger nevertheless mentions all these figures and suggests that they provide indisputable truth for the historical existence of Jesus.

In the final analysis, the fact that Jesus is not mentioned anywhere outside the New Testament for about 70 years after his alleged death should certainly raise some red flags about his existence. It means that Jesus is missing from the historical record until the late first century AD. And the earliest New Testament texts do not mention anything about a historical Jesus, or about his birth or ministry, as we find in later developments (expansions).

And yet, despite the lack of historical evidence, Christ is still who he claims to be, to wit, the son of God! After reading this essay, you might understandably wonder how I can possibly make such a claim. How could I say that Jesus never existed and in the same breath claim to believe in him? Well, because if you study the New Testament you’ll find that Jesus was never meant to come in Antiquity, but rather at the end of the world (Luke 17:30; 1 Peter 1:5, 20; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-3; Hebrews 1:1-2; Hebrews 9:26; Revelation 12:1-5; etc.).

The historical Jesus is based more on mistaken assumptions about the evangelists’ intentions than careful interpretation of their writings. I’m arguing that the traditional Christian understanding of the theology of the gospels is fundamentally incorrect. We have confused apocalyptic literature with history, and turned prophecy into biography. It’s not just the evangelists’ theological problem in finding the literary means to get Jesus to Bethlehem so as to fulfill Micah’s prophecy, it’s ours as well since our “theological needs here create biographical ‘facts’" (W.D. Davies, and E.P. Sanders).

Even so, the gospels are still valid as they give us a theological outline of Christ’s life using stories that are filtered down from the Old Testament. So, in conclusion, the gospels are prophetic parables or apocalyptic stories that are to be believed (paradoxically) and handed down to posterity until the time of their fulfillment:

“Once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. … After this the judgment" (Hebrews 9:26-27).

TRANSLATION AND EXEGESIS OF BIBLICAL GREEK

Eli Kittim

Ἡ μετάφρασις τῶν Ἑβδομήκοντα (Septuagint)

In the Septuagint’s version of Isa. 33.10, YHWH uses the Greek word *ἀναστήσομαι* (a derivative of the term *ἀνίστημι*, which means to ‘make to stand up’ or to ‘raise up’, but often meaning to ‘rise from the dead’) as a reference to His personal *resurrection*, which is then followed by His ascension (ὑψωθήσομαι) and exaltation (δοξασθήσομαι)

νῦν ἀναστήσομαι λέγει κύριος νῦν δοξασθήσομαι νῦν ὑψωθήσομαι (Isa. 33.10 LXX)

Translation

Now I will arise, says the Lord, now I will lift myself up; now I will be exalted (NRSV)

Compare the Greek terms *ἀναστῇ* (Isa. 2.19 LXX), *ἀναστήσεται* (Dan. 12.1 LXX), and *ἀναστήσονται* (Dan. 12.2 LXX), all of which refer to an eschatological *resurrection* from the dead!

How we got our Bible - Chuck Missler

Isaiah 9:6 Weighs Whether the Messiah is God (Christian Position) or a Mere Mortal (Judaic View)

By Author Eli of Kittim

I will present three examples from Isaiah Chapter 9 and verse 6 (which illustrate the Messiah’s Divinity) to demonstrate that the Hebrew text is not referring to a person of mere human origin, as Judaism suggests.

Let me introduce the first point of my argument. In Isaiah Chapter 9 and verse 6, the Hebrew word פֶלֶא “pele” (Strong’s H6382) is derived from the term “pala’,” which means “a miracle”– a marvellous wonder; as in the phrase “signs and wonders" (cf. Exod 15:11; Psalm 77:11, 14; Psalm 78:12; Psalm 88:10). Therefore, the standard English translation of the Hebrew term פֶלֶא “pele” as merely “wonderful” (in Isaiah 9:6) is not entirely accurate or adequate because it fails to address the nuances of this expression, which suggest that this child is associated with miracles and wonders! In other words, the term “pele” (Hb. פֶלֶא “Wonder”) implies that this is no ordinary child (not your typical human being), thereby suggesting the possibility of his divine or supernatural origin.

Secondly, Isaiah 9:6 says that this “son” (Hb. בֵּ֚ן “ben”; Strong’s H1121 i.e., “messianic child”) is called “mighty” (Hb. גִּבּוֹר “gibbor” Strong’s H1368) “God” (Hb. אֵ֣ל “el” Strong’s H410). The attribution of the phrase “mighty God” to the Messiah confirms the previous allusion regarding his ability to work wonders while admitting of no doubt or misunderstanding that this appellation of Messiah implies he is indeed God incarnate!

Thirdly, in Isaiah 9:6, the Messiah is called “the Prince” (Hb. שַׂר־ “sar” Strong’s H8269), “the everlasting” (Hb. עַד “ad” derived from “adah,” which means “perpetuity,” “continually,” or “eternally” Strong’s H5703). In other words, this “son” that “is given” to us as a gift (Hb. נִתַּן־ “nit·tān” Strong’s H5414) is from everlasting! As a supplemental observation, compare Micah 5:2 regarding the Messiah, “whose origin is from of old, from ancient days.”

Similarly, in Daniel 7:14 it is said that the Messiah’s kingdom is “everlasting” (Hb. עָלַם֙ “alam” Strong’s H5957), thus presumably reinforcing the notion that the Messiah (Hb. בַּר אֱנָשׁ “bar enash” i.e., “son of man” Dan 7:13) is himself everlasting. That’s why Isaiah 2:19 and Zephaniah 1:7 seemingly refer to the Messiah as “Lord” (Hb. יְהוָה֙ “Yhvh”), and why Zechariah 12:10 suggests that God (Hb. אֵלַ֖י “El”) himself  is looked upon by those who pierce him, followed by a world-wide mourning in the last days.

No wonder John 1:1-2 tells us categorically that the “Word” (Gk. Λόγος “Logos” i.e., Christ) is God:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.”

The author of Colossians contributes to this discussion by stating that Christ (i.e., “Messiah” or the Anointed One) “is the image of the invisible God” (1:15).

This is precisely why the great messianic prince named Michael is likened to God in Daniel 12:1 (Hb. מִיכָאֵל “Mikael” i.e., “Who is like God?” Strong’s H4317), and why the name of the messianic child in Isaiah 7:14 is “Immanuel” (עִמָּנוּאֵל i.e., God is with us).

Conclusion

Isaiah 9:6 in the original Hebrew text paints a divine picture of the Messiah, unlike the one erroniously drawn by traditional Judaism of a mere human being!

What did Moses Mean when he Said that God will Raise Up a Prophet Like Me? Was he Referring to Muhammad or to Someone Else?

By Author Eli Kittim 🎓

Deuteronomy 18.15 foretold the coming of a notable prophet after the manner of Moses whose words would command everyone’s attention. Here, we must use the principle of "double-fulfillment" in the interpretation of Bible prophecy. The first fulfillment of the prophecy refers to Joshua, who was to succeed Moses as leader. However, the second fulfillment of the prophecy refers to the prophetic line that would follow, ultimately culminating in Jesus Christ, the Messiah (see Acts 3.20-21), as this Torahic prophecy was then carried forward into the New Testament and recorded in the Book of Acts:

 “Moses said, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you from your own people a prophet like me. You must listen to whatever he tells you. And it will be that everyone who does not listen to that prophet will be utterly rooted out from the people’” (3.22—23; cf. 7.37).

The Greek text is as follows:

Μωϋσῆς μὲν εἶπεν ὅτι

προφήτην ὑμῖν ἀναστήσει κύριος ὁ θεὸς

ὑμῶν ἐκ τῶν ἀδελφῶν ὑμῶν ὡς ἐμέ· αὐτοῦ ἀκούσεσθε κατὰ πάντα ὅσα ἂν

λαλήσῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς.

ἔσται δὲ πᾶσα ψυχὴ ἥτις ἐὰν μὴ ἀκούσῃ τοῦ προφήτου ἐκείνου 

ἐξολεθρευθήσεται ἐκ τοῦ λαοῦ.

The key word, here, is ἀναστήσει (“raise up”). The Greek word ἀναστήσει is derived from the verb ἀνίστημι, which means to “raise up” or to “raise from the dead” (see G. W. H. Lampe [ed.], A Patristic Greek Lexicon [Oxford: Oxford University, 1961], pp. 145—46). The term ἀναστήσει—just like its cognates ἀναστήσεται and ἀναστήσονται—seemingly refers to a resurrection from the dead (see e.g. Mk 9.31; Lk. 18.33; Jn 11.23—24; 1 Thess. 4.16).

In Deuteronomy 18.15, the Hebrew term is קוּמ֖ (qum). The word qum means to “stand up” or to “raise up,” but all too often it means to “rise from the dead” (e.g. Isa. 26.19; Mk 5.39—42). Since the Septuagint (LXX) translates it as ἀναστήσει, it is reasonable to assume that Luke, the author of Acts, is drawing his inspiration from the LXX. 

Notice also that Acts 10.41 uses a cognate of the word ἀναστήσει (Acts 3.22), namely, ἀναστῆναι to refer to a resurrection from the dead (cf. Acts 17.3; Mk 9.10; Lk. 24.46; Jn 20.9). Interestingly enough, the New Testament uses yet another resurrection theme (ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῇ) and a cognate of the word ἀναστήσει in reference to the teachings of Moses: “‘If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced even if someone rises from the dead’” (Lk. 16.31). What is more, the phrase “raise up” (Acts 3.22) in connection with Moses’ reference to a future great prophet is also used in Acts 5.30 to denote Jesus’ resurrection: “‘The God of our ancestors raised up Jesus, whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree.’”

Conclusion

Based on translation and exegesis of Greek and Hebrew, Moses’ prophecy that “God will raise up [ἀναστήσει; qum] … a prophet like me” gives us a criterion by which its fulfillment may be judged. In other words, by this sign everyone will know that the notable prophet has indeed come. And what is this sign? It is simply this: the great prophet like unto Moses will be raised from the dead! In using this criterion of resurrection, we’ll be able to identify whether he is a true or false prophet.

Accordingly, Muhammad cannot lay claim to Moses’ prophecy, given that he has not been brought back from the grave. There can only be one person who fits the bill of the great prophet predicted by Moses in Deuteronomy 18.15 (Acts 3.19–23): Jesus Christ!

After all, Jesus Christ himself says that Moses “wrote about Me” (John 5.46)!