Golgotha: the Place of the Skull

Whose Skull Is Buried There?

Introduction

I blogged about the hyperlink between Psalm 22 and Jesus’s crucifixion, and also the connection between Psalms 23 and 24 with the resurrection this past Easter season. One question that came up during my studies was centered on the name of the location where Jesus’s crucifixion took place—Golgotha, Aramaic for the phrase, “the place of the skull” (Mat 27.33; Mar 15.22; Joh 17.17): Whose skull was it named after?

Scholars and theologians throughout church history offered four main explanations. According to Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible, there are four traditional explanations.[1]

However, the fact is we have no ideas what the answer is. In my attempt to tackle “the weird and the obscure stuff in the Bible”—my favorite pastime—I came up with a possible fifth option. Since no one can substantiate the previous four in absolute affirmative, in my opinion, mine is as good as any of them. But before I flesh out my hypothesis, I want to examine each of the four in detail to ensure mine has better biblical explanatory power.

Historical Explanation

A Skull-Shaped Hill

This is the most popular claim in the Church that posits Golgotha’s name came as the result of the crucifixion site was on a hill that resembles a skull (see below). However, no early evidence from any sources has been found to substantiate this view. Further, the Gospel accounts never referred to the place as a hill. Archaeologically speaking, we just do not have the precise location of Jesus’s crucifixion site to pin point that “Mount Golgotha” was the crucifixion site. Again, we can reject this view with confidence. 

(Photo credit: https://bramanswanderings.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/skull-4.jpg)

Common Place of Execution

According to history, this was the explanation originated with Jerome, an early fifth century church father (AD 346-420). He asserted Golgotha was a common disposal site for executed criminals. Because they were criminals, after their execution their skulls were strewn around the site. There are several reason I don’t accept this explanation. First, its grammar usage points to a singular skull, e.g., “a skull” (ESV) or “the skull” (CSB), not the plural “skulls”.

Second, though rare, Romans did practiced beheading, which was regarded as a more honorable means of execution and was only available to its citizens. The condemned would not experience suffering since beheading is relatively quick and painless. Church tradition teaches us Paul was executed in Rome in this manner, which makes sense since he was a Roman citizen. 

But beheading wasn’t an option for criminals in Palestine. Roman public executions were generally events put on to execute runaway slaves, prisoners of war, common criminals and army deserters. They were used as deterrent and were great spectacles, a twisted form of entertainment. These executions were designed to inflict the maximum amount of pain for the longest possible time. The cruelest method of execution was the crucifixion. So it would seem odd to decapitate the corpse after the crucifixion. 

Thirdly, since the fact that no first century evidence were found to substantiate Jerome’s claim, we can mark this explanation as unlikely true.

Symbol of Death

Some suggest that the name “skull” was used figuratively, simply as a symbol of death by execution. Again, there is no historical or biblical evidence to support this explanation. 

Adam’s Skull

The last of the common explanation was based on the writing from another early church father, Origen (AD 185–253), who in his commentary on Matthew mentioned there is an early, pre-Christian tradition that the skull of Adam was buried in that place and hence its name. This is probably the oldest explanation on the origin of the name, and was used by several writers after Origen. 

This legend [2]—in the spirit of Moses carrying Joseph’s bones back to the promised land for burial (Gen 50.25; Exo 13.19; Jos 24.32)—tells us that Noah brought Adam’s bones into the ark. Once the flood subsided, Noah divided Adam’s bones among his sons, and gave to Shem, his righteous son, the responsibility of taking Adam’s skull to Melchizedek, the king-high priest of Salem (Jerusalem), who then buried the skull outside the city. This place became known as “Karkaphta,” the place where Jesus was likely crucified.[3] Later, Jerome was credited by his contemporaries to have said Adam’s skull was buried under the very place Christ was crucified.[4]

Again, there is no biblical warrant for this view. Moreover, why would Adam want his skull to be buried in Salem, a place that was of no significance to him? The reason Joseph wanted his bones to be transported to Canaan was because he has a family tomb in Shechem (Jos 24.32). If Adam wanted to be buried anywhere specific, it would have been in Eden, near the garden’s entrance. I am skeptical of the historicity of this explanation. It’s legendary from the third century, nothing more.

An Alternate Explanation

There is a peculiar commentary in 1 Samuel 17 where the Scripture recorded the famous battle between David the shepherd boy and Goliath the Philistine giant. It was a story of a ultimate underdog defeating the undisputed champion. After David killed Goliath, he decapitated Goliath with his own sword. Anyone who has grown up in church has heard of this story in Sunday School. But what has been overlooked often is 1 Samuel 17.54:

And David took the head of the Philistine and brought it to Jerusalem, but he put his armor in his tent.

Remember, David served King Saul at this time, whose capital was at Gibeah, in the tribal territory of Benjamin. At that time Jerusalem still belonged to the Jebusites. It wasn’t until David became king and unified all twelve of Israel’s tribes in his seventh year of reign that he moved his capital from Hebron to Jerusalem (2Sa 5.5). So, the note in 1 Samuel 17.54 took place about 10 years after David’s victory over Goliath. And by the time he brought Goliath’s severed head to Jerusalem, it must’ve been only a skull.

Here is where I applied some sanctified inductive reasoning to the narrative. During the period of the judges and early monarchy, Israel’s main nemesis was the Philistines. Goliath was the epitome of the enemy of God’s people. While the Bible is silent as to where David put the Philistine’s head, I’m guessing his many wives weren’t too keen on having a giant skull on a wall of the palace. Furthermore, God’s enemies don’t belong inside his holy city. Thus, it’s entirely plausible Goliath’s head was buried outside of Zion. 

So, I submit to you, it’s my hypothesis that Goliath’s head is that skull and its burial location became known as “The Place of the Skull”. This hypothesis has scriptural support, thus possesses superior explanatory power compared to ad hoc explanations and legendary tales. And this place was likely made into a “cursed” place, where the Romans continued the tradition of executing criminals there.

Was it still buried there at the time in the first century Palestine? Possibly, but no one knows. Herod had implemented significant reconstruction of Jerusalem and its surrounding area, and renovated the second temple. Is it still there today? Again, it’d be speculation but probably unlikely since the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and burnt down the temple in AD 70.

Theological Implication

One reason many Christian favor the Adam’s skull view is its theological implication—Jesus the second Adam has reversed the transgression of the first Adam. It’s a beautiful story of redemption. But I believe the Goliath skull hypothesis makes an equally, if not superior, theological importance. 

We all know that David was Israel’s most famous king. And we all know that Goliath was his most notorious rival. Since Jesus is called the “son of David,” the promised eternal king of Israel, then we can make a parallel comparison between Goliath and Jesus’s nemesis (and ours): Satan. In John’s other book, Revelation, he refers to Satan as the “dragon… the ancient serpent” (Rev 20.2). This description should take us back to Genesis 3.14-15:

14 The LORD God said to the serpent, 
“Because you have done this, 
cursed are you above all livestock 
and above all beasts of the field; 
on your belly you shall go, 
and dust you shall eat 
all the days of your life. 
15  I will put enmity between you and the woman, 
and between your offspring and her offspring; 
he shall bruise your head, 
and you shall bruise his heel.”

The Hebrew shûwph for “bruise” (ESV) or “strike” (CSB) literally means to snap at; figuratively, it means to overwhelm or overcome. Theologians refer to the serpent’s condemnation as the “protevangelium,” the first glimmer of the gospel. It became clear to the Gospel writers that the crucifixion was the serpent “snapping at” the heel of the one who ultimately crushes his “head” upon his resurrection. A serpent’s poison is lodged in its head; and a “bruise” on that part is fatal. Thus, the fatal blow shall be the strike which Satan shall receive from Christ, though he didn’t understand the nature and extent of his doom at the time.[5] Paul understood the brilliance behind God’s plan which he hid from all the heavenly hosts from the very beginning. In 1 Corinthians 2.8 he explains:

None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

The “ruler of this Age” are the principalities, authorities and power of darkness in the heavenly places (Eph 6.12). In other words, God permitted Satan to afflict the humanity of Christ. Satan thought he had thwarted God’s plan by killing the Messiah. Satan is smart enough to know that he could never defeat God Almighty. So he tries to do everything to delay his own judgment (cf Psa 82.6-7; Eze 28.2). However, had he realized this was God’s redemptive plan from the very beginning, he wouldn’t have done it. 

Conclusion

As the blood of Jesus drips on the ground on “The Place of the Skull,” it was God fulfilling his promise to bruise or overwhelm the serpent’s “head”. The enemy has been neutralized. His power has been rendered impotent. The sin he ushered into the world by tempting Adam and Eve to disobey has been defeated, and its deadly consequence has been reversed because “it is finished! He has done it.” Jesus has defeated the tempter and the ensuing death. He completely finished his atoning work on the cross. There’s nothing else anyone can do to add to it. And the benefit we have is we can live in the freedom of Christ from today onward to eternity.

REFERENCES
[1] Carl Wayne Hensley, “Golgotha,” Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988), 890.
[2] Bar Bahluli apud Castel. Lexic. Polyglot. col. 3466; Elmacinus, p. 13. Patricides, p. 12. apud Hottinger. Smegma Oriental. l. 1. c. 8. p. 257; De Resurrectione Christi, p. 479.
[3] Elmacinus, p. 13. Patricides, p. 12. apud Hottinger. Smegma Oriental. l. 1. c. 8. p. 257.
[4] Epistle Marcellae, fol. 42. L. Tom. I.
[5] Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible, vol. 1 (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997), 19.

The Shepherd Psalm Trilogy | Hyperlinking Easter to Psalms 22-24

Introduction

In my recent blog series, as I connect Psalm 22 to Jesus’s crucifixion, I noted that Psalms 22, 23 and 24 form the Shepherd Psalm Trilogy. In this essay, I want to explore my hypothesis that these three prophetic psalms foretold the sequential events of the first Easter in AD 33, specifically hyperlinking Psalm 22 to the crucifixion, Psalm 23 to the Sabbath Day and Psalm 24 to Resurrection Sunday. We know Jesus was crucified and buried on a Friday and he rose from the dead on Sunday.

Psalm 22

I’ve written extensively my view that hyperlinks Psalm 22 to the crucifixion in a seven part blog series. At the conclusion of this psalm the messianic figure extolls Yahweh’s ever present nearness and his promise to deliver those who cry out to him (22.19-21). Contrary to the feeling of abandonment, he praises Yahweh “for he has not despised or abhorred the affliction of the afflicted, and he has not hidden his face from him, but has heard, when he cried to him” (22.24). Indeed the risen Savior met and told his brethren of the Father’s great name and his mighty deed (Psa 22.22, 25-26; cf. Mat 28.16-20; Luk 24.44-49; Joh 20.19-21). And just as the Messiah commissions his brethren to go to the ends of the world, to the nations, to turn their hearts to Yahweh and welcome his reign on earth in an eternal kingdom, Jesus commissions his disciples to do likewise (Psa 22.27-31; Mat 28.16-20).

If all this hasn’t fully convinced you of the hyperlink between Psalm 22 and the crucifixion, I want to highlight the last line of the psalm with Jesus’s last spoken words on the cross. The psalter ends Psalm 22 with the following words, “they shall come and proclaim his righteousness to a people yet unborn, that he has done it” (22.31). The Faithlife Study Bible makes the following commentary on the ending of this verse,

The Hebrew phrase here, ki asah, can be understood as “for it is done.” Jesus may have had this verse in mind when he said “It is finished” (tetelestai in Greek) as He died on the cross (John 19:30).

John D. Barry et al., Faithlife Study Bible (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2012, 2016), Ps 22:31.

In other words, on the cross Jesus quoted the first and last line of Psalm 22 to point all those within an earshot that he is the suffering one, the long awaited Messiah who came to redeem humanity from eternal separation from Yahweh.

Psalm 23

The 23rd psalm is perhaps one of the most often quoted and beloved psalms of all times. Generally, it’s been taught that David, the shepherd king, was reflecting on Yahweh’s protection, guidance and provision over his life. Yahweh is indeed the Great Shepherd to David and to his people.

When you look at the entire psalm, you will see the theme of rest. Notice the phrases, “He makes me lie down in green pastures. He leads me beside still waters. He restores my soul… your rod and your staff, they comfort me… and I shall dwell in the house of the LORD forever” (23.2-4, 6b). Further, I would argue that this rest came as the result of peace as expressed in the words, “I will fear no evil, for you are with me…. You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies” (23.4-5).

As I mentioned above, the day after Jesus’s crucifixion was the Sabbath (cf. Joh 19.42), the day of rest. It was the holy day Yahweh set aside at Mount Sinai for himself. I hope you’re beginning to see a connection forming between Jesus’s burial and the Sabbath. It was the day Jesus was at rest in the grave.

As a youth, one of my many questions about Easter was where Jesus spent Saturday, the day between his death and his resurrection? Reading the Apostles’ Creed, particularly the part where it states “He suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried; he descended to hell” just added more confusion to a teenager’s mind. Why would Jesus, the sinless Son of God, go to hell?

It wasn’t until years later, as I became a better student of the Word, that I learned the Hebrew Sheol (or Hades in the Greek), which rendered as “hell” in English is nothing like Milton’s description of hell in Paradise Lost! (In my opinion, that poem has made a big messes of several modern Christian “doctrines” of the the fall as well as the spiritual realm, including hell!). Ancient Israelites understood Sheol is the realm of the dead, the dwelling place where dead humans (or elohim) go. They still live. This is the reason Jesus shocked the Sadducees in an exchange about the resurrection when he declared the implication of Exodus 3.6:

³¹ And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God: ³² ‘I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not God of the dead, but of the living.”

Matthew 22.31-32

In other words, those who are dead physically remain alive spiritually. Their spirit awaits the Day of the Lord where they will receive a new immortal body. 

You might be asking what does Sheol have to do with Psalm 23, a psalm about Yahweh being the Good Shepherd?

Here’s the connection. Jesus’s body was laid to rest in a tomb just before the Sabbath began. But his Spirit was alive in Sheol. He was under the Father’s protection and provision, in a green pasture, besides still waters and being restored (23.1-3). He was literally walking through the “valley of the shadow of death,” but because he was under Yahweh’s care, he does not fear death—he is actually being comforted by the Father’s sovereignty and authority, i.e., rod and staff (23.4). Humanity’s enemy is death (Rom 5.12), and yet, in Sheol Jesus is enjoying a celebratory feast in its presence, sitting at Yahweh’s table (23.5) and looking forward to an everlasting life dwelling in Yahweh’s house (23.6). In Psalm 16.10 the Messiah joyfully sings,”For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption.”

It’s a picture of the fearless Messiah in the presence of death. As a matter of fact, Psalm 68 reveals the victorious messianic King taking his enemies as captives. Further Hosea prophesied about this King redeeming the faithful from eternal death in Hosea 13.14 (cf. 1Co 15.55). There is no fear of death because it has been defeated by the Great Shepherd. We can rest in his victory just as the buried Jesus rested in Yahweh’s assurance of resurrection.

Which brings us to Psalm 24…

Psalm 24

This psalm is all about the King of glory coming to his throne room. It pictures the victorious Messiah ascending to reign as the King over all the earth. In ancient cultures, it was a common practice to have the crown prince assume the throne while the king Father was alive. This ensures continuity of legacy and a smooth transition of power. The crown prince is coronated as king, the vice-regent to the kingdom. In effect the kingdom has two kings that function in unity as one king. This is the backdrop to Psalm 24.

The psalter asks rhetorically, “Who is this King of glory? The Lord, strong and mighty, the Lord, mighty in battle!” The battle took place in Sheol. The strong and mighty King—a picture of omnipotence—has returned from death to life. Jesus’s resurrection was his coronation to the throne, to be seated at the Father’s right hand. It’s the reason Jesus can claim in Matthew 28.18 that “all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” He fulfilled the vision Daniel had in Babylon five centuries before. In his vision recorded in Daniel 7.13-14, he saw the divine “Son of Man” (God the Son) coming with the clouds of heaven to present himself before the Ancient of Days, who is Yahweh (God the Father).

Today, King Jesus sits on his throne. Further, the Father King tells him to sit until he defeats and subjugates all of his enemies:

¹  The LORD says to my Lord:
“Sit at my right hand,
until I make your enemies your footstool.” 
²  The LORD sends forth from Zion 
your mighty scepter.
Rule in the midst of your enemies!

Psalm 110.1-2

Will you be among those who can ascend the hill of Yahweh and stand in his sacred space? Or will you be one who will be crushed under Yahweh’s feet as his footstool? To be among the blessed you need to pledge your believing loyalty to the King of Glory (Pas 24.5-6). To reject him as your King is to be among his condemned enemies, one of the captives he will subjugate.

Conclusion

In 1 Corinthians 2.8 Paul writes, “None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” While these rulers may apply to the Romans, Herod and Jewish leaders, I believe they’re even more nefarious than any human leaders. Remember, Paul is speaking to believers who were former pagan in Corinth. In this passage he speaks of wisdom from the Spirit. This wisdom is contrary to the “rulers of this age.” This should tells us that they’re the dark powers of the pagan nations. Further, throughout Paul’s writings he identified these “rulers” along with “powers,” “dominions,” “principalities” and “authorities” as evil spiritual forces (cf. Eph 3.10; 6.12; Col 1.16; 2.15).

Yahweh’s means of redeeming humanity was hidden even among spiritual beings, both righteous and wicked. It’s the great mystery of the ages now made clear after the resurrection. Despite of the veiled mystery, it was nonetheless foretold in the Shepherd Psalm Trilogy. I hope you will take the time this Easter season to read Psalms 22, 23 and 24 and reflect the shame Jesus endure on your behalf and the victory he gained over death through his resurrection. He has ascended his throne and is sitting at the Father’s right hand. I close with the psalter’s encouragement in Psalm 24:

⁴  He who has clean hands and a pure heart,
who does not lift up his soul to what is false
and does not swear deceitfully.
⁵  He will receive blessing from the LORD
and righteousness from the God of his salvation.

Psalm 24.4-5

May you continue to pursue a life of cleanliness and purity, rejecting falsehood and deceit. It is a promise that when you do so you will receive blessing and righteousnesses from the God of your salvation. Be encouraged today because he is risen, he is risen indeed!

Part 7: Golgotha, Ground Zero | Hyperlinking Easter to Psalm 22 Series

This is Part 7 of a multipart series connecting Jesus to the suffering Messiah in Psalm 22. In my last post I blogged about the “strong bulls of Bashan” attacking the him. This foreshadowed the spiritual battle between Jesus and his enemies, both human and supernatural.

The Cosmic Battlefield

Tying all the past blogs back to the crucifixion, Psalm 22 describes the cosmic battle between good and evil. On Golgotha–Hebrew for the place of the skull (have you ever wondered, “Whose skull?”)–evil thought it had triumphed over Jesus by murdering him. However, the Messiah’s sacrificial death was always the plan. With his blood he redeemed humanity from their sin of transgression. This plan from “before the creation of the world” was hidden even to those in the divine realm. It was a plan only known by the triune Godhead. 

Paul was convinced of this when he wrote,

None of the rulers of this age knew this wisdom, because if they had known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

1 Corinthians 2.8

The demonic forces—the “rulers of this age”—didn’t have a clue this was how Yahweh had planned to conquer evil from the very beginning. They encircled and surrounded the Messiah and directed his human enemies to inflict pain, hurl insults and crucify him. The evil alliance played into God’s hand foretold in the prophetic poem, “scorned by mankind and despised by the people. All who see me mock me; they make mouths at me; they wag their heads” (22.7). David writes his enemies were like a pack of wild “dogs”—a derogatory term Jews used for Gentiles—surround their victim for the final kill. Their nails were like lions’ “teeth” piercing (or disfigure) his hands and feet. And these Gentiles (Romans) divided his garment and cast lots for his robe. Thus he cries out for his God, his heavenly Father, to come to his aid in his most agonizing hour and deliver him from these animalistic foes. He had an unwavering confidence that God would hear and answer.

The Victor

Jews during the Second Temple period saw Mount Hermon in Bashan as the rival mountain to Mount Sinai (Psa 68.8), the mountain where Yahweh first made his covenant with Israel. In cosmic geography, mountaintops are where the gods live because they are lofty and inaccessible to humans. But, as David prophesied in Psalm 68, Yahweh will lead his divine army to conquer Mount Hermon by defeating his rivals gods (they’re really no rivals because he is supreme), and making it part of his eternal abode as the victor,

15  O mountain of God, mountain of Bashan;
O many-peaked mountain, mountain of Bashan!
16  Why do you look with hatred, O many-peaked mountain,
at the mount that God desired for his abode,
yes, where the LORD will dwell forever?
17  The chariots of God are twice ten thousand, 
thousands upon thousands; 
the LORD is among them; Sinai is now in the sanctuary. 
18  You ascended on high, 
leading a host of captives in your train 
and receiving gifts among men, 
even among the rebellious, that the LORD God may dwell there. 

Psalm 68.15-18

This conquest of the enemy’s territory is the reason Paul cited Psalm 68 in Ephesian 4.8 to show the resurrected Jesus is the prophesied Yahweh who conquered Mount Harmon—death and Hades (Sheol)—and led them as prisoners in the victory parade, all the while giving spoils of war to his people as their warrior king.

I can’t imagine on Golgotha the Pharisees and chief priests who witnessed the entire Psalm 22 (not to mention Psalm 68 after Jesus’s resurrection) unfolding right before their eyes didn’t make the connection. Just as Paul alluded, they were duped by the god of this age to deny the obvious (2Co 4.4).

Conclusion

I hope this series on Psalm 22, which began by exploring the misunderstood meaning behind Jesus’s outcry on the cross on April 4, 33 AD, almost 1,990 years ago to the date, has aided your understanding of Matthew 27.46. It wasn’t the cry of a despondent Jesus because his Father had forsaken him. It was Jesus, the very subject of the psalm, pointing those who stood beneath the cross what they are witnessing was foretold in the Scripture a millennia before. Ultimately, he shows them that God will not abandon his people but instead can be trusted to come to deliver them when they cry out. 

This God will deliver you like the crimson blood of the Paschal Lamb, and purge your heart of the corruption by sin to purify you as the two sacrificial goats of Yom Kippur. Both of these are typological symbols that telegraph the mission of the Messiah: to redeem those who place their believing loyalty to him. 

Have you pledged your believing loyalty to him? If so, praise and worship him on this Good Friday for the pain and suffering he endured to make it possible. If not, what is holding you back?

Part 6: Attack of the Bulls | Hyperlinking Easter to Psalm 22 Series

This is Part 6 of a multipart series connecting Jesus to Psalm 22. In my last post I blogged the crimson worm is a typology of the Messiah in Psalm 22.6-8. In today’s entry, I want to explore the use of another animal in Psalm 22., the “strong bulls of Bashan”:

¹²  Many bulls encompass me; 
strong bulls of Bashan surround me; 
¹³  they open wide their mouths at me, 
like a ravening and roaring lion.

Foreshadowing a Spiritual Battle
The psalter pleads for divine nearness and protection as he faces his enemies, the “strong bulls of Bashan” that encompassed and surrounded him (22.11-13). Often theologians suggest the psalter portrays his enemies using metaphors such as bulls, lions and dogs. However, if you recall from previous post, there is no parallel between this psalm and events in David’s life. Both Jews and Christians understood this psalm is about the promised Messiah.

What if, for argument sake, these “strong bulls” weren’t just his human enemies but spirit enemies too? A clue given here is “Bashan,” an ancient name for the region located in Upper Galilee that was once occupied by the Amorites and Canaanites, Israel’s arch nemesis. And during Jesus’s day it was occupied the Romans, which the Jews referred to as the “Galilee of the nations (or Gentiles)” (Mat 4.16; cf. Isa 9.1).

Israel’s Ancient Enemy
Bashan is first mentioned as kingdom of Og during the conquest of Canaan (Num 21.32-35). King Og was the last of the Rephaim to rule the region (Deu 3.10-14). Rephaim (and Anakim) were giant clans from antiquity. (Think of the Rephaim as the general description of descendants of the Nephilim and Anakim is a specific family of the Rephaim.) They were the same giants the Israelite spies observed in the land of Canaan, the descendants of Anak (Num 13.28-33). Moses later confirmed the spies’ report on the stature and might of the Anakim, and even reminded the new generation of Israelites that they had personal knowledge of this being true (cf. Deu 1.28; 2.10; 9.1-2). In other words, when they were children they heard about or even saw these giants.

These Anakim lived in Hebron and surrounding region. As I mentioned above, they were the descendants of the Nephilim, who were the hybrid offspring between “sons of God” and “daughters of man” (Gen 6.1-4; cf. Num 13.33). By the time Israelites entered the promised land, Yahweh had used the Ammonites to eliminate majority of them (Deu 2.20-21). And as Joshua dealt with the last of them in the conquest of Canaan, he proceeded to eliminate majority of the Anakim from the hill country of Judah and Israel, and drove their remnant into the Philistine territory of Gaza, Ashdod and Gath (Jos 11.21-23; 15.13-14). Just as Joshua defeated the Anakim, centuries later David battled another “son of Anak,” the Philistine Goliath of Gath. Lastly, David and his mighty men put an end to the Rephaim line by eliminating the four remnant Philistine giants (2Sa 21.15-22). Therefore, the Canaanites [1], indigenous people of Bashan led by rebel giants, have always been painted as Israel’s mortal and spiritual enemy, opposing the will of God Most High.

Bashan and Mount Hermon
Bashan, as a region, was referred to as the “land of the Rephaim” or “valley of the Rephaim” [2] (Jos 17.15; 18.6; 2Sa 5.18, 22; 23.13; 1Ch 11.15; 14.9; Isa 17.5). It’s often described as a place of spiritual darkness throughout the Old Testament because it was a spiritually dark place where its people were ardent Ba’al worshipers. Moreover, when the sons of Israel took over the land, the people of Bashan enticed them to worship Ba’al alongside with Yahweh. The worship of Ba’al took place on the “mountain of gods” (har elohim) [3]. In Jesus’s day, Bashan was in the region called “Upper Galilee,” home to the largest species of kermes worms (see previous blog post). And Jesus, whose ministry base was in the northern Galilee city of Capernaum, was often referred to as a “Galilean” by the Jews.

Cavern at the base of Mount Hermon

The most notable landmark in Bashan is Mount Hermon. At 9,230 feet, it is the tallest mountain in ancient Israel. And it was a major cultic worship center for many nations throughout its history—Canaanites worshiped Ba’al there, apostate Israelites worshiped Ba’al there and the Greeks worshiped Pan at the same mountain. At the foot of the mountain there is a great cavern which ancient pagans considered to be the entrance to the underworld—it became known as “the gates of hell.” 

During the times of Judges, the tribe of Dan gave up their allotted territory because they failed to possess their land due to Philistine opposition. Instead of trusting Yahweh to fight for them (cf. Exo 14.14), they chose to relocate to Laish, a city at the foot of Mount Hermon, and renamed it Dan (Jdg 8) [4]. There Danites pursued other gods, thus became an apostate tribe when it setup a high place on this mountain through erecting a temple and dedicated it to golden calf worship (1Ki 12.25-33). This same golden calf worship was Israel’s sin of idolatry during the exodus by making a forbidden image to represent Yahweh. Later, during the divided kingdom period, Jeroboam built two high places for golden calf worship in northern Israel—Bethel and Dan—to prevent his subjects from going to Jerusalem to offer sacrifices and return as spies for Rehoboam, the king of Judah. Thus, the calves of Ba’al certainly correlate to the “strong bulls” and “wild oxen” imagery of the antagonizers to God’s suffering servant.

The significance of Mount Harmon to Second Temple Jews (c 500 BC-AD 100) was that according to the apocryphal book of 1 Enoch, there were 200 fallen sons of God (“sons of Elohim”) who descended on that mountain and began to corrupt humanity by teaching them art, metal working, sorcery and various incantations (1En 7.1-11). These rebellious supernatural beings seduced human women who then gave birth to the Nephilim (Gen 6.1-4), a race of forbidden hybrid divine-human giants mentioned previously. [5]

Mount Transfiguration
And it was on this same mountain where Jesus asked the question of the ages: Who do you say that I am? Peter responded by acknowledging he was the anticipated Messiah, the Son of the living God who came to liberate Israel and establish his kingdom on earth. To which Jesus replied to this confession by declaring on this “rock” (i.e., Mount Hermon) the “gates of hell” shall not withstand his church on the offensive. This was a declaration of war against the powers of this present darkness. 

And many biblical scholars believe that it was on this same mountain, near the city of Caesarea Philippi, where a few days later Peter, James and John witnessed Jesus’s transfiguration. Since this was the epic center of Yahweh’s divine opposition, it’s of no surprise that it was on this mountain Jesus revealed his true identity and proclaimed his messiahship; it was his declaration of war against God’s opposition in the spirit realm—the powers, authorities, principalities and rulers of this age in Ephesians 6. In effect, Jesus declared his intention to transform this “mountain of the gods (elohim)” to the “mountain of God (Elohim)”. It was a pronouncement of the King’s coming and his declaration of war to take back what belongs to him. It was the reason majority of Jesus’s recorded exorcisms were performed in Galilee.

Typology of the Bulls
So, who do the “strong bulls of Bashan” represent in the crucifixion story? The most obvious were the Romans. The Roman standards often used animals to represent their viciousness and ferocity. Among the animals such as eagle, boar and wolf, they used an image of the mythical beast, a human-headed ox. The pagan Roman soldiers at Jesus’s trial certainly mocked and assaulted him as “the King of the Jews” (Mat 27.27-30). They beaten and flogged him to the point he was unrecognizable. 

What wasn’t as obvious were the Jewish leaders. These religious leaders of Judaism have nothing in common with the pagan Romans. Or did they…? In contrast to making his case that Jesus is the Messiah, John the Apostle writes in John 19.12-16:

12 From then on Pilate sought to release him, but the Jews cried out, “If you release this man, you are not Caesar’s friend. Everyone who makes himself a king opposes Caesar.” 13 So when Pilate heard these words, he brought Jesus out and sat down on the judgment seat at a place called The Stone Pavement, and in Aramaic Gabbatha. 14 Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover. It was about the sixth hour. He said to the Jews, “Behold your King!” 15 They cried out, “Away with him, away with him, crucify him!” Pilate said to them, “Shall I crucify your King?” The chief priests answered, “We have no king but Caesar.” 16 So he delivered him over to them to be crucified.

The Jews, incited by their rabbis, pledged their allegiance to Caesar instead of Jesus, as their King. This is treason of the highest form!

Like ravening lions, these bulls of Bashan “open wide their mouths” against Jesus; they were making a mockery of his kingship claim with ferociousness. And their assault on him was beyond humane. The Jewish temple guards punched and pounded his face with their fists, and they spat on him and mocked him by saying, “Prophesy to us, you Christ! Who is it that struck you?” (Mat 26.67-68). I hope you understand the magnitude of this punishment. His face and eyes were so bruised and swollen, plus blood is flowing down from the thorny crown on his head and covering his eyes, he can no longer see. They were mocking his claim to be Messiah since he surely has omniscience and would know who had struck him.

Your Thoughts
This prophetic Psalm may not have clearly identified who these bulls of Bashan were, but their nature and the manner they treated the Messiah was undeniably clear: with great contempt. It may seem odd that the Jews, those who despise the oppressive Romans with a passion, would be their closest ally when it came to dealing with Christ. Further, while Pilate didn’t consider Jesus doing anything deserving execution, the Jews certainly did. They charged Jesus with blasphemy, the claim that he is Yahweh-incarnate. Such a claim is worthy of death penalty… unless the claim is true, which then he deserved their worship. The old adage, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” is certainly true here.

Next time, on Good Friday, I will conclude this series by tying all this to the crucifixion. (I will have a bonus blog on Easter Sunday.) But until then, I’m interested to hear your feedback. How has this post added to or changed the way you understood spiritual warfare to be? And how will you approach this Easter differently because of it?

References:
[1] In Genesis 9.20-25 we see Noah’s curse on Canaan because he was the forbidden offspring of Ham in his attempt to usurp Noah as the new “father of humanity.” Genesis tells us Ham committed matrimonial incest based on the ancient near eastern idiom “saw the nakedness of his father” as euphemism for sexual intercourse with his wife or daughter (cf. Lev 18.7-14; 20.11, 17-20; 27.20). This is the reason Canaan was the recipient of Noah’s curse instead of Ham (but it doesn’t mean Ham hadn’t suffer consequences for his sin). The point the Genesis narrator makes is that the Canaanites are usurpers of God’s will because their forefather was a usurper.

[2] Bashan was the original “valley of the Raphaim.” Later in Israel’s history the valley west of Jerusalem became known as the “valley of the Raphaim” because it was there where David warred and killed the Philistines and the last of the giant warriors.

[3] The reference “har elohim” in Psalm 68.15 is ambiguous. It can be translated as either “mountain of God” or “mountain of gods” because Hebrew has no capitalization to denote whether it is Yahweh, the unique Elohim, or those supernatural beings categorized as elohim, i.e., the ”sons of Elohim.” However, in 1 Enoch and other Second Temple Jewish writings, Mount Hermon was the location where the rebellious sons of God from Genesis 6 met and ruled.

[4] This forfeiture of their allotted territory also meant the loss of their tribal representation among God’s faithful people in the end times (cf. Rev 7.4-8).

[5] They were forbidden because in God’s original creation mandate, each kind was to reproduce after its own kind (Gen 1.21-22, 24-25). Later Jude spoke of these rebellious divine beings and Nephilim, their hybrid descendants, who will face judgment in “utter darkness” in Jude 6-16. Moreover, Peter refers to the same divine incursion in 2 Peter 2.4 that God will punish the “angels when they sinned.”

Part 5: Jesus the Worm | Hyperlinking Easter to Psalm 22 Series

The Crimson Worm (kermes ilicid)

This is Part 5 of a multipart series connecting Jesus to Psalm 22. In my last entry I wrote about how the Jews viewed Psalm 22 since their return from the exile. Further I shared the common rabbinical practice of citing the first line of a passage to lead their audience to the rest of the text. Thus, the reason I suggested that the Father didn’t abandon Jesus on the cross based on the psalter’s words: 

In you our fathers trusted; they trusted, and you delivered them. To you they cried and were rescued; in you they trusted and were not put to shame… For he has not despised or abhorred the affliction of the afflicted, and he has not hidden his face from him, but has heard, when he cried to him (22.4-5, 24).

In this post, I want to continue my exploration of the psalm starting with verses 6-8 where the messianic figure cries out:

⁶  But I am a worm and not a man, scorned by mankind and despised by the people. ⁷  All who see me mock me; they make mouths at me; they wag their heads; ⁸  “He trusts in the Lord; let him deliver him; let him rescue him, for he delights in him!”

A Worm But Not an Ordinary Worm

The suffering servant laments that he is “but a worm and not a man” in midst of mockery and persecution from humanity. The popular interpretation is that in anguish he compared himself to a helpless, powerless, down-trodden worm, the weakest among all the creatures. However, here the psalter had more in mind than just the feeling of contempt and rejection. There are two Hebrew words for “worm”: rimmah and tôlaʿath. First, rimmah is the word broadly used to denote a maggot or worm. The second tôlaʿath is a narrower term that refers to a grub or worm (cf. Exo 16.20; Deu 28.39; Isa 14.11; 66.24), and particularly, it refers to the kermes ilicis, or the Crimson Worm (cf. Psa 22.6; Jon 4.7).

The Crimson Worm

Kermes ilicid is a species of scale insect. The common name kermes also represent the red dye extracted from the dried bodies of these insects. It’s the oldest known red dyestuff that dyed cloths into a very deep, blackish-red color, i.e., blood-like red. Jars of kermes have been found in a Neolithic cave-burial site at Adaouste (France). Ancient Egyptians, Greeks and Romans used them to dye clothes and fabrics. It was so valuable in that in the first century AD, kermes was often part of the tribute paid to conquering Roman armies.

According to an article from BioScience, the dye had a very special use during the Second Temple period Israel:

The scarlet dye—known as shani in Hebrew—was used in the Holy Land during the biblical period. This dye was widely used for religious rituals in the second temple until the temple’s destruction in AD 70 (Feliks 1966). According to a source from the same period, only the best shani dye product should be used, and it should come “from the worm in the mountain area” (Zuckermandel 1970).

Amar, Z. [1]

The largest of the species of the crimson worms were found in northern Israel, particularly in the Upper Galilee region [2]. Keep in mind the Upper Galilee as we will encounter it later when we get to “Bulls of Bashan” in Psalm 22.12.

The Crimson Dye

The adult female kermes ilicis is covered with a protective shell that is integral part of her body formed by the wax secretion from her pores. She has a maxilliped that she uses to suck the sap of the host plant, and with a wax that she secretes, she attaches herself to the branch or trunk. She lays eggs only once in her life because once laid she dies. Her abdominal cavity shrinks afterwards and becomes nourishment for her offsprings after the eggs hatch. The female crimson worm produces the dye pigment in both her body and in her eggs. Her offsprings are stained red by the dye and remain so for the rest of their lives. 

To make the scarlet dye, where approximately 50,000 to 60,000 scale insects are needed to produce one kilogram of the dried dyestuff, the insect is first dried and grounded to powder. Next, the powdery dyestuff is placed in a pot of water and cooked on a low heat, which turns the water red. The dye-maker then strains the water and it is ready for use. In a blog posted by Shari Abbott she writes:

In biblical times, the red dye excreted from the Crimson Worm (Ps 22:6, Isa 1:18, Isa 66:24) was used in the High Priest’s robe and probably for red dye used on ram’s skins to create the covering of the Tabernacle in the wilderness.  Uses of this red dye continue today. The worm’s body and shell, while still red and attached to the tree, are scraped off and used to make what is called “Royal Red Dye.” The waxy material is used to make high-quality shellac, which is used in the Middle East as a wood preserver. And the remains of the Crimson Worm are also used in medicines that help in regulating the human heart

Jesus, S.A. [3]

Typology of the Tola’ath

When Jesus directed those within an earshot to Psalm 22, he was revealing a truth hidden within about himself. He is the tola’ath of the psalm. Just as the mother tola’ath willingly attached herself to the wood to die in order to bear offsprings, Jesus willfully allowed his enemies to nailed him to the wooden cross because he desired to fulfill his mission of making others to be offsprings of God (cf. 1Jo 3.16; Gal 1.4). Just as her offsprings feed on her body to live, the followers of Jesus are to “feed” on his body and his blood to live eternally (cf. Mat 26.26). And just as the mother tola’ath when crushed excreted a crimson, scarlet dye that covers her offsprings, which “stains” (or marks) them permanently, Jesus was also crushed for our iniquities where his blood covered us and marked us as his (Isa 53.5; Eph 2.13). 

We’re not told whether those who rejected Jesus as the Messiah beneath the cross understood the significance of his self-identification to the crimson worm in Psalm 22.6. We know that it was after they hurled insults and shook their heads at him, and divided his garments, when Jesus quoted Psalm 22. Certainly they must’ve felt the sting of their mockery as he reminded them they were foretold verbatim in 22.7-8 (Mat 27.39, 43; Mar 15.29; Luk 23.35; Joh 19.24). But they likely missed the psalm’s implications just as they missed many of his parables as demonstrated by their continual denial and coverup of the resurrection. And even if they did, it would’ve been a realization that came a little too late.

Your Thoughts

I hope the typology of the crimson worm gave you new appreciation to the psalm. More importantly, I hope it shows you the richness of the text as well as how even the least significant word at first glance can be filled with deep meanings and significant implications. This is the genius of the writers of the Bible, both human and divine. 

Next time I will contrast the humble worm of Galilee with the powerful bulls of Bashon. But until then, I’m interested to hear your feedback. How has this post added to or changed the way you understood Easter to be? And how will you approach this Easter differently because of it?

References
[1] Amar, Z., Gottlieb, H., Varshavsky, L., Iluz, D., (n.d.). https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/55/12/1080/407161
[2] Zohar Amar (2007). Yaron Serri (ed.). Tracking the scarlet dye of the Holy Land (Be-ʻiḳvot tolaʻat ha-shani ha-Erets-Yiśreʼelit) (in Hebrew). Neṿeh Tsuf (Modi’in). ISBN  965-90818-2-0. OCLC  645876294.
[3] Jesus, S. A., Reasons for Hope*. (2021, March 15). How was Jesus Like a Worm? What’s the Crimson (or Scarlet) Worm? A Remez In Psalm 22? Reasons for Hope* Jesus. Retrieved 22 April 2022, https://reasonsforhopejesus.com/psalm-22-crimson-scarlet-worm/ 

Part 4: The Jewish View of Psalm 22 | Hyperlinking Easter to Psalm 22 Series

This is Part 4 of a multipart series connecting Jesus to Psalm 22. It is my hope to bring this series to its conclusion on Good Friday. I’ve addressed the erroneous conclusion that God the Father abandoned Jesus on the cross based on the false assumptions that God cannot look upon sin because Jesus literally became sinful in exchanging his righteousness for our unrighteousness.

Since the Father didn’t abandon him on the cross, then there must’ve been a specific purpose Jesus quoted Psalm 22 (Mat 27.46; Mar 15.34). And it’s my thesis that he did so for the benefit of all those stood underneath the cross—his disciples and followers as well as his accusers and executioners.

A Rabbinical Practice

In antiquity, before the invention of books, writings were only scroll form. Further, chapters and verses that divided lengthy texts into segments haven’t been invented yet. Thus, the common rabbinical practice in Jesus’s day was to quote the first line of a passage to direct his audience to a specific text he had in mind. In an oral culture, their pupils would have memorized large portions, if not all, of the Tanakh (or Septuagint). Thus, by reciting the first line of a passage, their students would immediately recognize its reference.

So there he was, pushing aside the searing pain in his arms and legs to fill his collapsed lungs with enough air to speak, he continued to shepherd his people. By combining the gospel accounts (Mar 15.34-39; Mat 27.46-50; Luk 23.46; Joh 19.28-30), we have Jesus’s literal dying words,

And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” And some of the bystanders, hearing it, said, “This man is calling Elijah.” After this, Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfill the Scripture), “I thirst.” A jar full of sour wine stood there, so one of them at once ran and took a sponge, filled it with sour wine, and put it on a reed and gave it to him to drink. But the others said, “Wait, let us see whether Elijah will come to take him down and save him.”

When Jesus had received the sour wine, he cried out again with a loud voice, “It is finished! Father, into your hands I commit my spirit!” And he bowed his head and yielded up his spirit.

Jesus (Mar 15.34-39; Mat 27.46-50; Luk 23.46; Joh 19.28-30)

There is no mistake Jesus intentionally directed them to Psalm 22. He used it both to encourage his followers of the coming darkest hours and to condemn his executioners of the judgment to come for crucifying the promised Deliverer of Israel.

Starting with today’s post, I will share my research to provide some biblical and historical context that connect this Davidic psalm that encouraged the Israelites and Jews under foreign oppression and occupation.

A Psalm of Purim

Psalm 22 is a very special psalm to the Jewish people throughout its history, particularly during the Diaspora (the Babylonian exile). The 1896 discovery of the Cairo Genizah—Hebrew for the “hiding place”—in the Ben Ezra Synagogue in Old Cairo, Egypt, was one of the greatest Jewish treasures ever excavated. Among the cache of over 400,000 sacred Jewish manuscripts fragments and documents there contained the earliest written custom which designated Psalm 22 as the Psalm of Purim (AD 870). As you may recall, Purim is a Jewish festival first instituted after Esther laid aside her own life, obeyed Mordecai’s challenge which led to the subsequent foiling of Haman’s plot to exterminate all Jews in the Persian Empire (Est 9.26). The Jews saw her as a typological messiah whom God used to deliver his people from extinction. Thus, the Jews celebrate Purim on the 14th (some on the 15th) of the Jewish month of Adar, the last festival of the year, just before the Passover, which begins a new year (in the old Jewish calendar) that corresponds to February and March in our Gregorian calendar.

The Jews made Psalm 22 the psalm of Purim because according to the Babylonian Talmud Megillah (AD 450-550), Queen Esther quoted this psalm when Mordecai disclosed his the overhearing of the plot to eradicate the Jews. Initially, she felt abandoned and without hope, but through fasting and praying, she faithfully obeyed Mordecai’s challenge. As result God came to their rescue and prospered them from the brink of destruction. All through her.

But, this isn’t the earliest known connection between this psalm and Purim. One hundred years earlier, the church father Jerome (AD 349-407) chastised those who made the central figure of the psalm to be anyone other than Christ, implying it was already an established practice,

“My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?” Impious are those who think the psalm was voiced in the persona of David or Esther or Mordecai, for by the very testimony of the evangelist, passages from it are understood to be about the savior: “They divided my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots,” “They have pierced my hands and feet” (Commentary on Matthew 4.27.46, completed on March 398)

Jerome (Commentary on Matthew 4.27.46, completed on March 398)

And this connection between Psalm 22 and Purim may be even more ancient than the fourth century AD according to Midrash Tehillim (Hebrew commentary on Psalm), perhaps even pre-dating the first century AD, observed during the Maccabean dynasty as “Mordechai Day” (2Ma 15.36). The Jewish historian, Josephus, said the Purim festival was widespread in his day. This means Jesus participated in this annual celebration during his earthly life. More importantly, as he celebrated, he would have known this psalm was all about him as the promised Deliverer of Israel. According to an article published in the Jewish Bible Quarterly, Dr. Raymond Apple suggests this psalm may be a prophetic poem with a messianic promise, it is “an indication of the future, which will bring both suffering and salvation.”

While Jews and Christians continue to debate the identity of the central figure of Psalm 22, one thing is beyond clear—the hero of Psalm 22 is a messianic-figure. Regardless the exact time the Jewish designation of this psalm as the Psalm of Purim, the Jewish belief that the suffering one in this psalm was the Messiah is unmistakable.

A Messianic Psalm

In this psalm David appeared to recall an event in his life that caused a great deal of distress and brought him to the point of death. But, there are no recorded incidents in David’s life that can account for this. As one Bible scholar pointed out, this psalm isn’t describing an illness or abuse but one painting a picture of an execution. Although David was once threatened with stoning (cf. 1Sa 30.6) this psalm details a much more severe scene. The only explanation is that David wrote this psalm as a prophet regarding his ultimate descendant, the Messiah (cf. Act 2.30). And Jesus, by quoting this psalm, identifies himself as the central figure of this psalm, the one whom God promised to send to deliver his people.

In this prophetic psalm, the Messiah appeals to Yahweh, his Great Shepherd, to deliver him from imminent threat and death. He was in agony and restless, but nevertheless he pledges his believing and loving loyalty to the God of Israel because of his faithfulness shown to his ancestors in Egypt—he rescued them, he liberated them and he restored their dignity (22.3-5).

Conclusion

By citing Psalm 22.1 Jesus was reminding all those within earshot that God hasn’t abandoned his faithful servant but rather he will deliver him and execute justice on his enemy, all those who persecuted him.

Your Thoughts

In my next blog post, I will show you the various metaphors used in Psalm 22 all point to Jesus in the hands of his enemies. I’m excited to share my research with you because it deepened my view on the supernatural nature of the Scripture. Of course it’s supernatural since it was the Holy Spirit who inspired the authors to write.

But until then, I’m interested to hear your feedback. What are your thoughts on my conclusion? As always, I would love it and appreciate it if you can share this blog with others.

Part 3: Did Jesus Literally Become Sin? | Hyperlinking Easter to Psalm 22 Series

This is Part 3 of a multipart series connecting Jesus to Psalm 22. Part 1 of this series began with the question: Did God the Father forsake Jesus on the cross. Then in Part 2 I tackled the erroneous, but well intentioned, assertion that God cannot look upon sin. It is my hope to bring this series to its conclusion on Good Friday.

REVIEW
In addressing the problem with asserting the Father abandoned Jesus on the cross, I listed two premises that led to the common misunderstanding held by many Christians. As a review, the syllogism is as follows:

Premise 1: God in his purity cannot look on evil or sin (Hab 1.13)
Premise 2: Christ literally became our sin on the cross (2Co 5.21)
Conclusion 1: Hence, God in his purity cannot look on Christ who was sin
Conclusion 2: Hence, God in his purity cannot be in the presence of sin that was in Christ
Conclusion 3: Therefore, God must turn his back on Christ and abandon him on the cross

Now hat I’ve debunked Premise 1, I want to explore Premise 2 of the syllogism.

INVESTIGATING THE TEXT
In his letter to the Corinthians, Paul explained that God made Jesus, the sinless one, “to be sin” for our sake. However, what did he mean by “made to be sin”? Scholars over the ages offer three possible interpretations. Colin Kruse summarizes as the following in his commentary 2 Corinthians: An Introduction and Commentary (Tyndall New Testament Commentaries, Intervarsity Press):

1) Christ was made a sinner. The idea is that just as Christ’s righteousness is imputed on the believer, in the same way, our wickedness is imputed on him. Thus he became an actual sinner—possessing sin itself—in this exchange when he bore the sins of the world.

2) Christ was made a sin-offering. This idea is supported by Paul’s use of sacrificial terminology, i.e., Christ as our Passover Lamb (Rom 3.25; 1Co 5.7). Further, the word for “sin” (hamartia) is used in the Septuagint to mean “sin offering” (Lev 4.24; 5.12).

3) Christ was made a sin-bearer. This idea is supported by appeal to Paul’s letter to the Galatians, where he speaks of Christ’s death in terms of his bearing the consequences of our sins (3.13).

Considering these three interpretations, we must reject the first because it’s contrary to the biblical teaching on Jesus’s character. Further, that’s not how imputation works. When Christ’s righteousness is imputed on us it doesn’t mean we’re no longer sinless. It means the sins we have now and will have in the future are covered by his righteousness. The demand for justice through penalty has been paid on our behalf, which takes us to the second interpretation.

Christ is our sin offering for John the baptizer stated as much in John 1.29, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” John alludes to Jesus as the better Passover Lamb. While Colin Kruse acknowledges this idea is supported by the Septuagint’s usage of the word, he declares, “The word (hamartia) is never used in this way in the New Testament, and it is doubtful whether it carries that meaning here.” He continues his thought that although sacrificial death for sin is consistent with Pauline theology, it’s probably not the best explanation to this passage, which takes us to the third interpretation.

Kruse considers this interpretation is the best by arguing as bearer of sin’s consequences it parallels with “so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” He says in the New Bible Commentary (emphasis added),

If becoming the righteousness of God means that God has pronounced judgment in our favour and put us in right relationship with himself, then to become sin, as the opposite of that, would mean that God had pronounced judgment against Christ (because he took upon himself the burden of our sins; cf. Is. 53:4–6, 12).

Colin G. Kruse, “2 Corinthians” in New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition, ed. D. A. Carson et al., 4th ed. (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1994), 1198

I believe that both the second and third interpretations have merit and are consistent with biblical teachings of penal substitutionary atonement. It’s not an “either/or” proposition but rather a “both/and” one. Jesus is both the final, perfect sacrifice—the spotless Lamb of God in John’s Gospel—and the sin-bearer that appeased God’s demand for justice from human transgressions against a holy and righteous God.

THE LAMB AND TWO GOATS
We are familiar with Jesus as the Passover Lamb, who took away the sins of the world. But the foreshadowing of Jesus can be seen in another festival observance, the two goats offered on the Day of Atonement in Leviticus 16.3-22. The symbolism of the two goats offered on the Day of Atonement ultimately pointed toward Christ.

The purpose of these goats—treated as two parts of the same sacrifice—was to purify and to purge. In light of the cross, Jesus was both the sin-offering goat that purified and the sin-bearing goat that purged. Foreshadowed by the first goat, he was slaughtered as the sin-offering goat with his blood “sprinkled” on the faithful to purify them so that they are fit for dwelling in God’s sacred space, in the true “tabernacle”: Jesus Christ. This was the point of Hebrews 9.18-22.

As for the second goat, on the Day of Atonement the priest places his hand on it as sign of transferring sin from the guilty to the innocent. It became the national sin-bearer for Israel. Once transferred the priest sets it loose into the wilderness, the symbol for purging sin from the camp.

This latter part of the ceremony has always puzzled theologians and scholars because the goat is reserved “for Azalea”. Some scholars translated “Azazel” as “the scapegoat” to avoid any suggestions of the goat being a sacrifice to appease a demonic power, in light of Leviticus 17.7. However, this translation isn’t completely accurate because it doesn’t take into account the cultural context of the Israelites during the exodus. According to an Egyptian superstition, Typhon, the evil spirit that lived in the wilderness. This was a common ancient view of the wilderness or desert as a place of desolation because it represented a place that is devoid of life, i.e., no vegetation or herding. Hence, it symbolized a place of evil and death. 

During the exodus, as long as the Israelites were inside the camp, they were in God’s sacred space. When people became unclean, such as leprosy, they were sent outside the camp, into the wilderness, because they’re unfit for the camp. Their uncleanness polluted God’s sacred space. Jewish scholars affirm this idea and consider Azazel to be the proper name for a demonic being who lived in the wilderness. In the First Book of Enoch, written during the third to second century BC, Second Temple Jews considered Azazel to be the name of the chief of the “sons of God” that led the rebellion in Genesis 6.1-4.

This second goat is a picture of Jesus nailed to the cross on Golgotha, a place outside of the city of Jerusalem, i.e., “outside the camp”. He carries away the sins of God’s people into the land of desolation, into Sheol, the land of the dead. His sacrificial death on the cross was the symbol of God’s total forgiveness of sin. He purged it from his covenant people. The author of Hebrews may have had this in mind when he wrote in Hebrews 13.10-13—Jesus was both the goat for sacrifice and the goat for Azazel:

10 We have an altar from which those who serve the tent have no right to eat. 11 For the bodies of those animals whose blood is brought into the holy places by the high priest as a sacrifice for sin are burned outside the camp. 12 So Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people through his own blood. 13 Therefore let us go to him outside the camp and bear the reproach he endured. 14 For here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city that is to come. And it’s all because Christ became the sin-bearer and took away all our sin so that it is purged from God’s sacred space, the “heart” of every believer.

Regardless whether you see Jesus as the two-goat offering or not, one thing is clear, under no circumstance did Jesus ever become a sinner in exchange with us. He is still the only one who was, is and will be sinless in human history. Therefore, we can conclude that Premise 2 is false.

A THOUGHT EXPERIMENT
Jesus can’t become literal sin. To suggest such is circular reasoning. It was yet another attempt to explain the erroneous presupposition that God the Father abandoned Jesus on the cross. And, whereas the first premise was result of poor exegesis, the second premise is completely ad hoc, if not heretical, since it means Jesus, who is God, literally took on our sin-nature in him.

In Part 1 I quoted Billy Graham for saying, “And in that moment He was banished from the presence of God, for sin cannot exist in God’s presence. His cry speaks of this truth; He endured the separation from God that you and I deserve.” Using this statement, I want us to do a thought experiment by constructing the following logic presented in it:

P1: God banished Jesus from his presence
P2: Sin cannot exist in God’s presence
P3: Jesus separated from the Godhead
C: Therefore, Jesus can’t be God

Jesus was co-eternal with God, he was the agent of creation, and he and the Father are one (Joh 1.1-3; 10.30). So this conclusion goes against all the teachings of the New Testament authors on Jesus’s divinity. It’s scandalous! It’s heretical! (I’m not saying Billy Graham was a heretic; all I’m just saying is by carrying these three premises to their logical conclusion we will end up making a claim we must never entertain.) 

It just goes to show that ideas have consequences. When it comes to making a theological statement regarding God’s nature, we must examine all its implications fully or else we might end up with heresy.

Now, some preachers have tried to soften this conclusion by providing another ad hoc explanation—when Jesus cried out the opening line from Psalm 22, he was speaking as the human Jesus. Again, ideas have consequences. This time error begets more errors. If their rationale were true, then it totally redefines the biblical concept of the “hypostatic union”—how God the Son, Jesus Christ, took on a human nature, yet remained fully God at the same time (John 1; 10.30; Rom 1.4; Col 2.9; 1Ti 2.5). The scripture teaches Jesus had two natures—both human and divine—which were inseparable. He wasn’t a mixture of half divine and half man; instead he continued to exist as God when he became a man by adding human nature to himself (Phi 2.5-11). When Jesus acted, he didn’t act as “the human” Jesus or the “divine” Jesus; he always acted as the “God-man” Jesus. To strip away Jesus’s divinity from his humanity or vice versa is committing the heresies of Docetism, Apollinarianism and Arianism. Consequences of these heretical teachings either nullifies Jesus’s sacrifice on the cross because he didn’t have an actual physical body or it turns Christianity into a polytheistic religion.

CONCLUSION
By taking the idea that God the Father had to abandon Christ at the cross—because he cannot look on or be in the presence of sin—to its logical conclusion, we can confidently and scripturally claim that the Father neither turn his face away from looking at Jesus because of sin nor abandoned him so that Christ had to endure the pain of the crucifixion alone. Instead we can rest in the hope that whenever we cry out to God, he is ready to hear and act as our Good Shepherd.

YOUR THOUGHTS
With both premises debunked, the erroneous view of Jesus’s cry on the cross has been corrected. In the forthcoming blogs I will deal with the reason Jesus quoted Psalm 22 as his last words to those standing underneath the cross.

But until then, I’m interested to hear your feedback. Do you agree or disagree with my conclusion? Why or why not? And what are your thoughts on Jesus being the two-goats of Atonement?

Part 2: Can God Look Upon Sin? | Hyperlinking Easter to Psalm 22 Series

This is Part 2 of a multipart series on the relationship between Jesus and Psalm 22. I hope to bring it to its conclusion on Good Friday.

REVIEW
Last week I opened this series with the following question: Did God the Father forsaken God the Son on the cross? In it I gave two premises that led to its logical conclusion affirming God has indeed forsaken Jesus on the cross, the common understanding held by many Christians. As a review, the syllogism is as follows:

Premise 1: God in his purity cannot look on evil or sin (Hab 1.13).
Premise 2: Christ literally became our sin on the cross (2Co 5.21).
Conclusion 1: Hence, God in his purity cannot look on Christ who was sin.
Conclusion 2: Hence, God in his purity cannot be in the presence of sin that was in Christ.
Conclusion 3: Therefore, God must turn his back on Christ and abandon him on the cross.

Here in Part 2, I want to explore Premise 1 of the above syllogism.

CONTEXT MATETRS
It’s been said that context is king. And it’ll serve us well to know the context of any passage we’re studying.

Habakkuk was a prophet to the southern kingdom of Judah during its declining years (c 640-615 BC). He was perplexed. First, he was perplexed by the rampant sins of the Judahites, Yahweh’s chosen people. Evil trumped while the righteous suffered. Wickedness, violence and idolatry seemed to go unchecked and there was no sign of slowing down. The prophet was at a loss to the reason God tolerated wrongdoing for so long.

So he lodged a complaint to God, asking him why he wasn’t doing anything about evil and wickedness that’s polluting his promised land.

And when Yahweh finally answered him, Habakkuk was further perplexed by his response. His response was that he is about to do something regrading the unrestrained wickedness of his people. He will soon judge and punish Judah for their idolatry. And the kicker is, his chosen instrument of divine punishment is the pagan Babylonians, a nation even more wicked than Judah. 

Yahweh’s surprising response not only shocked Habakkuk but caused him even more consternation. The prophet was stupefied. Now he raises the question to God: How can you use these wretched barbarians to punish your covenant people? In other words, he was asking Yahweh how he could use wickedness for his divine purpose—in this case the brutal Nebuchadnezzar and his savage Babylonian army.

IS THAT REALLY WHAT THE TEXT SAYS?
And this is when we come across the text that formed Premise 1. It is found in Habakkuk 1.13 (ESV):

You who are of purer eyes than to see evil 
and cannot look at wrong,
why do you idly look at traitors
and remain silent when the wicked swallows up
the man more righteous than he?

This passage is written in Hebrew poetry. Thus, the first clue for us is that it contains figurative language. Our second clue is that while Habakkuk extolling of Yahweh’s holiness as the cause for his abhorrence to evil, that wasn’t his entire speech. If we stop reading after this part of the verse, “You who are of purer eyes than to see evil and cannot look at wrong” then we would arrive at the conclusion God indeed cannot look at evil.

But he calls into question God’s holy character in that he seems to tolerate wrongdoing by saying, “why do you idly look at traitors?” Here’s the interesting part. Earlier in Habakkuk 1.3 he used a similar language, “why do you idly look at wrong?” So, in his own assessment Habakkuk accuses God of seeing both wrongs and treachery where he ought not have done so. In his own admission, God is looking and seeing the wickedness all around, both in the Judahites and in the Babylonians. Essentially, the prophet’s faith in a holy God is shaken by his choice of the instrument of punishment. He couldn’t understand why God would use the vile to punish those who are “more righteous.” Habakkuk just couldn’t understand that, from Yahweh’s perspective, Judah is more wicked than the pagan Babylonians. 

Isn’t that the same problem we believers have, that in our own estimation we’re “more righteous” than the unbelievers? And I would venture to say that we would question God’s goodness or call his care for us into question when we see the wicked triumph while his children suffer.

DEBUNKING PREMISE 1
Before I complete my thoughts on Habakkuk’s assessment, I want to tackle this question from a logical standpoint. When Adam and Eve ate from the forbidden fruit, even though they could hide themselves from God, God nevertheless could still see them. Before the all-knowing God, they were naked in the truest sense. God saw them in their fallen state. As a matter of fact, I would say that from the very beginning humanity has forced the holy God to look upon sin and evil.

Further, if God has to turn his head from seeing sin like some of us who get queasy in the sight of blood, then how can such a God ever deal with his covenant people or even come to sinners to draw them closer to himself? He is hardly a sovereign and supreme God if an act of wickedness will cause him to turn his head and forsake his people. 

Hopefully you can see that logically and theologically, if God is truly too pure to look upon evil, then God should never look at any of us. Yet he did. He did so with intensity. And because he did so with intentionality, we were the beneficiary of it.

In conclusion, what some Christians hold as the “gospel truth”—in this case, Premise 1—is a false belief. Habakkuk not only didn’t say “God can’t look upon sin,” the reality is that he says the exact opposite. To him God can and does look upon sin and wrongdoing. God will not shy away from sin and evil because he know he can do something about it.

And I, for one, am glad that he did so and will continue to do so until he eradicates evil and wickedness altogether one day.

YOUR THOUGHTS
Generally, in a syllogism when one premise fails, then the entire argument falls. However, in the next blog I will address the premise that Christ literally became sin on the cross. To me this is another unscriptural belief taught by some that needs to go away.

But until the next blog, I’m interested to hear your feedback. Do you agree or disagree with my conclusion? Why or why not? And what are some other beliefs many Christians hold dearly but really aren’t scriptural?

Part 1: Did God the Father Forsaken God the Son on the Cross? | Hyperlinking Easter and Psalm 22 Series

This is a multipart series on the relationship between Jesus and Psalm 22. I have tackled this subject four years ago in my blog titled Was Christ Abandoned by the Father? Today, in 2023, I want to share with you my further exploration of the deeper meaning of Jesus’s last words. 

In Part 1 of this series, I want to revisit and reexamine the claim often made by preachers, pastors and commentators: God the Father abandoned Jesus on the cross.

Introduction
The sky begins to turn dark and the winds are blowing ferociously. The people begin to shield their faces for grains of sand were pelting them. Yet, no one moved on that crowded hilltop called Golgotha. All watching a man suffer. All waiting to hear his last exhale. 

Jesus has been hanging on the cross for nearly three hours now, agonizing over the searing pain felt throughout his body. His arms and shoulders throbbed as his tendons and muscles are stretched beyond their elastic limits, to the point of tearing. Yet he had to push through the burning pain to pull himself up by his pierced hands because he was suffocating. But when he finally takes in a welcomed breath, his lungs exploded as if it were on fire. Further, as he tries to hold himself up with his pierced feet and trembling legs, wood splinters dig deeper into his torn and exposed spine from Roman executioners’ merciless lashings. With every ounce of his will, he fought the human body’s desire to giving in to subconsciousness as its pain management and self-protection mechanism, which he put in place as its Creator. He slowly gathers his strength for one final declaration. The same mouth that spoke the world into existence now cries out one last time to his Heavenly Father, he recites the opening line of Psalm 22 (Mat 27.46 ESV; Mar 15.34), 

“Eli, Eli, lemá sabachtháni?” That is, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”

With these four Aramaic words Jesus spoke his last and gave up his spirit.

The Claim
When Jesus cried out his these last words, the crowd beneath the cross misunderstood his plea, thinking he was calling on Elijah to come save him. However, today, there is a different misunderstanding regarding these words. It’s the belief that God the Father had forsaken Jesus on the cross in the final minutes of his anguish. The idea is Jesus’s cry of abandonment by the Father was far more distressing than his physical flogging, thorns from the crown pressed into his scalp and brows, and large spikes driven through his hands and feet. His Father had forsaken him on the cross. Some even claim, for the first and only time in history, God the Son was all alone, separated from God the Father. After all, if it weren’t true, then why would Jesus, the Truth personified, make such a shocking claim.

The assertion of the Father’s abandonment has always troubled me over the years. It presupposes the reason God the Father had to turned his back on his Son is because he cannot look upon sin, when Jesus became sin on our behalf. For example, the Reverend Billy Graham answered a similar question with the following response (emphasis added),

“But in reality His words point to something far different. They point to the fact that when Jesus died on the cross, all our sins—without exception—were transferred to Him. He was without sin, for He was God in human flesh. But as He died all our sins were placed on Him, and He became the final and complete sacrifice for our sins. And in that moment He was banished from the presence of God, for sin cannot exist in God’s presence. His cry speaks of this truth; He endured the separation from God that you and I deserve.” (https://billygraham.org/story/did-god-abandon-jesus-on-the-cross-billy-graham-answers/)

“Banished.” That was an even stronger, more forceful language than “forsaken” or “abandon”. Miles Custis echoes Reverend Graham’s notion in his article (emphasis added),

“The opening line of Psalm 22 beautifully expresses the anguish of the psalmist. He is suffering greatly, but his chief concern is that God—the source of his trust and deliverance—appears to have abandoned him. Matthew and Mark both attribute these words to Jesus (Mt 27:46; Mk 15:34). Jesus’ physical sufferings pale in comparison to the trauma of being forsaken by God as he takes the weight of our sin upon himself.” (https://www.logos.com/grow/5-allusions-to-psalm-22-at-christs-crucifixion/)

The Rationale
Reverend Graham was no doubt the greatest evangelist of the 20th century, but was he correct in his theological claim? And what does that tell us about God if we carry his claim (and all similar claims) to its logical conclusion? 

Those defending that “the Father abandoned Jesus because he cannot look upon sin” conclusion do so by conflating two ideas from unrelated passages, Habakkuk 1.13 and 2 Corinthians 5.21. 

In Habakkuk 1.13 after the prophet saw the abounding wickedness in Judah, he declared,

Your eyes are too pure to look on evil,
And you cannot tolerate wrongdoing.

And in 2 Corinthians 5.21 we read of Paul’s teaching on the means of reconciliation for humanity to God,

He made the one who did not know sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.

The presupposition that God forsook Jesus on the cross came as result of a literalistic reading of these passages. The syllogism behind it is as follows:

Premise 1: God in his purity cannot look on evil or sin (Hab 1.13).
Premise 2: Christ literally became our sin on the cross (2Co 5.21).
Conclusion 1: Hence, God in his purity cannot look on Christ who was sin.
Conclusion 2: Hence, God in his purity cannot be in the presence of sin that was in Christ.
Conclusion 3: Therefore, God must turn his back on Christ and abandon him on the cross.

Your Thoughts
I will address my evaluation of the logic behind this claim in my next post. In the meantime, I’m interested to read your feedback. Do you agree or disagree with the syllogism? Why or why not?