December 12, 2018

Daniel 5 Writing on the Wall By: Ben Fronczek

http://granvillenychurchofchrist.org/?p=1256


Daniel 5 Writing On the Wall

Daniel 5    Writing on the Wall      By: Ben Fronczek
Introduction: I like it when I learn where certain sayings come from; like the saying ‘Writing on the wall’.  This refers to, ‘A sign of imminent danger or doom.’   The origin of this saying comes from Daniel 5 which we will be looking at today. But first a little background information:
After King Nebuchadnezzar died in 562 B.C. his son Evil-Merodack, ruled over Babylonia for 2 years (562-560). In August 560, King Evil-Merodack was assassinated by General Neriglissar, who was the Kings own brother-in-law and Nebuchadnezzar’s son in law. General Neriglissar ruled as King  for 4 years (560-556) and was succeeded by his son Labashi-Marduk in 556 who was only a boy. Because he was young and weak ruler Labashi-Marduk was murdered after reigning 9 months. Then Nabonidus became king. He was Nebuchadnezzar’s other son-in-law having married his other daughter. For commercial and military advances Nabonidus devoted spent a lot of time in North Arabia, and Edom which he conquered in 552 B.C. In his final 10 years he left his son Belshazzer in Babylon to rule it in his absence.
It was during this time when father and son ruled Babylon the Medo-Persian empire and military led by Cyrus was growing and finally marched toward Babylon. Cyrus and his army met Nabonidus and his army north of Babylon but Cyrus defeated Nabonidus.  What was left of his army fled south leaving Babylon wide open to the Medo-Persians.
Inside the city Belshazzer did not seem to concerned about the army that surrounded Babylon. You see, he considered the city impregnable. There were a double set of walls that surrounded Babylon. It is said that the walls were over 300 feet high and eighty feet wide. The walls were so thick that 4 chariots could ride abreast on top of the walls which were also surrounded by deep moats. If one were to ride around the city outside the walls, he would travel about 60 miles. The wall had 250 guard towers and rooms for soldiers to sleep. It had 100 gates, all armored with brass. If an enemy soldier managed to get over the walls and moats he would have to cross a quarter mile of bare land before he could reach the city. There was enough food warehoused for a 20 year siege and farmland within the wall to raise more if needed. The Euphrates River also flowed under the wall to provide water.
So Belshazzer was not concerned. As a matter of fact while the Medo-Persian army lay outside, Belshazzer, in defiance arrogantly hosts a HUGE party which we will read about in Daniel 5.
Read Daniel 5:1-4   (Click on site to read)
It is said that Babylon had a banquet room that could hold up to 10,000 people. Here we read that  Belshazzer threw a party for a thousand of his nobles. I am sure there were others at this feast including wives, friends, servants, musicians, and who knows how many other people.
And then Belshazzer makes a truly bad decision. “He gave orders to bring in the gold and silver goblets that Nebuchadnezzar his father had taken from the temple in Jerusalem, so that the king and his nobles, his wives and his concubines might drink from them. “
The Text goes on to say that, as ‘The king and his nobles, his wives and his concubines drank wine from these sacred cups, they praised their gods of gold and silver, of bronze, iron, wood and stone.’
That was the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back.  Read 5:5-30  (Click on site to read)
Now I want you to get a feel for what takes place here and what happens.
● Babylon is surrounded by a new enemy, the Medo-Persian army and the king’s son, Nebuchadnezzar’s grandson now sits on the throne in Babylon and has no concerns what so ever other than turning up his nose to them and is partying like there’s nothing is going to happen.
● In arrogance and stupidity he does something that His grandfather Nebuchadnezzar did not even consider doing. He orders his servants to bring out the sacred cups that were used in the holy temple of God and uses them to drink wine out of and offer up toasts to their false deities.
● Then a hand appears out of nowhere, just a hand, probably a big hand floating up in the air in his banquet hall. At that point I’m sure everyone went silent; people stopped talking and laughing, the music stopped, dancers stood still as every eye watched to see what this hand would do. Then a finger etched some words into the plaster on the wall.
● This definitely got everyone’s attention, especially the king’s. The text says that “His face turned pale and he was so frightened that his legs became weak and his knees were knocking.”   This guy was shaking in his boots and rightfully so.  He wanted to know what all this meant so he calls for his enchanters, astrologers, and diviners and promises to reward the one who could give him some answers. But none of them could.
● Well the Queen mother (his grandmother, Nebuchadnezzar wife) comes on the scene and tells him about Daniel who is probably now simi-retired and now in his 80’s. Daniel came and so without mincing any words, he lets the king know what this was all about and what it meant.
He told him that even though his grandfather honored the God of Heaven, and had to learn it the hard way; in verses 22-24 Daniel says,  22 “But you, Belshazzar, his son,have not humbled yourself, though you knew all this.  Instead, you have set yourself up against the Lord of heaven. You had the goblets from his temple brought to you, and you and your nobles, your wives and your concubines drank wine from them. You praised the gods of silver and gold, of bronze, iron, wood and stone, which cannot see or hear or understand. But you did not honor the God who holds in his hand your life and all your ways. 24 Therefore he sent the hand that wrote the inscription.”
● And so Daniel lets him know that his reign was over and the kingdom was going to be handed over to the Medes and Persians. And we read that very night the prophecy was fulfilled, and the king was slain.
So maybe you are wondering how the Medes and Persians were able to take Babylon if it was so secure. The Greek Historian Herodotus lets us know what happened. Remember the I told you that the Babylonians had a good supply of water; they actually had a river entering the city under the walls. Well I guess while partying, Cyrus had his men upstream and they diverted most of the river away from Babylon. With the water only up to their knees, the army unexpectedly just walked right in. It is said that the army took the city so fast that the residents of Babylon did not even realize what had happened.
Lesson for us:                                                                                                 
● Those who think they are totally secure are not by what THEY have or because of what THEY do. Like Belshazzar they are just fooling themselves. It does not matter how much money, or how much power you have, or what kind of security system you have, or how good your health insurance is, or how many guns you have…we are not in control, GOD IS. HE is the one we need to put our trust in. God is the One who can exalt you or take you down!
● Second, (THIS ONE IS IMPORTANT) Don’t dishonor or mess with that which is important to God. Belshazzar messed with cups that were only meant to be used in Holy service to Yahweh. They treated these things which were holy without respect. Over and over we read in Scripture that our God is a loving God, but we also read that He is a jealous God. He does not like being disrespected. He does not appreciate it when we out of arrogance use  or misuse things which He considers important or holy as unholy. He does not like it when we imply that anything and anyone is more important than He is.
So how well do you treat the things of God? Want some examples: In the 10 commandment we are told:
  “You shall have no other gods beforeme. “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God. (Exodos 20:3-5) Don’t put anything in God’s place! God cares about who, what, and even how we worship.
● In the Commandments God also instructs not to even use His name in vain or as the Amplified Bible put it,  [use His name, lightly or frivolously, in false affirmations or profanely];  We dishonor God if and when we do this.
● He also commands not to dishonor your mother and father, and not to kill or steal, or covet, or lie about another, or chase after another person’s spouse.
Why? People are precious to GodWe are His children. Jesus told us to love others like He loved them and the church and was willing to die for them.
● Did you know that the way you act or conduct yourself around others can also dishonor God. Listen to what Paul wrote to the Romans in 2:2 concerning the hypocritical Jew, he wrote No wonder the Scriptures say, “The Gentiles blaspheme (or speak evil about) the name of God because of you.”
What is he saying here? ‘People will mock God when they see you who claim to be a believer act selfishly, unthankful, lazy, divisive, unforgiving, mean or cruel and argumentative. When others see you acting like that as a  “Christian”, they blaspheme the name of God because of you. You dishonor God and Christ.  1 Peter 2:12 states that we should be living such a way that other will praise and Glorify God; like Daniel did before Nebuchadnezzar.
● What about His word, Do you treat it with Honor and respect? The final warning in the book of Revelations is if anyone adds to it or takes away from His word they will be cursed and will not share in the tree of life in Heaven.
So I encourage you to honor GOD and honor and respect the things of God or that which is important to Him.  Also make a commitment and point to put Him and His will first before all else. Also treat His people well with honor and respect.  Treat His word and scripture with honor and respect as something holy and precious. And if you are a Christian, act like one.
If you do, like Daniel, you will not only bring Glory to God and maybe cause others to believe in His awesome greatness, you will be blessed and made more secure than one could ever be made by any human effort!
For more lessons click on the following link: http://granvillenychurchofchrist.org/?page_id=566

Does Hell Exist and Is it Eternal? by Trevor Bowen

http://insearchoftruth.org/articles/hell.html

Does Hell Exist and Is it Eternal?

INTRODUCTION

"If God is a kind, loving, and merciful god, how is it possible that He could possibly allow man to suffer eternal condemnation in hell? How could He allow man to be separated from Him for eternity?" This question concerning the eternal condemnation of the wicked is best answered by doing a word search on the word "hell" and other related words and then drawing conclusions based on the sum of these verses. Of course, each verse must be interpreted consistently in its context. Therefore, the goal of this article will be to collect and study some of the more conclusive and relevant passages regarding hell, specifically the ones which relate to the question of hell's existence and duration.

WHAT IS "HELL"?

Most people are familiar with the idea of hell being a place of eternal punishment, reserved for the wicked. However, it is essential that we turn to the Bible to refine this idea, because the Bible truth is the ultimate reality.
Jesus spoke of the danger of "hell fire" (Matthew 5:22Mark 9:43-48), which condemnation is depicted in the symbolic account of Judgment Day:
"And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire." Revelation 20:12-15
One of the many points that can be gleaned from these passages is that hell, vividly illustrated as a "lake of fire", is an undesirable, tortuous place to spend eternity. A second observation is that the basis for this judgment was how they lived their lives - "his works". However, this passage does not speak of the duration of this punishment. Is it possible that this judgment is temporary? Is the condemnation eternal?

THE DURATION OF HELL

Once again, we should turn to the pages of God’s message for us to learn the answers to our questions.
"Then He will also say to those on the left hand, 'Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels" . . . And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." Matthew 25:4146
" ... in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power" II Thessalonians 1:8-9
Also, the account in Revelation speaks of the "lake of fire and brimstone" as being a place of eternal torment (Revelation 20:10). Although some of these verses speak of the fire being eternal or everlasting, other verses, such as Matthew 25:46, clearly speak of the punishment itself being eternal. Therefore, it seems that if condemned to hell, one's judgment would be forever. A natural question would be to wonder if a kind and loving God could sentence any man to eternity in hell. Would God actually do this? Would He issue an eternal condemnation to hell and everlasting separation from Him?

THE POSSIBILITY OF ETERNITY IN HELL

Although it seems clear that God has constructed a place of eternal torment and punishment, the question may yet arise, "Is it possible that God would actually condemn someone to hell?" The answer is provided in the verses that we have already observed. Jesus warned of the danger of "hell fire" (Matthew 5:22Mark 9:43-48). One necessary inference is that there must be a real possibility that each of us could be condemned to hell, else there is no real danger. Would God make empty threats? Would a divine and loving Father warn of things that pose no danger? Clearly, No! The danger is real, unless we are willing to second-guess everything that Jesus said, including the promise of heaven (John 14:2-3).
Sadly, not only does the Bible outline the possibility of condemnation in hell, but it further states that the majority of people will end up there!
"Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it." Matthew 7:13-14
Once we reach the unseen realm of the dead, there is no way to "cross sides". In fact, the Bible symbolically speaks of a "great gulf" that separates the two realms of the dead, who are awaiting the final judgment day (Luke 16:19-31). After we die, the next fate-determining event is judgment day (Hebrews 9:27), and as we have previously seen, that judgment is final and the majority of people will find themselves condemned.
Yet someone may ask, "But, how can God let this happen? How can He be a kind and loving god and let any member of His creation spend eternity in hell?"

A KIND AND LOVING GOD

God certainly does not want anyone of his creation to be lost because of their sins:
"The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." II Peter 3:9
Elsewhere, we are told that the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and long-suffering is leading us to repentance (Romans 2:4) . Therefore, God is kind, loving, and does not want anyone to be perish. Consequently, He is diligently seeking the repentance of all of mankind over all time. Sadly, as we have already seen (Matthew 7:13-14), many have and will reject His gracious opportunity to repent and be forgiven.
"And the LORD God of their fathers sent warnings to them by His messengers, rising up early and sending them, because He had compassion on His people and on His dwelling place. But they mocked the messengers of God, despised His words, and scoffed at His prophets, until the wrath of the LORD arose against His people, till there was no remedy." II Chronicles 36:15-16
Despite our desires and the will of society that such a judgment scene not occur, we cannot change, nor should we ignore that a "separation" will occur upon Judgment Day (Matthew 25:31-46). This division of all people will be based upon our actions (II Corinthians 5:10). On that day, the Lord will bless many with eternal life in heaven with God, but He will reward many more with eternity in hell (Matthew 25:31-46).
As a kind and loving God, He has desperately tried to help mankind repent, but as a just God, He cannot allow willfully, disobedient, and unrepentant people to populate His holy abode. Eventually, His mercy reaches a limit, until there is no longer a remedy - by man's choice.

CONCLUSION

The idea of hell is a powerful motivating force that encourages us to obey God. It is not the most noble motivation, but it reaches the most selfish heart and makes it receptive to the high and transcendent motivations of love and gratitude. We should never deceive ourselves into believing the common notion that we are in no danger of "hell fire". As we have seen, hell is a real danger and an eternal punishment that awaits the disobedient. Sadly, many people will find themselves there. Dear reader, please do not let this fate befall you. Continue your quest for truth and learn God’s will for you, so that you may be saved from hell.
For further study: Please read more passages regarding the danger and duration of hell:
 Trevor Bowen

Friend or Foe by EE Healy

http://www.eehealy.com/commentary/a-friend.jpg

The Sacredness of Marriage by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1237


The Sacredness of Marriage

by Dave Miller, Ph.D.


Since its inception, the United States of America has been a country whose Founding Fathers recognized the need for God in public life, and the need for Bible principles of morality to govern and structure American society. Our Founding Fathers recognized that if our country ever strayed significantly away from these foundational moral, spiritual, and ethical principles, we would be doomed as a nation. For 150 years, our society recognized the importance of what some are calling the “traditional family,” i.e., a husband and a wife who marry for life and rear their children together. Divorce was almost unheard of in this country. When it did occur, it was regarded as deviant behavior. Family disruption in the form of separation, divorce, and out-of-wedlock birth were kept to a minimum by strong religious, social, and even legal sanctions. Immediately after World War II, most American children grew up in a family with both biological parents who were married to each other.
This state of affairs held sway up through the 1940s and 1950s. In fact, disruption of the traditional American family reached a historic low in the 1950s and early 1960s. But then something happened (see Whitehead, 1993). Beginning in about 1965, the divorce rate suddenly skyrocketed, more than doubling over the next fifteen years. By 1974, divorce passed death as the leading cause of family breakup. By 1980, only fifty percent of children could expect to spend their entire childhood with both their parents. Now half of all marriages end in divorce. Every year a million children go through divorce or separation, and almost as many more are born out of wedlock. People who remarry after divorce are more likely to break up than couples in first marriages. The same is true for couples who just live together.
Overall child well-being has declined, despite a decrease in the number of children per family, an increase in the educational level of parents, and historically high levels of public spending. The teen suicide has more than tripled. Juvenile crime has increased and become more violent. School performance has continued to decline. Some sociologists are now recognizing the incredibly harmful effect these circumstances are having on our country and the homes of America. They are beginning to realize the relationship between family structure and declining child well-being. Some are even admitting that the social arrangement that has proved most successful in ensuring the physical survival and promoting the social development of the child is the family unit of the biological mother and father.
But our society as a whole has been slow to see family disruption as a severe national problem. Why? A fundamental shift has occurred in our culture with reference to religious and moral value. Much of our society has jettisoned the Bible as the absolute standard of behavior. The Bible is no longer considered to be the authoritative regulator of daily living. Many, perhaps most, Americans no longer feel that divorce is wrong. “Irreconcilable differences” and “incompatibility” are seen as perfectly legitimate reasons for divorce—flying directly in the face of Bible teaching. Many Americans no longer feel that a couple simply living together without marriage is morally wrong. By the mid-1970s, three-fourths of Americans said that it is not morally wrong for a woman to have a child outside marriage.
We could debate the causes of this basic cultural shifting. I would argue that the influence of evolution and humanism in our educational system, the impact of feminism, the increased participation of women in the work force to the neglect of their children, the widespread prosperity that we enjoy as a nation (causing us to forget God and to indulge ourselves)—these and other factors have contributed to our moral decline. Hollywood, television, and the cinema have unquestionably glamorized, defended, and promoted divorce, premarital sex, unwed motherhood, abortion, and the use of alcohol, filthy language, and many other immoral behaviors.
Ironically—and tragically—the media have been working overtime to discredit the married, two-parent family by playing up instances of incest, violence, and abuse. If a family has religious inclinations, its members are depicted on programs as weirdoes and deviants. In fact, it is surely disgusting to the sensibilities of the morally upright that what was once mainstream and normal (i.e., the religious, church-going, two-parent family) is being demonized and ridiculed, while behavior that once was considered deviant, reprehensible, and immoral is paraded before society—on TV, in the news, and in the courts—as the social norm. Anyone who lifts a finger to speak against such immorality is berated as “homophobic,” “prejudiced,” “judgmental,” “mean-spirited,” and guilty of a “hate crime.”
Two illustrations of the undermining of the marriage relationship as God intended are the recent decisions regarding homosexuality by the United States Supreme Court and the Episcopal Church. By a 62-45 vote, the Episcopal House of Bishops elected the denomination’s first homosexual bishop on August 5, 2003 (see Duin, 2003). Only days earlier, the Supreme Court ruled that sodomy laws are unconstitutional—even though sodomy was treated as a criminal offense in all of the original thirteen colonies and eventually every one of the fifty states (see Robinson, 2003; “Sodomy Laws,” 2003). Sadly, a generation has arisen who simply does not share the values of its parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents. Sexual fidelity, lifelong marriage, and parenthood are simply no longer held up as worthwhile personal goals.
All of this self-centeredness has taken its greatest toll on the children. The erosion of basic moral values in exchange for pluralism, the growing tolerance of moral and ethical diversity, the shifting of emphasis to choice, freedom, and self-expression, have all inflicted great damage on marriage and the family—especially the children. The fuller body of empirical research now documents a number of startling conclusions:
  1. Divorce almost always brings a decline in the standard of living for the mother and children, plus a dependence on welfare; children in single-parent homes are far more likely to propagate the same behavior.
  2. Children never fully recover from divorce. Five, ten, fifteen years after a divorce, the children suffer from depression, under-achievement, and ultimately, their own troubled relationships.
  3. Young adults from disrupted families are nearly twice as likely as those from intact families to receive psychological help.
  4. Children in disrupted families are nearly twice as likely as those in intact families to drop out of high school. Those who remain in school show significant differences in educational attainment from those children who grow up in intact families.
  5. Remarriage does not reproduce nor restore the intact family structure. The latest research confirms that stepparents cannot replace the original home.
  6. For children whose parents divorced, the risk of divorce is two to three times greater than it is for children from married parent families.
These findings—and many others—underscore the importance of both a mother and a father in fostering the emotional well-being of children. But even more far-reaching effects have been documented—effects that impact society at large beyond the confines of the family. Authorities now are beginning to admit that a central cause of our most pressing social problems (i.e., poverty, crime, and school performance) is the breakup of the traditional American family.
What is even more startling is the fact that as an institution, marriage has lost much of its legal, religious, and social meaning and authority. For most of American history, marriage was one of the most important rites of passage in life. But now, marriage has lost much of its role and significance as a rite of passage. Sex is increasingly detached from the promise or expectation of marriage. Cohabitation is emerging as a significant experience for young adults. It is now replacing marriage as the first living together union. It is estimated that a quarter of unmarried women between the ages of 25 and 39 are currently living with a partner, and about half have lived at some time with an unmarried partner. Referring to this state of affairs as “the deinstitutionalization of marriage,” researchers at the National Marriage Project at Rutgers University concluded: “Taken together, the marriage indicators do not argue for optimism about a quick or widespread comeback of marriage. Persistent long-term trends suggest a steady weakening of marriage as a lasting union, a major stage in the adult life course, and as the primary institution governing childbearing and parenthood” (Popenoe and Whitehead, 1999).
Make no mistake: the social science evidence clearly documents the fact that the breakdown of the traditional two-parent, biological husband-wife family is a major factor contributing to the overall moral, religious, and ethical decline of our country. The social fabric of American civilization is literally tearing apart. The social arrangement that has proved most successful in ensuring the physical survival, and promoting the social development, of the child is the family unit of the biological mother and father. America is in deep trouble.
Our society is not likely to solve these massive problems. The liberal elite has been operating with great vigor for over forty years to push our country into “value neutrality” and “political correctness.” The clear-cut restraints and distinctions between right and wrong so typical of American culture in the past have been systematically dismantled. Relativism has taken the place of objective, absolute truth. The glorification of the individual has encouraged people to determine for themselves right and wrong—rather than looking outside themselves to the Transcendent Creator of the Universe. Consequently, whatever the individual feels is right is sanctioned as right—at least for that individual. The absolute standard of moral value and human behavior—that previously governed our nation—has been successfully supplanted. Subjectivity reigns supreme, and God has been effectively severed from human culture. “Everyone did what was right in his own eyes” (Judges 21:12).

GOD’S VIEW OF THE MATTER

The fact remains that there is a God in heaven (Daniel 2:28). God has spoken to the human race through His written Word, i.e., the Bible. In that inspired communication, He has designated the structure of society. He created male and female with the intention for one man to marry one woman for life (Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:4-6). Here is the foundational building block of humanity. That is His simple will on the matter. He hates divorce (Malachi 2:16). The only way He permits divorce is if one marriage partner divorces the other marriage partner for the one reason that the marriage partner has committed fornication, i.e., illicit sexual intercourse. Upon that basis alone, God allows the innocent partner to put away that unfaithful mate and form a second marriage (Matthew 19:3-9).
God intended for the husband and wife to produce children who, in turn, are to receive nurturing and care from their parents in a stable, loving home (Ephesians 6:1-4; Colossians 3:18-21). In this divinely ordained institution of the home, God intended that children receive the necessary instruction and training to prepare them to be productive, honest, God-fearing, hard-working citizens of their country. The home was designed by God to impart to each succeeding generation proper religious, moral, and social principles that would in turn make their nation strong and virtuous. The Bible is filled with references to the essential ingredients of healthy family life (e.g., Deuteronomy 4:7-9; 6:1-9; 11:18-21; 32:46-47; Psalm 127; Proverbs 5:15-20; 6:20-35; 11:29; 12:4; 14:1; 15:25,27; 17:1,13; 31:10-31), including proper parenting skills (Proverbs 13:24; 19:18; 22:15; 23:13-14; 29:15,17; Ephesians 6:1-4).

CONCLUSION

How simple! The solution to the confusion and corruption that has gripped American civilization is simple—if hearts are humbly yielded to the will of God. If we could get our families back on track according to God’s will, we could get our nation back on track. It starts with you and me. We must believe in, affirm to others, and conform ourselves to the sacredness of marriage.

REFERENCES

Duin, Julia (2003), “Gay Bishop Sets Off Talk of Episcopal Schism,” The Washington Times, [On-line], URL: http://www.dynamic.washtimes.com/print_story.cfm?StoryID=20030806-123147-7931r.
Popenoe, David and Barbara Dafoe Whitehead (1999), “What’s Happening to Marriage?” [On-line], URL: http//marriage.Rutgers.edu/Publications/pubwhatshappening.htm.
Robinson, B.A. (2003), “Criminalizing Same-Sex Behavior,” [On-line], URL: http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_laws1.htm.
“Sodomy Laws in the United States,” (2003), [On-line], URL: http://www.sodomylaws.org/usa/usa.htm.
Whitehead, Barbara (1993), “Dan Quayle Was Right,” The Atlantic Monthly, [On-line], URL: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/family/danquayl.htm.

The Saga of Ancient Jericho by Wayne Jackson, M.A.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=988

The Saga of Ancient Jericho

by Wayne Jackson, M.A.

After having spent forty hard years in the wilderness of Sinai, the children of Israel were stationed on the eastern bank of the Jordan River, just north of the Dead Sea. The challenge was now before them; they were to take the land of Canaan that Jehovah had promised to Abraham five centuries earlier.
The first obstacle in Israel’s path was the fortress city of Jericho. Joshua sent spies across the Jordan to survey the situation. When the presence of these Hebrews was detected, a Canaanite woman—Rahab the harlot—befriended them. Doubtless she saved their lives, and in turn, the spies promised that she and her family would be spared during the coming invasion (Joshua 2).
Shortly thereafter, Joshua led Israel against Jericho. The procedure for capturing the city was strange indeed, according to military standards. The Hebrews were to encompass the walls of the city once a day for six days, then, seven times on the seventh day. A blast was to be made on the priests’ trumpets, the people were to give a great shout, and the city would be theirs—for God had given it to them (Joshua 6:2,16). When the Hebrew people, by faith, followed this plan, the walls of Jericho fell down. According to divine instructions, the Israelites then destroyed the inhabitants of the city (with the exception of Rahab and her kinsmen), both man and beast. They were charged to confiscate the gold and silver and the vessels of brass and iron for Jehovah’s treasury, but they were prohibited from taking any personal booty. The city then was burned. Finally, a prophetic curse was placed upon any who attempted to refortify Jericho (Joshua 6).
It is important to note at this point that the chronology of the Bible indicates that the Israelite conquest of Canaan took place near 1400 B.C. Upon the basis of archaeological data, we know that Solomon commenced his reign over the united kingdom of Israel about 970 B.C. Additionally, 1 Kings 6:1 states that from the fourth year of Solomon’s reign, back to the time of the Exodus from Egypt, was a period of 480 years. This would suggest that Israel’s departure from Egypt occurred circa 1446/5 B.C.Since the invasion of Canaan commenced about forty years later (after Israel’s sojourn in the wilderness), this would put the conquest of Canaan at approximately 1406/5 B.C.It is important to remember this because liberal scholars, rejecting the chronology of the Bible, date these events 150 to 200 years later!
There are several important elements in this account worthy of consideration.

IS THE ACCOUNT HISTORICALLY ACCURATE?

The historical accuracy of the fall of Jericho has lain under a cloud of doubt in the minds of many for more than three decades. John Garstang, a professor at the University of Liverpool, excavated Jericho between 1930 and 1936. Garstang identified a destruction level at the ancient site that he called City IV. He concluded that this was the occupation level which paralleled the city of Joshua’s day, and that the biblical account was accurate. Jericho had fallen to Israel about 1400 B.C. He wrote: “In a word, in all material details and in date the fall of Jericho took place as described in the Biblical narrative” (1937, p. 1222). For several years, scholars generally accepted Garstang’s conclusions. However, that was to radically change.
From 1952 to 1958, Kathleen Kenyon, of the British School of Archaeology (daughter of famed archaeologist, Sir Frederic Kenyon) supervised an expedition at Jericho. Her work was the most thorough and scientific that had been done at this site. Her team unearthed a significant amount of evidence, but surprisingly, Kenyon’s interpretation of the data was radically different from Garstang’s. She contended that City IV had been destroyed about 1550 B.C. and therefore there was no fortress city for Joshua to conquer around 1400 B.C. She suggested that the archaeological evidence discredited the biblical record! And, not surprisingly, a sizable segment of scholars fell dutifully into line. Whenever there appears to be an apparent conflict between the Bible and other data, there is always a certain group that immediately calls the Scriptures into question. They never have the patience to wait for the more complete picture. Comments like those of Magnusson are typical: “...on a purely literary level, the Book of Joshua reads more like an adventure story than history...there is no archaeological evidence to support it” (1977, p. 96).
One of the most curious elements of this whole matter, however, is the fact that, prior to her death in 1978, Kathleen Kenyon’s opinions regarding Jericho had been published only in a popular book (Kenyon, 1957), in a few scattered articles, and in a series of preliminary field reports. The detailed record of her work was not made available until 1982-83, and an independent analysis of that evidence is bringing to light some startling new conclusions.
The March/April 1990 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review (certainly no “fundamentalist” journal) contains an article titled “Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho?—A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence,” authored by Bryant G. Wood. Dr. Wood is a visiting professor in the department of Near Eastern studies at the University of Toronto. He has served in responsible supervisory positions on several archaeological digs in Palestine. In this scholarly article, Wood contended: “When we compare the archaeological evidence at Jericho with the Biblical narrative describing the Israelite destruction of Jericho, we find a quite remarkable agreement” (1990, p. 53, emp. added). The professor emphasized several major points of agreement between the archaeological evidence and the record in the book of Joshua. A summary would appear as follows:
  1. The Bible indicates that Jericho was a strongly fortified city. It was surrounded by a “wall,” and access to the fortress could only be obtained through the city “gate” (Joshua 2:5,7,15; 6:5,20). Biblical Archaeology Review notes: “The city’s outer defenses consisted of a stone revetment wall [some 15 feet high] at the base of the tell [hill] that held in place a high, plastered rampart. Above the rampart on top of the tell was [the remnant of] a mudbrick wall [about 8 feet high at one point] which served as Jericho’s city wall proper” (see Wood, 1990, p. 46).
     
  2. According to the Old Testament, the invasion occurred just following the 14th day of Abib (March/April) (Joshua 5:10), thus in the springtime, or in the harvest season (3:15). Rahab was drying flax upon her roof (2:6). Both Garstang and Kenyon found large quantities of grain stored in the ruins of Jericho’s houses. In a very limited excavation area, Kenyon found six bushels of grain in one digging season—“This,” as Wood commented, “is unique in the annals of Palestinian archaeology” (1990, p. 56).
     
  3. The biblical record affirms that the conquest was accomplished swiftly in only seven days (6:15). The people of Jericho were confined to the city with no chance to escape (6:1). The abundance of food supplies, as indicated above, confirms this. Had the citizens of Jericho been able to escape, they would have taken food with them. Had the siege been protracted, the food would have been consumed. The Old Testament record is meticulously accurate.
     
  4. When the Israelites shouted with a great shout on that seventh day, the “wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city” (6:20; cf. Hebrews 11:30). Kenyon’s excavations uncovered, at the base of Jericho’s tell, a pile of red mudbricks which, she said, “probably came from the wall on the summit of the bank” (Kenyon, 1981, p. 110; as quoted in Wood, 1990, p. 54). She described the brick pile as the result of a wall’s “collapse.” Professor Wood stated that the amount of bricks found in the cross-section of Kenyon’s work area would suggest an upper wall 6.5 feet wide and 12 feet high (1990, p. 54).
     
  5. According to the Scriptures, Jericho was to be a city “devoted” to God, hence, the Hebrews were to confiscate the silver and gold, and the vessels of brass and iron for Jehovah’s treasury. However, they were to take no personal possessions(6:17-19). The archaeological evidence confirms this. As indicated earlier, a considerable amount of grain was found in Jericho. Grain, in biblical times, was exceedingly valuable, being frequently used as a monetary exchange (see 1 Kings 5:11). It therefore is unthinkable, unless by divine design, that the Israelites would have taken Jericho and left the grain intact. The Bible is right!
     
  6. The Scriptures state that during the destruction of Jericho, the city was set on fire (6:24). When Miss Kenyon dug down into the city, she discovered that the walls and floors of the houses were “blackened or reddened by fire...in most rooms the fallen debris was heavily burnt” (Kenyon, 1981, p. 370; as quoted in Wood, 1990, p. 56).
     
  7. The Bible indicates that Rahab’s house was built “upon the side of the wall, and she dwelt upon the wall” (2:15). A number of houses were found just inside the revetment wall, which could have abutted the wall [see point (1) above], thus easily accommodating an escape access from the city (Wood, 1990, p. 56). The evidence indicates that this area was the “poor quarter” of the city—just the type of residence that one might expect a harlot to have.
     
  8. Whereas Kathleen Kenyon contended that Jericho (City IV) had been destroyed about 1550 B.C., and abandoned thereafter, hence, there was no city for Joshua to conquer in 1400 B.C.(according to the biblical chronology), the actual evidence indicates otherwise. A cemetery outside of Jericho “has yielded a continuous series of Egyptian scarabs [small, beetle-shaped amulets, inscribed on the underside, often with the name of a pharaoh] from the 18th through the early-14th centuries B.C.E., contradicting Kenyon’s claim that the city was abandoned after 1550 B.C.E.” (Wood, 1990, p. 53).
Other evidences indicate a harmony with the biblical chronology as well. There is absolutely no reason to contend that the book of Joshua is in error in its description of the conquest of Jericho.

MORAL DIFFICULTIES

Some have argued that the account of Jericho’s destruction places the Bible in a morally compromising position. It is alleged that Rahab’s lies (Joshua 2:4-5) condone situation ethics, and that the slaughter of the city’s women and children (Joshua 6:21) is reprehensible—a reflection upon a benevolent God. These objections simply are not valid.
First, one should note that the Scriptures do not attempt to conceal Rahab’s falsehood. Her weakness is bluntly revealed. This evinces the impartiality of the divine record and is an indirect suggestion of inspiration. Too, one should understand that this woman was from a pagan environment. Her concept of morality and her personal lifestyle (she was a harlot) needed considerable refining. In spite of her sordid background, she had developed a sincere faith in Israel’s God (see Joshua 2:9ff.). Consequently, when the spies approached her, she was not “disobedient” as were the others of Jericho. She received the spies and sent them out another way. It was by these “works” of faith that she was delivered (Hebrews 11:31; James 2:25). She was not “justified” by lying; rather, she was justified by her faith and her works, in spite of her ignorance and/or weakness. It would be a gross misuse of this narrative to employ it as proof that there are occasions when it is divinely permissible to lie.
We must not pass from this point without noting that the case of Rahab demonstrates the wonderful harmony between faith and works in the divine plan. The writer of Hebrews states that Rahab perished not, as a result of her faith; James declares that she was justified by her works. These two requirements are not mutually exclusive of one another.
Second, while the extermination of an entire population may seem excessively cruel when viewed as an isolated incident, other factors shed light on that situation. Consider the following: (a) The destruction of Canaan’s heathen tribes was justified in view of their utter abandonment of moral restraint. The ancient evidence indicates that they practiced child-sacrifice, religious prostitution, sodomy, etc. A people can reach a state of such deep depravity that the justice of God demands punishment. (b) Their destruction had not been rendered impetuously. Jehovah had been patient with them for more than 500 years; finally, their cup of iniquity ran over and the time for judgment came (see Genesis 15:16). (c) This type of punishment was implemented on a rather limited basis—principally, upon the tribes of Palestine. This was due to the fact that God had chosen Canaan as the place where the Hebrew nation was to be cultivated in view of the coming Messiah, the Savior of the world. It was an example of moral surgery for the benefit of all mankind. (d) Finally, it still is true that these Old Testament narratives illustrate the fact that innocent people (e.g., infants) frequently have to suffer the consequences of evil acts that others generate, due to the kind of world in which we live. This should motivate us to want a better state wherein wickedness does not exist. And so, though such cases as the fall of Jericho may entail some difficulty, the problem is not insurmountable.

THE PROPHETIC CURSE

Following the destruction of Jericho, Joshua pronounced an imprecation upon the ancient city, saying: “Cursed be the man before Jehovah that riseth up and buildeth this city Jericho: with the loss of his firstborn shall he lay the foundation thereof, and with the loss of his youngest son shall he set up the gates of it” (Joshua 6:26).
Some writers have assumed that this prophecy failed, for not many years after Jericho’s fall, one reads of people living in Jericho (see Joshua 18:21; Judges 3:13; 2 Samuel 10:5). In fact, it is called specifically “the city of Jericho.” And yet, there is no record of the “curse” being fulfilled in those times proximate to Joshua’s invasion.
In response to this charge, several factors need to be noted. First, the prophetic curse did not state that Jericho never was to be inhabited. It does not even indicate that the city never was to be rebuilt. The divine prediction was simply this: The man who attempts to rebuild Jericho, as a fortress city (cf. “set up the gates of it,” 6:26) would be the recipient of the divine curse (see Coslinga, 1986, p. 73).
The fact of the matter is, five and a half centuries later, during the reign of Ahab of Israel, Hiel of Bethel rebuilt Jericho as a fortress. And, precisely as Joshua had declared, he lost his oldest son when the foundation was laid, and his youngest son when the gates of the city were set up (see 1 Kings 16:34). The prophecy was fulfilled. There is no discrepancy in the Bible record.

REFERENCES

Coslinga, C.J. (1986), Joshua, Judges, Ruth (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).
Garstang, John (1937), “Jericho and the Biblical Story,” Wonders of the Past, ed. J. A. Hammerton (New York: Wise).<
Kenyon, Kathleen (1957), Digging Up Jericho (London: Ernest Benn).
Kenyon, Kathleen (1981), Excavations at Jericho, Vol. 3: The Architecture and Stratigraphy of the Tell, ed. Thomas A. Holland (London: British School of Archaeology).
Magnusson, Magnus (1977), Archaeology of the Bible (New York: Simon & Schuster).
Wood, Bryant G. (1990), “Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho?—A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence,” Biblical Archaeology Review, 16[2]:44-58, March/April.

Originally published in Reason & Revelation, April 1990, 10[4]:17-19.