Hebrews part three.

I'm back. Somehow life goes on, even when your heart has been smashed into a million pieces by the inconceivable and unexplainable.

We continue on in Hebrews chapter one at verse ten. There the author makes a quote that he attributes to god speaking about the christ. "In the beginning, o lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands." First of all, this exact phrase does not seem to appear as is in the Old Testament. It appears to be a mash up of Psalm 8:6 and Zechariah 12:1. Second, the logic seems to be: if scripture is the word of god, and god is saying these things, and god appears to be talking to someone else. Who else could that someone be? Must be the christ!

Verse 11 contains a small piece of Isaiah 51:6, "they (the heavens) will wear out like a garment." Verse 12 is a reconstruction of Psalm 102:25-27, You will roll them (the heavens)up like a robe; like a garment they will be changed, but you remain the same, and your years will never end." Again, this is supposed to be the words of god speaking about the christ. I guess the writer couldn't admit to himself that the OT scriptures were not the words of god, but someone else talking about god.

Hebrews 1:10-12 is supposed to be a single quote from god, but what we find is words picked from multiple Psalms, Isaiah, and Zechariah. They are all sewed together to prove the author's point by seeming to be a cohesive unit. And who is going to know any better if they don't have access to scriptures?

In verse 13, the author tells us that god never told any angels to sit at his right hand until he makes their enemies into a foot stool, now did he? No, but he said that to someone in Psalm 110:1, which was supposed to have been written by David about someone called "the lord." Must be Jesus!! Hallelujah.

In verse 14, the author veers off course and says, "aren't angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?" This must be so because, according to my study bible,  Psalm 91 implies it and the story of Daniel in the lion's den proves it. That's logic.

That concludes chapter one. Chapter two continues on with the angel theme. The readers are told to pay careful attention to what they've heard (from whom?) and not drift away. The message spoken by angels is binding and disobedience results in punishment that we can't escape if we ignore the message of salvation. Nice. What choice do we have?

So....about this message of salvation. We are not yet told exactly what is was, or who it came through. Maybe the author will enlighten us later, or maybe he thinks we already know. It was apparently first announced by "the lord" and confirmed by those who had heard him, whoever they were. Apparently the author was not one who personally heard him. I'm assuming that "the lord" here refers to the christ, because the next sentence says that god also testified to it by distributing miraculous signs and gifts. Not any more.

We will pause here. Till next time.

Mark part nine

We are at Mark 5:35. Jesus had been on his way to heal Jairus's daughter but got sidetracked by the woman who had supposedly been bleeding for twelve years. Now someone runs up and tells Jairus his daughter is dead. Jesus tells him to not be afraid, just believe. Only Peter, James and John were allowed to accompany Jesus to Jairus's home. When they got there, the mourners were in full cry. Jesus told them they needn't make so much noise, the child was only sleeping. They laughed at him.

Jesus took only the father, mother, and his three disciples, into the child's room. He grabbed the child by the hand and told her to get  up, and she did. Then "he gave strict orders not to let anyone know about this." Which was probably the best way to get the news spread. On the other hand, it's an excuse, when someone says they never heard this story from Jairus, or anyone else. Then a christian could say, of course not, jesus swore him to secrecy. My study bible claims it is because Jesus didn't want  to "precipitate a crisis" before his ministry was complete. That is assumed. It is not actually in the text.

By the way, just like the woman in the previous story bled for twelve years, this little girl was twelve years old. Do you think that was a coincidence? I don't. Twelve is one of the Bible's magic numbers.

We are now in chapter six. Jesus goes to his hometown with his disciples. He teaches in the synagogue on the sabbath, amazing his neighbors with his wisdom and miracles. Jesus is a carpenter. He worked with his hands, which would most likely mean he had no formal religious training. The people knew his mother Mary, his sisters, and his brothers James, Joseph, Judas, and Simon. His father is not mentioned. It seems that Jesus came from a large family.

Let's talk about Jesus's family. It may have no significance, but I find the names of his family members interesting. If you look at the original text, his  mother has the same basic name as Moses's sister, Miriam. His brother James is actually Jacob, the name of the founding father of Israel. This is thought to be the James mentioned in Paul's letters and the one that wrote the book of James. His brother Joseph has the name of one of Jacob's sons, as does Judas (Judah) and Simon (Simeon). Jesus himself is actually named Joshua, the name of the man who led the Israelites in the conquest of Canaan, also the name of a mystical high priest in the book of Zechariah. Another coincidence? Maybe. One thing the bible is good at is reusing names, or using names with specific meanings to the context. It may also just reflect the cultural popularity of those names.

Anyway, the text says Jesus's neighbors were offended by him. To which Jesus makes that famous statement, "Only in his hometown...is a prophet without honor." We are told Jesus was not able to work many miracles there, just heal a few sick people, because of the people's lack of faith. (He's got a built in holy spirit meter.)  Can you blame them? What would you think if the local plumber in your town, whom you had known since he was a child, suddenly stopped working and became an itinerant preacher and faith healer? Do you realize that since he is no longer being productive, he must get his food/lodging/clothing from somewhere? That's where you come in. People are expected to physically support "men of god." Nice work if you can get it. Jesus couldn't get it there. You would think he wasn't god in the flesh, or something.

Another interesting thing, even though we are studying Mark as a stand alone book: In the book of Luke, and only the book of Luke, at the age of twelve (there is that number again), Jesus was amazing people in the temple with his wisdom. Yet, in Mark's story, we see no sign that Jesus ever gave his neighbors previous reason to believe he was special.

More to come.

Heaven part five.

We are now looking at the plural of heaven--heavens. Skimming through the references in Strong's concordance, it seems clear that the Ancient Israelites believed in multiple heavens in layers above the earth. Deuteronomy 10:14 says, "To the lord your god belong the heavens, even the highest heavens.." 1 Kings 8:27 says, "the heavens, even the highest heaven, cannot contain" god. The same is said in 2 Chronicles. Nehemiah 6 says Yahweh made all the heavens, even the highest heavens.

In Psalm 2, the one enthroned in the heavens laughs at the kings of the earth. In Psalm 18, Yahweh parted the heavens and came down, on dark clouds, with smoke pouring from his nostrils and fire from his mouth. "He mounted the cherubim and flew; he soared on the wings of the wind." Hail, thunder, and lightening, announced his presence. Pretty cool imagery. In a few Psalms, god is said to be above the heavens. In 68:4, Yahweh rides on the clouds in the NIV, he rides in the heavens in the KJV. The word translated clouds and heavens here is a totally different word, arabah,that usually refers to a desert, which is wierd. In 68:33, the NIV says Yahweh rides the ancient skies above. The KJV says he rides upon the heaven of heavens. Again, the word translated skies and heavens is the same root word shameh.

There are multiple passages in Psalms where the heavens praise Yahweh. They rejoice and declare his righteousness and glory. Many passages in the Old Testament with the word heavens are redundant. God made the heavens. The heavens are high. They have clouds, dew, rain, stars, birds, etc. Yahweh's right hand spread out the heavens in Isaiah 48:13.

I have come to a very interesting passage in Isaiah 66. It speaks of new heavens and a new earth. There will be no crying there. Infants will not die and people 100 years old will be thought young. They will be blessed and Yahweh will never harm them. This is specifically for the Israelites but Christians tend to co-opt it.

Jeremiah 10:11 tells us that the gods that did not make the heavens and the earth will perish from the earth and from under heaven, but not the god that made the heavens and the earth, Yahweh. (Sorry to break it to Yahweh, but his days are numbered as well.) When Yahweh thunders, the waters in the heavens roar, he brings the wind out from his storehouses.

In Ezekiel 1:1, the heavens opened and Ezekiel saw visions of god. After seeing a few surreal fantasy like creatures, at the end of chapter one Yahweh appears. He is sitting on a throne of sapphire. From the waist up he looks like glowing hot metal. From the waist down he was on fire. A brilliant light surrounded him and looked like a rainbow.  In Joel and Haggai, the heavens are shook. In Zechariah 6, four spirits of heaven, who stand in the presence of the lord of the whole world, look like chariots with horses. They head out to the east, south, north, and west, of course.

That's it for heaven/heavens in the Old Testament. What have we learned? The word/words heaven in the Old Testament are almost exclusively the same root  Hebrew word, shameh. That word is also translated as sky, air, and clouds in the NIV. Yahweh created the heavens/sky. He also lives there. (Where did he live before he created the heavens? ) At times he is said to be above the highest heaven or in the heaven of heavens. He's got a throne in the heavens and the earth is his footstool. From there he speaks, hurls lightening, sends hail, rain, dew, and winds which are stored there. Birds fly and clouds float in the heavens above. There are multitudes of spirit beings in heaven or the heavens which are often represented by the stars or are the stars, depending on which passage you read. One day there will be a new heavens and a new earth for the Israelites. I found nothing about people ever living an eternal life with god in heaven, if they believe in a messiah.

The New Testament is next.

High priest Joshua, wrap up

We will not move on in the book of Zechariah. Chapters 9-14 are completely different and seem to have no connection to the previous chapters in style or content. In chapters 1-8, we saw two different types of text, one first person, one third person point of view. The portions of the text written in third person are harsher in tone and do not flow with the rest of the text. If I was to guess, I would assume the first person portions of the text to be authentic. It seems to have been written just before the building of the second temple. It also appears to be predicting a wonderful future for the Israelites returning to their homeland. God will return to them, everyone will prosper, the nations around will be envious.

The high priest Joshua will be given a supreme position of honor and authority, for god will have cleansed him of any sin that he incurred before he arrived in Jerusalem. He will be responsible for the construction of the new temple, with the help of other returning exiles,  after Zerubbabel has laid the foundation. When it is finished,  Zerubbabel will set in the capstone. All the sin present in Jerusalem will be packed up and carried off to Babylonia. Exiles from the four corners of the earth will return. People will live to old age, and children will play safely in the streets. Yahweh will save them and make them a blessing. It's a very pleasant and optimistic  prophecy, very much like a pep talk for the first waves of returning exiles.

We know that optimism was misplaced. Ezra-Nehemiah, writing later and looking back, outlined the many troubles the exiles had rebuilding the temple and the city walls. It also details the poor relations the Jews maintained with the locals, which was the cause of most of the trouble. No wonder. We are told that the Jews refused their help in rebuilding the temple, scorned their worship of yahweh, and eventually instituted a policy of separation and segregation. They even insisted on divorcing wives who were locals, and what became of their children? Can we blame the locals for sabotage and enmity in those circumstances?

Just as the book of Haggai does not mention Zechariah, Zechariah does not mention Haggai. Zechariah's tone is gentler and more optimistic than book of Haggai. Zechariah was also far more inclusive and ecumenical. I imagine that first half of the book of Zechariah could have formed the basis of a hope for the Jews after the destruction of the second temple and the new diaspora that resulted. Maybe there would be another High Priest Joshua to rebuild the temple. It happened before, why not again?

If we look back at the book of Jude, it does not use Zechariah as a basis for optimism. Jude cherry picks verses from Zechariah 3 and other old testament books to prove his own point, which appears to be that he thinks ungodly men are trying to corrupt Judaism (Christianity, if you believe Jude is a christian book). Jude sounds very much like a fundamentalist sounds today. He sees people of his tribe doing and saying non-traditional things. He is throwing up his hands in horror at their audacity and proclaiming them condemned men. He is telling his friends to strengthen their faith and remain loyal to it.

Someone very likely did not like the name Joshua/Jesus included in the passage about the archangel and Satan, in Jude 1:9.  So, they changed Joshua to Moses. If it had remained Joshua, it would automatically  have been associated with the high priest Joshua, who was proclaimed The Branch by Zechariah. This may have thrown doubt on the christian claim that a first century Jesus/Joshua was the one the branch the prophesies of old were referring to, not a post exile high priest.

High Priest Joshua, part 4

We continue in Zechariah 6. Zechariah is still with the angel in his vision. Now he sees four chariots with four different color horses, coming from between two mountains of bronze. These horses are sent in the four cardinal directions throughout the earth.

Next, the word of the lord came to Zechariah, telling him to take silver and gold from some of the exiles, make a crown, and set it on the head of the high priest Joshua. Then, Zechariah is to say, "Here is the man whose name is the Branch, and he will branch out from his place and build the temple of the lord. It is he who will build the temple of the lord, and he will be clothed with majesty and will sit and rule on his throne. And there will be harmony between the two." So here the high priest Joshua is called the branch. The author of Zechariah seems to be saying saying that Joshua is the fulfillment of the prophecies about the Branch, found in Isaiah 4 and Ezekiel 17. Jeremiah 23 and 33 also mention a righteous branch. After this, the crown is to be given back to the exiles, but kept in the temple as a memorial. This is to remind them the temple will be built if they obey the lord.

Since it is clear from this passage that Joshua was the Branch. It seems quite plausible that he could have become a larger than life mythological figure or symbol in Judaism, or among some Jews, representing a man of righteousness and favor with god. After the destruction of the second temple, in the days of Rome, wouldn't the Jews be looking for a second Joshua/Branch to rebuild the temple and be anointed as high priest by Yahweh? It's a compelling thought.

In chapter 7 of Zechariah, we start with a short paragraph written in third person, possibly inserted later. It is now supposed to be the 4th year of Darius, ninth month, 4th day. People of Bethel came to ask the lord a question, through the priests. They wanted to know if they should continue to mourn and fast in the fifth month as they had done for years.

Next, in verse 4, we have first person passage where god asks Zechariah to ask all the people and priests if they had really been fasting for yahweh, or even feasting for yahweh, over the last seventy years. Hadn't the prophets of old asked the same thing when the Jerusalem and the surrounding area were at peace? The appearance of the number seventy usually has some prophetic significance.

In verse 8, we switch back to third person. Verses 8-10 appear to be inserted in the text. They disrupt the continuity of the passage. If they were left out the rest of chapter eight would make more sense, continuing in the vein of what happened when the prophets of old warned the people but they did not listen. Then the lord scattered them among the nations. It's about the past. However, verses 8-10 seem to be trying to connect it with Zechariah's time. It is slightly confusing.

Moving on to chapter 8, we are back in first person. Yahweh tells Zechariah he will return to Jerusalem to live. Once again there will be peace and prosperity. Yahweh will save his people from the east and the west and the will come back to live in Jerusalem. Everyone hearing those words needed to be strong to rebuild the temple. The lord was not going to treat the remnant of his people as he did in the past. (That didn't work out so well, did it?) Crops would grow, rain would fall, and the remnant's inheritance would flourish. Judah and Israel would be a blessing. Yahweh brought disaster upon their ancestors when they angered him, but now he is determined to do good again to Jerusalem. These are the things Yahweh required of them: to speak the truth, be just, and treat their neighbors right.

So, to answer the question from verse four, the mourning fasts are to become festivals of joy. Many people from other lands will come and seek out Yahweh. They will beg to live in the land of the Jews.

More to come.

High priest Joshua, part 3

We left off in Zechariah chapter 2. This chapter does not mention the high priest Joshua, but I am doing a summary of Zechariah so we can see where Joshua fits in the book. Last time I mentioned I wanted to explore something about this particular chapter. I was confused at the way the angel's speech to Zechariah was worded in the NIV. It seemed as if there were two "Lords" speaking, the plain lord and the lord almighty. Plus, an angel was speaking on behalf of the lord, as though he was the lord. It was confusing and I needed to get it straight in my head. I'm still confused. In verses 8-13, all the words "lord"  are from the word yahweh, but yahweh appears to be talking about himself in the third and first person at the same time. It is a grammatical horror. I decided to compare the Christian version of Zechariah 2 with the Jewish version. They are quite different in grammatical structure, but I am no more enlightened than I was before. So, we will move on to chapter three.

Zechariah is telling what else happened in his vision. The angel who was speaking to him showed him Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the lord. The angel of the lord in these kinds of situations usually appears to physically represent the lord and speak for him, almost as if he is the lord, but he is not. It can get confusing. This angel of the lord was thought to be the archangel Michael, as seen in Jude. Satan is standing at Joshua's right side to accuse him. This is not the Christian version of Satan, but the Jewish version. He is kind of like a prosecuting attorney, trying to prove the defendant guilty. The lord (actually the angel) said to Satan, "the lord rebuke you, Satan," then the angel requested that Joshua's filthy clothes, representing sin, be taken away, and rich garments be put on him. Zechariah told the angel to put a clean turban on Joshua's head, and it was done.

Next, the angel of the lord commissioned Joshua to govern the temple, if Joshua would walk in Yahweh's ways. Then he would be given a place among the angels. He told Joshua that he and his associates were symbolic of things to come. Yahweh was going to bring his servant, the Branch. This refers to prophecies in Ezekiel 17 and Isaiah 4, about Yahweh restoring Jerusalem,and maybe the monarchy, with a descendant of the old monarchy. My study bible calls it a messianic prophecy, but I think the author is just referring to the restoration of Jerusalem. The chapter goes on to predict an ideal future for the land. It should be noted that this was probably written before the Greeks and Romans came to conquer the holy land. There was no need for a savior. Things were going to be fixed. The Jews were migrating back to their homeland and rebuilding their city as well as their relationship with Yahweh. Later jews looking for a savior may have tried to find hope of a messiah in this passage, but I doubt that was the original purpose. Funny that the prophet Zechariah did not foresee the future conquests.

In chapter 4, the angel of the lord wakes Zechariah up, only to find himself in another symbolic vision with lamp stands, lights, olive trees, etc. this is supposed to represent the word of the lord about Zerubbabel laying the foundation of the temple and completing it. The two olives trees represent two who are anointed to serve  the lord of all the earth. It could be the new king and the new high priest. My study bible says it could be another messianic vision of a future combination priest-king. However, these are two separate and distinct olive trees.

In chapter 5, Zechariah does a double take and sees a flying scroll. It is a curse against all thieves and liars. Then the angel draws his attention to a basket. It was a measuring basket, inside the basket was a woman. She represented wickedness. (Ugh, it would be a woman.) the basket has a lead cover which was pushed down over the top. It was lifted up by two other women with wings who carried it away to Babylon.

We will continue on next time.

The High Priest Joshua, part 2

Now let us look at what Haggai and Zechariah have to say about the priest Joshua/Jeshua. They were supposedly present at the rebuilding of the second temple in Jerusalem.

Haggai 1:1 tells us Joshua, the son of Jehozadak, was the high priest in the second year of King Darius. At that Time, Haggai was prophet to Zerubbabel, the governor of Judah.  The book speaks of Haggai completely in third person but its authorship is traditionally ascribed to Haggai. This seems to be a common practice in the Bible. To me it is clear that the true author/authors are unknown, especially when the book itself makes no authorship claims. The time period that the events are to have taken place is fairly easy to figure out because there is secular history of Darius and the Persian Empire.

In verses 1:12&14, we are told that the high priest Joshua and the governor Zerubbabel listened to and obeyed Haggai because he was  god's messenger and delivered "the voice of the lord." So Haggai was kind of telling everyone what to do and claiming it was god's will. Haggai's message from the Lord was "I am with you." This made them all anxious to build god a house, the temple.

In chapter 2, Haggai continues to tell Joshua the high priest and Zerubbabel the governor what god is saying. Why can't god speak to them directly? That is so weird, and suspicious. Anyway, they are told god's spirit will stay with them and they are not to be afraid. The new temple they build for him will be greater than the previous one. "The silver and the gold is mine," declares the lord. Ha! Even more suspicious. Then god tells them that they were defiled before, now they will be blessed. Plus,  Zerubbabel will be like god's chosen  king. That's pretty much it. Nothing different or earth shattering. The word of the lord came from Haggai in the second year of Darius, on the sixth, seventh and ninth months. He does not mention Zechariah.

Let's look at Zechariah. This book begins in third person with a kind of introduction. It says the word of the lord came to Zechariah in the second year, on the eighth and eleventh months. How convenient, another mouthpiece of god, one who can speak for god on the months when Haggai doesn't. The word of the lord is a little more harsh in tone coming from the introduction to Zechariah. He tells the people they need to turn from their evil ways and repent. If they return to him, he will return to them.

Starting in verse 1:8, the narrative switches to first person and appears to be coming directly from Zechariah. He is having visions. These visions have elements and symbols that are common to other apocalyptic writings. You've got horsemen on horses of different colors riding through the earth, and angels talking with "the lord" and Zechariah. (Move over Revelation.) But these horsemen said they rode through the earth and found peace. When does Jerusalem get a piece of it? The lord says he is going to return to Jerusalem. His house will be rebuilt and prosperity will return. Then he speaks of four horns that scattered Judah and four craftsmen who will throw down the horns. This predicts a defeat of Israel's enemies.

In chapter two we read Zechariah's continuing vision of the coming glory of the new Jerusalem. It won't have exterior walls because the lord himself will be a wall of fire around it. Well. That didn't happen. According to Ezra-Nehemiah, walls were built. Zechariah continues with a theme of the Jews returning to Jerusalem and "the lord" returning to live with them. There is something going on in this 2nd chapter that I want to explore next time. Till then.

Jude afterthoughts, the High Priest Joshua

I got to thinking about that High Priest Joshua guy from Zecariah 3 and I thought it would be a shame
not to explore who he was while he was fresh in our minds. First of all, let's remember that the name Joshua = Yeshua= Jesus. It's the same name, but not necessarily the same person. However, I would like to consider the possibility that the myth and cult surrounding Jesus might have had an origin in the mythic tradition surrounding the high priest Joshua that Jude was probably referring to. In fact one possibility is that the only word in Jude that was changed is the word Jesus (Yeshua) into the word Moses in verse 9.  The other Jesus phrases may have been in the original text, actually referring to the high priest of Zechariah, not the Jesus of Nazareth. There is no way to know, but, to me, these speculations make more sense than that Jude was written by a christian worshipper of the New Testament Jesus. That Jesus can't be found in the book of Jude.

First let's note that the high priest Joshua is called Jeshua the son of Jozadak in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. He is called Joshua son of Josedech in Haggai and Zechariah. They are considered the same person.

In Ezra 2:2, we see Jeshua was a Babylonian exile, returning to Jerusalem. In Ezra 3:2, we see Jeshua is a priest. Seven months after the return, Jeshua and his fellow priests build the altar of god to burn sacrifices. In Ezra 3:8, two years after the return, Jeshua and his fellow priests and Levites supervise the building of the new temple. In Ezra 4:3, the people who were living in the land when the exiles returned wanted to help build the new temple because they had also been worshipping Yahweh. Jeshua and the rest of the heads of the families of Israel refused their help. The locals resented that and set about trying to sabatoge the building. Eventually, after multiple complications, the building came to a stop. In Ezra 5:2, Haggai and Zechariah were prophets, the ones who later supposedly wrote about Joshua/Jeshua. They were helping Jeshua try to rebuild the temple. They finished the temple in Ezra 6. In Ezra 7, many more exiles returned to Jerusalem from Babylon, including Ezra, supposedly the writer of this book, even though it refers to him in the third person. They brought many levites and lots of treasure for the temple with them. When the new group got to Jerusalem, they had a great sacrifice to god. Later, they were told that the previous group of returned exiles had intermarried with the locals. Ezra was appalled. After a lot of weeping, wailing, and repenting, all the men who had married "foreign" women were required to "put away" their wives, which probably meant to divorce them. Then they had to each sacrifice a ram as a guilt offering. This included descendants in Jeshua's family.

I always think its funny how the bible calls the locals of that land foreigners. Technically, the returning Israelites themselves were the foreigners by that time.

In Nehemiah, we have an account of later events. Ezra had left Babylon for Jerusalem in Artaxerxes 7th year. Nehemiah left Babylon in the 20th year. He left because he heard that the wall of Jerusalem was broken down and its gates burnt. He wants to help rebuild. After the walls have been rebuilt and guards appointed, Nehemiah wants to register everyone. He finds the genealogical records of the first group of returned exiles. Jeshua's name is included in Nehemial 7:7, 12:1, 7, 10 (there we learn names of one of Jeshua's sons and some of his grandsons.) In this book Jeshua's son is called Joiakim. Joiakim served "in the days of Nehemiah the governor and Ezra the priest and scribe." The name Jeshua is repeated a few times in the book of Nehemiah, but it is unclear if it always the same Jeshua.

That's pretty much it for Jeshua in Ezra and Nehemiah. The only definite claim to fame in these books  is that he was a levite priest and one of the first exiles to return. He was supposed to be instrumental in building the new temple, aka "the house of god."

Next we look at what the books of Haggai and Zechariah have to say about him.

Jude, part 4 and wrap up

We continue with verses 17-19. "...remember what the apostles of our lord (Jesus Christ) foretold. They said to you, 'In the last days there will be scoffers ("mockers" in some translations) who will follow their own ungodly desires.' These are the men who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the spirit." I put Jesus Christ in parentheses to show that it could be taken out and the passage could very well have been written by a Jewish non Christian. None of the ideas in this passage, or in the whole of Jude, have been distinctly Christian.

The term apostle was not new with christianity, it had the generic greek meaning of messenger or one who was sent on behalf of another. Both the old and new testaments speak of scoffers or mockers and last days. The quote Jude mentions does not occur in either the old or new testament. There were issues of divisions in Judaism in the first century, even besides the introduction of Christianity. Jude's letter could very well have been a polemic against the Hellenization of Judaism.

Verses 20-21: ".... build yourselves up in your most holy faith and pray in the holy spirit. Keep yourselves in God's love as you wait for the mercy of our lord (Jesus Christ) to bring you to eternal life." Again, nothing here is specific to Christianity and could be referring to Judaism. I put Jesus Christ in parentheses to show that it is not necessary to the passage.

Verses 22-23: "Be merciful to those who doubt; snatch others from the fire and save them; to others show mercy mixed with fear--hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh." Snatching from fire is found in Amos 4:11 and Zechariah 3:2. The Zachariah verse is found in the context of the high priest Joshua (Jesus figure) that I mentioned in a previous post. After Joshua was said to have been snatched from the fire. Zechariah 3:4 says he was dressed in filthy clothes, equated with sin.  The angel of the lord had them removed and clean clothes were put on him. Coincidentally, this passage in Jude mentions clothing stained by corrupted (sinful) flesh. Actually, I don't think it was a coincidence. Jude seems to have anchored part of his letter on the first verses in Zechariah 3.

Jude's letter ends with "To him who is able to keep you from falling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy (like Joshua in Zechariah 3)--to the one and only god our savior be the glory, majesty, power, and authority, (through Jesus Christ) our lord ( ,) before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen." I put the words "through Jesus Christ" and the comma in parentheses to show how the meaning and flow of the sentence is changed without them. There were no comma's in the early manuscripts. Also if you read the interlinear text, the word order of this passage differs from the NIV. The translators are the ones responsible for that. I don't blame those christians who get suspicious of certain translations. Liberties do seem to be taken in many cases. Perhaps doctrinal agendas are at play in some instances.

I urge you to go back and read quickly through the book of Jude, leaving out all references to Jesus Christ. When I do that, I see a Jewish document, not a Christian one. There is no mention of any of Jesus's life or unique teachings. No, birth, baptism, sermons, miracles, death, burial, or resurrection. None of the disciples/apostles are mentioned by name. No specific churches are mentioned. No uniquely christian doctrines are discussed. On the contrary, Jude mentions a number of specifically Jewish teachings and writings, biblical (old testament) and extrabiblical.

This book does not claim to be inspired or the word of god.  I think some enterprising christian may have co-opted a first century  Jew's sermon or essay and inserted a few generic references to Jesus. Maybe it was stolen or confiscated. Maybe this writing was referring to those of the new christian sect as the bad guys. Anyway, It seems obvious: Jude=Jew. I don't wonder that it was disputed by the early church.

Jude, part 3

Verse 7 of Jude says that Sodom and Gomorrah, with their sexual immorality and  perversion, are examples of "those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire." This is another old Testament reference. Notice that lack of hospitality is not the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah in this passage.

Verse 8  says that "In the same way these dreamers (the condemned people this letter is about) pollute their own bodies, reject authority and slander celestial beings. This could apply to Jews who have given up following the law of Moses. (See 2 Peter 2:10)

Verse 9 Talks about the archangel Michael disputing with the devil over the body of Moses. Even Michael, himself a celestial being,  did not have the nerve to slander another celestial being. (See 2 Peter 2:10-11) Instead, he said, "The lord rebuke you!" This story is supposed to have come from a document called the Testament of Moses or the Ascension of Moses. However, it bears a remarkable similarity to the first verses of Zechariah 3, where a high priest Joshua (same name as Jesus ) is standing before the angel of the lord (Michael?) and Satan. There Satan is rebuked with the words  "The lord rebuke you." Some Wikipedia writer suggests that the word 'Moses' has replaced the word 'Joshua' deliberately, to avoid confusion. You're darn right it would be confusing if Jude said that the devil and Michael argued over the body of Joshua (Jesus). Then this verse would clearly be associated with the high priest Joshua of Zechariah 3, and it might be doubted that the author was referring to the first century Jesus. I can see how that would be a problem for those promoting the first century Jesus guy.

Verse 10 says the godless men don't know what they are talking about, and what they do know does them no good.

Verse 11 says the godless men have taken the way of Cain (murder?), Balaam (greed), and Korah (rebelling against leadership). 2 Peter 2:15 also mentions Balaam.

Verses 12 -13 says the godless men are blemishes at (the jew's? or the christian's ?) love feast. (Echoed in 2 Peter 2:13) They are shepherds who feed only themselves, clouds without rain (see 2Peter 2:17), autumn trees without fruit and uprooted, wild waves, wandering stars with blackest darkness reserved for them (see 2 Peter 2:17 again. Notice how 2 Peter draws many phrases and themes from Jude.)

Verses 14-16 is said to quote directly from the the book of Enoch, "See the lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones to judge everyone, and to convict all the ungodly of all the ungodly acts they have done in the ungodly way, and of all the harsh words ungodly sinners have spoken against him." (That's four times ungodly.) My study bible says that "the book of Enoch was not canonical does not mean it contained no truth." Can't that be said of any book, fiction and non-fiction? It goes on to say "Nor does Jude's quotation of the book mean he considered it inspired." Then what does it mean?

The book of Enoch was not written by Enoch. The author of the book of Enoch did not even live at the same time Enoch was supposed to have lived. It is fiction.Enoch is most likely a fictional person. How can it be talking about a prophecy that never happened, from a person who may never have lived, and it still be true? My study bible says "Jude uses the quotation to refer to Christ's second coming and to his judgment of the wicked." So? How does that make it true? How is a fictional quote from a fictional man support for anything? It reminds me of "quotes" from famous people found all over the internet today. It seems clear to me that the author of Jude did not consider it fictional at all. He was ignorant of the history of the book of Enoch. We have an advantage over him.

More to come. Because of pressing family matters, The next post will probably be at the end of next week.