After Solomon dies, his son Rehoboam makes a pretty ridiculous decision. The Israelites ask him if he is going to be easier on them than their father. Instead of appeasing them, Rehoboam institutes forced labor and says in 1 Kings 12:14 “My father disciplined you with whips, but I will discipline you with scorpions.” I don’t think that statement would go over well for any ruler ever in history. This causes 10 of the 12 tribes to split and form the northern kingdom which becomes known as Israel. The remaining 2 tribes are Judah and Benjamin who form the southern kingdom to be called Judah. Also important is that Jerusalem and the temple were located in Judah.

Since Israel (the northern kingdom) didn’t have their own place of worship, they created their own places to worship and elevated 2 golden calves to the status of gods (1 Kings 12:25-33). These worship spots became known as the high places. As punishment God sent the nation of Assyria to capture and take captive the northern kingdom (2 Kings 15-17). The Assyrians force them them out of the promised land into exile in other parts of the Assyrian empire.

Judah, even though they had a temple, opted to follow in the footsteps of their brothers to the north and worshipped idols as well. The Assyrians invaded and gave Judah quite a bit of trouble, but God didn’t allow them to completely drive Judah out mainly due to the faithfulness of Hezekiah. After Hezekiah dies though, Judah turns even worse to the point where they didn’t even know that the Torah existed. So God sends the nation of Babylon, who had just defeated the Assyrian army, to invade and exile the people of Judah (2 Kings 25).

So now at this point there are virtually no Israelites living in the promised land. The 10 tribes of the northern kingdom were scattered throughout the Assyrian Empire, but it was then defeated by the Babylonians. The 2 tribes of the southern kingdom are now exiled out into the Babylonian Empire. The only Israelites who seem to be remaining in the promised are a few of the poorest people of Judah who the Babylonians allowed to stay (2 Kings 25:12). Ironically in the northern kingdom the Assyrians had resettled it with foreigners who began to worship God (though not exclusively) after He sent lions to kill a bunch of them (2 Kings 17:24-41).

Fast forward a few years and the Persian empire now has defeated the Babylonian empire and controls the fate of the Israelites who were exiled. Ezra and Nehemiah go about rebuilding the city of Jerusalem and the temple, but only two and a half tribes are now present. If you read Nehemiah 11, you’ll see only Judah, Benjamin and Levi mentioned because they are the only ones to return to the land. Levi is only counted as half because the Levites were scattered throughout the northern and southern kingdom in cities dedicated to them. This was so they could have a presence all over the land to carry out their priestly duties.

The obvious question now is what happened to the 10 lost tribes of Israel. In 2 Chronicles 30, we do see that at least some people from the northern tribes had escaped the Assyrian exile and found their way back to Israel. They still choose to ignore the need to worship God in Jerusalem at the temple. There were probably very few of them left and they are likely ignored for the rest of the Bible because of their refusal to worship God. The only other mention of one of those tribes comes in Luke 2:36 where the prophetess Anna is said to be part of the tribe of Asher.

So what happened to them? It seems likely that they were just assimilated into the populations of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires. There were a few who returned and probably lived in the promised land, but by the time of the New Testament the Romans had come and built roads leading to more dispersion. Any Jews left would have been scattered after the Romans war with the Jews in the first century.

There have been many wilder theories. One Portuguese guy in the 17th century claimed they were all living in South American when he traveled there. There have been random people groups all over the world who claim to be descended. The current nation of Israel has even declared some of these people groups legitimate enough to have the right to return to Israel and live there. There are even crazier theories that say the Japanese and Irish are actually just descendants of these 10 tribes. I’m not sure how that even makes sense.

In case you were curious, the horse pictured is not the actual Trojan horse, just a replica for chubby tourists to stick their heads out of. There is actually no real evidence of Homer’s epic battle actually happening, but considering it happened some 3000 years ago that is no surprise. There were also something like seven versions of the city of Troy. They just kept building on top of the location. Our guide said there was evidence of a big battle at some point (though he didn’t know what the evidence was).

The city was pretty ingeniously defended though. They had huge 12 foot stone walls that sloped slightly to give people situated on top an easy angle to attack anyone who might try to climb. On top of the 12 foot stone walls, a wall of clay was built with holes in it for archers.

The main entrance ramp

There was a huge main entrance with a big ramp leading up to it, but in the case of invasion it would have been closed and relatively easy to defend. The best idea I thought were the side entrances. These were smaller and probably very heavily trafficked. To deter invaders they built walls on either side like a hallway and then a sharp turn to get to the door. This prevented anyone from being able to easily maneuver a battering ram in there. Even if they did get it in there, they couldn’t make the sharp turn to use the battering ram because of the wall behind them.

The side entrance to the ancient city of Troy

So if you were under the impression that people in ancient times were not as smart, how many of you would have come up with that idea?

Paul did not write the book of Romans.

Actually I don’t really think Paul wrote most of those so called “epistles.” It’s all there in Romans 16:22. A guy named Tertius wrote the book of Romans.

Alright, so it really isn’t as controversial as I make out. More that likely Tertius was just Paul’s amanuensis. That means someone who writes what someone else dictates, like a stenographer. Paul was very educated or so he thought in Galatians 1:14. He more than likely knew at least four languages and probably wrote his own copy of the Hebrew Bible while he was studying in Jerusalem. So he was more than capable of writing all 13 of the epistles attributed to him. But he was also a very busy man as you see in 2 Corinthians 11:24-28. So to help him out one of his disciples wrote down as he dictated, Tertius being the lucky guy to write Romans.

You would probably be correct in assuming that most of Paul’s letters were dictated to an amanuensis. It seemed to be a common practice to dictate letters, but allow the author to write the last few lines themselves as a sort of signature. You can see this at the end of many of Paul’s other letters such as 2 Thessalonians 3:17 and Colossians 4:18 and 1 Corinthians 16:21. This would have authenticated the source, as well as made it more personal. Similar to the modern day practice of checking to see if the signature in a salutation was written by hand with a pen or printed on there.

Tertius is never mentioned again in the Scriptures. His name means “third son” which have caused many to think that Quartus (“fourth son” from Romans 16:23) might have been his little brother. Both being the children of uncreative parents. But Tertius does have one thing going for him. I (heretically) imagine people discussing the books of Romans in heaven and Tertius just sitting back saying, “Oh did you like that…cause I wrote it you know.”

References:

• ISBE
• Holman Bible Dictionary
• Romans 16:22-23
• 1 Corinthians 16:21
• 2 Corinthians 11:24-28
• Galatians 1:14
• Colossians 4:18
• 2 Thessalonians 3:17

So while He was here what Bible did Jesus use? Some of Jesus’ Old Testament quotations seem to come from a Hebrew text like the aforementioned Masoretic Text and some of them seem to line up with an Aramaic text. But of the 250 Old Testament quotations in the New Testament, the majority are from the Septuagint. The Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible. The word Septuagint means “seventy” which allows us to abbreviate it as LXX. It got its name from a story, possibly legend, about the origins of this Greek translation.

A letter from a court official of King Ptolemy, supposedly from the 3^rd century BC, speaks of the origins of LXX. Ptolemy was a big fan of literature and boasted the world’s largest library in Alexandria. He became interested in the Hebrew Bible, especially the Torah, and wanted it translated into the common language at the time, Greek. The High Priest of Jerusalem, Eleazar, sent him six elders from each of the tribes of Israel to translate. They confined themselves to the island of Pharos and 72 days later they emerged with a Greek translation of the Pentateuch. The name Septuagint was adopted at some point to acknowledge the 72 elders who translated it in 72 days.

While that story makes you feel all warm and cozy, the letter is suspect in its dating and authenticity. The LXX may have also been created to accommodate the popularity of the Greek language which was even spoken commonly in Jerusalem. It also was convenient for the large amount of Jews who, as a result of a new invention called roads, had moved far away from Jerusalem into primarily Greek-speaking areas.

It seems that the LXX was not intended to be the authoritative Scripture that was used by priests in the synagogue, but was meant for use by everyone else. Similar to most churches where the congregation uses the NIV at home, while the pastor may preach from another translation, if not the Greek. That is why the Apostles and Jesus chose the LXX. Christianity did not spread rapidly through the elite of society such as the Pharisees. It spread to common folk and especially Gentiles who where ignorant of the Hebrew language. The Jews however seem to have abandoned the use of the LXX in the 2^nd century AD, probably because of the popular usage by Christianity (a competing religion) and because of the dispersion of the Jews after the Temple was destroyed. Many Jews after 70 AD didn’t stay in the unaccommodating Roman Empire and probably ended up in areas, like Persia, where Aramaic was more commonly spoken. The Christians however, continued to use the LXX through the 4^th century. In the 4^th century, Jerome translated the Bible into Latin and found the Hebrew to be more accurate. His Latin Vulgate took over predominance and is still important today in the Roman Catholic Church.

Jerome was correct in noticing the differences between Hebrew and the Septuagint. If the LXX was created in only 72 days, it might help explain the differences from the Masoretic Text, which is seen as the authority in Judaism today. The Septuagint grew to include several non-canonical books in addition to the books found in the Hebrew Bible. The LXX also has books in a different order and some books, such as Job, Joshua and Proverbs are shorter than the Hebrew Bible. The LXX also appears to lack a set translation style. In some areas it has a literal translation while in others a more free translation is apparent. Even with these faults, the LXX is still remarkably consistent with the Masoretic Text and most differences are due to translation style.

The greatest consequence of the LXX is that it bridged the gap between Hebrew believers and Gentile believers. Without it, the spread of Christianity may have been greatly hindered. It also offers an interesting application for us when debating between different translations. Jesus and the Apostles saw fit to base their teachings on what is today seen as only the second best in accuracy. While the LXX did not provide them the best verbatim translation, it was more culturally relevant. As a long-time proponent of literal translations, it makes me think differently of more culturally relevant translations.

• The Acts of Paul and Thecla, a 2nd century apocryphal book, described the Apostle Paul as small in size, bald-headed, bow-legged (or bandy-legged), with meeting eyebrows and a large, red and somewhat hooked nose. See image at right.

• Paul had at least one sister according to Acts 23:16

• He knew Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic and probably Latin.

• As a Roman Citizen he likely had a first middle and last name. The first two would have been common to the family. The third was his personal name which was Pallus. Greek writers would have only recorded Paul though since they likely had little understanding of Latin and the three name system. Saul was his Jewish name.

• It is probable that the Apostle Paul was not around in Jerusalem during Jesus’ ministry since he is never mentioned. Rabbis were supposed to have a trade in order to support themselves. After learning from Gamaliel in Jerusalem, he probably went back to Tarsus. He would have practiced his father’s trade of tent making and then gone back to Jerusalem (sometime after Christ’s death or close to), maybe to join the Sanhedrin.

• More than likely Paul was married since parenthood was a requirement to be a candidate for the Sanhedrin and Jews did not usually remain celibate. His wife may have died early since there is no mention of her.

• Paul rarely quotes Jesus directly. Some of these instances are found in Acts 20:35 and 1 Corinthians 11:24-25.

• Paul did not jump directly into his missionary journeys. He spent three years in Arabia after his conversion and then went to Jerusalem for fifteen days. From there he went back home to Tarsus and lived there for about eight or nine years. Then Barnabus tracked him down and asked Paul to be a leader of a Christian church in Antioch, which he did for a full year. Approximately fourteen years after his conversion, the Apostle Paul finally embarked on his first documented missionary journey.

The fish as a symbol for Christianity probably arose from the frequent references to fish in the New Testament. When Jesus feeds the 5000 in Matthew 14:17, He only has five loaves and two fish. Jesus prompts a miraculous catch of fish for His disciples when He first meets them in Luke 5:6 and again after His resurrection in John 21:6. In Mark 1:17 Jesus tells Simon and Andrew that He can make them fishers of men, which might make a symbol of a middle-aged, overweight man with a beer and fishing pole a more accurate symbol than the ichthus. I’d put it on my car.

The most common story about the origin of the ichthus symbol is that Christians drew half of it in the dirt and another believer came along and drew the other half, effectively communicating their beliefs in secret to avoid arrest. This usage is very possible, but it is unlikely that the ichthus truly originated for this purpose due to two reasons. First, there are no ancient writings or other archaeological evidence to suggest this purpose. Second, most of the ancient drawings of fish found relating to Christianity have scales and are more elaborate than the one found on the back of SUVs today. It seems that the ichthus with two lines that we know today came along later. Others have suggested that the ichthus (fish drawing, not the symbol) might have been drawn in dirt or scratched on walls to indicate the direction of an underground church meeting. It is believed that the Romans used a similar symbol to indicate a funeral and so Christians could have used that as an excuse if they were caught.

There are many who think that the fish as a symbol was taken over by Christians from pagan religions when Christianity became the official religion of Rome. Though the fish was used as a symbol in pagan religion before Christianity, the Christians seemed to have adopted it long before Constantine made Christianity the official religion of Rome. The earliest extra-biblical reference to fish and Christianity comes from Clement of Alexandria who lived from about 150 to 215 AD. Clement recommends to his readers that they have their seals engraved with a dove or a fish. He doesn’t give any explanation for why, so it is assumed that his readers already understood the significance of the fish. This means that the fish as a Christian symbol came along even before Clement’s writings.

Another interesting aspect of the ichthus history is it use as an acrostic. Ichthus is simply the Greek word for fish, spelled Iota Chi Theta Upsilon Sigma (ΙΧΘΥΣ). The acrostic goes as follows:

• Ι = Iesous which means Jesus
• Χ or CH = Xristos or Christ
• Θ or TH = Theos or God
• Υ or U = Huios which means Son
• Σ or S = Soter which means Savior

When combined the acrostic reads “Jesus Christ, God’s Son, Savior.” Whether or not this was the reasoning for Christians to choose the fish or if the acrostic was used later is unclear. There are ancient coins found around Alexandria which refer to the Roman emperor Domitian (81-96 AD) as “Son of God.” Christians may have devised the acrostic in protest.

The modern day, simplistic version of the ichthus supposedly originated in Australia as a chalk drawing at Sydney University. The Evangelical Union at Sydney University tried to spur curiosity about the symbol which they drew all over campus and ultimately hoped that curiosity lead to evangelism. The symbol was then popularized throughout other areas of Australia and eventually made its way onto cars, businesses, t-shirts and pretty much any other mass-produced consumer good that Christians might buy. Whether or not anyone has ever seen your ichthus, immediately repented and professed Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior remains to be seen. Many think that the fish should always be oriented with its head to the left. This follows the same shape as the Greek letter alpha and symbolizes Revelation 1:8 where the Lord refers to Himself as the Alpha and Omega.

Evolutionists combated the popularity of the ichthus using a fish with legs, which symbolizes the “missing link” between fish and land animals in evolution or possibly the tiktaalik. Christians retaliated using a bigger fish with the word “truth” inside and it was eating the Darwin fish, perhaps parodying the “survival of the fittest.” The battle wages on today in what is known as the Fish Wars. But watch out for the newest competitor, the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

References:

• Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster
• Symbolism of the Fish
• Ichthys
• Fish (Ichthus) as an Early Christian Symbol
• Matthew 14:17
• Mark 1:17
• Luke 5:6
• John 21:6
• Revelation 1:8

John Wycliffe made the first major attack on the Roman Catholic Church as an Oxford professor in the 1300s, about 150 years before Luther’s 95 theses. This has given him the nickname “the Morning Star of the Reformation.” As a professor at Oxford he became involved in a debate over dominion. The questions was, does a ruler/leader have dominion because the church ordains him or because of his character? The default view was that if the church appoints a leader, there is nothing that can be done to unseat him. Wycliffe’s idea was that there are a set of moral rules outside of any leader that they have to follow and no man was above them. He went as far as saying that the English government has the responsibility to correct the abuses of church leadership and even remove church officials who were abusing power and seize their property. Obviously, the Pope did not approve and condemned Wycliffe’s teaching. The only reason the church did not pursue further punishment is due to Wycliffe’s influential friends and the English government who protected him.

In Wycliffe’s continued attacks on the Pope, he declared that church leaders should not be wealthy and disagreed with the Pope living a life of luxury, saying the Papacy was full of poison. He became angrier and more radical as time went on and he began to believe that the Pope was actually Antichrist. He argued against the idea that the bishop of Rome (i.e. the Pope) is above all Christianity because Peter died in Rome. Wycliffe said, by that reasoning, the head Islamic Priest in Jerusalem should be even higher than the Pope since Jesus died in Jerusalem. Wycliffe began to preach that “Neither the testimony of Augustine nor Jerome, nor any other saint should be accepted except in so far as it was based upon Scripture.” Thus Wycliffe set the stage for sola scriptura, which became one of the cries of the Protestant Reformation.

By writing twelve arguments against transubstantiation in 1380, Wycliffe crossed a line that most of his supporters were not willing to cross. Being silenced by his new found isolation gave Wycliffe time to pursue a new mission of getting a Bible in the language of the peasants. Wycliffe’s translation was the first major translation into a European language since Jerome’s Latin Vulgate almost 1,000 years before. He also sent out his remaining followers, mainly college students, to spread this new translation and teach his ideas. Their enemies called them Lollards or Mumblers and eventually they would be tracked down and forced to renounce their views and expelled from Oxford.

Wycliffe died in 1384 without the Pope being able to get to him, until 44 years later Pope Martin V had his body dug up, burned and the ashes thrown into the river. However Wycliffe’s teaching inspired a student in Prague named John Huss, who launched a second major attack on the Catholic Church. Huss was appointed preacher at Bethlehem Chapel near the University of Prague and used that position to continue the teachings of Wycliffe. Huss had ironic paintings made in the church showing the Pope riding a horse while Jesus walked barefoot. Another showed Jesus washing the disciples’ feet and the Pope having his own kissed.

Although Huss gained huge support for his teachings regardless of being excommunicated, he got in big trouble when he spoke out against the sale of indulgences. He was forced to leave Prague and live in exile. One day the King of Bohemia, Sigismund, requested Huss’ presence at the Council of Constance to share his teachings. Sigismund promised Huss safe travel to and from the conference, which Huss seemed to take as a backing of his teaching. Huss showed up and presented his ideas, only to be declared a heretic and imprisoned despite his claim of protection from Sigismund. Sigismund, by allowing the arrest, thought the fear of execution would help to bring peace among Huss’ increasingly militant followers. Huss would spend eight months in jail before July 6, 1415; the day he was burned at the stake. When asked again to recant just before the fire was lit, John Huss said,

In the truth of the Gospel which I have written, taught, and preached, I will die today with gladness.”

John Huss said that even though they put a stop to him, there would come a day when others would come that they could not oppose. The first two attacks on the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church would seem to fail, but they prepared the ground for a German monk name Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation. Although Luther rightly gets much of the credit for sparking the reformation, it is probable that without Wycliffe and Huss the Reformation would have turned out quite differently.

References:

• Church History in Plain Language
• The Rumblings of Reform (Audio)
• John Wycliffe: Ahead of His time
• John Huss

To make matters even worse, the specific Ammonite whom they had built a tomb for in the temple was for Tobiah, who as you remember was an enemy of the reconstruction of Jerusalem and also had corrupted the nobles of Jerusalem.  So this is about as big of a betrayal as can happen and has to baffle Nehemiah.  On top of that they haven’t been allotting the tithes to the priests, so they had to leave the city.  And they are not honoring the Sabbath, but are working instead.

I think that every single person who ministers (not necessarily in a paid position) will face this kind of let-down at some point.  For some reason, probably sin, men are going to fall back into their old sinful habits (Proverbs 26:11).  I think that very often that this is devastating to people who have poured so much time and effort into discipling and teaching just to see little results.  It’s times like this that God’s sovereignty is important to me, because I know I can’t change hearts but I am just called to go preach the Word and make disciples.  God is the one who changes hearts.

The majority of believers that I encounter, do not have radically different lives from the non-believers I encounter.  I think that Nehemiah is seeing this and trying to make the people understand the eternal weight of the decisions that they are making.  I know its not very acceptable to question people’s salvation today, but I think there is great value in individuals wrestling with their salvation and wondering why if they are saved, why does their life not look in the least bit like more mature believers?

It is encouraging to see the entire population supporting the priests and ministers with material giving.  It is encouraging for ministers to not have to worry while doing what God has called them to.  It is also shows a true commitment by the people since they are backing up their promise with action.  You’re never truly committed to something until you are sacrificing finacially.