Tag: date

Good Friday: The Day the Moon Turned to Blood

~ Bob Hayton ~ 2 Comments

Today is Good Friday. We celebrate the death of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ today. When we think back to all that happened on Good Friday, we of course focus on Jesus’ becoming the “propitiation for our sins” (1 John 2:2).

But I want you to also think about all the signs and wonders which were on display that day. The sky turned dark, there was an earthquake and many who were dead came back to life. The veil of the Temple ripped from the top down. And on top of all of this, the weeks leading up to Jesus’ death were filled with all the talk of his many miracles including the raising of Lazarus from the dead.

Peter’s Sermon at Pentectost

Keep these signs and wonders in view as you look at Acts 2 with me, as Peter tries to explain another miraculous event – the mighty, rushing wind, tongues of fire, and the miraculous speech that enabled the 120 who were gathered in the upper room to tell the Good News to people of a multitude of languages, who all heard the Gospel in their native tongue.

For these people are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day. But this is what was uttered through the prophet Joel:

“And in the last days it shall be, God declares, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams; even on my male servants and female servants in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy. And I will show wonders in the heavens above and signs on the earth below, blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke; the sun shall be turned to darkness and the moon to blood, before the day of the Lord comes, the great and magnificent day. And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” [quoted from Joel 2:28-32]

Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know—this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it….

This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses. Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing. (Acts 2:15-24, 32-33)

Put in this light, you can see what Peter is doing. He’s comparing both the signs and wonders that were seen on Pentecost with the larger story of all that was seen surrounding Jesus – and all of this is the fulfillment of Joel’s prophesy, which Peter quotes. We have the men and women speaking in tongues (the first part of Joel’s prophecy), and we have a darkened sky and other wonders (the second part). Peter is making a point that the “last days” have now come. He adds the words “last days” to Joel’s prophecy for this very reason (Joel has “and afterward”). The “signs of the times” as it were, were already being seen – and Peter felt like he was living with the “day of the Lord” in the near future.

Some object to this view of Peter’s sermon in Acts 2. They claim that Peter was just making an anlogy with Joel 2 to the current situation. Others claim that just the first part was being fulfilled, not the heavenly signs – which would obviously be in the future tribulation period. I won’t delve into all the arguments, but suffice it to say that the view that the New Testament authors understood the “last days” to have begun is quite strong and is attested to throughout the New Testament (see 1 Cor. 10:11, Heb. 1:2, 1 Pet. 1:20, 1 John 2:18).

Going back to Acts 2 now, let me quote from a book I’ve been reading: 40 Questions About the End Times by Eckhard Schnabel (Kregel, 2012):

The connections of the “wonders” and “signs” of Joel’s prophecy with Jesus’ ministry and death provide the basis for Peter’s subsequent arguments concerning the status and the significance of Jesus. The reference to the “last days” establishes how Peter reads the prophets: God has begun to fulfill his promises; the last days have arrived with Jesus’ ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension, and his bestowal of the Spirit. (pg. 21-22)

I agree with Schnabel’s conclusion, but I was especially intrigued with another point he made, almost in passing, in this chapter.

The Moon Turned to Blood

The suggestion that Acts 2:19 refers to a lunar eclipse during which the moon assumes a dull, red color, which was visible in Jerusalem at Passover in A.D. 33, is intriguing; however, it requires a later date for Jesus’ crucifixion, which is more plausibly dated in the year A.D. 30. (pg. 20)

Ever since I read Harold Hoehner’s Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ (Zondervan, 1978), I have held to a Friday crucifixion and to April 3, A.D. 33 as the most likely date for Jesus’ death. I am not alone in considering A.D. 33 to be the most likely date for Christ’s death and resurrection. If you click this link, you should be able to read the relevant section from IVP’s Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, edited by Joel Green, which concludes as I do. So I was not put off by Schnabel’s preference for A.D. 30. Instead I was very much intrigued by his reference to the moon turning to blood being explained by a lunar eclipse.

I must be honest in admitting that while I have understood Peter to be saying Joel 2 is fulfilled, I was thinking the literal fulfillment focused on the Pentecost event not on the darkening of the sun at Christ’s death. Or at least I hadn’t thought very much about this. So I was eager to read the paper that Schnabel cited which dealt with this lunar eclipse. I was happy to find that the paper is freely available online. It is titled, “The Jewish Calendar, a Lunar Eclipse and the Date of Christ’s Crucifixion” by Colin J. Humphreys and W. Graeme Waddington (Tyndale Bulletin 43, 1992).

I encourage you to read the entire paper (available here), but for my purposes I will excerpt the chief evidence presented for understanding a lunar eclipse to be in view with the prophecy that the moon would turn to blood.

Evidence from Early Christian Writings

In addition to quoting from the apocryphal “Report of Pilate”, the authors of the paper cite Cyril of Alexandria (A.D. 412) as evidence:

The so-called ‘Report of Pilate’, a New Testament apocryphal fragment states, ‘Jesus was delivered to him by Herod, Archelaus, Philip, Annas, Caiphas, and all the people. At his Crucifixion the sun was darkened; the stars appeared and in all the world people lighted lamps from the sixth hour till evening; the moon appeared like blood’. [No matter the authenticity of this later document,] there must have been a tradition that at the Crucifixion the moon appeared like blood….

Further evidence is provided by Cyril of Alexandria, the orthodox Patriarch of Alexandria in AD 412. After stating that there was darkness at the Crucifixion he adds, ‘Something unusual occurred about the circular rotation of the moon so that it even seemed to be turned into blood’, and notes that the prophet Joel foretold such signs. (pg. 342)

The Technical Nature of the Phrase “Moon Turned to Blood”:

The moon turning to blood is a graphic description of a lunar eclipse. The reason an eclipsed moon appears blood-red is well known and the effect has been well documented. Even though during an eclipse the moon is geometrically in the earth’s shadow, some sunlight still reaches it by the refraction of light passing through the earth’s atmosphere. The light reaching the moon is red since scattering by air molecules and very small particles along its long path through the atmosphere preferentially removes the blue end of the spectrum. The phrase ‘moon turned to blood’ has been used by writers and historians to describe lunar eclipses for many centuries, and the expression dates back to at least 300 BC….

In the medieval European annals compiled by G.H. Pertz there are so many lunar eclipses described by ‘the moon turned to blood’ that the phrase appears to be used as a standard description. (pg. 343-344)

For additional corroboration, see the picture at the top of this post (taken from this article about a lunar eclipse in Brooklyn from 12/21/10). In that article, the moon is described as going “dark red” — very similar to the “blood red” description of the medieval era.

Conclusion

On this point, the authors put forth the following conclusion:

There is therefore strong evidence that when Peter, the ‘Report of Pilate’, and Cyril of Alexandria refer to the moon turning to blood on the evening of the Crucifixion, they were describing a lunar eclipse. It is surprising that this deduction does not appear to have been made before, although F.F. Bruce almost reaches this conclusion. He states, with reference to Peter’s Pentecost speech, ‘It was little more than seven weeks since the people in Jerusalem had indeed seen the sun turned into darkness, during the early afternoon of the day of our Lord’s Crucifixion. And on the same afternoon the paschal full moon may well have appeared blood-red in the sky in consequence of that preternatural gloom’. Presumably Bruce and other commentators have not been aware that a blood-red moon is a well-documented description of a lunar eclipse. (pg. 344)

The paper goes on to document how there was only one lunar eclipse that would have been visible from Jerusalem during the Passover in any of the years that are possible dates for his death. That eclipse is dated to Friday, April 3, A.D. 33 – the most likely date of the crucifixion.

This study has forced me to see the Crucifixion anew — to realize what a world-shattering event it really was! The death of Christ and His resurrection marked the end of the old age and the beginning of a new one. And miraculous signs in the heavens and on earth all attest to the prophetic undertones of what is happening. This also should serve to wake us up to the importance of the Cross of Christ and the Empty Tomb. The Gospel of Christ really is world-shattering. The realities we are sharing through the indwelling Spirit and our present realization of the blessings of the Gospel are all a brand new experience which is a foretaste of even greater things to come!

We are living in the last days and Jesus’ return draws near. May we live soberly and righteously in light of all that Christ has done for us. And may we not forget that the power of His resurrection has been given to us — we can live lives that testify to the glory of the age to come.

UPDATE: You can read my review of 40 Questions About the End Times here.

More Info on the Discovery of the 1st Century MSS Fragment of Mark

~ Bob Hayton

Recently, Dr. Dan Wallace made news about the discovery of what is possibly the earliest NT MSS fragment ever found. I gave details on the find here.

Well, Dr. Wallace was recently interviewed by Hugh Hewitt on his radio show about the discovery and gave additional details. We now know the MSS contains part of one papyrus leaf, written on both sides. From the sound of it, it is most of one leaf so several verses but not much more. It was also found in Egypt — all seven of these MSS finds were found there. Dr. Wallace will also be on of the authors of the book that will publish all seven papyri fragments in early 2013.

Wallace continues to consider this a truly monumental manuscript find, as the following snippet from the full interview makes clear:

HH: Wow. Now in terms of, for the lay audience, Professor Daniel Wallace, the significance of this work when it appears, how would you grade it, with an A being a Dead Sea Scroll sort of significance, and you know, flunking, it just doesn’t matter?

DW: I would grade it at least an A, maybe an A+.

HH: And will the rest of the scholarly world agree with you on that assessment, do you think?

DW: I think that when they understand the ramifications of the entire nature of this manuscript that I’m not at liberty to mention, yes. They’re going to understand. At least those that will accept that date. Since the manuscript doesn’t have a date stamp on it, it says it was done this year, there are always going to be dissenters. But to do the work of paleography takes thousands and thousands of hours of research to do one.

I’m not sure the discovery will prove to be the equal of the Dead Sea Scrolls, but I’m cautiously optimistic that it will prove to be very consequential.

I also got an update from Matthew Hamilton who I quoted in my earlier post on this. From his information and that of Wallace from this interview, the following looks to be the list of the 7 manuscripts. Many of these would be the earliest textual witness we have of that Biblical book, if the dates hold true.

  1. 2nd century homily (sermon) on Hebrews 11
  2. 2nd century frg. with I Corinthians 8-10
  3. 2nd century frg. with Matthew
  4. 2nd century frg. with Romans 9-10
  5. 2nd century frg. from Hebrews, one side contains 9:19-22
  6. 2nd century frg. with Luke
  7. 1st century frg. [part of one leaf] with Mark

For more details read the entire transcript of the Hewitt – Wallace interview, and keep an eye on the Evangelical Textual Criticism blog.

Earliest NT Manuscript Discovered???

~ Bob Hayton ~ 1 Comment

Over on my team blog, KJVOnlyDebate.com, my friend Damien Garofalo shared the news of the possible discovery of a 1st Century NT manuscript of the Gospel of Mark. There isn’t much information on this as of yet, but here’s what I know so far.

Dr. Daniel Wallace spilled the beans in a recent debate with Bart Ehrman that there has now been discovered a papyrus fragment of Mark that has been dated to the 1st Century. This would make the manuscript earlier than P52, a manuscript fragment of the Gospel of John dated to A.D. 125. The publication of the new manuscript fragment, and any additional details about its discovery, will not be available until next year, unfortunately. There are indications, however, that the fragment appears to be part of the Green collection, which claims to include “one of the world’s largest holdings of unpublished biblical and classical papyri.” More details on that collection, here.

At Sheffield Biblical Studies blog, I found the following tidbit with more details about the new discoveries.

From what I’ve been able to glean there are now in the Green Collection 7 unpublished NT papyri:

  1. 2nd century frg. with Hebrews 1
  2. 2nd century frg. with I Corinthians 8-10
  3. 2nd century frg. with Matthew
  4. 2nd century frg. with Romans 8-9
  5. 2nd century frg. with part of a Pauline Epistle, from what I know it is from Hebrews
  6. 2nd century frg. with Luke
  7. 1st century frg. with Mark

As for where these manuscripts have been found, there is no official word, but the following tidbit about the director of the Green collection may have the answer:

Carroll also developed a method to extract writings reused in the infrastructure of mummy coverings while preserving the decorative external features. This groundbreaking research has uncovered some of the earliest-known ancient Greek writings.

I was able to learn that the technical term for this is cartonnage (papyrii and other linens and fabric that was molded into funeral masks for Egyptian mummies). So the assumption is that most of these fragments may have been found through Carroll’s innovative method of extracting papyrii from cartonnage. And as Matthew Hamilton mentioned over in the comments at Evangelical Textual Criticism blog, this could have important ramifications for the ability to date the papyrii with precision.

…if other NT papyri in the Green Collection were recovered from cartonnage, then perhaps also the fragment of Mark. Unlike papyri like P52, a papyrus fragment found in cartonnage has at least 2 elements of context:

Firstly the other papyri in the cartonnage may indicate a date range – if they all appear to be 2nd century then a 1st century date for a NT frg. would be odd, and conversely, if they all appear to be 1st century then a 2nd century date for a NT frg. would be odd. But if they come from a wide range then the context is much weaker

Secondly, if the cartonnage is dated by style or other features to the late 1st century then any of the papyri that make up the cartonnage MUST predate the late 1st century.

Unfortunately Daniel Wallace’s information does not make it clear if the fragment of Mark was from cartonnage like the fragment of Romans, or if it was a loose fragment.

We will have to wait for more information on this, but even if these fragments are quite small, they still (if the early dates hold) stand as added testimony to the authenticity of the New Testament.

I should note in passing, that with the size of the fragment, it is almost surely not going to contain profound new insight of lasting text-critical value. The dream-scenario that Paul Maier writes about in The Constantine Codex of a textual discovery that forever settles the question of Mark’s ending, remains fiction, for now.

See my recent update which corrects some of the details speculated on in this post.

Dating Christ’s Birth: November 18 or December 25?

~ Bob Hayton ~ 11 Comments

I just finished reading an essay by Paul Maier on the date of the birth of Jesus Christ. The essay is entitled “The Date of the Nativity and the Chronology of Jesus’ Life” and was a chapter in the book Chronos, Kairos, Christos:
Nativity and Chronological Studies Presented to Jack Finegan edited by E. Jerry Vardaman and Edwin M. Yamauchi (Eisenbrauns, 1989), now out of print. [HT: Justin Taylor]

Maier has written many popular level books bringing various Biblical stories to life. Click on the image above to see his book on the first Christmas which details many historical and archaeological details you may be unfamiliar with. Be sure to search inside the book, to explore it more fully. It promises to be a fascinating book.

Anyway, Maier writes as a scholar who also isn’t too keen on defending Luke’s Quirinius mention and some other historical details in the New Testament. Nevertheless, he reviews the data and concludes that November/December 5 B.C. is the most likely date for Christ’s birth. At the end of the essay he brings to bear the earliest and most specific reckoning of Christ’s birth in the church fathers. Clement of Alexandria pegs the month and day of Jesus’ birth to our November 18. Given some of the evidence Maier marshals, that date may well be preferred to December 25, which came about later. Still, one month and 7 days is not far from the mark!

The essay is an interesting read, but no matter what day you celebrate Christ’s birth on (the Orthodox still celebrate January 6th as his birth), be sure to spend some time celebrating and worshiping our Lord this Christmas.

Mark — Good News of Jesus, the Suffering Savior (part 1)

~ Bob Hayton ~ 1 Comment

Introduction – Mark 1:1

1. “Gospel” — A New Kind of Book

A. Mark’s opening verse gave a title to a new kind of book — a Gospel.
B. The non-inspired titles: “The Gospel According to Mark, Matthew, Luke, John” likely derive from Mark 1:1.
C. A Gospel is not an objective, historically focused biography.
D. They are similar to other “lives” of philosophers and political leaders in ancient times — they are crafted to tell a story with a goal in mind for the reader.
E. They are different in that they focus on Jesus Christ in a unique way — they unpack the theological significance of Jesus Christ and give us the true Good News.
F. They don’t simply give us what happened, they tell us what to believe about what happened. They are in essence, preaching materials. They tell the story of God’s saving actions in Christ Jesus.
G. The Synoptic Gospels are Matthew, Mark, and Luke and it is believed that Matthew & Luke made use of Mark in the writing of their Gospels. They certainly followed his pattern. Each of the four authors had particular emphases in his writing.

DISCUSSION: What are some benefits to the four-fold Gospel that we have in the New Testament? Why four books instead of one? Why are the books similar and different. What can we learn from that? Record your thoughts.

2. Mark — The First Gospel

A. Author
The Book is anonymous, but from early on it has been attributed to Mark — the John Mark of Acts 12:12, 12:25, 13:5, 15:36-39, Col. 4:10, Philemon 24, 1 Pet. 5:13, 2 Tim. 4:11.

Here’s the earliest attribution of the book to Mark, by Papias in AD 140 (but known to us through Eusebius’ quote in roughly AD 320):

The Elder (likely John) said this also: Mark, who became Peter’s interpreter, wrote accurately, though not in order, all that he remembered of the things said or done by the Lord. For he had neither heard the Lord nor been one of his followers, but afterwards, as I said, he had followed Peter, who used to compose his discourses with a view to the needs of his hearers, but not as though he were drawing up a connected account of the Lord’s sayings. So Mark made no mistake in thus recording some things just as he remembered them. For he was careful of this one thing, to omit none of the things he had heard and to make no untrue statements therein.

Another early tradition (AD 160-180) reads: “Mark declared, who is called ‘stump-fingered’ because he had short fingers in comparison with the size of the rest of his body. He was Peter’s interpreter. After the death of Peter himself he wrote down this same gospel in the regions of Italy.”

Interestingly, Mark received relatively little attention in the preserved writings of the church, up until around the 1800s for the most part. There are aspects of Mark which make it difficult, and Augustine assumed Mark just offered up an abbreviated version of Matthew which was certainly larger, and which Augustine thought was written first. (However, often in the sections Mark shares with Matthew, Mark’s account is more detailed and longer than Matthew’s.)

B. Date
Most put this after the death of Peter in AD 64 and before the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70. This is our best guess.

This becomes important when we remember the intense persecution of the Christians at the hands of Nero in this time, Paul was martyred in AD 67 near the end of the persecution period. (see 1:12-14, 8:34-38, 10:30-34, 10: 45, 13:9-13)

C. Destination and Place of Writing
Both are likely Rome. Mark is first quoted in 1 Clement & the Shepherd of Hermas, both associated with Rome. Church tradition is almost united in having Mark writing to the Romans from Rome, and Mark is associated with Peter who almost certainly spent the last few years of his life in Rome where he was martyred. Clues in the letter point to a Gentile audience and possibly even a Latin / Roman audience. Grammatical points as well as many explanations of Jewish customs and translations of Aramaic into Greek given in Mark.

D. Purpose
We can only sketch ideas on this and as we study Mark we’ll learn if we are right or not in our ideas here.
1) To make the Gospel accessible to Gentiles (a missiological aim)
2) To encourage those facing persecutions, particularly the beleaguered Christians in Rome.
3) To explain and defend the faith — particularly the nature of Christ being fully man and fully divine (as well as how Jesus fulfilled and superseded the Messianic expectation of the Jews)
4) To explain the significance of the cross (almost half the book is devoted to the last week of Christ’s life– the passion week), and Christ’s death is foretold in 3:6.

DISCUSSION: What other thoughts come to mind when you think of characteristics or traits of Mark. Are there other themes which come to mind?

3. Theme Verse — Mark 1:1

A. Gospel — (Evangel / Good News, from euangelizomai – to evangelize)
1) The “Gospel” is connected by the “as” in vs. 2 to the quotation in vs. 2-3. The intimation there as well as in 1:14-15 is that the “Gospel” is a fulfillment of something foretold in the Old Testament.

DISCUSSION: Can you think of other places where the “Gospel” is rooted in the Old Testament? Is “the Gospel” really in the Old Testament? Jot down your observations and thoughts.

Rom. 1:1-4 & 1 Cor. 15:1-4 root the Gospel in the OT Scriptures. Initial Gospel sermons stemmed from OT texts (Acts 2:16-36, 13:16-41). Gal. 3:8, Abraham had the gospel preached to him beforehand. 1 Pet. 1:25 ties the word of Isaiah 40 to the gospel preached in the NT era (as does Mk. 1:1 with 1:2-3 – Is. 40 again is quoted) [cf. 1 Pet. 1:10-12]. OT “Gospel” texts are Ps. 40:9, 68:11, 96:2, Is. 40:9, 41:27, 52:7, 61:1). The Good News of God’s saving reign, and the ushering in of an era of righteousness is foretold in Isaiah. Mark connects Jesus’ ministry with the beginning of that fulfillment. “The beginning of the Gospel…” (Already / Not Yet fulfillment)

Download this study in PDF ~ See all posts in this series.

The posts in this series include notes from a Men’s Bible Study I’m teaching on the Gospel of Mark every other Saturday morning. I am sharing them so they might possibly be a blessing to others. Feel free to download the lesson sheets and use them for your own purposes.