The Great Isaiah Scroll – Science Revelations

Posted on by K.B. Vogelman

Isaiah is considered to be the greatest of all the prophets by Judaism and Christianity making the Book of Isaiah the greatest of all the prophetic books in the Bible.^[1] Many references and interpretations of Isaiah’s prophecies are found in the Talmud with Sanhedrin tractate 98 alone making ten references.^[2]

Paramount to the prophecies of Isaiah is having confidence that his prophecies are reflected accurately in today’s Bibles.^[3] Sciences of archeology and textual criticism enhanced by technology play a major role in making that determination.

Produced from 285-247 BC, the Septuagint LXX translation is the primary foundation for Christian Bibles. Josephus, a Jewish Pharisee, described in detail the origin of the Septuagint translation. Egypt ruler Ptolemy Philadelphius wrote to Priest Eleazar in Jerusalem requesting six of the best elders from each of the 12 tribes of Israel to make a Greek translation from the official Hebrew text.^[4]

Elders including priests traveled to Egypt with scrolls from the Temple for the translation project.^[5] King Ptolemy was most impressed with the condition of the scrolls:

“…and when the membranes, upon which they had their law written in golden letters, he put questions to them concerning those books; and when they had taken off the covers wherein they were wrapt up, they showed him the membranes. So the king stood admiring the thinness of those membranes, and the exactness of the junctures; which could not be perceived, (so exact were they connected one with another;)…”^[6]

Upon completion, the Greek translation was reviewed again by “both the priests and the ancientest of the elders, and the principal men…” and finalized with a promise that it would never be changed.^[7] “Septuagint” in Latin means 70 as does the Roman Numeral “LXX” representing those who worked together on the translation.^[8]

Hebrew Bible translations are based on two surviving Hebrew Masoretic Texts (MT), the Aleppo Codex dated to 925 AD and the Leningrad Codex circa 1008-10 AD.^[9] About a third of the Aleppo text was destroyed in a synagogue fire resulting in a dependency on the Leningrad manuscript to fill in the missing text.

Spanning the timeline between the Septuagint and the MT is at least 1150 years. In the interim, many events transpired in Judea– the Greek Empire with its language and Hellenism influences; the rule of King Herod; and domination by the Roman Empire which destroyed Jerusalem with the Temple in 70 AD.^[10] These seismic events affected the purity of the MT translations.

Addressing these impacts opened the door to the Miqraot Gedolot HaKeter Project to produce a “precise letter-text” translation of the Masoretic text. Director Menachem Cohen, Professor of Bible at Bar-Ilan University of Israel, said the project was intended to address the “thousands of flaws of the previous and current editions.”^[11]

Dead Sea Scroll discoveries at Qumran, beginning in 1947 continuing over the next decade until 1956, revealed a treasure trove of ancient scrolls determined to be about 2000 years old.^[12] Two scrolls of Isaiah were among the discoveries, one virtually complete scroll known as “Qa” and the second scroll known as “Qb” which is about 75% complete.^[13]

For good reason, the Qa scroll has been dubbed “The Great Isaiah Scroll” and is on display in Jerusalem at the Shrine of the Book.^[14] The Scroll can be viewed in its entirety on the Internet.[15]

Dated to c. 125 BC, The Scroll is compromised of 17 pieces of leather sewn together, each strip containing from 2 to 4 pages of text.^[16] For the MT, it serves as a side-by-side, older Hebrew text comparison and precludes the claim of any Christian influences because it predates the arrival of Jesus of Nazareth.

A precept of the science of textual criticism is the shorter the time interval between the original and the existing text, the greater the level of textual purity – the shorter time frame assumes a fewer number of interim handwritten copies where variations are inevitably introduced.^[17]

Translation nuances are to be expected in the Greek translation because some ancient Hebrew characters do not have a direct Greek equivalent.^[18] As with any translation, some words or phrases must be deciphered by the translators with a heavy dependence on the context.^[19]

Josephus revealed the translation of the Greek Septuagint is based on a side-by-side Hebrew text taken directly from the Temple suggesting textual purity of the highest degree.^[20] Inevitably, the lack of not having a side-by-side text significantly impacted the MT purity. Text variations posed a huge challenge to the Miqraot Gedolot HaKeter Project team where even the spelling of “Israel” appears differently.^[21]

“…the aggregate of known differences in the Greek translations is enough to rule out the possibility that we have before us today’s Masoretic Text. The same can be said of the various Aramaic translations; the differences they reflect are too numerous for us to class their vorlage as our Masoretic Text.” – Menachem Cohen^[22]

Focus is placed only on the two major controversial prophecies of Isaiah 7:14 and the Chapter 52-53 parashah. Differences are found in the very small vowel punctuations seen more easily with technology enhancements.^[23]

“The major difference between the Aleppo Codex and the Dead Sea Scrolls is the addition of the vowel pointings (called nikkudot in Hebrew) in the Aleppo Codex to the Hebrew words.” – Jeff A Benner^[24]

Isaiah 7:14 is entirely written in the future tense making it an undisputed prophecy although there are several potentially meaningful differences between the MT and Septuagint reflected by The Scroll.^[25] Variations include the translation controversy of the two Hebrew words ha-alamah, a text pronoun difference and two name differences.^[26]

MT translates ha-almah as “a young woman” while The Scroll translated the words as “a young maiden. ” According to Rabbi Maimonides, a “virgin maiden” is a female who has not reached the age of maturity whereas a “woman” implies she is not a minor i.e. a virgin maiden is between 12 1/2 and 13 years of age.^[27]

Hebrew ha exclusively means “the” – specific to the noun that follows.^[28] The Septuagint translates the Hebrew words ha-almah into Greek as “ha Parthenos” precisely meaning “the virgin.”^[29]

Pronoun differences appear where the MT says “she” will call his name; The Scroll says “he” will call his name; and the Septuagint generically refers to “you” earlier in the text.^[30] Presumably, “He” refers to God in The Scroll whereas “she” refers to the mother in the MT and “you” refers to the audience.

Two other noteworthy differences are the MT and Septuagint use of the word Adonai for “Lord” (rather than “LORD”) while The Scroll translation uses YHWH, the name of God.^[31] At the end of the verse, the MT writes Immanu-el as two words; however, The Scroll writes it as a single word “Immanuel.” In Hebrew, one word always indicates a name.

Interestingly in Column XLIV, The Scroll begins the Isaiah 52-53 parashah with the reference to “my servant.”^[32] Differences found in The Scroll are mostly grammatical and do not change the general text; however, there are some notable exceptions.^[33]

First is not a textual difference where a note written in the margin of The Scroll equivalent to 53:2 reads, “before us” or “him.” No Bible translation includes these words in the first sentence which would otherwise say something like, “out of dry ground before us or him.”^[34]

A significant Biblical issue between the Septuagint and the MT in Isaiah 53:4 is not settled by The Scroll using the Hebrew word חֹ֑לִי (choliy). Bible translators have used a myriad of words: “pain,” “weakness,” “sorrows,” “grief,” “suffering” “sickness,” “evil,” “illness,” “infirmities,” or “disease.”^[35]

One last noteworthy difference revealed by The Scroll is the appearance in the equivalent verse 53:11 of the word nephesh/nap̄·šōw translated most commonly from Hebrew text as “life” while other translations sometimes use the word “soul” or “light.” Other Christian and Jewish Bibles including the MT translate the word as “it.”^[36]

How likely is it that The Great Isaiah Scroll accurately reflects the original Hebrew text written by the prophet Isaiah?

Updated February 11, 2024.

This work is licensed under aCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

BSB = Berean Study Bible
CSB = Christian Standard Bible
ISV = International Standard Version
NAB = New American Bible
NHEB = New Heart English Bible
NIV = New International Version
NRSV = New Revised Standard Verson
WEB = World English Bible

REFERENCES:

[1] “Isaiah.” Jewish Encyclopedia. 2011. <http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8235-isaiah> “Isaiah.” Biblica | The International Bible Society. 2019. <https://www.biblica.com/resources/scholar-notes/niv-study-bible/intro-to-isaiah>
[2] Soncino Babylonian Talmud. Sanhedrin 98a, footnote #1. Isaiah XLIX:7, XVIII:5, I:25, LIX:19, LIX:20, LX:21, LIX:16, XLVIII:11, LX:22, LIII.4. <https://israelect.com/Come-and-Hear/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_98.html#98b_31> CR The Babylonian Talmud. Trans. Michael L. Rodkinson. 1918. Sanhedrin, Chapter XI, p 310. <http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/t08/t0814.htm>
[3] Cohen, Menachem. “The Idea of the Sanctity of the Biblical Text and the Science of Textual Criticism.” Bar-Ilan University. 1979. <http://cs.anu.edu.au/%7Ebdm/dilugim/CohenArt> Benner, Jeff A. “The Great Isaiah Scroll and the Masoretic Text.” Ancient Hebrew Research Center. 2017. <http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/bible_isaiahscroll.html> Zeolla, Gary F. Universitat De Valencia. “Textual Criticism.” 2000. <http://www.uv.es/~fores/programa/introtextualcritici.html> “Isaiah.” Biblica | The International Bible Society. 2019. <https://www.biblica.com/resources/scholar-notes/niv-study-bible/intro-to-isaiah>
[4] Josephus, Flavius. Antiquities of the Jews. Trans. and commentary. William Whitson. The Complete Works of Josephus. 1850. Book XII, Chapter II. <http://books.google.com/books?id=e0dAAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false> “Septuagint.” Septuagint.Net. 2014. <http://septuagint.net> Benner. “The Great Isaiah Scroll.” Lundberg, Marilyn J. “The Leningrad Codex.” USC West Semitic Research Project. 2012. <https://web.archive.org/web/20140826133533/https://www.usc.edu/dept/LAS/wsrp/educational_site/biblical_manuscripts/LeningradCodex.shtml> “Septuagint.” Encyclopædia Britannica. 2019. <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Septuagint> Cohen. “The Idea of the Sanctity of the Biblical Text and the Science of Textual Criticism.”
[5] Josephus. Antiquities. Book XII, Chapter II. 5-6, 11-13. Whitson, William. The Complete Works of Josephus. 1850. Antiquities of the Jews. Book XII, Chapter.II.12, footnote *.
[6] Josephus. Antiquities. Book XII, Chapter II.11.
[7] Josephus. Antiquities. Book XII, Chapter II.13.
[8] “Septuagint.” Definitions.net. n.d. <https://www.definitions.net/definition/septuagint> “Septuagint.” Merriam-Webster. 2020. <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Septuagint> Josephus. Antiquities. Book XII, Chapter II.7, 11. Whitson. The Complete Works of Josephus. Antiquities of the Jews. Book XII, Chapter.II.12, footnote *.
[9] Abegg,, et al. The Dead Sea Scrolls. “Introduction”, page x. Aronson, Ya’akov. “Mikraot Gedolot haKeter–Biblia Rabbinica: Behind the scenes with the project team.” Association Jewish Libraries. Bar Ilan University. Ramat Gan, Israel. n.d. <http://www.jewishlibraries.org/main/Portals/0/AJL_Assets/documents/Publications/proceedings/proceedings2004/aronson.pdf> Miller, Laura. “The Aleppo Codex: The bizarre history of a precious book.” 2012. Salon. <http://www.salon.com/2012/05/13/the_aleppo_codex_the_bizarre_history_of_a_precious_book>
[10] “Scrolls from the Dead Sea.” Library of Congress. n.d. <https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/scrolls/late.html> Greenberg, Irving. “The Temple and its Destruction.” MyJewishLearning.com. 2020. <https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-temple-its-destruction> “Destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE.” Harvard Divinity School. 2020. <https://rlp.hds.harvard.edu/faq/destruction-second-temple-70-ce>
[11] Cohen, Menachem. “Mikra’ot Gedolot – ‘Haketer’ – Isaiah.” 2009. <http://www.biupress.co.il/website_en/index.asp?id=447>
[12] “Dead Sea Scrolls.” Archaeology. 2018. <http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/dead-sea-scrolls.htm> “Scrolls from the Dead Sea.” Library of Congress. Roach, John. “8 Jewish archaeological discoveries – From Dead Sea Scroll to a ‘miracle pool.’” Science on NBCNEWS.com. <http://www.nbcnews.com/id/28162671/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/jewish-archaeological-discoveries/#.VLU34XtFYuI> “The Great Isaiah Scroll.” The Digital Dead Sea Scrolls. 2020. <http://dss.collections.imj.org.il/isaiah> Benner. “The Great Isaiah Scroll.” “Isaiah.” Biblica.
[13] Miller. Fred P. “The Great Isaiah Scroll.” Moellerhaus Publisher. Directory. 1998. <http://www.moellerhaus.com/qumdir.htm> Cohen. “The Idea of the Sanctity of the Biblical Text.” Footnote #4. Abegg, Jr., Martin G., Flint, Peter W. and Ulrich Eugene Charles. The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible: the oldest known Bible translated for the first time into English. 2002. <https://books.google.com/books?id=c4R9c7wAurQC&lpg=PP1&ots=fQpCpzCdb5&dq=Abegg%2C%20Flint%20and%20Ulrich%2C%20The%20Dead%20Dead%20Sea%20Scrolls%20Bible%2C&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q=Isaiah&f=false>
[14] Benner. “The Great Isaiah Scroll.” Abegg,, et al. “The Dead Sea Scrolls.” “The Great Isaiah Scroll.” AllAboutArchaeology. photo. 2021. <https://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/great-isaiah-scroll-faq.htm>
[15] “The Great Isaiah Scroll.” The Digital Dead Sea Scrolls.
[16] Miller. Fred P. “Q” = The Great Isaiah Scroll Introductory Page” Chapter I, IV. Moellerhaus Publisher. 2016. <http://www.moellerhaus.com/Controversy/Controversy.htm> Benner, Jeff A. “The Great Isaiah Scroll and the Masoretic Text.” “textus receptus.” The Free Dictionary. 2020. <https://www.thefreedictionary.com/Received+Text#:~:text=The%20text%20of%20a%20written,of%20recipere%2C%20to%20receive.%5D> “The Great Isaiah Scroll.” The Digital Dead Sea Scrolls.
[17] Westcott, Brooke F. & Hort, John A. The New Testament in the Original Greek – Introduction|Appendix. pp 31, 58-59, 223-224, 310-311. 1907. <https://books.google.com/books?id=gZ4HAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=The+New+Testament+in+the+Original+Greek&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiOjMvk3fjXAhUE5yYKHSTHC5wQ6wEIOjAD#v=onepage&q=The%20New%20Testament%20in%20the%20Original%20Greek&f=false> Miller. Fred P. The Great Isaiah Scroll. 1998. “Qumran Great Isaiah Scroll.” Benner. “The Great Isaiah Scroll.” Cohen, Menachem. “The Idea of the Sanctity of the Biblical Text and the Science of Textual Criticism.”
[18] Welch, Adam Cleghorn. “Since Wellhausen.” p 175. <https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/expositor/series9/1925-09_164.pdf> Benner, Jeff A. “Introduction to Ancient Hebrew.” <https://www.ancient-hebrew.org/introduction.htm>
[19] Benner. “Introduction to the Hebrew Bible.”
[20] Schodde, George H. Old Testament Textual Criticism. pp 45-46. 1887. <https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/469936> Gentry, Peter J. “The Text of the Old Testament.” p 24. 2009 <https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/52/52-1/JETS%2052-1%2019-45%20Gentry.pdf>
[21] Cohen. “The Idea of the Sanctity of the Biblical Text.” CR Miller. Fred P. “The Translation of the Great Isaiah Scroll.” Book of Isaiah. Trans. Fred P. Miller. Moellerhaus Publisher. 2001. <http://www.moellerhaus.com/qa-tran.htm> Benner, Jeff A. “The Great Isaiah Scroll and the Masoretic Text.”
[22] Cohen. “The Idea of the Sanctity of the Biblical Text.” Footnotes
[23] Cohen. “The Idea of the Sanctity of the Biblical Text.” Footnotes #6-7.
[24] Benner, Jeff A. “The Great Isaiah Scroll and the Masoretic Text.”
[25] Miller. Fred P. “The Translation of the Great Isaiah Scroll.” “The Translation of the Great Isaiah Scroll “Dead Sea Scrolls Bible Translations.” 2016. <http://dssenglishbible.com/scroll1QIsaa.htm>
[26] Miller, Fred P. “Column VI – The Great Isaiah Scroll 6:7 to 7:15.” Ancient Hebrew Research Center. n.d. <http://www.moellerhaus.com/qum-6.htm>
[27] Miller. “Column VI – The Great Isaiah Scroll 6:7 to 7:15.” Miller. Fred P. “Assyrian Destruction of Israel is Not the End God Will Bring the Messiah to the Same Territory and the Same Restored People.” Chapters 7-8. Ancient Hebrew Research Center. n.d. <http://www.moellerhaus.com/7-8.htm#alma> Benner, Jeff A. “Textual Criticisim of Isaiah 7:14 (Video).” 2020. <https://www.ancient-hebrew.org/textual-criticism/textual-criticism-of-isaiah-7-14.htm> “Dead Sea Scrolls Bible Translations.” Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 17.” Sefaria.org. Footnotes #48 & 49. n.d. <https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Forbidden_Intercourse.17.13?lang=bi&with=Navigation&lang2=en>
[28] Benner. “Introduction to the Ancient Hebrew Alphabet.”
[29] Miller. “Column VI – The Great Isaiah Scroll 6:7 to 7:15.”
[30] Benner, Jeff A. “Column VI – The Great Isaiah Scroll 6:7 to 7:15.” Miller. Fred P. “The Translation of the Great Isaiah Scroll.” Lines #28-29. Isaiah 7:14. NetBible.org. LXXM. <https://classic.net.bible.org/verse.php?book=Isa&chapter=7&verse=14 >
[31] Benner, Jeff A. “What isthe difference between lord, Lord and LORD?” Ancient Hebrew Research Center. 2020. https://www.ancient-hebrew.org/god-yhwh/difference-between-lord-Lord-and-LORD.htm
[32] Miller. Fred P. “The Translation of the Great Isaiah Scroll.”
[33 Cohen. “The Idea of the Sanctity of the Biblical Text.” Footnote #4. Benner, Jeff A. “The Great Isaiah Scroll and the Masoretic Text.”
[34] Miller. “The Translation of the Great Isaiah Scroll.” Miller, Fred P. Moellerhaus Publishers. “Column XLIV – The Great Isaiah Scroll 52:13 to 54:4.” n.d. <http://www.moellerhaus.com/qum44.htm> “Dead Sea Scrolls Bible Translations.” 1Q Isaiah^a, <http://dssenglishbible.com/scroll1QIsaa.htm> “Isaiah 53 at umran,” Hebrew Streams. <http://www.hebrew-streams.org/works/qumran/isaiah-53-qumran.pdf> Isaiah 53:2. Biblehub.com. <https://biblehub.com/isaiah/53-2.htm> Isaiah 53:2. NetBible.org. <http://classic.net.bible.org/verse.php?book=Isa&chapter=53&verse=2> Yisheyah (Book of Isaiah) JPS translation. Breslov.com. 1998. <http://www.breslov.com/bible/Isaiah53.htm#2> Yeshayahu – Isaiah – Chapter 53. Chabad.org. Complete Jewish Bible translation. 2020. <https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/15984>
[35] Miller. “The Translation of the Great Isaiah Scroll.” Benner, Fred P. “The Great Isaiah Scroll and the Masoretic Text.” 2020. <https://www.ancient-hebrew.org/dss/great-isaiah-scroll-and-the-masoretic-text.htm#2> “Dead Sea Scrolls Bible Translations.” 2016. <http://dssenglishbible.com/scroll1QIsaa.htm> “Isaiah 53 at Qumran.” NetBible.org. n.d. <https://classic.net.bible.org/verse.php?book=Isa&chapter=53&verse=4> H2483. LexiConcordance.com. n.d. <http://lexiconcordance.com/hebrew/2483.html>
[36] “Isaiah 53:11.” BibleHub.com. Lexicon & Interlinear. 2020. <https://biblehub.com/isaiah/53-11.htm> “Isaiah 53:11.” NetBible.org. Hebrew text. 2020. <http://classic.net.bible.org/verse.php?book=Isa&chapter=53&verse=11> “H5315.” Lexicon-Concordance. n.d. <http://lexiconcordance.com/hebrew/5315.html> Isaiah 53:11. JPS translation. Isaiah 53:11. Complete Jewish Bible. Isaiah 53 :11. “Isaiah 53 at Qumran,” Benner, Jeff A. “The Great Isaiah Scroll and the Masoretic Text.” Miller. “Column XLIV – The Great Isaiah Scroll 52:13 to 54:4.” n.d. <http://www.moellerhaus.com/qum-44.htm> Miller. “The Translation of the Great Isaiah Scroll.” “Dead Sea Scrolls Bible Translations.” 1Q Isaiah^b. Footnote (2). 2016. <http://dssenglishbible.com/scroll1QIsab.htm>

Jeremiah – (Don’t Kill) the Messenger

Posted on by K.B. Vogelman

Jeremiah – (Don’t Kill) the Messenger

Jeremiah was tasked by God to foretell news to kings and people of Jerusalem at a time when it was not uncommon to kill the messenger if the news was not welcome.^[1] It didn’t matter that sprinkled in were reassuring prophecies of good news about the coming Messiah and the regathering the nation of the Hebrews.

While Josiah was king of Judah, Jeremiah foretold Jerusalem would meet the judgement of total destruction – captives, many killed and treasures lost. The Hebrew people had willfully and repeatedly broke the Covenant they agreed to uphold when God gave it to them at Mt. Sinai.^[2]

Death plots, even by his own family, were orchestrated to kill Jeremiah.^[3] Passhur, chief of security for the priests, had Jeremiah flogged and put in stocks near the Temple.^[4]

Released, Jeremiah forewarned Passhur of the manner of his death, that of his family and friends. Specifically, “the king of Babylon” would strike them with terror.^[5]

Continuing their defiance and evil ways, such as sex with pagan gods and sacrificing to them their own children, drew the wrath of God setting the scene for the curse of Jeconiah (aka Jehoiachin).^[6] God sent a judgement message through Jeremiah to both Jeconiah and his father King Jehoiakim, son of Josiah.

For Jehoaikim, it was a death sentence. Jechoniah’s judgement, instead, was that none of his sons would sit on the throne of David, in fact, they would not even prosper.^[7]

Just five verses later, Jeremiah makes clear that in-spite-of God’s judgement, David’s royal lineage would not end.^[8] God explicitly promised another king would be raised up from the Branch of David:

Jer 23:5 “”Behold, the days are coming,” declares the LORD, “When I will raise up for David a righteous Branch; And He will reign as king and act wisely And do justice and righteousness in the land.”_(NASB)

Nebuchadnezzar’s army attacked Jerusalem fulfilling the judgement prophecy wreaking havoc and destruction on Jerusalem while taking captives.^[9] One of those captives with special skills and pedigree was indeed King Jeconiah as well as and another future high-profile Biblical figure – Daniel.^[10]

Over the next 10 years Nebuchadnezzar’s puppet King Zedekiah, brother of Jeconiah, had learned nothing from the judgment of his father and brother by continuing to ignore and offend both King Nebuchadnezzar and God.^[11] Having had enough, Nebuchadnezzar took action against Jerusalem once again.

Meanwhile, Irijah, captain of the Guards in Jerusalem, accused Jeremiah of being a traitor and then had him arrested, tried, flogged and thrown into a dungeon.^[11] Jeremiah’s nemesis, Pashhur, along with three others approached Zedekiah advising the King that the prophet should be killed because his prophecies were demoralizing the troops.^[12]

Zedekiah allowed Pashhur and cohorts to do as they wanted. They then lowered Jeremiah into an old cistern deep with mud and left him to starve to death.^[13]

Ebed Melech, an Ethiopian official at the palace, heard of Jeremiah’s plight. While King Zedekiah was conducting royal business at the Benjamin Gate away from the strict protocols of the palace, Ebed took the opportunity to inform the King of Jeremiah’s situation.

Quietly King Zedekiah instructed Ebed how to secretly rescue the prophet from the cistern. Jeremiah was moved to an outdoor prison yard and given a scant daily ration of bread.^[14]

Puppet Zedekiah came to realize the truthfulness of Jeremiah’s prophecies when Nebuchadnezzar again besieged Jerusalem. The King secretly questioned the prophet seeking his guidance, but it was too late.^[15]

During his confinement God sent another message to Jeremiah to address worries that God had rejected Israel and Judah saying the throne of David would never end. Jeremiah foretold that the nations would one day be regathered and restored, then issued a second Branch of David prophecy:

^{Jer. 33:14-15, 17} “‘The days are coming,’ declares the LORD, ‘when I will fulfil the gracious promise I made to the house of Israel and to the house of Judah. In those days and at that time I will make a righteous Branch sprout from David’s line; he will do what is just and right in the land… For thus says the LORD, ‘David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel…” _(NASB)

Emphasized were the trustworthiness of Jeremiah’s prophecies of God’s promises to Israel and Judah as well as His promises to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and David. It was not just a promise with a limited guarantee or a warranty – God said it was unconditionally ironclad using an analogy of astronomy:

^{Jer. 33:20-21}“”Thus says the LORD, ‘If you can break My covenant for the day and My covenant for the night, so that day and night will not be at their appointed time, then My covenant may also be broken with David My servant so that he will not have a son to reign on his throne, and with the Levitical priests, My ministers.”_(NASB)

When Babylon attacked, Zedekiah was given a choice: live, or fight and die. Choosing to surrender to the Babylonians, Zedekiah still tried to escape Nebuchadnezzar’s army, was captured and tortured.^[16]

Jeremiah’s reputation as a prophet had become known to the Babylonian King. Remaining imprisoned in the court yard during the siege, Jeremiah was rescued by the command of none other than King Nebuchadnezzar!

Orders issued by Nebuchadnezzar to his top commander, Nebuzaradan, was to find the prophet during their attack of Jerusalem, protect him and do whatever he asked. Jeremiah was released in Gedaliah, given food and a gift.^[17]

The Book of Jeremiah issued numerous detailed prophecies, many that came true in a single lifetime. Are the future Branch promises of God issued through Jeremiah reliable prophecies about the Messiah and the regathering of Judah and Israel back in Jerusalem?

Updated June 14, 2024.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

REFERENCES:

[1] Jeremiah 1; 37:17.
[2] Jeremiah 3:6; chapters 1-15.
[3] Jeremiah 11-12.
[4]Jeremiah 17-18, 20, 26.
[5] Jeremiah 20:4-6. “Jehoiakim.” Jewish Encyclopedia. 2011. <http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8562-jehoiakim> “Jehoiachin.” Jewish Encyclopedia. 2011. <http://jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8543-jeconiah>
[6] CR II Chronicles 36:11-14; Jeremiah 3:2; 7:22-26, 31.
[7] CR Jeremiah 36:30-32.
[8] Jeremiah 24; 29; Daniel 1:4.
[9] Daniel 1.
[10] Chronicles 36:12; Jeremiah 27:20; 32:2; 37:1-2. Bakon, Shimon. “Zedekiah: The Last King of Judah.” Jewish Bible Quarterly. Vol. 36, No. 2, 2008. <http://jbq.jewishbible.org/assets/Uploads/362/362_zedekiah.pdf>
[11] Jeremiah 37:13-16; 38:6, 13, 24-28.
[12] Jeremiah 38:1-6.
[13] Jeremiah 14:3; 38:5-6, 9. “Jeremiah in the Cistern.” HeartofaReadyHeart. Image. 2009. <http://heartofareadywriter.blogspot.com/2009/10/august-27th-prophet-persecuted.html>
[14] Jeremiah 37:21; 39:16-18.
[15] Jeremiah 37:17; 38:14. CR 37:3-10.
[16] Jeremiah 38:17.
[17] Jeremiah 39; 40; 43:6.

Angelic Encounters at the Tomb – a Gospel Conflict?

Posted on by K.B. Vogelman

Angelic Encounters at the Tomb – a Gospel Conflict?

Descriptions in the Gospels of angelic encounters at the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth seem to vary posing a potential conflict. One Gospel describes two angels and two Gospels describe one angel at the empty tomb.

Statements of those witnessing the same event are expected to vary and, as long as they are consistent on key information, it is a hallmark of truthful authenticity and credibility. If two statements vary too much or are very nearly or exactly the same, it is a strong indication of deception.

Witness statements must be evaluated based on their own merit using longstanding investigative principals to decipher credible and truthful statements from deceptive ones. Using of a form of literary analysis and comparing other statements is part of the investigative process.

Investigations must factor in any hard evidence, such as the empty tomb and abandoned burial cloths, and key facts, information, perspective, sequence of events, etc. To determine what happened, the scene must be recreated.

All three Gospels’ descriptions vary, yet they are all tightly consistent on the main details – there was an angelic presence; the tomb was empty; the body of Jesus was gone; and the angelic pronouncement that Jesus is alive, just as he had predicted.

Setting the scene, earlier that afternoon Jesus of Nazareth had been executed by crucifixion requiring a hasty burial before Jewish Sabbath Law restricted various activities. By Jewish day-reckoning, the Sabbath began at sunset that evening.

When Sabbath restrictions were no longer a concern, the chronicles of the Resurrection of Jesus begins. The three synoptic Gospels – Matthew, Mark and Luke – join the story line at different points.

Mark’s account establishes the earliest timeline identifying Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome purchasing burial spices as soon as the Sabbath ended.^[1] The women worried about how they would move the stone from the entrance clearly indicating they were not aware the tomb was sealed and guarded.

Matthew’s account begins at the tomb as sunrise approached Sunday morning. The joint-contingent of armed koustodia, established by the command of Pilate at the behest of the Jewish council, were on-duty guarding the sealed tomb to prevent the theft of the body. Arriving at the tomb were the two Marys, Salome, Joanna and other unnamed women where they encountered the koustodia.^[2]

Suddenly a great earthquake struck when the women witnessed an angel rolling away the stone from the entrance to the tomb. Matthew described the angel:

^{MT 28:2-3}“And behold, there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat on it. His countenance was like lightning, and his clothing as white as snow.” _(NKJV)

At this point Mark and Luke join the story line at the tomb with each describing, differently though consistently, the physical attire of the angels:

^{MK 16:5} And entering the tomb, they saw a young man clothed in a long white robe sitting on the right side…” _(NKJV)

^{LK 24:4} “… behold, two men stood by them in shining garments.”_(NKJV)

Luke, written after Matthew and Mark, unambiguously says there were two angels. Consistently, Luke quotes Cleopas’ witness account that he unwittingly gave to the resurrected Jesus. Cleopas said, “they [women] came back and told us that they had indeed seen a vision of angels who said that he was alive.” The statement is plural – more than one person witnessed the empty tomb and there was more than one angel later corroborated by John’s account.^[3]

Matthew and Mark only refer to one angel with unnecessary and unexpected information, yet personifying and specific detail that adds authentic realism. Such descriptive details are typically absent from a deceptive statement.

After an angel rolled away the large stone, Matthew reports he did a curious and unusual thing – he sat on it. Not standing or hovering in the air like the stereotypical image of an angel. In dazzling array there he sat, perhaps with his legs draped over the side of the stone.

Mark describes an angel inside the tomb specifically on the right side also sitting, not standing – details typically absent from a deceptive statement. Logically, this angel cannot be the same one sitting outside on the rolled-away stone.

Body language of the angles indicates they were waiting, relaxed and inviting in demeanor. According to Matthew, the angel who was sitting on the stone at the tomb’s entrance spoke to the women inviting them to go inside:

^{MT 28:5-6} “”Do not be afraid; for I know that you are looking for Jesus who has been crucified. He is not here, for He has risen, just as He said. Come, see the place where He was lying.”_(NASB)

At the angel’s invitation, at least some of the women entered the tomb. While inside, Mark describes another angel who spoke to the women, his message similar to Matthew:

^{MK 16:5-6} “Entering the tomb, they saw a young man sitting at the right, wearing a white robe; and they were amazed. And he said to them, “Do not be amazed; you are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who has been crucified. He has risen; He is not here; behold, here is the place where they laid Him.’””_(NASB)

Pointed out to the very same witnesses – the two Marys, Salome and perhaps other unnamed women – was the same spot where the dead body of Jesus had lain as they watched Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus preparing it for burial.^[4] Had the angel’s statement been untrue about the crucified body of Jesus, the women would be expected to refute it… they didn’t.

Corroborating information is provided by the eyewitness Gospel of John’s account. His personal knowledge begins where he and Peter were mourning when terrified women burst into the room and Mary Magdalene excitedly announced the empty tomb.^[5] They raced to see it for themselves followed by Mary Magdalene.^[6]

Marveling at finding the tomb empty with only the burial cloths used to wrap the body, John and Peter decided to go home leaving Mary behind. Standing outside the tomb crying, Mary stooped and looked back inside where she saw two angels who spoke to her:

^{JN 20:12-13} “And she saw two angels in white sitting, one at the head and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain. Then they said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping?” She said to them, “Because they have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid Him.”_(NKJV)

John’s source, Mary Magdalene, consistently described two angels dressed in white sitting on each end of the stone slab.^[7] Mary Magdalene’s reaction, or lack of one, to the supernatural beings indicates familiarity with them.

Mary had a previous engagement with angels earlier that morning when all the terrified women did not speak to the angels and ran. This time she is not alarmed and she spoke with the angels.

One other detail, one not called out by the Gospels, is a Jewish legal fact that, if not in met, could diminish the credibility of the Resurrection event. God’s Law required two witnesses to corroborate the same point of evidence to establish a fact. Two angels as witnesses to the Resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth met that requirement.^[8]

Are the Gospels accounts in conflict in their accounts of angels who witnessed the Resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth?

Updated February 18, 2024.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

REFERENCES:

[1] Mark 16.
[2] Luke 24.
[3] Luke 24:34. NRSV. Kirby, Peter. “Gospel of Luke.” EarlyChristianWritings.com. 2019. <http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/luke.html> “The Book of Luke.” . Quartz Hill School of Theology. n.d. <http://www.theology.edu/biblesurvey/luke.htm> Tzaferis, Vassilios. Bible Archaeology Society. “Crucifixion – the Archaelogical Evidence.” n.d. <https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/crucifixion/a-tomb-in-jerusalem-reveals-the-history-of-crucifixion-and-roman-crucifixion-methods>
[4] Matthew 27; Mark 15; Luke 23. Edersheim, Alfred. The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah.1883. Book 5, Chapter XV. pp 1419-1420. <http://www.ntslibrary.com/PDF%20Books/The%20Life%20and%20Times%20of%20Jesus%20the%20Messiah.pdf> “Centuries later, archaeologists opened the tomb of Jesus.” News24hours. photo. 2016. <https://news24hours.in/2016/10/31/centuries-later-archaeologists-opened-the-tomb-of-jesus-christ>
[5] John 20.
[6] Luke 24; John 20.
[7] Shanks, Hershel. “Crucifixion Bone Fragment, 21 CE” The Center for Online Judaic Studies. 2004. <http://cojs.org/crucifixion_bone_fragment-_21_ce> Romey, Kristin. “Unsealing of Christ’s Reputed Tomb Turns Up New Revelations.” National Geographic. 2016. <https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/10/jesus-christ-tomb-burial-church-holy-sepulchre>
[8] Deuteronomy 17:6, 19:15; Numbers 35:30. Soncino Babylonian Talmud.Sanhedrin. 9a; 30a; 56a, footnote #1. <https://israelect.com/Come-and-Hear/sanhedrin/index.html> Resnicoff, Steven H. “Criminal Confessions in Jewish Law .“ Project Genesis. 2007. <https://web.archive.org/web/20160122222638/http://www.torah.org/features/secondlook/criminal.html>