INERRANCY AND DOCTRINAL PURITY

How did the Christian Bible come to be?

It’s complicated. I’m sure I don’t understand it.

I imagine men wrote many books over hundreds, even thousands, of years. The best of these books were collected by other men interested in truth, ethics, and the nature of God.

These men were, I suppose, prominent in law, medicine, politics, philosophy, and religion. They selected books that presented a consistent view of their ideas about Jesus and what he had done. They prayed that God would guide them as they organized their chosen books into a collection, now called the Bible.

We know they believed God answered their prayers, because they included in the Bible this passage: all Scripture is God-breathed and useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness….

By AD 400 Jerome produced a definitive Latin edition of the Bible called the Vulgate, which effectively set the Canon of the New Testament. The Canon of the Old Testament wasn’t fully agreed on until after the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century.

One notable change: the Book of Sirach (which Jesus quoted) was dropped to make the Protestant Old Testament match the then current Judaic Canon.

In the 13th century, Stephen Langton divided the Bible into chapters. In the 16th century, French printer, Robert Estienne, divided it into verses.

Today, the shepherds of Christianity spend years studying the books of the Bible, their histories and pedigrees. Some believe God has called them to shepherd the faithful by keeping church doctrine consistent with the “inerrant” Scripture of the Bible.

In the two thousand years since the crucifixion of Jesus, the pursuit of inerrancy has led — by some accounts — to the establishment of over forty-thousand Christian denominations.

It seems reasonable to ask: if Scripture is inerrant and plainly written, why so many denominations? Are the large numbers the result of a godly pursuit of “inerrancy” or from other causes? The extraordinary number of denominations — many formed after the Protestant Reformation of 1517 — leads me to think that the natural tendencies of young pastors, chafing under the authority of those with whom they disagree, may play a role.

These leaders seem to share the conviction that God chose them to fight the good fight against false doctrine. They defend their understanding of God’s inerrant word against all comers. Sometimes, it seems to me, they end up increasing their influence but leave weakened churches and damaged denominations in their wake.

I think I know why these men don’t fight and win their battles within the denominations they were called to serve. I imagine it doesn’t occur to them, because they see themselves as protectors of congregants who could be eternally harmed by contact with heretics.

And, in truth, it’s stressful to submit to church authorities with whom they disagree, especially in matters of faith. Some can’t deal with it. The pressure is too great. They find themselves in an uncomfortable cognitive-dissonance between the truth of Scripture as God has revealed it to them and another compelling biblical principle: submission to the authorities established by God Himself.

It’s a psychological double-bind of excruciating pain for those who take seriously their vows to serve Christ. It takes a lot of prayer and the support of the saints to determine God’s will and muster the strength to endure it. These leaders sometimes choose to break away to form new churches — new denominations — where they can better manage their message. And in the end, if the history of the Church is a guide, God is faithful to justify the conscientious men who belong to Him and heal their divides.

Where does this idea about “inerrancy” of Scripture come from, since the Bible was written by men, and gently hides mankind’s many prejudices and ignorant ideas about history and science? If Scripture is inerrant — and I believe it is — its truth must come from God alone. God makes Scripture true, even when human logic, common sense and evidence seem to speak otherwise.

Sometimes God condescends to endow truth to Scripture as a concession to our hard hearts and inabilities to love each other the way we should. Jesus said as much when he replied to the famous question Pharisees asked about an apparent contradiction in the Bible concerning divorce, recorded in Mathew 19. Moses permitted divorce, contrary to God’s original plan, Jesus said, because people’s hearts were hard.  

The Bible plainly says we live in a time when the law of God is written on our hearts. The law is no longer written on stone, unless it is our hearts that are made of stone. We know in our hearts — where the law lives — we should love more.

Loving more means, it seems to me, judging less for one thing.  We should pray we can love more our spouses, our sisters and brothers, mothers and fathers, and especially our neighbors, both gay and straight.

Yes, making safe spaces for gay folks to worship Jesus and to grow in holiness within our churches is a controversial subject these days. But it seems to me that those of us who are straight share with our gay brothers and sisters a life-long desire for sexual sin. That we can better hide our sinful desires gives us no advantages before Christ, our redeemer, because he sees into our hearts and knows we are, by nature, sinful and in rebellion against God — pretty much all the time.

This much we know. Love pleases God more than hate. We should know that tolerance and inclusion please God more than intolerance and exclusion, because the Bible says, God is love.

But those of us who belong to Christ Jesus know more. If we honestly face our past and examine our hearts, we know that God loved us first, before we even knew who He was, while we still numbered ourselves — many of us — among the most ungodly on the earth.

jesus resurrection flying-doveShouldn’t we love those who are like what we used to be?

Of course, we should. Yes, it’s difficult, because most of us want to forget our pasts and move on. Will we really move on without first rescuing our fallen friends? Some can be found within our churches. Will we abandon them on a battlefield of doctrinal purity?

With God’s help, I know we won’t.

Billy Lee                                                                                                              

THE CHURCH AND THE GAY PEOPLE

During a recent doctor visit I noticed that the Physician Assistant taking my blood pressure wore an Archie Watch, purple wristband, and Batman necklace. “You like cartoons?” I asked. 

“I love comics,” he said, “don’t you?”


archie comic 3


We bantered about comic book characters, then I asked about his wristband. Oh, it’s a ”pride” bracelet, he gushed.

His eyes glittered.

I said, “What are you proud of?” 

He bowed his head. “It’s a gay pride bracelet!” 

He pulled the blood pressure cuff and stepped back. He twinkled like a playful puppy.


My mind glazed as I remembered the “controversy” at our church. The national denomination voted to allow women and gays to serve as ministers and marry same-sex couples.

Local leaders threw a fit. They said things like: The Bible says…  We cannot in good conscience… God will judge… remember Sodom and Gomorrah… etc. etc.

They arranged meetings, made phone calls, fired-off texts & e-mails, and scrambled into Chevy Suburbans to meet like-minded others to plan and discuss strategies.

What were their options? What to try next? How would they shape the congregation to challenge heresy?

At a meeting I suggested that breaking with the denomination seemed like divorce, at least to me. I asked, “What about unity? Doesn’t commitment count for anything?”

It didn’t. Not when commitment countered God’s Word.  

Every question, each objection, all challenges met articulate response. The Pastor and Elders were ready, prepared, determined. They would do God’s Will come Hell or high water. 


The PA turned to go. I blinked my eyes. “Say”, I called after him. “…ask a question? No need to answer.”

He turned. “It’s ok.”

I cleared my throat. “Well… religions…all religions… are conservative about sex, right?” I stammered. “You know… it’s true… Christian churches especially. They don’t believe in sex until married.” I shrugged. “It won’t change anytime soon.”

“Look!” he interrupted. “I don’t care about religion. I have beliefs. What Christians think, I don’t give a shit.”

“Oh”, I said.

I gathered thoughts and pushed on. “Well, hear me out, OK? A second of your time, that’s all. I want to ask… what can Christians do to make it better for gay people?”  I tried a sweet smile. “What can we do to show love?” 


Kinkade church


“Easy,” he said.  “Stop judging.”

Eyes darkened.

“I don’t like it. It makes me feel bad.”

He took a quick breath.

“Marry us. In churches… really.” His eyes settled, then he paused. He raised his hands. “Don’t get me wrong. Right now, I don’t want marriage.” He blushed and looked away. A vein in his neck throbbed.

He showed his teeth. “I have issues with commitment, OK?”

I waited for more, but he stopped. He turned to leave, then clenched his fists and twirled. Eyes wet, he seemed to cry. Maybe… I wasn’t sure.

“Why can’t anyone marry the ones they love?”  Rising on his toes, he glared, pirouetted, and walked away.

Billy Lee

HOREMHEB, EXODUS PHARAOH?

After looking into the history that archaeologists think they know of the time around Horemheb, it seems to me that a compelling narrative of the Exodus and Horemheb can be constructed consistent with what is known from archaeology and written historical records including (and especially) the Bible, since it is the one and only account of the Exodus that exists today, I’m told.


Pharaoh Horemheb with Amun-Ra, the king of the gods, standing beside him.

So here is my version of events.

Horemheb in hieroglyphs

 The Son of Ra, Amun, Loves Horemheb

After comparing the dates Egyptologists have assigned to the reigns of the pharaohs with the date of Moses’s birth worked out by rabbinical scholars, it seems to me that Horemheb could have been the Exodus pharaoh.

But in a search of the Internet and other sources, I found that most historians don’t believe the Exodus occurred, and among other researchers, few say the Exodus pharaoh was Horemheb. Some claim he was Ramesses II; some, Thutmosis III; others speculate about other pharaohs; but very few have said, as far as I can tell, that he was Horemheb.

According to most Egyptologists, Horemheb ruled from 1319 to 1292 BCE. Some Rabbis claim that Moses was born in 1391 and, according to the Bible record, confronted Pharaoh eighty years later in 1311 — eight years after Horemheb took power.


Seder Olam 2
Seder Olam (sequence of world events -lit. World Order

Rabbinic Judaism uses the Seder Olam (World Order) from the 2nd century CE to date Biblical events. According to the Seder Olam, 832 BCE is the date Solomon started construction of the first temple.  1311 BCE is the date of the Exodus.

The interval agrees closely with the 480-year period described in   I Kings, 6:1.  More importantly, the date 1311 BCE places Moses and the Exodus squarely in the reign of Horemheb if the chronology of modern Egyptologists is accepted.

To be fair, a few fundamentalist millennial Christian sources place the start of temple construction at 1000 BCE but this date strains credulity, because it was established to fit the theory of millennialism where history is divided into seven one-thousand year “days.”  History is almost never as precise or the calendar that clean, even when written by God.

Historians have established that, before he was pharaoh, Horemheb commanded the Egyptian army under Pharaohs Tutankhamun and Ay.  After he became pharaoh and lost the army (as described in the Exodus story of the Bible; see a summary below), an angry Horemheb enlisted his allies, the polytheistic priests and their cults, to erase the history of the “monotheist” former pharaoh, Akhenaten, his allies, and family members.

One of those family members was Akhenaten’s adopted cousin, Moses (see next section, The Exodus Story), who Horemheb blamed for bringing Egypt to ruin.

Historians agree that during his reign Horemheb intensified a damnatio memoriae (campaign to strike from memory) against the former pharaoh, Akhenaten. The campaign was initiated by Akhenaten’s son, Tutankhamun, and the pharaohs that followed — Smenkhkare, Neferneferuaten and Ay.

These pharaohs during the years 1334-1319 BCE reversed many — but not all — of Akhenaten’s reforms, because they thought the reforms created uncertainty and turmoil over the status of the priesthood and the gods, which to them seemed essential to the economy and stability of Egypt.

But Horemheb took the reversal to another level — restoring order by turning back all of Akhenaten’s reforms and re-establishing traditional polytheism throughout the whole of Egypt.


ipuwer papyrus
Ipuwer Papyrus

The surviving copy of the Ipuwer Papyrus — housed in the Netherlands at the Dutch National Museum of Antiquities and dating to the 19th dynasty (13th century BCE) — may actually describe the conditions in Egypt during the Amarna/post-Amarna period before and after Horemheb took power. It may have been during this period that the Hebrews, led by Moses, lobbied Horemheb to let them leave Egypt for their ancestral lands in Canaan.

The Exodus Story

Pharaoh Thutmose IV died around 1390 BCE leaving a very young son, Amenhotep III, to become pharaoh. To fashion the story to fit the Bible narrative, that same year a teenage daughter of Thutmose IV, possibly Princess Tiaa, found Moses floating in a basket on the Nile River. She brought Moses into the palace to be a playmate for her brother, the new pharaoh.


Pharaoh's Daughter Finds Moses Exodus 2:3-6
Pharaoh’s daughter, Princess Tiaa, discovers Moses

The sister of the deceased Thutmose IV located Moses’s mother, Jochebed, and brought her into the palace to wet-nurse Moses. Soon after, Princess Tiaa adopted Moses and raised him as her son.

Through this arrangement Tiaa’s much younger brother, the new Pharaoh Amenhotep III, became Moses’s uncle, though they were about the same age. Perhaps the two grew up together and were close — more like brothers than uncle/nephew.

The influence of religion on the Thutmose family by Moses’s mother — a monotheistic Jewish woman — might have been considerable. No one can know for sure, but what followed — the eventual embrace of monotheism by Amenhotep III’s son, Amenhotep IV (who later changed his name to Akhenaten) — might be understood as having evolved under her influence.

Jochebed may have continued to live within the pharaoh’s household for many years assisting Princess Tiaa to raise her own son and through him influencing Tiaa’s grandson, Akhenaten, who would become the famous founder of Egyptian monotheism. Jochabed’s influence could make sense out of the history that followed.

According to this version of events, when Moses was forty years old, in 1351 BCE, Amenhotep III died. Amenhotep IV (his son and young cousin to Moses) became pharaoh. 

Moses fled Egypt, according to the Bible to avoid trial for killing an overseer. But, because he was the adopted son of the prior pharaoh’s older sister, Moses may have worried that his cousin, Amenhotep IV, (or more likely, his aides) considered him a rival for power.

A few years later, Amenhotep IV changed his name to Akhenaten to reflect his revolutionary belief in a single creator god he called Aten, the Sun Orb. He then suppressed the existing polytheistic cults.

Akhenaten built a new city, Amarna, to honor Aten. This move toward a form of monotheism turned Egyptian society upside down and angered the priests who depended on polytheism for their economic well-being.


akhenaten profile
Pharaoh Akhenaten — formerly Amenhotep IV

In 1335 BCE Akhenaten died, and Moses at age 56 returned to Egypt. He found Egypt in chaos and rebellion due to outrage by the priests and their acolytes over the move away from polytheism.

During the next 15 years Moses lived among the Hebrews and by age 70 had become their de-facto leader. Horemheb meanwhile became pharaoh.

By age 80 Moses was challenging Horemheb to let the Hebrews leave Egypt.  Eventually, Horemheb did — issuing a directive, according to the Bible, that the general population provide the Hebrews with gold and silver when they left.

Horemheb’s plan may have been to trap Moses and the Hebrews against the marshes in the Sea of Reeds and annihilate them to recover their newly acquired wealth to re-stock the depleted Egyptian treasury.

But during the Exodus of 1311 BCE an unexpected inundation (the famous Red Sea flood in the Bible account) cost Horemheb his army and his plans to destroy the fleeing Hebrews. The Hebrews escaped, so Horemheb, encouraged by the priests, turned his fury against the Amarna cults and ramped up the ongoing damnatio memoriae started by Tutankhamun against his father, the former Pharaoh Akhenaten, and his allies.

I should mention that although the Egyptians closely watched, recorded, and forecast the yearly inundations of the Nile, unexpected floods sometimes did occur in the Delta region through which the Exodus may have taken place.


Ramesses II
Pharaoh Ramesses II

When Horemheb died leaving no heir, the Ramesses family seized power. Ramesses I, Seti I and Ramesses II spent the next forty years continuing the damnatio by finishing the demolition of the town of Amarna and its temples, destroying steles, and grinding down glyphs and cartouches that referred to anyone associated with the heretical Amarna one-god movement.

They also sent armies into Canaan to hunt down Moses and the Hebrews in the territory that both Moses and Joseph — who died 59 years before Moses’s birth — had claimed was the eternal homeland given to the Hebrews by God.


[Joseph’s bio story is told in Genesis chapters 37-50. Billy Lee claims it’s most interesting passage from world literature he’s read. THE EDITORS]


Unknown to the pharaohs, Moses and the Hebrews decided to stay away from Canaan. Instead, according to the Bible, they found a source of water and hid themselves in the vast Sinai wasteland where they believed their pursuers were less likely to look.

The pharaohs sent at least three armies into Canaan to hunt them down. Unable to find Moses, they marched north to search in Syria where the Hittites ambushed them.

As a result, the Egyptians conducted a number of military campaigns against the Hittites. The most reliably verified and documented of the conflicts occurred in 1274 BCE, led by Pharaoh Ramesses II. This war financially exhausted and militarily weakened both sides.

Forty years after the Exodus (and just three years after the Ramesses II incursion into Syria) in 1271 BCE, Moses died. Egypt had by then already withdrawn from Syria and Canaan. The time would never be more right.

According to the Bible, Joshua (Moses’s successor) walked the Hebrews out of their Sinai desert hiding place and entered the land of Canaan.


Ramesses Battle of Kadesh
Battle of Kadesh

Twelve years later in 1259 BCE — sixteen years after the end of hostilities between the Syrian Hittites and Egypt and fifty-two years after the Exodus — Egypt signed the famous peace treaty of Kadesh with the Hittites. The peace treaty — concluded between Egyptian Pharaoh Ramesses II and the Hittite King Hattusili III — is the oldest surviving treaty in existence.

It diminished the most dangerous existential threat to the new Israel by making less likely Egypt’s return to wage war either in Syria or Canaan. Egypt desired a lasting peace in order to rebuild its society and military and to restore its wealth.

The desire for peace didn’t last. By 1208 BCE (fifty years later), Egypt was aware that the hated Hebrews had returned to Canaan where they were building fortified towns and cities.

Ramesses’ son, the aging Merenptah, decided to finish his family’s vendetta and go into Canaan to do battle with the fledgling Israel. According to the “Merneptah Stele” (found by Flinders Petrie and housed in the Cairo Museum), he “destroyed Israel’s seed” such that “they were no more.”

History and the Bible agree that Merenptah exaggerated his assessment.


Merneptah Stele
On this stele Merneptah claims that he destroyed Israel. 

It is interesting to note that Merneptah’s inscriptions describing Israel’s destruction were carved on the back of a stelae that once belonged to Amenhotep III, Moses’ “uncle” and childhood companion. Merenptah simply turned it around and used it as his own.

It is fascinating (perhaps macabre) to recall — in light of the Bible account of the Passover and the killing of the first-born by the Angel of Death — that tomb examiners found the fetus of Horemheb’s son and heir-apparent inside his wife’s mummified body. Horemheb had no heir, and the Ramesses’ family was able to take power.

No records of Moses or the Exodus itself, in hieroglyphs or Egyptian script, have been found.

Billy Lee

 

Egypt King's List 1

Egypt King's List 2

Egypt King's List 3