I have been with RVL (that's what everyone calls him) at that spot and heard that exact lesson. I appreciate your research. My thought is not to go into a defense of RVL but to note how this type of analysis is common in evangelicalism. I refer to the desire on the part of preachers, teachers and speakers to help the text. It's not enough that Jesus fed 5,000 men, which is what the gospels say. It has to be pointed out that who knows how many women and children were there (at least one boy). With one wife per man and two kids per family (just because) it was clearly the feeding of the 20,000. It's not enough that Jesus talked to the Samaritan woman at the well in John 4, she has described as an adulterous, or a vixen or even worse. It's not enough that Jesus announces the formation of the church, it has to be done right in front of a pagan temple because that makes it a real announcement.
Well this is super discouraging. I had already been angry at being lied to my whole life by pastors and popular books, and was trying to follow scholars. I liked Van Der Laan (and the spinoff Bema podcast--Marty Solomon directly credits Ray, and tells this story), I liked Heiser too. They both have actual degrees in their subjects I thought. I can't run out and get academic access or degrees myself at this point, or dig into EVERY topic as deep as you just did. (I dig into some of them myself, as best I can, and find plenty of holes. ) I have 20 study Bibles and tons of commentaries that disagree with each other, and make claims I have already debunked. Sigh.
I DO appreciate you showing the trail, and in your other article about these historical urban legends (the one about anointing lambs feet with oil in the Chosen, which was also very discouraging. I also like the show, but have spotted other ridiculous stuff, like the whole mega-church event Sermon on the Mount vibe, including fancy clothes, a stage, and popping out of a "green room" backstage area.
Is there anything for the serious layman to do? I have some Hebrew and less Greek, and no university access!😪
I don't know if you saw but I actually did a Bema article too.
I think the thing I want to emphasize is that a lot of this stuff isn't lying. It's just amateurism. It's not knowing how to handle a historical source (ie, "if Herodatus says one woman had sex with a goat for Pan in Egypt, that means everywhere in the Roman Empire centuries later everyone was having sex with goats for Pan."). It's not morally wrong to not know something.
I think the only real solution is to read as much as you can and not hang your hat on any one source. The more you learn the more you'r able to understand the shape of historical work, and what's plausible. I'm currently working on an article about "how to develop a historical sense of smell" -- ie., figure out what sounds right and what doesn't.
Interesting. I wonder, what's the validity of temple prostitution at the temple in ephesus or Corinth? It seems like it's a lot of here-say in history about how bad things actually were. I've been pretty steeped in 1st and 2nd Timothy due to trying to understand the cultural significance of the false teaching Paul* seems to be speaking about.
Even without checking, my first thought is that the main temple at Ephesus was to Artemis, one of whose defining characteristics is virginity, so prostitution in her name seems improbable.
I feel like the Christian show writers are falling into a lazy trap, namely mapping Hades onto Hell and therefore assuming that deities associated with Hades/the realm of the dead are evil deities. Putting aside the point that people generally do not regard themselves as worshipping evil deities, this doesn't fit well with the myths. The myth of Persephone is complex, but it surely doesn't present her as a type of Satan.
The idea that a cave understood to be linked with the realm of the dead is the Hellgate from _Buffy the Vampire Slayer_ is one the show writers bring to the material. It doesn't connect at all to what I know about the actual religion being discussed. (Respect for others' religions is, of course, not one of their concerns.)
I have found the Faithlife study Bible from Logos has excellent and scholarly sources from academia for those who are interested in backstories and history.
If the disciples knew their Old Testament, they knew the significance of Jesus words at Caesarea Philippi. Especially in the light of a divine council worldview.
A dissertation by Judd Burton further illuminates this point:
"Even the Jews seem to provide their own connections with the pre-existing
tradition of Pan at Banias. Azazel, the most criminal of the Watchers who landed on Mount Hermon in The Book of Enoch, was related to the goat in form. He later appears in the Levitcal laws as the scapegoat. The demons of Jewish lore also bear resemblance, if only in demonized form, to the lusty and uncontrollable Pan. The seirim and the shedim"(demons in old testament)" were satyr-like and thus also goat-like. The ubiquitous presence of Pan at the site and a proximity to Mount Hermon would not have gone unnoticed by a Jewish population familiar with apocalyptic currents within their own religion."
I wouldn’t want to put all my chips on the Watchers being a well known legend throughout the ancient world that the disciples would know. That said, Heiser’s version of the argument (the mountain has legendary associations with fallen angels) is the strongest. I don’t think Matthew and Mark pick up the intertext because they don’t mention the mountain.
I think it was by Pan that the devil got his horns in church tradition.
I wouldn't expect a 'clear' dialogue presented in the gospels concerning these things but the breadcrumbs are certainly there. It is exiting and Biblical Theology is illuminated by these things.
I think Jesus took the disciples there to pick a fight with the powers and principalities and put the powers of darkness on notice. I also believe that Mt. Hermon was where the transfiguration occured.
It has to do with the cosmic geography considerations in the Old Testament.
Matthew writes that Jesus and the disciples were in the 'region of Caesarea..', Mark says 'the towns of Caesarea...'
And of interest ( don't know how important), it was only after going there that He began to tell the disciples what would transpire in Jerusalem in the coming days. This is interesting to me.
Yeah, you can speculate however you want about which mountain this may have been at which place or which village. It’s just not in any early source and it’s not in the New Testament.
To establish foundation we need to understand that when the New Testament writers referred to "the scriptures" they were referring to their scriptures, i.e, the Old Testament.
Also, the places under discussion are in the region of Bashan- the place of the serpent in Ugarit and Canaanite languages.
As a side note , it's very interesting that the road that the Romans took while on their way to finish off the Jews at Masada is called 'the path of the serpent'. Even to this day.
Sorry, I mean from the text - it is speculation that Mark intended us to think they were specifically at the Paneas.
As far as whether we're supposed to hear a Hermon reference, I think what makes this read a little tough and more from the grounds of "implied interpretation" to "speculation" is that name isn't used when that's what people familiar with the Watchers would know. Mark is also generally pretty spare about references to that story. So is Matthew. The closest thing I can think of is the "in the days of Noah" idea in Matthew.
Do you think that because Mark didn't record the dialogue of 'the gates of hell will not prevail against it", that the premise is invalid, or that they were at a different place that what others have recorded?
It depends what you mean by "invalid." So now we may be getting into some literary critical reads.
I think maximalist literary interpretation (looking at the array of mythologies and texts that can be brought to bear on a source) is a valid form of reader response theory. So in the world of constructing an ideal reader and what they might know, we might say that an ideal reader of Mark is generally informed of a wide range of mythologies and is hearing a range of literary echoes from a collection of Hebrew sources.
The question is, is such an ideal reader constructed by the text of Mark (or for that matter Matthew) itself, or are there indications an author behind the text is intending this to be an allusion. And in that case, because there are comparatively very few literary echoes in either case (the name of the mountain isn't dropped, the name of the shrine isn't dropped, the gates of Hades are juxtaposed against the church as a community founded by the Christ only, the language of Hades is quite spare in Matthew and doesn't appear at all in Mark) then I think that whether Matthew intends us to hear a battle between Jesus and his angels against fallen angels is significantly more speculative. Especially because there's competing traditions in Jewish lit about what demons are and where they come from, and we don't know if there's one that Matthew is particularly attached to.
A lot can be answered on their expectation of what the Messiah would do when He comes and that comes from the worldview they held concerning Scriptures.
Cesarea Phillipi has deep roots in the Old Testament with Mt. Hermon and Bashan and in other books that informed the worldview of those who penned the New Testament. You can see it in what they wrote.
It was Mt. Hermon as the location of the incident of Genesis 6 which Jude references the 'angels that sinned'.
This all happened in the very same location that King Og (a giant) was finally defeated.
As I said I think the stronger case for rhe Paneas having underworld hints is the Second Temple literature. But this is not clearly being used as an intertext in Mark or Matthew AT ALL. There are no references to Hernon, Paneas, fallen angels, nothing. They’re just near CaesPhil.
In Matthews account you can follow the 'possible' direction of movement from CaesPhil to Galilee to Capernaum noticing the movement to the south. This is all after the Transfiguration........but Mt Tabor is to the west of Capernaum......
I have been with RVL (that's what everyone calls him) at that spot and heard that exact lesson. I appreciate your research. My thought is not to go into a defense of RVL but to note how this type of analysis is common in evangelicalism. I refer to the desire on the part of preachers, teachers and speakers to help the text. It's not enough that Jesus fed 5,000 men, which is what the gospels say. It has to be pointed out that who knows how many women and children were there (at least one boy). With one wife per man and two kids per family (just because) it was clearly the feeding of the 20,000. It's not enough that Jesus talked to the Samaritan woman at the well in John 4, she has described as an adulterous, or a vixen or even worse. It's not enough that Jesus announces the formation of the church, it has to be done right in front of a pagan temple because that makes it a real announcement.
"Help the text" is a brilliant way to put it.
Well this is super discouraging. I had already been angry at being lied to my whole life by pastors and popular books, and was trying to follow scholars. I liked Van Der Laan (and the spinoff Bema podcast--Marty Solomon directly credits Ray, and tells this story), I liked Heiser too. They both have actual degrees in their subjects I thought. I can't run out and get academic access or degrees myself at this point, or dig into EVERY topic as deep as you just did. (I dig into some of them myself, as best I can, and find plenty of holes. ) I have 20 study Bibles and tons of commentaries that disagree with each other, and make claims I have already debunked. Sigh.
I DO appreciate you showing the trail, and in your other article about these historical urban legends (the one about anointing lambs feet with oil in the Chosen, which was also very discouraging. I also like the show, but have spotted other ridiculous stuff, like the whole mega-church event Sermon on the Mount vibe, including fancy clothes, a stage, and popping out of a "green room" backstage area.
Is there anything for the serious layman to do? I have some Hebrew and less Greek, and no university access!😪
https://laurarbnsn.substack.com/p/the-bema-podcast-a-friendly-critical
I don't know if you saw but I actually did a Bema article too.
I think the thing I want to emphasize is that a lot of this stuff isn't lying. It's just amateurism. It's not knowing how to handle a historical source (ie, "if Herodatus says one woman had sex with a goat for Pan in Egypt, that means everywhere in the Roman Empire centuries later everyone was having sex with goats for Pan."). It's not morally wrong to not know something.
I think the only real solution is to read as much as you can and not hang your hat on any one source. The more you learn the more you'r able to understand the shape of historical work, and what's plausible. I'm currently working on an article about "how to develop a historical sense of smell" -- ie., figure out what sounds right and what doesn't.
Wow. Thanks so much for doing this thorough critical review for our benefit. It is greatly appreciated.
Interesting. I wonder, what's the validity of temple prostitution at the temple in ephesus or Corinth? It seems like it's a lot of here-say in history about how bad things actually were. I've been pretty steeped in 1st and 2nd Timothy due to trying to understand the cultural significance of the false teaching Paul* seems to be speaking about.
There a good scholarly book out on Artemis...Nobody's Mother.
Even without checking, my first thought is that the main temple at Ephesus was to Artemis, one of whose defining characteristics is virginity, so prostitution in her name seems improbable.
I feel like the Christian show writers are falling into a lazy trap, namely mapping Hades onto Hell and therefore assuming that deities associated with Hades/the realm of the dead are evil deities. Putting aside the point that people generally do not regard themselves as worshipping evil deities, this doesn't fit well with the myths. The myth of Persephone is complex, but it surely doesn't present her as a type of Satan.
The idea that a cave understood to be linked with the realm of the dead is the Hellgate from _Buffy the Vampire Slayer_ is one the show writers bring to the material. It doesn't connect at all to what I know about the actual religion being discussed. (Respect for others' religions is, of course, not one of their concerns.)
I have found the Faithlife study Bible from Logos has excellent and scholarly sources from academia for those who are interested in backstories and history.
https://www.logos.com/product/36338/faithlife-study-bible
Just an FYI
If the disciples knew their Old Testament, they knew the significance of Jesus words at Caesarea Philippi. Especially in the light of a divine council worldview.
A dissertation by Judd Burton further illuminates this point:
"Even the Jews seem to provide their own connections with the pre-existing
tradition of Pan at Banias. Azazel, the most criminal of the Watchers who landed on Mount Hermon in The Book of Enoch, was related to the goat in form. He later appears in the Levitcal laws as the scapegoat. The demons of Jewish lore also bear resemblance, if only in demonized form, to the lusty and uncontrollable Pan. The seirim and the shedim"(demons in old testament)" were satyr-like and thus also goat-like. The ubiquitous presence of Pan at the site and a proximity to Mount Hermon would not have gone unnoticed by a Jewish population familiar with apocalyptic currents within their own religion."
I wouldn’t want to put all my chips on the Watchers being a well known legend throughout the ancient world that the disciples would know. That said, Heiser’s version of the argument (the mountain has legendary associations with fallen angels) is the strongest. I don’t think Matthew and Mark pick up the intertext because they don’t mention the mountain.
Thank you for this. I'd heard this account as well.
I think it was by Pan that the devil got his horns in church tradition.
I wouldn't expect a 'clear' dialogue presented in the gospels concerning these things but the breadcrumbs are certainly there. It is exiting and Biblical Theology is illuminated by these things.
I think Jesus took the disciples there to pick a fight with the powers and principalities and put the powers of darkness on notice. I also believe that Mt. Hermon was where the transfiguration occured.
It has to do with the cosmic geography considerations in the Old Testament.
Matthew writes that Jesus and the disciples were in the 'region of Caesarea..', Mark says 'the towns of Caesarea...'
And of interest ( don't know how important), it was only after going there that He began to tell the disciples what would transpire in Jerusalem in the coming days. This is interesting to me.
I appreciate your article.
Yeah, you can speculate however you want about which mountain this may have been at which place or which village. It’s just not in any early source and it’s not in the New Testament.
To establish foundation we need to understand that when the New Testament writers referred to "the scriptures" they were referring to their scriptures, i.e, the Old Testament.
Also, the places under discussion are in the region of Bashan- the place of the serpent in Ugarit and Canaanite languages.
As a side note , it's very interesting that the road that the Romans took while on their way to finish off the Jews at Masada is called 'the path of the serpent'. Even to this day.
What's not in the New Testament? I don't want to misunderstand.
As for speculation, isn't all our understanding speculation until God (the only Omniscient) grants us faith concerning it?
Sorry, I mean from the text - it is speculation that Mark intended us to think they were specifically at the Paneas.
As far as whether we're supposed to hear a Hermon reference, I think what makes this read a little tough and more from the grounds of "implied interpretation" to "speculation" is that name isn't used when that's what people familiar with the Watchers would know. Mark is also generally pretty spare about references to that story. So is Matthew. The closest thing I can think of is the "in the days of Noah" idea in Matthew.
Agreed.
Do you think that because Mark didn't record the dialogue of 'the gates of hell will not prevail against it", that the premise is invalid, or that they were at a different place that what others have recorded?
It depends what you mean by "invalid." So now we may be getting into some literary critical reads.
I think maximalist literary interpretation (looking at the array of mythologies and texts that can be brought to bear on a source) is a valid form of reader response theory. So in the world of constructing an ideal reader and what they might know, we might say that an ideal reader of Mark is generally informed of a wide range of mythologies and is hearing a range of literary echoes from a collection of Hebrew sources.
The question is, is such an ideal reader constructed by the text of Mark (or for that matter Matthew) itself, or are there indications an author behind the text is intending this to be an allusion. And in that case, because there are comparatively very few literary echoes in either case (the name of the mountain isn't dropped, the name of the shrine isn't dropped, the gates of Hades are juxtaposed against the church as a community founded by the Christ only, the language of Hades is quite spare in Matthew and doesn't appear at all in Mark) then I think that whether Matthew intends us to hear a battle between Jesus and his angels against fallen angels is significantly more speculative. Especially because there's competing traditions in Jewish lit about what demons are and where they come from, and we don't know if there's one that Matthew is particularly attached to.
A lot can be answered on their expectation of what the Messiah would do when He comes and that comes from the worldview they held concerning Scriptures.
Cesarea Phillipi has deep roots in the Old Testament with Mt. Hermon and Bashan and in other books that informed the worldview of those who penned the New Testament. You can see it in what they wrote.
It was Mt. Hermon as the location of the incident of Genesis 6 which Jude references the 'angels that sinned'.
This all happened in the very same location that King Og (a giant) was finally defeated.
Well, maybe.
As I said I think the stronger case for rhe Paneas having underworld hints is the Second Temple literature. But this is not clearly being used as an intertext in Mark or Matthew AT ALL. There are no references to Hernon, Paneas, fallen angels, nothing. They’re just near CaesPhil.
Oh, this is cool! I just noticed this:
In Matthews account you can follow the 'possible' direction of movement from CaesPhil to Galilee to Capernaum noticing the movement to the south. This is all after the Transfiguration........but Mt Tabor is to the west of Capernaum......
Interesting, if valid.