T. Ernest Wilson Video

here

Conster – Nation – Ingimar DeRidder

Last year there were hundreds of TV commercials offering products to consumers with the seductive incentive “No payments until next year.”  Well,  guess what?  It’s next year.  Home foreclosures are not only up, fiscal reality has come down like a ton of bricks.  Past due notices,  like gaping fissures in the earth are swallowing borrowers and lenders alike.  Sink holes are opening on the floor of the stock exchange and financial behemoths find themselves  sinking in the tar pits of their own greed.

Satan has always been a predatory lender.  He will gladly give you credit.   He will let you have what you want with “no money down,”  and if you buy today, he will throw in a set of steak knives for free.  Faust was a fool.  The pathetic figure of German legend makes a deal with the devil.  The word “faust” comes from the Latin meaning “lucky.”  America may have run out of luck.  She has been on a credit card binge and now comes the hang-over.  She has maxed out her Master Card and she is about to find out that Hedonism has a hard taskmaster.  Hypocrisy is singing “God Bless America,” while living as if there is no God.  It is a “so called” Christian nation that is writing checks “in faith” when there is no money in the bank.  We sent our children off to study MONEY and get their MBA’s at MIT while the best business advice could be had for free all along.  The Bible says “Better is a little with righteousness, than great revenues without right.”  America was once a great nation.  Now we find a certain consternation.  We need repentance more than rebates and the wish that America will rush out on another spending spree. Like the prodigal that “spent all” we need to say “Father I have sinned.”   Only repentance will make a Debtor Nation a Better Nation.    Only then can we sing without being a hypocrite, “God,  Bless America.”   -id

The Luke Travel Narratives – Gordon Franz

Introduction

Some critical scholars have suggested that the “Luke Travel Narrative” (Luke 9:51-19:47) are not historically and geographically correct. This paper will propose a chronological and historical reconstruction of the last six months of the life of the Lord Jesus Christ based on a harmonization of the “Luke Travel Narratives” and the Gospel of John. If this harmonization / chronology is accepted, the parables and discourses that the Lord Jesus gives during this last six months of His life takes on a new meaning. He uses the surrounding topography, flora and fauna and material culture to illustrate the word-pictures in His discourses and parables.

The Historicity of the “Luke Travel Narrative”

Biblical scholars have long been puzzled by Luke’s travel narrative, or “central section” as it is sometimes called. Luke begins this section by stating that Jesus is traveling toward Jerusalem (9:51, 53; 13:22, 33; 17:11; 18:31; 19:11, 28). However, the Biblical geographer has problems tracing the route because Jesus begins by going through Samaria (9:52), is later found in Bethany (10:38-42), then “between Samaria and Galilee” (17:11) and finally at Jericho (19:11). If He is going to Jerusalem, this is not the most direct way!

Critical scholars have picked up on this erratic itinerary and questioned the accuracy of this section. For example, J. A. Robertson wrote: “There is no portion of the writings of Luke which presents a more forbidding obstacle to our acceptance of the claims of the evangelist to be an accurate and orderly historian than the section of the Third Gospel which is sometimes called ‘the Travel Narrative.’ It is the happy hunting ground of the detractors of the historian. And his defenders have sought to gloss over the difficulties that confront us here by suggesting that the ‘order’ in which Luke declares he has arranged his material is logical rather than chronological” (1919:54-55). C. C. McCown suggests that the geography of the Luke travel Narrative contains omissions, inexactitudes, and positive errors. He states, “… for Luke geography and topography serve merely as literary devices. He is not interested in itineraries as were travelers, both Christian and non-Christians, at a slightly later time … His geographical settings were intended to give life and color to the pictures he was drawing. They are a literary artifice like the pastoral scenes of Hellenistic and Roman poets” (1938:56, see also 1932).

I have a problem squaring these statements of the critical scholars with the opening words of Luke’s gospel. Luke states: “In as much as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, it seems good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed” (1:1-4, all Scripture quotes are from the New King James Version).

The problem can be resolved if a careful examination of the beginning of the Luke Travel Narrative is made. Luke 9:51 says: “ Now it came to pass, when the time had come for Him [the Lord Jesus] to be received up, that He steadfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem …” Professor David Gooding, in his commentary on Luke’s Gospel, puts this verse in proper perspective. He says: “We should at once notice carefully what the goal of the journey is said to be. It is sometimes stated on the basis of 9:51 that our Lord’s goal on this journey was Jerusalem. But this is not so. Our Lord’s journey certainly lay via Jerusalem; but the goal of the journey was what Luke describes as ‘being received up’. The phrase has the same sense as that given by the early Christian hymn quoted by Paul (I Tim. 3:16) which says that Christ ‘ was believed on in the world, received up in glory’. In other words by ‘being received up’ Luke is referring to Christ’s ascension into heaven. That and no less was the goal of the journey” (1987:179). If Dr. Gooding is correct, and I believe he is, then the Lord Jesus could take three of four journeys to Jerusalem and Luke would be perfectly correct in his chronology and geography.

A Proposed Reconstruction

Harmonies of the gospels are not in vogue in scholarly circles today. I believe they are still valid tools, and therefore, I will attempt to harmonize the Luke Travel Narrative with the Gospel of John, chapters 7-12.

The Pilgrimage to Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles via Samaria (Luke 9:51-10:16; Fall AD 29)

The Lord Jesus went secretly up to Jerusalem via Samaria for the Feast of Succoth (Tabernacles) in the Fall of AD 29. [I am assuming an AD 30 crucifixion and resurrection of the Lord Jesus in Jerusalem]. This was the fastest, yet potentially more dangerous route to Jerusalem from Galilee. Josephus describes the route via Samaria as being “for rapid travel, it was essential to take that route, by which Jerusalem may be reached in three days from Galilee” ( Life 269; LCL 1:101). The route was dangerous because of the hatred between the Jews and Samaritans. Josephus records elsewhere: “Hatred also arose between the Samaritans and the Jews for the following reason. It was the custom of the Galileans at the time of a festival to pass through the Samaritan territory on their way to the Holy City. On one occasion, while they were passing through, certain inhabitants of a village called Ginae, which was situated on the border between Samaria and the Great Plain, joined battle with the Galileans and slew a great number of them” ( Antiquities 20:118; LCL 10:63. In Wars 2:232; LCL 2:415, only one Galilean was killed at Gema). The site of Ginae / Gema was known in the Bible as Ein-Gannin (Josh. 19:21) and it situated at modern day Jenin on the edge of the Plain of Esdraelon.

More than likely the Lord Jesus took advantage of the locale to remind His disciples of past Israelite history. As they crossed the Plain of Esdraelon, He pointed westward to the Carmel Range and recounted the encounter between Elijah and the prophets of Baal on Mount Carmel (II Kings 18). After being rejected in the first Samaritan village (Jenin), two disciples, James and John (“the sons of thunder”), recalled the lesson and said, “ Lord, do you want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them, just as Elijah did?” (Luke 9:54). The disciples had heard the lesson, but failed to grasp the true meaning and application for their lives.

A little further on the road, the Lord Jesus instructed His disciples on the cost of discipleship. One disciple volunteered to follow the Lord wherever He went, but requested to first say farewell to his family. The Lord Jesus responded, “ No one, having put his hand to the plow, and looking back, is fit for the Kingdom of God” (9:62). In September, one would notice the Samaritan farmer out plowing his field in order to get it ready for the fall planting.

As they walked further on the road, Jesus noticed only a small number of farmers out in the olive groves harvesting the olives. Jesus made an analogy to a spiritual harvest when He said, “The harvest truly is great, but the laborers are few; therefore pray the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into His harvest” (10:2). The chronology is important at this point. The grain harvest is in May and June and is the one Jesus refers to in John 4:35. But the harvest Jesus had in mind is in the fall, thus the olive harvest. He also reiterates the woes against Chorazin, Bethsaida and Capernaum (10:13-16) to the Galilean pilgrims that were in the caravan heading for Jerusalem. Jesus had given these same woes more than a year earlier in Capernaum (Matt. 11:20-24).

The Feast of Succoth (Tabernacles) in Jerusalem (John 7:14-10:21)

The Lord Jesus arrived in Jerusalem about the middle of the Feast of Succoth. It was during this time He taught in the Temple and had a heated discussion with the Pharisees. He forgave the woman taken in adultery and well as healed a man who was born blind. Lord records nothing of the events that transpired in Jerusalem for the Feast of Succoth.

After the Feast of Succoth in Jerusalem / Bethany (Luke 10:17-11:13, or 12:53)

Jesus, along with His twelve disciples, probably enjoyed the hospitality of Lazarus, Mary and Martha in Bethany while awaiting the return of the seventy disciples that Jesus had sent out to Peraea just prior to Succoth (Luke 10:1). When they did return, they rejoiced that the demons were subject to them. Jesus had to put things in proper perspective and admonished them to not rejoice in the demons being subject to them, but rather, that their names were written in heaven (10:17-20).

The parable of the Good Samaritan (10:23-37) was probably given in the Temple area, maybe even on the “Rabbinic stairs” at the southern entrance of the Temple enclosure. Jesus used the Roman road from Jerusalem to Jericho to illustrate the answer to the lawyer’s question, “Who is my neighbor?” A certain man was going down to Jericho (a 1,000 meter elevation change) and fell among robbers. The rugged terrain of the Wilderness of Judea would be an ideal place for bandits to hide in order to ambush unsuspecting travelers. The priests and Levites would be on this road because they were either going to, or coming from their Temple duties. The rabbinic sources indicate that Jericho was largely inhabited by priests during the Second Temple period.

The “certain village” (10:32) where Mary and Martha resided was Bethany (cf. John 11). The Lord Jesus was praying in a “certain place” when His disciples asked Him to instruct them in prayer (11:1). There is an early church tradition that Jesus instructed His disciples His disciples on the Mount of Olives. Today, the Pater Noster Church preserves this tradition with over 65 tiled panels with the Lord’s Prayer in different languages. It should be pointed out that this instruction is different than the Lord’s Prayer given in the Sermon on the Mount recorded in Matthew 6 more than a year and a half earlier. That may be a reflection of the disciple’s short memory!

The First Peraean Ministry (Luke 11:14, or 12:54 – 13:33, note 13:22)

Professor M. Avi-Yonah describes Peraea, the territory east of the Jordan River, as a “long and comparatively narrow stretch of land, extending from Amathus in the north to Machaerus and the River Arnon in the south. Narrow at its northern and southern ends, it widened in the middle where it bordered with Philadelphia. … The fertility of the Jordan Valley meant that settlements were close to each other and hence the units of administration were fairly small. Peraea faced the district of Jericho and parts of Samaria on the west. … Its importance was that it provided a strip of Jewish territory east of the Jordan which could be regarded as being almost in touch with Jewish Galilee. Consequently Jews who wished to avoid the ‘contamination’ of passing through the country of the Samaritans were able to approach Jerusalem by way of Peraea, crossing opposite Jericho and then going up to Jerusalem …” (1974:1:96-97).

In the first phase of Jesus’ Peraean ministry there are a few chronological and geographical indicators that should be pointed out. Jesus instructs the multitudes regarding the “signs of the times” when He says, “ When you see a cloud rising out of the west, immediately you say, ‘A shower is coming’; and so it is” (12:54). This is a reference to the “former (or early) rains” that begin soon after the Feast of Succoth. Probably at the northern most point of Peraea , Jesus turned around and headed back towards Jerusalem, thus the statement: “And He went through the cities and villages, teaching and journeying toward Jerusalem” (13:22). As this phase of His Peraean ministry drew to a close, some Pharisees warned Jesus, probably opposite Jericho in Peraea, that Herod Antipas wanted to kill Him (13:31). This statement could only have been made in the territory controlled by Herod Antipas, i.e. Galilee or Peraea. Galilee should be ruled out because He sets His location as two and a half days from Jerusalem (13:33).

The Festival of Hanukkah in Jerusalem (Luke 13:34-14:33; John 10:22-39; December AD 29)

The Lord Jesus visited Jerusalem for the Festival of Hanukkah during the winter of AD 29. This feast was a memorial to the purification and rededication of the Temple by Judas Maccabeus on Kislev 25, 165 BC (Franz 1998:91, 92).

In John’s Gospel, Jesus walked into the Temple, in Solomon’s porch on the outer fringes of the Temple enclosure. Here, the religious leaders surrounded the Lord Jesus and asked Him to tell them plainly whether He was the Messiah or not (10:24). Jesus answered, “ I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Father’s name, they bear witness of Me. But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me” (10:25-27). Luke describes what takes place after this rejection. Jesus said, “ O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, but you were not willing! See! Your house is left to you desolate; and assuredly, I say to you, you shall not see Me until the time comes when you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the LORD’!” (13:34, 35). This was the last time Jesus would be in Jerusalem until He returned for His “Final Week”. On “Palm Sunday” of Passion Week, the crowed quoted Psalm 118:26, “ Blessed is He who comes in the name of the LORD!” in fulfillment of Jesus’ words four months prior (Matt. 21:9; Mark 11:10; Luke 19:38; John 12:13).

While in Jerusalem for Hanukkah, Jesus gives two parables concerning banquets. One concerns the taking of the lowly place (Luke 14:7-14) and the second is the parable of the Great Supper. The setting or backdrop for these parables could be any of the palatial structures in the Upper City of Jerusalem, some excavated by Nahman Avigad in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City (1980:95-120). After Hanukkah John records that Jesus went “ beyond the Jordan to the place where John was baptizing at first and there He stayed” (10:40). This began the second phase of His Peraean ministry.

The Second Peraean Ministry (Luke 14:34-17:10; John 10:40-42; Winter AD 30)

The Lord Jesus went to Peraea via Jericho. This route is reflected in the reference to salt (Luke 14:34, 35) which would be in abundance in the area because of the Dead Sea. Also the reference to the audience of the three parables that followed: the parable of the lost sheep, coin and sons. Jesus was addressing tax-collectors that would be living in border cities. Jericho was the first city one came to as they entered Judea from Peraea. This locale also provides the setting for the parable of the lost sheep. In this parable, Jesus states, “ What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he loses one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the wilderness, and go after the one which is lost until he finds it?” (15:4). The Judean Wilderness, which Jesus and His disciples passed through on the way to Jericho, would be fresh in the minds of His disciples and well known to the audience of tax-collectors in Jericho. Jesus had told a similar story several months earlier in Capernaum (Matt. 18:11-14). In the Galilean setting He talked about the sheep being lost in the mountains. Jesus used the same illustration but adapted it to fit the locale where He was speaking.

From this vantage point in Jericho, the Lord Jesus could also point south toward the community that resided at Qumran when He gave the parable of the unjust steward (16:1-13). In this parable, Jesus makes reference to the “sons of light” (16:8) which, according to the sectarian literature from Qumran, was one of the designations of the inhabitants of Qumran (Flusser 1988: 150-168).

Jesus could also point to Macherus, the summer palace of Herod Antipas in Peraea, when He spoke about divorce (16:18). Within the past year, Herod Antipas had divorced his Nabatean wife and married another divorcee, Herodias. It was here John the Baptizer [Remember, John was not a Baptist, he was a Jews] was beheaded for standing for the truth and condemning Herod for his actions (Mark 6:18; Hoehner 1980: 110-171).

In the account of the rich man and Lazarus, Jericho would be the ideal setting for this event (Luke 16:19-31). Lazarus was begging near the palatial structures that were near Herodian Jericho (2001:40-63).

The Raising of Lazarus in Bethany (John 11:1-53)

After hearing the news of the sickness of His friend Lazarus, [a different Lazarus than the one mentioned in Luke 16], Jesus waited two days before returning to Judea. His disciples warned Him of the possible impending danger that waited Him if He went to Jerusalem. On this occasion, Jesus goes to Bethany, on the back side of the Mount of Olives, and raises Lazarus from the dead. As a result, the religious establishment plotted to put Jesus to death (11:53).

The Retreat to Ephraim (John 11:54-57)

Jesus withdrew to Ephraim, modern day Taiyibeh, some 20 miles (according to Eusebius, but 12 ½ miles as the crow flies) north of Jerusalem to remain in seclusion with His disciples. From Taiyibeh, one could see the range of the Mount of Olives and any movement toward Ephraim if the religious establishment wanted to find Jesus in order to do Him harm. Situated on the edge of the Wilderness of Ephraim sometimes afforded the Lord Jesus the opportunity of solitude and preparation for the Passion Week to follow.

The Last Journey to Jerusalem for the Passover via the Jezreel Valley and Peraea (Luke 17:11-19:27; Matt. 19:1-20:34; Mark 10:1-52)

Rather than going directly into Jerusalem from Ephraim, Jesus went through Samaria to join up with the Galilean pilgrims, probably near Scythopolis (ancient Beth Shan) heading to Jerusalem via Peraea. Luke 17:11 is the pivotal passage in this regards. It states: “ Now it happened as He went to Jerusalem that He passed through the midst of Samaria and Galilee.” Plummer grasps the geographical significance of this passage. He states, “It means ‘through what lies between.’ i.e. along the frontier, or simply, ‘between .’ … ‘Through the midst of Samaria and Galilee’ would imply that Jesus was moving from Jerusalem, whereas we are expressly told that He was journeying towards it. Samaria, being on the right, would naturally be mentioned first if He was going eastward along the frontier between Samaria and Galilee possibly by the route which ends at Bethshean, near the Jordan” (1981:403). Somewhere in the Jezreel Valley was a “certain village” where ten lepers begged the Lord Jesus to heal them. One of these lepers was a Samaritan who returned and thanked the Lord Jesus for healing him (Luke 17:11-19).

At this point the Synoptic gospels pick up each other and follow the Lord Jesus to Jerusalem. One “apparent contradiction”, concerning the healing of the blind man (men) near Jericho, should be discussed at this point (Matt. 20:29-34; Mark 10:46-32; Luke 18:35-43). Matthew records that two blind men were healed as they left Jericho. Mark mentions only one as they left Jericho. Luke seems to contradict this by saying there was only one who was healed as Jesus entered Jericho. If there were two men healed, then there is at least one man who was healed. Matthew, for his purposes, mentions that there were two. The real problem lies with “leaving” and “entering” Jericho. Edersheim in his monumental Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah comments on this problem with these words, “But, in regards to the other divergence, as trifling as it is, that St. Luke places the incident at the arrival, the other two evangelists at the departure of Jesus from Jericho, it is better to admit our inability to conciliate these differing notes of time, than to make the clumsy attempts at harmonizing them. We can readily believe that there may have been circumstances unknown to us, which might show these statements to be not really diverging” (1976:II:355). I believe the solution to the problem is now at hand. Based on what we know about Jericho in the Second Temple period we can conclude there were two Jericho’s, one which was populated by Jews and the other by Romans. The Jewish city of Jericho was under the modern town of Jericho, near the city square. Herodian Jericho is situated 1 ½ kilometers to the west on the Roman road leading up to Jerusalem. This was the royal winter place of Herod the Great and was surrounded by villas of the wealthy. The event which follows the healing of the blind man in Luke’s gospel is Jesus’ encounter with Zacchaeus. He lived in Herodian Jericho because he was a very wealthy man as well as a tax collector. He would not have lived in Jewish Jericho.

The Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem (Luke 19:28-44; Matt. 21:1-11; Mark 11:1-11; John 12:12-19; Sunday, April 2, AD 30)

All four gospels record the triumphal entry into Jerusalem by the Lord Jesus on “Palm Sunday”, thus ended His “Final Journey” to Jerusalem. This week was the most important week in the history of humanity, for it was in this week that the Lord Jesus suffered for the sins of the entire world and rose triumphantly from the grave three days later. It was because of this cross work that He could offer salvation, a home in heaven, His righteousness to any and all who would put their trust in Him alone as their Savior (John 3:16; Eph. 3:8, 9; Phil. 3:9).

Concluding Thoughts

I have attempted to harmonize the last six months in the Life of the Lord Jesus Christ as recorded in the accounts in the Luke “travel narrative” as well as the Gospel of John. The critics failed to understand the importance of Luke 9:51, thinking that the final destination intended was Jerusalem. As a result of this misunderstanding they saw geographical problems in the narrative. If we correctly understand the phrase “received up” to refer to the ascension of the Lord Jesus to heaven, the text would allow three or four journeys to Jerusalem that finally ended in the Passion Week and Luke ends his gospel with the ascension of the Lord Jesus from Bethany into Heaven. That, and only that, was the final goal of His journey!

Bibliography

Avigad, Nahman

1980 Discovering Jerusalem. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson.

Avi-Yonah, Michael

1974 Historical Geography of Palestine. Pp. 78-116 in The Jewish People in the First Century. Vol. 1. Edited by S. Safrai and M. Stern. Assen: Van Gorcum, and Philadelphia, PA: Fortress.

Edersheim, Alfred

1976 The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. 2 vols. In one. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans. 5^th printing.

Flusser, David

1988 Judaism and the Origins of Christianity. Jerusalem: Magnes and Hebrew University.

Franz, Gordon

1998 Hanukkah: The Festival of Light. Bible and Spade 11/4: 91, 92.

Gooding, David

1987 According to Luke. A New Exposition of the Third Gospel. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans.

Hoehner, Harold

1980 Herod Antipas. A Contemporary of Jesus Christ. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Josephus

1926 The Life. Against Apion. Vol. 1. Trans. by H. Thackeray. Cambridge, MA; Harvard University. Loeb Classical Library 186. Reprinted 1976.

1927 The Jewish Wars. Vol. 2. Trans. by H. Thackeray. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Loeb Classical Library 203. Reprinted in 1976.

1965 Jewish Antiquities. Vol. 10. Trans. by L. Feldman. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Loeb Classical Library 456. Reprinted in 1981.

McCown, C. C.

1932 The Geography of Jesus’ Last Journey to Jerusalem. Journal of Biblical Literature 51:107-129.

1938 The Geography of Luke’s Central Section. Journal of Biblical Literature 57:51-66.

Netzer, Ehud

2001 The Palaces of the Hasmoneans and Herod the Great. Jerusalem: Yad Ben-Zvi and Israel Exploration Society.

Plummer, Alfred

1981 A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to S. Luke. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.

Robertson, J. A.

1919 The Passion Journey. Expositor. 8^th series, 17: 54-55.

To What Should We Be Loyal – William MacDonald

What do you think of the person who says, “My parents were members of this denomination. I was born in it. And I’ll die in it.”"Oh,” you say, “I think he’s wrong to talk like that:” “Yes, but why is he wrong?”

“I suppose because he assumes his denomination is right and will always be right.”

“Well, then, to what denomination or group should he be loyal?”

“I guess he shouldn’t be loyal to any denomination, because no denomination is perfect.”

“One final question. If he shouldn’t be loyal to any denomination or group of Christians, to what should he be loyal?”

“He ought to be loyal to the Lord and to the principles of His Word.”

Yes, of course! That is the only correct answer. It is a mistake to develop an undying loyalty to any Christian fellowship, no matter how scriptural it may be at the time.

Even suppose that you reject the whole idea of denominations. Suppose you meet with Christians who refuse any sectarian name. Suppose, for instance, that they speak of themselves by the innocuous name of “the assemblies.” They seek to adhere to the teaching of the Word. Shouldn’t you throw in your lot with them permanently and be loyal to them alone?

If you do, you will find yourself in a difficult position.

You are committed to a group that will almost inevitably change over the years. This has been the history of almost every Christian fellowship. Liberal tendencies creep in. Zeal and freshness give way to formalism. A denominational hierarchy develops. Soon you can write Ichabod over the whole thing-the glory has departed.

Then again, if you are loyal to a group of assemblies, the question always arises, “With which particular ones do you agree?” There are wide differences among any group of local churches, just as there are wide differences among individuals. Some are open, some are exclusive. Some are conservative, some are liberal. Some have a pastor who presides over the congregation, others repudiate a one-man ministry. No two assemblies are exactly alike.

So there is a real problem. To which assemblies are we to be loyal? Are we to blindly subscribe to all the assemblies that might be listed in a semi-official address book? It seems obvious that we cannot consistently do this. We must judge each individual assembly by the Word of God, as far as our own personal affiliation is concerned.

Here is another problem. If my loyalty is to a particular group of local churches, what is to be my attitude toward other Christian groups that might in some ways be closer to the New Testament pattern than mine is? How do I evaluate them? Do I simply wave them off by saying, “They are not among ‘our’ assemblies.” Do I accept or reject them by whether their activities are reported in one of “our” magazines?

Then there is the matter of individual Christian workers “outside our circle.” How do we evaluate them? Do we ask, “Has he been commended by one of ‘the assemblies?” “Is he with us?” Or do we inquire if he is serving the Lord in accordance with the principles of the New Testament?

Certainly the easiest policy is to judge individuals or groups by whether or not they are “with us.” This does not require spiritual exercise or discernment. But it is a false and dangerous basis of judgment. It supplants the Word of God as our final authority. It assumes a priori that “we” are correct in our position and that everyone else should conform to us. It leads to inconsistency, embarrassment and confusion.

Christians must be taught to test everything by the Scriptures. This is our only authority. The question is not, “How do we do it in ‘our assemblies’?” but “What does the Bible teach about it?”

Our loyalty must be first, last and always to the Lord and to the principles of His Word. And we should never blindly assume that any group of believers has a monopoly on the truth, is adhering to the New Testament in its entirety, or is immune from drift and departure.

Every generation must guard against the danger of slipping into denominational, sectarian ways of thinking. Down through the centuries, there have been great movements of the Holy Spirit in which certain truths have been recovered out of the rubble of tradition, formalism and ritualism. The first generation, that is, those living at the time of these movements have been intelligent concerning the scriptural principles involved. But then the second and third generations have tended to follow the system routinely because their parents were in it, and because they themselves were brought up in it. There has been a decline of true conviction and an increasing ignorance of the biblical basis of the pattern followed.

Thus the history of most spiritual movements has been aptly described in the word series: man … movement … machine . . . monument. At the outset there is a man, anointed in a special way by the Holy Spirit. As others are led into the truth, a movement develops. But by the second or third generation, people are following a system with sectarian, machine-like precision. Eventually nothing is left but a lifeless, denominational monument.

If you were to ask a sampling of Christians, “Why do you meet in church fellowship where you do?” how many do you think could give a clear, scriptural answer? Not many! There is widespread ignorance as to the truth of the New Testament church, and therefore a general lack of conviction on the subject. How can we have strong convictions about something we do not know or understand?

In a healthy New Testament assembly, those who are in fellowship know why they are there. They are not sermon-tasters or followers of men, but Christians who are well grounded in the truth of the gospel and of the Church. They are prepared to judge everything by the Word. They are not unalterably committed to any particular group of assemblies. If trends develop which are unbiblical and dishonoring to the Lord, they will seek the leading of the Holy Spirit to the company of those who do meet in obedience to the Bible.

Let us examine some of the great truths concerning the assembly which are found in the New Testament and to which we should be loyal.

1. 1. UNITY OF THE BODY

      One of the most obvious truths is the unity of the body of Christ. There is only one body, one church, one assembly (Eph. 4:4).Because this is true, all believers are responsible to bear witness to it. As we gather together, we should give practical expression to it. Nothing that we do or say should deny it.

      Many Christians see quite clearly that sects and denominations are a denial of the truth of the one body (I Cor. 1:10-13; 3:3). Sects create the impression that Christ is divided, and thus misrepresent the truth of God’s Word. Many of us see this quite clearly and refuse such names as Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist or Episcopalian.

      But we do not always see that any name that separates us from other members of the body is divisive and unscriptural. Even if we take a biblical name like brethren, for example, the minute we qualify it or capitalize it, we transgress. It is as wrong for some believers to identify themselves as Plymouth Brethren, United Brethren, Christian Brethren, Evangelical Brethren, Open Brethren or Exclusive Brethren as it is for others to call themselves Presbyterians or Pentecostals.

      Brethren with a capital B implies that there are some believers who are not brethren, or that some are brethren in a distinctive way. We hear people ask, “Is he in the Brethren?” or they report sadly, “He left the Brethren.”

      The truth is, of course, that if he’s saved, he’s in the brethren, and he can’t leave the brethren since the believer is eternally secure.

      It is certainly right that we should gather to the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ alone, but the minute we speak of ourselves as “Christians gathered to the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ alone,” meaning that we do and others don’t, we have become a sect.

      To speak of any particular group of Christians exclusively as “the Lord’s people” betrays a sectarian attitude. It puts us in the same class as those in Corinth who said, “I am of Christ”-meaning that they were of Christ to the exclusion of all others (I Cor. 1:12).

      Another way in which inconsistency appears is the habit of calling a particular gathering of Christians in a town “the assembly” in that town. Or speaking of states and cities where there are “no assemblies.” Actually this is not accurate language. The assembly in any given town is made up of all true believers there. Within that town there may be several gatherings of Christians. In addition there may be some true Christians who are not associated with a local fellowship for one reason or another; they may be under discipline, for instance. All go to make up the assembly in the town, though all may not meet together in one place.

      Someone will say, “Well, how can I distinguish my assembly from the other evangelical churches in Hometown?” The answer is, “Instead of calling it ‘the assembly’ in Hometown, refer to it as the assembly that meets in the Bible Chapel at 5th and Pine.” Then you have not denied the unity of the body.

      We must never forget that we are Christians, believers, brethren, disciples and saints-and so are all who have been redeemed by the precious blood of Christ. To deny this by any form of sectarianism, denominationalism or exclusivism is to deny the truth of the Bible and to be guilty of carnality and pride.

   2. ALL BELIEVERS ARE MEMBERS

      A second great truth for which we should stand is that all true believers are members of the body of Christ and therefore members of one another (I Cor. 12:12-26). This being so, it is necessary for us to recognize all Christians as our brothers and sisters.It is not always easy to do this. Men have erected fences. People are more loyal to their own denomination than they are to the body of Christ. They do not recognize the unity of the Spirit.

      But the trouble is not all with other people. Even in our own hearts, there is often the desire to be distinctive, to think of ourselves as having a cover on church truth or some other truth. We often find it difficult to befriend those who do not see exactly as we do. Instead of rejoicing when others are led into a certain measure of divine truth, we are apt to magnify the ways in which they are still different from us. And too frequently we quarrel most bitterly with those whose church order is strikingly similar to our own.

      How then can we give practical expression to the truth that all genuine believers are members of the body of Christ?

      First of all, we should love them because they belong to Christ (I John 4:11). The fact that they may differ with us in various areas of doctrine or practice should not prevent our loving them.

      We should pray for them (I Sam. 12:23). This is a debt we owe to all men, especially those who are of the household of faith.

      Third, we should seek to share with them the precious truths which God has shown us from the Word (II Tim. 2:2).

      This does not mean that we should adopt a deliberate policy of sheep-stealing, that is, moving into other evangelical groups with the specific purpose of leading people out to “our own fellowship.” Nowhere in the Bible are we called to this divisive ministry. Rather, in our individual contact with others and as led by the Holy Spirit, we should minister Christ to them as the gathering Center of His people. We should “”teach everyone we can, all that we know about Him, so that, if possible, we may bring every man up to his full maturity in Christ” (Col. 1:28, Phillips).

      Not only should we love other believers, and pray for them, and seek to edify them, but we should also learn from them (I Cor. 12:21). It is a mistake to think that we have all the truth and that we cannot benefit spiritually from those outside “our own fellowship.” Every member has something to contribute to the rest of the body. Any man-made barriers that hinder believers from helping other believers are contrary to the will of God.

      Also we should refrain from criticism, jealousy, gossiping, backbiting or judging (Luke 6:37). Each believer is a steward of the Lord. We are distinctly forbidden to judge others before the time, that is, before the Lord comes (I Cor. 4:5). Paul asks, ‘Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? To his own Master he standeth or falleth” (Rom. 14:4). And when Peter became concerned about John’s service for the Lord, Jesus said, “What is that to thee? Follow thou me” (John 21:22).

      We should rejoice whenever Christ is preached, whether or not we agree with the methods and motives. Paul wrote to the Philippians: “Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will; the one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds; but the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defense of the gospel. What then? Notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice’ (Phil. 1:15-18).

      The fact that we thus recognize all true believers as members of the body does NOT mean that we will adopt their policies and practices. We are responsible to obey the Word of God as He has revealed it to us. We can love people without loving the system in which they are found and without becoming a part of it. As far as our own pathway is concerned, we must be uncompromisingly obedient to the Bible. As far as other believers are concerned, we should be patient and tolerant.

   3. CHRIST, THE HEAD OF THE CHURCH

      A third important truth for which we must stand is that Christ is the Head of the Church (Eph. 5:23; Col. 1: 18). This means that we must look to Him for direction and guidance in the affairs of the local assembly.We all realize that the truth of Christ’s headship is denied when a pope, for instance, claims to be head of the church on earth. But we must guard against the more subtle error of thinking that any of us has any right to manage the affairs of the assembly. It is so easy to give lip service to the Headship of Christ, and yet to maneuver, lobby and connive in a carnal way in order to get one’s own way. Instead of waiting upon Him in fasting and prayer, we apply successful business methods and the wisdom of this world. All this is a practical denial of the Headship of Christ. If Christ is Head, then everything must be done under His guidance and control.

   4. THE PRIESTHOOD OF ALL BELIEVERS

      Then there is a fourth truth—the truth that all true believers are priests. InI Peter 2:5-9, we learn that we are holy priests and royal priests.As holy priests we offer up spiritual sacrifices to God by Jesus Christ (v. 5). These sacrifices include:

      • the sacrifice of our bodies (Rom. 12:1,2).
      • the sacrifice of our praise (Heb. 13:15).
      • the sacrifice of our possessions (Heb. 13:16).

      As royal priests we show forth the excellencies of Him Who has called us out of darkness into His marvelous light (I Peter 2:9). This means that every believer is expected to witness for Christ, both by life and by the spoken word.

      As holy priests we go into the sanctuary to worship. As royal priests we go out- into the world to testify.

      The idea that worship and service are the functions of a special group known as priests or clergymen is foreign to the New Testament. All believers are priests and should be free to exercise their priestly functions.

   5. NO ONE-MAN MINISTRY

      There are some local churches that repudiate the clerical system, refusing to have what might be called a one-man ministry. And yet if you were to ask many of the Christians in those churches for a scriptural defense of their position, they would be hard put to give an answer. Why is it wrong to have a one-man ministry in the local assembly?The first reason is because it is not found in the New Testament. The assemblies in apostolic times consisted of saints, bishops and deacons (Phil. 1:1). The bishops, or elders, are always spoken of in the plural. Not one elder over a church, but several elders in each church. Bible historians agree that the clerical system arose in the second century; it was not found in the churches of the New Testament.

      Secondly, the clerical system generally ignores the purpose for which the gifts of evangelist, pastor and teacher were given to the church. The function of these gifts is to build up the saints for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ (Eph. 4:12). In other words, Christian service is not the function of any one class but the responsibility of all believers. It is only as each one fulfills his function that the body will develop and mature. The function of the gifts listed inEph. 4:11is to build up the saints to the point where they are mature, functioning members of the body. Thus, these particular gifts are temporary aids, not permanent fixtures.

      When one man is responsible for all the teaching and preaching in a local church, there is always the danger that people will gather to him, not to the Lord. If a man is especially gifted, people are drawn to his preaching. They attend because he is there. If he leaves for any reason, then they are apt to follow him, or if this is not possible, they often drift elsewhere, looking for another gifted man.

      Christ should be the gathering Center of His people (Matt. 18:20). We should be drawn by His presence, not by a man. When believers see this and act upon it, the local assembly need not be shaken by the departure of any man. An assembly where Christians gather to Christ has strength, stability and solidarity.

      And, of course, there are potential dangers when all or most of the teaching in a local church is done by one man. People tend to accept his word as authoritative. If they are not studying the Scriptures for themselves, they are not in a good position to discern error.

      In addition, no one man is able to provide the diversity of ministry that is possible when the Holy Spirit has liberty to speak through several men. We must be concerned not only with ministry that is doctrinally accurate, but also with ministry that provides a balanced diet for the people of God. The scriptural injunction is, “Let the prophets speak two or three and let the others judge” (I Cor. 14:29).

      A one-man ministry too often stifles the development of gift in a local church. There is not the same opportunity for others to participate. Some ministers insist on confining most of the work to themselves; they resent anyone else’s intruding into their office. But even where this is not the case even where ministers would like to see others participating-the very nature of the clerical system discourages the so-called layman from developing his God-given gifts.

      When one man is salaried by the local congregation as preacher, there is often a subtle temptation to water down the message. It should not be so, but the fact is that by controlling a minister’s salary, the congregation often cuts itself off from receiving the full counsel of God.

      Now we recognize that there are many great men of God in the clerical system who preach the gospel faithfully, teach the Word, and seek to shepherd the sheep of Christ. And God is using them.

      We also recognize that there are many “one-man ministers” who do not have the clerical spirit. They have a sincere desire to help the saints in every possible way, to lead by example, and not to lord it over God’s heritage.

      And we also realize that it is possible for someone who is not a clergyman to have the clerical spirit. InIII John 9-11, for example, we read of Diotrephes who acted as a tyrant in a local assembly.

      But the fact remains that the clerical system is basically wrong and unscriptural. The world will never be evangelized in the way that God intended, and the church will never be built up according to the divine plan as long as the distinction between clergy and laity is maintained.

   6. THE PRESIDENCY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT

      Another vital truth which each local assembly is obligated to maintain and practice is the presidency of the Holy Spirit (John 14:16, 26). This means that the Holy Spirit is the Representative of Christ in the church on earth. He is the One Who should be allowed to lead the people of God in prayer, praise and worship. He should have liberty to speak through servants of His own choosing according to the spiritual needs of God’s people.InI Cor. 14:26, we have a picture of a meeting of the early church in which there was this freedom of the Spirit. “How is it then, brethren? When ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.”

      When the Spirit is thus free to lead, there will be spontaneity in teaching, preaching, worship and intercession.

      Most of us realize that the ministry of the Holy Spirit has been greatly quenched by the introduction of ritual and liturgy. The use of printed prayers, of stereotyped messages for certain days of the “church calendar,” of a prescribed order of service that must be followed without deviation-these things fetter the Holy Spirit in the meetings of the local church.

      But we must guard against more subtle ways of quenching Him. For instance, we must guard against manmade rules in our worship meetings. In some places, there is an unwritten law that there must be no ministry before the breaking of bread. Or that the meeting must not go beyond a certain time. Or that in worshipping we must not dwell on our own sins or unworthiness. Or that we must sit or stand when praying or singing. All such rules quench the spirit of spontaneous worship and lead to formalism.

      We often make a man an offender for a word. Perhaps a young believer will express thanks to God for dying for him. Must he be rebuked for this? We all know that God, the Father did not die. And doubtless the young believer knows it too. But in the self-consciousness of taking part publicly, he is apt to express himself poorly. Should he be made ashamed of his first, faltering act of public worship? Is it not better to hear his sincere though faulty adoration than not to hear it at all?

      Generally speaking we believe that the Holy Spirit will guide the worship of His people along a certain theme. But suppose a brother gives out a hymn that seems to be quite unrelated to this theme. Must he be embarrassed for this? Is it not better to sing the hymn and pray that as he matures sufficiently to discern the theme in the meeting, he will do so without losing any of his warmth and affection for the Lord?

      Which reminds us of a certain preacher who was asked, “What would you do if some brother gave out a hymn that was obviously not in the Spirit?” He replied, “I’d sing it in the Spirit.”

      As we seek to give the Holy Spirit His proper place in the assembly, let us beware of rules that quench Him and that kill spontaneity and unaffected worship.

   7. EACH ASSEMBLY INDEPENDENTLY RESPONSIBLE TO CHRIST

      There is another principle in the Word of God that should guide us in connection with the assembly, namely that each assembly is independent and responsible only to Christ. There is no such thing in the New Testament as a denomination, a federation of churches, or a circle of fellowship. There is no headquarters on earth, exercising authority of any kind over local assemblies.The headquarters of the church is where the Head is—in heaven.

      Every local church should carefully avoid anything that might lead to centralized control on earth.

      This centralization is the evil that has hastened the spread of modernism. The liberals have seized control of the denominational headquarters and of the seminaries. They knew that if they could control the headquarters, then eventually they could control all the churches.

      The formation of a central group often comes from government pressure or from a desire to obtain certain benefits from the government. But then centralization makes it easy for totalitarian governments to suppress the church. If they capture a few denominational leaders, they can control the activities of the entire denomination.

      God’s will is that each assembly should be an independent unit, responsible directly to the Lord Jesus. This hinders the spread of error, and enables the church to go underground more easily in times of persecution.

   8. THE ROLE OF THE GIFTS IN THE CHURCH

      We have already touched briefly on the role of gifts in the Church. Actually every believer has some gift, some special function in the body of Christ. In addition there are the special service gifts of evangelist, pastor and teacher (Eph. 4:11). The latter gifts were given to help all the saints find their gift and to exercise it. They were given to build up the saints for the work of the ministry, and thus for the building up of the body of Christ. From this it is clear that:The work of the ministry is not for a special class of Christians but for all the people of God.

      The work of the special gifts of Ephesians 4 is to build up Christians to the point where they can carry on by themselves, then to move on. In other words, the saints should not become perpetually dependent on such gifts. On the contrary these gifts should work themselves out of a job in the shortest possible time, then move on to new areas of opportunity. Just as parents begin right away to teach children to take care of themselves, so should these gifts teach the babes in Christ.

      Now this raises a question: “How long should such a gift remain in a local assembly?” There is only one Possible answer to the question—as long as it takes to mature the saints to serve. Paul only stayed in Thessalonica “for three sabbath days” (Acts 17:2), yet left behind an indigenous assembly-self-supporting, self-governing and self-propagating. As far as the record is concerned, the longest that he stayed in any one place was the three years that he spent in Ephesus (Acts 20:31). It is not exactly a question of how long a man stays in one place, but rather what his purpose is. What is he trying to do? Is he trying to equip the saints to carry on by themselves?

      In this regard, these gifts must guard against the natural tendency to nestle, to think of themselves as having a lifetime appointment in any one place. (This is as true of foreign missionaries as of workers in the homeland.) They must keep themselves mobile. And they must also guard against another subtle danger, that is the feeling that the saints couldn’t get along without them. When they are absent, the attendance drops; this makes them think that they must not leave. They are afraid that the whole assembly would go to pieces. It caters to pride to think that we are indispensable. And sometimes it wounds our pride to think that we are no longer needed in a particular place. Actually we should rejoice when that time arrives.

      While speaking of gifts, there is something else that should be mentioned. In the New Testament, these gifts were charismatic, not professional. By this we mean that these gifts were men who were sovereignly endowed by the Holy Spirit without regard to training or occupation. For instance, the Spirit would reach down and equip a fisherman to be an evangelist. Or He might take a shepherd to teach His Word. Or He might fit a carpenter to exercise a pastoral ministry among the saints.

      There is no suggestion in the New Testament that professional training can make a man a gift to the church. The idea that only men who have had formal schooling in the Word are qualified to minister is disgusting. Training can be helpful to a believer in getting a grasp of the Scriptures, but no amount of training can make a man an evangelist, a teacher or a pastor. And there is always the danger of professionalism. If the Scriptures are approached from a philosophical basis, then training can be a very deadening and dangerous thing.

   9. THE LOCAL CHURCH

      When is a local church a true New Testament Church? When most of the members are true believers? Even if only a minority are true believers? Wherever Christians are gathered in the Lord’s Name? What qualifies a group to be considered a local assembly?Actually the New Testament does not lay down hard and fast rules as to what an assembly is. It does state that where two or three are gathered in Christ’s Name, He is in the midst (Matt. 18:20). And the Scriptures assume that those who compose the assembly are Christians, although it is also recognized that unbelievers are sometimes taken into the number unawares (Acts 20:29, 30). Also the New Testament seems to assume the presence of elders and deacons in the normal assembly (Phil. 1:1). But beyond that there is no final way for us to say that certain Christian groups are New Testament churches and that others are not. We can be grateful that we are not the judges in these cases.

      If a group professes to be a Christian assembly, then it should manifest the truth of the church universal. It should be a miniature, a replica of the body of Christ. It should present a living portrayal of the church of the living God.

      Now the situation among local churches in the world today is this. Some local assemblies depict the universal church very badly. Some do it more accurately. None does it perfectly. What you have is a wide range of churches with all different degrees of likeness to the universal church.

      Some churches obviously have no right to be thought of as Christian assemblies. I am thinking of those liberal churches, for instance, that deny all the fundamental doctrines of the faith.

      But then we have a wide variety of other churches that do acknowledge Jesus Christ as only Lord and Savior. Some are more evangelical than others. Who can say where the line is that divides those that are N. T. churches from those that are not? We have to leave them with the Lord. Our responsibility is to build according to the pattern, that is, to give a true likeness of the church in our own local assembly.

      Certainly no assembly has any reason for pride. If we could see ourselves as the Lord sees us, we would probably shrivel up and die. Spiritual pride is itself a denial of the truth that we are seeking to uphold.

CONCLUSION

To what should we be loyal? Once again we emphasize that we should be loyal to the Scriptures, not to any church system or circle of fellowship. In a day of drift, we must constantly test everything by the Bible and act accordingly.And there will be a price to pay. It costs something to follow New Testament principles. There will be reproach from the world and opposition from other Christians. But our responsibility is clear. We must obey God and leave the consequences with Him.

Coins and the Book Of Revelation – Gordon Franz

Introduction

Coins offer a “numismatic window” into the world of the New Testament (Oster 1982: 218). At the end of the First Century AD, the power-hungry Roman emperor minted coins as political propaganda in order to influence his culture. This article peers through that window and examines the imperial coins from the reign of Emperor Domitian. The article also examines how Domitian’s regime attacked some unchanging truths of the Word of God, how the Book of Revelation constructs a subtle polemic against Emperor Domitian, and how the Roman provincial coins can illustrate the messages to the seven churches.

The classic example of the Flavian Dynasty using coins for propaganda purposes is the “Judea Capta” coins. These coins were minted by Emperors Vespasian, Titus and Domitian and depict a Roman soldier standing guard next to a palm tree with a weeping Judea seated under the tree. On the edge is the words “Judea Capta” translated “Judea is captured.” This coin commemorates the end of the First Jewish Revolt and the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. There were Jewish people throughout the Roman world and the propaganda message of these coins was clear: “Don’t you, or anybody else, think about revolting again. We will defeat you just as we defeated the Judeans!” For a good discussion of these coins, see Hendin 2001: 303-343.

The Book of Revelation only mentions one coin by name: the denarius in the third seal judgment (Rev. 6: 5, 6; Franz 2000:9-11). However, monetary exchange is also mentioned in Revelation 13:17, 18: “and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man: His number is 666.” How these transactions will be carried out, either by cash, credit card, microchip or some other technology, I will leave that for the prophetic sensationalists and speculators to figure out! For a First Century AD understanding, see Kraybill 1996.

Two coins illustrate the abuse of numismatics in contemporary sensationalist prophetic studies. The first is a coin issued by the Vatican in 1995 with Pope John Paul II on the obverse and the depiction of the woman and child of Revelation 11 on the reverse. Some of the sensationalist prophecy teachers were not so much interested in the reverse side of the coin as they were the bottoms of the obverse side. Underneath the portrait of the pope were three six-pointed stars. These prophecy teachers were quick to make the association with the number 6-6-6!

The second coin is the 2-euro coin from Greece. On the reverse of this coin is a “woman riding a beast!” Greek mythology says that this woman is Europa, a Phoenician princess, being carried away to the island of Crete by Zeus / Jupiter disguised as a bull (Jones 1990: 110). These coin types are known from ancient times and are also on the coins from modern Cyprus too. They have nothing to do with the woman riding the beast in Rev. 17:3, 7.

Coins are a neglected area of study for New Testament scholars, yet they are important for Biblical studies. One person points out that “numismatic evidence can … help shed light on important historical events which had a bearing on the lives of the New Testament writers and their audience” (Kreitzer 1996: 28).

A good coin to illustrate the importance of numismatics for Biblical studies is a coin minted by Antiochus IV with the inscription “theos epiphanies” (“god manifest”) on the reverse. Some have called this the Hanukkah coin because when Antiochus desecrated the Temple in Jerusalem he also claimed deity. Several years later, the Antiochus IV and his Seleucid army were defeated and the temple in Jerusalem rededicated. The festival of Hanukkah commemorates this event. The Lord Jesus goes to the Temple for Hanukkah in John 10, He makes the statement, “I and my Father are one” (10:30), an outright declaration of His deity. This declaration should be seen in the context of Antiochus’ blasphemous claim to being “god manifest” (Franz 1998).

There is a helpful book that illustrates the coins that were encountered by the Apostle Paul and his companions on their travels through the Roman world. It is entitled, The Pocket Guide to Saint Paul by Peter Lewis and Ron Bolden (2002). The book contains some interesting theological views that some would disagree with, but the numismatic material is very good.

The Date of the Book of Revelation

The date for the Book of Revelation is a much debated topic. The two prevailing views are the early date during the reign of Emperor Nero, ca. AD 65. Some advocates of the early date tend to see the Book of Revelation as being fulfilled with the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. I do not share these views and see a number of historical inconsistencies with this understanding (Franz 2003).

The second view is the late date for the Book of Revelation set during the reign of Emperor Domition, ca. A.D. 95. A good case can be made for this date (Hitchcock 2003; 2005).

The Coins of Emperor Domitian

Self-deified emperor

Emperor Domitian had a definite ego problem! In Imperial Rome the senate would deify an emperor upon death (Kreitzer 1990:210-217). However, Domitian, like Gaius Caligula, could not wait until death, so he deified himself while he was alive. This is well attested by the ancient writers (Franz 1999).

Suetonius (AD 75 – ca. 140), in his book Lives of the Caesars, wrote, “With no less arrogance he began as follows in issuing a circular letter in the name of his procurators, ‘Our Master and our God bids that this be done.’” [“Dominus et deus noster hoe fieri iubet.”] ( Domitian 13:2; LCL 2:367). He also delighted in the adulation of the people in the amphitheater when they shouted, “Good Fortune attends our Lord and Mistress” [Domino et dominae feliciter!”] ( Domitian 13:1; LCL 2:367) a reference to himself and his wife.

Pliny the Younger (born AD 61 or 62 – died before 113), wrote in his Panegyricus, a tribute to Emperor Trajan, “He (Domitian) was a madman, blind to the true meaning of his position, who used the arena for collecting charges of high treason, who felt himself slighted and scorned if we failed to pay homage to his gladiators, taking any criticism of them to himself and seeing insults to his own godhead and divinity; who deemed himself the equal of the gods yet raised his gladiators to his equal” (33:4; LCL 2: 395).

Dio Cassius, in his Roman History, wrote, “For he even insisted upon being regarded as a god [ theos] and took vast pride in being called ‘master’ [ despotus] and “god” [ theos]. These titles were used not merely in speech but also in written documents” ( Epitome of Book 67:5:7; LCL 8:329). Elsewhere he wrote, “One Juventius Celsus, … [conspired] … against Domitian … When he was on the point of being condemned, he begged that he might speak to the emperor in private, and thereupon did obeisance before him and after repeatedly calling him ‘master’ [ despoton] and ‘god’ [ theon] (terms that were already being applied to him by others)” ( Epitome of Book 67:3:4; LCL 8:349). Later writers repeat the same claim and then go on to embellish it. However, Statius claims Domitian rejected these titles ( Silvae 1:6:83-84; LCL 1: 69, 71).

There seems to be other contemporary evidence that backs up Domitian’s claim to deity. Unfortunately, no monumental inscriptions have been discovered with these titles on them. Dio Cassius again adds an important detail, when he wrote, “After Domitian, the Romans appointed Nerva Cocceius emperor. Because of the hatred felt for Domitian, his images, many of which were of silver and many of gold, were melted down; and from this source large amounts of money were obtained. The arches, too, of which a very great number were being erected to this one man, were torn down” ( Epitome of Book 68:1:1; LCL 8:361). Upon his death, the Roman Senate was, “… overjoyed … [assailed] the dead emperor with the most insulting and stinging kind of outcries. … Finally they passed a decree that his inscriptions should everywhere be erased, and all record of him obliterated” (Suetonius, Domitian 23:1; LCL 2:385). This decree, the damnatio memoriae, destroyed all the statues and epigraphical inscriptions of Domitian. Evidence of this can be seen in the arch at Hierapolis, built by Domitian, as well as the dedicatory inscriptions for the Temple of the Sabastoi in Ephesus (Friesen 1993:34).

The only evidence not destroyed was the set of coins minted by Domitian as it was impossible to recall all of them. Numismatics is able to provide some evidence of Domitian’s boast of deity.

The Numismatic Evidence

Dr. Ernest Janzen, of the University of Toronto, in an article entitled, “The Jesus of the Apocalypse Wears the Emperor’s Clothes” (1994, see also 1993) provides for two lines of evidence from numismatics for Domitian’s claim to deity. The first are coins minted in AD 83 called the DIVI CAESAR (“divine Caesar”) coins (Vagi 2:329, coins 1160, 1161, 1162). These coins, minted in gold and silver, had the bust of Domitia, the wife of Domitian, on the obverse with the inscription, “DIVI CAESAR MATRI” and “DIVI CAESARIS MATER”, the mother of the divine Caesar! (Vagi 2:327, coins 1149, 1150, 1151; RIC 2:179, coin 209A; 2:180, coin 213). On the reverse was their infant son who was born in the second consulship of Domitian in AD 73 and died in the second year after he became emperor in AD 82 (Suetonius, Domitian 3:1; LCL 2:345). He is depicted as naked and seated on a zoned globe with his arms stretched out surrounded by seven stars! ( RIC 2:209; coins 440, 441) The inscription surrounding it said “DIVUS CAESAR IMP DOMITIANI F”; translated it means, “the divine Caesar, son of the emperor Domitian.” The infant is depicted as baby Jupiter (Jupiter being the head of the Roman pantheon). “The globe represents world dominion and power, while stars typically bespoke the divine nature of those accompanied. … the infant depicted on the globe was the son of (a) god and that the infant was conqueror of the world” (Janzen 1994:645-647). It goes without saying that if he is the son of a god, then his father, Domitian, must be god! I can not help but use my sanctified imagination and wonder if John did not have this coin in front of him when he penned, “and in the midst of the seven lampstands One like the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to His feet … He had in His right hand seven stars” (Rev. 1:13,16). He refers back to this vision in the letter to the church at Thyatira when the Lord Jesus identifies Himself as the “Son of God” (Rev. 2:18).

The second bit of numismatic evidence comes from the coins with the fulmen (“thunderbolt”) on them. The fulmen is the divine attribute of Jupiter. Janzen says, “In 84 Domitian struck reverse type Jupiter holding thunderbolt and spear. The first issue of 85 continued this type but the second issue witnessed the fulmen in Domitian’s hand. He and Jupiter would ‘share’ the fulmen for the years 85-6 after which Jupiter remained as a regular type, only without fulmen. From 87-96 Domitian alone held the fulmen, persuasive evidence of a developing megalomania which place the fulmen in Domitian’s hand and are clearly patterned after the Jupiter with fulmen type” (Janzen 1994:648, footnote 55; RIC 2:185, coins 247,248; 186, coin 253; 189, coin 279; 192, coin 300; 194, coins 313,314; 196, coin 334; 197, coin 342; 203, coin 288). One numismatic expert says that this type “clearly suggests a parallel between himself and ‘Jupiter tonaus’ (the thunderer) or the father of the gods” (Mattingly, cited in Janzen 1994:648, footnote 55).

Martial, the first century satirist of Rome, confirms this idea in his writings. One of his epigrams, written in AD 94, describing the Gens Flavia says, “This piece of ground, that lies open and is being covered with marble and gold, knew our Lord ( domini) in infancy. … Here stood the venerable house that gave the world what Rhodes and pious Crete gave the starry sky [Helios, the sun god, was born on Rhodes according to some traditions, and Zeus, the chief god, was born on Crete- GF]. … But you the Father of the High One did protect, and for you, Caesar, thunderbolt ( fulmen) and aegis took the place of spear and buckler” ( Epigrams 9:20; LCL 2: 249). Sometimes Martial even calls Domitian the “Thunderer” (7:99:1; LCL 2: 157), a title that usually belongs to Jupiter (Zeus) ( Epigrams 9:91; LCL 2: 311)! Domitian is putting himself on the same level as Jupiter.

Elsewhere in Martial’s writings he calls Domitian “lord” ( Epigrams 7:2; 8:82; 9:20, 28, 66; LCL 2: 75, 231, 249, 257, 291) and “lord and god” ( Epigrams 5:8; LCL 1: 361; 7:34; 8:2; LCL 2: 105, 161). Interestingly, after the death of Domitian, Martial repudiates these titles attributed to Domitian ( Epigrams 10:72; LCL 2: 391). However, I think he was reflecting the sentiments of the day while Domitian was alive. Though he may not have believed it, that is what Domitian wanted, that is what he got.

Another interesting sidelight is that on some of Domitian’s coins, the initials “PM” appears on the inscriptions. Some of the coins have Domition praying or offering sacrifices ( RIC 2:201, coins 377,378; 202, coins 381,383,385). These initials stand for “pontifex maximus,” the high priest as head of the Roman religion. Biblically, this title belongs only to the Lord Jesus (Heb. 4:14). Yet in Revelation, the “things which you [John] have seen” (Rev. 1:19) is the vision of the glorified Son of Man who is also the High Priest (Thomas 1965: 241-247).

It appears that something triggered Domitian to openly claim deity in AD 85/86. The triggering event is not known, but the response in Asia Minor was a temple dedicated to the Sabastoi (emperors). This temple appears on several coins minted in Ephesus (Ramsay 1994: 168).

In the year AD 91/2 coins were minted in Alexandria, Egypt which had on the obverse a portrait of Domitian encircled by an inscription that identified Domitian as the “son of God” ( RPC 2:323,328,333-337). One coin in particular had on its reverse, four pygmies surrounding Hercules. In his left hand he is holding a fifth and in his right is his club. The inscription calls Domitian the “son of God” (Mowat 1901: 72-74; RPC 2:337, coin 2709).

Coins from the Seven Churches

Let us turn our attention to the Roman provincial coins of Asia Minor. The Book of Revelation was addressed to the churches at Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamon, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea (Rev. 1:11; 2-3). Each city minted coins during the reign of Emperor Domitian. The study of the local coins is important because of the light they shed on the city at the time. Colin Hemer points out, “Coinage is often in fact the most illustrating key to local religion and so to the formative ideas of the society” (2001:25). A British numismatic expert has observed, “The real value of the types of coins from the Greek East is the insights into the local city life which they reveal. Topography, architecture, literature and mythology, religious beliefs and practices, entertainments and celebrations were all considered suitable subjects for illustrations because the coinage provided citizens with a vehicle on which to express their civic pride” (I. Carradice, cited in Kreitzer 1996: 28).

Ephesus

The first letter from the Lord Jesus went to the church at Ephesus (Rev. 2:1-7). This city was famous because it housed one of the seven wonders of the ancient world, the Temple of Artemis / Diana. In this open-air temple there was a garden with deer roaming in front of a sacred tree and the cult statue of Artemis. This garden was called the “paradise of Artemis” (Hemer 2001:50-52).

Many coins from Ephesus have a bee on one side, symbolizing the priestesses that ministered in the temple as well as a palm tree and stag on the reverse (Rakicic 1994:6-12). The palm tree was a “sacred tree” and was considered the “tree of life” (Hemer 2001: 41-47).

John writes that the “overcomers” (those who have trusted the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior and are living a victorious Christian life) will “eat from the tree of life, which is in the midst of the Paradise of God” (Rev. 2:7).

What John is saying is this: the temple of Artemis is a false imitation of the real thing, i.e. the Biblical Tree of Life and the Paradise of God. Believers in the Lord Jesus have something infinitely superior than the Artemisian to look forward to. If they are faithful to the Lord, His Word, and to each other they will be “overcomers.” Those who overcome will receive the privilege of eating from the Tree of Life (Rev. 22:12-14) and abiding in the Paradise of God.

Smyrna

The second letter is addressed to the church of Smyrna (Rev. 2: 8-11). The city was established on Old Smyrna (Bayraki) and destroyed about 700 BC. It was reestablished as a polis in 290 BC. This is an example of a city that “died” but came “back to life.”

The story is told that Alexander the Great was hunting on Mt. Pagos when he fell asleep under a plane tree in front of the Temple of the two Nemeses. The two goddesses appeared to him in a dream and told him to rebuild the city of Smyrna on Mt. Pagos. The Smyraeans sent envoys to the Temple of Apollo at Klaros to inquire if they should rebuild. The response from the priest was, “Thrice, yes, four times blest will those men be who shall dwell in Pagus beyond the sacred Meles” (Pausanias, Description of Greece 5:1-3; LCL 3:193).

A Roman coin minted during the reign of Philippus Arab (AD 244-249) depicts Alexander the Great sleeping under a plane tree with the two Nemeses on Mt. Pagos (Akurgal 1993: pl. 46a). The two Nemeses appear on one coin minted during the reign of Domitian ( RPC 2:158, coin 1012).

Pergamum

The third letter is addressed to the believers living in Pergamum (Rev. 2:12-17). Twice in the letter Jesus acknowledges that Pergamum is where “Satan’s throne is” and where “Satan dwells” (Rev. 2:13). Commentators have had a field day trying to figure out these statements.

The numismatic evidence can support three of these ideas. The first is that Satan’s throne was located at Pergamun because there was a large temple to Asklepius, the god of healing. One of the characteristics of coins on Asklepius is that there is a snake coiled around a stick in his hands. Satan is called “that old serpent the Devil and Satan” (Rev. 12:9; RPC 2:144,145; coins 921,924).

The second possibility is the Temple of Zeus, the chief deity of the Greek pantheon that overlooked the lower city of Pergamun. This temple is now in the Berlin Museum. There are a number of coins minted with the bust of Zeus on it.

The third possibility is the Temple of Augustus and the emperor worship associated with the place. One coin was minted during the reign of Domitian depicting a temple with four columns and a statue of Augustus ( RPC 2:144, coin 918). This temple is also depicted in the reigns of Tiberius ( RPC 1:403, coin 2369), Claudius ( RPC 1:403, coin 2370) and Nero ( RPC 1:403, coin 2372).

Thyatira

The fourth letter is addressed to the church meeting in the city of Thyatira (Rev. 2:18-29). Colin Hemer states: “The longest and most difficult of the seven letters is addressed to the least known, least important and least remarkable of the cities. The letter was not, I think, obscure to the church in Thyatira, the problem lies in our remoteness from the contemporary facts” (2001: 106).

Coins might help to shed some light on the letter. In this letter Jesus is described as “the Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and His feet like fine brass” (Rev. 2:18). This is the only time in the Book of Revelation that Jesus is referred to as the “Son of God”. It is implied in Rev. 1:6; 2:27; 3:5, 21; 14:1.

The coins of Thyatira point to Apollo Tyrimnaeus as the patron deity of the city. Apollo was the “son of Zeus.” Jesus is described as having “eyes as flames of fire and feet of gleaning bronze.” The reader would immediately go back to the vision of the glorified Son of Man in Rev. 1:13-16. Colin Hemer points out that the fine bronze is “an alloy of copper with metallic zinc [that] was made in Thyatira, the zinc was obtained by distillation. This was a finer and purer brass than the rough and variable coinage-alloy” (2001:116). He goes on to suggest that there might have been a statue in town of the patron deity, Apollo Tyrimnaeus. Coins have been discovered of him grasping the hands of the Roman emperor (Ramsay 1994:235). While this coin is much later than the time of Domitian, there were coins with implements associated with Apollo (tripod, lyre) and his reign ( RPC 2:147).

The phrase “son of God” would also call to mind the coins of Domitian’s deified infant son seated on the globe reaching for the seven stars.

Sardis

The fifth letter is addressed to the church meeting in the city of Sardis (Rev. 3:1-6). There seems to be no coins that illustrate the letter to the church at Sardis.

Philadelphia

The sixth letter was written to the church in Philadelphia (Rev. 3:7-13). This was a small church to which Jesus has nothing negative to say. In fact, He commends them for keeping His Word and not denying His Name in spite of the fact that they had little strength (3:8).

There have been very few excavations in Philadelphia. In the Manisa Museum in Turkey there are statues of various deities that have been discovered by the locals while putting in foundations for their houses or plowing fields. Some of the deities represented are Dionysis, the god of wine and merrymaking; Demeter, the goddess of agriculture; Helios, the sun god. The coins add a few more deities. Philadelphia was a city that had a pluralistic society, but also had an exclusive element in the population that thought they had a corner on the market of truth, i.e. the synagogue. Yet the believers in the Lord Jesus were faithful to Him in spite of the societal pressures.

The promise to the overcomers was that he would be made a “pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go out no more. And I will write on him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the New Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God. And I will write on Him my new name” (3:12).

After the devastating earthquake of AD 17, the Roman government financially assisted the cities of Asia Minor that were affected by this quake. The city showed its gratitude to the emperor by changing the name of the city to “Neocaesarea”, the New Caesarea! There were coins minted in Philadelphia with this name on them ( RPC 1:492,493, coin 3017; 494, coins 3032-3040).

Laodicia

The final letter was written to the church in Laodicea, located in the Lycos Valley (Rev. 3:14-22). In this letter, Jesus had nothing good to say about this church. In fact, He describes their arrogance by saying, “You say, ‘I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing’ – and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked” (3:17).

The church was imitating the society around it. It was a very affluent society and quite self-sufficient. After the earthquake of A.D. 17, the Roman imperial government provided aid to the cities of Asia Minor, including Laodicia. Yet when Laodicia was hit with another earthquake in A.D. 60 (or 64) they declined the offer of imperial aid. Tacitus said, “Laodicea, one of the famous Asiatic cities, was laid in ruins by an earthquake, but recovered by its own resources, without assistance from ourselves” ( Annals 14:27; LCL 5: 151).

In A.D. 22-23, Emperor Tiberius (A.D. 14-37) issued a coin commemorating his generosity to the cities of Asia Minor. On the reverse was Tiberius seated on a throne with his feet resting on a footstool. The inscription surrounding him states that he personally financed the restoration of the cities (Vagi 2:243, coin 442).

Word pictures from Revelation

Altars and Thunderbolt

In the first two years of his reign, Domitian minted coins with thunderbolts on a throne ( RIC 2:154, coin 1; 155, coins 13, 16; 156, coin 24). These two objects are associated together in the Throne Room of Heaven recorded in Revelation 4. The description given is that the Lord Jesus is sitting on the throne with the 24 elders surrounding Him. John writes, “And from the throne preceded lightnings, thunders and voices” (4:5).

Statue of Domitian Riding a Horse

Emperor Domitian erected a large bronze statue of himself riding a horse in the Forum of Rome in A.D. 91, the famous Equus Maximus Domitiani (Platner 1929: 201-202). This statue commemorated his campaigns against the Germans and his attempt to bring peace to the Roman Empire. Statius, one of the Roman poets, describes this statue in detail in the first poem in his book, Silvae (LCL 1: 7-15). Domitian minted a coin with a detailed representation of this statue on it (Carradice 1982: 376,377; 1993: Plate 30:36).

In contrast, the Book of Revelation, chapter 19, records the return of the Lord Jesus to earth on a white horse with His saints following Him. Domitian took the title “Lord and God”. When the Lord Jesus returns, He will have on His robe and thighs a name written, “KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS” (19:16). Domitian thought he could bring peace to the Roman Empire, but only the Lord Jesus, the Prince of Peace (Isa, 9:6, 7) will bring world peace when He rules and reigns from Jerusalem.

Apollo and Ravens Predicting Prophecy

Emperor Domitian, the self-proclaimed “Lord and God” and ruthless dictator, reigned from AD 81 to 96. During the last few years of his life, Domitian became very superstitious. In fact, on the day before he was murdered, he consulted an astrologer ( Domitian 14:3; LCL 2:373). Domitian himself proclaimed his own death based on an astrological reading by declaring, “that on the following day the moon would be stained with blood in Aquarius” ( Domitian 16:1; LCL 2:375). It has been demonstrated that this was based on Domitian’s astrological readings (Molnar 1995:6-12).

During this time Domitian also consulted Apollo, the god of music and poetry, and who was also the god of light, truth and prophecy! To commemorate his superstition, the emperor minted coins depicting Apollo on one side and a raven, a bird associated with prophecy, on the reverse side (Jones 1990:266; RIC 2:188, coin 275; 204, coins 398, 399; 205, coin 410; 206, coin 414; 207, coin 424B). It was believed one could tell the future by watching this bird’s flight (Kanitz 1973-74:47), so Domitian looked to it to foretell his immediate future. Ironically, Suetonius, a Roman historian and senator, records, “A few months before he [Domitian] was killed, a raven perched on the Capitalium and cried, ‘All will be well,’ an omen which some interpreted as follows: ‘… a raven … could not say, “It is well,” only declared “It will be well.”‘” ( Domitian 23:2; LCL 2:385). Emperor Domitian died soon after and all was well! J

The Apostle John, exiled on the island of Patmos about AD 95, received a more sure word of prophecy. Not from a raven, nor Apollo, but from the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. The Book of Revelation begins, “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants – things which must shortly take place” (Rev. 1:1). He goes on to say, “Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written in it; for the time is near” (Rev. 1:3). Might we read the book, be blessed and also be encouraged.

Bibliography

Akurgal, E.

Ancient Civilizations and Ruins of Turkey. Istanbul, Turkey: NET Turistik Yayinlar. 8^th edition.

Burnett, Andrew; Amandry, Michel; and Ripolles, Pere Pau

Roman Provincial Coinage. Vol. I. From the Death of Caesar to the Death of Vitellius (44 BC – AD 69). London and Paris: British Museum and Bibliotheque Nationale de France. Cited as RPC 1.

Burnett, Andrew; Amandry, Michel; and Carradice, Ian

Roman Provincial Coinage. Vol. II. From Vespasian to Domitian (AD 69-96). London and Paris: British Museum and Bibliotheque Nationale de France. Cited as RPC 2.

Carradice, Ian

Coins, Monuments and Literature: Some Important Sestertii of Domitian. Pp. 371-383 in Proceedings of the 9^th International Congress on Numismatics (1979). Vol. 1. Edited by T. Hackens and R. Weiller. Luxembourg: International Association of Professional Numismatists.

Coin Types and Roman History: The Example of Domitian. Pp. 161-175 in Essays in Honour of Robert Carson and Kenneth Jenkins. Edited by M. Price, A. Burnett and R. Bland. London: Spink.

Dio Cassius

1995 Roman History. Books 61-70. Vol. 8. Translated by E. Cary. Cambridge, MA: Harvard university. Loeb Classical Library.

Franz, Gordon

1998 Hanukkah: The Festival of Light. Bible and Spade 11/4: 91, 92.

The King and I: The Apostle John and Emperor Domitian. Bible and Spade 12: 45-51.

The King and I: Opening the Third Seal. Bible and Spade 13: 9-11.

Was “Babylon” Destroyed When Jerusalem Fell in A.D. 70? Pp. 221-236 in The End Time Controversy. The Second Coming Under Attack. Edited by Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice. Eugene, OR: Harvest House.

Friesen, Steve

Ephesus. Key to a Vision in Revelation. Biblical Archaeology Review 19/3: 24-37.

Hemer, Colin

The Letters to the Seven Churches of Asia in Their Local Setting. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans.

Hendin, David

2001 Guide to Biblical Coins. 4^th edition. New York: Amphora.

Hitchcock, Mark

The Stake in the Heart – The A.D. 95 Date of Revelation. Pp. 123-150 in The End Times Controversy. The Second Coming Under Attack. Edited by Tim LaHaye and Thomas Ice. Eugene, OR: Harvest House.

2005 A Defense of the Domitianic Date of the Book of Revelation. Unpublished PhD dissertation. Dallas Theological Seminary. Dallas, TX.

Janzen, Ernest

A Numismatic Compass for the Troubled Waters of the New Testament Apocalypse. Pp. 99-138 in The Picus. Edited by J. R. Gainer. Willowdale, ON: Classical and Medieval Numismatic Society.

The Jesus of the Apocalypse Wears the Emperor’s Clothes. 637-657 in SBL 1994 Seminar Papers. Atlanta: Scholars.

Jones, John

1990 A Dictionary of Ancient Coins. London: Seaby.

Kanitz, L.

Domitian. The Man Revealed by His Coins. Journal of the Society for Ancient Numismatics 5: 45-47.

Kraybill, J. Nelson

1996 Imperial Cult and Commerce in John’s Apocalypse. Sheffield: Journal for the Study of the New Testament. Supplement Series 132.

Kreitzer, Larry

Apotheosis of the Roman Emperor. Biblical Archaeologist 53: 210-217.

1996 Striking New Images. Roman Imperial Coinage and the New Testament World. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic.

Lewis, P., and Bolden, R.

2002 The Pocket Guide to Saint Paul. Coins Encountered by the

Apostle on His Travels. Kent Town, South Australia: Wakefield.

Martial

1993a Epigrams. Vol. 1. Translated by D. R. Shackleton Bailey. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Loeb Classical Library.

1993b Epigrams. Vol. 2. Translated by D. R. Shackleton Bailey. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Loeb Classical Library.

Mattingly, Harold and Sydenham, Edward

The Roman Imperial Coinage. Vol. II. Vespasian to Hadrian. London: Spink and Sons. Reprint of the 1926 edition. Cited as RIC 2.

Molnar, Michael

1995 “Blood on the Moon in Aquarius”: The Assassination of Domitian. The Celator 9/5: 6-12.

Mowat, Robert

Hercules and the Pygmies. American Journal of Numismatics 35: 72-74.

Oster, R.

Numismatic Windows into the Social World of Early Christianity: A Methodological Inquiry. Journal of Biblical Literature 101: 195-223.

Pausanias

Description of Greece. Vol. 3. Translated by W. H. S. Jones. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Loeb Classical Library.

Platner, Samuel

A Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome. London: Oxford University.

Pliny

Letters, Book 8-10, Panegyricus. Vol. 2. Translated by B. Radice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Loeb Classical Library. Reprinted 1992.

Rakicic, M.

1994 The Bees of Ephesos. The Celator 8/12: 6-12.

Ramsay, William M.

The Letters to the Seven Churches. Updated Edition. Edited by M. W. Wilson. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.

Suetonius

1992 Suetonius. The Lives of the Caesars. Vol. 2. Translated by J. C. Rolfe. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Loeb Classical Library. Reprint of 1914 edition.

Statius

Silvae, Thebaid 1-4. Vol. 1. Translated by J. H. Mozley. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Loeb Classical Library.

Sutherland, C. H. V.

1984 The Roman Imperial Coinage. Vol. I. From 31 BC to AD 69. London: Spink and Sons. Revised edition. Cited as RIC 1.

Tacitus

1994 Annals 13-16. Vol. 5. Translated by J. Jackson. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Loeb Classical Library.

Thomas. Robert

The Glorified Christ on Patmos. Bibliotheca Sacra 122: 241-247.

Vagi, David

1999 Coinage and History of the Roman Empire. Vol. 2: The Coinage. Sidney, OH: Coin World.

This paper was first read at the Eastern Regional Evangelical Theological Society meeting at Baptist Bible Seminary in Clark Summit, PA on March 26, 2004. It was published, with photographs of the coins, in Bible and Spade, Vol. 19, no. 3 (Summer 2006), pages 73-87.