The Search For Noah’s Ark – Video – a review and critique – Franz, Crouse, & Geissler

THE SEARCH FOR NOAH’S ARK

(2008 Video Tape produced by the BASE Institute of Colorado Springs, CO. $14.95.)

A review and critique by Gordon Franz, Bill Crouse, and Rex Geissler
December 13, 2008

Introduction

Adventurer Robert Cornuke has produced a new video which claims that remnants of Noah’s Ark have been found in the Elburz Mountains about 54 miles from Tehran, the capital of Iran.

Cornuke is founder and CEO of the Bible Archaeology, Search and Exploration (BASE) Institute of Colorado Springs, Colorado.  In 2005 and 2006, Cornuke and select volunteers, visited Mount Suleiman in the Elburz Mountains looking for an object they suspected might be the remains of Noah’s Ark.   Prior to his claims about Mount Suleiman he was convinced that the Ark had landed on Mount Sabalan in Iran (Cornuke and Halbrook 2001).  After his third trip to Iran in 2006 he posted articles on his website detailing the reasons why he thought Noah’s Ark might have landed on Mount Suleiman, northwest of Tehran in Iran (some have since been taken down).  Cornuke’s claims have been examined and reviews posted on the web  and by multiple authors .  At the end of the reviews Cornuke was challenged to publish his findings from Mount Suleiman in a scientific peer-reviewed publication but none have been forthcoming.

Cornuke, while couching his claims in careful language, maintains that he has discovered the true Mount Sinai, the actual anchors from St. Paul’s shipwreck, the location of the Ark of the Covenant, and now Noah’s Ark in Iran (2005).  Now this material is available in a slick new video, the subject of this review.  Since evidence and claims are being made in this video which we believe do not establish the case that Noah’s Ark has been found, or that it could have landed in Iran, and because of the excellent production quality, we are concerned once again that its sensational claims will mislead the Christian public.

Genesis 8:4 and the Mountains of Ararat

The video begins by arguing that Genesis 8:4 does not specifically state that the Ark of Noah landed on contemporary Mount Ararat in Eastern Turkey.  That this Scripture only gives us a general location of the Ark’s final berth is one of the few points in the video with which we agree.

Main Premise of the Video

The main premise of the video, as stated on the back cover of the video box, is that: “Based on the testimony of the Bible, personal investigation, examination of evidence, and other factors, Cornuke points to Mount Suleiman in the modern-day country of Iran, as the most probable resting place for Noah’s Ark.”  This premise, however, collapses on Biblical grounds and other known facts.

Cornuke bases his conclusion on five main assumptions:
•    The veracity of the Ed Davis testimony as to the location of the Ark
•    The region (country) of Ararat (Urartu) extended into the central Elburz mountain range in Iran
•    An interpretation of Genesis 11:2 would mean that the Ark landed in Iran, east of Shinar (modern-day, south central Iraq)
•    Other ancient sources, for example Josephus, might extend the Land of Ararat eastward into Iran
•    The rock outcrop they found on Suleiman is the Ed Davis object, is petrified wood, and by implication, the remains of Noah’s Ark

Let’s look briefly at each of these assumptions.

The Ed Davis Testimony

First, the main reason Cornuke began his quest to find Noah’s Ark in Iran, is based on the testimony of a World War II soldier who claims he was shown the Ark in 1943.  In fact, we would be so bold as to say that without this testimony we sincerely doubt that Cornuke would have ever traveled to Iran.  The soldier in question, the late Ed Davis of New Mexico, claimed that while stationed in Iran with the Army Corps of Engineers he was shown the sites of the Garden of Eden and Noah’s Ark (Shockey 1986).  Ark researchers, including the authors, have spent many hours analyzing this testimony (Crouse 1988; 1989; 1993).

The story he tells is riddled with contradictions and puzzling problems.  For example, in his earliest testimony he indicated he was stationed in Hamadan, Iran, (Persia at that time) and because of a favor he did for his friends, they took him to the Garden of Eden and Noah’s Ark.  In the very first recording of his testimony he noted that his native friends were Lurs or Lourds, a predominant ethic group in western Iran (Luristan) near the Zagros Mountains.  However, zealous Ark researchers corrected him that they were Kurds since they are the major ethnic group in the villages at the base of Mount Ararat.  Hence from then on Davis calls them Kurds.

In subsequent debriefings, Ed noted other details such as the fact that he and his friends went through the town of Qazvin on their way to the mountain, and that he could see the lights of Tehran from the Ark’s site.  It was these two facts that led former detective Cornuke to conclude that Ed must have been somewhere in the Elburz Mountains north of Tehran.  Cornuke and remote-sensing expert Ed Holroyd then began looking at satellite data of the Elburz Mountains to find a configuration of canyons that matched Ed’s detailed description.  They concluded that just such a formation existed on Mount Suleiman.  In 2005 Cornuke made his way to Mount Suleiman and found a large black rock extrusion he came to believe was what Davis was shown.

What we find interesting is that while Cornuke believes he’s found the Ed Davis object he does not tell his viewers the whole story.  Davis also declared that the Ark was broken into two pieces and that you could see compartments inside. Because of the hollow nature of the Ark, he claimed that his friends had shown him artifacts that fell out of the broken Ark including lentils, beans, honey, hay, feathers, nuts, dried fish, oil lamps, tools, clay vats, petrified shepherd staffs and petrified woven twig doors!  Davis and his guides viewed this “Ark” object from the edge of a cliff and were planning to use ropes to get down to it the next day.  None of this description is shared in the documentary, nor does it square with the object shown in the video.  There is no cliff and no “compartments” and no artifacts shown at this rock outcropping in the video.

Most Ark researchers, however, do believe Ed Davis did have some kind of experience; his friends probably did show him something as he noted in the flyleaf of his Bible.  Interestingly enough, according to Lur tradition (and Ed Davis’ friends were Lourds) both the Garden of Eden and the final resting place of the Ark are in the region of Luristan.  According to Major Henry Rawlinson, the Lur tradition puts the Ark’s final resting place on a mountain called Sar Kashti, a mountain in the Zagros mountain range of Western Iran about a day’s drive from Hamadan (1839: 100).

The Boundaries of Ararat/Urartu

The second major problem with the Cornuke thesis is that there is no evidence yet discovered that indicates the region of Urartu/Ararat ever extended as far north and east into Iran as he claims.  In fact, in the video, Cornuke’s map doesn’t even cover the ancient capital of Ararat/Urartu on Lake Van!  This is a grievous error.  What is at stake here is the inerrancy of Scripture.  As far as these authors are aware, no Urartian scholar would put the Kingdom of Urartu as far to the east as Cornuke claims even at the height of its empire in the 8th and 7th centuries B.C.  At the most, it extended only a few miles south and east of Lake Urmia.  Most scholars are in agreement that when the author of Genesis referred to the mountainous region of Ararat in Gen. 8:4, he was making reference to the region directly north of Mesopotamia, centered around Lake Van (Zimansky 1998: 2).  The tribes and regional kings of Ararat (Urartu) are first mentioned in Assyrian literature in the 13th century B.C. meaning it could easily have been in existence and known by Moses (Zimansky 1998: 6).

The Urartu archaeological map is extended with more labels from noted Urartian archaeologist Boris Piotrovsky, who was Director of the Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg and directed the Urartian excavations at Karmir-Blour, one of the greatest fortresses of Urartu (1969: back cover).  In order to accurately demonstrate how different is Bob Cornuke’s map of Urartu shown in the video, the Piotrovsky map of Urartu had to be completely re-drawn (outlined in blue) in order to add entire areas of landmass to take into account Cornuke’s view of Urartu (outlined in red and adapted from the locations shown on the video into a new map).  Cornuke literally leaves out 36,500 square miles of the accepted archaeologist’s view of Urartu.  In addition, it should be noted that Cornuke adds about 28,000 square miles of geographical area to his map of Urartu with no archaeological support whatsoever, allowing his map to include some of the northern and central Elburz Mountains close to Mount Suleiman.

The presumed Ed Davis landing site on Mount Suleiman, northwest of Tehran, is far outside the land of Ararat/Urartu (at least 250 miles as the dove flies from Urartu to Mount Suleiman), and deep inside the Land of Madaia of the Medes!  This is a very crucial point to Cornuke’s claims.  Is Mount Suleiman, northwest of Tehran, in the Biblical land of Ararat/Urartu or not?  The BASE Institutes case stands or falls on this question.  Cornuke gives a vague, non-factual answer to this question when he states:

When people talk about the boundaries of Urartu — which is the Assyrian designation, Armenia, [the] more modern designation — They can’t be precise.  There is not a boundary that you can draw a line around.  It expanded and contracted up to a thousand [1,000] miles based on war, or famine, or some kind of drought, very mercurial in the boundaries.  So we can say it’s just right in that area of Turkey, the area of Iran, the area maybe of Azerbaijan.  It’s just right in that area of the world; we just can’t be precise where in the area when we are talking about Iran.  It’s right where the Bible indicates it should be [12 min.:30 sec.-13 min.:08 sec. into the video].

However, in the video, a speculative map of Ararat/Urartu graphic is shown that includes Mount Sabalan and comes close to Mount Suleiman.  Cornuke knows he must have the Land of Ararat/Urartu extend all the way over to the Elburz mountain range in order to give his discovery any kind of credibility.  It is our judgment that this graphic is very inaccurate and deceptive.  As noted earlier, this map does not even include the known historical capital and cultural center of Ararat/Urartu at Lake Van, nor does it include the Gordyene Mountains south of Van, the large Urartean site of Hakkari, nor any of Turkey or the traditional Hurrian highlands extending west to Erzincan.  However, it does conveniently extend south to the central Elburz Mountains and the edge of Mount Suleiman where not one piece of evidence for Urartian presence has ever been found.

Here is a brief summary of the region of Ararat/Urartu by noted expert Paul E. Zimansky and notice that none of the landmark’s he mentions are deep within Iran.  He states:

Urartian kings would have ruled all of the agricultural lands around Lake Van and Lake Sevan, and the southwestern shore of Lake Urumiyeh.  The upper Aras, particularly the Armavir and Erevan areas, was firmly in their hands, and conquest took them as far north as Lake Cildir.  Along the Murat, evidence for royal control is surprisingly meager, but sufficient to put the Euphrates at Izoli within the conquered zone and the Elazig area in the narrower sphere.  Campaign inscriptions are found well to the east of Tabriz, but the nearest evidence for firm state control in that direction comes from Bastam, thirty-eight kilometers north of Khvoy.  Missing from this picture are the large and fertile plains of Erzurum and Erzincan on the Karasu, the northwest shore of Lake Urumiyeh, the plain of Marand, and the middle Aras from Jolfa to the slopes of Mount Ararat.  All of these are generally assumed to be part of Urartu in some sense, and it is worth examining other forms of evidence to see if there might be some grounds for including them within the perimeter of state control (1985: 10).

Zimansky does not include the Elburz Mountains in the area of Urartu!  Thus, it is NOT, as Mr. Cornuke claims, right where the Bible indicates it should be!

Genesis 11:1, 2, From the East

There is a third reason why we believe that Cornuke is wrong.  The Genesis 11:1 and 2 passage is too weak an argument to use as a place reference.  The passage states:  “And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.  And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there” (KJV).  The argument goes like this:  If you translate the Hebrew miqqedem mdqm as: from the east, as the KJV does, it would clearly seem to indicate that the Ark must have landed somewhere to the east of historic Shinar (Mesopotamia), in modern-day Iran since it is that country that is directly east of Shinar.  However, if you translate the miqqedem as eastward, as the NIV does, then you have the migration coming from the west toward Shinar.   Elsewhere the miqqedem is translated in the east (NEB), that is:  men moved in the east, then, the directional point is much more indefinite.

Given that this migration occurred several hundred years after the disembarking from the Ark from the previous context of chapter 10, it seems best not to push this passage too much.  Wenham favors in the east when the miqqedem is used adverbially as in 2:8; 12:8; and Isa. 9:12 (1991: 238).  In addition, Mathews believes miqqedem marks events of separation, so it can also have a metaphorical sense (1996:1:478).  If you do select the more specific, directional interpretation as Cornuke does (as in the KJV), and you believe the Ark landed in northern Iran, or northeast Turkey, it would have certainly been more accurate for the writer to say they migrated from the north east.  Neither the Elburz Mountains, nor Mount Ararat is directly east of Shinar.  The Biblical mountains of Ararat (Urartu) are directly north of the plain of Shinar.

The apparent conflict between 8:4 and 11:2 is more easily resolved with a more indefinite interpretation in our opinion.  It should also be pointed out that that there is least a 100-300 years period between the landing of the Ark after the Flood (Gen. 8), and the Tower of Babel event (Gen. 11).  The peoples could have easily moved from where the Ark landed to other locations east or west of Shinar [Babylonia] before the Tower of Babel story took place.

The Ancient Sources

Fourth, one of Cornuke’s experts in the video, Frank Turek, briefly discusses the ancient sources.  Unfortunately the editing in the video is bad at this point.  Only the last part of a longer statement about Josephus and Nicolas of Damascus is given that seems to suggest that Ararat/Urartu extended further east than previously thought.

Let’s examine one passage in Josephus.  In Antiquities of the Jews 20:24, 25 (LCL 10:15), Josephus recounts the story of Monobazus, the king of Adiabene and the husband of Queen Helena, who wanted to see his son Izates before he died.  The capital of Adiabene was Arbela in northern Mesopotamia (present day Iraq).  When Monobazus saw his son, he gave Izates the district of Carron.  The land of Carron is described as a place with “excellent soil for the production of amomum in the greatest abundance; it also possesses the remains of the ark in which report has it that Noah was saved from the flood, remains which to this day are shown to those who are curious to see them.” The land of Carron must be in the mountains just to the north of Mesopotamia.  These mountains would be in present day southeastern Turkey, but they were never considered to be part of what is now present day Iran!

Petrified Wood?

The fifth line of argument may be the weakest of all.  In the video there are claims that the rock that was brought back from Mount Suleiman was petrified wood and that it contained animal hairs of various kinds, bird follicles, savannah grass, seeds, insects, and other such things.  This material should have been published first in a scientific peer-reviewed publication, either archaeological or geological, so that the scholarly community could see the documented evidence and analyze it.  The reviewers seriously doubt that this rock outcrop is anything but a solidified volcanic lava extrusion.  This can look exactly like petrified wood in the way it fractures and can even have cellular structures when seen under a microscope.  The viewer should be very careful about taking this evidence at face value until further documentation is available.  For a discussion of the geology of Mount Suleiman, see: Gansser and Huber 1962: 583-630.

Conclusion

On the sleeve of the video case it states that this video is a Dove Family Approved documentary.  It is our opinion that this should not have been approved because the video is deceptive in its presentation of the facts, i.e. the map with the supposed boundaries of Urartu.  In addition, it is factually inaccurate and based on a questionable eye-witness.  Also, in the credits at the end of the video one of the authors of this article (Bill Crouse) is listed as an advisor.  This was not authorized and he in no way wishes it to be seen as an endorsement of the material.

We have also noted how carefully at times statements are worded in the video.   On the cover of the video box and the beginning of the video, they build up the fact that they are looking for Noah’s Ark.  By the end of the video, they don’t claim they were looking for Noah’s Ark, but rather the Ed Davis object.  One wonders if this is a very clever change in case somebody challenges the content of the video.  Our opinion is that they have found neither.

We would caution those who read this:  If you are considering forwarding this review to another Christian who is enthused about this so-called discovery, as well as others from the BASE Institute, we pray that you do it with a sensitive and kind spirit.  It might be good to preface the review with a question:  Have you considered, or would you be interested in reading a different perspective about these discoveries?

In this review we want it to be perfectly clear that in no way is this review personal, either about Bob Cornuke, or anyone who appears in the video.  Our sole concern, at this point, is to review the information and make informed comments.  If it was the motive of the producers to instill confidence among believers that the Bible is true this sets a poor precedent, and could have the opposite result.  Even worse it is a poor testimony to unbelievers.

Bibliography

Corbin, B. J.
1999    The Explorers of Ararat: And the Search for Noah’s Ark.  2nd ed.  Highland Ranch, CO: Great Commission Illustrated Books.

Cornuke, Robert
2005    Ark Fever.  The True Story of One Man’s Search for Noah’s Ark.  Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House.

Cornuke, Robert; and Halbrook, David
2001    In Search of the Lost Mountains of Noah.  The Discovery of the REAL Mountains of Ararat.  Nashville, TN: Broadman and Holman.

Crouse, Bill
1988    Is the Ark in the Ahora Gorge?  Ararat Report #14 (Jan.-Feb.).

1989    The Ed Davis Testimony: An Addendum.  Ararat Report #20 (Jan.-Feb.).

1993    Modern Eyewitnesses: Are They Reliable?  Ararat Report #32 (May).

Crouse, Bill; and Franz, Gordon
2006    Mount Cudi – True mountain of Noah’s Ark.  Bible and Spade 19/4: 99-113.  http://abr.christiananswers.net/BAS19_4.pdf

Gansser, Augusto; and Huber, Heinrich
1962    Geological Observations in the Central Elburz, Iran.  Schweizerische Mineralogische und Petrographische Mitteilungen 42: 583-630.

Geissler, Rex; Basaran, Cevat; and Keles, Vedat
2006    Mount Ararat Archaeological Survey.  Bible and Spade 21/3: 70-96.

http://www.noahsarksearch.com

Josephus
1965    Antiquities of the Jews.  Book 20.  Vol. 10.  Trans. by L. H. Feldman.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.  Loeb Classical Library 456.  Reprinted 1981.

Mathews, Kenneth
1996    Genesis.  Vol. 1.  Nashville, TN: Broadman and Holman.

Piotrovsky, Boris B.
1969    The Ancient Civilization of Urartu: An Archaeological Adventure.  Trans. by James Hogarth, from Russian.  New York: Cowles Book.

Rawlinson, Major Henry
1839    Notes on a March from Zohab, at the Foot of Zagros, along the Mountains to Khuzistan (Susiana), and from Thence Through the Province of Luristan to Kirmanshah, in the Year 1836.  Journal of the Royal Geographical Society of London 9: 26-116.

Shockey, Don
1986    The Painful Mountain.  Fresno, CA: Pioneer.

Wenham, Gordon
1991    Word Biblical Commentary.  Genesis 1-15.  Vol. 1.  Milton Keynes, England: Word (UK).

Zimansky, Paul
1985    Ecology and Empire: The Structure of Urartian State, Chicago: University of Chicago.

1998    Ancient Ararat: A Handbook of Urartian Studies.  Delmar, NY: Caravan Books.

About the authors:

Gordon Franz is an archaeologist on the staff of the Associates for Biblical Research

Bill Crouse is an Ark researcher and the president of Christian Information Ministries

Rex Geissler is an Ark researcher and the president of Archaeological Imaging Research Consortium (ArcImaging)

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.

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.