"The abnegation of reason is not the evidence of faith, but the confession of despair."
- J.B. Lightfoot
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Trevin Wax with a helpful article:
Here are a number of urban legends that get repeated in sermons. Some are more pervasive than others, even appearing in commentaries and scholarly works.
1. The “eye of the needle” refers to a gate outside Jerusalem.
“It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God,” says Jesus in Mark 10:25. Maybe you’ve heard of the gate in Jerusalem called the “eye of the needle.” The camel could pass through it only after stooping down and having all its baggage taken off.
The illustration is used in many sermons as an example of coming to God on our knees and without our baggage. The only problem is… there is no evidence for such a gate. The story has been around since the 15th century, but there isn’t a shred of evidence to support it.
2. The high priest tied a rope around his ankle so that others could drag him out of the Holy of Holies in case God struck him dead.
Various versions of this claim have been repeated by pastors, but it is a legend. It started in the Middle Ages and keeps getting repeated. There is no evidence for the claim in the Bible, the Apocrypha, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Josephus, the Pseudepigrapha, the Talmud, Mishna or any other source. Furthermore, the thickness of the veil (three feet) would have precluded the possibility of a priest being dragged out anyway.
3. Scribes took baths, discarded their pens, washed their hands, etc. every time they wrote the name of God.
As a way of getting across the reverence of the Jewish and Christian scribes toward God, preachers like to describe the honor given to God’s name. Unfortunately, there’s no evidence that scribes did these sorts of rituals every time they came across the name of God.
4. There was this saying among the sages: “May you be covered in your rabbi’s dust.”
This is one of the most pervasive and fast-spreading stories to flood the church in recent years. The idea is that as you walked behind your rabbi, he would kick up dust and you would become caked in it and so following your rabbi closely came to symbolize your commitment and zeal. Joel Willitts explains:This is powerful stuff isn’t it? Well the only problem is that it just isn’t true… The context in which it is given in Mishnah Aboth 1:4 is expressly not what is assumed by those who promulgate this idea.5. Voltaire’s house is now owned by a Bible-printing publisher.
Voltaire was famous for saying, “One hundred years from my day there will not be a Bible in the earth except one that is looked upon by an antiquarian curiosity seeker.” There is a myth out there that within 50 years of Voltaire’s death, his house was owned by a Bible society that used his own printing press to make Bibles. Sounds like a great story, but it’s not true. Regardless, Voltaire’s prediction of the demise of the Bible was vastly overstated.
6. Gehenna was a burning trash dump outside Jerusalem.
I’ve used this illustration many times. But there isn’tevidence to support this idea. Still, because it seems like a reasonable explanation for the origin of the Hinnom Valley as “hell,” commentators and preachers have accepted it. It’s possible that the verdict may still be out on this one, but not if Todd Bolen is right:“The explanation for the ‘fire of Gehenna’ lies not in a burning trash dump, but in the burning of sacrificed children. Already in Old Testament times, the Valley of Hinnom was associated with the destiny of the wicked. That the valley was just outside the city of Jerusalem made it an appropriate symbol for those excluded from divine blessing.”7. NASA scientists have discovered a “missing day” which corresponds to the Joshua account of the sun standing still.
Please don’t repeat this myth. There has been no “missing day” discovered, and the legend has been circulating longer than NASA has been in existence, with different scientists playing the part.
Trackbacks:
Trackback URL: http://thinklings.org/bloo.trackback.php/6423.
Comments on "Christian Urban Legends":
2. Karl
- 04/27/2011 8:32 am CDT
In addition to those, there are other Christian urban legends that deal with more modern alleged instances of the miraculous or appearances of angels. Not that I believe all such stories are urban legend. But there are some that almost certainly are. I used to keep a running mental list of the ones that I heard during my days at Wheaton.
For example, there is the story of the young woman (usually on some college campus somewhere - I have heard about six different colleges given as the location as well as two or three large cities) walking home alone in the dark (usually from the library). She passes a threatening looking man who looks briefly in her direction but keeps on going. Later she learns that a brutal crime (rape, murder or rape/murder or sometimes "just" a robbery) was committed in the very vicinity she walked through that evening, and she is called in to see if she can identify the suspect. It is the same guy she passed, and apparently he committed the crime shortly after he saw her. She asks why he didn't attack her, and he says something to the effect of "what, with those two big guys walking on either side of you?" (i.e. she was unknowingly being protected by angels). Anyone else heard this one? I must've heard it a dozen times in the early 90's, always with a different location given for the incident and usually told as something that happened to a friend of a friend, or on the campus that someone's friend attended, or to a member of a friend's youth group or intervarsity group.
4. dave
- 04/27/2011 8:49 am CDT
It leaves you wondering why it's so common that metaphor is taken as concrete, concrete is taken as metaphor, and stories that are false are deemed more inspiring than stories that are true.
5. Raindream
- 04/27/2011 8:51 am CDT
A science professor at my college said these things seem to go in cycles. When you hear someone claiming that a man was rescued from the sea, having been swallowed whole by a huge shark or fish just like Jonah, then you can expect to hear a few weeks later someone claim NASA found the missing day and a half noted in the Bible.
I thought that Voltaire one was true (though I thought it was 100 years after) and the rope around the priest. What a bummer.
6. Raindream
- 04/27/2011 8:56 am CDT
But I know a drilling company in Russia opened a deep, deep hole in the earth, lowered a microphone, and heard the screams of the damned. Don't tell me that ain't true!
7. Shrode
- 04/27/2011 2:07 pm CDT
Ummmm....
I've repeated one of these in sermons many times...I'm not sayin which one. :-) I heard it from one of my pastors that I respect highly and who is actually a very good scholar, so I'm surprised at that one.
The rest I knew were myths. (The Gehenna one is fairly complicated though. I don't think I've ever said anything about it burning...) But there's lots of interesting stuff about that valley.
8. Ori Pomerantz
- 04/27/2011 6:43 pm CDT
For #4, you might be interested in an Orthodox Jewish explanation of that Mishna. It is recommending that you know scholars personally.
9. Bill
- 04/27/2011 6:44 pm CDT
I know I've taught the Eye of the Needle before, but it's been a long, long time. I recently taught on that passage, checked commentaries and realized that there was no evidence for it. I've learned to doublecheck as I've aged ;-)
I have also taught the Priest/Rope one. D'oh. Nevah again.
The NASA missing day never made any sense to me. I mean, we can't go back in time and check to see if a day is missing. We can only extrapolate back with what we know today. So there's no way to "find" a missing day anyway.
10. KenLeonard
- 04/27/2011 8:09 pm CDT
Karl and Jared,
Yes, I've heard both of those. The professor/chalk one has never struck me as genuine.
I've heard several people, from different political sides, tell me that they heard that Al Gore, John Kerry, George Bush (either one, depending on when the story is told), Barack Obama, Sarah Palin, or Jim Wallis cited John 16:3 as his/her favorite Bible verse.
This is one of those that I refer to Snopes and declare the conversation over.
13. Michele
- 04/28/2011 11:39 pm CDT
I've heard all of these and always sort of assumed some one had checked it out somewhere. I mean, the preacher is saying it, right?
How about the story that circulated when I was first saved, about the old woman who received her Social Security check, and printed on it was something like, "Cannot be cashed without 666 number". When the woman takes it to the bank to investigate, the teller gets all freaky, calls the manager and he says, "Um, these checks aren't supposed to be issued till 1995. Please forgive us for the inconvenience." Or something like that.
Good post.
16. damien
- 04/29/2011 10:49 am CDT
now i'm wondering if i've been duped into believing that everytime a bell rings an angel gets his wings.
17. salguod
- 04/29/2011 6:12 pm CDT
I heard once that the part in Hebrews that talks about Jesus sitting down was a radical idea to the Jews because priests on duty at the time never sat down, symbolizing that their work was never done. That Jesus sat down was significant because he was effectively saying the work is complete.
Neat little anecdote, not sure where I heard it. I did a casual Google search on it a while back and came up empty. No idea if there's any truth to it.
Anyone else hear that one and know if it's true?
18. Ori Pomerantz
- 04/29/2011 6:33 pm CDT
Salguod, Jesus wouldn't have been considered a priest. He was from the tribe of Judah, not Levy.
19. Bill
- 04/29/2011 10:19 pm CDT
I think Salguod is referring to Jesus as the High Priest, as He's referred to in Hebrews
20. Bill
- 04/30/2011 7:50 am CDT
Ori, apologies. I just clicked on your site and see that you're Jewish, so the book of Hebrews is probably not authoritative to you.
You're correct, in that while he was on earth, Jesus would not have been looked to as a priest, but rather as a rabbi (teacher). Hebrews refers to him as our high priest, because of his work of atonement in offering himself (and, to Salguod's point, now sitting at the right hand of God because that work is finished, as he was offered once for all).
Nice to have you around. Pull up a chair :-)
21. Paul
- 04/30/2011 4:12 pm CDT
Anyone else notice that Rob Bell includes #6 in his book Love Wins (see pages 68-69). Oops.
22. Ori Pomerantz
- 04/30/2011 10:09 pm CDT
Bill, if anybody needs to apologize it is me. This is a Christian site, and we were discussing Christian scripture. I should have realized that by the time Paul wrote his letter to the Hebrews the view of Jesus had already changed.
Therefore, actions which would not have been considered scandalous at the time they happened (when Jesus was not considered a priest), would have been interpreted differently already.
24. Michael Snow
- 05/01/2011 9:28 am CDT
Let's not forget the 'urban legend' of the season:
Equating the crowds [of disciples] that accompanied Jesus outside of Jerusalem with the crowd before Pilate, crying, 'crucify.'
25. Darrel
- 05/03/2011 7:19 pm CDT
I have taught the rope one before this way. "I have some teacher say that they tied a rope around the leg etc..." I would always go on to say that this is not in the Bible and I don't know if its true but would illustrate the seriousness of sin before a holy God with Jesus' grace. Its been a while since i used it however.
26. Jared
- 05/03/2011 7:45 pm CDT
I've used the rope thing before too, and I'm gonna out Phil here, b/c the first person I ever heard use that in a message was him. ;-)
I've only heard Phil preach once, actually, and that thing was in the message.
It was a Baptist Book Store employees' Christmas party (or something like that) at a restaurant in Nashville.
Phil, do you remember that?
27. Bill
- 05/03/2011 8:35 pm CDT
I've heard Phil preach before, in his church. He's AWESOME. Humble, prepared, focused on Jesus.
28. Bill
- 05/03/2011 9:54 pm CDT
. . . although I do seem to recall Phil using the rope thing in the message I heard too. I think he works it into every message.
He also was quick to point out to all of us that the word for "powerful" when describing the bible is the greek word dunamis, which is where we get our word dynamite. Because the Bible is DY-NO-MITE!!!
At least that's what I remember.
30. Jason_73
- 05/04/2011 5:44 pm CDT
I have heard that the rope/ankle one is actually of Kaballa origins, and Francis Frangipane, a popular charismatic preacher from Iowa regrets having popularized that teaching.
31. Shrode
- 05/06/2011 8:14 am CDT
UNCLE!!!!!
I confess. I have repeated the rope around the ankle thing so many times it's ridiculous.
I heard it from someone I respect a great deal as a scholar and so I just trusted it was true. Just like people who have heard me say it probably trusted it was true. And the person I heard it from probably heard it from a trustworthy source too and on and on....
Aaaaaargh.
But should I believe an internet blogger? Maybe it's an urban legend that the rope story is an urban legend. How can I know for sure? 
Jason 73, how do you know what you heard is true, or that I can trust what you said? ;-)
Can any of us believe anything we hear or read anymore?
(Further confession: I even told that story to students in a college class in which I was the instructor.) Man, I'm horrible.
In my defense, I have corrected the dynamite thing and the camel through the eye of the needle myth for years.
(Likewise, I have corrected the misuse of "wherever two or three are gathered in my name" AND the use of female angels in art waaaay more times then I perpetuated the rope around the ankle myth. So maybe that makes up for it? :-)
32. Bill
- 05/06/2011 10:12 am CDT
Phil,
What's the misuse of "wherever two or three are gathered in my name"?
33. Shrode
- 05/07/2011 6:58 am CDT
Took the bait, eh? :-)
It is usually used like this:
"a small group of christians are gathered together for prayer or Bible study, and the verse is quoted, usually in prayer, thanking God for his promise that he would be with such a gathering in a special way."
However, in context, it appears that Jesus is saying that God is in a special way, granting them authority, when they are going through the process of church discipline, especially if they kick the person out of the church. Notice that "two or three" in verse 20 seems to correspond with "two or three" in verse 16.
Matthew 18
15 “If your brother or sister[b] sins,[c] go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. 16 But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’[d] 17 If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
18 “Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be[e] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[f] loosed in heaven.
19 “Again, truly I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything they ask for, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. 20 For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.”
34. Shrode
- 05/07/2011 7:16 am CDT
I know, weird right? Part of you is saying, but wait, that doesn't mean that it's being misused...I think that's because you've heard it that way so many times, it's hard to undo all that conditioning.
Then your brain is saying, well, maybe the verse applies to any context, so it wasn't being misused. Go read the entire chapter. The whole thing hangs together. Right after verse 20, "for where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them." Peter asks, "How many times shall I forgive..." In other words, they are still talking about the same thing: sinning against your brother, asking and receiving forgiveness...or refusing to ask or grant forgiveness. I don't think it is correct interpretation or use to just pull verse 20 out of its context here.
And I know it's scary, but Jesus said above that what is done on earth will be done in heaven. Verse 20 seems to go along with that.
Also in context, I think Jesus is saying in verse 20, not just that he is there in approval when someone is removed from membership, but that he is also there in a special way when forgiveness and reconciliation happen, which is really the whole point!
Also, to continue my line of reasoning, I know that it's tempting to look at this as a series of unconnected sayings by Jesus, then it would make sense to use v.20, the way that it has been used so often. But if you look at the whole chapter, you see pretty quickly that this is not a series of unconnected sayings. It all hangs together.
Does this mean that Jesus isn't with us if two or three gather in his name. Of course not. We are the body of Christ. He lives in us and among us. Scripture makes that clear. Plus Jesus said, "I am with you always even until the end of the age."
So I think we can say Jesus is with us when we gather in his name. It's just that, that is not the point of that particular verse. It's being pulled out of context and applied to a very different situation then the one Jesus is talking about there.
35. Shrode
- 05/07/2011 7:38 am CDT
Oh and on the myth I perpetuated, apparently it was also perpetuated by John Gill and the (gasp) NIV Study Bible!
The earliest reference that I know of is in a 13th century A.D. Jewish work, the Zohar:
A knot of rope of gold hangs from his leg, from fear perhaps he would die in the holy of holies, and they would need to pull him out with this rope.
The Zohar says a lot of other things that are not trustworthy. In fact, wearing such a rope would probably be a violation of Leviticus 16:3-4, which gives clear directions on what the high priest is to wear on Yom Kippur:
But in this way Aaron shall come into the Holy Place: with a bull from the herd for a sin offering and a ram for a burnt offering. 4 He shall put on the holy linen coat and shall have the linen undergarment on his body, and he shall tie the linen sash around his waist, and wear the linen turban; these are the holy garments. He shall bathe his body in water and then put them on. (ESV)
John Gill cites this story in his Exposition of New Testament, published in 1746-48. Concerning Hebrews 9:7, he cites “Zohar in Lev. fol. 43. 3. & Imre Binah in ib”:
The Jews say, that a cord or thong was bound to the feet of the high-priest when he went into the holy of holies, that if he died there, the rest might be able to draw him out; for it was not lawful for another priest to go in, no, not an high-priest, none besides him on the day of atonement.
There are many websites and other sources that perpetuate this legend (including the NIV Study Bible on Exodus 28:35).
Source 1
From Christiananswers.net
36. Bill
- 05/07/2011 9:23 am CDT
Hey Shrode,
That's what I thought you'd say :-) - I think it's a bit sketchy, because then you said this:
Does this mean that Jesus isn't with us if two or three gather in his name. Of course not.
So, that particular passage hangs together (and, yes, I agree w you) so Jesus is pointing out that he will be with us in those tough church discipline times (and I agree with that), but really, he's with us whenever Christians gather, so . . .
doesn't that mean that saying that Jesus is with us when we gather to pray is not a "myth"?
I think this is one of those ones that contains a teachable moment: Context matters. Don't read the Bible like a set of unconnected settings. But people have been made to feel like untheological stooges when they've been corrected on this one (not by you - I've never heard you correct anyone on this and you wouldn't be doing it in a jerk way) when the crux of their statement is rock-solid true: Jesus is with us. That's supported by other passages of Scripture (Lo, I will be with you always . . ."
Here's another one: I once heard someone say that we can't "see" Jesus in the story of Abraham and the sacrifice of Isaac because no one in the New Testament ever mentioned that one as a type of Christ.
I disagree with that, pretty strongly. But did they have a point? Again, I think Gen 22 is a very strong foreshadowing of Christ, but I'm no theologian.
37. Bill
- 05/07/2011 9:27 am CDT
I just thought of this... I used "Lo, I am with you always. . .", but based on your debunking of the previous urban legend, couldn't it be plausibly stated that Jesus isn't with us, but only with those who are going into all the world (i.e., foreign missionaries), or, even only with the original apostles?
38. Bill
- 05/07/2011 9:32 am CDT
Oh, one more. I've long been taught (and have taught) that on the cross Jesus felt the full wrath of God, including separation from him (often anthropomorphized as "God turned his face away"). It wasn't until I read Your Jesus Is Too Safe that I discovered not everyone agrees. Jared (and you can pipe in here, Jared) said that God would never have left Jesus. I understand other pastors (I think Matt Chandler) also teach that. But I read others who teach very explicitly that Jesus was abandoned by God on the cross, and not just older preachers. I can't remember which one, but one of the most highly respected younger pastors of our day was quoted on a blog teaching that.
This one is actually pretty serious - and now I'm all concerned about whether I've been teaching that wrong all these years. Thoughts?
39. Jared
- 05/07/2011 10:41 am CDT
I subsequently found my view on those words of Jesus from the cross supported by Calvin too.
My take is this, briefly -- and I encourage anyone interested in seeing it fleshed out buy Your Jesus is Too Safe (wink, wink):
1. The teaching that says God abandoned Jesus on the cross -- although of course in some sense he did -- tends to appeal to the idea that sin is like God's kryptonite. He can't look at it or whatever. I find this view dumb. God is omnipotent. Sin is not more powerful than him.
2. To feel forsaken by God is not the same as being forsaken by God.
3. Jesus felt what David felt in Psalm 22, but we should read the whole psalm, knowing that Jesus' words would bring it to mind of his hearers.
4. Psalm 22 begins with the cry of forsakenness but proceeds to tell us that God does not abandon or forsake his children. The song is actually about how God won't leave or forsake us. And it ends with a cry of triumph in God's vindication and deliverance. "He has done it!" it says. Which sounds a lot like Jesus' words from the cross "It is finished."
I think the entirety of Psalm 22 should tell us how to understand Jesus' words from the cross, not just the first line of brokenness.
40. Bill
- 05/07/2011 4:12 pm CDT
Thanks Jared - I think that, for the most part, I agree, although I'm not completely sold. Bear with me: a few points below but I'm not trying to sway you, necessarily :-)
I checked - the pastor I read who was speaking of this was Tim Keller - it's in his book King's Cross. Small snippet:
"Jesus was forsaken by God so that we would never have to be"I agree about the kryptonite. I quit teaching "God can't look at sin" a long, long time ago in reference to this passage.
I do agree with you that Jesus felt forsaken. And that may be the main point. You are correct that God will never forsake his child. God will also never pour his wrath out upon his child, and I think that is where you and I may be looking at this slightly differently. I think that it's possible, not because "God cannot look upon sin", but because God was pouring his wrath out on Jesus, that Jesus felt something he'd never felt before - distance, the absence of the Father's presence.
That's about as far as I take the forsaken thing these days. And, like Psalm 22 (and well said, thanks) it was a temporary forsaking (if it was forsaking at all). I don't know anyone who teaches that God forsook Jesus forever, and I believe it was for just that time on the cross. "It is finished" is a victory cry.
41. Lois Tverberg
- 02/03/2012 2:24 pm CST
I recently wrote a historical analysis of the saying about "being covered in the dust of your rabbi."
http://ourrabbijesus.com/2012/01/27/covered-in-the-dust-of-your-rabbi-an-urban-legend/
It's not an urban legend. The idea actually originates from a well-known scholar of early Judaism.
Leave a Comment:
1. I can't tell you how many conversations I've had about that one. I was once told that a person questioned my salvation, because I've been "brainwashed by secular Progressive pseudo-theology" for denying the existence of that gate.
This by a person holding his Bible and "Atlas Shrugged," but apparently suffering from extreme irony deficiency.
2. That one, I believed when I heard it. And I'm taking your word for it not being true.
3. I'd never even heard that one. I think I'd be skeptical, but I don't know ...
4. Never heard that one. Knowing other Old Testament uses for "dust" and "dirt," I'd be a little wary of that one.
5. That would be so funny if true.
6. Yeah, I've heard that one. Believed it, too. We shall see, I suppose.
7. This one makes me sad. I don't really need NASA to confirm my faith, but so many people seem to be so invested in it. I believe what I believe because of the faith that God has given me.
If science agrees, then great. If not, that's okay, too. So many people get so invested in scientific confirmation, I wonder what happens when they realize that the confirmation doesn't really exist.
Where, then, is their faith, really? In the science, or the Word?
If your faith requires scientific confirmation, then is that really believing in things unseen, or is it just believing in what you have been shown?
Sigh ... I'll end the rant here.
Thanks for the post.