The Galilean Wedding (‘Before the Wrath‘)
During my ongoing research for the ‘Biblical Dinner’ and its companion book, Broken Bread, my investigation took an unexpected turn. I heard (and read) several scholars and pastors mention a possible link between certain parables and metaphors of Jesus where He employed traditional wedding imagery to clarify the events culminating with His second coming. Few of these scholars and pastors, however, elaborated on the connection between this familiar tradition (especially to Galileans) and its use as typology illustrating Jesus’ departure and future return. So I decided to take a deeper look. Here’s how I found what I found…
.
The BIG FAQ: The ‘Galilean Wedding’ Discovery Process and References This large document includes catalog of Scriptural references, bibliographical references to Biblical wedding customs, traditional elements (literal and parabolical), bibliography and endnotes. At nearly 140 pages, this document is still in draft form and is in no way complete.
.
Other Galilean Wedding FAQ’s
The following are actual questions or summaries of questions I am frequently asked regarding the Galilean Wedding and the movie, ‘Before the Wrath’ (based on my book, The Best Day of Forever, now ‘Before the Wrath’), and on my presentations, sermons and lectures.
Q: What ancient authors affirm that these traditions happened? You mention in this paper that ancient resources are rare. So if that’s the case, how do we have so much rich detail?
A: As I mentioned in the reference document, the Bible is not only God’s holy Word, it’s also a record—a repository of ancient Levantine history, customs and traditions, ranging from tribal to regional, spanning more than 1600 years from Moses to the Apostle John. If you are seeking extra-Biblical sources, many are referenced in the endnotes and bibliographies of the volumes of scholarly writings catalogued in the above reference document. Meanwhile, primary source references to weddings and wedding customs from the Bible and Pseudepigrapha are listed on pages 10-23 of the reference document.
Q: In the film, the material provided, and other videos where you speak about the Galilean wedding is that a phrase is repeatedly used stating that the “disciples knew exactly what Jesus was referring to”. There is no Scripture to back this up, and I think you know as well as most that many sermons have been preached on the disciples not understanding what Jesus was telling them. To continually state that a group of people clearly knew what was being talked about is a bold statement, and one I don’t think can be backed up.
A: When Jesus taught, His disciples and audiences understood exactly what He was saying, evidenced in the many recorded responses of His hearers. The record of the Gospels and Acts indicate that His closest disciples maintained a preconception that Jesus was going to assume the throne of David and rule and reign from Jerusalem in a restored kingdom of Israel. This is epitomized by one of the disciples asking “Lord, are you at this time going to restore the kingdom to Israel?”[1] moments before He ascended into heaven. Ten days later, on the Day of Pentecost, their entire understanding changed. As to the Jewish leadership, Jesus indicated they were incapable of understanding His message, while, as He prayed to His Father, He said, “…you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure.[2]” This is exemplified well in the Capernaum synagogue with the crowd’s visceral reaction to His ‘disappointing’ teaching that they needed Him to ‘live’ in the same way they needed bread to survive: “From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.[3]” Perhaps the most telling answer to this question, however, emerges when we take a huge step back and view the entire Bible through the wide-angle lens and literary context in which it was written.[4] Based on this ancient Levantine view of the world and its history, here is my thesis:
1. The Bible is not a book of riddles or a ‘hiding’—it’s a revealing—a revelation
2. The Bible was not written to scholars or theologians
3. The Bible was written to be understood so that God could be known to the extent to which He revealed Himself (if not, why did God give it to humanity?)
4. The Bible was written to be read to (or by) peasants, children, women (historically illiterate people) that all could know and understand God to the extent to which He has revealed Himself
5. God has revealed Himself through nature, through what He does, through prophets (what He says), through HIs written record (the Scriptures), through His Son Jesus (Jn. 14:9), through His Holy Spirit (Jn. 15:26)
6. The Bible is an Eastern Book—it’s entire writing style is non-Hellenized, reflecting ancient dialectical logic. The Bible’s original audience culturally did not abstract well, unlike Hellenists. It employs frequent concrete illustrations and a highly illustrative semantic vocabulary to which non-Hellenized people could easily relate and (most importantly) remember
- For more on this vital subject, please read Dr. Jim Fleming’s detailed explanation in the appendix of his excellent book, The Life of the Shepherd, Farmer and Village in Biblical Times (available at Amazon)
Q: What about the statements in the Before the Wrath movie about ‘new discoveries’?
A: Concerning statements in the movie about ‘new discoveries’, other than providing the source material, assisting as technical advisor and an interviewee, I wasn’t involved with the writing of the movie. The documentary was produced entirely by the excellent Ingenuity Films, including the screenplay, narration and public relations. I also agree that the movie trailer and occasional statements made in the film suggest that the evidence was archeological rather than anthropological and documentary. This has generated a certain amount of confusion, evidenced by the number emails I’ve received since the movie’s release. That being said, ‘new discoveries’ as a statement is a correct assessment of the content and intent of the movie. When the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, it was touted as a ‘new’ discovery, even though it was a re-discovery of something very old. Although there is nothing ‘new’ about ancient Biblical references to Levantine wedding customs, ‘unearthing’ their intended parabolic usage and metaphoric value is something that has gone almost entirely unnoticed except by a few scholars. Even more, this data has not, to my knowledge, ever been compiled coherently to the extent offered in the source material and the movie.
Q: How are Jesus’ wedding parables and word pictures representative of Galilean traditions?
A: Simply put, Jesus was Galilean, the twelve were Galileans,[5] approximately 70% of His teachings were done in Galilee, which means the ‘multitudes’ to whom He ministered were mostly Galileans. Moreover, native Galileans, including the Pharisee sect, were an bastion of very conservative Hebraic thought and customs in opposition to expanding Hellenization under Roman Judea. In this sense, Galileans were painfully sensitive to non-Hebraic, liberalized Judaic customs. Jesus’ rebuke of the extremist Pharisees for acts like wrapping their cloaks tightly about themselves as to not touch a gentile, unclean Jew or unkosher object demonnstrated the exclusivity of the Galileans and their culture. Since Jesus spent the bulk of His time speaking to Galileans and, as indicated by their reaction to His teachings, He spoke in a manner using parables and metaphors so they would understand and remember, even if many did not embrace what He said.
Q: How do we know portions of the Apostle Paul’s letters contain metaphors referring to ancient wedding customs?
A: Concerning Paul’s references to the relationship of Christ and the church to regional wedding customs (shiddukhin, erusin, nissuin), his language usage and the overall context of his Ephesian letter contains picturesque allusions to an arranged marriage. In V. 1:3, the Father chose us for His Son, etc.; in V. 4:30, the Holy Spirit is a ‘seal’ or ‘gift’ that guarantees there will be a day of redemption; in V. 5:25 Jesus Himself is the bride-price; etc. These are not abstractions—in the overall context of the letter the nature of the redemption is illustrated by idioms and metaphors—in some cases those of a common Levantine wedding and the return of the Bridegroom for His bride. Note: The Apostle Paul was not one of the original twelve apostles and was not a Galilean, but rather a militant, anti-Hellenization Judean Pharisee (possibly a Zealot as demonstrated by his early tendencies to incite violence). His allusions to Levantine wedding typology suggest personal experience as well as direct contact with the apostles and Galilean disciples of Jesus.
Q: What’s the difference between a Galilean wedding and other Levantine weddings?
A: Not much. The record in Bedouin wedding traditions and post-Temple period Jewish weddings suggest that the ‘kidnapping’ of the bride by the bridegroom was a predictable event. Jesus, Paul and John’s usage of this tradition as a memorable teaching tool suggest that Galileans included a ‘surprise’ element, making the bride’s ‘kidnapping’, though celebratory, quite literal. Additionally, that the bridegroom’s father alone could initiate the event reflected keeping the fifth commandment, with the bridegroom honoring his father by deferring the start of the wedding celebration to him.
Q: What ancient documentation exists that confirms Biblical wedding traditions?
A: The Bible is considered by most scholars (Christian and otherwise), as the most thorough record of ancient wedding traditions and customs dating from c. 1400 BC – c. AD 90 (see the references document for a detailed bibliography). There are numerous documents dating back thousands of years that refer to marriage customs, but nearly all are in the form of marriage contracts (‘ketubot’). These contracts contain stipulations of the marriage arrangement according to the laws or traditions that governed the people of that time—but they lack any description of wedding ceremonies and procedures. The Bible, however, records many detailed descriptions of wedding traditions, garment peculiarities, covenantal ratifications, etc., especially those practiced by the Hebrews.[6] How do we know? Go to the next question…
Q: How can we know what an ancient wedding and its traditional and ceremonial elements looked like?
A: As mentioned in the references document, pp. 8-9, discovery of ancient traditions of any kind demands a process of elimination, beginning with the traditional nuances of modern traditions (in this case, Jewish and Bedouin) and working backward to Second Temple Period Hebraic wedding customs—tracing in reverse the evolution of these customs and eliminating nuances that were added, Hellenized or Europeanized along the way. The catalyst for a shift in most Jewish traditions, including wedding customs came with the destruction of the Temple in AD 70, and the diaspora and persecutions that followed. Many traditions did not change but rather evolved slowly, with the migration of the Jewish people away from the Levant. Levantine Jews (mainly Yemenite) and Arabs, however, retained many of the ancient traditions, leaving them largely intact to this day. Modern, more traditional Jews reflect the cultural flow towards Hellenization with the advent of the Talmud, facilitating a theological shift that would permeate the subsequent centuries of common Jewish traditions and lifestyles. When asked why Jews adhere to certain staunch traditions, many have told me, “Because we’ve always done it that way…” This is a genuine perception, but it’s far from the record of history. Traditions evolve when removed from the original source by time, distance and crises. Therefore, working backward from modern, medieval, Byzantine and Roman Jewish traditions to the Second Temple Period (and earlier), eliminating that which was added or changed after the fall of the Temple, provides the best working picture of Biblical Jewish traditions in the available records. Of course, we’re referring to the Bible—but don’t forget about the Bedouins. Though they are modernizing rapidly, they’re still a repository of ancient regional traditions largely unaffected by the events of millennia of historical currents. Observations, interviews and writings of these time-honored desert people reveal much about what was painted on the backgrounds of Biblical history and traditions—including weddings.
Q: in ‘Before the Wrath’, Jay, in his interview, said that at the ‘kidnapping’ of the bride, she was ‘flown’ to the bridegroom’s father’s house. What are the supporting references to that statement?
A: In that culture, queens and other VIPs, due to their exalted status, were carried from place to place on sedan chairs (also called litters or biers) by servants or slaves. So were Levantine brides. Concerning ancient weddings, Jesus often characterized his return for His bride citing traditional regional wedding customs as a picture of what that return would be like. This includes the traditional ‘kidnapping’ of the bride to the bridegroom’s father’s house. Paul, who was not a Galilean,[7] described the ‘rapture’ (or whatever one chooses to call it) as an integral aspect of the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead. In 1 Corinthians 15 and 1 Thessalonians 4, he employs a rhetorical dialog to answer a question that apparently troubled both of those churches: what if you’re alive when the resurrection of the dead occurs? Employing a metaphor that borrowed from common regional weddings, Paul described the ‘harpazo’ (rapture) as the living getting ‘caught up [with the resurrected righteous dead] in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air’. This colorful description draws from the wedding tradition of the bridegroom arriving suddenly and unexpectedly to kidnap the bride at the outset of the lengthy wedding feast. Thus, the wedding tradition of the bride being lifted off the ground in a sedan chair and accompanying her bridegroom to his father’s house was aptly used to envision the prophetic ‘catching-up’ event. Literal human flight was virtually unimaginable until Leonardo da Vinci, but the ancients could picture that the resurrection-harpazo event of meeting the Messiah (‘Bridegroom’) in the sky and being taken to His Father’s house in the heavens. Since modern people can easily relate to flight, I used the word ‘fly’ to imply the mode of the event, metaphorically employed above. (For specific references concerning this metaphor-prophecy connection, please refer to the reference document.)
Comment concerning Joel R_________’s effort to discredit both Before the Wrath and Jay McCarl on his podcast…
Mr. R, in his initial email to me, requested my sources concerning ancient Biblical weddings and any prophetic nuances therein for discussion on his podcast. I provided him with my selected bibliography and an explanation of my research process, which he found insufficient for his investigation. He then requested further resources and clarifications, including the names of influences and scholars I used concerning the subject, which was provided along with a more detailed description of the scholarly process of ascertaining the data and extrapolating conclusions. Again, my answers proved insufficient for his podcast needs. His subsequent email requested further explanations, including his concerns about certain claims made in the trailer for the movie, ‘Before the Wrath’. I then put Mr. R in contact with the producer-director-owner of Ingenuity Films, who meticulously answered Mr. R’s inquiries and concerns. Still not enough. At this point I became suspicious of his intentions.
Mr. R then emailed a list of questions of such a detailed nature that, in the form in which they were posed, could not be adequately answered in anyway short of a medium-sized novel. It was at this juncture that I decided to investigate Mr. R’s specific positions on his eschatological matters, only to discover that he was a militant advocate of a post-tribulation rapture position. This in turn alerted me to the possibility that he might utilize our correspondence to build a straw man to knock down on his show—a common debate strategy. I concluded that Mr. R was not seeking to discuss or ‘protect Biblical truth’, as stated in his second-to-last email to me, but to target and nullify contrary eschatological positions for the entertainment value of his podcast and to satisfy his own ends. At that point, I elected to cease all contact with him. Additionally, I have no intention to engage him in any way in the future.
Such an approach has no precedent in Christian conduct in the Bible, even in the recorded rigorous efforts of the Biblical apostles and disciples to preserve Biblical truth. Mr. R’s podcast, his condescending discussion and ad hominem attacks, suggest a disingenuous and sensationalistic methodology.
When I wrote my books, I made no attempt compose elaborate scholarly works (except for Answering Evil). In fact, quite the opposite—I intended The Best Day of Forever and Broken Bread to be ‘easy reads’, especially for young people, and to keep the content within reach of the most basic Christian believer. Each book contains a substantial bibliography with limited footnotes and endnotes. For those desiring more extensive and specific references, I have assembled a catalog of hundreds of references in context, along with testimonies and interviews of scholars and other academians, Christian theologians, Rabbis, Muslims and Bedouins. It is available for viewing at this website.
[1] Our email correspondence may be viewed here.
[2] Before the Wrath was produced by Ingenuity Films, which used my book as source material for the production. Concerning the trailer, I had no input.
[1] The Holy Bible: New International Version (Ac 1:6). (1984). Zondervan.
[2] The Holy Bible: New International Version (Lk 10:21). (1984). Zondervan.
[3] The Holy Bible: New International Version (Jn 6:66). (1984). Zondervan.
[4] Read the books: Misreading Scripture Through Western/Individualist Eyes by Richards and James; anything written by Kenneth E. Bailey and Dr. James Fleming; various Bible Background commentaries, etc.
[5] With the possible exception of Judas Iscariot. Judas, however, followed Jesus and ministered with the other eleven primarily to Galileans in Galilee, indicating he was at least very familiar with Galilean customs and lifestyle. In other words, he was a good fit among Galileans.
[6] Cf.: Ezekiel 16:8-14, Matthew 22:1-14, Matthew 25:1-13, Ephesians 5:25-17, et al. (refer to reference document, pp. 11-24)
[7] Before his conversion, Paul prided himself as a militant Hebraic conservative (a ‘Pharisee of Pharisees’), and would have held to compatible views and traditions, in concert with Galilean anti-Hellenistic zeal. Further, Paul likely learned of Jesus’ employment of Galilean wedding typology from discoursing with the other apostles after his conversion.
jaymccarl.com 