Ancient copies of the Bible were carried during a procession to Westminster Abbey's altar
Today is the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible. A special celebratory service was held at Westminster Abbey today. It was the Bible, commissioned by a King, that made the Word of God available to all English-speaking people so that they were no longer reliant on translations by those who could read Latin. It allowed the common man to drink, as it were, straight from the bottle.
Advertisement
The English are known to change laws etc to please themselves, did they change anything when translating ???
400 years of fairy tales that is still messing with the black man’s head.
a book laced with controversy. sexual abuse ! fornication. Homosexuality and war ! and many gods ! stories which can not be confirmed !which leaves societies still scratching their heads to find the answer as to “IS there a GOD’ the question is should this Book shoud be revered or condemn.?
A stark observation looking at the picture on this blog is that non Whites are not in the hierarchy of the Christian Church in England? Why would a non Black not be involved in this historic occasion of walking the old bibles up to the Church Altar?
On another matter it seems Blatter of FIFA fame does’t know when to stop. This guy is unbelievable.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HI8Mm-rwZSU
@David. I was interested to hear the comments of Gordon Taylor on the subject of Mr Blatter’s remarks. Mr Taylor asks how teachers in schools are meant to stop children from using racial slurs on the football field, when they are told by Mr Blatter that they are okay. Mr Taylor goes on to say that the only colours that should count are not the colours of people’s skin, but the colours of their football jerseys.
On the subject of the King James Bible, it has been pointed out to me that this book that made the Bible available to the masses and not solely the province of Latin scholars, was commissioned by and bears the name of a homosexual king. Given the robustness of the debate on matters gay on BU, I thought this piece of trivia would be found to be of interest.
To Ac:
Your cheap shots do not take away from the fact that the only book which tells the story of man and his redemption is the Bible. They do not take away from the fact that it is the only source that brings man in close communication with his God. Finally, it is the only source which details the final reward for scoffers like yourself; for you have taken arms against the Creator of Heaven and Earth not against flesh and blood men as yourself. My brother be still and know that there is a God, whether it fits into your scheme of things or not. For much of what you have regurgitated here is only mere human wisdom, which in the scheme of things is worthless.
To Amused:
Biblical scholars did the translation not King James. Are saying that the heterosexuals should be very proud or ashamed that a homosexual had the balls to ensure that the Bible could be read by the proletarian. You need to be also aware of this trivia; had not for the reformation, you would not be here on the blog writing. You would be some where performing some menial task, while having to request a priest somewhere to read and write for you, unless of course you are from the elite stock, and if that be the case, my humble apologies.
King James 1 may have been relying on a pre-existing tradition when he defended his relationship with the young Duke of Buckingham: “I wish to speak in my own behalf and not to have it thought to be a defect, for Jesus Christ did the same, and therefore I cannot be blamed. Christ had his son John, and I have my George.”[7]
King James (of the King James version) used this statement to justify his homosexual relationship with the young Duke od Buckingham. Go figure.
@Lemuel. I merely reported a bit of interesting and provocative trivia. I took no position on it. I don’t see any relevance whatsoever in your comments on the Reformation. In England, this Reformation started in around 1534 with the Act of Supremacy that made the King (in this case, the six-times married Henry VIII) head of the Church. King James I of England (and VI of Scotland) was initially raised as a Roman Catholic (his mother being Mary, Queen of Scots). He was baptised a Roman Catholic, but subsequently came under Protestant influence when his mother fled to England where she had her head chopped off. The Reformation lasted a long time – right through the English Civil War, the Protectorate and the Restoration. So your comments about my educational possibilities are foggy and maybe you would like to share with me exactly what you mean.
BTW, James I, the gay king, most certainly commissioned the King James Bible which bears his name and it is certain that the Biblical scholars/translators would not have undertaken the task and brought it to fruition and would certainly not have got it published, without the authority and consent of the man, who, under the Act of Supremacy of 1534, was head of the Church in a time when there was very strict censorship – that man was James I and he was homosexual. So what is your problem with historical fact/trivia?
Another little piece of historical trivia for you. In 1625, Barbados was taken possession of in the name of the Gay King James I. Now, the mind boggles to see what tangent you are going to go off on with that piece of trivia, upon which I have not commented, merely reported.
lemuel | November 17, 2011 at 7:56 AM |
“They do not take away from the fact that it is the only source that brings man in close communication with his God.”
What are you saying, Lemuel? That the only way a human can communicate his “God” is by reading the king James Version of the Bible?
So the Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists, Chinese, Japanese, Aborigines, Amerindians, Native Americans, African animists, etc do NOT count in the eyes of your King James Bible god?
@Amused
Are you thinking that because the Bible was ‘endorsed’ by an alleged homosexual king this give credence to a sympathetic Christian view?
Amused | November 17, 2011 at 9:01 AM |
“Another little piece of historical trivia for you. In 1625, Barbados was taken possession of in the name of the Gay King James I.”
So it seems that Caswell and his ilk were right after all! The English did indeed introduce that dastardly rearguard act of sodomite proportion to young and vulnerable Barbados? The vehicle of indoctrination must have been by way of the Anglican Church where this perverse version of religious propaganda was spread from the glebe to pinfold street. It’s a pity that our people are so gullible, easily accepting anything issued as an edict from overseas. Whether it is King James’s instruction to promote homophobia from the pulpit cloak in clerical robes but at the same time resorting to the manse to the love of menservants or Cameron’s demand for “de-buggery” laws or no AID!
@ BU David & All….
Not sure if you’re putting words in his mouth, there. All Amused did is post a historical fact for others to think on. I’m seeing a lot of offshoot branches coming forth from those 2 simple statements.
@David.
I do believe that, as King James I in a time of absolute monrachy commissioned or commanded (not endorsed) the King James Bible thus allowing people to drink straight from the bottle, he gave them the right to make their own determinations on a whole range of matters – slavery, the Spanish Inquisition, homosexuality……..the list is endless and includes the right to use their own God-given brains to decide what the words actually mean. Most of the wars of the lst 1,500 years have had as their base religious differences, the majority of which have been between Christians of different sects and often between Christians and Jews, ignoring the fact that Christ himself was a Jew. Therefore, I prefer to drink right from the bottle on matters religious and I find the King James Bible, with its ornate and beautiful language, infintely more inspiring than the more modern publications. As far as the homosexuality part is concerned, it seems to me ironic and more that in the same way wars and pogroms were instigated and promoted against the Jews by the Church using as their grounds Christ himself (a Jew) is directly parallel to quotations from the King James Bible for which a gay man is responsible, in order to condemn gay people. My position on homosexuality is, as always, that between consenting adults in private it is as much of a non-issue as the same between heterosexual consenting adults. BTW, I consider myself a Christian and I try to follow the teachings of Christ. In other words, I do my best (without aways being successful) to do no harm to my fellow man. If that is not enough, I daresay when I shuffle off this mortal coil, I will be made aware of it.
In any case, going back to your question, it seems to me that there is a great division within almost off the organised Christian sects on a range of subjects, of which homosexuality is but one such, albeit the most minor, yet the most widely discussed. It also seems to me that within the RC Church its practitioners/priests are compelled to preach against it, but an alarmingly large number do not practice what they preach……..any more than they appear to practice celebacy, by which they are also supposed to be bound. So, what is “Christian”, in terms of dogma? It is constantly changing.
Therefore, the best I can come up with is that people should follow their consciences and convictions…….which is what I intend to continue to do. And I find history, including historical trivia, fascinating and would not want to see it re-written simply for one or other faction to try to prove a point. James’ tastes are incidental. And who knows, maybe he thought that by demystifying the Bible he would debunk some of the deliberate misinterpretations, including those nearest to himself. And just a little bit more provokative trivia, did you know that James I’s father, Henry Lord Darnley, was also gay (and Catholic) – and that his mother, Mary Queen of Scots, had Darnley murdered? But none of this detracts from the magnificent work that is the King James Bible, it is merely an incidental and interesting footnote.
Since no one wants to comment on my previous comment I will add another in support of the claim that Jesus was homosexual. Jesus may have come out on the cross when he said in John chapter 19, v 26,27 “When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whome he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son-in-law. Then he said to the disciple, behold thy mother-in-law. And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home”.
@lemuel isn,t that part of the of the facts in the bible or a “TRUTH” which we should ignore
@ Bentley | November 17, 2011 at 11:05 AM |
Both batty Zoe and “fraudy” PhD have just been released from the Black Rock cave to attack you! (LOL!!) You know what you are saying, my man! You are saying that Jesus was “gay”! But Zoe, PhD. will argue that Jesus Is God! Is the circle “square” “straight” or “bent”?
You ain’t easy , Bentley, the “bent” one from the closet!!
Don’t expect any further support from me! Once is enough!
Seriously Lemuel…..
Do you know how you and most of your ilk sound, with your claims of ‘only source’?
@Amused
Thanks for a comprehensive view of your position on the issue at hand. Is it possible to establish motive why King James ‘commanded’ the adoption of the Bible?
Lemule ….you stated that “the bible was translated by Biblical scholars did the translation not King James. Are saying that the heterosexuals should be very proud or ashamed that a homosexual had the balls to ensure that the Bible could be rad by the proletarian. You need to be also aware of this trivia; had not for the reformation, you would not be here on the blog writing.”
Reformation? ……..Martin Luther was shocked by the corruption of the clergy on a trip to Rome in 1510. Sixtus IV (1471–1484) established the practice of selling indulgences to be applied to the dead, thereby establishing a new stream of revenue with agents across Europe.[7] Pope Alexander VI (1492–1503) was one of the most controversial of the Renaissance Popes. He fathered seven children, including Lucrezia and Cesare Borgia, by at least two mistresses.[8] Fourteen years after his death, the corruption of the papacy that Pope Alexander VI exemplified—particularly the sale of indulgences—prompted Luther to write the The Ninety-Five Theses, which he nailed to the door of a church at Wittenberg in Saxony. Source wikipedia.
Reformation my pooch! Has anything changed? You are still enslaved. You will never see the truth you are blinded by words written by men some 3000 years ago who claimed to be servants of God. Which God? Jesus?
Hi guys: Another interesting piece of trivia on King James 1. He was also a Grand master of the secret order known as “Freemasons”.
Does that make him a bogey man too?
Lemuel are these the same who gave us the story of the immaculate conception.
@David. My guess is that it was political. If we go back to the Act of Supremacy, it confirmed the heretofore staunch Catholic “Defender of the Faith”, Henry VIII, as supreme governor of the Church in England. The title “Defender of the Faith” had been given to Henry by the Pope and retained by Henry after he got rid of the Pope. It has been passed down since then and is one of the titles of Elizabeth II.
The new Church of England was not by any means universally accepted in England. Many did not want to forsake Catholicism and Henry had a little problem with heirs. Edward, his weakly son, was Prince of Wales, while his elder daughter, Mary, was staunchly Catholic, her mother being Katherine of Aragon whose brother, Charles, was not only King of the extremely militarily powerful Spain, but Holy Roman Emperor as well. His younger daughter, Elizabeth, was a safe bet as she had been raised Protestant – and how could it have been otherwise, as it was in order to marry her mother, Anne Bolyne, that Henry kicked the Pope out in the first place. In any case, England had a rocky history with Popes, as the Popes were more at military threat from other countries, such as Spain, France and Austria and likely to take their sides, rather than that of England, in any disputes (either religious or secular). So, although getting rid of Catholicism was desirable from the point of view of England’s well-being, the thought of hellfire and damnation if they gave up Catholicism was a hurdle that a lot of English found difficult.
Upon Henry’s death, Edward inherited (and he was just a child) but did not see his majority and he was replaced by Queen Mary, staunchly Catholic, who married Philip of Spain and was hell bent on returning England to Catholicism, to the extent that over 300 Protestants were burned at the stake during her reign and she has henceforth been known as Bloody Queen Mary.
She was childless and succeeded by her sister, Elizabeth I, who promptly undid all Mary’s work to return England to Catholicism and gave England a period of prosperity and pride such as it had never before (and seldom since) enjoyed. Elizabeth, unlike her father, knew exactly what she was doing from a political point of view and ensured that during her reign there was not the slightest chance of England becoming once again subservient to the Pope and his continental cronies. But she had a problem. Mary Queen of Scots, her heir, who was devoutly Catholic (when it suited her) and with very close ties to France (she had been Queen of France, until her first husband, Francois I, died) and she was very much in the thrall of the Italian Queen Mother of France, Marie de Medici, who, in her turn, was closely aligned to the Pope. Mary played into Elizabeth’s hands and Elizabeth did not fail to have her beheaded.
By the end of Elizabeth’s reign, the English would not have accepted Catholicism. After all, they had roundly defeated the Spanish Armada, blessed by the Pope and made up of ships from both Spain and France, and were making a fortune by taking France and Spain on in the New World.
It must have been with no small relief that Elizabeth contemplated the fact that, with Mary gone, her heir was to be James of Scotland who, although baptised a Catholic, had been raised a Protestant under John Knox, who was actually licensed as a Church of England priest during his exile in England.
So, with the advent of James as King, Protestantism was safe. However, James’ children posed a potential problem.
Therefore in answer to the question that you may by now wish you had never asked:
I believe that James and his advisers decided to further separate the Church of England from the Catholic Church by having the Bible translated from Latin – something that was strictly forbidden by the Pope and you may recall that it is only relatively recently that Latin gave way to native languages in Church services – so, as only a small number of the population understood Latin to begin with, we have to wonder at the intestinal fortitude of ordinary people throughout Catholic Europe who attended Church regularly without being able to understand a single word of what was being said. So the King James Bible was, next to the Act of Supremacy, the greatest political tool in confirming the loyalty of a massive amount of the population to the Church of England.
Indeed, this Bible was undoubtedly a factor in seeing off James’ secretly Catholic son, Charles I, who, like his grandmother, also had his head removed. Then too, all Charles I’s children were raised as Catholic’s by their French Catholic mother, although Charles II had the good sense to pretend to be C of E. However, Charles II died without legitimate children and was succeeded by his brother, James II, who certainly had the intention of taking a leaf out of the book of Bloody Queen Mary and returning England to the Pope. However, he got kicked out and the English, by this time no longer an absolute monarchy, chose to maintain the monarchy in the person of James II’s daughter and son-in-law, William and Mary and, as they were childless, thereafter the crown would pass to Mary’s sister, Queen Ann. Parliament also passed the Act of Settlement (1702, I think – but am not sure) whereby it became law that, not only must the monarch not be Catholic, but could not be married to a Catholic.
One would like to think that King James exercised his authority to command the translation of the Bible into English out of concern that ordinary mortals could understand the Word of God and be brought closer to God by it. However, common sense dictates that the prime motivating factor was political. Whatever the motivation, though, it was, I believe, a magnificent thing to have done and has provided comfort and spiritual strength to millions of people over the last 400 years.
Anyone can feel free to correct me on all of this, as I am not as young as I used to be and my memory may be at fault and I have written this without cut and paste or looking up references and purely from memory.
@ Amused
If I did not know better I would think that you are my “late” father-in-law, C.G.W Clarke. LOL. That man knew world history “backwards”.
@ac | November 17, 2011 at 6:39 AM |
“a book laced with controversy. sexual abuse ! fornication. Homosexuality and war ! and many gods ! stories which can not be confirmed !which leaves societies still…”
Where in the bible is homosexuality accepted by God? I hope u are not referring to David and Jonathan who were best friends. where does the true God, who introduced himself to Moses as ‘I am” speak of acceptance of many god?
the pitiful thing about u, is that u would have chosen to gamble ur eternal soul. God does not have to prove himself to u, He already did – when He allowed u to wake up this morning, that was He giving u another chance to look around and know He exists. Whether u believe or not, will NOT change the fact that u will face Him when you die…it depends on u, whether u meet Him as a judge or as a friend .
i would rather live my life as if God existed, only to die and realise I was wrong than to live as if God DOES NOT exists only to die and realise I was wrong. ur an adult surely u cannot be so silly as to accept that there is no God
@ chocolate city hussle | November 17, 2011 at 4:21 PM |
It is noted hat you keep referring to your god in the masculine form!
is your god male or female. If neither then we can refer to your god a “IT”.
JUST ASKING | November 16, 2011 at 10:49 PM |
The English are known to change laws etc to please themselves, did they change anything when translating ???
*******************************************************************
The 10th Commandment according to the British Prime Minister David Cameron, to the Commonwealth will soon be amended to: “Thou shall covet thy neighbours ass, or else .”
@Amused
Thanks for what appears to be an erudite display in ‘medieval’ history. Agree with you that the decision might have been political by King James to make managing his subjects (army) more malleable. A decision in expediency!
@ Amused
i guess you studied the Tudors/Stewarts for your A level history. Who was your special period? Mine was Elizabeth !. Very good synopsis. You obviously went to school to learn and not just to eat lunch…..like some people I knew.
@ac
Why bother with those bible thumpers? We have been down this road before. Let them keep their book of myths. legends and fairy tales. They also believe that Moses the Egyptian High Priest, who learnt the secrets of the Temple at the feet of Pharoahs was a JEW.
@ MILK chocolate.
Since you are so versed and knowledgeable about the Bible can you explain to me in scholarly terminology . The immaculate conception generally known as “The Virgin Birth”
“In the small east German town of Wittenberg, a 34-year-old Augustinian priest walked to Castle Church and nailed 95 theological propositions for debate on the door. The debate Martin Luther began nearly 500 years ago turned the world upside down. Democracy, civil rights and liberties, constitutional government, religious liberty, and the free market all find their roots in the Reformation.”
All of the ‘redherring’ distractives, posted here by the BU ‘Bildge Pumpers’ cannot take away from the HISTORIC FACT* that the ‘Reformation’ of the sixteenth century, IS* next to the birth of Christianity, the TRUE Church of Jesus Christ, first century A.D., the greatest event in history; because the Reformation, despite and in spite of its failures, due to some individuals, gave DIRECTLY* of INDIRECTLY* a might impluse to EVERY forward movement, in Western civilization, and made Protestantism, the chief propelling force in History of modern civilization, a fact still not recognized by many.
Amused was addressing lemuel when he wrote “In 1625, Barbados was taken possession of in the name of the Gay King James I. Now, the mind boggles to see what tangent you are going to go off on with that piece of trivia” but hey there is nothing to stop me from jumping in. If what amused wrote is true it seems to me thatince Barbados started as a gay nation under King James 1, then Barbados is rightfully a gay nation (still)
Quoting Zoe | November 17, 2011 at 8:04 PM | “In the small east German town of Wittenberg, a 34-year-old Augustinian priest walked to Castle Church and nailed 95 theological propositions for debate on the door. ”
Seems to me that if Martin Luther (not KIng) had posted the things on Facebook that the Reformation would have gone much faster.
The Bible Alone and Constitutionalism
“Luther’s love for truth drove him on. The pope had erred in his teaching about indulgences, and therefore the pope was not infallible. In fact, the pope and church councils had made many errors over the centuries; they were not to be trusted, especially with something so important as the salvation of one’s soul. Luther wrote: “I do not trust either in the pope or in councils alone, since it is well known that they have often erred and contradicted themselves.” The only thing trustworthy was the Word of God itself, the Bible.”
“The medieval structure of ecclesiastical authority could not withstand the Protestant idea of sola scriptura–he Bible alone. One Christian man with a Bible was superior to any pope or council or tradition without it. Luther translated the Bible from Greek and Hebrew into German so the people could read it in their own language and not be subject to an ecclesiastical ruling class. By translating the Bible into the common language, Luther freed the German people from ecclesiastical totalitarianism: The Bible was the written constitution of the church, which the people could now read for themselves. His second major contribution to Western political thought was the idea of a written constitution–the Bible–limiting the power and authority of church (and later political) leaders. There is a direct connection between the Reformation cry of sola scriptura and the American idea of the Constitution–not any man or body of men–as the supreme law of the land.”
Christian Faith and Religious Liberty
“Luther argued that Christians were free of the arbitrary control of either the church or the state. God alone is lord of the conscience. He wrote. “It is with the Word that we must fight, by the Word we must overthrow and destroy what has been set up by violence. I will not make use of force against the superstitious and unbelieving…No one must be constrained. Liberty is the very essence of faith…I will preach, discuss, and write; but I will constrain none, for faith is a voluntary act…I have stood up against the pope, indulgences, and papists, but without violence or tumult I put forward God’s Word; I preached and wrote–this was all I did. The Word alone did all. If I had wished to appeal to force, the whole of Germany would perhaps have been deluged with blood.”
“Religious liberty, freedom of conscience, is an idea that Luther derived from the Bible’s teaching about faith: Belief is a gift of God; it is not a work of man’s free will. Men cannot believe the Gospel unless God causes them to. Luther wrote: “God’s Word should be allowed to work alone, without our work or interference. Why? Because it is not in my power to fashion the hearts of men as the potter molds the clay…I can get no further than their ears; their hearts I cannot reach. And since I cannot pour faith into their hearts, I cannot nor should I, force anyone to have faith. That is God’s work alone, who causes faith to live in the heart…We should preach the Word, but the results must be left solely to God’s good pleasure. By articulating the Biblical doctrine of faith as wholly a gift of God, Luther undermined the Catholic inquisition and formulated the theological rationale for religious liberty.”
The Reformation in Law And Economics
“Democracy, constitutionalism, and religious liberty were not the only social consequences of the Reformation. They were the beginning of a revolution that has implications for all aspects of life even five centuries later.”
“Harold Berman of Emory University has pointed out that “the key to the renewal of law in the West from the sixteenth century on was the Protestant concept of the power of the individual, by God’s grace, to change nature and to create new social relations through the exercise of his will. The Protestant concept of the individual became central to the development of the modern law of property and contract….” This, along with Luther’s idea that all callings–all labor, not just the labor of monks and nuns-could be done to the glory of God, led to the development of the free market economy. A free society and a free market were the political and economic expressions of the religious ideas of the Reformation. Capitalism was the economic practice of which Christianity was the theory.”
“One of Luther’s most brilliant followers, John Calvin, systematized the theology of the Reformation. The seventeenth-century Calvinists laid the foundations for both English and American civil rights and liberties: freedom of speech, press, and religion, the privilege against self-incrimination, the independence of juries, and the right of habeas corpus, the right not to be imprisoned without cause. The nineteenth-century German historian Leopold von Ranke referred to Calvin as the “virtual founder of America.”
“The German sociologist Max Weber wrote a book in 1908 titled The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism in which he argued that capitalism historically emerged in Protestant countries because they inculcated those virtues that led to the development of capitalism: hard work, honesty, frugality, thrift, punctuality. These virtues, coupled with the idea of a calling, provided the impetus ending serfdom and establishing a free political and economic order. The theology and values of the Bible, rediscovered by the Protestant Reformers in the 16th century, have been the principal ideas creating what we know as Western civilization.”
All These Things
“It was not Luther’s intention to create a civilization: he intended to proclaim the righteousness of God in Jesus Christ. His life was dedicated to a far more important activity than building an earthly city. Western civilization was an unintended byproduct of his faithfulness to the Bible. The Reformation put the Kingdom of God first not the kingdom of man or the kingdom of the church. The results were just as Christ said they would be:”
“Therefore I say to you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink; nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they?…Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: They neither toil nor spin. And yet I say to you that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Now if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is. and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? For after all these things the Gentiles seek. For your heavenly Father knows that you need all things.” “But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness. and all these things shall be added to you” (Matthew 6).
“Justification by faith–the righteousness of God imputed to sinners–is the only foundation of eternal salvation and earthly civilization. The Reformers sought first the Kingdom of God and all these things–the things we call Western civilization–were added to them, and to us.”
No other movement, be it religious or secular, in the history of mankind, has had such an affect upon FREEDOM, civil, democratic, educational, free market enterprise, etc, etc, like the Protestant Reformation has on Western Civilization, bar NONE!
@Zoe
What is the focal point of your last comment?
Can you distill it for us in the way Amused did for example?
We have some ordinary folks on BU who may want to follow the point you are making.
@Random Thoughts | November 17, 2011 at 8:14 PM. I didn’t mean it like that and you are being even more provocative than I was. As for Barbados still being a gay nation, well, I hope that is true, provided you interpret “gay” as being “happy” which generally I do believe we are.
@Pat. Always a pleasure to hear from you. Have you seen that the Bat Cave has opened and disgorged.
David, my last comment posted, is rather self-explanatory, I fail to see how any, even ordinary folk, could not understand the ‘focal’ point(s) made!
What Did the Protestant Reformation Secure For Modern Man?
It secured FREEDOM of religion, which was NOT permited before under the tyranny of Roman Catholicism, and its Popes. And as a legitimate consequence also, intellectual, political, and civil FREEEDOM. It made the Word of God, the Bible, with its instructions accessible to ALL. This IS* its triumphant vindication.
Compare for proof Protestant Germany under William I., with Roman Catholic Germany under Maximilian I., England under Queen Victoria, with England under Henry VIII., Calvinistic Scotland and Lutheran Scandinavia in the nineteenth century, with Roman Catholic Scotland and Scandinavia in the fiftheenth. Look at the origin and growth of free Holand and free North America. Contrast England with Spain of the present day; Prussia with Austria; Holland with Portugal; United States and Canada with older Mexico and Peru or Brazil. Consider the teeming Protestant literature in EVERY department of leaerning, science and art; universities, charitable institutions and missionary stations scattered all over the world. Surely, the Protestant Reformation can stand the test: “By their fruit ye shall know them.”
Do you get it now, David? Much of what we have in B’dos, that’s taken for granted, our democratic principles of governance, EDUCATION, FREEDOM of speech, right to assemble, and CHOOSE what religion one desires to embrace, etc, etc., were ALL spawned from the Protestant Reformation, without which, we’d probably be STILL under the BONDAGE of Roman Catholicism, which controlled the masses, from the CORRUPT dogma of Popes, which WAS/IS not the principiles, of freedom and liberty as taught in God’s Word, the Bible!
Is Sun Worship Idolatry?
From Idols and Idolatry:
Quote:
Objects of idolatry. The sun and moon were early selected as outward symbols of all-pervading power, and the worship of the heavenly bodies was not only the most ancient but the most prevalent system of idolatry. Taking its rise in the plains of Chaldea, it spread through Egypt, Greece, Scythia, and even Mexico and Ceylon.
Whatever of wealth or honor or pleasure is loved and sought before God and righteousness becomes an object of idolatry.
Ya hear that Nnaki! Ya sun worshipper! Idolater!
PAGAN SUN WORSHIP AND CATHOLICISM
THE MONSTRANCE and the WAFER GOD
——————————————————————————–
Exo 20:4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
Exo 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: …
Acts 19:26 Moreover ye see and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much people, saying that they be no gods, which are made with hands:
Note that the commandment of God forbids making and bowing down to images. Among pagans, perhaps the most common form of idolatry is sun worship, and the above prohibition would clearly exclude bowing down before images of the sun or moon (things in the heaven above). But then God gets even more explicit:
Deu 17:2 If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant,
Deu 17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded;
Deu 17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and inquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel:
Deu 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
Jer 8:1 At that time, saith the LORD, they shall bring out the bones of the kings of Judah, and the bones of his princes, and the bones of the priests, and the bones of the prophets, and the bones of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, out of their graves:
Jer 8:2 And they shall spread them before the sun, and the moon, and all the host of heaven, whom they have loved, and whom they have served, and after whom they have walked, and whom they have sought, and whom they have worshipped: they shall not be gathered, nor be buried; they shall be for dung upon the face of the earth.
Jer 8:3 And death shall be chosen rather than life by all the residue of them that remain of this evil family, which remain in all the places whither I have driven them, saith the LORD of hosts.
With that in mind, lets look at solar and lunar images directly associated with the Catholic Mass.
Here is Pope John Paul II holding what is called a Monstrance or Ostensorium. It is used to display a round wafer of bread, called the host, which is used in what is called the Mass, Lord’s Supper, Communion or Eucharistic meal. The Catholic believes this wafer of bread turns into the actual body of Christ when consecrated during the Mass.
All of this rampant, gross sacerdotalism (priestcraft, Witchcraft) that occurs in the Catholic Mass, IS nothing but Paganistic Idolatry!
To Amused:
Thank you again for your informed piece of English History. But i was referring to the broad social reformation which would have started with the rebellion of Martin Luther, and not Henry VIII’s removal of the Catholic Church as the primary spiritual institution in England. What he did was not a revolution.
I get the feeling that a certain inhabitant of the bat cave would be far more comfortable living in Iran where they still stone people to death. Problem, though, they sentence Christian priests to death by hanging for preaching the Gospel. So the Bat Cave inmate is on the horns of a dilemma – to move to Iran and glory in watching people being stoned to death and he himself then being hung, along with homosexuals, OR to stay home in Barbados and cut and paste until the cows come home, or they find a way of sealing the bat cave.
@ David….
I think I will need to copyright my ‘Bat Cave” label …don’t you think?
Had no idea it would have stuck…lol
To Pat, AC and Island Gal:
I find it almost hilarious that all of you have a stated position and I am not allowed to believe that Jesus Christ was the son of God. Why is it that I can not believe that the BIBLE is much more than a story book, as some of you put, but an instrument and a fountain of wisdom, not of the man made kind. Some of the things that most of you read and believe are even more of a fairy tale than the same Bible. Why is that i must believe that to be sensitive and socially relevant i must believe in the philosophy of the gay and lesbians.
@ lemuel | November 18, 2011 at 10:32 AM |
The King James version of the bible is a book of myths, legends, stories and historical accounts of kings, warriors and soothsayers.
Even the Queen- who is the God-appointed Head of the Anglican Church-
describes it as “the most interesting piece of English prose ever written” (or words along that line)! Not as the one and true and source of the word of your god!
@Techie
You need to behave and now there is one.
live by the bible and live good
you dont want to live by the word so you making excuses
Zoe | November 18, 2011 at 10:01 AM |
You make your god seem like a very very jealous ET!
“May the LORD bless you and protect you.
The LORD make his face shine upon you and be gracious to you.
The LORD turn his face toward you and give you peace.”
“He wraps himself in light as with a garment; he stretches out the heavens like a tent.”
“There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light.”
Just a few extracts from your ‘cut & paste’ story book cookie jar. You are a know-it all so no need to cite references!
Sounds like Sun Worship or an invocation to worship the ET!
MLnuki, you poor tormented soul, you seem to find great satisfaction in insulting and name calling, labelling people you don’t know anything about, just because they have a different world view to you.
I asked you before , have you ever had a real job, not some political handout, or second tier , third world, rubber stamp postion of bureacracy?
The apostle Paul wrote, “For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) but to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things…how beit there is not in every man that knowledge” (I Corinthians 8:5-7).
Faith plays a very important role in the life of a Christian, but also in all our lives. Do you have faith in your partner, or your children? Of course you do , but you will argue that you can see them in the flesh, and you have a personal knowledge through experience , right?
“But without faith it is impossible to please Him: for he that comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him” (Hebrews 11:6).
In science , one is expected to examine ALL the facts, not to hope or suppose, conveniently add on or subtract anything. Stand on the indisputable FACTS.
Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” (I Thessalonians 5:21). Surely this God would not then expect us to assume His existence, while instructing us to prove everything else from His Word!
There have been numerous theories , alternative arguments/deities, hundreds of different’ Gods’, some made of wood , stone , every material imaginable, or just plain hot gases, all of which have collapse under scrutiny, most of them requiring great leaps of faith.
I’ll leave you with this. Evolutionists have tried for decades to argue that humans are 99% similar chemically to apes, and blood precipitation tests do indicate that the chimpanzee is people’s closest relative. Yet regarding this we must observe the following: Milk chemistry indicates that the donkey is man’s closest relative.
Would you like to choose which one you are, the jackass or the chimp?
It takes two to tango.
Can we agree that ‘believing’ requires a leap of faith and move on? We have travelled this road so many times.
David | November 18, 2011 at 4:31 PM |
Can we agree that ‘believing’ requires a leap of faith and move on? We have travelled this road so many times.
@ David….
There lies the problem!
You are asking those who hold the “Truth” & “Facts” to say otherwise….they can’t do that!
The simplest of questions remain unanswered by them on BU.
@ Ph.D | November 18, 2011 at 4:22 PM |
“I asked you before , have you ever had a real job, not some political handout, or second tier , third world, rubber stamp “position” of “bureaucracy”?”
Please David & Technician, indulge me one more time!
PhD, my answers are as follows:
Yes a few jobs, none political. Highly paid that is why I no longer have to work today for a “fella”. If you call Europe and North America “third world”, then yes I have worked only in Third World countries but not in a rubber stamp position but in a position to influence minds unlike yours.
What about you, fraud? Yes go ahead and boast about your material achievements. Just remember the advice about storing up riches on earth and the difficulty of people like you carrying chips on your shoulder of dromedary proportions to pass through the eye of your god’s needle.
But I have just experienced an epiphany! Eureka! God is a sub-atomic particle faster than the speed of light! Thank you Jesus for saving me just before you are about to be crucified on the galactic equatorial cross and turn this world upside down!
@ Ph.D | November 18, 2011 at 4:22 PM |
millertheanunnaki | November 18, 2011 at 5:28 PM |
Deal with matters like than that and forget the “I got more material possessions than thou” hatred!
Truth by definition IS* absolute; Truth is the ultimate certitude, regardless of who ever DENIES* this reality. Truth does NOT* need anyone’s approval or acceptance, to be Truth. Reality IS* synonymous with Truth; and Truth is unyielding, one can choose to ignore it, SCORN and scoff at it, or even curse it, but all to know avail; in the end TRUTH* impassively stands its ground in the face of the most IGNORANT, emotional, vebal and pseudo- intellectual onslaughts!
Truth can be especially brutal to those who insist on worshipping at the Alter of Theory, I.e., ‘SUN’ worship, and those so inclined by such IGNORANCE and IDOLATRY; this is, because Truth has a way of frustrating theory, and, much like the mongoose circling a SNAKE, I.e., a Python who has swallowed a JACKASS, who simply CANNOT digest its meal, of Pagan idolatry, ultimately wearing it down, and devouring it.
Such is the BU ‘Bildge Pumpers’ and Scoffers club adherents baseless theories, with NO historic evidence, objectively, and coherently presented, at ALL, just voidless, stupid simplistic sentences, laced IN* ad hominem, distilled and brewed in ‘redherring’ distractives, as they have nothing of critical, logical, cogent substance to offer, just FOLLY, and FOOLISHNESS, emanate from the BILDGE they PUMP; from the PIT of DARKNESS, in which their empty, futile, MINDS dwell!
So it be! True to form!
Truth is proven by evidence, that can be discerned by the senses, and recorded objectively.
The problem with the Bible is that a lot of hands have gone into the pot in terms of interpretation, and everyone has their own opinion about what should be and what should not be in there. As long as it suits the person, the Bible is the one book that can be twisted and conformed to anything the person thinks. Can a dictionary be dealt with in the same way?
Also, Christianity, for all its emphasis on God, share a lot of holidays & prayer days with the pagan religions it replaced. Is Zoe so sure that Christianity doesn’t also worship a “SON” (Sun) of God?
Religion, at the end of the day, is about power…and man is the creator of that concept, not God.
Straight.
How do we know the Bible is true?
Learn about the Bible. There have been hundreds of books written on the subject of the evidences of the divine inspiration of the Bible, and these evidences are many and varied. Most people today, unfortunately, have not read any of these books. In fact, few have even read the Bible itself! Thus, many people tend to go along with the popular delusion that the Bible is full of mistakes and is no longer relevant to our modern world.
Nevertheless the Bible writers claimed repeatedly that they were transmitting the very Word of God, infallible and authoritative in the highest degree. This is an amazing thing for any writer to say, and if the forty or so men who wrote the Scriptures were wrong in these claims, then they must have been lying, or insane, or both.
But, on the other hand, if the greatest and most influential book of the ages, containing the most beautiful literature and the most perfect moral code ever devised, was written by deceiving fanatics, then what hope is there for ever finding meaning and purpose in this world?
If one will seriously investigate these Biblical evidences, he will find that their claims of divine inspiration (stated over 3,000 times, in various ways) were amply justified.
Fulfilled Prophecies
The remarkable evidence of fulfilled prophecy is just one case in point. Hundreds of Bible prophecies have been fulfilled, specifically and meticulously, often long after the prophetic writer had passed away.
For example, Daniel the prophet predicted in about 538 BC (Daniel 9:24-27) that Christ would come as Israel’s promised Savior and Prince 483 years after the Persian emperor would give the Jews authority to rebuild Jerusalem, which was then in ruins. This was clearly and definitely fulfilled, hundreds of years later.
There are extensive prophecies dealing with individual nations and cities and with the course of history in general, all of which have been literally fulfilled. More than 300 prophecies were fulfilled by Christ Himself at His first coming. Other prophecies deal with the spread of Christianity, as well as various false religions, and many other subjects.
There is no other book, ancient or modern, like this. The vague, and usually erroneous, prophecies of people like Jeanne Dixon, Nostradamus, Edgar Cayce, and others like them are not in the same category at all, and neither are other religious books such as the Koran, the Confucian Analects, and similar religious writings. Only the Bible manifests this remarkable prophetic evidence, and it does so on such a tremendous scale as to render completely absurd any explanation other than divine revelation.
Unique Historical Accuracy
Learn more about Archaeology and the Bible. The historical accuracy of the Scriptures is likewise in a class by itself, far superior to the written records of Egypt, Assyria, and other early nations. Archeological confirmations of the Biblical record have been almost innumerable in the last century. Dr. Nelson Glueck, probably the greatest modern authority on Israeli archeology, has said:
“No archeological discovery has ever controverted a Biblical reference. Scores of archeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or in exact detail historical statements in the Bible. And, by the same token, proper evaluation of Biblical descriptions has often led to amazing discoveries.”
Scientific Accuracy
Another striking evidence of divine inspiration is found in the fact that many of the principles of modern science were recorded as facts of nature in the Bible long before scientist confirmed them experimentally. A sampling of these would include:
■Roundness of the earth (Isaiah 40:22)
■Almost infinite extent of the sidereal universe (Isaiah 55:9)
■Law of conservation of mass and energy (II Peter 3:7)
■Hydrologic cycle (Ecclesiastes 1:7)
■Vast number of stars (Jeremiah 33:22)
■Law of increasing entropy (Psalm 102:25-27)
■Paramount importance of blood in life processes (Leviticus 17:11)
■Atmospheric circulation (Ecclesiastes 1:6)
■Gravitational field (Job 26:7)
■and many others.
These are not stated in the technical jargon of modern science, of course, but in terms of the basic world of man’s everyday experience; nevertheless, they are completely in accord with the most modern scientific facts.
It is significant also that no real mistake has ever been demonstrated in the Bible—in science, in history, or in any other subject. Many have been claimed, of course, but conservative Bible scholars have always been able to work out reasonable solutions to all such problems.
Unique Structure
The remarkable structure of the Bible should also be stressed. Although it is a collection of 66 books, written by 40 or more different men over a period of 2,000 years, it is clearly one Book, with perfect unity and consistency throughout.
The individual writers, at the time of writing, had no idea that their message was eventually to be incorporated into such a Book, but each nevertheless fits perfectly into place and serves its own unique purpose as a component of the whole. Anyone who diligently studies the Bible will continually find remarkable structural and mathematical patterns woven throughout its fabric, with an intricacy and symmetry incapable of explanation by chance or collusion.
The one consistent theme of the Bible, developing in grandeur from Genesis to Revelation, is God’s great work in the creation and redemption of all things, through His only Son, the Lord Jesus Christ.
Bible’s Unique Effect
The Bible is unique also in terms of its effect on individual men
There is no other document of antiquity, that even comes remotely close, to the historic veracity, and accuracy of fulfilled prophecies as contained in the Word of God, the Bible, NONE!
Seeker | November 18, 2011 at 10:30 PM | Truth is proven by evidence, that can be discerned by the senses, and recorded objectively.
“The problem with the Bible is that a lot of hands have gone into the pot in terms of interpretation, and everyone has their own opinion about what should be and what should not be in there. As long as it suits the person, the Bible is the one book that can be twisted and conformed to anything the person thinks. Can a dictionary be dealt with in the same way?”
Yes, Seeker, there are set principles and rules that govern the sound, establised methods of interpreting God’s Word, the Scriptures; Biblical Hermeneutics, Contextual Analysis, and Linguistic Exegesis. Many who are NOT trained in these proper principles of sound interpretation, have made a MESS of twisting Scripture; BUT, this most certainly does NOT invaladate the TRUTH of God’s Word, when properly interpreted.
“Also, Christianity, for all its emphasis on God, share a lot of holidays & prayer days with the pagan religions it replaced. Is Zoe so sure that Christianity doesn’t also worship a “SON” (Sun) of God?”
No, Seeker, true Christianity, does NOT worship a (Sun god!) Jesus Christ, the SON of God, CREATED all things, including the SUN, which He holds in the palm of His hand like an Atom! Also, because certain days within Christian orthodoxy, coincide with old pagan religions, does NOT equate them with paganism, no way!
“Religion, at the end of the day, is about power…and man is the creator of that concept, not God.”
Seeker, Religion is man seeking out God on man’s humanistic ways. Whereas, Christianity, in its purest and simplist ways, IS* Almighty God, in, through, and by, The Lord Jesus Christ, INITIATING the entire process of reaching down to mankind, and revealing Himself, in the Person of His Son, Jesus Christ. Dead, ritualistic religion, brings man into BONDAGE, spiritual bondage, it KILLS the spirit of man; whereas, Jesus Christ, brings LIFE, PEACE, JOY, PURPOSE, and the Gift of Eternal Life, with Him hereafter.
Seeker, you mention the dictionary and the Bible, and its proper interpretation. We humans use the words of the dictionary to distort just about everything there is , only a daily basis.
From a purely scientific or even plain common sensical perspective now, Dr. B. G. Ranganathan said, “…the probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop” . Surely there is some simple logic in that staement.
Everyone has witnessed explosions. Have you ever seen one that was orderly? Or one that created a watch or a clock? Or one that produced a single thing of exquisite design—instead of the certain result of chaos and destruction? If you threw a million hand grenades, you would see them produce chaos and destruction a million times! There would never be an exception.
Can we at least accept that our world is in deep trouble, and the problems are escalating by the day, financial crises , wars natural disasters, starvation and disease at proportions never yet witnessed across the world , all at the same time. Now is NOT the time for a lack of faith , quite the contrary. “all things [will] work together for good” if you love God (Rom. 8:28).
True Christians do not have to distort or fabricate answers to today’s problems using the Bible. The Bible already specifically addresses any and all problems we are facing today, so we just point the non-beleivers to the relevant text. Speaking of our time, the last generation before he returns,
Christ asked, “When the Son of Man comes, shall He find faith on the earth?” (Luke 18:8).
PHD
When all is said and then Scientific evidence is more logical and precise than anything written in the bible about the creation of the earth and foryou to deny that is evident of being dishonest and disillusion at worst.The problem that with most religionist is that the same GOD whom you believe to have given you all knoweledge YOU have deny the right to let YOU seekmore knoweldge SCARY!
@ PHD \
Maybe you can answer a question i have poised to the religionist on this thread. Explain the “Immaculate conception” no one so far have even tried maybe you can. I know it might take a BIG Leap of Faith to explain!
AC …you know that these religious zealots will not explain the “immaculate conception” because they just can’t.
Have you all noticed that the Bible was only written by men? I wonder why? Was it because men believed that women were less intelligent? Do you realise that all the prophets and disciples were men? The only book I remember in the bible was the book of Esther and it is probably the shortest book in the Bible ( subject to correction). And of course GOD is a MAN. Wunna men really feel important nuh (the religious zealots) Cor blind all awunna. That is why women are heading many of the households, holding the most mortgages and holding down many of the jobs as well as being the among the most educated. If they had obeyed the men and the Bible they would have been the worst off and second class citizens in this country. I am aware there are some (like Zoe, Scout, TB, Ph.D and Lemule) who feel that women have become too vocal and independent and must be brought back in line (behind the man). Well dat ent gine happen!
@Islandgal. Go, girl, go!!!! Yuh right!!!!!
One of the big ironies of today is that the RC would find millions to buy a Church but have several victims of child abuse and poor people in the flock where that money could have been put to more humanitarian use.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2011/11/18/catholic-church-buys-crystal-cathedral.html
@ islandgal246 | November 19, 2011 at 8:35 AM |
I support you one zillion % on this one!
The more these misogynists post their sexists comments the more reasons women have to think that men are a bunch of dumb jackasses. How can the likes of Zoe and the fraud PhD believe in a book that quarantines women because they are having a period. This would mean that aprrox. 25 % of non-pregnant adult females ought to be in isolation quarters on any day.
These silly men who still stupidly adhere to this mandatory practice as outlined in Leviticus15: 19-27
(“When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening, etc ”) would starve for days in a very dirty house with bawling nasty brats around them!
PhD & Zoe come to the defence of Mr. LEVITICUS!
@ Zoe & PhD:
Re: ac | November 19, 2011 at 7:09 AM |
“Explain the “Immaculate conception” no one so far have even tried maybe you can. I know it might take a BIG Leap of Faith to explain!”
Let me speak for once on your behalf to defend you from such a dangerous and serious charge!
This belief that Mary was sinless and of virgin birth just like her firstborn Jesus is pure heresy propagated by that satanic institution called the Roman Catholic (RC) Church. These sun worshipers and pagan sinners coined this concept of Mary’s divinity using the alleged writings of Luke as the basis for putting Mary next to male gods.
But remember that our dear doctor Luke is the RC equivalent of the snake man Ophiuchus (associated with the Egyptian Imothep or Greek Asclepius). He is portrayed in astrological legend as the protector and guardian of the womb (dark rift in the centre of the galactic (Holy) cross of the Milky Way) from which suns (Sons like Jesus) are born and sometimes reborn (refreshed). In astral-theology Mary is therefore represented as the milky way (Mother of God(s)) in which the So (u) n of Man is conceived sent to earth to save humanity but was crucified in the process and will return to usher in a new world order. This return to earth event is scheduled to be enacted next year around the winter solstice when the Sun (Son of God) will be returning to the centre of the galaxy where a special alignment (Holy cross) will occur which will open the portal for the refreshed sun (Jesus) to return to Earth to save (rapture) the likes of Zoe.
When this rare event (last time was approx 13,000 earth years ago circa 11,000 BC around the time of the great legendary Flood) takes place St. Luke the doctor aka Ophiuchus (Serpentarius, the serpent) will be there between Adam (Sagittarius) with his bow and arrow aimed at Eve’s vulva (centre of Scorpio) to receive the result of this union to be sent to Earth.
There is your explanation of the Immaculate Conception and a new Joy to the World called Jesus the Sun of Man! The I Ching says so! So sayeth the Chinese!
The Dogma of the so-called Immaculate Conception of Mary, in Catholicism, is unscriptural heresy, it has absolutely NO basis whatsoever in God’s Word, a fabrication of the Popes, in an attempt further deify Mary.
The Only Sure Guide To God’s Truth
The Bible is to be the sole source of doctrine for the Christian (2 Tim. 3:16,17). When this basic fact is recognized various forms of confusion are immediately cleared up. When the truth of Scripture is received one can find the God of the Bible, if he seeks God with all of his heart:
You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart. (Jer 29:13)
Regarding the teaching of the immaculate conception of Mary, all it takes to show the fallacy of it is to ponder and receive the following Scriptures:
For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, (Rom. 3:23).
Therefore, Mary has sinned, just like you and I have. Also, the second part of that verse reveals a unique feature of God’s glory, namely He has never sinned at any time, since He is God. So Romans 3:23 is a double blow to the immaculate conception of Mary belief, which has absolutely no support from the Bible. (Catholicism must go to other sources outside the Holy Scriptures for its teaching.)
Only Jesus Was Sinless.
Besides Rom. 3:23, other Scriptures speak of only one who was without sin—the Lord Jesus—with never any mention of Mary:
“For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are—yet was without sin.” (Heb 4:15)
“God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” (2 Cor 5:21)
“But with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect.” (1 Pet 1:19)
“He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth.” (1 Pet 2:22)
“Such a high priest meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens.” (Heb 7:26)
According to these verses of Scripture (or the teaching of the earliest Christian church), Jesus never sinned, but everyone else has. All others have been guilty of sin at sometime in their life, which is also shown elsewhere in Scripture:
“For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.” (Rom 11:32)
“If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word has no place in our lives.” (1 John 1:10)
Certainly, Mary is included in these last two verses, which indicts her like the rest of us as people who have sinned. Hence, we all need a Savior. Certainly, Mary knew her own need of this as shown in the following Scripture:
“And my spirit rejoices in God my Savior” (Luke 1:47)
The Conclusion From Scripture
From an unscriptural belief about Mary’s conception, many have been further misled to trust in her instead of the God of the Scriptures. This God has revealed His truth in the Bible, which leads us to the Lord Jesus. He alone is the Christian’s refuge, hope, strength, etc. Spiritual life is only found in him, according to Scripture. He is to be the object of our faith for salvation. This is vital truth for many sincere Catholics because the Mary of Catholicism is not the Mary of the Bible.
One is surely making the gravest of all mistakes by rejecting God’s eternal truth given to mankind in the Bible for anything else, even if it comes through a vision accompanied by miracles. Dear reader, may this not be the case with you. Remember, nothing can be wrong with going solely by what the Bible declares, which is foundational to the Christian life as well as salvation itself. This is the only safe, sure way to know God’s truth.
@ Zoe | November 19, 2011 at 11:10 AM |
“According to these verses of Scripture (or the teaching of the earliest Christian church), Jesus never sinned, but everyone else has.”
You have responded to the question of the immaculate conception true to form. But I have already presented a better defence on your behalf FOC. Don’t jeopardise your chances. The judges’ decision is awaited!
Would you call getting into a fit of anger in the temple and damaging people’s property sin or just breaking man-made laws?
If Jesus the son is the same as god the father then explain the conundrum:
The son Jesus (SUN) descended on the day of the Enunciation (25th of March 4 days after the Vernal Equinox in the Northern Hemisphere) and “knew” a sinful under-age virgin (Virgo) his own mother (incest aka Isis / Horus complex or Grecian Oedipus complex) to be thus giving her “arranged marriage” husband Joseph a ready-made jacket (fornication, adultery and coveting another’s wife (property)). Nine months later (25th of December- 4 days after the Winter Solstice -the opening of the womb) an illegitimate child is born in a cow shed or sheep pen away from social opprobrium and prying eyes (other than the light from the 3 stars in the belt of Orion and directed by the God (dog) star Sirius).
What a Christian parody of pagan astrological story telling!
Sex During Menstruation
You shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness as long as she is in her customary impurity. (Leviticus 18:19)
I. God hates it.
Indeed the marriage bed is undefiled (Hebrews 13:4), but there is something that can defile the marriage bed. Besides “strangers with you” (Proverbs 5:17), sexual intercourse during menstruation also defiles. Even though Leviticus 18:19 is in the law, and Christ is the end of the law for righteousness for everyone who believes (Romans 10:4), it nonetheless reveals that sex during menstruation is an abomination to God.
Several other sins are listed off in Leviticus 18, sex with near of kin, marrying a woman and her sister, adultery, idolatry, homosexuality, and bestiality. These are all identified as things that defile and are things that God hates, as the following verses declare:
Do not defile yourselves with any of these things; for by all these the nations are defiled, which I am casting out before you. For the land is defiled; therefore I visit the punishment of its iniquity upon it, and the land vomits out its inhabitants. You shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations, either any of your own nation or any stranger who dwells among you (for all these abominations the men of the land have done, who were before you, and thus the land is defiled), lest the land vomit you out also when you defile it, as it vomited out the nations that were before you. For whoever commits any of these abominations, the persons who commit them shall be cut off from among their people. Therefore you shall keep My ordinance, so that you do not commit any of these abominable customs which were committed before you, and that you do not defile yourselves by them: I am the Lord your God. (Leviticus 18:24-30)
Before this law was given to Moses (Leviticus 18:1), the nations and their land had already been defiled by these things, and the land had already vomited out nations that practiced them. This makes it clear, that these practices, which includes sex during menstruation, are, according to God, evil (i.e. sinful) and He viewed them as evil before the law was given to Moses.
Furthermore, the decree God gave the Israelites for anyone who had sex during the menstrual cycle was death.
If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has exposed her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from their people. (Leviticus 20:18)
The Lord obviously takes this very seriously and instructed the Israelites to kill anyone who did such a thing (cut off = put to death, see e.g. Exodus 31:14; Leviticus 20:1-5; Daniel 9:26).
Therefore, God’s condemnation of the wicked people of Jerusalem, although under the law at that time, is nonetheless a warning to all. In the context of a list of some very wicked things, the Lord says,
In you men uncover their fathers’ nakedness; in you they violate women who are set apart during their impurity. (Ezekiel 22:10)
God hates this practice.
II. It’s a Matter of Righteousness and Life and Death
Ezekiel 18 further reveals that sex during menses is indeed ungodly. Notice how the Lord describes a “just” man (vs 9) in Ezekiel 18:5-9:
But if a man is just and does what is lawful and right; if he has not eaten on the mountains, nor lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, nor defiled his neighbor’s wife, nor approached a woman during her impurity; (Ezekiel 18:5-6)
Along with several other things that depict a “just” (righteous) man, is one who does not approach “a woman during her impurity.” God says this man “shall surely live!” (Ezekiel 18:9) Conversely, after this the Lord says if this just man,
begets a son who is a robber or a shedder of blood, who does any of these things . . . (Ezekiel 18:10)
What is in view with the words, “who does any of these things”? One of those things is approaching “a woman during her impurity.” God says of this man,
If he has done any of these abominations, he shall surely die; his blood shall be upon him. (Ezekiel 18:13)
The death God speaks of here is one of eternal death (Revelation 20:14). This is made clear later in the chapter where He says,
“The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.”
“But if a wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed, keeps all My statutes, and does what is lawful and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die. None of the transgressions which he has committed shall be remembered against him; because of the righteousness which he has done, he shall live. Do I have any pleasure at all that the wicked should die?” says the Lord God, “and not that he should turn from his ways and live?”
“But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness and commits iniquity, and does according to all the abominations that the wicked man does, shall he live? All the righteousness which he has done shall not be remembered; because of the unfaithfulness of which he is guilty and the sin which he has committed, because of them he shall die.” (Ezekiel 18:20-24)
All men die, the righteous and the wicked (Ecclesiastes 2:14-16; 9:2-3), but not all men will be dead (Matthew 22:31-32; John 8:51; 11:26). The Lord is not speaking of simply physical death in Ezekiel 18. He is indicating their eternal home, life or death (Isaiah 66:24). Sexual intercourse during a period is a serious matter.
So, how long should one wait? In the law, the woman was unclean for seven days (Leviticus 12:2). This is a typical cycle, somewhere around seven days for it to be complete. Leviticus 20:18 describes the concern to be with the flow of blood. Actually, the answer to how long one should wait is quite simple. When the period is over, when there is no blood flow, then clearly there is no abomination before God if sexual intercourse is resumed (Hebrews 13:4).
Now, some may wonder about Leviticus 15:19-24, 32-33.
If a woman has a discharge, and the discharge from her body is blood, she shall be set apart seven days; and whoever touches her shall be unclean until evening. Everything that she lies on during her impurity shall be unclean; also everything that she sits on shall be unclean. Whoever touches her bed shall wash his clothes and bathe in water, and be unclean until evening. And whoever touches anything that she sat on shall wash his clothes and bathe in water, and be unclean until evening. If anything is on her bed or on anything on which she sits, when he touches it, he shall be unclean until evening. And if any man lies with her at all, so that her impurity is on him, he shall be unclean seven days; and every bed on which he lies shall be unclean. (Leviticus 15:19-24)
This is the law for one who has a discharge, and for him who emits semen and is unclean thereby, and for her who is indisposed because of her customary impurity, and for one who has a discharge, either man or woman, and for him who lies with her who is unclean. (Leviticus 15:32-33)
Is the issue here having sex, or simply lying down with a woman during this time? It appears to be the latter. In Leviticus 20:18, five chapters later, sex is definitely the context, and the practice is seriously condemned. Here, in Leviticus 15, there is no such language of condemnation, but simply an uncleanness for seven days, and not even a sin-offering for the man is required.
Thus, for a practical application for today, it is not that a man can’t sleep (sleep, that is) with his wife during her time, or even enjoy her breasts (Proverbs 5:19 “at all times”). It’s the sexual intercourse and the exposure of the flow of blood that God forbids (Leviticus 20:18).
Finally, what if a husband were to demand to have intercourse during his wife’s menstrual cycle? Should the wife submit to this (1 Peter 3:1-6)? No, it is an abomination to God (Leviticus 18:19-30). She should resist this even to her own death (Revelation 12:11). As it is written,
For consider Him who endured such hostility from sinners against Himself, lest you become weary and discouraged in your souls. You have not yet resisted to bloodshed, striving against sin. (Hebrews 12:3-4)
Resisting and striving against sin, even to the point of bloodshed, is Biblical. The people of faith in Hebrews 11 knew this well, that is, those who were tortured, scourged, stoned, slain with the sword, and sawn in two (Hebrews 11:35-37).
Of course, if a woman was overpowered by her husband, and the woman was an unwilling participant, then she has not sinned. The husband sinned, but the woman would be as one who was raped as in Deuteronomy 22.
If a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die. But you shall do nothing to the young woman; there is in the young woman no sin deserving of death, for just as when a man rises against his neighbor and kills him, even so is this matter. For he found her in the countryside, and the betrothed young woman cried out, but there was no one to save her. (Deuteronomy 22:25-27)
III. God’s View of Menstruation
In addition, God’s view of menstruation, even though He is the one who made it (Romans 11:36), is not one of pleasantries. He uses the woman’s monthly cycle as an illustration of severe disgust and hatred. Ezekiel 36:17 illustrates this:
Son of man, when the house of Israel dwelt in their own land, they defiled it by their own ways and deeds; to Me their way was like the uncleanness of a woman in her customary impurity. (note also verse 18)
Israel’s sin was seriously wicked (e.g. 2 Kings 17:7-18), and the Lord hated their ways so much, He likened it to menses.1
Even men’s own righteousness God likens to a rag of menstruations.
But we are all like an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags; (Isaiah 64:6; in the Hebrew text it is Isaiah 64:5)
A more literal translation of this is, “all our righteousnesses are like a rag of periods.” The Hebrew word בֶגֶד (beged) for “rag” (or “rags” as the NKJV has it) is actually in the singular, and the Hebrew word עִדִּים (`iddiym) translated “filthy” is actually in the plural, and is more akin to our word “period” or “time” than “filthy” (see Lexicons, Brown, Driver, and Briggs, p. 723 or Koehler and Baumgartner, p. 790).
IV. Conclusion
The Bible makes it clear that God’s view of a woman’s monthly cycle is one of disgust and an unclean thing, and intercourse during this time is something He hates. It’s an abomination to Him. So, be warned, those who practice what God hates will spend forever in eternal torment in the lake of fire (Revelation 21:8), because they are abominable and unclean (Ephesians 5:5).
Endnote:
1. Lamentations 1:17 in the KJV reads,
Jerusalem is as a menstruous woman among them.
The NKJV reads,
Jerusalem has become an unclean thing among them. (Lamentations 1:17)
The Hebrew noun translated “menstruous woman” (KJV) and “unclean thing” (NKJV) is נִדָּה (niddâh) and is used for the “impurity” of menstruation (Leviticus 12:2, 5; 15:19-20, 24, 25 [3x], 26 [2x], 33; 18:19; Ezekiel 18:6; 22:10; 36:17) and also other impurities, taking a brother’s wife (Leviticus 20:21), or the water of “purification” (Numbers 19:9, 13, 20-21 [2x]; 31:23); “rubbish” (2 Chronicles 29:5 KJV; NKJV); “unclean” & “uncleanness” (Ezra 9:11 [2x]; KJV “unclean”; “filthiness”); “unclean thing” (Lamentations 1:17; KJV “a mentruous woman”); “refuse” (Ezekiel 7:19; “removed” KJV), 20 (“far” KJV); “vile” (Lamentations 1:8; “removed” KJV); and “uncleaness” (Zechariah 13:1). The related verb, נָדָה (nâdâh), is found only in Isaiah 66:5 (“cast . . . out” KJV; NKJV) and Amos 6:3 (“put far away” KJV; “put far off” NKJV).
If Almighty God was still dealing with mankind today, as He dealt with the Jews in the OT, and other wicked, evil, Pagan nations, the vast majority of us, would be in HELL already, BUT, because of His Grace, Mercy, and Love, being extended to us NOW, in The Lord Jesus Christ, His Righteous Wrath and judgment is being restrained, BUT, time is running out quickly, as we are in the End-Time scenario of all prophetic consummation!
@ Zoe | November 19, 2011 at 12:37 PM |
So Zoe I take it you have never been “through the red lights”.
Good for you for obeying god’s instruction. Neither have I also. So you see I do follow go(o)d personal hygiene practices.
But what about the other verses that follow (20-27) in which your good requires that the woman be put away and isolated for a week fearing contamination arising from contact? You do not speak to this. Do you carry out this pariah approach to your female friends and family members? I certainly don’t? Beg to differ to you on this one!
Please don’t quote from the Book of Ezekiel which, from your previous silence, you don’t accept as the word of your god but as hallucinogenic ramblings of a mad writer. (A case of mirror, mirror on the wall!)
Quoting Zoe “Zoe | November 19, 2011 at 12:37 PM | Sex During Menstruation…You shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness as long as she is in her customary impurity. (Leviticus 18:19)…I. God hates it.”
Dear Zoe here is a question from a woman whon spent 456 months menstruating, and was never able to discover the hour, nor the minute or the second when my menstruation started. If in 456 months I was never able to discover this how could my husband, my boyfriend, my pastor, my priest, my doctor or YOU discover when each period started and when each ended. Therefore it seems to me that I and ever woman who has ever lived and who has ever had sex must have abominated God. Is God going to send us all to hell? Is heaven an all male club?
It is clear that you and the other men who wrote and edited the BIble know little about menstruation, so I’ll tell you that menstruation is a gradual process. And for the first few hours of the process a woman is generally unaware that menstruation has started, and if the womanis unaware therefore her male partmer is also unaware. It is likely that every man who has ever had sex with a woman has discovered only after the sex act that her menstruation had started.
@Zoe. Do us all a favour and move to Iran, but make sure that you embrace fundamentalist Islaam first. Then you can stone and degrade women, hang homosexuals and generally give vent to all the urges that make you, in our enlightend and Christian society, a certifiable nut case. I cannot believe that in 2011 in Barbados a sociopath like you still actually exists.
IS it true that human beings evolved from a snake ??
IS it true that this is reflected in the shape and appearance of ‘SPERM ??? ——->
JUST ASKING
JUST ASKING
Quotiog Zoe “[The Protestant Reformation] made the Word of God, the Bible, with its instructions accessible to ALL.”
Actually it was the invventinof the printing press that made the Eord of GOd, the Bible, with its instructions accessible to many.
The Protestant Reformaton [and the printing press] notwithstanding there are still millions of people who cannot read the Bible, the Koran, the Torah etc. and there are millions more too poor to afford such books.
Just saying…
@ JUST ASKING | November 19, 2011 at 6:35 PM |
The first characteristic of a person deemed capable of initiation into a higher state of knowledge is the innocent questions posed by that person with deep relevance to spiritual knowledge. Now to achieve your 1st degree (33 1/3 is the max for humans 34 for earthly gods, just for the record) you will have to juxtapose what you said against the role of the serpent in the Garden of Eden who is allegorically blamed for enticing Eve into eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil! Understand that and we will proceed to the next degree!
But in defense of the BIBLE it says that MARY was conceived by the HOLY SPIRIT. also that a virgin (MARY) will become pregnant . Also that Joseph had no sexual relations with mary !Is all this scriptual incorrect For as i have been told her that the BIBLE is the WORD of GOD and GOD does not LIE!
For the LORD God is a sun and shield: the LORD will givegrace and glory: no good thing will he withhold from them that walk uprightly.Psalm 84:11 (King James Version).
“The Sun of Righteousness will arise with healing in his wings.”
MALACI.
The face of Christ as the sun is likewise revealed at Revelation 1:16:
“…in his right hand he held seven stars, from his mouth issued a sharp two-edged sword, and his face was like the sun shining in full strength.”
“I Jesus have sent my angel to you with this testimony for the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright morning star.”- Revelation 22:16.
“I am the light of the world that every eye will see.”
Book of Ezekiel
Author: The Prophet Ezekiel is the author of the Book (Ezekiel 1:3). He was a contemporary of both Jeremiah and Daniel.
Date of Writing: The Book of Ezekiel was likely written between 593 and 565 B.C. during the Babylonian captivity of the Jews.
Purpose of Writing: Ezekiel ministered to his generation who were both exceedingly sinful and thoroughly hopeless. By means of his prophetic ministry he attempted to bring them to immediate repentance and to confidence in the distant future. He taught that: (1) God works through human messengers; (2) Even in defeat and despair God’s people need to affirm God’s sovereignty; (3) God’s Word never fails; (4) God is present and can be worshiped anywhere; (5) People must obey God if they expect to receive blessings; and (6) God’s Kingdom will come.
Key Verses: Ezekiel 2:3-6, “He said: ‘Son of man, I am sending you to the Israelites, to a rebellious nation that has rebelled against me; they and their fathers have been in revolt against me to this very day. The people to whom I am sending you are obstinate and stubborn. Say to them, “This is what the Sovereign LORD says.” And whether they listen or fail to listen – for they are a rebellious house – they will know that a prophet has been among them.’”
Ezekiel 18:4, “For every living soul belongs to me, the father as well as the son – both alike belong to me. The soul who sins is the one who will die.”
Ezekiel 33:11, “Say to them, ‘As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! Why will you die, O house of Israel?’”
Ezekiel 48:35, “And the name of the city from that time on will be: THE LORD IS THERE.”
Brief Summary: How can you cope with a world gone astray? Ezekiel, destined to begin his life’s ministry as a priest at age thirty, was uprooted from his homeland and marched off to Babylon at age of twenty-five. For five years he languished in despair. At age thirty a majestic vision of Yahweh’s glory captivated his being in Babylon. The priest/prophet discovered God was not confined to the narrow strictures of Ezekiel’s native land. Instead, He is a universal God who commands and controls persons and nations. In Babylon, God imparted to Ezekiel His Word for the people. His call experience transformed Ezekiel. He became avidly devoted to God’s Word. He realized he had nothing personally to assist the captives in their bitter situation, but he was convinced God’s Word spoke to their condition and could give them victory in it. Ezekiel used various methods to convey God’s Word to his people. He used art in drawing a depiction of Jerusalem, symbolic actions and unusual conduct to secure attention. He cut his hair and beard to demonstrate what God would do to Jerusalem and its inhabitants.
Ezekiel’s book can be divided into four sections:
Chapters 1-24: prophecies on the ruin of Jerusalem
Chapters 25-32: prophecies of God’s judgment on nearby nations
Chapter 33: a last call for repentance to Israel
Chapters 34-48: prophecies concerning the future restoration of Israel
Foreshadowings: Ezekiel 34 is the chapter wherein God denounces the leaders of Israel as false shepherds for their poor care of His people. Instead of caring for the sheep of Israel, they cared for themselves. They ate well, were well-clothed and well-cared for by the very people they had been placed over (Ezekiel 34:1-3). By contrast, Jesus is the Good Shepherd who lays down His life for the sheep and who protects them from the wolves who would destroy the flock (John 10:11-12). Verse 4 of chapter 34 describes people whom the shepherds failed to minister to as weak, sick, injured and lost. Jesus is the Great Physician who heals our spiritual wounds (Isaiah 53:5) by His death on the cross. He is the one who seeks and saves that which is lost (Luke 19:10).
Practical Application: The Book of Ezekiel calls us to join in a fresh and living encounter with the God of Abraham, Moses and the prophets. We must be overcomers or we will be overcome. Ezekiel challenged us to experience a life changing vision of God’s power, knowledge, eternal presence and holiness; to let God direct us; to comprehend the depth of and commitment to evil that lodges in each human heart; to recognize that God holds His servants responsible for warning wicked men of their peril; to experience a living relationship with Jesus Christ, who said that the new covenant is to be found in His blood.
New Agers, Raelians, like Nnaki, et al who want to equate what God’s prophet Ezekiel saw in visions of God, with modern day Satanic driven UFO, alien oriented DECEPTION, as Satan who IS* the father of all lies, and counterfieter of Almighty God, has been attempting to deceive mankind with his UFO, alien LIES and deception; IMPOSTER! LIAR!
The introduction to this vision’ His Angels, that Almighty God gave Ezekiel is magnificent and awakening. The prophet, observing the heavens to open, LOOKED, looked up. To clear the way, Ezekiel SAW magnificent cherub, cherubim, Almighty God’s created creatures, Angelic hosts, with incredible descriptive language, “…for their appearance was LIKE burning coals of fire…” each and every other derscription of this vision Almighty God gave Ezekiel, is significant.
Ezekiel’s conclusion of this vision. “This was the appearance of the LIKENESS of the Glory of the LORD. Here, as all along, the prophet is careful to guard against all gross corporeal thoughts of Almighty God. He does not say, This was the Lord (for He is invisible), BUT, “This was the Glory OF the Lord…” in which He was pleased to manifest Himself a Glorious being, YET, it is not ‘the glory of the Lord, BUT, the LIKENESS* of that Glory, some faint resemblance of it; nor is it any adequate likeness of that GLORY*, but only the appearance* of that LIKENESS*, a shadow of it, and not the very image of the thing, Hebrews 10: 1. When I saw IT, I fell upon my face. Ezekiel was overpowered by it. He fell upon his face in token of that Holy awe and reverence with which his mind was possessed and filled. All he saw was only to prepare him for that which he was to hear; for FAITH comes by hearing. God delights to teach the humble.
Satan has been DECEIVING many, in recent times with his COUNTERFIET attempts at such things, with his UFO, alien appearances, as given to Raelien, et al, all of whose messages, are to discredit Almighty God’s, historic divine revelation, as contained in His Word, the Bible.
Nnaki, Yes, you have swallowed, in your Pythonated GUT, and deceived brain, a JACKASS of HOGWASH LIES, exactly AS* Satan intented, for you et al such ignorant Raelien followers and travellers!
——————————————————————————–
Related Topics:
Book of Isaiah
ac | November 19, 2011 at 7:43 PM | “But in defense of the BIBLE it says that MARY was conceived by the HOLY SPIRIT.( NO,NO,NO, the Bible does NOT say that MARY was concieved by the Holy Spirit!) also that a virgin (MARY) will become pregnant .( Yes, this is correct, as she concieved by the Holy Spirit!) Also that Joseph had no sexual relations with mary !Is( Again, this IS NOT correct, as the Bible does NOT say this!) all this scriptual incorrect For as i have been told her that the BIBLE is the WORD of GOD and GOD does not LIE!”
ac, You are all confused, as you know NOT the Word of God, the Bible!
NOTE: When ac says Mary WAS concieved by the Holy Spirit, this could be construed to mean, that Mary WAS maraculously concieved I.e., immaculate conception, as ERRONEOUSLY decreed by Pope Pius IX on December 8, 1854. Utter, unscriptural heresy!
That Mary and Joseph had other children AFTER the virgin birth of Jesus, is clearly implied in Scripture. “When hath this man (Jesus) this wisdom, and these mighty WORDS?….Is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joseph, and Simon, and Judas? And his sisters, are they not all with us? ( Matt. 13: 54-56) They would be in fact half-brothers and half-sisters, since they were the sons and daughters of Joseph and Mary.
Another reference indicating the same is Matthew 1:24,25:
“And Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the Angel of the Lord commanded him, and he took his wife, and KNEW* her NOT, TILL* she brought forth a Son, and he called him Jesus.” The word ‘KNEW’ is a euphamistic terms for intimate, sexual relations, so that Joseph “KNEW” her NOT, did not have any sexual intimacy with Mary, “TILL” UNTILL, after the birth of Jesus.
The obvious inference, is that AFTER the birth of Jesus, Mary became wholly and completely the wife of Joseph, that they lived as normal husband and wife, taken in proper contextual connection with other references cited, that other children were borne into their family.
Therefore, the Scriptures affirm that Mary was a virgin UNTIL after Jesus was borne. Nothing beyond that is needed to safeguard the Deity of Christ, and the purity of Mary.
Zoe what a load of shoite do you think people are still that stupid to believe what you have just written. Stupseeee
But Zoe you still haven’t told me how a man knows when a woman’s menstruation begins and when it ends?
You have not told me either how a man can use the Bible to find out when menstruation begins and when it ends.
Surely if men are in danger of being burned eternally in hell if they sex with a menstruating woman, surely you should tell them when menstruation begins and when it ends so that they can be saved for eternal damnation.
I await your reply.
@ Zoe | November 20, 2011 at 9:38 AM |
“Book of Ezekiel”
Zoe you are not only a bat but also a parrot. (You call me all kinds of names so I can take the liberty and do a little “do fuh do”). Can’t you think for yourself sometimes and question things? Why do you accept what you read at face value at all times?
Hi parrot Zoe! Here is an extract from the said book (I am getting good at your favourite technique – cut & paste, you know!)!
“15 As I looked at the living creatures, I saw a wheel on the ground beside each creature with its four faces. 16 This was the appearance and structure of the wheels: They sparkled like topaz, and all four looked alike. Each appeared to be made like a wheel intersecting a wheel. 17 As they moved, they would go in any one of the four directions the creatures faced; the wheels did not change direction as the creatures went. 18 Their rims were high and awesome, and all four rims were full of eyes all around.
19 When the living creatures moved, the wheels beside them moved; and when the living creatures rose from the ground, the wheels also rose. 20 Wherever the spirit would go, they would go, and the wheels would rise along with them, because the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels. 21 When the creatures moved, they also moved; when the creatures stood still, they also stood still; and when the creatures rose from the ground, the wheels rose along with them, because the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels.
Are you trying to tell us that Jesus or your god along with a cohort came to Earth in a physical vehicle to warn Ezekiel? Sounds like some advanced sophisticated craft to us! I don’t think that kind of technology was available to mankind in Ezekiel’s day. Not even NASA today can boast of such astronautical engineering!
@ Zoe | November 20, 2011 at 9:55 AM |
“Also that Joseph had no sexual relations with Mary! Is(Again, this IS NOT correct, as the Bible does NOT say this!)”
Now it’s amazing how you can believe in all of this hogwash but can’t accept the possibility that your god was an ET!
“Joseph did not want to have sex with Mary after the intruder knew his wife because he felt that it was not the first time. There was no DNA testing then so he waited to see if the child looked like him (had his family features-stem of Jesse). If the baby did not have any family traits Mary would have been stoned to death for adultery.
So it is highly possible then that Mary was not a virgin when your god in the form of the holy spirit impregnated Mary on the 25th March 0001?
Joseph had sex with what we would call “an under-aged” girl before god did thereby opening up the possibility that he might indeed be the biological father of Jesus. Or was it a Roman centurion that fathered Jesus, so it is said to be claimed in some religious circles?
@ J | November 20, 2011 at 10:48 AM |
You wont get an answer from Zoe on this one. He does not deal in the realm of fact just fairy tales.
I too wonder how Jesus would have known the Mary Magdalene was NOT menstruating when he allowed her to wash his feet. He must have “known” bloody Mary the night before or maybe she was carrying his child!
Zoe don’t cut off my head for blasphemy! Just following Dan Brown line of reasoning!
According to Zoe this is an important issue, as a man who sexes with a menstruating woman is in danger of eternal damnation. I have had nearly 500 menstrual cycles, and I was never able to determin the precise beginning nor the precise end and neither could any man that I have ever known.
Any man who tells you that he knows precisely when a woman’s mensturation begins and when it ends is a LIAR.
Men enough went through the red lights and only found our about it afterwards.
Oh hell!!!!
I heard a rasta man with this foolishness once that no menstruatin woman could cook for him, at the time he was eating food from a vendor in the busstand. I asked him how could he know whether or not the woman who was selling the food had also cooked it and how he could know whether or not she was menstruating. He seemed flabergasted. In all honesty the though had never occured to him before. When we drink CocoCola or when we eat at Cheffete do we know whether or not a menstruating woman prepared or served drink or food. When we buy precribed medicine or OTC medicine do we know whether or not a menstruating woman handled our Viagra?
If the men of this world want us to withdraw our sexual, domestic and professional services (by this I mean teaching, doctoring, lawyering, accounting,etc) when we are menstruating we would be only too happy to do so.
Less work for us and less stress on our poor tired menstruating bodies.
But I expect that the world would be a much poorer place without our HARD WORK.
Zoe must think that a bell rings when a woman’s menstruation begins, something that goes ting-aling, ting-aling,ting-aling, ting-aling, ting-aling,ting-aling, unclean, unclean, unclean.
I am beginning to think that Zoe is a sexually repressed idiot who has never know a woman.
Zoe may know theology, but he gets a big fat zero=0 on his biology test.
LMAO!
J hit that one on the head! Nobody can tell when a woman is menstruating….and that is a NATURAL thing. If God hated it so much, he could’ve done something else to facilitate the movement of unused ovaries…
Also, if God hated women so much, why didn’t he just make Adam and Steve? Oh wait…
Again, the Bible is open to interpretation, and quite a lot of people will twist it to suit them. There are a few good concepts to follow, but there are also a few concepts that don’t quite gel, either.
And another question…do the concepts of the Bible still apply in today’s environment?
@ Zoe:
I am very sorry for putting you on the “spot” for requesting your views on this bleeding issue of monthly occurrences. The flow of “seeing red” responses is so thick and steady as to turn you into a lunatic.
Enough to make your bleeding heart defender PhD demand that your god issue a red papal bull to send me to fiery red hell!
Sorry, Zoe you need a pad to stop the flow of “Yorkers” from bruising your suppliant knees
The Bible also says that when a man dies his brother should lay with the widow and raise up seed unto his dead brother and in some places in the world which shall remain nameless this nonsense is still practised and it is causing endless problems because the brother died of AIDS and the widow is infected with HIV, anyhow…
I want to ask Zoe if he ever tried laying with his dead brother’s widow (especially if she is i big i’grunt Bajan woman? And is so will he please tell us the outcome. And and what did the neighbours and the church people say when they heard that you were fooping your dead brother’s widow?
And how did you manage to raise up your seed and your brother’s as well, and what did you tell NIS when 2 or more women delivered for you at the same time because you could have 2 or more dead brothers
Tek ya time answering. I ain’t in na hurry.
This religious literalism is what got the chappies from the Fundamentalist Church of Latter Day Saints into big, big trouble. 25 years in the penitentiary
Quoting Seeker ” to facilitate the movement of unused ovaries…”
Actually Seeker a woman’s ovaries don’t move anywhere. Female babies are born with 2 ovaries, and most old women are buried with 2 ovaries. It is unfertilized eggs which are disposed of each month.
I’ve long realized that most men know little about female biology.
Zoe never had a real cat purrred in his face yet so he will never see or smell the joys of womanhood.
@ J | November 20, 2011 at 12:23 PM |
“I’ve long realized that most men know little about female biology.”
I wish to plead on behalf of men.
Give them a break! Poor fellas! How can you females expect men to think and see with a “hard head and a blocked up one eye” leading the way?
Islandgal, girl, the only” purrrrring” most men know is that of a well tuned car. When it comes to taming a pussy cat the only way they know- is it to “slam it, bang it and make a deposit in the hairy (not so much these days to cause hair splits of glaucoma size) purse both before and after”! You gals, need to take matters in hand from the start to the finish!
Listen up blind bat Zoe, I am sticking up for you! I can advise you on how to make a woman say to you after eating a good sea cat meal (no cigarettes, please) the following:
“If this is what Heaven feels like, I want to go there!” Now I speak from experience and it is biblically true as John 3:16!
@ J/
What precisely is the point you are trying to make?
Do your parents know precisely when you were conceived ? But the proof became self evident with time, even though it took a bit longer and was a more complicated biological event. Based on your reasoning , should we pretend that you don’t exist because no one knows for sure when you were conceived , or are’nt you proof enough that you are here? At some point you have to notice, either by feel or sight that you were releasing menstrual fluid. Please? Why should anyone go to hell, man or woman , whether they knowingly or unknowingly sinned ,when they have the choice of the other alternative. If that is where you are headed, then blame only yourself, not men. Don’t become another member of the cuckoo chorus of lies and deceitfulness. God is about redemption and salvation. Think if we did’nt have that .
Read Psalms 51: and 1 John 1:19.You can and will be forgiven if you so choose, but they are rules attached.
@ Ph.D | November 20, 2011 at 1:46 PM |
“@ J/: What precisely is the point you are trying to make?”
The same bleeding point that every reader understand except you and Zoe understand or fail to appreciate (Jonathan & David sounds like!).
A man can be having sex with a woman and her “monthlies” arrive unannounced. But I doubt your rear guard activity in the old boys club would allow you to experience such ruby crowning of your small head.
What does a man do in such circumstance other than withdraw, clean his pistol and re-holster, and say “thank you Jesus for the red letter day, not another mouth to feed for this time around!”
But you and Zoe would wish to crucify the lying woman in the name of Jesus Christ for inviting you into the warm passage with her full knowledge that the lights were about to turn from green to red! There is not always an amber alert, Nerds!
Quoting Phd “Why should anyone go to hell…If that is where you are headed, then blame only yourself, not men”
I am not blaming men for anything.
I know that no man posesses the keys to heaven nor hell.
I know therefore that no man is more important than I am.
Men are just men, born of [to quote Zoe a filthy menstrous woman], every single one of them.
And child birth according to you guys of way of thinking is even filthier and bloodier than menstruation. Childbirth involves a whole set of blood, and a whole set of wet bloody afterbirth. No wonder my church in the old days had a service for the “cleansing of women after childbirth” As a little girl I wondered why the woman needed to be cleansed by the church authorities. I wondered what was dirty about childbirth.
As a grown woman I wonder how come no church has a service to clense men after ejaculation. Isn’t ejaculation just as filthy as menstruation or childbirth?
Tek ya time answering.
I ain’t in na hurry.
Biology 101 Menstrual blood is not dirty unless the woman has a sexually transmitted disease. And unless the woman is a lesbain she can only have caught a sexually transmitted disease from a man. Menstrual blood is no dirtier that the blood that will be transfused into you when you get your prostate surgery (unless the woman has a sexually transmitted disease)
However it is easier for the woman to catch a sexually transmitted disease from YOU (and I mean you too Zoe and Phd) when she is menstruating.
So try and keep ya distance from menstruating women, not because she is filthy and unclean, but because she may well not want you around her at that time (and I mean you too Zoe and Phd)
Matthew 1` vs. 18-24. Clearly states that Mary was a virgin and was conceived by the Holy Spirit.In fact when Joseph heard of her impending pregnancy he tried to back off marrying Mary. That is when the angel told Joseph to go ahead and marry her because according to what the Lord had told a prophet :A virgin will become pregnant and have a son and he will be called Immanuel . so there is the story of the virgin Birth in a nutshell subject to the religious dogma for interpretation
@ J | November 20, 2011 at 3:21 PM |
People like you and I are very luck to live in this age and not say 200 years ago.
can you imagine opposing the views of the like of Zoe & PhD. You would have been burnt at the stake as a witch and I would have been hung, drawn and quartered. Thank the God of Time and some changes ,in general, against bigoted views. Fortunately Zoe & PhD are scared of jail because there will be no monthly 7 days break for them.
Some people still think that I am a witch/obeah woman, and that’s ok. Fortunately they have no power to burn me at the stake or to send me to hell.
Hallelujah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ML nuki, your rather crass , degenerate mouthings is a reflection on you, as a person, and are not representative of any reality connected to me. It results from your intellectual ineptitude, your social upbringing, and your deceitful , dastardly demeanour.
Now we know why some animals eat their offspring. You started out with nothing, and still have most of it left.
Good riddance to fecal matter.
With medicine advancing at warped speed. It is insane that anybody would use the bible as a refernced guide on medical things. However i will renege and say they ought to stay with “PRAY” for sure they really need “PRAY” somewhow i think Jenkins would not be safe haven for those people seems like there is no class or classification to put them under.
Ph.D | November 20, 2011 at 4:13 PM |
Please leave me and my backside alone. I know nothing of fecal matters since I see it as an important and necessary “waste” of time. The same time it took your conception to take place.
Please don’t ejaculate on me! But deal with what J is saying about your views on menstruation! Do you see a woman who is performing a biological function as dirty and against your god’s commandments?
Yes or No! Left-hand wanker!
If you read about the mikvah found here in Barbados at the synagogue you will see that the Bible was taken very seriously from earliest settlement.
If you take a look at what wikipedia has to say you will see it was in use by both men and women from the year dot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikveh
I came across the statement that a mikvah is usually built before tha synagogue.
As you can see, the mikvah is still in use to this day and here is a youtube video on how a modern one works.
I am yet to hear anyone characerise God’s chosen as anything other than intelligent.
“If you read about the mikvah found here in Barbados at the synagogue you will see that the Bible was taken very seriously from earliest settlement.’
John the bible is the Christian’s holy book so how come you are saying that the early Jews in Barbados used it? Wouldn’t they have used their Torah?
Dear John:
If the Bible was taken so seriously in 17th, 18th and 19th century Barbados can you expalin please how come the Christians disenfranchised and harrassed the Jews and enslaved the black people?
Tek ya time answering.
Very few people in Barbados have actually practised Christianity (how could they when the love of money got in the way) then and now.
It is only recently that Barbados has become a good place for Jews and black people.
I am a Christian so I must write the truth.
J…. I was liking you before that last post of yours, whenever I hear those words ” I am a Christian” I know it is time for hypocrisy and lies. Saying you are a Christian does not give anyone credibility, will not make anyone a good person nor will it make anyone a moral person.
Both isalndgirl246 & J bring a breath of intellectual fresh air to this matter befitting of Athenian or “Minervan” description.
Now how can a human being like dear John be such a real “johnny of a Zoeian size” to believe that God has favourites? These people portray God as a foolish, stupid old bat easily influenced and controlled by the whims and fancies of a special group of Jesus killers.
Now if only people who follow jewish rituals have the direct ear and influence with the big guy how come the Chinese got the other smart jesus loving or hating religious bastards by the economic balls to the extent where prayers for manna are now directed to the dragon instead of jehovah jireh?
J | November 20, 2011 at 5:49 PM |
Dear John:
If the Bible was taken so seriously in 17th, 18th and 19th century Barbados can you expalin please how come the Christians disenfranchised and harrassed the Jews and enslaved the black people?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Perhaps because inspite of all their assertions they simply were not Christian!!
Kind of obvious!
What you should look at is how the worldwide and age old scourge of slavery was addressed by Christians over time.
Christians are responsible for its abolition.
Slavery is by and large no longer acceptable.
Christian men and women made this happen.
Go and read and think.
You will find out much more than by listening to uninformed gossip.
@ John | November 20, 2011 at 6:53 PM |
“Christians are responsible for its abolition.”
If you shit yourself you should be man or woman enough to clean your underwear! Unless you are too incompetent to help yourself!
And John weren’t those Christians also responsible for Slavery? But they brought you a reliegion that has enslaved your mind after you got your freedom. You are still a slave!
Go read about the Clapham sect
millertheanunnaki | November 20, 2011 at 6:58 PM |
@ John | November 20, 2011 at 6:53 PM |
“Christians are responsible for its abolition.”
If you shit yourself you should be man or woman enough to clean your underwear! Unless you are too incompetent to help yourself!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Suppose I don’t wear underwear!! What then!!
The point is that before assuming something to be the case because it is comfortable and convenient and everybody says so, go and check it out for yourself ……
……. now ….. am …. er ….. I am just using underwear as an example here.
Slavery was going on long before 1AD.
The enslavement of Africans and the trans saharan slave trade was going on for eons before the trans atlantic slave trade started.
Slavery existed all over the world.
It was comfortable and convenient to continue enslaving people, Africans and others.
It took Christian commitment and zeal to bring it to an end.
That much maligned thing called faith galvanised people into action and small numbers became the salt of the earth.
I don’t think I can be challenged on this one.
The facts speak for themselves.
Instead of dwelling on slavery, spend some time looking at why the world no longer accepts it as normal everyday business.
Nnaki-Raelian, In his endarkened, spiritual inept ignorance, writes:
“Are you trying to tell us that Jesus or your god along with a cohort came to Earth in a physical vehicle to warn Ezekiel? Sounds like some advanced sophisticated craft to us! I don’t think that kind of technology was available to mankind in Ezekiel’s day. Not even NASA today can boast of such astronautical engineering!”
Man, you are so backward in your understanding and perception of our Omnipotent, Omniscient, Creator, Almighty God.
The word ‘technology’ ‘astronautical engineering’ does not even exist, in His REALM of ABSOLUTE reality; for the ENTIRE Universe, of TRILLIONS of galaxies, that HE Created, and sustains, not by might* or power* BUT, by His ‘SPIRIT as He SPOKE the WORD* came into EXISTENCE, and He holds HIS* Universe in the plam of HIS* HAND* like an ATOM*!
NASA’s feble knowledge of ‘astronautical engineering’ is literally child’s play, LITERALLY, to HIM*; of course, your spiritually endarkened mind-set, (de psuekikos anthropos), does NOT, will NOT, and CANNOT fathom. grasp, nor understand such matters; nor would you even begin to understand, the ‘spiritual’ symbolic, significance, of Ezekiel’s vision, and the descriptive language and terms used, such as ‘wheels’ ‘eyes’ infront, at the sides, and behind, a waste of time, trying to explain, such significance to your Nnaki/Raelian, Satanically influenced and captivated mind, of Demonically driven FOLLY, FOOLISHNESS, and utter futility!
“If the light that be in YOU (Nnaki/Raelian) IS* DARKNESS, Oh’ how great is that DARKNES!”
Quoting John “It was comfortable and convenient to continue enslaving people, Africans and others.”
Comfortable and convenient for whom?
The enslaved?
Or the enslavers?
John if someone set my house on fire and then calls the fire service I don’t believe that I have to hug and kiss and express my undying graditude to the arsonist.
As a matter of fact I believe that I am well within my rights to call the police for the arsonist, or in my anger to drop some lashes in him and then call the police.
But gratitude?
No.
In spite of Zoe and Phd’s ranting and raving the major bodly fluid that has been responsible for spreading HIV in the late 20th and early 21st century is not “filthy” menstrual blood, but male ejaculate.
Let Zoe and Phd write a thesis on the filthiness of male ejaculate.
I must write the truth.
Goodnight everybody.
J | November 20, 2011 at 10:39 PM |
Quoting John “It was comfortable and convenient to continue enslaving people, Africans and others.”
Comfortable and convenient for whom?
The enslaved?
Or the enslavers?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Both!!
That is just how mankind (and womankind) thought.
……. until something changed in their hearts……. well, …… I’ll leave you to fill the blanks
J | November 20, 2011 at 10:46 PM |
John if someone set my house on fire and then calls the fire service I don’t believe that I have to hug and kiss and express my undying graditude to the arsonist.
As a matter of fact I believe that I am well within my rights to call the police for the arsonist, or in my anger to drop some lashes in him and then call the police.
But gratitude?
No.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You miss the point entirely.
Your arsonist who you want to call the police for or drop some lashes in does not exist except in your mind, a figment of your imagination, a strawman created in an abstract discussion.
You have been able to read a bit about the past and judge it against standards set by Christianity through Christian acts at the time, although you might not realise it.
Nobody has enslaved you as has been the case in the past.
Nobody will because Christianity worked and removed that threat which existed for generations.
You J have no axe to grind with anyone because you J are the beneficiary of Chhristian acts in the past.
@ J /
” Let Zoe and Ph.D write a thesis on the filthiness of the male ejaculate”.
Since you consider the male ejaculate to be filthy, then by extension you
are saying that you are filth. Without the male ejaculate, not one of us
would be here. Are we all HIV infected? The virus is transmitted through
bodily fluids, even breast milk, vaginal secretions, blood etc.
How is it that lesbians become infected? Where did the virus come from
in the first place? Are you equating HIV/AIDS with the menstrual cycle
of a woman?
MLnuki, you do a very good job of potraying who you are, and where
level of sophistication lies, by your lewd , obnoxious outbursts. A sewer
mentality.
Why don’t you respond to John’s statemant about who was responsible
for the abolition of slavery instead of releasing another flow of vile,
swinelike dribble. We humans have at least the ability to abolish
slavery, I don’t know of a swine who is capable of voting for the abolition
of the trough.It is his very existence.
Ph.D | November 21, 2011 at 5:02 AM |
” slavery, I don’t know of a swine who is capable of voting for the abolition”
I will avoid your personal attacks because you started it and I expect you to end it! Like water on a duck’s back I will shake it off!
But let me tell you something, Christians did not put an end to slavery! Economics did! The same way Christians were used in the forefront of the Trans-Atlantic trade by the political aristocracy and commercial barons (including the Jewish business financiers) the said Christianity was used as an excuse to end the unprofitable trade with the advent of the Industrial Revolution.
If modern so-called Christians like you and Zoe were so pathetically concerned about slavery then you would not peddle your filth about the Bible being the truth and only word of your god. Your book of confusion “clearly” (if you can appreciate the figure of speech implied here) approves of slavery! Please do not come with the alibi that that was then in those old days but Jesus came along and freed us all through salvation! This will certainly make you look like a damned fool and hypocrite given your strident defence of men having nothing to do with a menstruating women.
Why don’t Christian missionaries like you and Zoe take your newfound anti-slavery propaganda to those Islamic countries where slavery and subjugation of women are still practised. But again you would free the male slaves but leave the female, not so misogynist?
But remember, you will not be able to mention the word “Christian” without the religious police on your backside; neither would you be able to deal in any piggy matters!
As far as your innuendo to pigs is concerned, just bear this in mind: human beings eat pigs. A pig does not want to vote but would take great pleasure in watching you swallow its flesh causing you to ingest such biblical crap as to induce a long bout of verbal diarrhoea thus freeing you mind of the mental slavery the likes of you & Zoe continually try to promote among black people.
Stop running your mouth like a sick ‘nigger’ backside! Go figure that one out, dickerer!
@ MLnuki
” So Zoe I take it you have never been “through the red lights”.
Good for you for obeying god’s instruction. Neither have I also. So you see I do follow go(o)d personal hygiene practices.
” This will certainly make you look like a damned fool and hypocrite given your strident defence of men having nothing to do with a menstruating women. ”
I suppose you recognise the two above quotations. They came from you in this very thread. Who is the hypocrite here, or are you just overwhelmed and confused? Q.E.D.
Time to move on. Auf wiedersehen.
Wtf have I just read above???
John states that the abolition of slavery was due to Christianity?….and has the nerve to tell people to go read and research?
I did this at secondary school with loads of research and Christianity had NOTHING to do with the abolition of slavery…..it was strictly ECONOMICAL!
At least John is correct when he says that some portray to ‘be’ Christians as we can see clearly here on BU.
Just wind them up and watch their true colours, their nasty insults hidden behind biblical jargon etc.
What a joke!
@ Ph.D | November 21, 2011 at 8:27 AM |
What kind of academic fool are you?
Can’t you see the difference between having sexual intercourse with a menstruating woman and that of quarantine and isolation of women from any other form of day-to-day contact as required by your Leviticus 15 archaic and impossible law as if the women are carriers of the plague.
I suppose if you had your way you would recommend the same treatment for people with AIDS, would you not?
Please deal with “TECHNICIAN | November 21, 2011 at 10:42 AM | ”
regarding Slavery Christianity and Economics.
Nixon adviser Henry Kissinger branded Jewish as self-serving ‘b*******’, new documents reveal
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 1:38 PM on 18th November 2011
His famous quote was to call ordinary people ‘ the useless eaters’,
American Jewish groups, lobbying the Nixon administration on behalf of their Soviet brethren, got under White House adviser Henry Kissinger’s skin so much that he denounced them as self-serving ‘bastards’, newly released documents reveal.
The comments were made in August 1972, when appeals were flooding the White House over the Kremlin’s levying of fees for exit permits.
One such letter was from the Israeli prime minister, Golda Meir, appealing to the White House to end its strategy of ‘quiet diplomacy’, and for Mr Nixon to take up the issue with Soviet leaders directly.
White House legend: Henry Kissinger in his White House office in the Seventies. Newly released documents shes light on some of his less famous quotes
Honoured: Receiving the Association of German Magazine Publishers Golden Victoria Award last night
A White House official, Leonard Garment, himself flooded with letters and phone calls with Jewish appeals, asked Mr Kissinger for help and guidance.
According to transcripts released by the State Department, Mr Kissinger – deputy national security adviser at the time – said to Mr Garment: ‘Is there a more self-serving group of people than the Jewish community?’
Mr Garment replied: ‘None in the world.’
The exchange was all the more remarkable because both Mr Kissinger and Mr Garment were Jewish.
But Mr Kissinger continued, saying: ‘What the hell do they think they are accomplishing? You can’t even tell bastards anything in confidence because they’ll leak it.’
Despite his outburst, Mr Kissinger said he would take up the issue with Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin and also meet again with Jewish leaders.
But he finished with: ‘They ought to remember what this administration has done.’
Power behind the throne: Mr Kissinger was an adviser and then Secretary of State for presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford
Presidential adviser: Even after his term of office was over, Mr Kissinger’s opinions were sought by successive presidents, including Ronald Reagan
Still on duty: Mr Kissinger and George W Bush in the White House in 2002, ahead of Mr Bush signing legislation for a commission into the 9/11 attacks
The remarks were contained in documents dealing with U.S.-Soviet relations released by the State Department.
Mr Kissinger, 88, was not available for comment over the released transcript.
Nobel Peace Prize winner Mr Kissinger played a dominant role in U.S. foreign policy between 1969 and 1977.
During this period, he pioneered the policy of detente with the Soviet Union, orchestrated the opening of relations with the People’s Republic of China, and negotiated the Paris Peace Accords, ending American involvement in the Vietnam War.
Even after his term with presidents Nixon and Gerald Ford, he has been approached for advice by successive presidents – including Ronald Reagan and George W Bush.
TECHNICIAN | November 21, 2011 at 10:42 AM | Wtf have I just read above???
“John states that the abolition of slavery was due to Christianity?….and has the nerve to tell people to go read and research?
I did this at secondary school with loads of research and Christianity had NOTHING to do with the abolition of slavery…..it was strictly ECONOMICAL!”
“I did this at secondary school with loads of research and Christianity had NOTHING to do with the abolition of slavery….it was strictly ECONOMICAL”
Where did you go to school? And whose LOADS of research, perspective did you read?
There are many historians, who have written on this subject matter, with varying and conflicting views, on what caused the imputus, that ultimately drove the abolition of slavery. And any honest, unbiased perspective, has to include a number of contributing FACTORS* and NOT* any one single factor. It was clearly a combination of, Political, Economic, AND religious, specifically, the influence of ‘Christianity’ that played a role in the abolition of slavery! And, NOT strictly economical!
To hold this “…strictly economicall” view, is very myopic, to say the least!
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/REwilberforce.htm
Zoe | November 21, 2011 at 10:47 PM |
Zoe, but preferably PhD, please defend the following passages from your book of truth and the only source of your god’s word. Remember we must always follow your god’s word to the very “T”. No wavering; no re-interpretation to suit your personal agenda:
“However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)
If you buy a Hebrew slave, he is to serve for only six years. Set him free in the seventh year, and he will owe you nothing for his freedom. If he was single when he became your slave and then married afterward, only he will go free in the seventh year. But if he was married before he became a slave, then his wife will be freed with him. If his master gave him a wife while he was a slave, and they had sons or daughters, then the man will be free in the seventh year, but his wife and children will still belong to his master. But the slave may plainly declare, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children. I would rather not go free.’ If he does this, his master must present him before God. Then his master must take him to the door and publicly pierce his ear with an awl. After that, the slave will belong to his master forever. (Exodus 21:2-6 NLT)
When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)
When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property. (Exodus 21:20-21 NAB)
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ. (Ephesians 6:5 NLT)
Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)
The servant will be severely punished, for though he knew his duty, he refused to do it. “But people who are not aware that they are doing wrong will be punished only lightly. Much is required from those to whom much is given, and much more is required from those to whom much more is given.” (Luke 12:47-48 NLT)
@ J…
My apologies, you are correct! It IS the eggs that are disposed every month, not the ovaries themselves.
And yes, it IS economical reasoning, rather than religious, that ended the slave trade. Also, some slaves were becoming more aware of their plight, and it would cost a lot more to quell a rebellion than to free the source.
The question is…are we free? Truly?
Nnaki/Raelian, The following is NOT any re-interpretation, to suit any personal agenda; but, rather a sound scholarly interpretation, from a historic, cultural, and Biblical perspective, which is necessary, in order to understand its historical context.
‘Make Good Use of Your Servitude’
Some Observations on Biblical Interpretation and Slavery
by Michael Marlowe
October, 2003
“When you buy a Hebrew slave, six years shall he serve; and in the seventh shall he go out free, for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master has given him a wife, and she has borne him sons or daughters, the wife and the children shall be her master’s, and he shall go out by himself. And if the slave shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: then his master shall bring him unto God, and he shall bring him to the door or unto the door-post, and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he shall be his slave forever.”
—Exodus 21:2-6.
“Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling, with a sincere heart, as you would Christ, not by the way of eye-service, as people-pleasers, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart.”
—Ephesians 6:5-6.
If there is anything in the Bible that makes modern people nervous, it is its treatment of slavery. Slavery is humanely regulated in the legal portions of the Old Testament, and in the epistles of the New Testament slaveholders are exhorted to show kindness to slaves, but nowhere in the Bible is there anything which can be interpreted as a disapproval of the institution as such. People of our generation, Christians included, tend to have a very hard time with this, because it seems to amount to a tacit approval of the institution, and we balk at the idea that God did not consider the institution itself to be immoral.
Part of the problem is that we have false ideas about what slavery was really like. The life of a slave was not easy, but we get an exaggerated idea of the hardships of slavery from watching movies or reading historical material that is written on a popular level. Here the purpose is usually to dramatize the plight of slaves or to make some point about the evils of slavery in general, (1) but the historical reality was less dramatic. In most cases the life of a slave was not much different from the life of any lower-class worker. Those who have been in the military have experienced something like it — being legally bound to an employer and to a job that one cannot simply “quit” at will, not free to leave without permission, subject to discipline if one disobeys or is grossly negligent — all of this is familiar enough to those of us who have served in the military. And yet we know that the daily life of a good soldier is not especially hard. This is what it was like to be a slave.
Another problem is, when thinking about slavery we tend to have in mind the recent slavery of the black race in America, and so the whole subject of slavery gets mixed up with the issue of racism. But in ancient times, slavery was not associated with any particular race. By condoning slavery the Bible does not approve of racism.
A third reason why modern people have a hard time understanding the Bible’s treatment of slavery is that we often now tend to confuse morality with political values. The modern tendency is to politicize everything, including even the Christian gospel. Moral philosophy or ethics has become so politicized that it seems to be almost a sub-department of political science now, which is why we have seen the rise of an elaborate political correctness in our public life. “Racism,” “sexism,” “homophobia,” and so on, are the really serious sins under this new morality. Although we all know that people are not really equal, the egalitarian ideology of our time is considered to be of such overriding importance that any slight affront to it is considered sinful, while the principles of ordinary old-fashioned morality are downplayed and even denied. This political correctness is not merely a fad, it is the logical and inevitable result of the politicization of morality, the elaboration of an entirely new morality based upon political ideas of right and wrong.
In recent years the principle of equality has been raised to the status of a theological axiom in liberal churches. This is illustrated by the remarks made by an Episcopal bishop in an interview following his church’s decision to appoint a homosexual bishop in the Summer of 2003. The “Right Reverend” John Bryson Chane appealed to the egalitarian principle in this manner:
When I look at where gay, lesbian, and transgender persons are, they have been excluded from the full sacramental life of the Episcopal Church in the United States — and, in fact, excluded from the full sacramental life pretty much within the Anglican Communion. What I have to say to that is if, in fact, we believe theologically that God created human beings in the good image of God as creator, and if we, in fact, believe that everybody is equal in God’s eyes, then how in God’s name can we say that we don’t have enough theology to work this issue through? And how can we say that a person’s sexuality does not allow them to enter into the full life of this communion? (2)
“Everybody is equal in God’s eyes” is the premise, taken utterly for granted here, and in a rather sweeping way that includes not only spiritual matters but also matters of church government. But the authors of the Bible knew nothing of such modern egalitarian notions. Morality in the Bible is set forth as a personal matter, not a political matter, and it is certainly not based upon any idea that all people are of equal worth in God’s eyes. Salvation in the Bible is no “equal opportunity” proposition either. As for the political and social order, the Bible does not direct us to anything beyond the hierarchical principles of order which pertained to the ancient world of kings and patriarchs, promising only that in due time a righteous Kingdom will come. This must be understood by anyone who wants to get a clear idea of what the Bible is all about. A sensible and honest reading of the Bible cannot be possible for those who would read into it the politicized egalitarian morality of our age. Even the most cherished idea of modern civil philosophy — that “all men are created equal,” and “endowed with certain inalienable rights,” as the American Declaration of Independance puts it — must be left behind by the student who would fully enter into the world of the Bible.
This is denied by many liberal scholars (e.g. John Dominic Crossan, Gerd Theissen, and Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza), who, trying to put a ‘biblical’ coloring on their politicized version of Christianity, have argued that the New Testament contains some evidence that Jesus of Nazareth was a social revolutionary who founded a short-lived ‘egalitarian’ community based upon a ‘discipleship of equals.’ These scholars maintain that by the end of the first century the egalitarian program of Jesus was abandoned by his followers, who suppressed the egalitarianism of the early Church when they wrote or edited the New Testament documents. In two recent articles (3) John H. Elliott has reviewed these unconvincing efforts to find an egalitarian ‘historical Jesus,’ and in conclusion he finds it necessary to restate the obvious:
This concept that all persons are equal in respect to economic, social, legal, and political domains is of modern, Enlightenment origin and has been shaped by momentous economic, social, and political changes dramatically distancing our modern world from that of the biblical writers. The equality celebrated in the American and French revolutions, has little, if anything, in common with the comparatively rarely discussed concept of equality (more frequently “equity” or proportional equality) in the ancient world. Accordingly, searching for instances of egalitarianism in the New Testament communities, indeed in the ancient world on the whole, is as pointless as hunting for modern needles in ancient haystacks. (4)
As hard as this may be, it is only by prescinding from such modern cultural presuppositions and by adopting instead the presuppositions of the Bible’s authors, that one can even begin to understand and respect its teachings as the word of God. As D.E. Nineham puts it:
If God has condescended to address men in the full particularity of their peculiar historical and cultured environments, then we have got to immerse ourselves fully and sympathetically in those environments, with their customs and values, ways of thinking and patterns of imagery, before we can understand either his demand or their response. (5)
Unfortunately, it is not only liberal scholars who refuse to immerse themselves sympathetically in the Bible, but also many ‘evangelical’ scholars. We are not always well served by our own conservative commentators and translators in this matter. There seems to be an apologetic motive at work here — the Bible is domesticated in order to avoid scandalizing those who would be shocked to discover how utterly foreign it is to modern values. (6) This tendency appears in many forms. Regarding slavery, some of our English translations remove the offense by using the word “servants” instead of “slaves,” (7) and many evangelical expositors have tried to distract attention from the foreignness of the Bible’s teaching on slavery by dwelling upon things in the Bible which they allege to be part of some latent egalitarian “trajectory.” Usually reference is made to something or other in Paul’s Epistle to Philemon, which is construed as if the whole point of the letter was to urge Philemon to free his slave Onesimus. But this attempt to discover and highlight some hidden egalitarian agenda in the Bible is all the more difficult for evangelicals because they cannot simply dismiss most of the New Testament by calling it “secondary,” as do the liberals. And it not only fails to convince, but it is a serious misdirection, because it prevents people from coming to terms with the world-view of the Biblical authors.
However much we may want to find a Biblical case for the abolition of slavery, it is simply not there, not even in the Epistle to Philemon. (8) As George Elden Ladd puts it:
Paul has no word of criticism for the institution as such. In this sense, he was unconcerned about “social ethics” — the impact of the gospel on social structures. In fact, he admonishes slaves to be indifferent to their social status (1 Cor. 7:21), because a human slave is really a freedman of the Lord. (9)
1 Corinthians 7:21
Ladd mentions the interpretation of 1 Corinthians 7:21, which we will examine now in some detail, because some recent Bible versions have paraphrased the verse in such a way that it appears to be telling slaves that they should seek emancipation. But this interpretation is anachronistic and does violence to the context. In fact the meaning is quite the opposite. It is an instruction to slaves that they should care so little for worldly freedom that they should not even take notice of any opportunities to become free, as in the following modern versions:
New English Bible (margin). Were you a slave when you were called? Do not let that trouble you; but even if a chance of liberty should come, choose rather to make good use of your servitude.
Revised English Bible (margin). Were you a slave when you were called? Do not let that trouble you; but even if a chance of freedom should come, choose rather to make good use of your servitude.
Today’s English Version (margin). Were you a slave when God called you? Well, never mind; but even if you have a chance to become a free man, choose rather to make the best of your condition as a slave.
New American Bible. Were you a slave when your call came? Give it no thought. Even supposing you could go free, you would be better off making the most of your slavery.
American Standard Version. Wast thou called being a bond-servant? care not for it: nay, even if thou canst become free, use it rather.
Revised Standard Version (margin). Were you a slave when called? Never mind. But if you can gain your freedom, make use of your present condition instead.
New Revised Standard Version. Were you a slave when called? Do not be concerned about it. Even if you can gain your freedom, make use of your present condition now more than ever.
The Church Fathers (early writers of the Church) favored this interpretation. See, for example, the commentaries of Chrysostom, Theodoret, and Theophlact. Here are Chrysostom’s words on the verse:
“Let each man abide in that calling wherein he was called. Hast thou been called, having an unbelieving wife? Continue to have her. Cast not out thy wife for the faith’s sake. Hast thou been called, being a slave? Care not for it. Continue to be a slave. Hast thou been called, being in uncircumcision? Remain uncircumcised. Being circumcised, didst thou become a believer? Continue circumcised. For this is the meaning of, “As God hath distributed unto each man.” For these are no hindrances to piety. Thou art called, being a slave; another, with an unbelieving wife; another, being circumcised.
Astonishing! where has he put slavery? As circumcision profits not, and uncircumcision does no harm, so neither doth slavery, nor yet liberty. And that he might point out this with surpassing clearness, he says, “But even (All eikai dunasai) if thou canst become free, use it rather:” that is, rather continue a slave. Now upon what possible ground does he tell the person who might be set free to remain a slave? He means to point out that slavery is no harm but rather an advantage.
Now we are not ignorant that some say the words, “use it rather,” are spoken with regard to liberty: interpreting it, “if thou canst become free, become free.” But the expression would be very contrary to Paul’s manner if he intended this. For he would not, when consoling the slave and signifying that he was in no respect injured, have told him to get free. Since perhaps someone might say, “What then, if I am not able? I am an injured and degraded person.” This then is not what he says: but as I said, meaning to point out that a man gets nothing by being made free, he says, “Though thou hast it in thy power to be made free, remain rather in slavery.”
Next he adds also the cause; “For he that was called in the Lord being a bondservant, is the Lord’s free man: likewise he that was called, being free, is Christ’s bondservant.” “For,” saith he, “in the things that relate to Christ, both are equal: and like as thou art the slave of Christ, so also is thy master. How then is the slave a free man? Because He has freed thee not only from sin, but also from outward slavery while continuing a slave. For he suffers not the slave to be a slave, not even though he be a man abiding in slavery: and this is the great wonder.
But how is the slave a free man while continuing a slave? When he is freed from passions and the diseases of the mind: when he looks down upon riches and wrath and all other the like passions.
Ver. 23. “Ye were bought with a price: become not bondservants of men.” This saying is addressed not to slaves only but also to free men. For it is possible for one who is a slave not to be a slave; and for one who is a freeman to be a slave. “And how can one be a slave and not a slave?” When he doeth all for God: when he feigns nothing, and doeth nothing out of eye-service towards men: that is how one that is a slave to men can be free. Or again, how doth one that is free become a slave? When he serves men in any evil service, either for gluttony or desire of wealth or for office’s sake. For such an one, though he be free, is more of a slave than any man. (10)
Early modern interpreters which follow this line include Camerarius, Estius, Wolf, Bengel, and many others. In the nineteenth century, de Wette, Osiander, Maier, Ewald, Baur, Vaihinger, Weiss, and Meyer. In recent years it generally prevails among scholarly commentators, as for example in C.K. Barrett’s commentary:
“Were you a slave when you were called? See i.26 for the low social standing of many Corinthian Christians. Let not that trouble you, but even though you should be able to become free (emancipation could take place in a variety of ways, and was not infrequent) put up rather with your present status. A number of grammarians (e.g. Moulton, A Grammar of New Testament Greek, i. 247; ii. 165; Moule, An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek, pp. 21, 167; M.E. Thrall, Greek Particles in the New Testament (1962), pp. 78-82), and many commentators, prefer to render, If you actually (ει και) have an opportunity of becoming free, by all means (μαλλον, elative) seize it. This finds some support in the aorist tense of the imperative (χρησαι), but does not make sense in the context; see especially the discussion, with references, in J.N. Sevenster, Paul and Seneca, pp. 189 f. (and the same context for a discussion of the Pauline and Stoic attitudes to slavery). Particularly important is the for (γαρ) with which the next verse begins: You need not hesitate to put up with your servile condition, for the slave who has been called in the Lord (that is, to be a Christian, one who is in Christ) is the Lord’s freedman; and similarly the free man who has been called is Christ’s slave.” (11)
1 Timothy 1:10
Sometimes 1 Timothy 1:10 is mentioned as one verse which might indicate that the Bible considers slavery to be sinful. This misinterpretation was often put forth in abolitionist writings of the Civil-War Era. For example, in 1836 Angelina Grimke (a feminist abolitionist who was neither a scholar nor a believer in the Bible) wrote, “how can it be said Paul sanctioned slavery, when, as though to put this matter beyond all doubt, in that black catalogue of sins enumerated in his first epistle to Timothy, he mentions ‘menstealers,’ which word may be translated ‘slavedealers’?” (12) The verse lists ανδραποδισταις “menstealers” along with other ungodly and sinful persons (murderers, fornicators, sodomites, liars, etc.), and indeed this word is translated “slave traders” in the New International Version and in the New Living Translation. The New International Reader’s Version (a revision of the NIV for children) even interprets it as, “people who buy and sell slaves.” This is in keeping with Grimke’s interpretation. But this is certainly not the meaning of the word. Thayer’s Lexicon explains that the word means “one who steals the slaves of others and sells them” or “one who unjustly reduces free men to slavery.” This crime was often committed in ancient times. Penalties for it are specified in the Mosaic Law (see Exodus 21:16 and Deuteronomy 24:7), and it is frequently mentioned by Greek writers as the crime of ανδραποδον. In the ancient Roman code known as the Lex Fabia (third-second century B.C.) these slave-snatchers were called plagiarii, and so the word is translated thus in the Vulgate. (13) So ανδραποδισταις in 1 Timothy 1:10 does not refer to all slave traders, any more than the word πορνοις “whoremongers, fornicators” in the same verse could refer all men who have sexual relations with a woman. It refers to those who engage in an illegal activity, kidnapping of slaves, and not the legal slave-trade itself. For this reason, most Bible versions translate the word “kidnappers.”
Why have the translators of the NIV and the NLT used the words “slave traders” here, without even indicating the correct interpretation in a footnote? One might expect the NIV Study Bible, at least, to indicate the meaning, but even in that copiously annotated edition of the NIV there is no explanatory note here. We also observe that the recently-published English Standard Version has “enslavers” here, which is somewhat better than “slave-traders,” and it also has a note stating that the word means “those who take someone captive in order to sell him into slavery.” But this translation and this note are also incorrect for two reasons: In ancient times those who were taken captive in war were often kept or sold as slaves, unless they were redeemed by the payment of a ransom, and this military custom was not considered to be ανδραποδον. It was considered to be a merciful alternative to the massacre of defeated enemies. (14) Also, the crime of ανδραποδον often involved the kidnapping of one who was already a slave, not the enslavement of one who had been free. If the translators were not satisfied with “kidnappers” because this word does not indicate the connection with the illegal slave trade, they might have rendered it “slave-kidnappers,” but “enslavers” is not the meaning of this word.
We suspect an apologetic purpose for these mistranslations. All of these versions were sponsored by evangelical publishers, and many evangelical apologists have used isolated misinterpretations of 1 Timothy 1:10 in support of their contention that the Bible does not really condone slavery after all. But however well-meaning this may be, and however expedient it may be for apologists, it prevents people from really coming to terms with the world-view of the Biblical authors—a world-view which is very remote from modern egalitarian values and agendas.
None of this is to suggest that slavery is a good idea in the modern world. But it is a requirement of scholarly integrity, and of any true understanding of the Bible, that we should refrain from importing our own modern political and social values into the text.
——————————————————————————–
NOTES
1. For example, Schaff’s History of the Christian Church (vol 1, chap. 8, § 48) hyperbolically states that at times there were perhaps twice as many slaves as freemen in the Roman empire, and that, while the treatment of slaves “depended on the character of the master,” “as a rule it was harsh and cruel.” Indeed, life was harsh for all working-class people in ancient Rome by modern standards.
@ Zoe | November 22, 2011 at 12:43 PM |
You seem to be totally out to sea on this one. Why don’t you send an SOS to your friend and advocate PhD to come to your rescue?
You seem to want to wriggle your way out by obfuscating the issue.
But I would put a very simple and straightforward question to you with the naive expectation that you would provide a clear and understandable answer in order to establish your position on this topic. Here goes!
From the various passages quoted above, do you agree that the Judeo-Christian Bible condones and approves of the keeping of slaves?
If so, do you see it as alright in the sight of your god to keep slaves as your god through his word as condoned and approved?
Is it mandatory for modern Christians to follow the instructions as set out in the Book of Leviticus, especially Chapter15?
The most hermetic, DEEP, ABYSMAL SLAVERY* that ALL of mankind has ever being SUBJECTED to, since the FALL of Adam and Eve, IS* SIN* which permeates the ENTIRE human family, bar NONE!
One can be a billionaire, with all of materialism’s WEALTH, and earthly possessions, and STILL* be ENSLAVED* a SLAVE* to SIN!
Conversely, one can be enslaved, TODAY, in servitude, to some master, physically, financially, etc, AND, if one KNOWS* Christ, as personal Saviour and LORD, one IS* then FREE, FREE* in one’s spirit, soul, wheras, the billioniare, is STILL a SLAVE* entraped to his/her BONDAGE of materialism.
It is, therefore, supremely more profitable, to be a BONDSERVANT to Christ, than to be a SLAVE to Sin, and this world system of wanton,crass, evil, the LUST of the eyes, the LUST of the flesh, and the PRIDE, (Arrogance, hubris) of life!
@ Zoe | November 22, 2011 at 1:24 PM |
So this is your way of conceding defeat!
There will be reparations to pay!
@ Zoe..
It was clearly a combination of, Political, Economic, AND religious, specifically, the influence of ‘Christianity’ that played a role in the abolition of slavery! And, NOT strictly economical!
To hold this “…strictly economicall” view, is very myopic, to say the least!
I may not wax lyrical on topics like you but the points are simple and to the point.
FYI….I did this in 3rd form @ CCFS.
IMHO, I say strictly economical because in the day, Slavery was the economic power which ruled over the political will, which was encouraged and even enforced by religious beliefs.
You cant have it both ways.
That is what I gathered from what was researched and is my opinion.
Clear enough for you?
Nnaki?Raelian, Man, you are so dense, IGNORANT, on such matters, the Book of Leviticus, is Old Testament Law, Christ is the end of the law, rituals, sacrificies, to those who BELIEVE IN* HIM* Liviticus is NOT mandatory for the Church Age, you just DO NOT understand ; it YOU who is obfuscating the issue, it’s you who is way out to sea, in the DARKNESS of Raelian obscurity and folly!
“Is it mandatory for modern Christians to follow the instructions as set out in the Book of Leviticus, especially Chapter15?”
What a stupid question? Really!!!
Zoe | November 22, 2011 at 1:45 PM |
“the Book of Leviticus, is Old Testament Law, Christ is the end of the law, rituals, sacrificies, to those who BELIEVE IN* HIM* Liviticus is NOT mandatory for the Church Age,”
So I can dismiss the book of Genesis especially the Adam & Eve and Noah & the Flood nonsense and while at it the whole story of the Exodus.
Imagine a man with the colour of Henry Kissinger and those who called themselves Jews today being enslaved by a people of a darker skin and forced to work for 400 years in the hot boiling SUN. Skin cancer alone would have wiped out that race faster than the fall out from a nuclear disaster that befell Lot and his people.
Now Zoe, you can’t have your cake and eat it too! Is the Old Testament still relevant or what?
The case for a Creator – Lee Strobel
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=688111496234161611
@ SojournerTruth | November 22, 2011 at 2:38 PM |
As a key player in the movement of freeing black slaves from the South to a “slightly more liberal” North please give us your views on the relevance of the KJV Bible to the lives of black people then and now!
@ MLniku, this is not my area of EXPERTISE, but here is my understanding of the issue.
The claim is often made that the Bible approves of slavery, implicating God as its supporter, since rules governing slavery can be found in the both the Old and New Testament. Since virtually everyone agrees that forced, involuntary servitude is morally wrong, how can Christians justify the Bible’s apparent support of slavery?
Jihadists invoke the name of Allah when they do their dirty work. So he automatically becomes their accomplice ( in their minds). Likewise God’s enemies invoke his name when they believe they can show some connection between him and perceived evil.
First, we must recognize that the Bible does not say God supports slavery. In fact, the slavery described in the Old Testament was quite different from the kind of slavery we think of today – in which people are captured and sold as slaves. According to Old Testament law, anyone caught selling another person into slavery was to be executed:
“He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death”.Exodus 21:16
So, obviously, slavery during Old Testament times was not what we commonly recognize as slavery, such as that practiced in the 17th century Americas, when Africans were captured and forcibly brought to work on plantations. Unlike our modern government welfare programs, there was no safety-net for ancient Middle Easterners who could not provide a living for themselves. In ancient Israel, people who could not provide for themselves or their families sold them into slavery so they would not die of starvation or exposure. In this way, a person would receive food and housing in exchange for labor.
Injuring or killing slaves was punishable – up to death of the offending party. Hebrews were commanded not to make their slave work on the Sabbath, slander a slave, have sex with another man’s slave, or return an escaped slave. A Hebrew was not to enslave his fellow countryman, even if he owed him money, but was to have him work as a hired worker, and he was to be released in 7 years or in the year of jubilee (which occurred every 50 years), whichever came first. In fact, the slave owner was encouraged to “pamper his slave”.
•There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. (Galatians 3:28)
•knowing that whatever good thing each one does, this he will receive back from the Lord, whether slave or free. (Ephesians 6:8)
•And masters, do the same things to them, and give up threatening, knowing that both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no partiality with Him. (Ephesians 6:9)
•a renewal in which there is no distinction between Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and freeman, but Christ is all, and in all. (Colossians 3:11)
And please MLNuki, there is no need for the vulgarity and the reference to your own brethren using the n.. word, no matter in what context it is used.
@ Ph.D | November 22, 2011 at 5:30 PM |
What you have just written only confirms that the writings in the Bible are those of men written within an environment of times gone by but with certain moral precepts that have unchanging relevance to future periods For example, love thy neigbour, do good unto others as you would have them do unto you, etc. But there are other things in the Bible we need to put behind us and don’t see them as emanating from a loving God who created us. Whether we be white, black, yellow or other; gay, straight or both; male, female, or transgender; able or differently able; Jew, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Taoist, Shinto or Animist; tall, short thin or fat. We on this little planet are all God’s creatures made in its likeness and receive its beams everyday without which there is no LIGHT only Darkness and ignorance. Amen!
PS:
The “n’ word is a corruption of the Spanish noun “negro” or “black” in English by uneducated ignorant red necks.
Say it loud I am Black and I am proud! No skin cancer for me or my offspring in the coming times when the SUN of man show his presence and power!
Nnaki/Raelian, The Bible reveals that God is a covenant-making, covenant-keeping and covenant-revealing God. The Bible, God’s Word, is a covenantal book, being divided ino two sections, the Old and New Testaments (Covenants), and containing PROGRESSIVE revelation ob NINE major covenants. these Covenants comprise the purpose of Almighty God in both Creation and Redemption, and involve time and eternity. One of thye primary keys to the interpretation of Scripture is the Covenantal Principle of Hermeneutics.
Of the nine major Divine Covenants in the Bible, eight of them God made with man. These are as follows:
The Edenic Covenant ( Genesis 3)
The Adamic Covenant (Genesis 3)
The Noahic Covenant (Genesis 6-9)
The Abrahamic Covenant (Genesis 12-22)
The Mosaic Covenant ( Exodus 10-40; Galatians 3:24)
The Palestinian Covenant ( Exodus 19-40; Gal 3:24)
The Davidic Covenant ( II Samuel 7; Psa. 89; 132)
The New Covenant (Jer. 31: 31-34; Heb. 8; Matt 26)
The Everlasting Covenant: Made in eternity in the counsels of the Eternal Godhead, between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. All other covenants are but fragments of the WHOLE, and are PROGRESSIVE, unfolding of this Everlasting Covenant.
Naturally, then, it is entirely consistent, Nnaki/Raelian, for you in your unenlightened ‘spiritual’ ignorance, to say that we can dismiss the Genesis creation account of Adam and Eve, the Noahic flood, failing to understand the ‘progressive’ revelatory significance of the Covenants given above; as the Mosaic Covenant, came long after the HISTORIC narrative account of Creation, but, such other, CANNOT be expected from the ilk of your darkened, spiritually DEAD mind!
The Relationship of New Testament Believers to the Mosaic Law
1. He is never saved by keeping the Law (Gal. 2:21).
2. He is not under the Law as a rule of life, i.e., sacrifice, Sabbath keeping, tithing (Rev. 6:14; Acts 15:5, 24).
3. Thus, he does not walk by the Law but by the Spirit, which is the new law for the New Testament saint (Rom. 8:4; Gal. 5:5). This is law of liberty through faith in the power of God.
4. He is dead to the Law (Rom. 7:1-6; Gal. 2:19) by virtue of his union with Jesus Christ who fulfilled the Law.
5. He is to fulfill the righteousness of the Law, i.e., the spirit of the law as seen in Christ’s words in Matthew 10:37-40 love for God, and love for one’s neighbor (James 2:9). But this can only be fulfilled through a knowledge of Bible truth and the filling of the Holy Spirit, which furnishes the power or ability needed to live the Christian life according to the eternal moral law of God. So we are under God’s new law, the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus (Rom. 8:2-4).
Christ, the Fulfillment of the Mosaic Law
Christ fulfilled the Ten Commandments by living a perfect and sinless life. Thus, when man trusts in Christ, Christ’s righteousness is imputed to that individual so we have justification. We have Christ’s righteousness so the Law can’t condemn us (Rom. 8:1; 7:1-6; Rom. 5:1; 4:4-8).
Christ fulfilled the ceremonial ordinances, the shadows and types of His person and work, by dying on the cross for us and in our place. This showed that God was also perfect justice and sin must be judged, but God provided His Son, the precious Lamb of God. The penalty which the Law exercised was paid. Again there is no condemnation because the believer is “in Christ” (Col. 2:14; Rom. 3:24-25).
Christ also fulfilled the Social Law, but now He replaces it with a new way of life fitting to our new salvation. He gives provision for the inner man—the indwelling Holy Spirit—who enables us to experience true sanctification so that we may experience also the righteousness of the Law (Rom. 8:2-4).
Summary
1. Christ is the end of the Law and believers are not under the Mosaic Law. New Testament believers are not under Law but under grace (Rom. 6:14).
2. Since the Lord Jesus Christ fulfills the Law by His person and work, believers are under a new law; the obligation to walk by the Spirit of Life through faith (Rom. 8:2-4). If we are led by the Spirit, then we are not under the Law (Gal. 5:18).
3. Against such, i.e., the fruit of the Spirit, there is no law because the believer is then operating under the highest law, the standards are met as we walk by the Holy Spirit and grow in the Word (Gal. 5:22).
Warning Against Entanglements with the Law as Believers Today
After salvation by grace there has always been the grave danger of reverting to Law or legalism
@ Zoe | November 22, 2011 at 9:01 PM
“……The Bible reveals that God is a covenant-making, covenant-keeping and covenant-revealing God.”
Go tell that to the Indians, Chinese & Japanese!
Are these under your god’s covenant too? If so, since when? Remember America’s bigger creditor is China. So lookie, here, don’ t you go sending them to hell, ya hear!
One thing for sure; the same SUN shines on all of them. Starting from the Land of the Rising SUN in the East to California in the West!
To Miller:
I shall give in your proposal, for purposes of this discussion, that most of the first books of the Bible are fairy tales and not relevant to “these modern times”. But what I need to know in order to fashion my responses to you is where within the philosophical divide in the age of reason are you. Are a proponent of John Stuart Mills; are a proponent of Nietzche; are you a proponent of naturalism; are a post modernist or are you of the cultural relativism elk. I hope you are aware of Nietzche’s take on physical and as well as mental slavery. Come out of your hole and stop dropping futile ordinances; this one must done within the field environment.
@ lemuel | November 22, 2011 at 9:41 PM |
I don’t believe in the existence of any god as depicted in the Judeo-Christian story book. Call me pagan if you wish; but I worship the Power that cultures past and present are subjected to. I worship the LIGHT!
But I am of the strong view that other beings some of more advanced technological know-how to earthlings exist in other parts of our galaxy and have visited this solar system before. If you read between the lines in the book of Genesis you would appreciate where I am coming from. The book of Ezekiel also makes clear references to this type of visitations.
If you do not object to my refusal to simply accept at face value the story of man’s creation as outlined in Genesis I would expand a little further. But if you think what is written is the literal interpretation and should be accepted as is, so be it. Every person to his own belief, brainwashed or naive!
@ MLnuki.
You have every right to be proud of your race. So it does’nt help you to uplift your race but perpetrating the same kind of folly of the Redneck ignoramuses and using the n… word. You are also insulting yourself.
Yes the appropriate use and correct translation and description of the black race is Negro, also (Italian, and I beleive Portuguese. The German and Scandinavian word is neger. But this is all basically irrelevant.
Race is a concept of society that insists there is a genetic significance behind human variations in skin color that transcends outward appearance. However, race has no scientific merit outside of sociological classification. There are no significant genetic variations within the human species to justify the division of “ races.” We are all God’s children.The presumption that there are a number of different races within the human species implies that there is a different genetic code for these separate races. The degree to which the genetic makeup between individuals in different racial categories varies is 6%. However, within any certain race there is the same degree of difference between individuals. The development of varying skin pigmentation is not an influential enough of a difference to divide the human species into races. Skin color is merely a reaction to a dangerous environment. The same instances have been documented in immunity to diseases. A people who are endangered by a virus develop a way to survive .
Melanin is the sole reason for the colour differentiation in the skin, hair , and eyes. Its primary function is to protect against the ultra violet radiation.
There is a process called ultra fast internal conversion, which enables the melanin to dissipate more than 99% of the uv radiation , transforming it into heat, thereby protecting against DNA damage and hence any resulting melanoma /skin cancers.
Have a nice day.
@ Ph.D | November 23, 2011 at 5:27 AM |
“We are all God’s children. The presumption that there are a number of different races within the human species implies that there is a different genetic code for these separate races.”
Thanks for the lecture covering etymology, anthropology, genetics, etc. Most interesting!
But you assume I have a black skin so I should therefore see my self as a member of the “black” race. It’s amazing how a scientific thinking person like you can subscribe to the position that the variation among human beings resulting from varying levels of melanin took place in a period less than 9,000 years. You accept the story of the repopulation of the earth as told in the book of Genesis about Noah and his immediate family being the only source of all human beings living today.
Please explain to us, PhD, if Noah’s three sons and their wives were black how come there are Chinese, whites (Europeans), Amerindians, Inuits, etc? Are you suggesting that this variation took place over the period from the end of the flood (estimated by biblical fundamentalists like Zoe to be approx. 6,000 BCE-correct me if I am way of base here) to the present era?
Now if you accept the variation in human skin resulting from the level of exposure to the SUN’s rays why can’t you accept diversity in cultural and religious matters? Why must an Eskimo or a Indian in the Brazilian rainforest worship and accept your Jesus Christ in order to be accepted by your discriminatory god as defined by you and Zoe?
Now please don’t respond in an arrogant and academically pompous fashion. Deal with the issues placed before you and leave my character out of your responses!
To Miller:
Don’t you think it is bit ironic that you whole heartedly give yourself to adoration and worship of extra terrestial beings, but the concept of the extra terrestial being of all, God; finds it difficult to be part of your belief system. Do you recognize that what you purport to rest your entire belief system on the the stuff that science fiction is made of. All of the science fiction block busters conform to your “light” . I can not refer to you as Pagan; they had their Gods; the difficulty with them is they were are always made of wood or stone. The sad thing thing though is that most men today have substituted the wood and stone for riches, position of power, social status and things of that ilk.
You must admit that when men take away the Bible as the authority of right and wrong for the governance of society, that opens the door for a solid reliance on man’s reason. We thought that reason would have prevail when the secrets to atomic and nuclear energy were released, but the Japanese people paid a heavy price. In France after the revolution which got rid of all, including the Bible, their age of reason produced the figure of the city’s whore as the then epitome of worship. As men we have not been doing well with reason. That same Bible refers to man’s wisdom as a whole lot of foolishness. As it stands now we as a race of humanity stand in the shifting sands of what is right or wrong. The only difficulty is that each standard or rule is sweep away with the ebb and tide of reason, spiced with a heavy dose of relativism.
@ lemuel | November 23, 2011 at 8:30 AM |
“You must admit that when men take away the Bible as the authority of right and wrong for the governance of society, that opens the door for a solid reliance on man’s reason.’
What are you implying here, lemuel? That man can only determine what is right or wrong by relying on the Bible?
What about the Chinese & Indians? What is your take on them? After all they make up a significant part of mankind? How about the Eskimos or the pygmies in the jungle of the Congo? They don’t know the difference between right or wrong? Or you don’t consider them as having a “society”?
Each society determines its own standards of morality. Judeo-Christians have theirs, Hindus or Shintoists also have theirs. What we need to do as intelligent beings is to accept diversity and celebrate the good things we have in common but not force our concepts of morality on other cultures. This is not your God’s way. Remember God is not only LIGHT but also LOVE! Read the First Epistle General of John 1:5-10. Not an instruction to me the pagan but to you the Christian!
Sun Worship: Crass, Paganistic Idolatry
“And God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, and let them be lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth.” And it was so. And God made the two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth, to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.” (Genesis 1:14-19 RSV)
Our Star
The sun is a medium-sized main sequence yellow star at the center of our solar system, about 93 million miles (150 million kilometers) from earth. Measuring about 865,000 miles (1,400,000 kilometers) in diameter, the sun could contain 1,300,000 earths. The sun is very big, very hot, and makes life possible on earth – BUT THE SUN IS’NT a god! God created the sun, and the over 200 billion other stars in the “Milky Way” galaxy, plus hundreds of billions of other galaxies throughout the universe. The sun was CREATED by the Creator.
A Pagan Favorite
Since the most ancient times, the sun has been a favorite “god” or god symbol of pagan people all around the world. The Babylonians (see Ancient Empires – Babylon), Persians (see Ancient Empires – Persia), Egyptians (see The Ancient Egyptians), Greeks (see Ancient Empires – Greece) and Romans (see Ancient Empires – Rome) all had their sun gods. The native peoples of North and South America widely practiced sun worship, as did their Asian ancestors. The Europeans too were deeply involved in sun worship, and many of their sun-god festivals were carried over when they professed conversion to Christianity. These can still be seen today in the Easter bonfire and sunrise services, and the Christmas burning of the Yule log.
Sun worship was also widely practiced by the people of the Middle East, and even the Israelites were sometimes corrupted by it:
“Then he said to me, “Have you seen this, O son of man? You will see still greater ABOMINATIONS than these.” And he brought me into the inner court of the house of The Lord; and behold, at the door of the Temple of The Lord, between the porch and the altar, were about twenty-five men, with their backs to the temple of The Lord, and their faces toward the east, WORSHIPING the SUN”
ALL ancient Pagan Civilizations, bar NONE, who practiced such wanton IDOLATRY, SUN worship, and other forms of gross, crass Satanically inspired nonsense, came to UTTER RUINATION, at the hand of Almighty God, who warned against such ABOMINATIONS!
Myths and Misconceptions and the Slave Trade and Slavery
Slavery and World History
Myth: Slavery is a product of capitalism.
Fact: Slavery is older than the first human records.
Myth: Slavery is a product of Western Civilization.
Fact: Slavery is virtually a universal institution.
Myth: Slavery in the non-western world was a mild, benign, and non-economic institution.
Fact: Slaves were always subject to torture, sexual exploitation, and arbitrary death.
Myth: Slavery was an economically backward and inefficient institution.
Fact: Many of the most progressive societies in the world had slaves.
Myth: Slavery was always based on race.
Fact: Not until the 15th century was slavery associated primarily with people of African descent.
Enslavement and the Slave Trade
Myth: New World slaves came exclusively from West Africa.
Fact: Half of all New World slaves came from central Africa.
Myth: Europeans physically enslaved Africans or hired mercenaries who captured people for export or that African rulers were “Holocaust abettors” who were themselves to blame for the slave trade.
Fact: Europeans did engage in some slave raiding; the majority of people who were transported to the Americas were enslaved by Africans in Africa.
Myth: Many slaves were captured with nets.
Fact: There is no evidence that slaves were captured with nets; war was the most important source of enslavement.
Myth: Kidnapping was the usual means of enslavement.
Fact: War was the most important source of enslavement; it would be incorrect to reduce all of these wars to slave raids.
Myth: The Middle Passage stripped enslaved Africans of their cultural heritage and transformed them into docile, passive figures wholly receptive to the cultural inputs of their masters.
Fact: Slaves engaged in at least 250 shipboard rebellions.
Slavery in the Americas
Myth: Most slaves were imported into what is now the United States
Fact: Well over 90 percent of slaves from Africa were imported into the Caribbean and South America
Myth: Slavery played a marginal role in the history of the Americas
Fact: African slaves were the only remedy for the labor shortages that plagued Europe’s New World dominions.
Fact: Slave labor made it profitable to mine for precious metal and to harvest sugar, indigo, and tobacco; slaves taught whites how to raise such crops as rice and indigo.
Myth: Europeans arrived in the New World in far larger numbers than did Africans.
Fact: Before 1820, the number of Africans outstripped the combined total of European immigrants by a ratio of 3, 4, or 5 to 1.
Myth: The first slaves arrived in what is now the U.S. in 1619
Fact: Slaves arrived in Spanish Florida at least a century before 1619 and a recently uncovered census shows that blacks were present in Virginia before 1619.
Slave Culture
Myth: The slave trade permanently broke slaves’ bonds with Africa.
Fact: Slaves were able to draw upon their African cultural background and experiences and use them as a basis for life in the New World.
Myth: Plantation life with its harsh labor, unstable families, and high mortality, made it difficult for Africans to construct social ties
Fact: African nations persisted in America well into the 18th century and even the early 19th century.
Myth: Masters assigned names to slaves or slaves imitated masters’ systems of naming.
Fact: In fact, slaves were rarely named for owners. Naming patterns appear to have reflected African practices, such as the custom of giving children “day names” (after the day they were born) and “name-saking,” such as naming children after grandparents.
Myth: Slaveholders sought to deculturate slaves by forbidding African names and languages and obliterating African culture.
Fact: While deculturation was part of the “project” of slavery, in fact African music, dance, decoration, design, cuisine, and religion exerted a profound, ongoing influence on American culture.
Fact: Slaves adapted religious rites and perpetuated a rich tradition of folklore.
Economics of Slavery
Myth: Slavesholders lost money and were more interested in status than moneymaking; slaves did little productive work
Fact: Slaves worked longer days, more days, and more of their life
Myth: Slavery was incompatible with urban life and factory technology
Fact: Sugar mills were the first true factories in the world; slaves were widely used in cities and in various kinds of manufacturing and crafts.
Myth: Slaves engaged almost exclusively in unskilled brutish field labor.
Fact: Much of the labor performed by slaves required high skill levels and careful, painstaking effort.
Fact: Masters relied on slaves for skilled craftsmanship.
Religion
Myth: West and Central Africans received their first exposure to Christianity in the New World.
Fact: Catholic missionary activities began in the central African kingdom of Kongo half a century before Columbus’s voyages of discovery and Kongo converted to Catholicism in 1491. A sizeable community of African Christians developed around Portuguese settlement.
Myth: Priests and missionaries were primarily responsible for converting slaves to Christianity.
Fact: In Latin America, slaves were instructed not by European clergy but by African Christians, who spread a specifically African interpretation of Christianity.
Myth: Upon arrival in Latin America, slaves were given hasty instruction in a complex foreign religion in a language they could barely understand.
Fact: A certain number of slaves were baptized Christians and others were familiar with Christianity.
Myth: The Catholic Church did not tolerate the mixture of Catholicism with traditional African religions.
Fact: In Kongo and in Latin America, the Church did tolerate the mixture of Catholicism with African religions, allowing Africans to retain their old cosmology, understanding of the universe, and the place of gods and other divine beings in the universe.
Myth: Before the Civil War, the Southern churches were highly segregated.
Fact: In 1860, slave constituted about 26 percent of the Southern Baptist church membership.
Myth: Slave Christianity was essentially a “religion of docility.”
Fact: Christianity was dual edged and marked by millennialist possibilities; whites could not prevent black preachers from turning Christianity into a source of self-respect and faith in deliverance.
Resistance
Myth: Slaves were brainwashed and stunned into submission and rarely resisted slavery.
Fact: Resistance took a variety of forms ranging from day-to-day resistance, economic bargaining, running away and maroonage, and outright rebellions
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/historyonline/slav_fact.cfm
@ Zoe | November 23, 2011 at 9:17 AM |
“The sun is a medium-sized main sequence yellow star at the center of our solar system, about 93 million miles (150 million kilometers) from earth. Measuring about 865,000 miles (1,400,000 kilometers) in diameter, the sun could contain 1,300,000 earths.”
Where in the bible can this information be found? Sounds like an extract from a scientific journal or National Geographic which you should not be reading since the only book of truth is your bible!
I never argued that the SUN created the Universe. My argument is that without the SUN life on earth would not exist; so, therefore, the SUN can be considered as Mankind’s god.
You are the one that is insinuating that the SUN created all the other billions of stars and galaxies.
But if you insist that the god in your bible created all of these and of course the SUN then you will have to accept that “he” could have created other life forms on other planets and we humans might not be his favourite. There could still be other adams and eves living in gardens on other planets in other galaxies who did not disobey him and ate (accepted) the fruit of knowledge (technology) of the go(o)d(s)!
Nnaki/Raelian, How dare you seek to incorporate YOUR Pagan, idolatrous worship of the ‘sun’ god, with the absolute TRUTH, of the LIGHT, of Almighty God, which TRANSCENDS, the physical light, of the sun HE* Created, with your amoral, relativism, anything goes, philosophical hogwash!
I John 1-7
“That which was from the BEGINNING, which we have HEARD, (Jesus Christ) which we have SEEN with our EYES* (Jesus Christ) which we have LOOKED upon (Jesus Christ), and our hands have handled, concerning the Word (Jesus Christ) of LIFE, the LIFE (Christ) was manifested, and we have SEEN, and bear WITNESS, ans declare to you that Eternal life which was with the Father, and was manifested (revealed) to us, that which we have SEEN and HEARD (Jesus Christ), we declare to you, that you also may have fellowship with us and TRULY our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ. And these things we write to you that your JOY may be full. This IS* the message which we have HEARD (personally) from HIM* (Jesus Christ) and declare to you, that GOD IS* LIGHT* and in HIM is NO darkness at ALL. If we say that we have fellowship with HIM, and walk in DARKNESS (spiritually!) we lie and do not practice the TRUTH. But if we walk in the LIGHT* as He is in the LIGHT (spiritually) we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His SON* cleanses us from all sin.”
The apostle prefaces his epistle to believers in general, with evident testimonies to Christ, for promoting their happiness and joy. (1-4) The necessity of a life of holiness, in order to communion with God, is shown. (5-10)
Commentary on 1 John 1:1-4
(Read 1 John 1:1-4)
That essential Good, that uncreated Excellence, which had been from the beginning, from eternity, as equal with the Father, and which at length appeared in human nature for the salvation of sinners, was the great subject concerning which the apostle wrote to his brethren. The apostles had seen Him while they witnessed His wisdom and holiness, His miracles, and love and mercy, during some years, till they saw Him crucified for sinners, and afterwards risen from the dead. They touched Him, so as to have full proof of His resurrection. This Divine Person, the Word of life, the Word of God, appeared in human nature, that He might be the Author and Giver of eternal life to mankind, through the redemption of His blood, and the influence of His new-creating Spirit. The apostles declared what they had seen and heard, that believers might share their comforts and everlasting advantages. They had free access to God the Father. They had a happy experience of the truth in their souls, and showed its excellence in their lives. This communion of believers with the Father and the Son, is begun and kept up by the influences of the Holy Spirit. The benefits Christ bestows, are not like the scanty possessions of the world, causing jealousies in others; but the joy and happiness of communion with God is all-sufficient, so that any number may partake of it; and all who are warranted to say, that truly their fellowship is with the Father, will desire to lead others to partake of the same blessedness.
Commentary on 1 John 1:5-10
(Read 1 John 1:5-10)
A message from the Lord Jesus, the Word of life, the eternal Word, we should all gladly receive. The great God should be represented to this dark world, as pure and perfect LIGHT. As this is the nature of God, His doctrines and precepts must be such. And as His perfect happiness cannot be separated from His perfect holiness, so our happiness will be in proportion to our being made holy. To walk in darkness, is to live and act against religion. God holds no heavenly fellowship or intercourse with unholy souls. There is no truth in their profession; their practice shows its folly and falsehood. The eternal Life, the eternal Son, put on flesh and blood, and died to wash us from our sins in his own blood, and procures for us the sacred influences by which sin is to be subdued more and more, till it is quite done away. While the necessity of a holy walk is insisted upon, as the effect and evidence of the knowledge of God in Christ Jesus, the opposite error of self-righteous pride is guarded against with equal care. All who walk near to God, in holiness and righteousness, are sensible that their best days and duties are mixed with sin. God has given testimony to the sinfulness of the world, by providing a sufficient, effectual Sacrifice for sin, needed in all ages; and the sinfulness of believers themselves is shown, by requiring them continually to confess their sins, and to apply by faith to the blood of that Sacrifice. Let us plead guilty before God, be humble, and willing to know the worst of our case. Let us honestly confess all our sins in their full extent, relying wholly on his mercy and truth through the righteousness of Christ, for a free and full forgiveness, and our deliverance from the power and practice of sin.
This absolute TRUTH, is the Only way to the One True and living God, IN* His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ; otherwise, we PERISH in oue SINS!
MLnuki,
The task of defining race is a highly subjective and therefore unscientific endeavour. So we can conclude that race is not clearly definable and is not a good term to use in describing variations among people. Perhaps a better description would be ‘the varieties of man , who are members of the same species’.
Explaining how the different ‘races’ came into being is one of the most challenging task for a Christian person, even if they have a sound knowledge of the WORD.
Many times when confronted by non beleivers, we compound the problem by offering false interpretations of the Bible , mixed with bogus evolutionary science.
The term race does not appear in the Bible. The Bible refers to differing peoples in terms such as family, tribe, people and nation. It groups people according to familial relationships and then into nationalities. An example of familial relationship is found in Genesis 10, where the genealogies listed are grouped by family. It should be noted that nowhere are the sons of Noah associated with race or color. An important passage on this matter is found in Genesis 10:5:
In Scripture there are several references to problems in which people with different racial backgrounds were involved. In each case the instruction is clear that God made no distinction between races regarding salvation or blessing. In Numbers 12:1-16, Miriam and Aaron openly criticized Moses for marrying the Ethiopian woman but the issue was jealousy over Moses’ leadership, and the criticism was over marrying a foreigner, any foreigner, and not because she was an Ethiopian (see Number 12:2). In Acts 13:1 we read of “Simeon that was called Niger” and “Lucius of Cyrene”. Simeon was also referred to by his Latin name “Niger” (“niger” translates as “black” in English). Lucius was from Cyrene (Cyrene was an ancient city in North Africa; ancient Cyrene is now a city with a different name in modern day Libya). Simeon and Lucius are therefore thought to be black men who had an active place in the church at Antioch. Their names and countries are the only CLUES given regarding their race. As we see here in Acts 13:1, and in other parts of the Bible, when God spoke of groups of people it was always in the context of their nationality and not their race.
I’ll ask a simple question, why are we able to transfuse blood from any one race to the other? Transfusions are given according to blood type A, B, AB or O, not according to race.
See the following classic passage in Romans 10:11-13:
“For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Rom. 10:11-13).
Both the Old and New Testaments show that God does not hold any significance as to race. God sees us as one people; as “man.” Physical characteristics are not a part of God’s evaluation of man “. . .for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart” (I Samuel l6:7). Race, as defined by Webster’s Dictionary, is not a Biblical term and nowhere can it be shown that physical characteristics of a people are a reason or a guide to distinguish one from another.
I have no idea if Noahs sons were black, green, Caucasian or Inuit.
Hope I have provided some clarity.
Ph.D | November 23, 2011 at 10:22 AM |
“Perhaps a better description would be ‘the varieties of man, who are members of the same species’.”
Thanks for your “erudite explanation” on the outward physical diversity that exists among your god’s creatures. This diversity is found also in other fauna and flora. Without this biological diversity Mother Nature would have little or nothing to do!
But since you seem to believe that Jesus is your god who came to Earth in the form of a man (Son of Man) to save mankind please tell us what “variety” of man did he (Jesus) take on while on Earth from Mary’s womb to the crucifixion?
@ MLnuki.
Very , very simple actually. We know one thing for sure, he was NOT CONCEIVED by an earthly father, but he did have one in Joseph, so we can speculate all we want, we will never have that answer. No one has EVER seen GOD (Moses??). His mother Mary was probably of the tribe of Judah , I don’t know , I never met the fair lady. What you are getting is complexion, right? Race?
When I meet him I will see for myself.
“We know one thing for sure, he was NOT CONCEIVED by an earthly father, but he did have one in Joseph, so we can speculate all we want, we will never have that answer. No one has EVER seen GOD (Moses??). His mother Mary was probably of the tribe of Judah , I don’t know , I never met the fair lady.”
“When I meet him I will see for myself.”
Ph.D have you had your medication today? If that were a non Christian speaking Christians would say they they are crazy and believe in the occult.
ac: ‘The immaculate conception generally known as “The Virgin Birth”.’
Wrong. If you don’t know the difference between the immaculate conception and the virgin birth, perhaps you should try to avoid talking about them.
As Dr. Blackett can attest, it’s never a good idea to talk about things of which one is obviously ignorant.
What Color Was Jesus?
While Jesus had a certain colour ‘skin’, it was not the colour of His skin that paid the sacrificial price for the Redemption of ALL mankind, but who He WAS! The Son of God, God of very God, God Incarnate!
Most pictures of Jesus depict Him as a white man. Recent events have revealed that some black churches declare Him to be a black man. It appears that many Christians want to make Jesus into their own image, believing they can better relate to Him and that He can better relate to them if He had the same skin color or was of the same race. To determine what color Jesus had we must first ask, why people in different geographic regions have different colored skin? We must ask, Is the skin color determined by the climate where people live or did God plan them to look that way?
There is one source that answers these questions which have puzzled mankind. It is the Book of Enoch. In it Enoch describes how God took him to heaven just as the Bible describes in Genesis 5:24. Enoch lived in the sixth generation from Adam and he describes how he was shown the historical events that would take place on earth. He was given three major visions and in the third vision we are told how the races came into being and how they settled on the earth according to God’s plan for them.
In this third vision Enoch describes the great flood and how Noah and his family were the only survivors on earth. In chapter 106 of the Book of Enoch he describes Noah as being born white as snow and red as a rose. He does not mention Noah’s wife but we can assume that she was black. We can assume this because Enoch describes Noah’s sons as, one white like Noah, another red as blood and the third black. Noah’s sons were named Shem, Japheth and Ham. The commentary in the New American Bible, as well as the Macmillan Bible Atlas, tell us that Shem settled in the middle-east region, which would include modern day Israel and the Arab countries. Japheth settled north toward the Caspian and Black seas and toward Spain,Turkey and Europe. Ham settled in Egypt and Africa.
These are the families of the sons of Noah, after their generations, in their nations: and by these were the nations divided in the earth after the flood. (Genesis 10:32, KJV)
We can see that the races, who settled in geographic locations given to them by God, all came from these three sons. The color of their skins came from three basic colors as follows:
Red (And skin pigments of red) – This was Shem. From Shem came Abraham and the Hebrew nation as well as Jesus and all the middle-east and eastern nations.
Black (and dark skin pigments) – This was Ham. From Ham came the Egyptians and the African people.
White and (light skin pigments) – This was Japheth. From Japheth came the European nations.
When we see pictures of Jesus they usually show an attractive looking white man–but Jesus was neither! The Bible tells us this about Jesus:
He has no stately form or majesty that we should look upon Him, nor appearance that we should be attracted to Him. He was despised and forsaken of men, a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and like one from whom men hide their face. He was despised, and we did not esteem Him. (Isaiah 53:2-3, NASB)
So, now that we know the color of Jesus’ skin, does it make a difference? Now that we know that He was not attractive in appearance, can we still love Him? The beauty of Jesus was not in His physical appearance but in the Spirit that indwelled Him. He was made like this so that we would not worship Him as a man and so that we would make no graven image that would become an idol resembling ourselves. Jesus came to earth as a man to show us His Father; not what His Father looked like but who His Father was.
He told us this:
God is a Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in Spirit and truth. (John 4:24, NASB)
Mr. Zoe: “What Color Was Jesus?”
He was the same colour as all the other Jews of his generation in the Judea of his time—green with a hint of blue. I thought everyone already knew this.
Mr. Emmanuel Cohen is incorrect. The Essene fragments from Qumran clearly demonstrate that Jesus was blue with a hint of green, not green with a hint of blue. It was common at the time for short Jews with a messiah complex to be close to turquoise.
I SAW IT WITH MY OWN EYES
Eyewitness
The writers of the New Testament either wrote as eyewitnesses of the events they described or recorded eyewitness firsthand accounts of the events.
II Peter 1:16
“For we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our LORD Jesus Christ, but we were EYEWITNESSES of His majesty”.
They certainly knew the difference between myth, legend and reality. A professor of a world literature class in which I was speaking asked the question, “What do you think of Greek mythology”? I answered with another question, “Do you mean, were the events of the life of Jesus, the resurrection, virgin birth, etc., just myth?” He said, “Yes”. I replied that there is one obvious difference between these things applied to Christ and these things applied to Greek mythology that is usually overlooked. The similar events, such as the resurrection, etc, of Greek mythology were not applied to real, flesh and blood individuals, but rather to mythological characters. But, when it comes to Christianity, these events are attached to a person the writers knew in time-space dimension history, the historic Jesus of Nazareth whom they knew personally.
The professor replied, “You’re right, I never realized that before”.
S. Estborn in Gripped by Christ explains further the above. He relates that Anath Nath “studied both the Bible and the Shastras. Two biblical themes in particular deeply engaged his mind: first, the reality of the Incarnation, and second, the Atonement for human sin. These doctrines he sought to harmonize with Hindu Scriptures. He found parallel to Christ’s self-sacrifice in Prajapati, the Vedic creator-god. He saw, too, a vital difference. Whereas the Vedic Prajapati is a mythical symbol, which has been applied to several figures, Jesus of Nazareth is a historic person. ‘Jesus is the true Prajapati’, he said, ‘the true Saviour of the world.’ ” 6/43
J. B. Phillips, cited by Blaiklock, states, “I have read, in Greek and Latin, scores of myths but I did not find the slightest flavour of myth here. Most people who know their Greek and Latin, whatever their attitude to the New Testament narratives, would agree with him…
“A myth may be defined as ‘a pre-scientific and imaginative attempt to explain some phenomenon, real or supposed, which excites the curiosity of the mythmaker, or perhaps more accurately as an effort to reach a feeling of satisfaction in place of bewilderment concerning such phenomena. It often appeals to the emotions rather than the reason, and indeed, in its most typical forms, seems to date from an age when rational explanations were not called for.’ ” 3/47
I must take issue with my revered colleague Dr. Zurer. While it is true that the Essene fragments suggest that “turquoise” was the preferred colour for putative messiahs in first-century Judea, more recent archeological findings at Qumran indicate that all those in the Maccabee line (of which Jesus was surely part) favoured the more natural “olive” skin. Plus the big nose, of course.
THE RESURRECTION OF JESUS
Chapter 20
A student at the University of Uruguay said to me, “Professor McDowell, why can’t you refute Christianity?”
I answered, “For a very simple reason-the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”
After more than 700 hours of studying this subject and thoroughly investigating its foundation, I came to the conclusion that the resurrection of Jesus Christ is either one of the most wicked, vicious, heartless hoaxes ever foisted upon people, or it is the most important fact of history.
The resurrection issue takes the question, “Is Christianity valid?” out of the realm of philosophy and makes it a question of history. Does Christianity have a historically acceptable basis? Is sufficient evidence available to warrant belief in the resurrection?
Obvious Observations
In my attempt to refute Christianity, I made five acute observations of the resurrection that I previously had been totally unaware of.
OBSERVATION #1-Testimony of History
Before my research, I had never realized there was so much positive historical, literary and legal testimony supporting its validity.
ROMAN HISTORY SCHOLAR
Professor Thomas Arnold, for fourteen years the headmaster of Rugby, author of the three-volume History of Rome, and holder of the chair of modern history at Oxford, was well acquainted with the value of evidence in determining historical facts.
This great scholar said,
I have been used for many years to study the histories of other times, and to examine and weigh the evidence of those who have written about them, and I know of no one fact in the history of mankind which is proved by better and fuller evidence of every sort, to the understanding of a fair inquirer, than the great sign which God hath given us that Christ died and rose again from the dead. 3/324
TEXTUAL CRITIC
Brooke Foss Wescott, English scholar, said, “Taking all the evidence together, it is not too much to say that there is no historic incident better or more variously supported than the resurrection of Christ.” 82/4-6
PROFESSOR OF ANCIENT HISTORY
Dr. Paul L. Maier, professor of ancient history at Western Michigan University, concluded that, “If all the evidence is weighed carefully and fairly, it is indeed justifiable, according to the canons of historical research, to conclude that the tomb in which Jesus was buried was actually empty on the morning of the first Easter. And no shred of evidence has yet been discovered in literary sources, epigraphy or archaeology that would disprove this statement.” 56/A-10
CHIEF JUSTICE
Lord Caldecote, Lord Chief Justice of England, has written:
My faith began with and was grounded on what I thought was revealed in the Bible. When, particularly, I came to the New Testament, the Gospels and other writings of the men who had been friends of Jesus Christ seemed to me to make an overwhelming case, merely as a matter of strict evidence, for the fact therein stated … The same approach to the cardinal test of the claims of Jesus Christ, namely, His resurrection, has led me, as often as I have tried to examine the evidence, to believe it as fact beyond dispute.
LEGAL AUTHORITY
One man who was highly skilled at dealing with evidence was Dr. Simon Greenleaf. He was the famous Royall Professor of Law at Harvard University and succeeded Justice Joseph Story as the Dane Professor of Law in the same university. The rise of Harvard Law School to its eminent position among the legal schools of the United States is to be ascribed to the efforts of these two men. Greenleaf produced his famous three-volume work, A Treatise on the Law of Evidence, which still is considered one of the greatest single authorities on this subject in the entire literature of legal procedure.
Greenleaf examined the value of the historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ to ascertain the truth. He applied the principles contained in his three-volume treatise on evidence. His findings were recorded in his book, An Examination of the Testimony of the Four Evangelists by the Rules of Evidence Administered in the Courts of Justice.
Greenleaf came to the conclusion that, according to the laws of legal evidence used in courts of law, there is more evidence for the historical fact of the resurrection of Jesus Christ than for just about any other event in history.
RATIONALISTIC LAWYER
Dr. Frank Morrison, a lawyer who had been brought up in a rationalistic environment, had come to the opinion that the resurrection was nothing but a fairy-tale happy ending which spoiled the matchless story of Jesus. He felt that he owed it to himself, and to others, to write a book that would present the truth about Jesus and dispel the myth of the resurrection.
Upon studying the facts, however, he, too, came to a different conclusion. The sheer weight of the evidence compelled him to conclude that Jesus actually did rise from the dead. Morrison wrote his book-but not the one he had planned. It is titled, Who Moved the Stone? The first chapter, very significantly, is called, “The Book That Refused to Be Written.”
LITERARY GENIUS
The literary scholar, C. S. Lewis, former professor of Medieval and Renaissance literature at Cambridge University, when writing about his conversion to Christianity, indicated that he had believed Christians “to be wrong.”
The last thing Lewis wanted was to embrace Christianity. However, “Early in 1926 the hardest boiled of all atheists I ever knew sat in my room on the other side of the fire and remarked that the evidence for the historicity of the Gospels was really surprisingly good. ‘Rum thing,’ he went on. ‘All that stuff of Frazer’s about the Dying God. Rum thing. It almost looks as if it had really happened once.’
“To understand the shattering impact of it, you would need to know the man (who has certainly never since shown any interest in Christianity). If he, the cynic of cynics, the toughest of the toughs, were not -as I would still have put it -’safe,’ where could I turn? Was there then no escape?”
After evaluating the basis and evidence for Christianity, Lewis concluded that in other religions there was “no such historical claim as in Christianity.” His knowledge of literature forced him to treat the Gospel record as a trustworthy account. “I was by now too experienced in literary criticism to regard the Gospels as myth.”
Finally, contrary to his strong stand against Christianity, Professor Lewis had to make an intelligent decision:
You must picture me alone in that room in Magdelen, night after night, feeling, whenever my mind lifted even for a second from my work, the steady, unrelenting approach of Him whom I so earnestly desired not to meet. That which I greatly feared had at last come upon me. In the Trinity Term of 1929 1 gave in, and admitted that God was God, and knelt and prayed: perhaps, that night, the most dejected and reluctant convert in all England. 52/211, 215, 223
OBSERVATION #2-Resurrection Foretold
Christ actually predicted He would rise on the third day. His claims are substantiated throughout the four Gospels. When Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, He took the twelve disciples aside and said to them, “We are going up to Jerusalem. And the Son of Man will be delivered to death. They will deliver Him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify Him. And on the third day He will be raised up” (Matthew 16:21; Mark 8:31; Luke 9:22).
Mark points out in his Gospel that “He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders, and the chief priests, and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again” (Mark 8:31).
My revered colleague Dr. Isaacs is right to correct Dr. Zurer, whose research on first-century Judea is second to none. Much as I have long admired Dr. Zurer’s superb work, I must point out that recent excavations in both Jerusalem and Nazareth prove (conclusively, in my view) that Jesus had “olive” skin and a big nose. The question that still perturbs all biblical scholars is: Was Jesus Bald?
John confirms this when he writes: “Jesus answered and said to them, ‘Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.’ The Jews therefore said, ‘It took forty-six years to build this Temple, and will You raise it up in three days?’ But He was speaking of the temple of His body” (John 2:19-21).
OBSERVATION #3-Basis of Christianity
The historical fact of the resurrection is the very basis for the truth of Christianity. To put it simply, the resurrection of Jesus Christ and Christianity stand or fall together. One cannot be true without the other.
The apostle Paul emphasized this point when he wrote:
But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain; your faith also is in vain. Moreover we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we witnessed against God that He raised Christ, whom He did not raise, if in fact the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless (1 Corinthians 15:13-17).
OBSERVATION #4-Intelligent Faith
My fourth observation on Christianity was quite an eye-opener. The more I studied the historical/biblical Christian faith the more I realized it was an “intelligent faith.” When an individual in the Scriptures was called upon to exercise faith, it was to be that intelligent faith. Jesus said, “You shall know the truth [not ignore it] and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32).
A lawyer asked Jesus, “Which is the greatest commandment?”
Jesus replied, ” [To] love the Lord your God with all your heart … and with all your mind” (Matthew 22:37).
Never is an individual called upon to commit intellectual suicide in trusting Christ as Savior and Lord. Instead, a believer is instructed to be ready always to give an answer (an intelligent one) as to why he believes (1 Peter 3:15).
In his work, I Believe in the Resurrection, Dr. George Eldon Ladd observes that faith does not mean a leap in the dark, an irrational credulity, a believing against evidences and against reason. It means believing in the light of historical facts, consistent with evidences, on the basis of witnesses.
OBSERVATION #5-Historical Criteria
The resurrection of Christ must be examined by the same criteria as is any other past event in history. The faith of the early church was founded on experiences in the factual realm. For example, the followers of Christ said He showed Himself alive to them by “many convincing proofs” (Acts 1:3). Luke used the word tekmerion. That connotes a “demonstrable proof.”
It became apparent to me that my research would have to include the historical criteria for truth if I were to discover what really happened that first Easter.
Sufficient Evidence Needed
Wolfhart Pannenberg is a professor of systematic theology at the University of Munich, Germany. He has been concerned primarily with questions of the relationship between faith and history. This brilliant scholar says, “Whether the resurrection of Jesus took place or not is an historical question, and … at this point is inescapable. And so the question has to be decided on the level of historical argument.”
The evidence must be approached with an honest, fair view of history and the investigation must not be prejudiced by preconceived notions or conclusions. There is a compelling need to let the evidence speak for itself. Historian Ronald Sider writes about the need for objectivity in historical research:
What does the critical historian do when his evidence points very strongly to the reality of an event, which contradicts his expectations and goes against the naturalistic view of reality? I submit that he must follow his critically analyzed sources. It is unscientific to begin with the philosophical presupposition that miracles cannot occur. Unless we avoid such one-sided presuppositions, historical interpretation becomes mere propaganda. We have a right to demand good evidence for an alleged event, which we have not experienced, but we dare not judge reality by our limited experience. And I would suggest that we have good evidence for the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.
Proper Approach
The Erlangen historian Ethelbert Stauffer gives further suggestions on how to approach history:
What do we (as historians) do when we experience surprises which run counter to all our expectations, perhaps all our convictions and even our period’s whole understanding of truth? We say as one great historian used to say in such instances: “It is surely possible.” And why not? For the critical historian nothing is impossible. 72/17
Historian Philip Schaff adds to the above: “The purpose of the historian is not to construct a history from preconceived notions and to adjust it to his own liking, but to reproduce it from the best evidences and to let it speak for itself.”
The ultimate test historically concerning the resurrection is whether the purported facts are supported by the evidence.
Note
Much of what folows is based on the eye witness reports recorded in the Gospel narratives of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John. For evidence concerning the reliability of this material, see Section I: The Bible and Its Reliability of this book. For further evidence of the reliability of the resurrection reports in the New Testament, see, He Walked Among Us, pp. 278-90. The points covered there are the early origination of the reports, including evidence that
1 Corinthians 15:3-8 originated within three years of the death and resurrection of Jesus.Security Precautions
SECURITY PRECAUTION #1-The Trial
Jesus was brought for trial before the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate. All available evidence shows Pilate to have been an extremely cruel and merciless despot. Philo records that he was responsible “for countless atrocities and numerous executions without any previous trial.”
Six Trials
One needs to realize that Jesus Christ went through six distinct trials. One was before Annas, the high priest (John 18:13), another was before Caiaphas (Matthew 26:57), the third before the Sanhedrin (Matthew 26:59), the fourth before Pilate (Matthew 27:2), the fifth before Herod (Luke 23:7), and the sixth was back before Pilate (Luke 23:11-25). There were three Jewish trials and three Roman trials.
The Jewish legal system was made up of two different Sanhedrins. One Sanhedrin was composed of 23 members who tried cases involving capital punishment. 86/335 The other Sanhedrin of 71 could serve as a trial court for cases involving the head of state, the high priest, or for offenses against the state or the Temple. The Sanhedrin of 71 could not try a case involving capital punishment. It was probably the Sanhedrin of 23 that tried Jesus.
One was located in every major city in Judea.
Finally after three Jewish trials and three Roman trials, the Jewish authorities, in conjunction with the Roman authorities, delivered Jesus to be crucified (Matthew 27:26).
Various “security precautions” were taken to make sure that when Jesus was dead He would remain dead and buried.
SECURITY PRECAUTION #2-Death by Crucifixion
Alexander the Great introduced crucifixion into the Mediterranean world-mainly Egypt and Carthage. From all indications, the Romans learned the practice from the Carthaginians.
To Miller:
Stop with this chinese and indian skin texture thing; you are sounding like the white folks who dare never to believe that black poeple are the SAME as them. Check out chromosome 15 of the human line; even if you are blue and human it is the same in every one of us. Even Professor Diop indicate that much of the skin color or morphological differences in man are environmentally influenced.
Even in races or tribes that are found existing in isolation (that is away from modern man’s influence) have a system of morality or right or wrong based on the tenets of thew Ten Commandments in the Bible. Choose which ever you want in those societies the individual is not allowed to steal, rape, kill, unfair those who are socially weak or violate young virgins at his or her will. Yet modern man continues to find various means to put a gulf between themselves and these principles for living.
My former tutor, Professor Dov Templebaum, is too kind to Dr. Zurer. And he asks a question settled long ago. Those of us who have spent recent years getting dusty in the digs of Sumeria have long supported Sam Isaacs’s proposition that Jesus was bald. The main question is: did Jesus fart?
A Cruel Death
Death by crucifixion developed into one of the world’s most disgraceful and cruel methods of torture. Cicero called it “the most cruel and hideous of tortures.” 15/64 Will Durant wrote that “even the Romans … pitied the victims.” 21/572
Flavius Josephus, the Jewish historian, who was an advisor to Titus during the siege of Jerusalem, had observed many crucifixions and called them “the most wretched deaths.”
The Custom of Whipping
After the verdict of crucifixion was pronounced by the court, it was customary to tie the accused to a post at the tribunal. The criminal was stripped of his clothes, then severely whipped by the lictors or scourgers.
The whip, known as a flagrum, had a sturdy handle to which were attached long leather thongs of varying lengths. Sharp, jagged pieces of bone and lead were woven into them. The Jews were limited by their law to 40 lashes.
The Pharisees, with their emphasis on strict adherence to the law, would limit their lashes to 39, so that if they miscounted they would not break their law. The Romans had no such limitations. Out of disgust or anger, the Romans could totally ignore the Jewish limitation, and probably did so in the case of Jesus.
A Medical Perspective
Dr. C. Truman Davis, a medical doctor who has meticulously studied crucifixion from a medical perspective, describes the effects of the Roman flagrum used in whipping:
The heavy whip is brought down with full force again and again across [a persons] shoulders, back and legs. At first the heavy thongs cut through the skin only. Then, as the blows continue, they cut deeper into the subcutaneous tissues, producing first an oozing of blood from the capillaries and veins of the skin, and finally spurting arterial bleeding from vessels in the underlying muscles. The small balls of lead first produce large, deep bruises, which are broken open by subsequent blows. Finally the skin of the back is hanging in long ribbons and the entire area is an unrecognizable mass of torn, bleeding tissue. When it is determined by the centurion in charge that the prisoner is near death, the beating is finally stopped.
Eusebius, a third-century historian, confirms Dr. Davis’s description when he writes: “The sufferer’s veins were laid bare, and the very muscles, sinews, and bowels of the victim were open to exposure.”
A Crown of Thorns
After placing the crown of thorns on Christ’s head, they began to mock Him saying, “Hail, the King of the Jews.” They also spit on Him and beat Him with a rod. Then they led Him away to be crucified.
The Crossbar Burden
A man condemned to be crucified had to carry his own crossbar from prison to the place of his execution.
Dr. Pierre Barbet points out that “they began to use a long piece of wood, which was used for barring doors and was called the patibulum (from patere, to be open).” The patibulum weighed approximately 110 pounds and was strapped to the victim’s shoulders.
Crucifixion With Nails
Upon reaching the execution site, the condemned person was nailed or bound by ropes to the cross. Many have questioned the historical accuracy of the nailing of the hands and feet. The reason for this skepticism is that there has been almost zero evidence of it in history.
Dr. J. W. Hewitt, in his Harvard Theological Review article entitled, “The Use of Nails in the Crucifixion,” said, “To sum up, there is astonishingly little evidence that the feet of a crucified person were ever pierced by nails.” 39/29-45 He went on to say that the victim’s hands and feet were bound by ropes to the cross.
For years Dr. Hewitt’s statement was quoted as the final word. The conclusion, therefore, was that the New Testament account of Christ being nailed to the cross was false and misleading. Crucifixion by use of nails was considered legendary. It was believed that nails would have ripped the flesh and could not have supported a body on the cross.
A Dead Man Speaks
Then, a revolutionary archaeological discovery was made in June 1968. Archeologist V. Tzaferis, under the direction of the Israeli Department of Antiquities and Museums, discovered four cave-tombs at the site of Gav’at ha-mivtar (Ras el-Masaref) just north of Jerusalem near Mt. Scopus.
In Ossuary 4 of Tomb I, inscribed with the name Yohanan Ben Ha’galgal, were found the bones of an adult male and of a child. A large 7-inch spike had been driven through the heel bone, and both legs had been fractured. Haas reported: “Both the heel bones were found transfixed by a large iron nail. The shins were found intentionally broken. Death caused by crucifixion.” 34/39
The bones in Ossuary 4 confirm another passage in the New Testament:
The soldiers therefore came, and broke the legs of the first man, and of the man who was crucified with Him; but coming to Jesus, when they saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs (John 19:32,33).
Purpose for Breaking the Legs
To understand why the legs were broken, one must study the means of execution. The soldiers would feel for the depression at the front of the wrist, then drive the heavy wrought-iron spike through at that point. Next, the legs were placed together and a large nail was driven through them. The knees were left moderately flexed, and a seat (known as a sedecula) was attached to the cross for the buttocks of the victim.
Dr. Truman Davis, the M.D. whom I quoted before, describes what happens to the human body after a short time of exposure on the cross:
As the arms fatigue, great waves of cramps sweep over the muscles, knotting them in deep, relentless, throbbing pain. With these cramps comes the inability to push Himself upward. Hanging by His arms, the pectoral muscles are paralyzed and the intercostal muscles are unable to act. Air can be drawn into the lungs, but cannot be exhaled. Jesus fights to raise Himself in order to get even one short breath. Finally, carbon dioxide builds up in the lungs and in the bloodstream and the cramps partially subside. Spasmodically, He is able to push Himself upward to exhale and bring in the life-giving oxygen.
After a while, orthostatic collapse through insufficient blood circulating to the brain and heart would follow. The only way the victim could avoid this was to push up by his feet so the blood could be returned to some degree of circulation in the upper part of his body.
When the authorities wanted to hasten death or terminate the torture, the victim’s legs were broken below the knees with a club. This prevented him from pushing himself upward to relieve the tension on the pectoral or chest muscles. Either rapid suffocation or coronary insufficiency followed. In the case of Christ, the legs of the two thieves crucified with Him were broken, but Christ’s were not because the executioners observed He already was dead.
Spilling of Blood and Water
One of the executioners thrust a spear into Christ’s side, and, as recorded in John 19:34, “Immediately there came out blood and water.”
Davis relates that there was “an escape of watery fluid from the sac surrounding the heart. We, therefore, have rather conclusive post-mortem. Evidence that [Christ] died, not the usual crucifixion death by suffocation, but of heart failure due to shock and constriction of the heart by fluid in the pericardium.” 181186
A Job Well Done
Pilate required certification of Christ’s death before the body could be turned over to Joseph of Arimathea. 21/573 He consented to Christ’s being removed from the cross only after four executioners had certified His death.
The efficiency of execution by crucifixion was quite well-known in the time of Christ. Dr. Paul L. Maier, professor of ancient history at Western Michigan University, writes,
True, there is a recorded instance of a victim being taken down from a cross and surviving. The Jewish historian Josephus, who had gone over to the Roman side in the rebellion of A.D. 66, discovered three of his friends being crucified. He asked the Roman general Titus to reprieve them, and they were immediately removed from their crosses.
Still, two of the three died anyway, even though they apparently had been crucified only a short time. In Jesus’ case, however, there were the additional complications of scourging and exhaustion, to say nothing of the great spear thrust that pierced His rib cage and probably ruptured His pericardium. Romans were grimly efficient about crucifixions:
To the professors:
I detect an attempt here to reduce Christ to the realms of mankind with a heavy dose of mockery. If historically it is established that he was a man and God at the same time. What biological function would have stopped him from farting or going bald? What genetic trait would have stopped him from expressing his mother and her relatives genotypes and phenotypes. So Mr. Ash he did fart as you also continue to fart. Maybe King Agrippa had a point when he suggested that too much learning had made Paul mad. It seems that too much of it has made these professors kinky and homophobic.
@ Tommy nTinker “BELL”
Maybe you ought to refer to the dictionary for the meanings of “Immaculate” and Conception”
My former pupil, David Ash, criticizes me and snidely suggests that I have been inactive in archeological digs in Sumeria during recent years. I concede that I have been less active than in earlier years, but David knows better than most that I have spent a long time tending to Rosie, who has been afflicted by Pick’s disease.
I have at least spent enough time in the digs to learn (something that David clearly failed to learn) that Jesus did fart. The Essene fragments are inconclusive but the other Qumran parchments indicate strongly that Jesus had something like a “fart wrangler”—that is, somebody who followed him around and captured his farts in some kind of bag, for posterity.
Where are those bags now, full of Jesus’s farts? That’s the real question.
@Zoe | November 23, 2011 at 4:36 PM |
“Red (And skin pigments of red) – This was Shem. From Shem came Abraham and the Hebrew nation as well as Jesus and all the middle-east and eastern nations.
Black (and dark skin pigments) – This was Ham. From Ham came the Egyptians and the African people.
White and (light skin pigments) – This was Japheth. From Japheth came the European nations.”
But I want to ask you why you failed to indentify the branch of Noah’s ancestral tree that bore the fruit of the Chinese, Japanese and ethnic groupings of Mongoloid extract. We can assume those from the Indus valley can be considered, according to your assessment, descendants of Japheth
I notice you are now referring to the Book of Enoch! This is good and indicative of a growing flexibility and eagerness to expand your theological learning horizon. I will not mention your earlier dismissal of the same non KJV source for early Judean mythology and legend!
Now that you are prepared to take your first toddler’s steps outside your biblical playpen I suppose you can take a peep inside the cupboard and shed some light on the mythical character called Melchizedek.
SECURITY PRECAUTION #3-Solid Rock Tomb
The body of Christ was placed in a new tomb, hewn out of a solid rock, in a private burial area. Jewish tombs usually had an entrance 4-112 to 5 feet high.
SECURITY PRECAUTION #4-Jewish Burial
The New Testament is very clear that the burial of Christ followed the customs of the Jews.
In preparing a body for burial, the Jews would place it on a stone table in the burial chamber. The body first would be washed with warm water.
It was the custom, as verified in the New Testament, to prepare the corpse (after cleansing) with various types of aromatic spices.
In the case of Christ’s burial, 75 pounds of spices were used. One might regard this as substantial, but it was no great amount for a leader. For example, Gamaliel, grandson of the distinguished Jewish scholar Hillel, also was a contemporary of Jesus. Saul of Tarsus studied under him. When Gameliel died, 86 pounds of spices were used in his burial. Josephus, the Jewish historian, records that when Herod died, it required 500 servants to carry the spices for his body. 43 So the 75 pounds for Jesus was not at all unusual.
After all the members of the body were straightened, the corpse was clothed in grave vestments made out of white linen. There could not be the slightest ornamentation or stain on the cloth. 5/261 The grave linens were sewn together by women. No knots were permitted. For some this was to indicate that the mind of the dead was “disentangled of the cares of this life” 5/261-to others, it indicated the continuity of the soul through eternity. No individual could be buried in fewer than three separate garments.
At this point, the aromatic spices, composed of a fragrant wood pounded into a dust known as aloes, were mixed with a gummy substance known as myrrh. Starting at the feet, they would wrap to the armpits, put the arms down, then wrap to the neck. A separate piece was wrapped around the head. I would estimate an encasement weighing a total of between 92 and 95 pounds. John Chrysostom, in the fourth century A.D., commented that “the myrrh used was a drug which adheres so closely to the body that the graveclothes could not easily be removed.”
SECURITY PRECAUTION #5-Very Large Stone
Matthew records in his writings that a large stone was rolled against the front of the tomb (Matthew 27:60). Mark said the stone was extremely large (Mark 16:1-4). In today’s language, he would have said, “Wow! Get a loada’ that rock!”
Just how large was that “Wow, get a loada’ that rock” stone?
In the Mark 16:4 portion of the Bezae manuscripts in the Cambridge Library in England, a parenthetical statement was found that adds, “And when He was laid there, he (Joseph) put against the tomb a stone which 20 men could not roll away.”
The significance of this statement is realized when one considers the rules for transcribing manuscripts. It was the custom that if a copier was emphasizing his own interpretation, he would write his thought in the margin and not include it within the text. One might conclude, therefore, that the insert in the text was copied from a text even closer to the time of Christ, perhaps, a first-century manuscript. The phrase, then, could have been recorded by an eyewitness who was impressed with the enormity of the stone, which was rolled against Jesus’ sepulcher.
One and a Half to Two Tons
After my lecture at Georgia Tech, two engineering professors went on a tour of Israel with other Georgia Tech faculty members. They remembered the comments I had made about the large size of the stone. So, being engineers, they considered the type of stone used in the time of Christ and calculated the size needed to roll against a 4-1/2 to 5-foot doorway.
Later, they wrote me a letter containing all the technical terms, but they put their conclusions in simple language on the back of it.
They said a stone of that size would have to have had a minimum weight of 1-1/2 to 2 tons. No wonder Matthew and Mark said the stone was extremely large.
One might ask, “If the stone were that big, how did Joseph move it into position in the first place?” He simply gave it a push and let gravity do the rest. It had been held in place with a wedge as it sat in a groove or trench that sloped down to the front of the tomb. When the wedge was removed, the heavy circular rock just rolled into position.
SECURITY PRECAUTION #6-Roman Security
Jewish officials panicked, because thousands were turning to Christ. To avoid a political problem, it was to the advantage of both the Romans and the Jews to make sure Jesus was put away for good.
So the chief priests and Pharisees gathered together and said to Pilate, “Sir, we remember that when He was still alive that deceiver said, ‘After three days I am to rise again.’ Therefore, give orders for the grave to be made secure until the third day, lest the disciples come and steal Him away and say to the people, ‘He has risen from the dead,’ and the last deception will be worse than the first” (Matthew 27:63).
Pilate said to them, “You have a guard; go, make it as secure as you know how.” And so “they went and made the grave secure, and along with the guard they set a seal on the stone” (verse 65).
Some people would argue that Pilate said, “Look, you have your Temple police. You take your Temple police, and go make it secure.”
The Temple Police
Now, if you want to say it’s a Temple guard, you need to realize who made up that guard. It consisted of a group of 10 Levites who were placed on duty at different places at the Temple. The total number of men on duty was 270. This represented 27 units of 10 each. The military discipline of the Temple guard was quite good. In fact, at night, if the captain approached a guard member who was asleep, he was beaten and burned with his own clothes. A member of the guard also was forbidden to sit down or lean against something when he was on duty.
A Roman Guard
However, I am convinced it was the Roman guard that was placed at the grave of Christ to secure it.
A. T. Robertson, noted Greek scholar, says this phrase is in the present imperative and can refer only to a Roman guard, and not the Temple police. According to him, Pilate literally said, “Have a guard.”
Robertson adds that the Latin form koustodia occurs as far back as the Oxyrhynchus papyrus in reference to the Roman guard. The Jews knew Pilate wanted to keep the peace, so they were sure he’d give them what they wanted.
What was the Roman guard?
A Roman “custodian” did a lot more than care for a building. The word “custodian” represented the guard unit of the Roman Legion. This unit was probably one of the greatest offensive and defensive fighting machines ever conceived.
One helpful source for understanding the importance of the Roman guard is Flavius Vegitius Renatus. His friends called him Vegitius. A military historian, he lived several hundred years after the time of Christ when the Roman army started to deteriorate in its discipline. He wrote a manual to the Roman Emperor Valentinian to encourage him to instill the methods of offensive and defensive warfare used by the Romans during the time of Christ. Called The Military Institutes of the Romans, it is a classic today.
Vegitius wanted to see the Roman armies restored to the efficiency and might, which characterized them at the time of Christ. These armies were great because they were highly disciplined. He wrote, “Victory in war does not depend entirely upon numbers or mere courage; only skill and discipline will insure it. We find that the Romans owed … the conquest of the world to no other cause than continual military training, exact observation of discipline in their camps and unwearied cultivation of the other arts of war.”
There are two other excellent sources. At Indiana University, Dr. George Currie did his doctoral dissertation on the Roman custodian, and Dr. Smith edited a dictionary entitled, Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities.
To Prof. Templebaum:
I would want to wish your Rosie better health. However, I am sure the many scoffers and fart wranglers on this blog are gleefully delighted and well pleased with your level of contribution so far.
And now the resurrection. THE only MAN and person on this earth that after three days walk out of the grave but then again he was conceived of the HOLY GHOST, Not even Hollywood could have written such a script. OH i forgot Lazarus he too came back from the dead!
Before i forget Jesus ascended into heaven. oh boy and the story gets more complex. HE is coming out of the clouds some time.But when! No one knows! do not forget that all the dead who believed in JESUS would arise from the grave.
My former tutor Dov Templebaum criticizes me for criticizing him. Is this the way of a scholar?
Of course I knew of Rosie’s illness. Dov and Rosie treated me like a son. I loved them both and love them still. But if we are to have a dispute in a public space, perhaps this is the time for me to mention that Rosie once touched me inappropriately. I will say no more than that.
Professor Templebaum’s notion of a “fart wrangler” for Jesus is laughable. There is no evidence for it. Admittedly, the archeology seems to show that we have found a bit of Jesus’s toupee, but anything else is pure speculation.
The Force of the Roman Guard
These and other sources point out that the Roman guard was not a one-, two-, or three-man force. Supercilious pictures of the tomb of Jesus Christ show one or two men standing around with wooden spears and mini-skirts. That’s really laughable.
A Roman guard unit was a 4- to 16-man security force. Each man was trained to protect six feet of ground. The 16 men in a square of 4 on each side were supposed to be able to protect 36 yards against an entire battalion and hold it.
Normally what they did was this: 4 men were placed immediately in front of what they were to protect. The other 12 were asleep in a semi-circle in front of them with their heads pointing in. To steal what these guards were protecting, thieves would first have to walk over those who were asleep. Every four hours, another unit of 4 was awakened, and those who had been awake went to sleep. They would rotate this way around the clock.
Historian Dr. Paul Maier. writes, “Peter would be guarded by four squads of four men each when imprisoned by Herod Agrippa (Acts 12), so sixteen would be a minimum number expected outside a prison. Guards in ancient times always slept in shifts, so it would have been virtually impossible for a raiding party to have stepped over all their sleeping faces” without waking them.
High Priest Offers Bribe
Even Matthew records that it was a multi-man force when he wrote that “some of the guard came into the city and reported to the chief priests all that had happened” (Matthew 28:11).
A critic at this point might say, “See, they came to the high priest. It shows that they were the Temple guard.” The context is clear, however, that they came to the high priest because he had influence with the Roman authority and because it was the only possible way to save their necks. The high priest tried to bribe them (which would have been a mockery if they had been Temple police). He gave them money and told them what to tell the people. When the news reached Pilate, the high priest said he would keep them from being killed. Normally, they would receive the death penalty, because the story was to be that they had fallen asleep while guarding the tomb.
It is significant that the governor had to be satisfied, because I have not been able to find any account in history- secular, Jewish or Christian -indicating that the Roman governor had anything at all to do with the Temple police.
Even if the guard at the tomb had been made up of Temple police, the security would have been no less thorough.
A Fighting Machine
T. G. Tucker, in his book, Life in the Roman World of Nero and St. Paul describes one of these Roman guards:
Over his breast, and with flaps over the shoulders, he will wear a corset of leather covered with hoop-like layers, or maybe scales, of iron or bronze. On his head will be a plain pot-like helmet, or skull-cap, of iron.
In his right hand he will carry the famous Roman pike. This is a stout weapon, over 6 feet in length, consisting of a sharp iron head fixed in a wooden shaft, and the soldier may either charge with it as a bayonet, or he may hurl it like a javelin and then fight at close quarters with his sword.
On the left arm is a shield, which may be of various shapes. The shield is not only carried by means of a handle, but may be supported by a belt over the right shoulder. In order to be out of the way of the shield, the sword -a thrusting rather than a slashing weapon, approaching 3 feet in length- is hung at the right side by a belt passing over the left shoulder …. On the left side, the soldier wears a dagger at his girdle.
Polybius, the Greek historian of the second century B.C., records that, in addition to all this,the men are adorned with a crown made of feathers and with three upright feathers, either purple or black, about a foot and a half high; when they add these on the head along with the other arms, the man appears twice as big as he really is, and his appearance is striking and terrifying to the enemy.
The men of the lowest property classes also wear a bronze plate, 8 inches square, which they place in front of their chests and call the heart guard; this completes their armanment. But those worth more than 10,000 drachmae, instead of wearing the heart guard, along with the rest of their equipment, wear a coat of mail.
SECURITY PRECAUTION #7- Roman Seal
Mathew records that along with the guard they set a “seal on the stone” (Mathew 27:66). A.T. Robertson says this could be placed on the stone only in the presence of the Roman guards who were left in charge. Vegitius indicates the same thing. The purpose of this procedure was to prevent anyone from tampering with the grave’s contents.
After the guard inspected the tomb and rolled the stone in place, a cord was stretched across the rock. This was fastened at either end with sealing clay. Finally, the clay packs were stamped with the official signet of the Roman governor.
A parallel to this is seen in Daniel: “And a stone was brought and laid over the mouth of the den; and the king sealed it with his own signet ring and with the signet rings of his nobles, so that nothing might be changed in regard to Daniel” (Daniel 6:17).
Purpose of the Seal
Henry Sumner Maine, member of the Supreme Council of India, formerly regius professor of the civil law at the University of Cambidge, speaking on the legal authority attached to a Roman seal, said, “Seals in antiquity were actually considered as a mode of authentication.”
To authenticate something simple means to prove that it is real or genuine. So this seal on Jesus’ tomb was a public testimony that Jesus’ body was actually there. In addition, because the seal was Roman, it verified the fact that His body was protected from vandals by nothing less than the power and authority of the Roman Empire.
Anyone trying to move the stone from the tomb’s entrance would have broken the seal and thus incurred the wrath of Roman law and power.
Grave Robbers Warned
In Nazareth, a marble slab was discovered with a very interesting inscription – a warning to grave robbers. It was written in Greek and says, “Ordinance of Caesar. It is my pleasure that graves and tombs remain perpetually undisturbed for those who have made them for the cult of their ancestors or children or members of their house. If, however, anyone charges that another has either demolished them, or has in any other way extracted the buried, or has maliciously transferred them to other places in order to wrong them, or has displaced the sealing or other stones, against such a one I order that a trial be instituted, as in respect of the gods, so in regard to the cult of mortals. For it shall be much more obligatory to honor the buried. Let it be absolutely forbidden for anyone to disturb them. In case of violation I desire that the offender be sentenced to capital punishment on charge of violation of sepulcher.”
Maier observes, “All previous Roman edicts concerning grave violation set only a large fine, and one wonders what presumed serious infraction could have led the Roman government to stiffen the penalty precisely in Palestine and to erect a notice regarding it specifically in Nazareth or the vicinity.” 54/118-19 It well could be a response to the commotion caused by Christ’s resurrection.
Facts to Be Reckoned With
Now, something happened. Something happened almost two thousand years ago that changed the course of history from B.C. (Before Christ) to A.D. (the Latin Anno Domini – the year of our Lord).
That “something” was so dramatic it completely changed eleven men’s lives, so that all but one died a martyr’s death.
That something was an empty tomb! An empty tomb that a 15-minute walk from the center of Jerusalem would have confirmed or disproved.
Even after the two thousand years since that time, mankind hasn’t forgotten the empty tomb nor the resurrection appearances of Jesus Christ.
If you wish to rationalize away the events surrounding Christ and His resurrection, you must deal with certain imponderables. In fact, you might say that both the Jews and the Romans outwitted themselves when they took so many precautions to make sure Jesus was dead and remained in the grave. These “security precautions” -taken with the trial, crucifixion, burial, entombment, sealing and the guarding of Christ’s tomb -make it very difficult for critics to defend their position that Christ did not rise from the dead!
@lemuel | November 23, 2011 at 5:51 PM |
“To Miller:
Stop with this chinese and indian skin texture thing; you are sounding like the white folks who dare never to believe that black poeple are the SAME as them.”
Lemuel, what do you mean here, man?
All I am doing is performing an intellectual vivisection of the bull that Zoe is putting forward regarding the biblical source of modern man.? Do you want me to accept like some stupid black people what is contained in the book of Genesis as an explanation for the variety in ethnicity found among humans? You can if you want to! But my intelligence tells me that what is posited by Zoe and you is a load of inconsistent mythological folly that does make biological or scientific sense.
I am not dealing with racial or ethnic variations among humans from a sociological, political or racial supremacy point of view. If you read my threads you would realize I don’t give a damn about religious or racial bigotry. I believe in variety and its acceptance thereof (live and let live)!
I am simply arguing that from anthropological and biological perspectives the mythological Noah’s three sons could not be the direct ancestors of varied modern human beings given a geological time span of less than 13,000 years (I use that figure to entice you!).
ac: ‘Maybe you ought to refer to the dictionary for the meanings of “Immaculate” and Conception”.’
Er, right. OK. Er, excellent!
@TOMMY TINKER”bell
You are welcome!
Now explain the Resuurection! you might need to lokk up the word” Ressurection” carry on smartly!
ac: ‘”Maybe you ought to refer to the dictionary for the meanings of “Immaculate” and Conception”.’
O tempora o mores! Oh, morons.
Let’s look at the morons.Let’s watch them play.
Consider these seven facts:
FACT #1-Broken Roman Seal
The first obvious fact was the breaking of the seal that stood for the power and authority of the Roman Empire. The consequences of breaking the seal were severe. The FBI and CIA of the Roman Empire were called into action to find the man or men responsible. When they were apprehended, it meant automatic execution by crucifixion upside down. Your guts ran into your throat. So people feared the breaking of the seal. Even the disciples displayed signs of cowardice, and hid themselves.
FACT #2-The Empty Tomb
Another obvious fact after the resurrection was the empty tomb. The disciples of Christ did not go off to Athens or Rome to preach Christ raised from the dead; they went right back to the city of Jerusalem where, if what they were teaching were false, their message would have been disproved. The resurrection could not have been maintained for a moment in Jerusalem if the tomb had not been empty.
Dr. Paul Maier says,
Where did Christianity first begin? To this the answer must be: “Only one spot on earth -the city of Jerusalem.” But this is the very last place it could have started if Jesus’ tomb remained occupied, since anyone producing a dead Jesus would have driven a wooden stake through the heart of an incipient Christianity inflamed by His supposed resurrection.
What happened in Jerusalem seven weeks after the first Easter could have taken place only if Jesus’ body were somehow missing from Joseph’s tomb, for otherwise the Temple establishment, in its embroglio with the Apostles, would simply have aborted the movement by making a brief trip over to the sepulcher of Joseph of Arimathea and unveiling exhibit A. They did not do this, because they knew the tomb was empty. Their official explanation for it – that the disciples had stolen the body – was an admission that the sepulcher was indeed vacant.
There are both Jewish and Roman sources and traditions that acknowledge an empty tomb. These sources range from the Jewish historian Josephus to a compilation of fifth-century Jewish writings called the Toledoth Jeshu. Maier calls this “positive evidence from a hostile source, which is the strongest kind of historical evidence. In essence, this means that if a source admits a fact decidedly not in its favor, then that fact is genuine.” 55/5
Gamaliel, who was a member of the Sanhedrin, put forth the suggestion that the Christian movement was of God (Acts 5:34-42); he could not have done this if the tomb had been occupied, or if the Sanhedrin had known the whereabouts of Christ’s body.
Even Justin Martyr in his Dialogue With Trypho relates that the Jerusalem authorities sent special representatives throughout the Mediterranean world to counteract the story of the empty tomb with the explanation that His followers stole the body. Why would the Jewish authorities bribe the Roman guard and propagate the “stolen body” explanation if the tomb was occupied? Historian Ron Sider concluded that: “If the Christians and their Jewish opponents both agreed that the tomb was empty, we have little choice but to accept the empty tomb as an historical fact.”
FACT #3-Large Stone Moved
On that Sunday morning, the first thing that impressed the people who approached the tomb was the unusual position of that 1-1/2- to 2-ton stone that had been lodged in front of the doorway. All the Gospel writers mentioned the removal of the large stone.
Up an Incline
For example, in Matthew 27, it is said that a “large stone was rolled against the entrance of the tomb.” Here the Greek word used for roll is kulio, meaning “to roll.” Mark used the same root word kulio. However, in Mark 16, he added a preposition to explain the position of the stone after the resurrection.
In Greek, as in English, to change the direction of a verb or to intensify it, you add a preposition. He added the preposition ana, which means “up or upward.” So, anakulio can mean “to roll something up a slope or an incline.” For Mark, then, to have used that verb, there would have had to be a slope or an incline coming down to the front of that tomb.
Away From
In fact, that stone was so far “up a slope” that Luke used the same root word kulio, but added a different preposition, apo. Apo can mean, according to the Greek lexicons, “a separation from,” in the sense of “a distance from.” Apokulio, then, means to roll one object away from another object in a sense of “separation” or “distance from it.” Now, they saw the stone moved away in a sense of distance from “what”?
Let’s go back to Mark 16. On Sunday morning, the women were coming to the tomb.
You might say, “Wait a minute! Why were those women coming to the tomb Sunday mornings?” One reason was to anoint the body over the graveclothes with a mixture of spices and perfume. Another might ask, “Why would they come since the Roman security unit was there guarding the grave?”
That’s quite simple. The guard did not examine the body and secure the sepulcher until Saturday afternoon. On Friday afternoon the women had watched as the body was prepared in a private burial area. They lived in the suburb of Bethany and therefore were not aware of the Roman and Jewish actions about putting extra security at the place of Christ’s burial.
Let’s go back to Mark 16 again.
The women are saying, “Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance of the tomb?” Here, they used the Greek word for entrance. That’s logical, isn’t it? But, when they got there they said, “Who rolled the stone away from …?” and here they changed the Greek word for “the entrance” to the word used for the entire massive sepulcher. Apokulio, then, means “away from” in the sense of at a “distance from the entire massive sepulcher.”
Picked Up and Carried
In fact, the stone was in such a position up a slope away from the entire massive sepulcher that John (chapter 20) used a different Greek verb, airo, which (according to the Arndt and Gingrish Lexicon) means, “to pick something up and carry it away.”
Now, I ask you, if the disciples had wanted to come in, tiptoe around the sleeping guards, then roll the stone over and steal the body, why would they have moved a 1-1/2- to 2-ton stone up a slope away from the entire massive sepulcher to such a position that it looked like someone had picked it up and carried it away? Those soldiers would have had to be deaf not to have heard that stone being moved.
FACT #4-Roman Guard Goes AWOL
The Roman guard fled. They left their place of responsibility. This has to be explained away because the military discipline of the Romans was exceptionally good. Justin, in his Digest #49, mentions all offenses which required the penalty of death: a scout remaining with the enemy (-3.4), desertion (-3.11; -5.1-3), losing or disposing of one’s arms (-3.130), disobedience in war time (-3.15), going over the wall or rampart (-3.17), starting a mutiny (-3.19), refusing to protect an officer or deserting one’s post (-3.22), a drafted man hiding from service (-4.2), murder (-4.5), laying hands on a superior or insult to a general (-6.1), leading flight when the example would influence others (-6.3), betraying plans to the enemy (-6.4; -7), wounding a fellow soldier with a sword (-6.6), disabling self or attempting suicide without reasonable excuse (-6.7), leaving the night watch (-10.1), breaking the centurion’s staff or striking him when being punished (-13.4), escaping guard house (-13.5), and disturbing the peace (-16.1). To the above, one can add “falling asleep.” If it was not apparent which soldier had failed in duty, then lots were drawn to see who would be punished with death for the guard unit’s failure.
Fear of Punishment
One way a guard was put to death was by being stripped of his clothes, then burned alive in a fire started with the garments. The entire unit certainly would not have fallen asleep with that threat hanging over their heads. The history of Roman discipline and security testifies to the fact that if the tomb had not been empty the soldiers never would have left their position, nor would they have gone to the high priest. The fear of the wrath of their superiors and the possibility of the death penalty meant they paid close attention to the most minute details of their job. Dr. George Curie, who studied carefully the military discipline of the Romans, wrote that fear of punishment “produced flawless attention to duty, especially in the night watches.” 16/41-43
Dr. Bill White is in charge of the Garden Tomb in Jerusalem. His responsibilities have caused him to study quite extensively the resurrection and the events following the first Easter. White makes several critical observations about the Jewish authorities bribing the Roman guard:
If the stone were simply rolled to one side of the tomb, as would be necessary to enter it, then they might be justified in accusing the men of sleeping at their posts, and in punishing them severely. If the men protested that the earthquake broke the seal and that the stone rolled back under the vibration, they would still be liable to punishment for behavior, which might be labeled cowardice.
But these responsibilities do not meet the case. There was some undeniable evidence, which made it impossible for the chief priests to bring any charge against the guard. The Jewish authorities must have visited the scene, examined the stone, and recognized its position as making it humanly impossible for their men to have permitted its removal. No twist of human ingenuity could provide an adequate answer or scapegoat and so they were forced to bribe the guard and seek to hush things up.
FACT #5-Graveclothes Tell a Tale
In a literal sense, the tomb was not actually empty. Instead, an amazing phenomenon occurred. After visiting the grave and seeing the stone rolled away, the women ran back and told the disciples. Then Peter and John took off running. John outran Peter, and upon arriving at the tomb he did not enter. Instead, he leaned over and looked in and saw something so startling that he immediately believed.
He looked over to the place where the body of Jesus had lain. There were graveclothes, in the form of a body, slightly caved in and empty -like the empty chrysalis of a caterpillar’s cocoon. That was enough to make a believer out of anybody! He never did get over it!
The first thing that stuck in the minds of the disciples was not the empty tomb -but the empty graveclothes, undisturbed in their form and position.
FACT #6-Appearances of Christ Confirmed
On several occasions, Christ appeared alive after the cataclysmic events of that first Easter.
A Principle to Remember
When studying an event in history, it is important to investigate whether enough people who were participants or eyewitnesses to the event were alive when the facts about the event were published. This is helpful to validate the accuracy of the published report. If the number is substantial, the event can be fairly well established. For instance, if we all witness a murder, and in a week the police report turns out to be composed of fabricated lies, we as eyewitnesses can refute it.
In other words, when a book is written about an event, the accuracy of its contents can be validated if enough people are alive at the time it is published who have been either eyewitnesses of, or participants in, the events recorded.
Several very important factors often are overlooked when investigating Christ’s post-resurrection appearances to individuals. The first is the large number of witnesses of Christ after that first Sunday morning.
Fifty Hours of Eyewitnesses
One of the earliest records of Christ’s appearing after the resurrection is by Paul (I Corinthians 15). The apostle appeals to his audience’s knowledge of the fact that Christ had been seen by more than five hundred people at one time. Paul reminds them that the majority of these people were still alive and could be questioned.
@TOMMY TINKER “Bell:
Pardon the interruption but to be correct before you go dashing off to meet Mr webster . my input is subject to correction on the word”resurrection”
AC…are you talking about Star Trek the movie? LOLLL
ac: ‘you might need to lokk up the word” Ressurection”.’
I looked up the word “ressurection”. I looked up the word “lokk”.
Neither seem to exist. Can you help?
PS. Lol. And Lol. It’s always incredibly funny when cretins actually write “LOL”, don’t you think?
Dr. Ewin M. Yamauchi, associate professor of history at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio, emphasizes:
What gives a special authority to the list [of witnesses] as historical evidence is the reference to most of the five hundred brethren being still alive. St. Paul says in effect, “If you do not believe me, you can ask them.”
Let’s take the more than five hundred witnesses who saw Jesus alive after His death and burial and place them in a courtroom. Do you realize that if each of these five hundred people were to testify only six minutes each, including cross-examination, you would have an amazing fifty hours of firsthand eyewitness testimony? Add to this the testimony of many other eyewitnesses and you could well have the largest and most lopsided trial in history.
Variety of People
The second factor often overlooked is the variety of locations and people involved in Jesus’ appearances.
Professor Merrill C. Tenney of Wheaton College writes:
It is noteworthy that these appearances are not stereotyped. No two of them are exactly alike. The appearance to Mary Magdalene occurred in early morning; that to the travelers to Emmaus in the afternoon; and to the apostles in the evening, probably after dark. He appeared to Mary in the open air. Mary was alone when she saw Him; the disciples were together in a group; and Paul records that on one occasion He appeared to more than five hundred at one time (1 Corinthians 15:6).
The reactions also were varied. Mary was overwhelmed with emotion; the disciples were frightened; Thomas was obstinately incredulous when told of the Lord’s resurrection, but worshiped Him when He manifested Himself. Each occasion had its own peculiar atmosphere and characteristics, and revealed some different quality of the risen Lord.
In no way can anyone say His appearances were stereotyped.
Hostile Viewers
A third factor very crucial to interpreting Christ’s appearance is that He also appeared to those who were hostile or unconvinced. Over and over again I have read or heard people comment that Jesus was seen alive after His death and burial only by His friends and followers. Using this argument, they attempt to water down the overwhelming impact of the eyewitness accounts -but this line of reasoning is so pathetic it hardly deserves comment.
No author or informed individual would regard Saul of Tarsus to have been a follower of Christ. The facts show the exact opposite. He despised Christ and persecuted Christ’s followers (Acts 8:1; 9:1,2; Philippians 3:5,6). For Paul it was a life-shattering experience when Christ appeared to him (Acts 9:3-6). Although Paul was not at the time a disciple, he later became one of the greatest witnesses for the truth of the resurrection.
No one acquainted with the facts can accurately say that Jesus appeared to just “an insignificant few.”
FACT #7-Women Saw Him First
Another authenticating feature of the resurrection narrative is that the first appearances of the risen Christ were not to His disciples, but rather to women-to Mary Magdalene and the other women. This must have been an embarrassment to the apostles, Christ’s inner circle. They were likely quite jealous.
According to Jewish principles of legal evidence women were invalid witnesses. They did not have a right to give testimony in a court of law.
Unreliable Testimony
Dr. Maier accurately observes that since the testimony of a woman was deemed unreliable, the “initial reaction of the Eleven was understandably one of suspicion and disbelief. Again, if the resurrection accounts had been manufactured … women would never have been included in the story, at least, not as first witnesses.”
It Changed Their Lives
The changed lives of those early Christian believers is one of the most telling testimonies to the fact of the resurrection. We must ask ourselves: What motivated them to go everywhere proclaiming the message of the risen Christ?
Had there been visible benefits accruing to them from their efforts such as prestige, wealth or increased social status-we might logically account for their actions. As a reward, however, for their wholehearted and total allegiance to this “risen Christ,” these early Christians were beaten, stoned to death, thrown to the lions, tortured, crucified and subjected to every conceivable method of stopping them from talking. Yet they were the most peaceful of men, who physically forced their beliefs on no one. Rather they laid down their very lives as the ultimate proof of their complete confidence in the truth of their message.
Those Hardest to Convince
There was the skeptical family of Jesus (John 7:1-5). His brothers did not believe in Him. They were embarrassed to hear their brother say to the people, “I am the way, the truth and the life, no man cometh unto the Father but by Me,” and “I am the vine, you are the branches,” and “I’m the shepherd, you are the sheep” (John 14:6; 15:5; 10:11). What would you do if your brother did that?
There was James, His brother. He was found in the company of the Pharisees. James and his brothers mocked Jesus.
However, after Jesus went to that degrading death on the cross, disgracing the family, and was buried, where do we find those hardest to convince -His own family?
We find them in the upper room with the disciples waiting for the Holy Spirit to be sent (Acts 1:13,14). Now, since they mocked Him while He was alive, what happened in a matter of a few days to turn their lives upside down?
James became a leader in the early church and wrote an epistle stating, “I James, a bond-servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ [his brother]. . ” (James 1). Eventually, for the cause of Christ, James died a martyr’s death -he was stoned.
What happened?
The best explanation I know is recorded by Paul: “Then He appeared to James” (I Corinthians 15:7).
His Cowardly Followers
What about the fearful disciples of Jesus? When the authorities captured Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, “all the disciples left Him and fled” (Matthew 26:56; Mark 14:50). During Christ’s trial, Peter went out and denied Him three times (John 18:15-27; Mark 14:66-72). After Christ was crucified, the fearful disciples hid themselves in an upper room and locked the doors (John 20:19). But something happened within days to totally change this group of cowardly followers into a bold band of enthusiasts who faced martyrdom without fear or hesitation. Peter, who had denied Jesus, was imprisoned for his persistency in preaching a “risen Christ” and later was himself crucified upside down.
What happened? The most logical explanation is that the resurrected Jesus “appeared to Cephas [Peter] … then to all the Apostles” (1 Corinthians 15:5-7).
A Jewish Fanatic Converted
And how about Paul, the religious persecutor of the Christians? This Jewish fanatic so hated the followers of Christ that he obtained special permission to go to other cities and incarcerate Christ’s disciples. He ravaged the church (Acts 8:1-3; 9:1,2; 22:3-5).
But something happened to this persecutor. He turned from an antagonist to a protagonist of Jesus. He was transformed from a murderer to a Christian missionary. He changed from a bitter interrogator of Christians to one of the greatest propagators of the Christian faith.
The irony is that Paul began to confound the Jewish authorities “by proving Jesus is the Christ,” the Son of God (Acts 9:22). He was eventually killed for his devotion to Christ.
What happened? This historical explanation is Paul’s statement that Jesus “appeared to me also” (1 Corinthians 15:8; Acts 9:3-22).
It would be very difficult to explain the transformation of these men if the resurrection were not true. Professor Robert Grant says: “The origin of Christianity is almost incomprehensible unless such an event took place.” 32/302
A Resurrection Explains All the Facts
Harvard law professor Simon Greenleaf, a man who lectured for years on how to break down testimony and determine whether or not a witness is lying, concludes:
It was therefore impossible that they could have persisted in affirming the truths they have narrated, had not Jesus actually risen from the dead, and had they not known this fact as certainly as they knew any other fact.
The annals of military warfare afford scarcely an example of the like heroic constancy, patience, and unflinching courage. They had every possible motive to review carefully the grounds of their faith, and the evidences of the great facts and truths they asserted.
A believer in Jesus Christ today can have the complete confidence, as did those first Christians, that his faith is based not on myth or legend but on the solid historical fact of the empty tomb and the risen Christ.
Nnaki/Raelian, wrote:
“Lemuel, what do you mean here, man?
All I am doing is performing an intellectual vivisection of the bull that Zoe is putting forward regarding the biblical source of modern man.? Do you want me to accept like some stupid black people what is contained in the book of Genesis as an explanation for the variety in ethnicity found among humans? You can if you want to! But my intelligence tells me that what is posited by Zoe and you is a load of inconsistent mythological folly that does make biological or scientific sense.”
“I am not dealing with racial or ethnic variations among humans from a sociological, political or racial supremacy point of view. If you read my threads you would realize I don’t give a damn about religious or racial bigotry. I believe in variety and its acceptance thereof (live and let live)!
I am simply arguing that from anthropological and biological perspectives the mythological Noah’s three sons could not be the direct ancestors of varied modern human beings given a geological time span of less than 13,000 years (I use that figure to entice you!).”
Nnaki/Raelian, Man, your ignorance re this matter is simply beyond descrption! You want some anthropological and biological perspectives re Noah’s three sons; even going back to Adam and Eve?
Standby Nnaki/Raelian, I’ll beam you down some scientific evidence!
Is any account taken of the fact that biblical events occurred and were initially recorded in an unsophisticated time, compared to the present, and in a language other than English? Is it likely, therefore, that many of those events might have been misinterpreted by the individuals that initially recorded such events or mistranslated by those individuals that subsequently did translation?
@ Zoe | November 23, 2011 at 7:58 PM |
“Standby Nnaki/Raelian, I’ll beam you down some scientific evidence!”
First things first! Before you beam down any evidence please address the query that was posed regarding the anthropological connection between one of Noah’s sons and the ethnic groups of Mongoloid ancestry.
Please! Pretty, please!
Note that most living animals have a basic makeup – eyes, ears, nose, mouth, arms/wings, feet, etc. In fact, if you blank your mind and focus on an animal, such as a frog, you could almost picture a vastly deformed human being. The basic similarities are so striking that you could almost rationalize evolution, over millions/billions of years, where varied surroundings influenced the varying characteristics that we now observe.
Nnaki/Raelian, I challenge you, to cogently, coherently, objectively, scientifically, and, if possible, logically and honestly, to refute, what I posted earlier re the historic veracity of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ; and likewise, the following; Remember, Nnaki/Raelian, NO imagenary folly and unsupported, Star Trek nonsense. Take your time, don’t choke now; this ain’t no JACKASS, in your Pythonated gut!
Adam, Eve and Noah vs Modern Genetics
by Dr Robert W. Carter
Published: 11 May 2010(GMT+10)
The evolutionary map of world migrations is startlingly close to the biblical account of a single dispersal of people from Babel. The evolutionary “Out of Africa” theory tells us there was a single dispersal of people, centered near and travelling through the Middle East, with three main mitochondrial lineages, with people traveling in small groups into previously uninhabited territory, and that all of this occurred in the recent past. Every item in that list is something directly predicted by the Tower of Babel account in the Bible. (Image http://www.mitomap.org).
It comes as a surprise to most people to hear that there is abundant evidence that the entire human race came from two people just a few thousand years ago (Adam and Eve), that there was a serious population crash (bottleneck) in the recent past (at the time of the Flood), and that there was a single dispersal of people across the world after that (the Tower of Babel).1 It surprises them even more to learn that much of this evidence comes from evolutionary scientists. In fact, an abundant testimony to biblical history has been uncovered by modern geneticists. It is there for anyone to see, if they know where to look!
For our purposes, the most important places to look are in the Y chromosome (which is only found in males and which is passed on directly from father to son) and in the mitochondrial DNA (a small loop of DNA that we nearly always inherit from our mothers only; males do not pass it on to their children). These two pieces of DNA record some startling facts about our past.
Over the last decade, a vast amount of information has been collected that allows us to answer questions that we could not even consider earlier. The tools of modern genetics allow us to specifically ask questions about history, for our genes carry a record that reflects where we came from and how we got to where we are. The tools at our disposal are powerful.
Creation and genetics
There are two brief passages in the Creation account we can use to draw some conclusions about human genetic history. Please note that we cannot use these verses for land animals (because we do not know how many of each kind were initially created) or any of the swimming critters (“with which the waters abounded”—Gen 1:21). These statements apply to people only:
“And the Lord God formed man out of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being.” Gen 2:7
“And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall on Adam, and he slept; and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. Then the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman, and He brought her to the man.” Gen 2:21–22
These simple statements have profound implications. They put a limit on the amount of diversity we should find in people living today. The Bible clearly says the human race started out with two people only. But how different were these two people? There is an intriguing possibility that Eve was a clone of Adam. The science of cloning involves taking DNA from an organism and using it to manufacture an almost perfect copy of the original. Here, God is taking a piece of flesh, with cells, organelles, and, importantly, Adam’s DNA, and using it to manufacture a woman. Of course, she could not be a perfect clone, because she was a girl! But what if God had taken Adam’s genome and used it to manufacture Eve? All he would have had to do was to leave out Adam’s Y chromosome and double his X chromosome and, voilá, instant woman!
I do not know if Eve was genetically identical to Adam. The only reason I bring this up is because we have two possibilities in our biblical model of human genetic history: one original genome or two. Either result is still vastly different from the most popular evolutionary models,2 but we need to discuss the range of possibilities that the Bible allows.
Your genome is like an encyclopedia (almost literally). And, like an encyclopedia, the genome is broken down into volumes, called chromosomes, but you have two copies of each volume (with the exception of the X and Y chromosomes; women have two Xs but men have one X and one Y). Imagine comparing two duplicate volumes side by side and finding that one word in a particular sentence is spelled differently in each volume (perhaps “color” vs “colour”). Can you see that if Eve was a clone of Adam, there would have been, at most, two possible variants at any point in the genome? If Eve was not a clone, however, there would have been, at most, four possible variants at any point in the genome (because each of the original chromosomes came in four copies). This still allows for a lot of diversity overall, but it restricts the variation at any one spot to 2, 3, or 4 original readings.
Does this fit the evidence? Absolutely! Most variable places in the genome come in two versions and these versions are spread out across the world. There are some highly variable places that seem to contradict this, but most of these are due to mutations that occurred in the different subpopulations after Babel.
There are indications, however, that Eve may not have been a clone. The ABO blood group is a textbook example of a gene with more than two versions.3 There are three main versions of the blood type gene (A, B, and O). However, many, but not all, people with type O blood carry something that looks very much like a mutant A (the mutation prevents the manufacturing of the type A trait on the outside of cells). So here is a gene with more than two versions, but one of the main versions is clearly a mutation. This is true for many other genes, although, as usual, there are exceptions. The important take home point is that essentially all of the genetic variation among people today could have been carried within two people, if you discount mutations that occurred after our dispersion across the globe. This is a surprise to many.
The Flood and genetics
Like in the Creation story, there are only a few verses in the Flood account that help us with our model. But as seen before, these verses are profound.
Like in the Creation story, there are only a few verses in the Flood account that help us with our model. But as seen before, these verses are profound. About 10 generations after Creation, a severe, short bottleneck occurred in the human population. From untold numbers of people, the entire world population was reduced to eight souls with only three reproducing couples.
“So Noah, with his sons, his wife, and his sons’ wives, went into the ark because of the waters of the flood.” Gen 7:7
“Now the sons of Noah who went out of the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth… These three were the sons of Noah, and from these the whole earth was populated.” Gen 9:18–19
We can draw many important deductions from these statements. For instance, based on Genesis 7 and 9, how many Y chromosomes were on the Ark? The answer: one. Yes, there were four men, but Noah gave his Y chromosome to each of his sons. Unless there was a mutation (entirely possible), each of the sons carried the exact same Y chromosome. We do not know how much mutation occurred prior to the flood. With the long life spans of the antediluvian patriarchs, it may be reasonable to assume little mutation had taken place, but all of Creation, including the human genome, had been cursed, so it may not be wise to conclude that there was no mutation prior to the Flood. The amount of mutation may be a moot point, however, for, if it occurred, the Flood should have wiped out most traces of it (all of it in the case of the Y chromosome).
How many mitochondrial DNA lineages were on the Ark? The answer: three. Yes, there were four women, but the Bible does not record Noah’s wife as having any children after the Flood (in this case, girl children). And notice the claim in Gen 9:19, “These three were the sons of Noah, and from these the whole earth was populated.” This is a strong indication that Noah’s wife did not contribute anything else to the world’s population. With no prohibition against sibling marriage, yet,4 one or more of the daughters-in-law may have been her daughter, but this does not change the fact that, at first glance, we expect a maximum of three mitochondrial lineages in the current world population. There is a chance that there will be less, if there was very little mutation before the Flood or if several of the daughters-in-law were closely related. At most, we do not expect more than four.
How many X chromosome lineages were on the Ark? That depends. If you count it all up, you get eight. If, by chance, Noah’s wife passed on the same X chromosome to each of her three sons (25% probability), then there were seven. If Noah had a daughter after the Flood (not expected, but possible), there could be as many as nine X chromosome lineages. Either way, this is a considerable amount of genetic material. And since X chromosomes recombine (in females), we are potentially looking at a huge amount of genetic diversity within the X chromosomes of the world.
Does this fit the evidence? Absolutely! It turns out that Y chromosomes are similar worldwide. According to the evolutionists, no “ancient” (i.e., highly mutated or highly divergent) Y chromosomes have been found.5 This serves as a bit of a puzzle to the evolutionist, and they have had to resort to calling for a higher “reproductive variance” among men than women, high rates of “gene conversion” in the Y chromosome, or perhaps a “selective sweep” that wiped out the other male lines.6 For the biblical model, it is a beautiful correlation and we can take it as is.
The evidence from mitochondrial DNA fits our model just as neatly as the Y chromosome data. As it turns out, there are three main mitochondrial DNA lineages found across the world. The evolutionists have labeled these lines “M”, “N”, and “R”, so we’ll refer to them by the same names. They would not say these came off the Ark. They claim they were derived from older lines found in Africa, but this is based on a suite of assumptions (I discussed these in detail in a recent article in the Journal of Creation7). It also turns out that M, N, and R differ by only a few mutations. This gives us some indication of the amount of mutation that occurred in the generations prior to the Flood.
Let’s assume ten female generations from Eve to the ladies on the Ark. M and N are separated by about 8 mutations (a small fraction of the 16,500 letters in the mitochondrial genome). R is only 1 mutation away from N. This is an indication of the mutational load that occurred before the Flood. Given the assumption that mutations occur at equal rates in all lines, about four mutations separate M and N each from Eve (maybe four mutations in each line in ten generations). But what about R? It is very similar to N. Were N and R sisters, or perhaps more closely related to each other than they were to M? We’ll never know, but it sure is fascinating to think about.
One more line of evidence crops up in the amount of genetic diversity that has been found within people worldwide. Essentially, much less has been found than most (i.e., evolutionists!) predicted. The general lack of diversity among people is the reason the Out of Africa model has humanity going through a disastrous, near-extinction bottleneck with only about 10,000 (and perhaps as few as 1,000)8 people surviving. However, the reason for this lack of diversity is twofold. First, the human race started out with only two people. Second, the human race is not that old and has not accumulated a lot of mutations, despite the high mutation rate. Third, there actually was a bottleneck event, Noah’s Flood!
The Tower of Babel and genetics
The Tower of Babel has been a favorite bedtime story for generations. But is it more than a fairy tale? Could it be possible that there is evidence to back up this tale of rebellion and judgment? Like the Creation and Flood accounts, there are only a couple of verses that apply to our model of genetics. But, like the others, these verses are as profound as they are simple.
“Now the whole earth had one language and one speech.” Gen 11:1
“And they said, ‘Come, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower whose top is in the heavens; let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth.’” Gen 11:4
It sounds like they were in a homogenous culture, but what do people in that situation do? Would you expect them to mix freely? Were language or cultural barriers present that would have prevented the sons of Shem from marrying the daughters of Japheth? Would the daughters of Ham be expected to marry freely with the sons of any of the three men? Note in Gen 11:4 that they knew about the potential for spreading out and getting separated from one another and intentionally did the opposite! However, this was against the express command of God, who had ordered them to spread out (to populate the earth). So, He took matters into His own hands.
“’Come, let Us go down and confuse their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.’ So the Lord scattered them abroad from there over the face of all the earth, and they ceased building the city.” Gen 11:7–8
There are tremendous implications that come from the Babel account. First it explains the amazing cultural connectivity of ancient peoples—like pyramid building, common flood legends, and ancient, non-Christian genealogies that link people back to biblical figures (e.g., many of the royal houses of pagan northern Europe go back to Japheth, the son of Noah9).
The dramatic rise in world population over the past several decades is a well known fact. From a biblical perspective, the current human population easily fits into the standard model of population growth using very conservative parameters.10 In fact, starting with 6 people and doubling the population every 150 years more than accounts for the current human population (a growth rate of less than 0.5% per year!). Population size would have increased quickly given the rate at which the post-Flood population reestablished agriculture, animal husbandry, industry and civilization. So we must ask the question, “Why are there so few people in the world today?” The answer is that the world is young and we have not been here many thousands of years.
When did the dispersion occur? Our best clue about the timing of the event comes from Genesis 10:25. In referencing the 5th generation descendent of Shem, a man named Peleg, it says, “in his days the earth was divided.” To what is this referring? Many people believe this is referring to a division of the landmasses (plate tectonics). This may be true, but it would require a huge amount of geologic activity after the Flood, and this would have occurred in historical times with no record of the events. The interpretation I favor is that this passage is referring to the division of people at Babel. Just a few verses after the Peleg reference, the section is summed up with another reference to the division at Babel. This fits both the context and the science. In context, Peleg was closely associated with Babel.
How large was the population at the time? We would expect rapid population growth, but we cannot know exactly. There are 16 named sons born to the three brothers, Shem, Ham and Japheth. If we assume about the same number of daughters, Noah had on the order of 30 grandchildren. At that rate of growth, there would have been about 150 children in Salah’s generation, about 750 in Eber’s generation, and about 3,750 in Peleg’s generation. Of course, these generations overlap, etc., so let’s say there were between 1,000 and 10,000 people alive at the time of Babel. This fits nicely with the available data. It is a high rate of growth, but wars and disease had yet to start taking their toll.
There is one more verse in this section that we need to discuss:
“These were the families of the sons of Noah, according to their generations, in their nations; and from these the nations were divided on the earth after the flood.” Gen 10:32
At Babel, God did not separate the nations according to language. He used language to separate them according to paternal (male) ancestry! This has monumental significance and is the key to understanding human genetic history.
Do you see the implication in this simple verse? At Babel, God did not separate the nations according to language. He used language to separate them according to paternal (male) ancestry! This has monumental significance and is the key to understanding human genetic history. Paternal sorting would lead to specific Y chromosome lineages in different geographical locations. Since males and females from the three main families should have been freely intermixing prior to this, it also leads to a mixing of the mitochondrial lines. It is as if God put all the people into a giant spreadsheet and hit a button called “Sort According to Father.” He then took that list and used it to divide up and separate the nations.
We already saw that Y chromosomes have little variation among them. We now add the fact that this little bit of variation is almost always geographically specific. That is, after the nations were separated according to Y chromosome, mutations occurred in the various lines. Since the lines were sent to specific geographical areas, the mutations are geographically specific. The current distribution of Y chromosome lines is a tremendous confirmation of the biblical model.
Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) adds another confirmation. We have already learned that there are three main lineages of mtDNA. We now add the fact that these three lineages are more or less randomly distributed across the world. Also, the various mutations within each of the three main families of mtDNA are geographically specific as well.11 In other words, as the three mixed mitochondrial lines were carried along with the Y chromosome dispersal, each line in each area began to pick up new mutations, just like we would predict.
After the Flood
The last remaining significant reference in the Bible that will help us build our model of human genetic history is called The Table of Nations. It is found in Genesis chapters 9 and 10. The Table of Nations is a record of the post-Babel tribes, who they descended from, and where they went. If the Bible is an accurate source of history, one might expect to be able to find a significant amount of evidence for the Table of Nations in genetic data. The truth is not that simple, however, and it is important to keep several things in mind. First, the account was written by a person in the Middle East and from a Middle Eastern perspective. It is incomplete in that there are huge sections of the world that are not discussed (sub-Saharan Africa, Northern Europe, Most of Asia, Australia, the Americas, and Oceania). It also reflects a snapshot in time. It was written after the dispersion began, but not necessarily before the dispersion was complete. Indeed, much has changed in the intervening years. People groups have migrated, cultures have gone extinct, languages have changed, separate cultures have merged, etc. The history of man has been full of ebb and flow as people mixed or fought, resisted invasion or were conquered. The history of man since Babel is very complicated. Modern genetics can answer some of the big questions, but answers to many of the smaller details may elude us forever.
This is an important topic for the creation model. The world does not look at the Bible in a favorable light. In fact, it disparages it, sometimes with open hostility. Attacks are often centered on the claim that the Bible is not reliable on historical grounds, and if the history of the Bible is inaccurate, what about the theology? Think about what Jesus told Nicodemus in John 3:12, “If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?” Many people today see no history in the Bible; therefore, the spiritual implications are meaningless to them. What would happen for evangelism if the history of the Bible turns out to be true after all?
Related articles
The Non-Mythical Adam and Eve! Refuting errors by Francis Collins and BioLogos
Genetics: no friend of evolution
The genetics of skin colour in people—something fishy?
Professor of genetics says ‘No!’ to evolution
Genetics and God’s natural selection
One Blood: Chapter 3—Genetics and the human family
Genetics and Biblical demographic events
Corals, genes and creation
Is there enough time in the Bible to account for all the human genetic diversity?
Island girl star trek made more sense, Here is another intriguing tale. Jesus is standing on the Mount of Olives and lo and behold he is mysteriously swept into the clouds. Can I say aliens or angels . BTW didn’t gravity exist at that time!
not to forget that JESUS took five barley loaves and two small fish and fed five thousand people .there is a moral to that story only if the jesus people would see it. but unfortunately they are trapped into a world of supposition and magic
One Blood
The biblical answer to racism
by Ken Ham, Dr Don Batten and Dr Carl Wieland
Chapter 3
Genetics and the human family
Let us now apply this basic understanding of genetics to human beings. How did all the different ‘races’ arise (from Noah’s family)? First, what constitutes a ‘race’?
In the 1800s, before Darwinian evolution was popularized, most people, when talking about ‘races,’ were referring to such groups as the ‘English race,’ ‘Irish race,’ and so on. However, this all changed when Charles Darwin published his book On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.
Darwinian evolution was (and still is) inherently a racist philosophy, teaching that different groups or ‘races’ of people evolved at different times and rates, so some groups are more like their ape-like ancestors than others. The Australian Aborigines, for instance, were considered to be the missing links between an ape-like ancestor and the rest of mankind.1 This resulted in terrible prejudices and injustices towards the Australian Aborigines.2 A leading evolutionary spokesperson, Stephen Jay Gould, stated that ‘Biological arguments for racism may have been common before 1850, but they increased by orders of magnitude following the acceptance of evolutionary theory.’3
Racist attitudes fueled by evolutionary thinking were largely responsible for an African Pygmy actually being displayed, along with an orangutan, in a cage in the Bronx Zoo.4
As a result of Darwinian evolution, many people started thinking in terms of the different people groups around the world representing different ‘races,’ but within the context of evolutionary philosophy. This has resulted in many people today, consciously or unconsciously, having ingrained prejudices against certain other groups of people.
All human beings in the world today, however, are classified as Homo sapiens sapiens. Scientists today admit that, biologically, there really is only one race of humans. For instance, a scientist at the Advancement of Science Convention in Atlanta in 1997 stated, ‘Race is a social construct derived mainly from perceptions conditioned by events of recorded history, and it has no basic biological reality.’ This person went on to say, ‘Curiously enough, the idea comes very close to being of American manufacture.’5
Reporting on research conducted on the concept of race, the American ABC News science page stated, ‘More and more scientists find that the differences that set us apart are cultural, not racial. Some even say that the word “race” should be abandoned because it’s meaningless.’ The article went on to say that ‘we accept the idea of race because it’s a convenient way of putting people into broad categories, frequently to suppress them … . The most hideous example was provided by Hitler’s Germany. And racial prejudice remains common throughout the world.’6
In a 1998 article in the Journal of Counseling and Development, researchers argued that the term ‘race’ is basically so meaningless that it should be discarded.7
Because of the influences of Darwinian evolution and the resulting prejudices, we believe everyone (and especially Christians) should abandon the term ‘races.’ We could refer instead to the different ‘people groups’ around the world.
The Bible and ‘race’
The Bible does not even use the word ‘race’ in reference to people,8 but does describe all human beings as being of ‘one blood’ (Acts 17:26). This, of course, emphasizes that we are all related, for all humans are descendants of the first man Adam (1 Cor. 15:45).9 Because Jesus Christ also became a descendant of Adam, being called the ‘last Adam’ (1 Cor. 15:45), the gospel should be preached to all tribes and nations. When Jesus Christ became a man (God-man), He became a descendant of Adam. Thus, He became our relative—totally man, a descendant of the first Adam, yet totally God. Any descendant of Adam can be saved, because our mutual relative by blood (Jesus Christ) died and rose again.
‘Racial’ differences
Some people think there must be different ‘races’ of people because there appear to be major differences between various groups, such as skin color and eye shape.
The truth, though, is that these so-called ‘racial characteristics’ are only minor variations among the people groups. Scientists have found that if one were to take any two people from anywhere in the world, the basic genetic differences between these two people would typically be around 0.2 percent—even if they came from the same people group.10 But, these so-called ‘racial’ characteristics that many think are major differences (skin color, eye shape, etc.) account for only 6 percent of this 0.2 percent variation, which amounts to a mere 0.012 percent difference genetically.11
In other words, the so-called ‘racial’ differences are absolutely trivial. Overall, there is more variation within any group than there is between one group and another. If a white person is looking for a tissue match for an organ transplant, for instance, the best match may come from a black person, and vice versa. The ABC News science page stated, ‘What the facts show is that there are differences among us, but they stem from culture, not race.’12
The only reason many people think these differences are major is because they’ve been brought up in a culture that has taught them to see the differences this way.
According to the Bible, all people on earth today descended from Noah and his wife, his three sons and their wives, and before that from Adam and Eve (Gen. 1–11). The Bible tells us how the population that descended from Noah’s family had one language and were living together and disobeying God’s command to ‘fill the earth’ (Gen. 9:1; 11:4).13 God confused their language, causing a breakup of the population into smaller groups which scattered over the earth (Gen. 11:8–9).
Using modern genetics, we will show how, following such a breakup of a population, variations in skin color, for example, can develop in only a few generations. And there is good evidence to show that the various groups of people we have today have not been separated for huge periods of time.14
References and notes
1.A.S. Brown, Missing Links with Mankind in Early Dawn of History, New York Tribune, p. 11, 10 February 1924.
2.Carl Wieland, Darwin’s Bodysnatchers, Creation 14(2):16–18, March–May 1992. (See chapter 10, also.)
3.Stephen Jay Gould, Ontogeny and Phylogeny, Belknap-Harvard Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 127–128, 1977.
4.Jerry Bergman, Ota Benga: The man who was put on display in the zoo! Creation 16(1):48–50, December
‘He made the stars also …’ (Genesis 1:16)
Interview with creationist astronomer Danny Faulkner
By Carl Wieland and Jonathan D.Sarfati
Dr Danny R. Faulkner has a B.S. (Math), M.S. (Physics), M.A. & Ph.D. (Astronomy, Indiana University). He is Associate Professor at the University of South Carolina–Lancaster, where he teaches physics and astronomy. He has published about two dozen papers in various astronomy and astrophysics journals.
——————————————————————————–
Photo by Richard Fangrad
Dr Danny Faulkner speaking at the 2011 Super Conference in Canada
Carl Wieland/Jonathan Sarfati [CW/JS]: Dr Faulkner, how did you get interested in astronomy?
Dr Faulkner [DF]: Well, I can honestly say there hasn’t been a time in my life when I’ve not been interested in astronomy. I recall being three or four years old, looking up at the sky, being amazed at what was up there.
CW/JS: Many people have this image of an astronomer, sitting there each night staring into a telescope.
DF: There really aren’t any who spend all of their time looking through telescopes. The few research astronomers who do spend a good deal of time—they have to analyse the data they collect, write it up, plan future observations. So even the ‘full-time researchers’ probably only spend about two months of the year actually observing. Most astronomers, like myself, have an academic job teaching in university or other related jobs and we do research when we can. Usually I get in seven to fifteen nights a year at a local observatory and a few more when travelling elsewhere.
How did you become a Christian?
I had a conversion at age six. My father was a minister of a small church and just as I can’t remember not being interested in astronomy, I can’t remember not going to church.
Some teach that the big bang theory of how the universe evolved is such an obvious fact that we should accept it as if it had been written in the ‘sixty-seventh book of the Bible’.
I’m really concerned with people who put that much faith in the big bang. It is the overwhelmingly dominant model … But it has many problems.
That’s absolute rubbish. I’m really concerned with people who put that much faith in the big bang. It is the overwhelmingly dominant model, and they’ve had a few impressive predictions, like the background radiation. But it has many problems—they keep changing the model to make it fit the data we have. As a Christian, my biggest concern is that it doesn’t agree at all with the Genesis account of how the world came to be, and my big concern is that when you make that the fingerprint of God, as it were, then when the big bang is discarded, what does that do to Christianity? [See also What are some of the problems with the big bang theory?]
Genesis teaches that the earth was created first and then the sun, moon and the stars were created three days later. Is there any observation in your field of astronomy which would disprove this, or make it difficult to believe?
No. Most astronomers as well as geologists argue that the universe is aged 20 billion years, and the earth ‘scarcely’ 4.5 billion years old. All that’s really built upon a lot of indirect evidence and arguments—evidence that could very easily be interpreted other ways, and there are some other astronomical suggestions that the solar system and the earth and the rest of the universe are not really that old at all.
Can you give us some of these?
First, comets disintegrate too rapidly to have been in their present orbits for all those billions of years. So evolutionists theorise about a shell of comets, an ‘Oort cloud’ too far out to see, to act as a way to ‘restock’ the inner solar system with comets every so often.
However, there’s no scientific reason to believe that there really is an Oort cloud. The so-called Kuiper belt, closer in, has been put forward as a theoretical source of shorter period comets. However, even if there are comets in this region, it doesn’t solve the problem for the evolutionists, because the Oort cloud would still be needed to resupply the Kuiper belt after a while. [For more information, see Dr Faulkner’s detailed technical article Comets and the age of the solar system.]
Then there is the moon—due to tidal friction, this is slowly spiraling away from the earth, which is slowing down its rotation. If you calculate back a billion and a half years ago, the moon would have been in direct contact with the earth. So that is a very strong indicator that the moon can’t be even a third as old as the claimed 4.5 billion years, and it is probably vastly less than that. [See The Moon: the light that rules the night.]
Also, theory suggests we should find plenty of, say, million-year-old supernova remnants, but we don’t find any—though there are many that are thousands of years old. And that is a very startling result if you really believe in a universe that’s millions of years old [see Exploding stars point to a young universe, Creation 19(3):46–48, June–August 1997 and Q&A: ‘Young’ age of the earth & universe.]
How old do you think the universe is?
Probably six to eight thousand years.
Have you ever doubted what the Bible teaches about recent six-day creation?
Not seriously. I may have gone through a brief period when I was in high school or so, due to encountering people who were into theistic evolution, but then I got a copy of one of Henry Morris’s early books. Then I learned more and more about other scientists who believed in a recent creation.
Why is it important to believe in this?
Well, we have a very clear indication from Scripture that the creation really took place in six ordinary days [see How long were the days mentioned in the biblical creation account?]. And if you think it didn’t, then you are going to have to ask the question, ‘How do you know that it didn’t happen that way?’ Good biblical exegesis will simply not allow for a much greater length of time [see How long were the days of Genesis 1?]. And once you decide you are going to let ‘science’ dictate how you are going to interpret Scripture then there is no end to it. I recently read about former U.S. president Jimmy Carter, quoted as saying that he believes in the Virgin Birth but he doesn’t believe that the world was created in six days. I think if asked why not, he would say, well, because of overwhelming scientific evidence. And I think I would reply to that, the overwhelming scientific evidence is that a virgin birth is not possible. So be consistent on this point; one’s a miracle, so is the other. If you don’t believe in recent six day creation then it opens the door to serious doubts about the Virgin Birth, about the Resurrection; those would also be scientific ‘impossibles’.
What about the argument that the universe must be old, because light would take millions of years to get here from distant stars?
That has long been the biggest challenge for creationists. There have been several suggested answers—one from Australia around 13 years ago was [Barry] Setterfield’s possible drop in the speed of light. When I first encountered that I thought it was a pretty good idea, but there are a lot of consequences of that and I don’t any more think it is the answer. Perhaps the most common idea is that God created the light in transit. I have a real problem with that one. For example, when a distant supernova explodes, there is all sorts of detailed information in the light—the speed of expansion, what isotopes are involved, even sometimes a reflected light echo from nearby gas. Yet if the light was created ‘on its way’, all this is phony information—nothing like it ever occurred. This reminds me of a fellow named Gosse who was saying over 100 years ago that God created fossils inside the earth ready-made. I think this ‘light created on its way’ idea is a first cousin of Gosse’s notion.
So what idea do you like?
I got really excited with the cosmology which Russ Humphreys presented three years ago in Pittsburgh. It’s the first serious attempt that young-world creationists have offered as an alternative for first of all the universe itself—cosmology—and second a very detailed explanation for the distant starlight issue.1 I think that’s very impressive, and even if it turns out that Russell’s not right he’s certainly leading the way in that kind of work.
What about stars claimed to be forming today?
Stars supposedly condensed out of vast clouds of gas, and it has long been recognised that the clouds don’t spontaneously collapse and form stars, they need to be pushed somehow to be started. There have been a number of suggestions to get the process started, and almost all of them require having stars to start with. This is the old chicken and egg problem; it can’t account for the origin of stars in the first place. [See also Stars could not have come from the big bang.]
Stars are not very complex, and so-called ‘stellar evolution’ (though I don’t necessarily accept all of it) is a different critter from biological evolution. So I don’t have a problem with the idea that a cloud of gas, created initially by God in a special unstable condition, or compressed by a shock wave from a nearby exploding star, might collapse under its own gravity and start to heat up to form a new star. [See also Are stars forming today?. There is also the problem of getting rid of excess angular momentum so that the nascent star doesn’t spin itself apart, and this problem is still unsolved as of the February 1997 issue of Astrophysical Journal—see What Slows The Spin Of Young, Rapidly Rotating Stars?. The conservation of angular momentum is a problem for the evolutionary origin of the solar system—see a brief explanation.]
The Psalmist writes that the heavens declare the glory of God. What do you see as the best evidence for that?
I think the universe is a mighty beautiful place—I view God as the supreme artist. Then we see that there are a lot of incredible and unique things about the earth which make life possible. For example, as far as we know, liquid water only exists on the earth. We see water in vapour form in the atmospheres of several planets, in stars and the material between them. We’ve identified water in solid form—on Mars, on asteroids and comets, possibly even on Mercury. But the only place we know for sure2 that there is liquid water, one of the essential ingredients for life to exist, is on Earth. Even if it were proven elsewhere, liquid water would still be an amazingly rare and precious commodity that the earth has in abundance.
References and notes
1.See Dr Humphreys’ popular book Starlight and Time for a lay and technical explanation of this model. Return to text.
2.Note that there is now doubt about the claim of ice in moon craters (New Scientist, 14 June 1997, p.13). Dr Faulkner said to us after the interview that the alleged evidence for subsurface liquid water on Europa, one of Jupiter’s moons, is much more speculative and indirect than most think. Return to text.
Anthony P said “Thanks for your … website, it’s really easy to navigate and it is a massive bonus to be able to read back-issues of your magazines … without your ministry I probably wouldn’t be a Christian today. Thank you so much and keep up the good work.” So help us do just that!
Former Prime Minister Owen Arthur
Wed, November 23, 2011 – 7:13 PM
FORMER Prime Minister Owen Arthur thinks the National Insurance Scheme (NIS) should not have to carry any major financial burden for the Four Seasons project.
Speaking on the topic Managing Change in an era of global economic instability at a Barbados Chamber of Commerce luncheon yesterday, Arthur was of the view the project should be able to attract private investment.
“The planning and implementation of the project should be made to proceed entirely on the merits of the supporting financial analysis and on its merits in a private investment context rather than on the basis of political calculation.
“This especially should apply in respect of the involvement of the NIS. Above all, if a private developer cannot be encouraged to come in as a partner, the NIS should not be required to assume the kind of risks that are being touted,” he said.
@ Zoe…
After all the posting above…..why do you hate the Muslims and the Arabs so much (as you have clearly demonstrated on BU)?…aren’t they your brothers too?
Your hypocrisy have no bounds!!
Go ahead, I know…bilge pump, darkness, dumb dog, ignorant..blah…blah…blah….Happy Thanksgiving to you!
To Miller:
You can not have it both ways. You and others here speak to scientific assumptions; yet, when one produces these same assumptions that support the opposite view of your focus, you go off like a bull in a china shop. Chromosome 15 is scientific; it is not in the Bible. Prof Diop is not a biblical scholar; like you he similarly believes that the phenotype expression in humans are environmentally influenced. He also believes in the re-emergence of the old Egyptian forms of worship; although they have changed shape, they are still around. With chromosome 15, the Ham “story” becomes a definite possibility. In the book of Daniel chapter 2, there a long prediction that Europe would never be united again. Heard the news this morning. The Euro SHALL break up. This is a way of escape grasp it with both hands. it is like when evolutionist jump on the junk DNA syndrome then to find out that what they and scientist thought was junk was a very important part of the DNA sequence. Reason and “light” can not deliver you Miller; only the Son of God that man Jesus Christ can. If you want to feel the “power” try Jesus.
@ lemuel | November 24, 2011 at 8:43 AM |
“Reason and “light” can not deliver you Miller; only the Son of God that man Jesus Christ can. If you want to feel the “power” try Jesus.”
Go tell that to the Indians and the Chinese – approx. 2.5 billion and growing! But you can start by setting up your Jesus salvation cart on Kensington New Road.
“The Christian religion is a parody on the worship of the sun, in which they put a man called Christ in the place of the sun, and pay him the adoration originally payed to the sun.” Thomas “Tom” Paine
After all the ranting…
Zoe & Phd. aren’t really answering any questions directly & succinctly. Only Lemuel seems to do so.
Really now, cut & paste is too lazy! As Christians, be smart and DEFEND your statements HEAD ON!
THE
TABLE OF NATIONS
(GENEALOGY OF MANKIND)
AND THE
ORIGIN OF RACES
(HISTORY OF MAN)
The history of the races of mankind is a fascinating subject. Biologically, a race is generally thought of as a variety, or subspecies, within a given species. All the races are a part of the human race. We have made the term race to apply to skin color, but the dictionary defines race as “a class or kind of individuals with common characteristics, interests, appearances, or habits as if derived from a common ancestor.”
Where did we come from? The answers have always been with us, as presented in the original Table of Nations. What you are about to read can best be described as an Exegesis (from the Greek exégesis, verb: exégetikos, meaning interpretation, guide, translation or critical exposition). Once you have read what is presented here, you may not view any race of people the same way again. Note that there is nothing like the Table of Nations (as presented here) in any other national tradition. Every other attempt to tell where the nations derived or where one nation derived, which comes from the time before Christ (B.C.), is hopelessly naive and filled with impossibilities and myths. There is nothing from the B.C. period that can remotely compare with this presentation as to accuracy and detail.
The fact is, that wherever its statements can be sufficiently tested, Genesis 10 of the Bible has been found completely accurate; resulting partly from linguistic studies, partly from archaeology, and, more recently still, from the findings of physical anthropologists, who are, to this day, recovering important clues to lines of migration in ancient historic times. As implied in verse 32 of Genesis 10, this Table includes everybody; meaning that so-called fossil man, primitive peoples (ancient and modern) and modern man are all derived from Noah’s three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. In light of this, findings from anthropology, archaeology, ethnography, ethnohistory, genetics and geology, substantiate an alternate interpretation of the history of humanity. Additionally, references from historical records, ancient literature, mythology, burial customs, and other sources, all provide strong evidences.
This may seem a gross over-simplification, and even appear to oppose well-established secular anthropological opinion; however, science has proven itself over and over to be a double-edged sword. For example, it is often found that what is obviously true, is actually false. The obvious idea that the sun moved around the earth was erroneous, but until that view was corrected, little progress was made in the science of Astronomy. On the other hand, on occasion, what is obviously false turns out to be actually true. While scientific knowledge is characterized by a progressive approach to reality, it has often proved detrimental to the progress of understanding in the things which it has denied. Such is the case here. So before you begin to judge, please continue reading.
As stated earlier, race does not apply to skin color alone. Skin color is essentially the only biological difference in race, and science has been unable to determine what causes skin pigmentation. They have not been able to define the difference in cell pigment or structure. This superficial distinction is the basis for the division of mankind. Note:
Modern genetics shows that when a large, freely interbreeding group is
suddenly broken into many smaller groups which from then on breed only
among themselves (as the Biblical description of the language dispersion at
Babel would imply), different racial characteristics will arise very rapidly. It can
be shown that one pair of middle-brown parents could produce all known
shades of color, from very white to very black, in one generation. The racial
characteristics which exist today have not evolved, and generally speaking, are
simply different combinations of pre-existing (created) genetic (hereditary)
information. The environment plays a secondary role in favoring certain
combinations over others.
The Biblical viewpoint is that there is not a black race, white race, yellow race, etc. Instead, there are three distinct families or characteristics of man that make up the oldest Table of Nations in existence, which is a completely authentic statement of how the present world population originated and spread after the flood, as recorded in Genesis 10 of the Bible (a historical document itself). Here we learn the true divisions of mankind, indicating how the present population of the world came to be.
Genesis chapter 10 shows how the present world population was derived from Noah’s three sons: Shem, Ham and Japheth, and their wives (three family groups). Verse 32 states, “From these the nations spread out over the earth after the flood”. These “nations” are the descendants (generations, genealogies or family histories) of the sons of Noah (verse 1). Chapter 10 describes the differentiation of nations, and asserts that we were all descended from Noah. It is important to understand that people and nations are referred to in a genealogical form (common in Hebrew and other Semitic languages). We find genealogical references in Genesis 10 are firstly to persons or families (ethnological), and secondly to nations or tribes (ethnographical); thus, the chapter ends with an emphasis on nations or tribes, which helps us understand in following chapters where they settled or “spread out over the earth” (geographical).
The majority of scholars and Bible historians agree that most of the descendants of Shem, Noah’s oldest son, stayed in the Middle East. These include the Hebrews, Persians and Assyrians. The descendants of Ham, Noah’s middle son, include the Egyptians, Ethiopians, Canaanites, Phoenicians and Hittites. His descendants appear to be the first to fill the earth, as they were the early settlers of Africa, Asia, Australia, the South Pacific, and the Americas. The descendants of Japheth, Noah’s youngest son, migrated into Europe and parts of Central Asia. The Greeks, Romans, Spanish, Celts, Scythians, and Medes were Japheth’s descendants. Some people groups merged to form one nation, as did the Persians (Shem) and the Medes (Japheth), which later became the Medo-Persian empire.
Note that the many names of family groups and nations listed here naturally follow well-established rules in the development of language, and the transfer of words between languages of a different family or nation. For example, the ancient city of Unuk (in the Bible is the first city ever built, equated with Enoch), later appears as Uruk and Erech, then as Wark or Warka by the Sumerians, and finally appears in Greek as Purgos or Pergos. The conversion of “wark” into “purg-” shows the transfer of words between languages of a different family.
Interestingly enough, purgos becomes burgh in modern Indo-European languages, which is the root of the English word, borough. Several examples of this are below, specifically in the lines of Japheth. Here we have the beginnings of all people groups through Shem, Ham and Japheth:
Shem. Also Sem. Literal meanings are named or renown (father of the Semitic races – Shemites). The sons of Shem were:
(1) Elam “eternity” (sons were Shushan, Machul and Harmon) – (Elamites, Persians);
(2) Asshur “a step” or “strong” (sons were Mirus and Mokil) – (Assyrians/Northern Iraqis);
(3) Arphaxad “I shall fail” (sons were Shelach, Anar and Ashcol) – (Chaldeans/Southern Iraqis, Hebrews/Israelis/Jews, Arabians/Bedouins, Moabites/Jordanians/Palestinians, and related groups);
(4) Lud “strife” (sons were Pethor and Bizayon) – (Ludim, Lubim, Ludians, Ludu, Lydians, Chubs, other related groups in Asia Minor and North Africa);
(5) Aram “exalted” (sons were Uz, Chul, Gather and Mash) – (Aramaeans/Syrians, Lebanese, other related groups), and remnant groups throughout Asia, the Middle East, and North Africa.
Evidence shows that Noah’s sons kept together at first, then broke up into small groups and eventually arrived from the east in the southern Mesopotamian Plain (Gen. 11:2). The descendants of Elam, the first born son of Shem, Noah’s first born, were the first people to enter Mesopotamia. Susa, the capital city of the Elamites (Shemitic Elamites), gave rise to other early cities, such as Al-Ubaid (which later gave rise to Hamitic settlements—including the Sumerian civilization) and Jemdet Nasr. Recent excavations have provided very strong evidence of direct cultural links between some of the earliest cities in Babylonia and the lowest layers uncovered at Susa. These people established themselves first in the south and gradually spread toward the north, but without losing the cultural links. There are no known modern descendants of the Elamites. Other excavations have shown that one of the first Hamitic groups, the Sumerians, gave rise to considerable cultural advance and power in that region. Other people groups known very early included the Japhethites, noted especially for their fairness of skin, in the hill country east of the Tigris. Soon the great Babylonian empire came to be.
Further evidence shows that the rulers of Babylon attempted to avert dispersal of the people by proposing the building of a monument as a visible rallying point on the flat plain of Mesopotamia. Scripture and historical texts note that the tower of Babel, the building of which Nimrod (a Sumerian) supervised, was to have two great significances. The city of Babel would become the metropolis of the world and unite its inhabitants under the dictatorial rule of Nimrod. The tower was to be a monument to man to stand as a symbol of Babel. Given the present knowledge of Babylonian history, Genesis 11 has a solid historical foundation in early Mesopotamia. Nimrod hoped to prevent the people from scattering abroad into colonies as God intended, thus bringing upon themselves a judgment which led to confusion of the languages and rapid scattering throughout the earth. Babel means confusion. Urbanization, as attested by archaeological records, did not occur until after the dispersal of languages. The history of linguistic development and settlement patterns in Mesopotamia support this.
From here the three families of man populate the earth, and Shem’s descendants are well documented. Modern day Arabs and Jews trace their lineage to Shem. Many Arabic nomad tribes still claim they descended from Shem. The descendants of Shem are often called Semites, a term first used in the late 18th century for peoples listed in the Bible as descended from Shem. Today the term Semite refers to peoples who speak any of the Semitic languages, including the ancient peoples who inhabited Babylonia. Modern peoples speaking Semitic languages include the Arabs and Jews. Today, the Semitic-speaking peoples are concentrated in the Middle East and northern Africa.
Ham. Also Kham. Literal meanings are hot, burnt or dark (father of the Mongoloid and Negroid races – Hamites). He was the progenitor of:
(1) Canaan “down low” (sons were Zidon1, Heth, Amori, Gergashi, Hivi, Arkee, Seni, Arodi, Zimodi and Chamothi) – also Canaanites, Cana, Chna, Chanani, Chanana, Canaana, Kana, Kenaanah, Kena’ani, Kena’an, Kn’nw, Kyn’nw, Kinnahu, Kinahhi, Kinahni, Kinahna, Kinahne (Mongols, Chinese, Japanese, Asians, Malayasians, AmerIndians2, Eskimos, Polynesians, Pacific Islanders, related groups3);
(2) Cush “black” (sons were Seba, Havilah, Sabta, Raama and Satecha) – also Chus, Kush, Kosh (Nubians, Ethiopians, Sudanese, Ghanaians, Africans4, Bushmen, Pygmies, Australian Aborignies, New Guineans, other related groups);
(3) Mizraim “double straits” (sons were Lud, Anom, Pathros, Chasloth and Chaphtor) – also Misraim, Mitzraim, Mizraite, Mitsrayim (Egyptians, Copts);
(4) Phut “a bow” (sons were Gebul, Hadan, Benah and Adan) – also Putaya, Putiya, Punt, Puta, Put, Libia, Libya (Libyans, Cyrenacians, Tunisians, Berbers, Somalians, North Africans, other related groups).
Tribes in other parts of Africa, Arabia and Asia, aboriginal groups in Australia, native Pacific Islanders, American Indians and Eskimos were birthed from descendants of Canaan, Cush, Mizraim, and Phut.
Looking at history, whichever region is considered, Africa, Europe, Australia, or America, the major migrations have always been from Asia. In every area of the world where Japhethites have subsequently settled, they have always been preceded by Hamites. This pattern applies in every continent. In early historic times the circumstance seems always to be true, the earliest fossil remains of man being Mongoloid or Negroid in character and in head shape, whereas those that came last belong to the family of Japheth (Caucasoid). If you study ancient history and technological achievements, which were in many ways the equal of, or superior of, much that we have today, were founded and carried to a high technological proficiency by Hamitic people, showing an amazing adaptability to the world in which they live. Their achievements were exploited by the Japhetic people, who became great scientific discoverers. The Hamitic migrations indicate they sought a way of life, not an understanding or a control of nature beyond what was immediately useful.
1. Zidon (or Sidon) and his descendants settled on the Mediterranean coast of present-day Lebanon, then known as the land of Canaan. The Sidonians called themselves Kena’ani, or Canaanites. Interestingly, the Canaanites spoke a Semitic language, probably adopted from a large migration of Semites who came from land and sea, and introduced their language and a sophisticated maritime technology about 1800 B.C. Historians suggest the first Cannaanites succumbed to racial and linguistic intermixture with the invading Semites, which led to the loss of their own ethnic predominance, as evidenced by modern excavations. They eventually moved westward and occupied a very narrow coastal strip of the east Mediterranean, building new cities, and establishing significant trade with neighboring nations. In fact, the Israelite name for “Canaan” came to mean “traders”, though some suggest the name Canaan is from the Hebrew name Hurrian, meaning “belonging to the land of red purple.”
The Canaanites were known for their red and purple cloth (a purple dye was extracted from murex snails found near the shores of Palestine, a method now lost). The Greeks called the land of Canaan “Phoenicia”, which meant “purple”. The Phoenicians became a nation of great trade, language, and culture. Phoenician, Hebrew, and Moabite were a group of west Semitic languages, all dialects from Canaan, as referred to in Isaiah 19:18. The writing system of the Phoenicians is the source of the writing systems of nearly all of Europe, including Greek, Russian, Hebrew, Arabic, and the Roman alphabet. The Phoenician empire fell under Hellenistic rule after being conquered by Alexander the Great about 332 B.C. In 64 B.C. the name of Phoenicia disappeared entirely, becoming a part of the Roman providence of Syria. At the beginning of the Christian era, remaining Phoenicians were the first to accept the Christian faith after the Jews. Zidon’s name is still perpetuated in the modern-day city of Sidon (Saidoon is the Phoenician name, Saida in Arabic) in southern Lebanon.
2. Evidence for diverse migrations into the Americas comes from research on living American Indian populations, which includes data from Mitochondrial DNA. These studies have consistently shown similarities between American Indians and recent populations in Asia, Siberia and northern Scandinavia. These groups include the Lapps in northern Europe/Scandinavia, the Yukaghir in Siberia, plus Indians and Eskimos/Aleuts throughout Canada and America. Ancient skeletal remains show a range of physical attributes (round-headed) suggesting separate migrations of different populations from Asia and the South Pacific, representing 95 percent of all modern American Indian populations. One unique exception are the Sioux Indians, the popular red-skinned tribe having a long-head shape similar to that of early Italic peoples in Europe. They are thought to be descendants of Canaanites who intermarried with Indo-Europeans while migrating across Europe, and subsequently sailing to America. Studies of the native languages of the Americas have shown them to be extremely diverse, representing nearly two hundred distinct families, some consisting of a single isolated language.
3. The vast aggregate of peoples who are generally classified as Mongoloid, who settled the Far East, have been a question as to where they fall into the Table of Nations. The evidence shows they are Hamitic, even though some have incorrectly reasoned that the Chinese were of Japhetic stock, and the Japanese were either Japhetic or Semitic. There are two names which provide clues. Two of Canaan’s sons, Heth (Hittites) and Sin (Sinites), are presumed to be the progenitors of Chinese and Mongoloid stock. The Hittites were known as the Hatti or Chatti. In Egyptian monuments the Hittite peoples were depicted with prominent noses, full lips, high check-bones, hairless faces, varying skin color from brown to yellowish and reddish, straight black hair and dark brown eyes.
The term Hittite in Cuneiform (the earliest form of writing invented by the Sumerians) appears as Khittae* representing a once powerful nation from the Far East known as the Khitai, and has been preserved through the centuries in the more familiar term, Cathay. The Cathay were Mongoloids, considered a part of early Chinese stock. There are links between the known Hittites and Cathay, for example, their modes of dress, their shoes with turned-up toes, their manner of doing their hair in a pigtail, and so forth. Representations show them to have possessed high cheekbones, and craniologists have observed that they had common characteristics of Mongoloids.
*Khittae has, at times, been incorrectly associated with Kittim or Chittim (Greek Kition, Roman Citium, Jewish Cethimus), son of Javan, son of Japheth. Interestingly enough, Javan has been incorrectly interpreted to mean Japan. History distinctly shows Javan to be the ancestor of the Greeks and other related Mediterranean people groups.
Sin (or Seni), a brother of Heth, has many occurrences in variant forms in the Far East. There is one significant feature concerning the likely mode of origin of Chinese civilization. The place most closely associated by the Chinese themselves with the origin of their civilization is the capital of Shensi, namely, Siang-fu (Father Sin). Siang-fu appears in Assyrian records as Sianu. Today, Siang-fu can be loosely translated, “Peace to the Western Capital of China”. The Chinese have a tradition that their first king, Fu-hi or Fohi (Chinese Noah), made his appearance on the Mountains of Chin, was surrounded by a rainbow after the world had been covered with water, and sacraficed animals to God (corresponding to the Genesis record). Sin himself was the third generation from Noah, a circumstance which would provide the right time interval for the formation of early Chinese culture.
Furthermore, those who came from the Far East to trade were called Sinæ (Sin) by the Scythians. Ptolemy, a Greek astronomer, referred to China as the land of Sinim or Sinæ. Reference to the Sinim in Isaiah 49:12 notes they came “from afar,” specifically not from the north and not from the west. Arabs called China Sin, Chin, Mahachin, Machin. The Sinæ were spoken of as a people in the remotest parts of Asia. For the Sinæ, the most important town was Thinæ, a great trading emporium in western China. The city Thinæ is now known as Thsin or simply Tin, and it lies in the province of Shensi. Much of China was ruled by the Sino-Khitan Empire (960-1126 A.D.), which Beijing became the southern capital. The Sinæ became independent in western China, their princes reigning there for some 650 years before they finally gained dominion over the whole land.
In the third century B.C., the dynasty of Tsin became supreme. The word Tsin itself came to have the meaning of purebred. This word was assumed as a title by the Manchu Emperors and is believed to have been changed into the form Tchina. From there the term was brought into Europe as China, probably from the Ch’in or Qin dynasty (255-206 B.C.). The Greek word for China is Kina (Latin is Sina). As well, Chinese and surrouding languages are part of the Sino-Tibetan language family. Years ago, American newspapers regularly carried headlines with reference to the conflict between the Chinese and Japanese in which the ancient name reappeared in its original form, the Sino-Japanese war. Sinology refers to the study of Chinese history.
With respect to the Cathay people of historical reference, it would make sense to suppose that the remnants of the Hittites, after the destruction of their empire, travelled towards the east and settled among the Sinites who were relatives, contributing to their civilization, and thus becoming the ancestors of the Asian people groups. Still others migrated throughout the region and beyond, making up present-day Mongoloid races in Asia and the Americas. The evidence strongly suggests that Ham’s grandsons, Heth (Hittites/Cathay) and Sin (Sinites/China), are the ancestors of the Mongoloid peoples.
4. There are many native African tribes which trace themselves back traditionally to Ham. The Yoruba, who are black skinned, for example, claim to be descendants of Nimrod, son of Cush, whereas the Libyans, who are much lighter skinned, are traced back to Phut. The Egyptians were direct descendants of Mizraim. Ancient Egyptians have been considered the greatest technicians in all human history. Other African groups trace their roots back to Ham or one of his descendants. It is therefore suggested that all of Africa, despite the different shades of color of its native populations, was initially settled by various members of this one Hamitic family.
The evidence appears to point consistently in the same direction, supporting that not only Africa with its black races, but the Far East, the Americas, and other Island nations with their colored races were all descendants of Ham. The Hamitic people were the first to reach the far and distant lands of the world, preparing the way for the future. Their inventions and discoveries made a significant impact on the world, and provided inspiration for the Japhethites.
Japheth. Also Diphath. Literal meanings are opened, enlarged, fair or light (father of the Caucasoid/Indo-Europoid, Indo-European, Indo-Germanic, or Indo-Aryan races – Japhethites). Japheth is the progenitor of seven sons:
(1) Gomer “complete” (sons were Ashkenaz, Riphath and Togarmah) – also Gamir, Gommer, Gomeri, Gomeria, Gomery, Goth, Guth, Gutar, Götar, Gadelas, Galic, Gallic, Galicia, Galica, Galatia, Gael, Getae, Galatae, Galatoi, Gaul, Galls, Goar, Celt, Celtae, Celticae, Kelt, Keltoi, Gimmer, Gimmerai, Gimirra, Gimirrai, Gimirraya, Kimmer, Kimmeroi, Kimirraa, Kumri, Umbri, Cimmer, Cimmeria, Cimbri, Cimbris, Crimea, Chomari, Cymric, Cymry, Cymru, Cymbry, Cumber (Caledonians, Picts, Milesians, Umbrians, Helvetians, Celts1, Galatians, Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Goths, Vandals, Scandinavians, Jutes, Teutons, Franks, Burgundians, Alemanni, Armenians, Germans2, Belgians, Dutch, Luxembourgers, Liechensteiners, Austrians, Swiss, Angles, Saxons, Britons, English, Cornish, Irish, Welsh, French, and other related groups);
(2) Magog “land of God” (sons were Elichanaf, Lubal, Baath, Jobhath and Fathochta) – also Gog, Gogh, Magug, Magogae, Mugogh, Mat Gugi, Gugu, Gyges, Bedwig, Moghef, Magogian, Massagetae, Dacae, Sacae, Scyth, Scythi, Scythia, Scythae, Sythia, Scythes, Skuthai, Skythai, Scythia, Scynthia, Scynthius, Sclaveni, Samartian, Scoloti, Skodiai, Scotti, Skoloti, Skoth-ai, Skoth, Skuthes, Skuth-a, Askuza, Askuasa, Alani, Alans, Alanic, Ulan, Uhlan (Scythians, Scots, Irish); also Rasapu, Rashu, Rukhs, Rukhs-As, Rhos, Ros, Rosh, Rox, Roxolani, Rhoxolani, Ruskolan, Rosichi, Rhossi, Rusichi, Rus, Ruska, Rossiya, Rusian (Russians3, Belarusians, Ukrainians); also Mas-ar, Mas-gar, Masgar, Mazar, Madj, Madjar, Makr-on, Makar, Makaroi, Merkar, Magor, Magar, Magyar (Hungarians – also Hungar, Hunugur, Hurri, Gurri, Onogur, Ugor, Ungar, Uhor, Venger); Finns, Lapps, Estonians, Siberians, Yugoslavians, Croatians, Bosnians, Montenegrins, Serbians, Slovenians, Slovakians, Bulgarians, Poles, Czechs, and other related groups);
(3) Madai “middle land” (sons were Achon, Zeelo, Chazoni and Lotalso) – also Mada, Amada, Madae, Madea, Manda, Maday, Media, Madaean, Mata, Matiene, Mitani, Mitanni, Megala (Medes4, Aryans, Persians, Parsa, Parsees, Achaemenians, Manneans, Caspians, Kassites, Iranians, Kurds, Turks, East Indians, Pathans, Hazaras), including the peoples of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Azerbaijan, Khazachstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikstan and Kyrgyzstan, and other related groups;
(4) Javan “miry” (sons were Elisha, Tarshish, Kittim and Dodanim) – also Jevanim, Iewanim, Iawan, Iawon, Iamanu, Iones, Ionians, Ellas, Ellines, El-li-ness, Hellas, Hellenes, Yavan, Yavanas, Yawan, Yuban, Yauna, Uinivu, Xuthus (Grecians, Greeks, Elysians, Spartans, Dorians, Britons5, Aeolians, Achaeans, Myceneans, Macedonians, Carthaginians, Cyprians, Cretans, Basques, Latins, Venetians, Sicanians, Italics, Romans6, Valentians, Sicilians, Italians, Spaniards, Portugese, other related groups);
(5) Tubal “brought” (sons were Ariphi, Kesed and Taari) – also Tabal, Tabali, Tubalu, Tbilisi, Tibarenoi, Tibareni, Tibar, Tibor, Sabir, Sapir, Sabarda, Subar, Subartu, Thobal, Thobel, Tobol, Tobolsk (Georgians, Albanians, other related groups);
(6) Meshech “drawing out” (sons were Dedon, Zaron and Shebashnialso) – Me’shech, Mes’ek, Meshekh, Meskhi, Mushch, Muschki, Mushki, Mishi, Muski, Mushku, Musku, Muskeva, Muska, Muskaa, Muskai, Maskali, Machar, Maskouci, Mazakha, Mazaca, Massagatae, Mtskhetos, Modar-es, Moskhi, Moshkhi, Mosher, Moshch, Moschis, Mosoch, Moschi, Moschian, Mo’skhoi, Moschoi, Mosochenu, Mosochean, Mossynes, Mosynoeci, Moskva, Moscovy, Moscow (Muscovites, Latvians, Lithuanians, Romanians, other related groups);
(7) Tiras “desire” (sons were Benib, Gera, Lupirion and Gilak) – also Tiracian, Thracian, Thirasian, Thuras, Troas, Tros, Troia, Troi, Troy, Trajan, Trojan, Taunrus, Tyrsen, Tyrrhena, Rasenna, Tursha, Tusci, Tuscany, Etruscan, Eturscan, Erul, Herul, Heruli, Erilar, Vanir, Danir, Daner, Aesar, Aesir, Asir, Svear, Svea, Svie, Svioner, Svenonian, Urmane, Norge (Pelasgians, Scandinavians7, Varangians, Vikings, Swedes, Norwegians, Danes, Icelandics, other related groups).
The Japhetic people are, in general, the peoples of India and Europe (Indo-European stock), with which any demographer is familiar8.
1. The whole Celtic race has been regarded as descended from Gomer, though history suggests modern Celts are descended from both Gomer and Magog. Archaeologists and ethnologists agree that the first Indo-European group to spread across Europe were Celts. The Irish Celts claim to be to the descendants of Magog, while the Welsh Celts claim to be to the descendants of Gomer. Irish chronicles, genealogies, plus an extensive number of manuscripts which have survived from ancient times, reveal their roots. The Irish were descendants of Scythians, also known as Magogians, which is strongly supported by etymological evidence. Archaeological evidence shows that both the Celts (from Gomer) and Scythians (from Magog) freely shared and mingled cultures at their earliest stages. Russian and eastern European excavations plainly reveal the blending of these two groups. Their geographical locations (what is now eastern Europe, southern Russia and Asia Minor) were referred to by the Greeks under the name of Celto-Scythae, which was populated by the Celts to the south and west, and the Scythians to the north. The ancient Greeks first called the northern peoples by the general name of Scythae; but when they became acquainted with the nations in the west, they began to call them by the different names of Celts, including the Celto-Scythae. Celts and Scythians were considered essentially the same peoples, based on geography, though many independent tribes of Celts and Scythians existed. The Latins called them the Galli, and the Romans referred to them as the Gauls. Later names used by Greeks were the Galatai or Galatae, Getae, Celtae, and Keltoi. In the third century before Christ (about 280 B.C.), the Gauls invaded Rome and were ultimately repelled in Greece, where they migrated into the north-central part of Asia Minor (Anatolia). Known as fiercely independent peoples, they conquered the indigenous peoples of that region and established their own independent kingdom. The land became known as Galatia. The Apostle Paul wrote his famous epistle to their descendants, the Galatians.
Early Celtic tribes (from Gomer) settled much of the European theater, including present-day Spain, France, England and Germany, prior to contact with Scythians. For many centuries France was called Gaul, after the Celtic descendants of Gomer, whom ceded the territory to Romans and Germanic/Teutonic Franks (whence France) in the 4th century A.D. Northwest Spain is called Galicia to this day. Some of the Gomerites migrated further to what is now called Wales. The Welsh claim their ancestors “first landed on the Isle of Britain from France, about three hundred years after the flood.” The Celtic language survives intact today mainly in the two variants of Welsh and Irish/Scottish Gaelic. The Welsh call their language Gomeraeg (after Gomer). The Celts of today are descendants of Gomer, and of the blended tribes of Magog and Gomer.
2. Present-day Germanic people groups are descendants of both Japheth and Shem, and there are several references from recent and ancient history. Recent history records the descendants of Gomer migrated and settled in the region that is now northern Europe (Germany and Scandinavia). These tribes became the Goths, Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Teutons and Burgundians, descendants of some of the first peoples to migrate to northern Europe from ancient times—the Askaeni. The Askaeni were descendants of Ashkenaz, son of Gomer, son of Japheth. When the Askaeni arrived in northern Europe, they named the land Ascania after themselves, which later translated Scandia, then Scandinavia. Later in history, we find the Askaeni being referred to as Sakasenoi, which became Sachsen, and finally Saxon. The Saxons played an big part in European and English history. Ashkenaz has been one of the most well preserved names throughout European history.
Semitic peoples also migrated to central Europe (southern Germany, Austria and Switzerland). These people were the descendants of Asshur, son of Shem, and is where the name “German” originates. Asshur is well known in history as the father of the Assyrians. The Assyrians occupied a Mesopotamian city on the lower Tigris River called “Kir” and placed captive slaves there (also referenced in 2 Kings 16:9). The city was populated by the Assyrians for many years, and the inhabitants became known as “Kir-men”. The Assyrian “Kerman” were driven from their land shortly after their fall about 610 B.C. They migrated into central Europe where they were called “German” or “Germanni”, a general name used by the Romans to represent all Assyrian tribes. The known Assyrian tribes were the Khatti (also Hatti, Hessians)—Chatti is still the Hebrew term for German, and Khatti was often used by the Romans to represent Germanic tribes; the Akkadians (Latins called them Quadians); the Kassites (or Cossaei); and the Almani (or Halmani, Allemani was the Latin name). Today, Germans refer to themselves as the “Deutschen”, which is derived from the Saxon word for an “Assyrian”. Their country name is Deutschland. The Romans referred to the Deutschen as Teutons. Ancient Hindu literature uses both the word “Asgras” and “Daityas” to refer to the Assyrians. “Daityas” is a Sanskrit word for “Deutsch”—a name applied to the Assyrians over 1500 years before the birth of Christ.
3. Ancient peoples known as the Sarmatians (not to be confused with the Samaritans) and Alans lived in the area around the Caspian Sea from about 900 B.C. Sarmatian and Alani tribes were later called Scythians (Slavs of today), who were also known as the Rukhs-As, Rashu, Rasapu, Rosh, Ros, and Rus. There is no debate that they were the inhabitants of southern Russia, and the existence of the names of rivers, such as the “Ros”, refer to Rus populations. Much later, about 739 A.D., the word Rus appears again in eastern Europe, interestingly, from a different source. Finnish peoples referred to Swedes as “Ruotsi”, “Rotsi” or “Rus” in contrast with Slavic peoples, which was derived from the name of the Swedish maritime district in Uppland, “Roslagen”, and its inhabitants, called “Rodskarlar”. Rodskarlar or Rothskarlar meant “rowers” or “seamen”. Those Swedish conquerers (called Varangians [Vikings] by the Slavs), settled in eastern Europe, adopted the names of local tribes, integrated with the Slavs, and eventually the word “Rusi”, “Rhos” or “Rus” came to refer to the inhabitants. Russia means “land of the Rus.” Scholars continue to debate the origin of the word Rus, which has derived from two sources: the Ruotsi or Rhos, the Finnish names for the Swedes, and earlier from the Scythians called the Rashu or Rosh in southern Russia.
4. The Aryans first come into historical view about a thousand years before Christ, invading India and threatening Babylonia. Historians of old reference an Aryan chief called Cyaxeres, king of the Medes and Persians. The Medes and Persians seem to have been tribes of one nation, more or less united under the rule of Cyaxeres. Elam (son of Shem) is the ancient name for Persia. Elamites are synonymous with Persians. The Persians are thus descended from both Elam, the son of Shem, and from Madai, the son of Japheth. The Medes and Persians had settled in what is now modern Persia, the Medes in the north, the Persians in the south. The most notable Persians of today are the Iranians. Interestingly, the word Iran is a derivative of Aryan. The Medo-Persian people groups are divided into hundreds of clans, some sedentary and others nomadic. All speak Indo-European languages, and some groups have pronounced Mongoloid physical characteristics and cultural traits, derived from Mongolian invasions and subsequent cultural integration. An example today would be the Uzbeks of Uzbekistan, and remnant groups living in Afghanistan and parts of Central Asia.
5. The history of Britain can be traced back to the sons of Japheth. Historical evidence strongly suggests the first inhabitants of the British isles were the descendants of Javan (from his sons Elisha and Tarshish), and of Gomer and Magog. Gomerites are today’s modern Welsh. Traditional Welsh belief is that the descendants of Gomer arrived about three hundred years after the flood, and the Welsh language was once called Gomeraeg. The Welsh (Celts) are thought to have created Stonehenge. Additionally, the descendants of Tarshish (Elisha’s brother) apprear to have settled on the British Isles in various migrations about the same time. Genesis 10:4 refers to Tarshish as those of “the isles of the Gentiles”. The Phoenicians traded silver, iron, tin and lead with them (Ezekiel 27:12), and even mention the incredible stone monuments at Stonehenge. Around 450 B.C., ancient historian Herodotus wrote about shipments of tin coming from the “Tin Isles” far to the north and west. There is no question that the British isles, including the northern coast of Spain, were the seat of the tin trade. King Solomon acquired precious metals from Tarshish (1 Kings 10:22). English historians assert that British mines mainly supplied the glorious adornment of Solomon’s Temple, and in those days the mines of southwestern Britain were the source of the world’s supply of tin.
The name Briton originated from Brutus (a descendant of Elisha), the first king on Britain’s mainland, arriving about 1100 B.C. Two sons of Brutus, Kamber and Albanactus, are referenced in English pre-history. From Kamber came Cambaria and the Cambrians (who integrated with the Gomerites [mostly Celts] and became the present-day Welsh). The descendants of Albanactus were known as the Albans (or the Albanach whom the Irish commonly called them). Geographers would later call the land Albion. The Britons, Cambrians and Albans populated the British Isles, which later endured multiple invasions, beginning with successive waves of Celts about 700 B.C. The Celts (or Gaels) called the land Prydain, their name for Briton. Those Celts (descendants of Gomer) integrated with the descendants of Elisha and Tarshish (sons of Javan), creating what some scholars called “a Celticized aboriginal population” in the British Isles. Some of the invading people groups were Scythians, descended from Magog, who became known as the Skoths or Scots. The name for the Celts or Cymru was “Weahlas”, from Anglo-Saxon origins, meaning “land of foreigners”—Wales. The Welsh still call themselves Cymru, pronounced “Coomry”. Later the Romans referred to the land as Britannia, invading there about 50 years before the birth of Christ. By the third century A.D., Jutes, Franks, Picts, Moors, Angles, Saxons and other groups were invading from surrounding Europe. In the sixth century A.D., Saxons called the land Kemr (Cymru), and the language Brithenig (Breton). The Angles eventually conquered Britannia, renaming the territory Angleland, which became England. Vikings invaded in the 9th century, and the Normans (or Northmen—former Danish Vikings) conquered England in 1066. Today, the British isles are settled by the ancestors of those people groups, which included Gomer and Javan (first inhabitants), plus Magog (later invasions by various people groups).
6. What of Romans and pre-Roman peoples? Migrating nomadic peoples came from across the Alps and across the Adriatic Sea to the east of the Italian peninsula. They were primarily herdsmen, and were technologically advanced. They worked bronze, used horses, and had wheeled carts. They were a war-like people and began to settle the mountainous areas of the Italian peninsula. Historians called these people Italic, and they include several ethnic groups: the Sabines, the Umbrians and the Latins, amongst others. Rome was, in part, founded by these agrarian Italic peoples living south of the Tiber river. They were a tribal people and the social logic of tribal organization dominated Roman society in both its early and late histories.
The date of the founding of Rome is uncertain, but archaeologists estimate its founding to around 753 B.C., although it existed as a village or group of villages long before then. As the Romans steadily developed their city, government and culture, they imitated the neighboring civilization to the north, the Etruscans (former Trojans). Romans are sometimes referred to as “Etruscanized Latins”. Roman legend states that Aeneas, the founder of the Roman race, was a prince of Troy who was forced to flee that city at the close of the Trojan war against Greece. Rome’s founder, Romulus, had a latinized Etruscan name. The Etruscans dominated central Italy, and had already founded many cities, having arrived some 500 years earlier after leaving the city of Troy around 1260 B.C. The Etruscans were greatly influenced by the Greeks, and the Etruscans brought that influence to the city of Rome. The Romans called Etruscans the Tusci, and Tuscany still bears the name. The first two centuries of Rome’s growth was dominated by the Etruscans. After many battles with the Etruscans, the city of Rome identified itself as Latin, eventually integrating the Estruscans and remaining peoples in the region. Rome became a kingdom, then an empire.
7. Scandinavian predecessors have a unique history. Scholars agree that Scandinavians (Danes, Norwegians, Swedes) came from early Germanic people groups, including the Goths, Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Teutons and Burgundians (descendants of Gomer). Ashkenaz, son of Gomer, is ancestor of those Germanic peoples. The descendants of Ashkenaz have many historical references. Known as the Askaeni, they were some of the first peoples to migrate to northern Europe, naming the land Ascania. Latin writers and Greeks called the land Scandza or Scandia (now Scandinavia). Roman records describe a large city on the southern shore of the Caspian Sea (about 350 A.D.) where a chain of mountains begins, and runs eastward along the shore and beyond it, forming a natural boundary. Those mountains were called the Ascanimians, the region was called Sakasene (a form of Ashkenaz), and the dwellers of the city were the Saki. The Saki tribes had been migrating north to Europe for some time. The Saki called themselves the Sakasenoi, which we know as the Sachsens or Saxons. Around 280 A.D. the Romans tell of the employment of Saxons to guard the eastern British coasts against barbarians. About 565 A.D., the Saxons battled over territory in the Baltic region with another powerful people, the Svear. Historical records indicate that descendants of Tiras also settled in Scandinavia, a people called the Svear. The Svear are descendants of the first inhabitants of the ancient city of Troy, a people then known as the Tiracians (also Thracians, Trajans or Trojans). They were described as a “ruddy and blue-eyed people”. The city of Troy was destroyed around 1260 B.C. after a succession of wars with the Greeks. Thousands of Trojans resettled abroad. That included Trojan warriors who sailed across the Black Sea to the Caucasus region in southern Russia; and one of the most documented of Trojan settlements is along the mouth of the River Don on the Black Sea. The locals named those Trojan settlers the “Aes”, meaning “Iron” for their superior weaponry. Later, the inner part of the Black Sea was named after them, called the “Iron Sea” or “Sea of Aesov” in the local tongue. Today, the name continues as the “Sea of Azov”.
The Aes or Aesir, travelled from the Caucasus region to the Baltic Sea in Scandinavia around 90 B.C., which is supported by several scholars and modern archaeological evidence. A tribe that migrated with them were the Vanir. The Aesir clans traded with local Germanic tribes, including the Gutar. Romans called the Gutar “Goths”, the Aesir “Svear”—Swedes, and the Vanir “Danir/Daner”—Danes. The Svear and Daner populations were described specifically as taller and fairer (blonde) than other people groups in the Baltic region. The Svear population flourished, and with the Goths they formed a powerful military alliance of well-known seafarers. The Romans noted that Svear people together with the Goths were, from the 3rd century A.D., ravaging the Black Sea, Asia Minor and the Mediterranean, using the same type of weapons as their Trojan ancestors. The Svear and Goths dominated the Russian waterways, and by 739 A.D. together they were called Varyagans or Varangians (from the Swedish Vaeringar), according to written records of the Slavs near the Sea of Azov. Like their ancestors, Scandinavians lived in large communities where their chieftains would send out maritime warriors to trade and plunder. Those fierce warriors were called the Vaeringar, which literally meant “men who offer their service to another master”. We later know them by their popularized name, the Vikings. Further evidence of Aesir (Asir) settlements in the Baltic region came from their Thracian language, which not only influenced, but is very close to the Baltic and Slavic (Balto-Slavic) languages of today. By the 9th century A.D., the Svear state had emerged as the major power in Scandinavia. The Svear, Daner and Goths, along with other Germanic tribes, settled in what is now present-day Sweden, Norway, Denmark and other parts of the Baltic region. They were forefathers of the Scandinavians—the descendants of both Gomer and Tiras.
8. Early history shows the Japhethites split into two groups. One group settled in the region of present-day India and Central Asia, and the other group in the European theater. Indo-European languages originate from those people groups who migrated throughout western Eurasia (Europe, the Near East, Anatolia, and the Caucasus). Together they form what is known as the “Indo-European” family of nations. Both of these divisions trace their ancestry back to Japheth. For example, early Aryans knew him as Djapatischta (chief of the race), Greeks referred to Japheth as Iapetos or Japetos, East Indians called him Jyapeti or Pra-Japati, Romans used Ju-Pater or Jupiter, the Saxons perpetuated his name as Iafeth, subsequently transliterated as Sceaf (procounced “sheef” or “shaif” – and recorded his name in their early genealogies as the son of Noah, the forebear of their various peoples), and the variant Seskef was used by early Scandinavians. All of these peoples, we must remember, were pagans whose knowledge or even awareness of the book of Genesis had been lost, or was non-existent.
Endnote:
The information presented here is only an interpretation of historical research and Biblical data. Certain assumptions may not be accurate, and new discoveries can change group references. We are all directly related to either Shem and his wife, Ham and his wife, or Japheth and his wife. History has long since confirmed abundantly this distribution of mankind, exactly as the Bible describes. Every human being on earth today is your cousin, whether first, second – or thousandth!
Nothing in the legendary or archaeological history of the ancient world denies the biblical account of the creation of the world, the entrance of sin and death, the judgment of Noah’s flood, and the rise of the peoples from his descendants after their dispersal from Babel. Furthermore, the historical dates used to determine the formation of people groups, nations, or kingdoms does not in any way conflict with the Genesis account, but are well within the approximate dates for the creation of the world and mankind about 5800 B.C., the flood of Noah about 3400 B.C., and the dispersal from Babel around 3200 B.C.
This information is not intendend to promote or reflect a particular theology, religious sect or genealogical group. Don’t dismiss the fact that with some of the Shemites, Hamites, and Japhethites there would have been intermarriage and subsequent people groups. For example, scholars note evidence that suggests the descendants of Lud (Shemites) migrated north and intermarried with the Greeks (descendants of Japheth), and were eventually absorbed in that culture.
The interaction of all three family contributions is the theme of history. The remarkable thing is that they all can be substantiated to a degree, often unsuspected by students of history, up to the present time. The descendants of Shem, Ham and Japheth are evidenced, not only by Biblical history, but archeological, anthropological, biological, ethnographical, ethnological, etymological, geological, and secular history. The question is not one of levels of worth but of uniqueness of contribution, and though differences exist, not any one group is superior or inferior.
Consider the major language groups today. Essentially, there is an increasing recognition that many of the languages of the world are related and that, subsequently, many of the cultures of the ancient world are thus also related in origin. They all can be traced back, in their various linguistic groups, to a “father tongue” embracing the major language groups of today, which are:
Indo-European (Northern India/Europe)
Afro-Asiatic (Northern Africa/Middle East/Southwestern Asia)
Kartvelian (Caucasus Mountains/Southern Russia)
Uralic (Northern Europe/Central Siberia/Eurasia)
Altaic (Eastern Europe/Central Asia)
Dravidian (Central & Southern India)
Sino-Tibetan (Northern & Eastern Asia)
Malayo-Polynesian (Southeastern Asia/Pacific Islands)
Austro-Asiatic (Eastern India/Southwestern Asia)
Niger-Congo (Western & Central Africa)
Nilo-Saharan (Northeastern Africa)
Khoisan (Southern Africa)
Eskimo-Aleut (Northeastern Siberia/Alaska/Aleutians)
Algonkian, Athapascan, Iroquoian, & Mosan (North America)
Uto-Aztecan, Oto-Manguean, Mayan, & Macro-Chibchan (Central America)
Carib, Andean-Equatorial (South America)
Torricelli, West Papuan & Sepik-Ramu (New Guinea)
Bunaban, Ngaran & Yiwaidjan (Northern Australia)
Pama-Nyungan (Central & Southern Australia)
The total number of languages in the world is estimated to be around 6000. Here are the most common spoken & written languages worldwide:
Achinese, Afrikaans, Akan, Albanian, Amharic, Arabic, Armenian, Assamese, Aymara, Azerbaijani, Balinese, Baluchi,
@Zoe | November 24, 2011 at 11:20 AM |
“Furthermore, the historical dates used to determine the formation of people groups, nations, or kingdoms does not in any way conflict with the Genesis account, but are well within the approximate dates for the creation of the world and mankind about 5800 B.C., the flood of Noah about 3400 B.C., and the dispersal from Babel around 3200 B.C.”
So what are you telling the world here? That the earth is only 7,811 year old?
But I would provide you a hole not to further bury yourself but to use as an escape hatch to wriggle your way out!
Let us allow for the saying that “a day is like a thousand years in the sight of your god”. Therefore we get – 7,811 X 365 X 1,000 = 2,851,015,000 years which is getting very close to reality. Mankind therefore had enough time to leave the genetic engineering factory of Eden and migrate to the far corners of the planet.
Wtf Zoe…..
A link would have been nice >:O
.Zoe & Lemuel crushed the competition with irrefutable evidence
SojournerTruth | November 24, 2011 at 12:34 PM |
.”Zoe & Lemuel crushed the competition with irrefutable evidence”
It is amazing what people call evidence…..stories filled with supernatural beings magical happenings written over 3000 years ago with no proof.
Nnaki/Raelian, Man, you continue to manifest your ignorance and ineptitude, as you try DIGGING yourself out of one of those DEEP, DARK* BLACK HOLES* in outer space (LOL!) the likes of which, your eternal
DESTINY becons YOU!
Your FUTILITY, is so dense!
2 Peter 3:8—‘one day is like a thousand years’
Question: Doesn’t 2 Peter 3:8 indicate that the days of creation might not be literal, but thousands of years long?
Answer: 2 Peter 3:8–9 reads:
‘But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.’
The first thing to note that the context has nothing to do with the days of creation. Also, it is not defining a day because it doesn’t say ‘a day is a thousand years’. The correct understanding is derived from the context—the Apostle Peter’s readers should not lose heart because God seems slow at fulfilling His promises because He is patient, and also because He is not bound by time as we are.
The text says ‘one day is like [or as] a thousand years’—the word ‘like’ (or ‘as’) shows that it is a figure of speech, called a simile, to teach that God is outside of time (because He is the Creator of time itself). In fact, the figure of speech is so effective in its intended aim precisely because the day is literal and contrasts so vividly with 1000 years—to the eternal Creator of time, a short period of time and a long period of time may as well be the same.
The fact that the passage is actually contrasting a short and long period can be shown by the fact that Peter is quoting Psalm 90:4 (Peter’s statement ‘do not forget’ implies that his readers were expected to recall something, and this passage has this very teaching). This reads:
‘For a thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night.’
This is synonymous parallelism, where a long period of a thousand years is contrasted with two short periods: a day, and a night watch. But those who try to use this verse to teach that the days of Genesis might be 1000 years long forget the additional part in bold. For if they were consistent, they would have to say that a watch in the night here also means 1000 years. It’s difficult to imagine that a Psalmist (Psalm 63:6) is thinking on his bed for thousands of years or that his eyes stay open for thousands of years (Psalm 119:148).
The immediate context of the Psalm is the frailty of mere mortal man in comparison to God. This verse amplifies the teaching, saying that no matter how long a time interval is from man’s time-bound perspective, it’s like a twinkling of an eye from God’s eternal perspective.
In any case, the meaning of ‘day’ in Genesis 1 is defined by the context there—the Hebrew word for day, yôm יום , is used with the words ‘evening’ and ‘morning’, and the days are numbered (first day, second day, etc.). Whenever yôm is used in such a context, it is always an ordinary day, never a long period of time. The meaning of the days of creation as ordinary days is also affirmed by Exodus 20:8–11, where God told the Israelites to work for six days and rest on the seventh because God had made all things in six days and rested on the seventh. For more information, see other articles in Q&A: Genesis under ‘Days of Creation’.
Professing to be wise Nnaki/Raelian, you have BECOME a fool!
My esteemed colleague and former tutor, Professor Dov Templebaum, has been a pioneering economic geographer and archeologist, whose published explorations into the social anthropology of first-century Judea have been inspirational to generations of scholars. I am one of those scholars, and my admiration for him knows no bounds.
Here, however, and sadly, I must take issue with Dov. All of the evidence suggests that Sammy Isaacs has always been right. Building on the meticulous and painstaking work of Manny Cohen (whom I’m glad to see participating in this discussion, after his many years of silence), Sam showed that the profession of “fart-wrangler” (“κλανιά πήρε” in the original Greek) was exclusive to the Sumerian hinterland and never even reached the coast, much less cosmopolitan Judea. It was a profession never used by the Maccabee descendency.
The confusion seems to have arisen as a result of a mistranslation from the early Greek in one of the apocrypha used as a source by at least two of the authors of the synoptics. Phonetically, the Aramaic (here rendered as late Arabic) “المعجب بخادمه” was almost identical to the old Greek. But in Aramaic (and, indeed, in the early Arab scripts), it simply meant a “follower”.
@ Zoe | November 24, 2011 at 3:31 PM |
So you fell for the trap!
You remain adamant that your god made the universe in 6 solar days- no more, no less!
He deserves to be fired and not worshipped! Why would an all powerful, omniscient (know-it-all) creator of heaven and earth and two defective slaves have to take 6 days to complete a job that could have been done in 1 day, or 1 hour or even 1 second or, ad nauseam, 1 nanosecond. Why wait so long? Was he trying to impress other gods and made numerous errors, or what? Even Superman the ET could have done a faster and better job! Ask any child born with spina bifida why your god created him or her in his image.
Professor Dov Templebaum
My former (and brilliant) postgraduate pupil Judy Tabor has rightly enjoyed an excellent career since she left Mount Scopus. I have heard of her in connection with Rhodes Scholarships and Fulbright Fellowships, and I have no doubt that she deserves them all. Her scholarship on second-century Judea is unparalleled in its acuity and breadth of knowledge. As a historical geographer and, I daresay, as an archeologist, she has few peers.
As a linguist of the ancient tongues, however, Dr. Tabor was never (shall we say) the best in the class. Her mistranslation of a mistranslation is enough, I think, to demonstrate just how wrong she is.
I have never claimed to be a scholar of second-century Judea. I do make a strong claim, however, to being a scholar of first-century Judea. Dr. Tabor (and I insist that I wish her well) would do well to remember that.
@ Professor Dov Templebaum | November 24, 2011 at 4:28 PM |
Please explain to an undergrad like me. Are you referring to first and second century BCE or CE? Because if it is ‘BCE’, you should be a scholar of 2nd century before becoming a scholar of first century?
Am I getting my nickers in a twist on this one, Professore, or it is way over my head, Sir?
Perhaps I am too late to join this discussion. Judit, thank you for remembering. I still recall fondly those study groups in the basement on Mount Scopus.
I have not been well for many years (hence my silence!!), but I think that better days are coming. I never really got over that bizarre episode with Rosie Templebaum. It seems to have haunted my life.
But enough of that. I agree with you, of course. I’ve been trying to keep up with the literature. Sam Isaacs has done some great work, as far as I can see, and surely you’re right about the Greek. As to Prof. Dov, these days I really don’t know what to think. I was sorry to hear about Rosie. It’s a miserable way to go.
But … you know …?
To Miller:
Your last piece to me seems full of desperation. You know very well that they are chinese and indian and others in the middle east who are christians. Your statement seems to imply that almost half the earth is being deprived of “power”. Furthermore, sun worship was well before christ. Most of the eastern countries were practitioners of it, especially the Egyptians during the time of Moses. That is why Moses could not accept the title of prince of Egypt; it would be to deny the ONLY TRUE God, maker of heaven and earth. Yes, Brother Miller in SIX days. That is why there is that weekly celebration called the Sabbath. It is a everlasting celebration to God’s act of creation. To be honest, your reference to the supplanting of the sun for the SON was the act of the Roman Catholic Church. This is why their implantation of pagan practices has seen an image of adoration of almost everything supposedly religious posted in all of their churches.
@ lemuel | November 24, 2011 at 5:58 PM |
“You know very well that they are chinese and indian and others in the middle east who are christians.”
Come on lemuel! I might appear desperate but you are certainly scraping the barrel! Yea, how many Christians really practice in those lands you just mentioned? Certainly not as much as Muslims, Hindus and those of other non-Christian faiths that live in so-called Christian lands. Most of these ‘orthodox’ Christians don’t even see Jesus as God but as only as the Son of God. Check out Britain, Europe, Canada, Trinidad & Guyana!
But if you have so much faith in your religion why are you an armchair Christian? You should be doing what Jesus and his disciples did and travel the hi-ways and y-ways and letting sinners and non-believers know about your sweet Jesus and the salvation he has to offer in order to have eternal life. You should start by visiting the Hindus and Muslims in Barbados and let them know that unless they accept your Jesus as God they will not be saved from damnation and will burn in Hell. I will come along and even promise to change my ways from Sun Worship to Son Worship.
Deal or no deal, lemuel boy!
Bring back Macabee Version
@ Lemuel…
Are you a Seventh Day Adventist (SDA)?
Why did God take six days to create everything instead of existence all at once?
The whole Word of God is founded upon the number SEVEN .All of life revolves around this number and it is the holy number of God. Seven symbolizes completeness or perfection. There are 7 recorded statements of Jesus while He was on the cross, there are 7 churches, with their 7 spirits, in Revelation, Jerusalem is 777 meters above sea level, the Israelites marched around Jericho for 7 days before its fall, when 7 priests blew 7 trumpets 7 times, there are 7 weeks between Passover and Pentecost. SEVEN symbolizes Spiritual Perfection and used over 700 times in the Bible. It is used 54 times in the Book of Revelation. The word FINISHED is also connected with the number SEVEN. In Revelation 10:7 we read, “In the days of the voice of the SEVENTH angel, when he shall begin to sound the mystery of God should be FINISHED.” 7-day week exists only because it was revealed by God to humanity, according to His Will.
Conclusion: We need to remember that God’s methods, His timings and His moments and thinking are often different from our timing and thinking we must allow let God be God, and do only what He is calling us to do and Live the life what God called us now and be obedient to him instead of wrestling with God’s method and God’s moment. We need to know that “God Has a Plan and purpose for everything and he uses everything for good, and everything has a reason for happening (Ecclesiastes 3:1-10). Apostle Paul clearly said that God has only provided us with a limited understanding. The scriptures says that we are to Avoid worthless, foolish talk that only leads to more godless behavior (2 Timothy 2:16)
O Timothy! Guard what was committed to your trust, avoiding the profane and idle babblings and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge— by professing it some have strayed concerning the faith. Grace be with you. Amen. 1 Timothy 6:20–21
But avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless. 10 Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition, 11 knowing that such a person is warped and sinning, being self-condemned. Titus 3:9-11.
The Word of God directs us NOT to answer questions which have no answer…”But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.” -2nd Timothy 2:23
Nnaki/Raelian, Stop asking foolish questions, man; but then again, one cannot expect other from such a Raelian like you!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSBIOqyC1JQ .
Church in China experiencing ‘tremendous’ growth
by Dibin SamuelPosted: Tuesday, August 3, 2010, 11:35 (BST)
The church in China is experiencing tremendous growth like never before, says the World Council of Churches (WCC).
Mathews George Chunakara, Director of WCC’s International Affairs and Public Witness, said there had been a “unique and explosive growth” of Christianity among the Chinese people.
“I have been visiting China for the last 15 years. I am astounded to see the tremendous growth there. Their worship places are now overflowing,” Chunakara told Christian Today.
“It is not just the poor you see in churches, even the rich and educated are embracing Christianity. Beijing and Shanghai are the proof,” he added.
The ecumenical leader compared freedom of religion in the country now to a decade ago, when the church kept a tight grip on the goings on in churches. He said the situation had “much improved” and that the government was now starting to “favour” religious people.
In the early 1970s, there were an estimated 3 million Christians in China. Now, the number may be as high as 130 million. However, the government continues to keep a close eye on the activities of officials churches and there has been sporadic persecution against Christians belonging to unofficial house churches.
“The Chinese government will not raid unless provoked. Now being the fastest growing economy, they know the importance of a harmonious society. To promote such a society, they are giving religion a special role,” says Chunakara.
For instance, the Communist Government amended the Constitution two years ago to accommodate the role of religion.
“You could not expect such a thing to happen 15 years ago,” Chunakara said.
“Not only China, in many Asian countries the church is expanding. More people are coming to God. In addition, the participation of young people is absolutely remarkable in comparison with those in West. There is genuine spiritual eagerness among the grassroot level people,” said Chunakara.
He says God is using the foolish to shame the wise. God is bringing a spiritual awakening in third world countries.
Zoe | November 24, 2011 at 9:21 PM |
“The whole Word of God is founded upon the number SEVEN .All of life revolves around this number and it is the holy number of God. ”
This biblical numerology sounds like a whole lot of sorcery and magic (black or white?- all the same)! One would have thought that 3 would be your favourite number – the 3 god heads and all that baloney!
What you said about accepting things as written down or spoken by people pretending to be the mouthpieces of your god is a very good reason to dismiss the supremacy of any one religion.
Again I will repeat my guiding principle when it comes to seeking knowledge:
“Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it. ~Buddha”
@ Zoe | November 24, 2011 at 10:51 PM |
Where there is money to be made commercialized Christianity would spot a business opportunity. You can bet your 7 last bottom dollars that these early commercial posts (like the newly opened up mining towns of the 19th C) are primarily owned by white American televangelists and religious venture capitalists!
Astounding growth in the church worldwide
Posted in The Holy Spirit is on the move by Seth Barnes on 3/4/2010
As I said in an earlier blog, the world is getting brighter, not darker. Haiti was an example. What we thought was just a horrific event has been transformed into a catalytic moment in the life of the nation. And it represents a God who is on the move around the world.
We Americans tend to confuse our personal and national circumstances with that of the church around the world. We may be struggling, but God’s work is not. Things are moving rapidly across the globe. More people are coming to Christ now than at any other time in the history of the world. Consider these facts as presented in a recent article by J. Lee Grady:
There are now about 600 million Christians in Africa. Protestant Christianity grew 600 percent in Vietnam in the last decade. In China, where a 50,000-member megachurch was raided in Shanxi province a few weeks ago, there are now an estimated 130 million churchgoers.
“We have no reason to fear the future. Whatever challenges loom ahead, the same God who carried us through this past decade will give us success in the next one.”
Astounding church growth has occurred in Guatemala, Brazil, India and Ethiopia. In Nepal, which had no Christians in 1960, there are now a half-million believers. The Christian population of Indonesia has mushroomed from 1.3 million to 11 million in 40 years.
Smug scholars in Europe and the United States love to cite Islam as the world’s fastest-growing religion, but observers know the facts: Christianity, while waning especially in Europe, is growing faster than ever in the Southern hemisphere. Philip Jenkins, who wrote The Next Christendom in 2002, declared: “The center of gravity has moved to the global south. So if we’re looking for the religion that is going to affect the largest number of lives in the 21st century, it is almost certainly going to be Christianity.”
We need to be encouraged with what God is doing in the earth. If you’ve been a witness to this move of God, what have you seen lately?
Zoe posted……
“Smug scholars in Europe and the United States love to cite Islam as the world’s fastest-growing religion, but observers know the facts: Christianity, while waning especially in Europe, is growing faster than ever in the Southern hemisphere.”
This I found on Wiki…..
Claims to be the fastest growing religion
Note that it would be an ‘argumentum ad populum’ fallacy to claim that being the “fastest growing religion” has any logical consequences about the truth of that religion.
While it is possible to find claims that almost any religion is the fastest growing, it is much harder to find ones backed up by scientific data.
Where is your scientific proof here Zoe? You cant just cut and paste another’s perspective and parade them on BU as facts…..come on man, You should ‘know’ better.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claims_to_be_the_fastest-growing_religion
The more I read the Christians on BU and elsewhere, the more I am convinced that the whole Bible story is an ‘argumentum ad populum’
To Miller:
How can you quote from a book or traditional eastern enlightenment scrolls to defeat sayings and writings in another book, the Bible. Are you telling us that university students and scientists must now ignore the previous work done in a discipline and “reason” on it before it can be accepted as credible? Are you saying that all libraries and sources of books or thoughts of human contemplation should be discarded for your “reason”. Yet, the philosophers who were on the fore front of the reason movement “wrote” down their thoughts for posterity, and we now read them. How did you know about much of the “adverse learning” that you demonstrate here each day? Did you “reason” it out? How long did each “reason” take? Who or what validated your conception of what was the thing to believe? Was it another human being, a holy guru from the east or one of your friends from Kensington New Road? Miller my friend you are sounding less lucid than a person in the full flight of a psychosis.
Again stop with the chinese and indian fulcrum; it shall not accomplish its desired effect. You challenged christians to go on the highway and the byway to spread the good news about salvation. Yet, when it is being done right here on this blog; you are spewing all kinds of venom. You latest pieces do show desperation creeping in; maybe the “reason” construct is not holding, but you are allowed to say “I was down the wrong path”. You are among friends.
To Technician:
I am a believer in the traditional God Command philosophical construct; just as many here gleefully wear on their shirt sleeves their John Stuart Mills, Nietzche, St. Augustine, relativism and cultural relativism constructs. I do not hide from what I believe and when that can be demonstrated to be wrong then I shall accept what is demonstrated to be right. There are Sabbath keeping churches that are not of the seventh day adventist ilk. These churches celebrate the Sabbath because as the SDAs they recognize that it celebrates God’s great creation.
Inbreeding caused demise of the Spanish Habsburg dynasty, new study reveals
” One of Europe’s most powerful royal dynasties was so obsessed with securing its blue-blooded inheritance through family marriages that it brought about its own extinction through inbreeding, scientists have found.
The Hapsburgs ruled Spain from 1516 to 1700, presiding over the first global empire, but died out after generations of intermarriage, according to the first genetic analysis of the family.
The royal fashion of marrying relatives to preserve the dynastic heritage culminated in a monarch who was so genetically inbred that he was unable to provide an heir and power passed to the French Bourbons.
The dynasty was one of the most important and influential royal families in Europe – branches of the family ruled Austria, Hungary, Belgium, the Netherlands, the German empire and Spain.
Scientists have examined the family tree of the last of the Spanish Habsburgs, King Charles II, who died in 1700 at the age of 39, and discovered that, as a result of repeated marriages between close relatives, he was almost as inbred as the offspring of an incestuous relationship between a brother and sister or father and daughter.
The study found that nine out of 11 marriages over the 200 years were between first cousins or uncles and nieces, producing a small gene pool that made rare recessive genetic illnesses more prevalent.
“Only half of the babies born to the dynasty during the period studied lived to see their first birthday, compared with about 80 per cent of children in Spanish villages at the time.
The study, published this week in the journal Public Library of Science One, indicated that Charles II suffered from two separate rare genetic conditions, which were almost certainly the result of his ancestors’ marriage patterns and which effectively assured that the dynasty died out with him.
Nicknamed El Hechizado (“the hexed”) because of his deformities, Charles II was not only inflicted with an extreme version of the Hapsburg chin, as immortalised in portraits by Titian and Velazquez, but his tongue was said to be so big for his mouth that he had difficulty speaking and drooled.
Historical accounts record that he also suffered from an oversized head, intestinal upsets, convulsions and, according to his first wife, premature ejaculation and his second wife, impotence.
“He was unable to speak until the age of four, and could not walk until the age of eight. He was short, weak and quite lean and thin,” said Gonzalo Alvarez, of the University of Santiago de Compostela, who led the study.
“He looked like an old person when he was 30 years old, suffering edemas [swellings] on his feet, legs, abdomen and face. During the last years of his life he could barely stand up and suffered from hallucinations and convulsive episodes,” he said.
The scientists concluded that medical problems of Charles II were not random but could be symptoms of two genetic disorders; an inherited thyroid deficiency, and renal tubular acidosis, a type of kidney failure that can cause metabolic problems.”
By Fiona Govan in Madrid
1:36PM BST 15 Apr 2009.
THE TELEGRAPH.
@ Lemuel….
A simple yes or no was all that was required……geeez.
Why do you always have to cloud the issue?
Is the answer a yes or no?
To Technician:
In your technical parlance, do not try to pigeon hole me and then attempt to bombard me from a point of view where you think I can not mount a frontal or rear guard attack. That shall never happen. The only one here who is cloudy is you. Whether I am of the SDA faith or not is not relevant here. You have already voiced your portion on the “evil” impact of faith. I don’t see how a yes or no could be any help to you, spiritually, at this stage of your gleeful scoffing and tearing down of all things spiritual.
To ALL BU Scoffring ‘Bildge Pumpers’ I re-post my challenge to Nnaki/Raelian, and ALL ‘Scoffers’ whose ONLY, non-substantive folly, IS* stupid “REDHERRING” voidless, nonsense, that any idiot can write in short, futile sentences, as you all continue doing!
Zoe | November 23, 2011 at 8:26 PM | Nnaki/Raelian, I challenge you, to cogently, coherently, objectively, scientifically, and, if possible, logically and honestly, to refute, what I posted earlier re the historic veracity of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ; and likewise, the following; Remember, Nnaki/Raelian, NO imagenary folly and unsupported, Star Trek nonsense. Take your time, don’t choke now; this ain’t no JACKASS, in your Pythonated gut!
Adam, Eve and Noah vs Modern Genetics
by Dr Robert W. Carter, and my other posts, from bright intelligent men/women, REFUTE them, with sound counter evidence, NOT IGNORANCE, folly and Bildge Pumping HOGWASH!
@ Lemuel….
I asked a simple question, you find it hard to answer, now you go on a rant….sad.
If you are ashamed to say to which denomination you belong, you are doing something wrong but I do understand the rules of one day Christianity.
Dont worry about me, I am happy where I am and I can say exactly who I am and where I stand without confusion.
You are correct, what you are has absolutely no bearing on my life, you neither add or subtract to it.
What I do find amazing about people like you and Zoe, is the fact that you always call others scoffers and mockers but in reality, aren’t you all scoffers and mockers also?
Don’t you all scoff at other beliefs? Don’t you all mock other beliefs and even go as far as condemning them because you believe yours to be the only truth?
Here we have Zoe frothing and spitting venom because others dont believe in his stories.
You all can’t scare or insult people into believing.
Stupse!
To Technician:
Like a spoiled child you did not get your little straw doll to put some blows on, and there you go frowning and scoffing. You can call me what ever, but if you are so settled in your beliefs and point of contemplation why would you worry about my one dayism. About right and wrong, Tech, some day coming soon if your God be God we shall see, but if the God of the Bible affirms he is the real and only God, it would have been a shame that a little herb cause you to lose all of the profit from his LIGHT.
@ Lemuel…..
I dont tear down all things spiritual….
I tear down all things ReLIEgion!!
A little herb….?!?!?
LOL….here you go again…..that little herb was created by your God for man..lol.
To Technician:
I really had a good laugh at that last one. I must concede it was created by Him, but did he intend that it be used for recreational purposes. That is what most use it for.
To Techie:
I try to affirm all things spiritual from the word of God. Religion has been misused and abused by man, and it continues today.Have to go see you later.
To Techie:
I try to affirm all things spiritual from the word of God. Religion has been misused and abused by man, and it continues today.
Glad to read this but IMHO, you are mixing the two, which can be dangerous (as aptly demonstrated over and over by Zoe).
ReLIEgion and Spirituality is not (IMHO) the same (Zoe will refute this with cut and paste).
“Again stop with the chinese and indian fulcrum; it shall not accomplish its desired effect.”
Your Holy Highness, please pardon my political incorrectness!
Is it OK to refer to them as “significant cultures from the Eastern Hemisphere which do not accept the teaching that Jesus is God or even as the Only Son of God as part of the religious practices?
My question to you is this: Do you see these “other religions’ as spiritually inferior to your Christianity to the extent that the practitioners will never be saved through grace and enter into the Kingdom of God?
Please answer in a simple and clear manner?
Secondly, do you accept the Book of Revelation as a clear indication of the very imminent return of Jesus Christ to Earth when those who believe in him will be taken to Heaven?
Again a simple answer will suffice.
Thanks very much for your cooperation, your Holiness!
Why is Jesus the only way to heaven/God?
Why is Jesus the only way? Because Jesus said He was the only way. “I am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me,” (John 14:6). Of course, just because someone says he is the only way, doesn’t mean he is. But, this is why we need to look at Jesus’ miracles as a proof that He was right about who He said He was. Jesus walked on water, calmed a storm with a command, raised people from the dead, and rose from the dead Himself. It is the fact of His incredible deeds.
Now, if Joe Schmoe on the street said that he was the only way to God, we’d look at him and say, “Yeah, right.” But, if Joe calmed a storm with a command, raised someone from the dead, walked on water, etc., that would add a lot of credibility to his claim. After all, he is demonstrating extraordinary abilities consistent with his claim.
This is the case with Jesus. He made extraordinary claims and performed extraordinary deeds. Therefore, it is logical to conclude that what Jesus said was true — especially since He claimed to be God (John 8:24,58; 10:30-33; 5:18).
Also, consider that no one else has done what Jesus has done. No one else has risen from the dead, calmed storms, raised others from the dead, and fulfilled numerous prophecies, etc. Though some may have claimed to be able to do one or two of these things, none have done all the things Christ has done as well as claim divinity. Since Christ has done all of these things and since He claims to be God in flesh, then it is logical to believe what He has said… that He is the only way.
As we speak, many Indians, Chinese, and thousands of Muslims across the Middle East, and elsewhere in countries, that have traditionally embraced a variety of other non-Christian beliefs, are coming to The Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Saviour and Lord of all mankind, with Glorious testimonies of His liberating POWER, presence and PEACE in their lives, accompanied by many miraculous events, I.e., healing of sickness. etc, which they never experienced before; as HE* said, it would happen, IF* you you BELIEVE* in Him!
Jesus The Only Way To Heaven.
The Jesus Movement of the 1960s and ’70s, the “One Way” sign-the index finger held high-became a popular icon. “One Way” bumper stickers and lapel pins were everywhere, and the “One Way” slogan for a time became the identifying catchphrase of all evangelicalism.
Evangelicalism in those days was an extremely diverse movement. (In some ways it was even more eclectic than it is today.) It encompassed everything from Jesus People, who were an integral part of that era’s youth culture, to straight-line fundamentalists, who scorned everything contemporary. But all of them had at least one important thing in common: They knew that Jesus Christ is the only way to heaven. “One Way” seemed an unshakable belief that all evangelicals held in common.
That is no longer the case. The evangelical movement of today is no longer unified on this issue. Some who call themselves evangelicals are openly insisting that faith alone in Jesus is not the only way to heaven. They are now convinced that people of all faiths will be in heaven. Others are simply cowardly, embarrassed, or hesitant to affirm the exclusivity of the gospel in an era when inclusivity, pluralism, and tolerance are deemed supreme virtues by the secular world. They imagine it would be a tremendous cultural faux pas to declare that Christianity is the truth and all other faiths are wrong. Apparently, the evangelical movement’s biggest fear today is that Christians will be seen as out of harmony with the world.
Postmodernism
Why has this dramatic shift taken place? Why has evangelicalism abandoned what believers once all agreed is absolutely true? I believe it is because church leaders, in their desperate quest to be relevant and fashionable, have actually failed to see where the contemporary world is going and why.
The dominant worldview in secular and academic circles today is called postmodernism. To the postmodernist, reality is whatever the individual imagines it to be. That means what is “true” is determined subjectively by each person, and there is no such thing as objective, authoritative truth that governs or applies to humanity universally. The postmodernist naturally believes it is pointless to argue whether opinion A is superior to opinion B. After all, if reality is merely a construct of the human mind, one person’s perspective of truth is ultimately just as good as another’s. “Truth” becomes nothing more than a personal opinion, usually best kept to oneself.
That is the one essential, non-negotiable demand postmodernism makes of everyone: We are not supposed to think we know any objective truth. Postmodernists often suggest that every opinion should be shown equal respect. And therefore, on the surface, postmodernism seems driven by a broad-minded concern for harmony and tolerance. It all sounds very charitable and altruistic. But what really underlies the postmodernist belief system is an utter intolerance for every worldview that makes any universal truth-claims-particularly biblical Christianity.
Postmodernism and the Church
The church today is filled with people who are advocating postmodern ideas. Some of them do it self-consciously and deliberately, but most do it unwittingly. (Having imbibed too much of the spirit of the age, they are simply regurgitating worldly opinion.) The evangelical movement as a whole, still recovering from its long battle with modernism, is not prepared for a new and different adversary. Many Christians have therefore not yet recognized the extreme danger posed by postmodernist thought.
Postmodernism’s influence has clearly infected the church already. Evangelicals are toning down their message so that the gospel’s stark truth-claims don’t sound so jarring to the postmodern ear. Many shy away from stating unequivocally that the Bible is truth and all other religious systems and worldviews are false. Some who call themselves Christians have gone even further, purposefully denying the exclusivity of Christ and openly questioning His claim that He is the only way to God.
Jesus The Only Way To Heaven
The biblical message is clear. Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me” (John 14:6). The apostle Peter proclaimed to a hostile audience, “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). The apostle John wrote, “He who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him” (John 3:36).
Again and again, Scripture stresses that Jesus Christ is the only hope of salvation for the world. “For there is on God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 2:5). Only Christ can atone for sin, and therefore only Christ can provide salvation. “And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life” (1 John 5:11-12).
Those truths are antithetical to the central tenet of postmodernism. They make exclusive, universal truth claims, declaring Christ the only true way to heaven and all other belief-systems erroneous. That is what Scripture teaches. It is what the true church has proclaimed throughout her history. It is the message of Christianity. And it simply cannot be adjusted to accommodate postmodern sensitivities.
Instead, many Christians just pass over the exclusive claims of Christ in embarrassed silence. Even worse, some in the church, including a few of evangelicalism’s best-known leaders, have begun to suggest that perhaps people can be saved apart from knowing Christ.
Christians cannot capitulate to postmodernism without sacrificing the very essence of our faith. The Bible’s claim that Christ is the only way of salvation is certainly out of harmony with the postmodern notion of “tolerance.” But it is, after all, just what the Bible plainly teaches. And the Bible, not postmodern opinion, is the supreme authority for the Christian. The Bible alone should determine what we believe and proclaim to the world. We cannot waver on this, no matter how much this postmodern world complains that our beliefs make us “intolerant.”
Tolerant Intolerance
Postmodernism’s veneration of tolerance is its most obvious feature. But the version of “tolerance” peddled by postmodernists is actually a twisted and dangerous corruption of true virtue.
Incidentally, tolerance is never mentioned in the Bible as a virtue, except in the sense of patience, forbearance, and longsuffering (cf. Ephesians 4:2). In fact, the contemporary notion of tolerance is a pathetically feeble concept compared to the love Scripture commands Christians to show even to their enemies. Jesus said, “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, and pray for those who spitefully use you” (Luke 6:27-28; cf. vv. 29-36).
When our grandparents spoke of tolerance as a virtue, they had something like that in mind. The word once meant respecting people and treating them kindly even when we believe they are wrong. But the postmodern notion of tolerance means we must never regard anyone else’s opinions as wrong. Biblical tolerance is for people; postmodern tolerance is for ideas.
Accepting every belief as equally valid is hardly a real virtue, but it is practically the only kind of virtue postmodernism knows anything about. Traditional virtues (including humility, self-control, and chastity) are openly scorned, and even regarded as transgressions in the world of postmodernism.
Predictably, the beatification of postmodern tolerance has had a disastrous effect on real virtue in our society. In this age of tolerance, what was once forbidden is now encouraged. What was once universally deemed immoral is now celebrated. Marital infidelity and divorce have been normalized. Profanity is commonplace. Abortion, homosexuality, and moral perversions of all kinds are championed by large advocacy groups and enthusiastically promoted by the popular media. The postmodern notion of tolerance is systematically turning genuine virtue on its head.
Jesus The Only Way To Heaven
Just about the only remaining taboo is the naïve and politically incorrect notion that another person’s alternative lifestyle, religion, or different perspective is wrong. One major exception to that rule stands out starkly: It is OK for postmodernists to be intolerant of those who claim they know the truth, particularly biblical Christians. In fact, those who fancy themselves the leading advocates of tolerance today are often the most outspoken opponents of evangelical Christianity.
Why is that? Why does authentic biblical Christianity find such ferocious opposition from people who think they are paragons of tolerance? It is because the truth-claims of Scripture-and particularly Jesus’ claim to be the only way to God-are diametrically opposed to the fundamental presuppositions of the postmodern mind. The Christian message represents a death blow to the postmodernist worldview.
But as long as Christians are being duped or intimidated into softening the bold claims of Christ and widening the narrow road, the church will make no headway against postmodernism. We need to recover the distinctiveness of the gospel. We need to regain our confidence in the power of God’s truth. And we need to proclaim boldly that Christ is the onlytrue hope for the people of this world.
That may not be what people want to hear in this pseudo-tolerant age of postmodernism. But it is true nonetheless. And precisely because it is true and the gospel of Christ is the only hope for a lost world, it is all the more urgent that we rise above all the voices of confusion in the world and say so.
@Zoe | November 25, 2011 at 9:43 PM |
“Jesus The Only Way To Heaven”
Hi Flyweight! I saw your cut & paste post. But I am waiting to receive a post from the pretender to the heavyweight throne King Lemuel.
But I guess we will have to wait until after his Pharisaical observance of the Sabbath!
My preceeding three posts, pointed out the Absolute ‘Truth claim’ that Jesus Christ IS* the Only way to Almighty God, His Father, and heaven.
This ‘Truth claim’ by Jesus is either TRUE or FALSE, either/or!
The three fundamental Laws of Logic, are themselves, Absolute Truths, and are universal, regardless of culture, race, creed, or ethnicity.
1) The law of Identity
2) The law of Excluded Middle
3) The law of Non-Contradiction
Assessing competing, and contradictory ‘World views’ bears out the utterly fundamental grounding of Logic, for thinking critically, objectively, coherently, about ‘truth’ and World views. These logical laws point us toward truth.
Reason, the ability to think rationally, critically, is* necessar for ‘Revelation’
(facts, evidence) to be coherent.
Without these Laws of Logic, NO rational thought would be possible. To reject these basic laws of logic, one would have to ‘utilize’ these very laws to reject them, thereby refuting one’s own argument.
Logical Absolutes form the very foundations of how we approach and understand reality. Logical absolutes are unchangeable absolute fundamental laws of logic. There are three logical absolutes which are the law of identity, law of non-contradiction, and law of excluded middle. Any human being that seeks the truth and wishes to be able to support their beliefs would do well to know and study these laws.
Law of Identity
The Law of Identity states something is what it is:
A = A. The law of identity is basic and fundamental for the other basic laws of logic. LI asserts that a particular entity or object IS* that particular object. In other words, it IS identical to itself. For example, ‘The Red pen IS the Red pen’ it is NOT, ‘The blue pen.’
A certain rock is that rock. We identify the rock by our sense data, yet there is a true essence of the rock which exists exclusively apart from our sense data. So the rock is what it is independent of the attributes we ascribe to it. If no humans were around to observe the rock, it would still exist and its nature would still be what it is.
Law of Excluded Middle
The law of excluded middle says that a statement is either true or false. When someone states that a God exists the statement is either true or false but it cannot be both. The law of excluded middle ties in with the law of identity in this logic:
A = A, is either true (A=A) or it is false (A=/=A)
The law of excluded middle is not to be confused with a false dichotomy. A false dichotomy might state something like “either Christianity is true or Islam is true, can’t be both”. However there is the possibility that neither is true. A statement that has an excluded middle is Christianity is either true or false but it cannot be both.
A statement is True, is one that ‘corresponds to reality.’ If statement “X” is true, corresponding to reality, then that implies that not-X is FALSE. In other words, if something is TRUE, this must exclude something, namely FALSITY. We are left with two exhaustive options – TRUTH or FALSITY.
The LEM entails NO third way is possible. For example, Almighty God either exist, or He does not exist. There is no other alternative.
Law of Non-contradiction
The law of non-contradiction states that two opposing statements cannot both be true:
A = A and A=/=A cannot both be true
That is, A cannot be -A in the same respect or same time. In other words, two competing ‘Truth claims’ cannot be both right, in the same respect or the same time. They can both be wrong, BUT, they CANNOT* both be right. World views are all making ‘truth claims’ and the only sound method of evaluating their respective ‘truth claims’ is by utilizing these unalterable, unchanging Laws of Logic.
The Historic Judeo/Christian Worldview.
This World view contains claims about reality, which are either True or False..
Therefore, any World view, must be subjected to, and must sustain, (3) test in order to be considered valid.
1) Logical Consistency
2) Empirical Adequacy
3) Experiential Relevancy
The only religious World view, across comparativer difficulties, premised on warranted, credible facts and evidence, that meet and sustains all three of these criteria, is the Historic Judeo/Christian World view.
Secondly, and intrically connected to the above criteria for validity, every system must also demonstrate and deal with the following questions:
1) Origin
2) Meaning
3) Morality, and
4) Destiny.
Again, the theistic Christian World view, is the ONLY one that convincingly demonstrate and sustian to, the above questions, unparalleled with any other religious world view.
The structure of justification/warrant, in defending any propositional ‘Truth claim’ IS* coherence. Coherence IS* our sole criterion for TRUTH.
Coherence is found throughout God’s Word the Bible, from beginning,
Genesis, to the End, the Book of Revelation.
‘To say of what IS* that it IS*, or of what is NOT* that it is NOT* is TRUE.”
(Aristotle, Metaphysics, 1077 b-26)
The Book of Revelation: Timetable for the End Time
The book of Revelation—a revealing of the future—is history written in advance.
Does the book of Revelation give us additional details about events leading up to Christ’s return?
“The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants—things which must shortly take place. And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John, who bore witness to the word of God, and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, to all things that he saw. 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” (Revelation:1:1-3).
The book of Revelation—a revealing of the future—is history written in advance. It describes in detail the events leading up to Christ’s return, then tells us what will happen beyond that time. Be sure to look up and read these scriptures and surrounding passages in your Bible.
Does the book of Revelation confirm the sequence of events of Jesus Christ’s earlier prophecy?
Carefully read and study Revelation:6:2-8. Here the same conditions Jesus Christ described in the Olivet Prophecy are present in symbols: the four horsemen of the apocalypse.
The white horse represents a powerful, conquering religious deception. (Some assume that the rider of this horse is Jesus Christ, but a comparison with the description of the returning Christ in Revelation:19:11-16, and the sequence of events Christ gave in the Olivet Prophecy and the book of Revelation, shows they are not the same).
The red horse (the color of fire and blood) and its rider clearly represent warfare. The black horse and rider depict famine (note the comment about the outrageously high cost of food). The sickly colored pale horse represents the sickness and disease that inevitably follow warfare and food shortages.
How will the conditions represented by these four horsemen impact humanity?
“. . . And power was given to them over a fourth of the earth, to kill with sword, with hunger, with death, and by the beasts of the earth” (Revelation:6:8).
According to this prophecy, war, violence, starvation and disease may take hundreds of millions of lives. These disasters will also affect animals, which will also take a large toll of human life through predation and spread of disease.
How does Revelation depict the sequence of events that will precede Christ’s return?
“And I saw in the right hand of Him who sat on the throne a scroll written inside and on the back, sealed with seven seals” (Revelation:5:1).
The book of Revelation depicts the events described in the Olivet Prophecy through a series of seven “seals.” In the time of the apostle John, who wrote this book under the inspiration of Jesus Christ (Revelation:1:1-2), official correspondence was customarily fastened with a wax seal. To read what was inside, the seal had to be broken and the scroll unrolled. This is what John saw in vision. (Be sure to study the charts on page 12 to better understand the flow of events described in the book of Revelation.)
What do these seven seals symbolize?
Revelation 6 describes the opening of the first six seals, which depict major events and trends. You should read this entire chapter carefully. The first six seals are:
First seal (verse 2): religious deception (compare Matthew:24:4-5[4]And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.[5]For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.).
Second seal (verses 3-4): war (compare Matthew:24:6-7[6]And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet.[7]For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.).
Third seal (verses 5-6): famine (compare Matthew:24:7For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.).
Fourth seal (verses 7-8): disease (compare Matthew:24:7For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.).
Fifth seal (verses 9-11): tribulation and persecution of true Christians (compare Matthew:24:9-13[9]Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name’s sake.[10]And then shall many be offended, and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.[11]And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.[12]And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.[13]But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.; Luke:21:12-19[12]But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name’s sake.[13]And it shall turn to you for a testimony.[14]Settle it therefore in your hearts, not to meditate before what ye shall answer:[15]For I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist.[16]And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death.[17]And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake.[18]But there shall not an hair of your head perish.[19]In your patience possess ye your souls.).
Sixth seal (verses 12-14): an earthquake and heavenly signs (compare Matthew:24:7For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.; Luke:21:11And great earthquakes shall be in divers places, and famines, and pestilences; and fearful sights and great signs shall there be from heaven.).
What is unique about the seventh seal?
“When He opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour. And I saw the seven angels who stand before God, and to them were given seven trumpets” (Revelation:8:1-2).
The seventh seal is divided into seven “trumpets,” which reveal further events leading up to Jesus Christ’s return. These events, which are not described in the Olivet Prophecy, are sometimes referred to as “the seven trumpet plagues.” The seventh seal is comprised of these seven events. Be sure to read all of Revelation 8 and 9, which describe the events to occur at the first six trumpets.
The first six trumpets plagues are:
First trumpet (Revelation:8:7): devastation of earth’s vegetation.
Second trumpet (verses 8-9): devastation of oceans and seas.
Third trumpet (verses 10-11): devastation of rivers and fresh water.
Fourth trumpet (verse 12): sun, moon and stars partially darkened.
Fifth trumpet (Revelation:9:1-11): a satanically influenced military power.
Sixth trumpet (verses 13-19): an enormous rival military power.
What happens as a result of this sixth trumpet plague?
“By these three plagues a third of mankind was killed . . .” (Revelation:9:18).
Here we read that another third of earth’s inhabitants will die at the hands of this massive 200 million-man army (verse 18). This is in addition to those who have lost their lives earlier. These frightening prophecies help us understand how all life on earth will be threatened with extinction!
How do people react to these events? Do they finally repent of their evil and turn to God?
“But the rest of mankind, who were not killed by these plagues, did not repent of the works of their hands, that they should not worship demons, and idols of gold, silver, brass, stone, and wood, which can neither see nor hear nor walk. And they did not repent of their murders or their sorceries or their sexual immorality or their thefts” (verses 20-21).
Incredible as it may seem, even after man has brought utter disaster on himself and after God begins to punish him for his rebellion and sins, man will still choose to defy his Creator. He will continue in the same direction that will bring mankind to the brink of extinction.
What happens when the seventh trumpet sounds?
“Then the seventh angel sounded: And there were loud voices in heaven, saying, ‘The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever!’” (Revelation:11:15).
“For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first” (1 Thessalonians:4:16For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:).
The blast of the seventh trumpet announces the triumphant return of Jesus Christ to earth. “The kingdoms of this world” come under Christ’s dominion as the Kingdom of God is at last established on earth! At the same time, “the dead in Christ will rise”; God’s faithful servants throughout history will rise from their graves to eternal life with Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians:15:51-53[51]Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,[52]In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.[53]For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.).
To better understand these vital subjects, be sure to request your free copies of the booklets What Is Your Destiny?, What Happens After Death? and The Gospel of the Kingdom. All discuss these subjects in much greater detail.
Will Jesus Christ literally return to earth?
“And in that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which faces Jerusalem on the east. And the Mount of Olives shall be split in two, from east to west, making a very large valley; half of the mountain shall move toward the north and half of it toward the south” (Zechariah:14:4And his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof toward the east and toward the west, and there shall be a very great valley; and half of the mountain shall remove toward the north, and half of it toward the south.).
This obviously describes a physical, literal return to earth. Jesus Christ will return to the Mount of Olives, which overlooks Jerusalem from the city’s east side. Apparently a massive earthquake will then split the mountain in half, opening a new valley running east to west from Jerusalem to the Judean desert.
Why will Jesus Christ return to earth?
“Pilate therefore said to Him, ‘Are You a king then?’ Jesus answered, ‘You say rightly that I am a king. For this cause I was born, and for this cause I have come into the world . . .” (John:18:37Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.).
At Jesus’ trial before His crucifixion, the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate, asked Him if rumors about His being a king were true. Jesus responded that this was true, that He indeed was born to be a king. However, He also told Pilate, “My kingdom is not of this world” (verse 36). Christ’s purpose at that time was not to overthrow the Roman government and restore the kingdom of Israel, which people assumed was the intent of the Messiah. Jesus’ kingdom—the Kingdom of God—would not be established on earth until far into the future.
Was Jesus Christ’s destiny prophesied to Mary before His conception and birth?
“Then the angel said to her, ‘Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end’” (Luke:1:30-33[30]And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.[31]And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.[32]He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:[33]And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.).
The angel told Mary that her son was destined to “reign over the house of Jacob”—the restored 12 tribes of the Israelite nation—in a kingdom that would have no end.
Is Jesus Christ’s kingdom—the Kingdom of God—a literal kingdom?
“I was watching in the night visions, and behold, one like the Son of Man, coming with the clouds of heaven! He came to the Ancient of Days, and they brought Him near before Him. Then to Him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom the one which shall not be destroyed” (Daniel:7:13-14[13]I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.[14]And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.).
In vision the prophet Daniel saw Jesus Christ—”one like the Son of Man”—come to God the Father—”the ancient of Days.” In this vision Christ was “given dominion and glory and a kingdom” in which “all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him.” Notice that He will rule over physical peoples and nations of all languages. This is clearly describing literal rulership over physical, flesh-and-blood human beings.
What will Jesus Christ’s title be at His return?
“And He has on His robe and on His thigh a name written: King of kings and lord of lords” (Revelation:19:16).
Jesus Christ was destined to rule! His kingdom was foretold by the Hebrew prophets, revealed to Mary before His conception and birth and affirmed by Jesus Christ Himself. He will return to rule on earth over all kingdoms, governments, peoples and nations. He will be the supreme authority, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords over all the earth!
@ Zoe | November 26, 2011 at 10:35 AM |
I am NOT sparring with you unless you land a punch with some feel in it!
I am waiting on lemuel your new coach and promoter. It seems that PhD has abandoned your corner.
It is very disheartening to read the comments on this blog, this could have been an avenue of intelligent discourse and advancement to those, who otherwise would not have a voice in the main-stream media.
What I am bombarded with is nothing less than hate speech towards anything that is different. Fundamental Christians are targeted as bigots and simpletons at best and the bottom of the food chain at worse!!
People like Zoe et al can argue theology and church history ad nauseum (their long-windiness gives me a migraine) followers of Jesus Christ and citizens of His Kingdom will talk to you nay-sayers about relationship, on that you cannot argue. When you have an experience with someone and you know what they have done for you, others may talk like a ‘shirt sleeve flapping in the wind’ nothing shakes your confidence.
As far as Jesus Christ being the only way to God, believe or not- that is each individual’s choice!! Should I invite to my home in St. Lucy and inform you that there is only one set of directions to reach my home and you choose to disregard my directions, take your own course and then get lost, it is not my fault!
God’s mercy and love is shown even in nature we cannot avoid His wonder and awesome power, His intelligence in design and creation, but a place has been reserved for us who constantly state that we want nothing to do with God, a place of thick darkness, of abject terror and torment, where even Death itself cannot die, because God is nowhere in that place everything that the opposite of His Nature will rule and reign- darkness, extreme pain, agony, torment, terror, eternal separation from mercy, forgiveness, even the ability to breathe fully, a place of rotted, burning flesh of man and beast, no water to quench the thirst, no neighbourly kindness, fire and heat so intense that one cannot breathe no better than an asthma sufferer, time would have ended so there is only unceasing eternity and a memory that will not stop reminding you that you could have followed His directions, all the songs and the sermons heard and a hardened misguided heart led you all the way, by one’s own choosing away from a Father who died to love you!!!
@ Albranch | November 26, 2011 at 11:29 AM |
“Should I invite to my home in St. Lucy and inform you that there is only one set of directions to reach my home and you choose to disregard my directions, take your own course and then get lost, it is not my fault!”
What you have posited above is not in harmony with the teachings of Jesus as advised in the parable of the lost sheep.
“If a man has a hundred sheep and one of them wanders away, what will he do? Won’t he leave the ninety-nine others on the hills and go out to search for the one that is lost?
And if he finds it, I tell you the truth, he will rejoice over it more than over the ninety-nine that didn’t wander away!
In the same way, it is not my heavenly Father’s will that even one of these little ones should perish.”
Matthew 18: 12-14
Please in your response save us the ad hominems just tell us if the parable is applicable to the situation and your action you described in your thread.
.What I am bombarded with is nothing less than hate speech towards anything that is different. Fundamental Christians are targeted as bigots and simpletons at best and the bottom of the food chain at worse!!….’
Come again sir…..
You slip is showing!!
Albranch sounds like the typical JW.
How can you state…..’As far as Jesus Christ being the only way to God, believe or not- that is each individual’s choice’…
Then come back with the tried and tested scare tactics of …’ but a place has been reserved for us who constantly state that we want nothing to do with God, a place of thick darkness, of abject terror and torment, where even Death itself cannot die,’…..
If we all have free will and some choose not to follow your (and Zoe’s et al) path…who are you to judge?
Are you not then guilty of hypocrisy?
To Miller:
Having read your posts, I must admit that I had a good laugh, especially as I have been promoted as a promoter and then crowned royally with what most would consider to be what paddy shot at. But you should admit that Zoe’s piece on Post modernism is important as it has given rise to what some currently refer to as “open theism”. This something that I an sure that you miller would be very interested in.
To understand the book of Revelation, one must first read and understand the book of Daniel. They complement each other. Why the book was written in the symbolism that it is in testifies to the King of Babylon’s dream about the statue. The bible is about about God’s interaction with man and His role in the affairs of man. The book of Revelation with its symbols gives some insight into the last days and the end of human time. No those who are chosen shall not live in Heaven; this earth shall be renewed and inhabited. The last chapters are specific about this.
About not only the chinese but any group who does not hear the gospel message, I do not know how God intends to deal with those situations, but it is clear that those of us who have been exposed shall have no excuse. By the way the gospel has been preached in india and china for a long time now; the roman catholics have martyrs going back to the 16th century.
To Miller:
Within the plan of salvation, there is only ONE way to be saved. These other religions have no saviour, even the Jews are still waiting for THEIR messiah. The only religion that has a saviour is Christianity.
“Within the plan of salvation, there is only ONE way to be saved. These other religions have no saviour, even the Jews are still waiting for THEIR messiah. The only religion that has a saviour is Christianity.”
What a LOAD of GARBAGE Lemule you speak only for your self and this is why the world is in this state because of the religious dogma that has fcuked up the minds of people like you.
You know what You CHRISTIANS reminds me of a Bunch of Communists.
meaning Your Way or the Highway. i wonder what would Jesus think. No wonder he cautioned that many would be called but few would be chosen.to do his work .
To Island Gal:
I have been trying my best not to lay my written tongue on you. But this time I have to respond. Why are you so upset about people like me believing in a load of garbage? What is clear is that there will a time as it was in Egypt when the real God shall stand up. When he stands up, saying that you did not hear or know would not be enough. In trying to get rid of God, many of you have attempted to replace him with “reason”, the “force”, finding “self”, eastern religions, self awareness gurus, and we could go on and on. None of these can be your saviour, and you need one, Island.
To AC:
There are some things that I shall admit; present day christians are not the best example of what Christ wants. At times we are too judgmental, hypocritical, closed minded, too cold and not kind to our fellow men. But that does not take away from the fact that what is contained in the Bible is not true or shall not stand on the day when the king of kings and the lord of lords stand up. Guessing form the standards set by the creator, many of us shall stand condemned as shall many of you.
Lemuel But you know who wrote the BIBLE. a bunch of judgemental ! Hypocrtical! Closeminded cold and not too kind to fellow man but yet you say what is written is TRUE! or is their an exception for the writersof the GOOD BOOK!
Le Mule…..I do not need a saviour and my spiritual awakening has nothing to do with being saved. You are one mixed up individual that you will never see the forest.
To AC:
Stop putting words in my mouth; I never said anything about who wrote the Bible. I made a reference to present day christians ans their less than charitable behaviour towards their fellow man. All of us are sinners and I am sure those inspired writers would have had their failings, but that does not nullify what is being transmitted; hope for mankind. And if ever we need it we need it now.
To Island:
Your spiritual awakening has to make sense of this life. Why are you here, for what purpose to eat, sleep and then die or is there much more to it. Is there a need for mankind to be restored to their communication with God?
Le MULE…..you haven’t made sense of your life on this planet . I don’t give a rat’s ass about why what and where. I live in the now and how I can make my life better with my fellow man. My interpretation of GOD is different from yours. The bible should be thrown in the garbage bin to allow man to develop to his highest potential.
lemuel | November 27, 2011 at 1:14 AM |
“To Miller:”.
By Jove, the Sabbath is passed and no ass has fallen into the well! Thank you for responding to my post.
So you are saying that these other religions and their practitioners are not worthy in the sight of your god and saviour! In other words, if they do not accept your lord and saviour Jesus Christ they don’t stand a chance of going to heaven and meeting your sweet Jesus as god, right? They stand less of a chance to see the face of god than a “snowcone” will last in hell!
So what is your view of Christian Barbados buying Chinese made goods and Japanese vehicles- (I use the words Chinese and Japanese with your forgiveness in mind). Don’t you see these as goods tainted with the devil’s handiwork? Why support and enrich people who do not have anything to do with your lord and saviour, ask them to invest in your country, and then turn around and borrow money you know you can’t payback? Have you ever been to (patronised) a Chinese restaurant? You ought to be very careful or you might just see a devil in the wonton soup! But I believe you are very good are compartmentalising your life. Church on Saturday to pay homage to the god Saturnalis decry people of other faiths from Sunday to Friday but buy the material goods made by the same slaves to Satan.
But before you come with your “holier-than-thou” harangue please respond to the second query that was posed to you regarding the Book of revelation. For ease of reference the second query is reproduced as follows:
“Secondly, do you accept the Book of Revelation as a clear indication of the very imminent return of Jesus Christ to Earth when those who believe in him will be taken to Heaven?
Again a simple answer will suffice.”
To Miller:
Never assume that I have not journeyed to China. You know as well as i do that to answer the question one would first have to know where to begin for one’s audience. You are making the isolation argument. And you know that that does not make any sense. Remember China did that with her great wall and spent centuries trying to catch up with the explosion of modern science and technology. Many of the trinkets you accuse me of hypocritically purchasing were products of her re-engineering exercise which saw her stealing western technology and at times making it better. The knowledge which is available to man is God given; hence, all of us should benefit from the engendering of life that it brings. By the way I do my own chinese fried rice; i have a difficulty with how it is prepared by them.
I have said clearly in the last piece; this earth shall be renewed and those who have chosen God shall live here. Check the last chapters of Revelation. Yes, I believe in a literal return of our Lord and saviour Jesus christ. I do not interpret Revelation as visitations from beings from outer space. Miller, you are also aware that the globalization phenomena are responsible for all of us buying goods made in chine and the east. That is a guilt trip that can not work.
Lemuel why are you saying that i put words in your mouth just the way you interpret the GOOD BOOK is the way you have mis screwed what i said all i did was to infer that all of mankind has the same shortcomings including those who wrote the GODLY BOOK which means it is not infallible since man is not infallible.Having said that the GODLY BOOK is subjected to criticism and correction
To AC:
The good book, the Bible, is a transmittal of God’s thoughts through the pen of men. Your ridiculous assumption would have these purveyors of those thoughts fornicating, stealing and at the same time writing a good holy book. Come on AC you are better than that; I have seen it in other posts. Do not let the carnality that you feel towards believers and their foibles get the best of you and sully your thinking.
lemuel you seem to be skirting the issue as readily accepted by all Christians that the GOOD BOOK says that man is not perfect taking that into consideration it would leave no doubt in ones mind that the writings in the GODLY BOOK would indeed be not as precise as one wishes to believe.Even Moses and David and others GODLY men whom God had chosen fell prey to their imperfection because they are human
BTW are you Scout! tell the TRUTH Godly Christian!
To AC:
You seem to want to make the argument that sinner do sinful things; the bible was written by sinners; therefore the bible is a sinful book. Look at your syllogism and recognize it for what it is; that is invalidity of it. This world and things you hold on to were conceptualized by sinners; does that make everything you do in life bad; does that make you a congenital thief or worse? No. The Bible itself does not run away from the sins of man; the mere fact that you can point to the sins of some of the great men in the Bible testifies to that, but does that destroy its message or standard for the way men should conduct themselves in this life. No. So do not in glee stand on your soap box. The bible is and shall remain the good book for life.
Far from it i would not call the GOODLY BOOK a sinful book although iti does indeed records the sinful nature of some of GOD’s chosen people . However i would rather say ” IMPERFECT” since many of the writings can not be proven.
BTW i see you chose to ignore the latter part of my previous post . SO i would interpret it that to be YES subject to correction only by YOU
Are you finding it difficult to understand how some human beings can treat other human beings as they do? Consider the possibility that aliens are here and interbreeding with human beings. Are you still finding it difficult?
@ Lemuel…..
Do you see now why I care nothing about ReLIEgon and Christianity?
After reading your posts and some (the short) ones from Zoe, it only serves to reaffirm my belief……It is a sad joke!!
You claim that Christianity was spread long ago in China by Roman Catholics…Zoe would argue to the death that it was not Christianity.
On BU we have JWs, Mormons, SDAs, Zoes (yes, he deserves his own brand) et al.
The one thing I find you all DO NOT have is tolerance!
Have it ever occurred to you, that you also scoff and mock others?… or is it the fact you all think your specific group has the monopoly on the truth?….that is just pure arrogance!
What makes it even more laughable is the way you all would gang up and ridicule, mock, scorn and condemn the non believers, using the Bible as your sword BUT can not even agree on the said Bible in its entirety. The non believers are more united than you guys…lol.
Just listen to what the great Zoe really thinks of JWs, SDAs, Mormons, Catholics and Anglicans for starters.
I suspect the others feel the same towards Zoe and others to….where then is the Christian’s credibility?……and please don’t quote the Bible…..you all have made a joke of the book.
@ lemuel | November 27, 2011 at 10:28 AM |
“Many of the trinkets you accuse me of hypocritically purchasing were products of her re-engineering exercise which saw her stealing western technology and at times making it better. ”
So you denounce a people, in general, for not accepting the teachings laid down in your good book called the bible but yet buy gods made by “stolen technology” and in some cases ‘close to slavery’ labour.
I thought one of the basic injunctions found in your book is: “Thou shall not steal!”
Can I accuse you then of aiding and abetting in this theft and exploitation of human beings and also of buying and receiving stolen goods?
Please bring a cogent argument why this charge should not apply!
I will address your acceptance of the coming return of your Jesus as outlined in the Book of the Apocalypse in a separate thread.
@lemuel | November 27, 2011 at 10:28 AM |
“To Miller:
I have said clearly in the last piece; this earth shall be renewed and those who have chosen God shall live here. Check the last chapters of Revelation. Yes, I believe in a literal return of our Lord and saviour Jesus christ. I do not interpret Revelation as visitations from beings from outer space.”
Now that you have more “precisely” addressed my query about the return of your lord and saviour Jesus Christ should I assume his return is imminent given that the current events taking place across the globe are equivalent to the warning signs mentioned in the New Testament – Matthew chapter 24?
So if the future of mankind is solely determined by the imminent return of Jesus why then do you rely on secular human activities and institutions to shape and determine man’s view of the future and his development? Truly your abiding faith in Jesus’s imminent return to Earth ought to be the main focus and concern of humans if they are to go to heaven or inhabit a ‘refreshed’ earth. So explain to us why you put so much “faith in the UWI’s future capacity to save Barbadians from socio-economic decay and destruction?
Reproduced below is one of your contributions to the debate of financing the UWI.
lemuel | November 25, 2011 at 8:04 AM |
“Yes, we shall face or are facing tough economic times, but should we so dismantle a fundamental institution that when times improve it shall prove impossible to put together again.”
Now surely this is not a show of faith in your Jesus’ return to sort out all of mankind’s problems on earth including Barbados! Your argument should be one chiselled along the path of Christian enlightenment by mandating that the institution be turned into a Judeo-Christian propaganda organ trumpeting the warning to the people that they must seek salvation and accept your lord before it is too late instead of teaching lies about rational though and reason. To quote you: “John Stuart Mills, Nietzche, St. Augustine, relativism and cultural relativism constructs” (and all that baloney- my emphasis added)!
That multi-faith chapel that cost so much to build will be converted to a Christian fundamentalist performance centre to make American televangelist burn with envy.
But be prepared to see a fall off in numbers. Muslims are doing very well educationally in Barbados and might not want to attend a learning institution where the names of Allah and Mohammed are banned.
But as noted before you are extremely clever at pigeon-holing your schizophrenic intellectual eggs; ably at ease in separating your religious dogma addled ones from the more progressive, enlightened and materially practical fertile lot.
A piece of homework for you and your new sidekick Zoe: Do a bit of research (Zoe can even cut & paste) on the coming galactic alignment or cross. This is an astronomical event whose last occurrence was approx 13000 years and is believed to have given rise to the legend of the great flood as mentioned in your story book where Noah is the main character in the fable.
A bit of knowledge on this event might enlighten you and to more deeply appreciate the real meaning of the astral theological term you used, i.e. “ those who are chosen shall not live in Heaven; this earth shall be renewed and inhabited. The last chapters are specific about this.”
Comparing science and the Bible
Missing in this discussion is information that has been disallowed by the scientific method, which discards any information that cannot be verified or disproved by observation or experimentation.
That missing information is found in the Bible. The scientific approach generally leads to rejection of biblical facts and statements about other intelligent life, because science cannot prove those statements. This isn’t necessarily the fault of science; it simply is the way the scientific discipline was established and functions. Of course, we can rely on something science has proven. But, like most things, even science has its limitations.
When the Bible reveals something of a spiritual nature, such information is often beyond the level of science. Science is often incapable of proving or disproving what is stated. The Bible describes this kind of information as revealed knowledge, or knowledge we cannot discover through human effort alone.
An interesting example of this is found in Matthew 16. Here, Jesus asked His disciples what people were saying about Him. The answers varied. Then He asked: “‘But who do you say that I am?’ Simon Peter answered and said, ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ Jesus answered and said to him, ‘Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven’” (Matthew:16:15-17[15]He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?[16]And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.[17]And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.).
Understanding Jesus Christ’s identity as the Son of God is not scientific; it is not in the flesh-and-blood realm, proven through a microscope or telescope. This kind of knowledge is beyond science. In His conversation with Peter, Jesus affirmed that only God reveals this kind of knowledge. This revealed knowledge is the missing component in man’s desire to understand his place in the universe. Without it, man will forever be left with a string of unanswered questions and endless possibilities.
Of course, not all who claim revealed knowledge actually have it. Occasionally we learn of cultlike small groups that claim to have secret knowledge of the unknown. When tragedy results, like the recent mass suicide of the Heaven’s Gate group near San Diego, many are inclined to dismiss all revealed knowledge.
The difference between these groups and the Bible is the SOURCE of their information. Even large, long-established religious assemblies have shown their inadequacies in interpreting and explaining the Bible and attempting to represent God’s revealed will. All groups have fallible human leaders, while the Bible contains the very words of God Himself. As 2 Timothy:3:16 “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: tells us, “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God.” Its authority is unassailable, whereas speculation of individuals remains just that-speculation.
The Bible has answers
So what can we learn from Scripture about extraterrestrial life and man’s place in the universe? The Bible reveals that there is extraterrestrial intelligent life, but NOT as many suppose. The Bible does not speak of aliens who live on other planets, but it does speak of a Spirit Being who “inhabits eternity” (Isaiah:57:15 “For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones.).
The Bible is silent about extraterrestrial life-forms as popularized in science fiction and the entertainment media, yet it is by no means silent about real extraterrestrial life in all its great abundance. The beings spoken of in the Bible are real. They have appeared and spoken directly to humans (Genesis:3:9-10[9] “And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou?[10]And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.; 4:9; 16:9). The Bible records the existence of many millions of angelic beings (Revelation:5:11) who are “ministering spirits” to mankind in fulfillment of God’s purpose (Hebrews:1:13-14[13]But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?[14]Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?).
The first verse of the Bible introduces us to the ultimate Spirit Being: God. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis:1:1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.). It presents two pieces of revealed knowledge beyond the realm of science. The first is the existence of God. The second is found in the word created, a translation of the Hebrew word bara.
“This verb is of profound theological significance, since it has only God as its subject. Only God can ‘create’ in the sense implied by bara. The verb expresses creation out of nothing, an idea seen clearly in passages having to do with creation on a cosmic scale…” (Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, 1985, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, “Create”).
The concept of bringing the universe into existence from nothing is completely outside the parameters of scientific observation and experimentation. Science tells us a great deal about matter that already exists. It tells us that matter can change shapes and form. But science cannot account for the appearance of something that previously did not exist. It can only theorize about possible explanations for how everything we see around us came to exist from nothing.
We see this even in the various theories for the evolution of life into the myriad forms we see today-all start by assuming that matter already existed.
The Bible vs. evolution
In the face of this fundamental deficiency, some have tried to blend revealed knowledge with scientific theory in what is known as theistic evolution, or a belief that God made matter and then allowed evolution to shape life. In a monumental announcement the Roman Catholic Church recently agreed that life as we know it may have come about in this way.
Theistic evolution, however, is not the simple bridge between the spiritual and the physical worlds many would like. There are simply too many conflicts. The Bible, for example, reveals that God formed Adam from the dust of the ground (Genesis:2:7And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.), not by evolutionary happenstance.
Scientific limitations aside, the apostle Paul said, “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse” (Romans:1:20For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:, New International Version).
Science acknowledges that we live on planet Earth, but in rejecting revealed knowledge it can provide no absolutes about how our world came to be. In contrast, Paul said this beautiful planet, with its many sophisticated, interwoven relationships among its intricate array of life-forms, is testimony to God’s existence.
The Bible further says, “The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God’” (Psalm:14:1The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.; 53:1). Why would anyone reject revealed knowledge simply because it did not meet humanly imposed limitations? Paul, speaking of man’s moral decline, explains: “For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools” (Romans:1:21-22[21]Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.[22]Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,, NIV).
Mankind desperately needs the revealed knowledge that only the Bible can provide. Through the pages of this divinely inspired book, we learn not only about extraterrestrial intelligent life (God and the angelic realm), but how this planet and we humans came to be-and what God has in store as our ultimate destiny.
A scientist’s last words
The late Carl Sagan was respected worldwide as one of this century’s greatest scientists. His many credentials included his tenure as the David Duncan professor of astronomy and space sciences and director of the Laboratory for Planetary Studies at Cornell University. He also wrote 30 books and served as an adviser to NASA on the Mariner, Voyager and Viking unmanned space missions.
Before dying from a rare disease in December 1996, he penned these words: “Six times now have I looked Death in the face. And six times Death has averted his gaze and let me pass. Eventually, of course, Death will claim me-as he does each of us. It’s only a question of when. And how.
“I’ve learned much from our confrontations-especially about the beauty and sweet poignancy of life, about the preciousness of friends and family, and about the transforming power of love…
“I would love to believe that when I die I will live again, that some thinking, feeling, remembering part of me will continue. But as much as I want to believe that, and despite the ancient and worldwide cultural traditions that assert an afterlife, I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking” (Billions & Billions, Random House, New York, 1997, p. 214).
Although he excelled in scientific endeavors as few others have ever done, Sagan’s otherwise expansive outlook was in many ways shackled by the scientific method to which he had devoted his life. This remarkable man had not come to trust in the revealed knowledge of the Bible-promises that human beings can eventually “be like” their Creator (1 John:3:1-2[1]Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.[2]Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.) and take on His “divine nature” (2 Peter:1:2-4[2]Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord,[3]According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:[4]Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.).
From the outset the Bible describes man as created “in the image of God” (Genesis:1:27So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.). The profound ramifications of this concept are discussed and described throughout the rest of the Bible.
Whether human beings understand these things or not, the Bible promises that “the glory of the LORD will be revealed, and all mankind together will see it. For the mouth of the LORD has spoken” (Isaiah:40:5And the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it., NIV). In due time this will come to pass. The Good News is dedicated to sharing this revealed knowledge found within the Bible.
The Bible is silent about extraterrestrial life, as it is popularly conceived, in other parts of the universe. At the same time, most of the world is markedly ignorant of the extraterrestrial life to which the pages of the Bible so abundantly testify. Mankind is also largely ignorant of the incredible future potential God has in store for human beings “out there.”
There is indeed life out there-and your destiny is to become part of it if you so choose!
Zoe | November 23, 2011 at 8:26 PM | Nnaki/Raelian, I challenge you, to cogently, coherently, objectively, scientifically, and, if possible, logically and honestly, to refute, what I posted earlier re the historic veracity of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ; and likewise, the following; Remember, Nnaki/Raelian, NO imagenary folly and unsupported, Star Trek nonsense. Take your time, don’t choke now; this ain’t no JACKASS, in your Pythonated gut!
Adam, Eve and Noah vs Modern Genetics
by Dr Robert W. Carter, and my other posts, from bright intelligent men/women, REFUTE them, with sound counter evidence, NOT IGNORANCE, folly and Bildge Pumping HOGWASH!
Come now Nnaki/Raelian, stop crawling around like an ANT caught in the Epidermis of an Elephants FOOT, and respond and refute my re-posted challenge to you as per above!!
Signs In The Heavens
Christians are naturally interested in heaven. Many rightfully look forward to going there eventually, according to God’s plan and schedule. But what exactly, or where exactly, is heaven?
The term we know as heaven is the English translation of the original two words in the Bible. The Hebrew word in the Old Testament is pronounced roughly shaw-may, and the Greek word in the New Testament is pronounced roughly, oo-ran-aws. Both mean the same thing – either the sky, or the outer space above it, depending on the context of what the writer was talking about. Sky or space are quite accurate modern substitutes for heaven.
If you happen to be someone interested in astronomy, the years ahead are going to provide you with many interesting observing sessions. No one, in fact, will miss it. There is a lot about to happen up there.
Some coming attractions:
•”…the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars [meteorites] will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken. At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky…” (Matthew 24:29-30)
•”After He said this, He was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid Him from their sight”…”why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, Who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen Him go into heaven” (Acts 1:9,11). See The Return Of Jesus Christ
•”something like a huge mountain, all ablaze, was thrown into the sea” (Revelation 8:8). See A Huge Mountain, All Ablaze and The Apostle John.
•”a great star, blazing like a torch, fell from the sky” (Revelation 8:10)
•”a third of the sun was struck, a third of the moon, and a third of the stars, so that a third of them turned dark. A third of the day was without light, and also a third of the night” (Revelation 8:12). See The Seven Seals
•”And he performed great and powerful signs, even causing fire to come down from heaven to earth in full view of men” (Revelation 13:13). See The Great False Prophet
•”I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know – God knows. And I know that this man – whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, but God knows – was caught up to Paradise. He heard inexpressible things, things that a man is not permitted to tell” (2 Corinthians 12:2-4). See On The Road To Damascus
•”But in keeping with His promise, we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness” (2 Peter 3:13).
Because Satan knows the incredible significance of the planetary and other heavenly aspects and SIGNS of the Return of Jesus Christ, he, the father of ALL LIES and DECEPTION, continues to CONFUSE the likes of Nnaki/Raelian, et al of his ilk, with his FALSE Demonic interpretations, of such Astronomical activities, keeping them in his Satanic DARKNESS!
NO LIE is of the Truth!
@ Zoe | November 27, 2011 at 10:59 PM |
Comparing science and the Bible
“Then He asked: “‘But who do you say that I am?’ Simon Peter answered and said, ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’ Jesus answered and said to him, ‘Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven’” (Matthew:16:15-17[15]He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?[16]And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.[17]And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.)”
This is clear biblical evidence that JESUS IS NOT GOD. Irrefutable evidence straight from the “Master’s” mouth confirming scientifically that Jesus is not your God but a creation of your God. Can a single god be in heaven looking after the billions of stars and other planets while he becomes a shape shifter or a “Q” on Earth being a fisher of Piscean humans? The coming age of Aquarius would remove the dominance of the fish motif with coming end of papal control.
Prove what is written that is supposed to be coming from the mouth of the Son of Man on Earth with reference to His Father (SUN) in the Sky to be -“bilge pumping, stupid, void and non-substantive nonsense that any idiot can write in short, futile sentences”- to quote you.
Let us hear your spin on this Yorker!
The Deity of Christ: That He IS* Co-Eternal, Co-Equal, Co-Omnipotent, Co-Omniscient, Co-Omnipresent, Co-Immutible with Almighty God, distinguishable, yet, indivisible in nature, and attributes; He is God of very God, as revealed in His Word, the Scriptures, the Bible.
During the filming of the Exorcist the famous Swedish actor Max Von Sydow was having trouble with his lines. The director William Friedkin recalls: “I threw the script on the bed, grabbed him, and said ‘What is wrong?’ He said ‘I don’t believe in God, and I don’t believe in this.’ I said ‘But Max, you played Christ in The Greatest Story Ever Told.’ He said, ‘Yes. But I played him as a man’.” (Celebrities in Hell, p. 269). It’s the question of the ages. Is Christ merely a man or is He God manifest in the flesh? Since the word ‘deity’ derives from the Latin ‘deus’ (a god), to assert the deity of Christ is to claim that the man who walked the dusty roads of ancient Galilee was none other than God incarnate.
There are eight lines of evidence worthy of consideration in making the case for the deity of Christ:
1. Christ possesses the attributes of deity.
2. Christ possesses divine offices
3. Christ possesses divine relationships
4. Christ acts with all the prerogatives of deity
5. Christ possesses the names and titles of God
6. Christ claimed to be God
7. Christ accepted divine worship
8. Direct proof texts
1. Christ possesses the attributes of deity.
There are certain characteristics that are true of God alone. Whoever has these characteristics or attributes must of necessity be God. The following divine characteristics are attributed to Christ in the Bible:
a. He is Eternal (Isa 9:6, Micah 5:2, John 1:1, John 8:58)
b. He is Immutable or unchanging (Mal 3:6, Heb 13:8, Heb 1:10-12)
c. He is Omnipotent or all-powerful (Rev 1:8, Phil 3:21, 1 Cor 15:25, Matt 28:18)
d. He is Omniscient or all-knowing (Matt 12:25, chs. 24-25, Luke 6:8, 9:17, John 1:47-51, 2:24-5, 4:17-18, 6:61, 64, 13:1, 11, 16:30, 18:4, 21:17, Col 2:3)
e. He is Omnipresent (Matt 18:20, Matt 28:20, John 1:48, Mark 6:48)
f. He is Impeccable or not liable to sin (1 John 1:5, 2 Cor 5:21, 1 Pet 2:22, 1 John 3:5)
2. Christ possesses divine offices.
There are certain offices that are unique to God. In sharing these offices Christ is given equality with God by the scriptures of truth:
a. He is the Creator of the universe (Gen 1:1, John 1:3, Col 1:16, Heb 1:10)
b. He is the Sustainer of the universe (Heb 1:3, Col 1:17).
3. Christ possesses divine relationships.
The relationships that Christ has, as revealed in scripture, put His deity beyond doubt:
a. He is one in nature and essence with the Father (John 10:30)
b. He is the Son of God in a unique way (John 5:18, 20:17)
John Ch. 5 is a masterful setting forth of the deity of the Messiah. The following lines of truth are easily discernable in the passage and set forth the unity and equality of the Father and the Son:
Their unity and equality in person based on relationship (5:16-18)
Their unity and equality in action based on revelation (5:19-20)
Their unity and equality in life-giving power (5:21)
Their unity and equality in honour based on judgment (5:22-25)
Their unity and equality in possession of life (5:26-29)
John repeatedly outlines the equality of the Father and Son in stark terms:
To honour the Son = to honour the Father (John 5:23)
To know the Son = to know the Father (John 8:19)
To believe the Son = to believe the Father (John 12:44)
To see the Son = to see the Father (John 12:45, 14:9)
To receive the Son = to receive the Father (John 13:20)
To hate the Son = to hate the Father (John 15:23)
To deny the Son = to deny the Father (1 John 2:23)
4. Christ acts with all the prerogatives of deity
A prerogative of God is a right or privilege exclusive to Himself. The following divine prerogatives are attributed to Christ in scripture, thus providing further proof of His deity:
a. He forgives sin (Psa 85:2, Matt 9:2-8, Luke 7:47). Christ’s action in forgiving sinners was not on the same level as when a person who has been wronged says “I forgive you” to his adversary. Since all sin is against God, for Christ to step into the scene and claim to forgive the wrongs someone has committed against God is to claim equality with God.
b. He raises Himself from the dead (John 2:19, 10:18).
c. He has been appointed the judge of all (John 5:22, Acts 17:31)
d. He speaks with divine authority (Matt 7:28-29). Christ did not quote other Rabbis as His authority nor does the Bible ever state, “The word of the Lord came to Jesus.” Rather what one sees is the Old Testament “Thus saith the Lord ” replaced with the New Testament words of Jesus “But I say unto you.” (Matt 5:22, 5:28, 5:32, 5:34, 5:44, 11:22, 11:24, 12:6, 12:36, 17:12, 26:29)
5. Christ possesses the names and titles of God
The remarkable number of parallel names between the Father and the Son is a fascinating study in itself. Here is a partial list:
God/Jehovah Title Christ
Exod 3:14 The ‘I am’ John 8:58
Psa 10:16 King Matt 21:5, Rev 17:14, Psa 2:6
Isa 44:6 First & Last Rev 1:17
Deut 10:17 Lord of Lords Rev 17:14
Isa 63:16 Redeemer Rev 5:9
Psa 78:35 Rock 1 Cor 10:4
Psa 106:21 Saviour Luke 2:11
Psa 23:1 Shepherd John 10:14
Deut 6:4 God Heb 1:8
Psa 27:1 Light John 1:4, 8:12
Seeking to circumvent this very powerful Biblical testimony to the deity of Christ some have argued that the name issue is no different than two people happening to have the same name, like two John Smiths. This argument is undone by that fact that in both Old and New Testaments the Bible is adamant that there is only one God (Deut 6:4, 1 Tim 2:5), yet this same Bible calls Jehovah God and Jesus God.
6. Christ claims to be God
In the Gospel of John seven people attest to the deity of Christ.
1. John Baptist (1:34)
2. Nathanael (1:49)
3. Peter (6:69)
4. Martha (11:27)
5. Thomas (20:28)
6. Apostle John (20:31)
7. The Lord (5:17, 5:23, 8:58, 10:30, 10:36, 14:9)
The seventh in the list here is the Lord Jesus Himself, which contradicts the claim of those who say that Jesus never said He was God. C.S. Lewis comments: “One attempt consists in saying that the man [Jesus] did not really say these things, but that His followers exaggerated the story, and so the legend grew up that He had said them. This is difficult because His followers were all Jews. That is, they belonged to that nation which was of all others most convinced that there was only one God – that there could not possibly be another. It is very odd that this horrible invention about a religious leader should grow up among the one people in the whole world least likely to make such a mistake. On the contrary, we get the impression that none of His immediate followers…embraced the doctrine at all easily.”
7. Christ accepted divine worship
Who receives and is worthy of worship is a ‘big issue’ in the Bible. The following people refused to be worshipped:
1. Paul (Acts 14:8-15)
2. Peter (Acts 10:25-26)
3. An angel (Rev 22:8-9)
Jesus Himself clearly stated that only God must be worshipped (Matt 4:10, Luke 4:8) yet repeatedly allowed men to worship him (Matt 14:33, 28:9, John 20:28-29). This is powerful evidence that Jesus claimed to be God. In another of those amazing parallels, Jehovah in the Old Testament says that every knee shall bow to Him (Isa 45:23). The New Testament then states that every knee shall bow at the name of Jesus (Phil 2:10). In Heb 1:6 the Father says of Christ “Let all the angels of God worship Him.”
8. Direct proof texts
The Bible categorically spells out the fact that Jesus is God again and
again in the most uncertain terms in the following eleven proof texts:
1. John 1:1
“The Word was God.”
The New World Translation of the Jehovah’s Witnesses has attempted to
obscure this plain statement by translating it “The Word was a god”. They claim the authority to do this on the basis of the fact that the definite article ‘the’ does not appear before the word for ‘God’ in the text. Professor Donald MacLeod comments:
“By omitting the definite article before God (theos) John is not (as Jehovah’s Witnesses and others claim) reducing his statement to the impossible level of ‘the word was a god’. He is avoiding a form of language which would have meant either ‘the word was the Father’ or ‘the Word was the godhead’. Both of these propositions would have been erroneous. John’s problem was that he had to assert the deity of the Son without prejudice to the deity of the Father and he does this, negatively by omitting the article and, positively, by going on to state, ‘The Word was with God’. The Word was not the Father. Not was the Word the only person of the godhead. The Word was God with God ” (Donald MacLeod, From Glory to Golgotha p. 140-141).
The New World Translation gives the game away further down John chapter 1 in verse 18. Here again the definite article is missing in the Greek original but nevertheless the NWT still says “No one has seen God at any time.” Clearly their tampering with verse 1 was not due to any consideration of Greek scholarship but rather to the bias of a deity denying cult.
2. Isaiah 7:14, Matt 1:23
“Emmanuel…God with us.”
At His birth the lovely name Emmanuel was pronounced over Christ. It means ‘God with us’. Literally in Greek Matt 1:23 says “The God with us.” The definite article is present in reference to Christ as God, which is the
final nail in the coffin of the Watchtower’s faulty argument concerning the missing definite article in John 1:1. The same is true of the famous statement of Thomas in John 20:28, which translated literally reads, “The Lord of me and the God of me”, the definite article being present twice in his confession.
3. Isaiah 9:6
“For unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.” Note the unambiguous reference to Christ as ‘the mighty God’.4. John 5:18
“Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had
broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.”
See the comments above under ‘His Sonship’.
5. John 8:58
“Before Abraham was: I am.”
This is more than a claim to pre-existence, where the imperfect tense would have sufficed. This is a claim to eternal existence and self-existence. The use by the Lord Jesus of the divine title the ‘I am’ (Exod 3:14) is a high
claim to deity.
6. John 10:30
“I and My Father are one.”
The word ‘one’ here is in the neuter gender. It refers to a unity of essence
between the Father and the Son that is spiritual, intimate and unbreakable. Attempts to interpret it to mean ‘one in purpose’ are misguided, as an examination of the violent reaction of the Jews in passage shows. John 17:11 and 21 states that there’s a similarity between Christians’ union with each other in the body of Christ and the unity of the godhead, but not a total sameness. The sameness of nature and essence of the Father and the Son is expressed in the use of the following words in the Bible:
Reference Greek Translation Meaning
a. John 1 logos The Word of God Christ the personal manifestation of deity
b. Colossians 1 eikon The Image of God Christ in essence the perfect expression/representation of God
c. Colossians 2 theotes Godhead Christ possesses the essence and nature of God
d. Philippians 1 morphe The form of God Christ bears the character of God exactly
e. Hebrews 1 charakter The express image Christ the impress of God’s substance and essence bearing exact similarity in every way.
7. John 14:9
“He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?”
In that Christ is the Word of God, the image of God, exists in the form of God and is the express image of His person, He can rightfully say “To see Me is to see the Father.”
8. Colossians 2:9
“For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.”
Late in the first century AD false teachers called Docetists taught that while Jesus appeared human, He was really only divine (Docetism is from the Greek verb dokeo, to seem). They taught that the ‘divine Christ’ descended on Jesus at His baptism and left before the cross. This later developed into full-blown Gnosticism which flourished in Egypt in the second and third centuries. This is the background of the so-called ‘Gospels’ of Thomas, Mary, Philip and Judas, documents written by those who denied that Jesus was God manifest in the flesh. These Gnostics spoke much about ‘fullness’ and held a belief in a plethora of emanations or divine beings on an ascending scale. Where did Christ fit into this scheme? He was displaced from His true status as the Word who became flesh. Paul points out that all the fullness that the Gnostics believed existed across all the many divine emanations actually dwelt bodily in Christ! Furthermore the New Testament teaches that “all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” dwell in Christ (Col 2:3). He is also spoken of as being “full of grace and truth” (John 1:14).
So, the totality of the power and attributes of deity – the fullness – dwells in Christ bodily. Two words are of particular interest in Colossians 2:9. Firstly, the word ‘dwelleth’ (Gk. Katoikeo) means to reside permanently. This undoes the error of the Docetists. Secondly, the word Godhead (Gk. Theotes) refers to the essence and nature of God. It is not to be confused with the similar word translated Godhead (in the KJV) in Romans 1:20 (Gk. Theiotes). This refers to the divine perfections and attributes of Divinity.
9. 1 Timothy 3:16
“And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was
manifest in the flesh.”
The confession of the city of Ephesus where Timothy lived was, “Great is Diana of the Ephesians” (Acts 19:28). Paul here states that the Church’s confession is that “Wonderful is revelation of the godly Christian life…God was manifest in the flesh.” Though there is some controversy as to the retention or omission of the word ‘God’ in this passage, the weight of evidence is clearly on the side of the manuscripts that read ‘theos’.
10. Hebrews 1:8
“But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.”
This mighty testimony to the deity of Christ reveals the Father calling the Son ‘God’.11. 2 Peter 1:1 (NKJV)
“The righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ.”
The Greek grammar used in this verse demands that one person be meant, not two. It clearly states that Jesus is God.
Problem verses
In light of the eleven clear verses above, one might legitimately wonder how the Unitarians and the cults manage to deny the Deity of Christ. They lean on a group of texts which they either take out of context, or misinterpret, or both. Here are the eight most frequently used texts, together with a Biblical rebuttal to their misuse.
1. Mark 13:32
“But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.”
Here it is argued that Christ was not omniscient and therefore must have surrendered his Deity, at least to some degree, when coming to earth. The following verses refute that idea: Matt 12:25, chs. 24-25, Luke 6:8, 9:17, John 1:47-51, 2:24-5, 4:17-18, 6:61, 64, 13:1, 11, 16:30, 18:4, 21:17, Col 2:3. So what does this verse mean? The Lord spoke of certain things that He had left in His Father’s hands such as who would sit on His left and right hand in the kingdom (Matt 20:23), and the subjugation of all His enemies (Mark 12:36). So, in coming to earth the Bible reveals that Christ temporarily and voluntarily left certain things in His Father’s hands.
Now, with reference to Christ’s knowledge, it is important to remember that omniscience means not simply knowing everything, but the ability to know everything. We know that Deity can choose not to remember (Heb 10:17). Jesus is not saying in Mark 13:32 that he cannot know the day and the hour of His return but that He chose not to know it while He was on earth. He had ability to know, but He temporarily and voluntarily chose to leave that date in the Father’s hands.
2. Mark 10:18
“Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.”
The claim here is that Jesus is saying, “I am not God so you should not be calling me good.” Again, this is to take an isolated text and attempt to overthrow the testimony of the rest of scripture. One of the basic rules of hermeneutics is that difficult verses must always be explained by simple ones, never the other way round. The explanation is quite simple. The Lord was taking up the young man on the ground on which He was approached Him. The man did not accept the Deity of Christ. He came to Jesus as one good man to another. That being the case, the Lord was simply saying, “You do not recognise Me as God, so why do you call Me good. No one is truly good but God – and you don’t think I am God.”
3. Matt 12:31
“Whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.”
This text seems to imply that it is more serious to blaspheme the Holy Spirit than Jesus. That implied inequality would therefore undermine the Deity of Christ. What’s the answer? In looking at Jesus of Nazareth and hearing His teachings, it would have been relatively easy for someone to completely miss the fact that this Man was God incarnate and thus speak against Him in true ignorance. Though inexcusable, this ignorant speaking against Christ was forgivable. However, a look at the context of Matthew 12 reveals that the Lord’s statement follows on the heels of a display of multiple notable manifestations of the miraculous healing power of the Spirit of God through the ministry of Christ. Faced with this undeniable evidence of God at work in their midst, the Jewish leaders attributed the miracles to the power of Satan. This was not a charge made from ignorance. It was a deliberate rejection of the power of the Spirit of God in the ministry of Christ. Such a rejection represented the committal of the unpardonable sin. Understood properly, this verse has nothing to say about the Deity of Christ.
4. John 14:28
“My Father is greater than I.”
Perhaps this is the favourite Deity-denying verse of the Mormons and the Jehovah’s Witnesses. However, the Lord Jesus is but expressing the fact that in coming to earth and taking on manhood He accepted a position and status in relation to the Father that made the Father ‘greater’. The greatness refers not to Christ’s essential nature, but to His position administratively as a result of voluntarily becoming man. The Prime Minister or President of a country is ‘greater’ that an ordinary citizen, but not ‘better’. Thus Christ declares His Father to be greater than Himself, but not better.
5. 1 Cor 11:3.
“The head of Christ is God.”
This statement does not imply inequality between Christ and God, any more than the same verse implies inequality between men and women. The verse is stating that in becoming man, the Christ submitted Himself to the Father administratively, but not essentially. His was a voluntary subordination in His role as man, Messiah and Mediator, while all the time He remained (and remains) equal with the Father.
6. Luke 22:42
“Not My will but Thine be done.”
This verse seems imply that the Son’s will was different to the Father’s, leading some to use it to deny Christ’s Deity. It will help to understand this statement of Christ if we remember that there was no independence in the life of the Lord Jesus. In Jesus Christ, Satan knew he faced a man who walked in total submission to and dependence on His Father. At the core of Satan’s attempt to make Jesus turn stones into bread was not so much a challenge aimed at Christ’s ability, but rather a challenge aimed at making Christ act independently of His Father. In effect Satan was saying, “If You are the Son of God, what are you doing depending each day on the word of Your Father? Take the initiative and do Your own thing.” However, the Lord stated in John 5:19-20 that He never acted as a rival of the Father (as the Jews supposed). He repeatedly emphasised the fact that He had no separate interest to His Father’s but rather subjected His will to that of the Father from the moment of His incarnation. Note the three verses below:
“Wherefore when He cometh into the world, He saith…I come…to do Thy will, O God.” Heb 10:5-7
“I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.” John 5:30
“For I came down from heaven, not to do Mine own will, but the will of Him that sent Me.” John 6:38In other words, what the Lord said in Gethsemane was nothing new. It was a very intense and real reiteration of the guiding principle of His life on earth which highlighted of His servanthood in bowing to the sin-bearing horror of the cross. It was not a conflict of wills. When Christ asked, “If it be possible let this cup pass from Me”, He knew only too well as the Lamb foreordained before the foundation of the world that the cross was unavoidable. Note what He says to Peter a few minutes after the agony in the garden, “Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?” (John 18:11). Remember also that in the upper room Christ had said, “Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour.” John 12:277.
1 Cor 15:28
“And when all things shall be subdued unto Him [Christ], then shall the Son also himself be subject unto Him [the Father] that put all things under Him [the Christ], that God may be all in all.”
Does the fact that this verse speaks of Christ being subject to the Father imply He is less than God? No. The context is the end of the millennial reign of Christ. As that 1,000 year period terminates, the mediatorial character of the kingdom will come to an end. During world history, as long as there has been any element of opposition to the supremacy of God, anything requiring subjugation, Christ has exercised governmental authority on the Father’s behalf. However, as the eternal state dawns it will no longer be a case of the Son carrying out the subjugation of all things to the Father – all will be merged in the infinite and absolute supremacy of God, the triune God, who will be everything in everything. “That is to say, not the Son carrying out a special work for the Father as previously, but God – Father Son and Holy Spirit – acting as such in all things everywhere.” W.E. Vine.
8. Phil 2:6-8
“Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men.”
It has been taught from this verse that Christ gave up His deity either partially or wholly when He became man. At least a couple of Bible translations convey this faulty idea:
Good News Bible: “He always has the nature of God, but he did not think that by force he should try to remain equal with God. Instead of this, of his own free will, he gave up all he had, and took the nature of a servant.”
Contemporary English Version: “Christ was truly God, but he did not try to remain equal with God. Instead he gave up everything and became a slave, when he became like one of us.”
When this verse is understood properly, word by word, it will be clearly seen that in the incarnation Christ surrendered nothing of His true and complete deity.
First we meet the word “being” (Greek, huparcho). The way this word is used in the New Testament expresses previous existence and continuing existence. For example:
David being a prophet (Acts 2:30)
Man being the image and glory of God (1 Cor 11:7)
If thou being a Jew (Gal 2:14)
Joseph of Arimathaea being a councillor (Luke 23:50)
So, when Paul speaks of Christ “being in the form of God”, he means to say that Christ always existed in the form of God and continued to exist in that form when He became man. At the incarnation Christ became something He had never been before (man), while never ceasing to be what He always was (God).
Then Paul uses the expression “in the form [Gk. morphe] of God”. In English the word ‘form’ has multiple meanings, from a piece of paper, to a bench, to a mood. One particular English use reflects the Greek word quite well. The character and nature of a person can be implied in the word ‘form’ as in the sentence, “The Doctor came early, true to form.” This is its sense in Phil 2:6. Christ has always and continues ever to exist in the form, the essence and nature of deity.
The verse continues, “Thought is not robbery [Gk. harpagmos] to be equal with God.” Robbery here is the noun of the Greek word harpagmos, to seize or take away. There is no thought whatsoever in this verse of the Christ relinquishing any part of His essential eternal deity. Some translate this verse ‘thought it not something to be grasped’ (taking harpagmos in a passive sense). However, Greek scholar Gordon Fee suggests that harpagmos (robbery) is not to be thought of as a thing at all. He points out that nouns ending in -mos do not ordinarily refer to a concrete expression of the verbal idea in the noun, but to the verbal idea itself. Rather, says Fee, harpagmos is an abstract noun that emphasizes the concept of ‘grasping’ or ‘seizing’ (and should be taken here in an active sense). That being the case there are at least three possibilities as to the meaning of Phil 2:5:
1. Christ did not view His equality with God as an act of seizing or robbery because He already was and always had been equal with God.
2. Christ did not view His equality with God selfishly in a grasping way, but poured Himself out for us.
3. Christ did not seize upon the fact that He was equal with God (to avoid suffering and death). Harpagmos (robbery) has a cognate, harpage, which means ‘booty’ or ‘prey’. In this passage the Greek idiom can be taken in the sense of ‘a matter to be seized upon’ i.e. ‘taken advantage of’.
To paraphrase Philippians 2 with the Greek background of option 3. in mind: “Who though He was in the form of God He did not think this divine quality should be used for His own advantage, as giving Him a reason to avoid suffering and death.” Fee translates it in the New International Commentary on the New Testament, “Being in the form of God as He was, Christ did not consider it a matter of seizing upon to His own advantage, this being equal with God we have just noted, but He emptied Himself.” This is in keeping with the context of the whole epistle of Philippians where Paul repeatedly emphasises the need in Christian living to waive one’s personal rights and think of others (2:4 & 21), as exemplified in the lives of Timothy and Epaphroditus (2:19-30).
This view of ‘robbery’ helps in considering the next expression – “made Himself of no reputation” or ‘emptied Himself’. Just as harpagmos (robbery) needs no object for Christ to seize so Christ did not empty himself of anything – He simply emptied Himself or poured Himself out by taking on the form of a slave. It is important to note the way the word empty (keno) is used in the New Testament in its four other occurrences:
“For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect.” Rom 4:14
“For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.” 1 Cor 1:17
“It were better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void.” 1 Cor 9:15
“Yet have I sent the brethren, lest our boasting of you should be in vain in this behalf.” 2 Cor 9:3
As can be readily seen from these verses the word kenoo ‘to make empty’ is used figuratively in the sense of ‘to make void, neutralize or abase’. It is therefore a fitting word as used by Paul to describe the self-abasement of Christ.
This densely packed passage continues with the words “Took the form of a servant.” When Paul uses the word ‘morphe’ (form) again, he does not mean to imply that Christ exchanged the ‘form of God’ for the ‘form of a servant’ at the incarnation. Rather He chose to express the form of God in the form of servant.
“Made in likeness of men”. The word ‘likeness’ (Gk. homoioma) means resemblance. Christ in every way, sin apart, resembled man, because He was man, yet nothing of this likeness to man in any way compromised His deity.
Finally Paul says Christ was “found in fashion as a man”. The Greek word for fashion here is ‘schema’. It refers to what is visible and perceptible (See 1 Cor 7:31, ‘the fashion of the world’). Thus while for form (morphe) remains the same, the ‘schema’ changed at the incarnation. Christ will eternally exist in fashion as a man.
So, Nnaki/Raelian, Ya not even playing marble cricket with your FEBLE, child-like ‘yorkers’ you are playing like the ANT* you ARE* still trapped IN* the Elephants Epidermis of its FOOT!
@ Zoe | November 28, 2011 at 2:19 PM |
So you are calling your friend Jesus a pathological schizophrenic liar who even on his dying cross was so mentally deranged with a split personality as to shout:
“… Jesus cried out in a loud voice, ‘Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?’ which is translated, ‘My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34; Matthew 27:46).
Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they don’t know what they are doing.” And the soldiers gambled for his clothes by throwing dice. Luke 23:34
This is not a yorker this time but a back drive passed you for 4 runs!
Why did Jesus cry out, “My God, My God, why have you forsaken Me?”
In Matthew 27:45-46, it says, “Now from the sixth hour darkness fell upon all the land until the ninth hour. 46And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” that is, “My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?” If Jesus is God, why would He say this?
First of all, Jesus quoted Psalm 22:1 which begins with, “My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?”. Jesus quoted this Psalm in order to draw attention to it and the fact that He was fulfilling it there on the cross. Consider verses 11-18 in Psalm 22:
Be not far from me, for trouble is near; For there is none to help.12 Many bulls have surrounded me; Strong bulls of Bashan have encircled me. 13 They open wide their mouth at me, As a ravening and a roaring lion. 14 I am poured out like water, And all my bones are out of joint; My heart is like wax; It is melted within me. 15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd, And my tongue cleaves to my jaws; And Thou dost lay me in the dust of death. 16 For dogs have surrounded me; A band of evildoers has encompassed me; They pierced my hands and my feet. 17 I can count all my bones. They look, they stare at me; 18 They divide my garments among them, And for my clothing they cast lots.
The term ‘dogs’ was used by the Jews to refer to Gentiles (cf. Matt. 15:21-28). His heart has melted within Him (v. 14). During the crucifixion process, the blood loss causes the heart to beat harder and harder and become extremely fatigued. Dehydration occurs (v. 15). Verses 16b-18 speak of piercing His hands and feet and dividing his clothing by casting lots. This is exactly what happen as described in Matt. 27:35.
Psalm 22 was written about 600 years before Christ was born. At that time, crucifixion had not yet been invented. Actually, the Phoenicians developed it and Rome borrowed the agonizing means of execution from them. So, when Rome ruled over Israel, it became the Roman means of capital punishment imposed upon the Jews whose biblical means of execution was stoning. Nevertheless, Jesus is pointing to the scriptures to substantiate His messianic mission.
A further comment
2 Cor. 5:21 says, “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” It is possible that at some moment on the cross, when Jesus became sin on our behalf, that God the Father, in a sense, turned His back upon the Son. It says in Hab. 1:13 that God is too pure to look upon evil. Therefore, it is possible that when Jesus bore our sins in His body on the cross (1 Pet. 2:24), that the Father, spiritually, turned away. At that time, the Son may have cried out.
One thing is for sure. We have no capacity to appreciate the utterly horrific experience of having the sins of the world put upon the Lord Jesus as He hung, in excruciating pain, from that cross. The physical pain was immense. The spiritual one must have been even greater.
That shows us clearly how much God LOVES US!
Jesus Christ was/IS, fully God, and SINLESS man, humanity, its called the hypostatic union of God/Man. He spoke as God, and He also spoke in His humanity, as fully human being, while many mysteries are not revealed to us this Cry of Jesus from the Cross, was probably from His humanity, as He bore the SINS of ALL mankind.
Nnaki/Raelian, You would NEVER understand, such is the state of ‘spiritual’ DARKNESS in which your ANT* like mind dwells, lost in the abyss of Raelian folly!