Saturday, October 3, 2020
Saturday, June 13, 2020
More apologetics resources
If you have enjoyed these lessons, please see some of the following sites for more in-depth study:
Morality: Is there a difference Between right and wrong?
How do you decide if something is right or wrong?
Are there moral absolutes? As a Christian, I believe there are.
Can you think of some things that are always right or wrong? For one, everyone believes murder is wrong. Even in the prolife/pro choice de bate, everyone agrees that it is wrong to kill babies. The argument is over the definition of when the fetus becomes a baby. What about lying or stealing? Everyone believes it is wrong when it is done to them!
Do culture or upbringing have an impact on morality? Do they completely explain it?
If there are moral absolutes, where do they come from?
What do you say to the person that says:
“I don’t need anyone to tell me what to do. I’ll decide for myself what is right and wrong?” If we all decide for ourselves, without any independent standard that we collectively agree on, we have anarchy.
Here we have two opposing world views:
Christianity says God created me. I have value. God says what is right and wrong according to his standard written down for us in the Bible.
Evolution says everything was a result of random chance and mutation. We have no value beyond existing. No law but survival of the fittest.
Who is better, Mother Theresa or Osama Bin Laden?
“The moment you say that one set of moral ideas can be better than another, you are, in fact, measuring them both by a standard, saying that one of them conforms to that standard more nearly than the other.” C.S. Lewis, (1969), “The Case for Christianity”
So what standard is used?
Secular Humanism, based on Darwinism, Says our purpose is only to enjoy life, to reach our own potential, and do what is best for our own game. This Idea is popular right now.
“Survival of the fittest” is a way to explain away selfish ambition and avoid accountability for stepping on others on your way to the top. Whoever dies with the most toys wins!
What do you say to the person that says:
“I believe in God, but not religion. Religion is responsible for all the wars and suffering in the world.”
I have heard that line dozens of times. It simply isn’t true. In its extreme, Darwinism has encouraged people like Hitler, Mao Tse Tung, and other terrorists to push their own brand of racism and extremism, killing millions in the process. Tens of millions have been tortured and killed by atheistic or communist regimes, just in the last century:
Communist China: 77 million
The Nazis: 21 million (non battle-related)
Communist Soviet Union: 62 million
The Khmer Rouge killing fields in Cambodia: 2 million
Religious wars have happened, but killing people and suppressing human rights is not basically a religious practice. It is fallen, corrupted humanity acting out selfishness and greed.
What about racism?
The Bible, the Old Testament says we are all related. First from Adam and Eve, then Noah. We were separated at the Tower of Babel. In the New Testament, all believers are children of Abraham and joint heirs with Christ.
Racism is not consistent with Christianity, and Christians should not tolerate it.
https://gleanernow.com/news/2020/06/call-for-change?utm_source=Northwest+Adventists&utm_campaign=f15669b433-NWAdventists_20200604&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8f9cae1547-f15669b433-68373894&mc_cid=f15669b433&mc_eid=dcbcd0d0eb
On the other hand, Darwin clearly believed, wrote about, and taught that some races were inferior to others, because of genetic evolution.
Darwin’s most famous book is actually titled, “On the Origin of Species or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life”
This foundational racist belief system was endorsed by Hitler and others who used this teaching to practice genocide. It was used to support euthanasia, to decrease the burden of an ill person on society. In 1940’s Germany, 200,000 mentally ill and disabled people were involuntary euthanized, citing Darwinism and survival of the fittest to justify murder!
What about some other special human attributes? Humans can think, plan, feel, and imagine! We are self aware. Accidents of nature, being simple containers of chemical reactions, would not be self aware.
How could evolution explain hopes, dreams, creativity, the ability to appreciate art and music, the ability to love?
What about our ability to to work together and build a society?
Societies based on Judeo-Christian values are more prosperous than other societies and are more supportive of human rights and offer higher quality of life to all citizens, not just those who agree with those in charge. American founding fathers knew that freedom is best afforded by putting God in the center of our decision making. This is from the Jefferson Memorial in Washington DC:
.
Finally, suicide is the leading cause of death for young people in most parts of the world, and the rate is increasing.
If you believe you are a random occurrence held up by survival of the fittest, what purpose do you find?
If you see yourself as a son or daughter of the King of the Universe, created by the God that loves you enough to die for you, can you help stop this trend?
“For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the LORD, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future” Jeremiah 29:11
Are there moral absolutes? As a Christian, I believe there are.
Can you think of some things that are always right or wrong? For one, everyone believes murder is wrong. Even in the prolife/pro choice de bate, everyone agrees that it is wrong to kill babies. The argument is over the definition of when the fetus becomes a baby. What about lying or stealing? Everyone believes it is wrong when it is done to them!
Do culture or upbringing have an impact on morality? Do they completely explain it?
If there are moral absolutes, where do they come from?
What do you say to the person that says:
“I don’t need anyone to tell me what to do. I’ll decide for myself what is right and wrong?” If we all decide for ourselves, without any independent standard that we collectively agree on, we have anarchy.
Here we have two opposing world views:
Christianity says God created me. I have value. God says what is right and wrong according to his standard written down for us in the Bible.
Evolution says everything was a result of random chance and mutation. We have no value beyond existing. No law but survival of the fittest.
Who is better, Mother Theresa or Osama Bin Laden?
“The moment you say that one set of moral ideas can be better than another, you are, in fact, measuring them both by a standard, saying that one of them conforms to that standard more nearly than the other.” C.S. Lewis, (1969), “The Case for Christianity”
So what standard is used?
Secular Humanism, based on Darwinism, Says our purpose is only to enjoy life, to reach our own potential, and do what is best for our own game. This Idea is popular right now.
“Survival of the fittest” is a way to explain away selfish ambition and avoid accountability for stepping on others on your way to the top. Whoever dies with the most toys wins!
What do you say to the person that says:
“I believe in God, but not religion. Religion is responsible for all the wars and suffering in the world.”
I have heard that line dozens of times. It simply isn’t true. In its extreme, Darwinism has encouraged people like Hitler, Mao Tse Tung, and other terrorists to push their own brand of racism and extremism, killing millions in the process. Tens of millions have been tortured and killed by atheistic or communist regimes, just in the last century:
Communist China: 77 million
The Nazis: 21 million (non battle-related)
Communist Soviet Union: 62 million
The Khmer Rouge killing fields in Cambodia: 2 million
Religious wars have happened, but killing people and suppressing human rights is not basically a religious practice. It is fallen, corrupted humanity acting out selfishness and greed.
The Bible, the Old Testament says we are all related. First from Adam and Eve, then Noah. We were separated at the Tower of Babel. In the New Testament, all believers are children of Abraham and joint heirs with Christ.
Racism is not consistent with Christianity, and Christians should not tolerate it.
https://gleanernow.com/news/2020/06/call-for-change?utm_source=Northwest+Adventists&utm_campaign=f15669b433-NWAdventists_20200604&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8f9cae1547-f15669b433-68373894&mc_cid=f15669b433&mc_eid=dcbcd0d0eb
On the other hand, Darwin clearly believed, wrote about, and taught that some races were inferior to others, because of genetic evolution.
Darwin’s most famous book is actually titled, “On the Origin of Species or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life”
This foundational racist belief system was endorsed by Hitler and others who used this teaching to practice genocide. It was used to support euthanasia, to decrease the burden of an ill person on society. In 1940’s Germany, 200,000 mentally ill and disabled people were involuntary euthanized, citing Darwinism and survival of the fittest to justify murder!
What about some other special human attributes? Humans can think, plan, feel, and imagine! We are self aware. Accidents of nature, being simple containers of chemical reactions, would not be self aware.
How could evolution explain hopes, dreams, creativity, the ability to appreciate art and music, the ability to love?
What about our ability to to work together and build a society?
Societies based on Judeo-Christian values are more prosperous than other societies and are more supportive of human rights and offer higher quality of life to all citizens, not just those who agree with those in charge. American founding fathers knew that freedom is best afforded by putting God in the center of our decision making. This is from the Jefferson Memorial in Washington DC:
Finally, suicide is the leading cause of death for young people in most parts of the world, and the rate is increasing.
If you believe you are a random occurrence held up by survival of the fittest, what purpose do you find?
If you see yourself as a son or daughter of the King of the Universe, created by the God that loves you enough to die for you, can you help stop this trend?
“For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the LORD, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future” Jeremiah 29:11
Wednesday, May 6, 2020
Prophecy: God Communicating with Creation (US!)
If we were created by a personal God who cares about us and is personally involved with His creation, as the Bible asserts, wouldn't we expect that God to communicate with his creation?
- Do you believe God ever communicated with humans?
- Does the Bible show God communicating with people? If so, in what ways?
- What are some ways that you see God communicating with humanity today, if any?
The Bible shows us that God speaks to his people in various ways. Moses and Paul saw him face to face (or nearly). Many others had visions or dreams. To even more, God audibly spoke to them. Prophecy is another means of communication we see repeatedly in the Bible. Amos 3:7 says that God reveals all of his plans through the prophets. In the New Testament, Peter explains one of the purposes of prophecy: (1 Peter 1:10 – 12). This says that the prophecies regarding the Messiah were meant for us, so we would understand who Jesus really was. How can this understanding help us in our faith?
The Bible itself says that the fulfillment of prophecy is proof of its validity, and thus the reputation of the Bible stands on prophecy. (see Isaiah 41:21 – 23, 46: 9 – 10). In the New Testament, this is repeated. (See Revelation 12:17; 19:10 – the Testimony of Jesus is the Spirit of Prophecy). One of the gifts of the Spirit is prophecy (1 Cor 12:10; 14:1, 22), and prophecy comes from God (2 Peter 1:20).
Let's look at some of the prophecy we see in the Bible.
The Old Testament contains more than 600 prophecies of the Messiah. We will not be studying them in their entirety today! Christians believe these prophecies were fulfilled in the life of Jesus Christ. The odds of one man fulfilling all of them is astronomical. Let's look at just a few: Jesus was born at just the right time. (see the 70 weeks prophecy in Daniel 9). The Bible tells us that the wise men from the east were searching for the new King that was to be born. When they asked the priests in Jerusalem, the priests knew exactly where to send them (Matthew 2: 1 – 12). Jesus was born when Messiah was expected and where he was expected to be born!
In Jesus' ministry, he often referred to the prophecies about the Messiah. See John 13:19 and Isaiah 43:10 (Jesus quoting Old Testament messianic prophecy). When Jesus was on the cross, he cried out, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani” “My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46). On the surface, we see Jesus feeling the weight of the sins of the whole world crashing down on him. He felt the separation from the Father. He felt forsaken. But there is more....Read Psalm 22. Look especially at vs. 8, 14-18. Those watching the crucifixion would have been very familiar with this Psalm, and would have recognized that he was quoting this prophecy of the Messiah!
• Discussion: Some have said that Jesus just arranged everything so that it only appeared that he fulfilled prophecy. But can you think of any of the prophecies that he could not have arranged, if he were not the Messiah?
• What if the Bible writers changed the facts after Jesus died, so that we would be duped into believing that he was the Messiah? (see lesson on Jesus; the apostles died for their faith in the resurrection and would not have died for a lie; there were too many eyewitnesses).
• If the Bible is right about the prophecies concerning Jesus, can we trust it to be right on other prophecies?
Lets look at some long reaching prophecies in the OT. (Read Daniel 2:28 and briefly review the statue in Daniel 2, the 4 beasts in Daniel 7 and Revelation 12 and 13). God predicted the world-dominating kingdoms that would come at and after the time of Daniel in Babylon and that after the 4th kingdom described in these visions, no other kingdom would rule the whole world until Jesus comes and establishes his kingdom forever. Not Napoleon, not Hitler; no one has been able to reunite the kingdoms of the world under one rule.
• What prophecies can you think of that have come true, that help you to rely on the Bible as an accurate predictor of the future?
The Bible is full of prophecies that have come true, and others that have not yet come true. Prior to its exile into captivity, Israel was warned by prophet after prophet to stop worshiping idols. This is documented throughout the history books in the Bible. Israel did not stop, and the nation was taken away by its enemies into Assyria and Babylon, just as predicted and forewarned. In the prophecies, Cyrus was even named as the leader God would use, long before he was born! (Isaiah 44:28 and 45:1. These were written before the nation was taken away by Babylon, which was the kingdom that was overthrown by Cyrus and Media/Persia). Then, they were returned to their previous lands, just, again, as predicted by the prophets.
• If we can trust the Bible's accuracy on the captivity of Israel and its return, on the birth, death, and resurrection of Jesus, can we trust it to be accurate on the details not yet fulfilled, such as the return of Christ? Prophecy is one way that we can know the Bible is a trustworthy source.
For more on this, see:
https://www.amazingfacts.org/media-library/study-guide/e/4995/t/right-on-time--prophetic-appointments-revealed-
Sunday, April 19, 2020
Thousand or Millions?
The teleological argument
Teleological means “by design”. We have already discussed many ways in which our universe appears to be uniquely situated to sustain life on this planet and how complex life actually is. Until Darwinian evolution became the prevailing theory, most everyone believed that everything around us showed evidence of being designed. The precision found in every area of science, from the smallest cell to the vastness of space still speak to us today as being too intricate to have come together by chance, time, and random mutations. The “laws” of science seem to point to some force behind them. And everything that is designed must have a designer. This is the DEFAULT argument. However, Darwin's theory proposes that the “evidence” we have only makes it appear that everything was designed.
Teleological means “by design”. We have already discussed many ways in which our universe appears to be uniquely situated to sustain life on this planet and how complex life actually is. Until Darwinian evolution became the prevailing theory, most everyone believed that everything around us showed evidence of being designed. The precision found in every area of science, from the smallest cell to the vastness of space still speak to us today as being too intricate to have come together by chance, time, and random mutations. The “laws” of science seem to point to some force behind them. And everything that is designed must have a designer. This is the DEFAULT argument. However, Darwin's theory proposes that the “evidence” we have only makes it appear that everything was designed.
People tend to believe what they want to believe. It is difficult to change someone's idea of the truth, unless we can show them the error in their own cherished belief. It is not wrong to make them defend their belief, instead of asking us to defend ours, (though we have a well-established, logical belief system). We will never make someone believe what we believe based on the evidence alone, but they can't prove their position, either. It is always a choice, based on presuppositions and desires. What we want to show is that it is not blind faith or naivete that causes us to believe in God and the Bible, but that the evidence still supports our position/the truth.
Instead of having to defend our own position all the time, let's discuss some ways that the evolutionary way of thinking doesn't compare with the creation argument, starting with the age of the earth.
1. Modern science generally uses radioactive dating to show that the earth is billions of years old.
Why? (accept some answers...such as to show that fossils are old, that the time needed for evolution to slowly take place could have occurred)
But what is the science behind radioactive dating?
Several types: carbon 14, potassium/argon are two. (Describe an atom and an isotope. Use graphic if possible). The idea is that the parent isotope is radioactive, but the daughter isotope is stable. Carbon 14 has a 1⁄2 life of 5,730 years. This means that in 5,730 years that half of the carbon 14 in a sample will have decayed into nitrogen 14 (stable)This is the most common radioactive dating mechanism.
Some interesting facts about carbon dating: Carbon is not radioactive at all after 100,000 years. It shouldn't even exist in diamonds, but it does. If diamonds took millions of years to form, as is commonly taught, there would be no measurable carbon 14 left in them.
In radioactive dating, they start with some assumptions: The rate of decay is constant and nothing leached into or out of it since it formed. But how do they know how much they started with ? They measure the ratio of carbon 14 in the sample to determine age. Assumption: They started with no stable, only radioactive carbon. Assumption: The atmospheric rates of carbon 14 and carbon 12 have remained constant. How do they know? In practice, different dates are frequently given to the same rock samples. Also, in some experiments, known dates were not chosen in blind testing. This is highly inconsistent and inaccurate. In potassium/argon dating, scientists assume that there is no argon initially, but sometimes samples contain lots of argon and no potassium! They use different isotopes with the same assumptions.
Does this change your faith in the dating systems used by some scientists?
• What about Theistic evolution? Can't both ideas be right? Couldn't God have set things in
motion a long time ago,then sat back and watched things evolve? Many churches have made this compromise. But it contradicts God's word.
Genesis chapter one teaches morning, then evening, the 1st, 2nd,...7th day. A day couldn't be millions of years each. Light x million years, then dark x million years?
• What about the Bible verse that says a day is as 1,000 years/1,000 years as a day? (2 Peter 3:8).
This verse refers to prophecy. It doesn't make sense to take it out of context and associate it with creation. Could plants created before the sun live for a thousand years? If the earth was not created in 6 literal days, then the Sabbath wouldn't make sense.
In the Biblical creation account, the earth was created first, then the sun and the moon; water, then land; plants before fish; birds before animals; death after sin by mankind; Adam from dust.
Evolution teaches: the sun first, then earth, then the moon; land, then the seas; fish and marine organisms before plants; reptiles before birds; death ever present; mankind from apes.
These two accounts cannot be reconciled. It is one or the other.
The Hebrew word for day Used in the Genesis account of creation = YOM. It always means a literal day. Jonah in the fish and Joshua marching around Jericho used same word YOM for days. In English, we can say, “back in my day” to mean an age or a time period, but not in Hebrew.
• Discussion: Does it really matter if we believe God created the world and everything in it in 6 literal days, or if He used the evolutionary process to work it out? Why or why not?
Think of the consequences of theistic evolution: If death is a natural process used by God via evolution, there is no need for redemption from sin. Also, what is the character of God if he just sat back and watched millions of years of struggle and death and didn’t intervene? God said each day was good. Could it have been good if it was death and destruction for each period between each new evolutionary stage? Is God incompetent? Is He powerless to stop cycle of death and natural selection?
The Bible teaches creation, then sin, then the curse and the need for redemption, Jesus and the cross, and a future restoration. We cannot reconcile this with millions of years of death and destruction prior to sin.
Sunday, March 1, 2020
The Cosmological Argument
• Is there anything in space that helps you to believe in God?
• What challenges have heard from astronomy that may have you questioning the Bible?
Studying astronomy does much to strengthen the faith of the believer. Originally, astronomy was not at odds with the Biblical world view. Johannes Kepler was an early astronomer. He helped prove Copernicus' theory that the earth revolves around the sun. His work helped explain the seasons, phases of the moon, eclipses, etc. He was a Christian and used his knowledge of God and the consistency and order of a creator to help him advance the science of astronomy. Only recently has science tried to divorce itself from the teachings of the Bible.
Many scientists believe in “the Big Bang Theory” because most evidence points to the universe having a beginning. However, accepting that the universe had a beginning, begs the question of how it began in the first place. This leaves evolutionists having to claim a very long time frame for accidents to initiate everything we see in motion. The long time frame leaves the creationists struggling to support the biblical teaching of a seven day creation week and a young earth. Here are some of the facts that help support the Biblical viewpoint:
Moon Recession: Secular scientists have proposed several theories about how the moon could have come into being: in the 1960's, it was fission from the earth. In the 1970's, it was captured by earth's gravity from somewhere else. In the 1980's, it was collapse of a dust cloud or nebula. Currently it is thought that collision of earth and a mars-sized space object formed the moon. In any case, they are having much difficulty, explaining the receding of the moon.
Here is the problem: interaction between the gravity of the moon and the earth is resulting in a gradually receding moon and a slowing of earth's rotation. The rotational motion of the high tides pull the moon forward and away from earth. The moon's gravity pulls back on the earth and slows its spin. The moon is moving 1.5” per year away from the earth. If we work backward in time, the moon would have been in direct contact with earth 1.55 billion years ago, but scientists claim the moon is 4.6 billion years old!
If the earth is only 6,000 years old, however, the moon would have only moved 755' and the slowing of earth's rotation would mean a day would be just 1.2 seconds shorter than at present.
Sun faintness: the sun produces energy by nuclear fusion, changing hydrogen in to helium. The energy produced should cause the sun to brighten. Going backward in time, the sun would have been 30% dimmer 3 billion years ago, which would have meant an ice age on earth. The seas would have been frozen solid at the time evolutionists teach life was just forming. Creationists believe God must have placed the sun and moon where they are when he said he did!
Comets: as they circle the sun, they leave a trail of dust and debris. After about 10,000 years, they should disappear completely1.
THE BIG BANG THEORY:
Problem: Scientists don't see what they want to see. The planets in our own galaxy have elliptical orbits that don't follow the same path on each successive orbit. This can't be accounted for using the current formulas and factoring in the gravity of the sun, the other planets, or other known bodies. Also, when measuring the speed of galaxies, we see that objects farther from the center of a galaxy for example, are moving faster than those in the center. Gravity alone can't account for these observations. To make up the difference, and make their math work, some scientists have turned to “dark matter” and “dark energy” to make up for the forces that they have not yet discovered.
The first law of Thermodynamics: Mass-energy can neither be created or destroyed. The quantity of matter/energy remains the same.
The second law of thermodynamics: While the quantity remains the same, the quality of matter/energy deteriorates over time. Usable energy is used for production, growth, and repair. It is converted into unusable energy and is irretrievably lost.
Therefore, if the amount of mass-energy is constant, but is being converted into unusable energy, then everything is winding down. This points to a beginning. But they cannot explain the beginning of the universe. They say it started with a “singularity” but cannot account for what caused the singularity.
“For the scientist who has lived by faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.”2
“Interestingly, many argue that it is implausible to invoke a creator who created matter from nothing. However, the big-bang theory invokes a similar belief without any basis in observed reality. Either matter is eternal (which neither camp believes) or there is a supernatural aspect or intelligence which brought matter and the natural realm into existence. Both are religious beliefs. This indicates the importance of starting assumptions in any origins theory.”3
Red shift: Light moving toward us is at the blue end of the spectrum. Light moving away from us is at the red end. The wavelengths of light from distant galaxies when observed from our galaxy are shifted toward the red end of the spectrum. This shows that they are moving away from us. This is true in every direction. All galaxies appear red-shifted from our perspective on earth. Most models point to the earth being at or near the center of the universe. Hubble found this idea to be “intolerable,” so he encouraged scientists to keep looking for alternatives!
• But doesn't it take thousands of years for light to reach the earth from distant stars? Then, certainly, the universe must be billions of years old, right?
Creationists can explain this through the Bible. About 17 times in the Bible, God states that he “stretched out” the universe. (Isaiah 42:5, 45:12, 51:13, Jeremiah 10:12, Psalm 104:2 for example). We can explain that our belief in an omnipotent God that is able to create the universe and place everything where it belongs makes more sense than billions of stars burning for billions of years without burning out, slowing down, or using up the available energy!
Interestingly, a new physics theory by Moshe Carmeli, claims that the universe has 5 dimensions, not 4. Piggybacking on Einstein's theory of general relativity, Carmeli has developed a formula which uses the folding and bending of the fabric of space and time. With this model, dark matter does not have to be invoked in order to explain how we can see light from a supernova 2 million light years away, when the earth is only 7,000 years old. This theory explains how God could have started in our area of the universe, and stretched out the heavens, as He said He did, and the light could have sped up as the objects moved rapidly away from us.4
There is also a theory about how the earth brought the light to earth during creation in a super-speed scenario: Dasha Theory
Until very recently, science supported the anthropic principle (anthropic = beneficial to man): Life would not be possible if the conditions in the universe varied even slightly.
Examples:
*The electromagnetic coupling constant binds electrons to protons in atoms. If it was smaller, fewer electrons could be held. If it was larger, electrons would be held too tightly to bond with other atoms. And the ratio of electron to proton is exactly right. Molecules could not form at a different ratio.
*Electromagnetic and gravitational forces are so finely tuned that only the right kind of star can be stable. Our sun is stable and is the right color for photosynthesis to work. It is also the right mass and right distance to not overwhelm us with radiation or pull the tides too high, or pull us too close to other planets.
*Our planet is the right distance from the sun for the water cycle to be stable (not freezing or boiling). And the gravity, axial tilt, rotation period, magnetic field, crust thickness, atmosphere concentration are just right.
• Discussion: What have you learned from astronomy or physics that supports your belief or disbelief in a creator?
1Dr. Markus Bliets, in and interview with Jonathan Sarfati; Busting Myths, 2015 Creation Ministries International, Powder Springs GA.
2Jastrow, Robert, “God and the Astronomers,” 1978, p. 16
3Bates, Gary, Alien Intrusion, 2018 Creation Ministries International, Powder Springs GA; p. 84. 4Carmeli, Moshe, “Cosmological Special Relativity”, 2002 World Scientific, Singapore
• What challenges have heard from astronomy that may have you questioning the Bible?
Studying astronomy does much to strengthen the faith of the believer. Originally, astronomy was not at odds with the Biblical world view. Johannes Kepler was an early astronomer. He helped prove Copernicus' theory that the earth revolves around the sun. His work helped explain the seasons, phases of the moon, eclipses, etc. He was a Christian and used his knowledge of God and the consistency and order of a creator to help him advance the science of astronomy. Only recently has science tried to divorce itself from the teachings of the Bible.
Many scientists believe in “the Big Bang Theory” because most evidence points to the universe having a beginning. However, accepting that the universe had a beginning, begs the question of how it began in the first place. This leaves evolutionists having to claim a very long time frame for accidents to initiate everything we see in motion. The long time frame leaves the creationists struggling to support the biblical teaching of a seven day creation week and a young earth. Here are some of the facts that help support the Biblical viewpoint:
Moon Recession: Secular scientists have proposed several theories about how the moon could have come into being: in the 1960's, it was fission from the earth. In the 1970's, it was captured by earth's gravity from somewhere else. In the 1980's, it was collapse of a dust cloud or nebula. Currently it is thought that collision of earth and a mars-sized space object formed the moon. In any case, they are having much difficulty, explaining the receding of the moon.
Here is the problem: interaction between the gravity of the moon and the earth is resulting in a gradually receding moon and a slowing of earth's rotation. The rotational motion of the high tides pull the moon forward and away from earth. The moon's gravity pulls back on the earth and slows its spin. The moon is moving 1.5” per year away from the earth. If we work backward in time, the moon would have been in direct contact with earth 1.55 billion years ago, but scientists claim the moon is 4.6 billion years old!
If the earth is only 6,000 years old, however, the moon would have only moved 755' and the slowing of earth's rotation would mean a day would be just 1.2 seconds shorter than at present.
Sun faintness: the sun produces energy by nuclear fusion, changing hydrogen in to helium. The energy produced should cause the sun to brighten. Going backward in time, the sun would have been 30% dimmer 3 billion years ago, which would have meant an ice age on earth. The seas would have been frozen solid at the time evolutionists teach life was just forming. Creationists believe God must have placed the sun and moon where they are when he said he did!
Comets: as they circle the sun, they leave a trail of dust and debris. After about 10,000 years, they should disappear completely1.
THE BIG BANG THEORY:
Problem: Scientists don't see what they want to see. The planets in our own galaxy have elliptical orbits that don't follow the same path on each successive orbit. This can't be accounted for using the current formulas and factoring in the gravity of the sun, the other planets, or other known bodies. Also, when measuring the speed of galaxies, we see that objects farther from the center of a galaxy for example, are moving faster than those in the center. Gravity alone can't account for these observations. To make up the difference, and make their math work, some scientists have turned to “dark matter” and “dark energy” to make up for the forces that they have not yet discovered.
The first law of Thermodynamics: Mass-energy can neither be created or destroyed. The quantity of matter/energy remains the same.
The second law of thermodynamics: While the quantity remains the same, the quality of matter/energy deteriorates over time. Usable energy is used for production, growth, and repair. It is converted into unusable energy and is irretrievably lost.
Therefore, if the amount of mass-energy is constant, but is being converted into unusable energy, then everything is winding down. This points to a beginning. But they cannot explain the beginning of the universe. They say it started with a “singularity” but cannot account for what caused the singularity.
“For the scientist who has lived by faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.”2
“Interestingly, many argue that it is implausible to invoke a creator who created matter from nothing. However, the big-bang theory invokes a similar belief without any basis in observed reality. Either matter is eternal (which neither camp believes) or there is a supernatural aspect or intelligence which brought matter and the natural realm into existence. Both are religious beliefs. This indicates the importance of starting assumptions in any origins theory.”3
Red shift: Light moving toward us is at the blue end of the spectrum. Light moving away from us is at the red end. The wavelengths of light from distant galaxies when observed from our galaxy are shifted toward the red end of the spectrum. This shows that they are moving away from us. This is true in every direction. All galaxies appear red-shifted from our perspective on earth. Most models point to the earth being at or near the center of the universe. Hubble found this idea to be “intolerable,” so he encouraged scientists to keep looking for alternatives!
• But doesn't it take thousands of years for light to reach the earth from distant stars? Then, certainly, the universe must be billions of years old, right?
Creationists can explain this through the Bible. About 17 times in the Bible, God states that he “stretched out” the universe. (Isaiah 42:5, 45:12, 51:13, Jeremiah 10:12, Psalm 104:2 for example). We can explain that our belief in an omnipotent God that is able to create the universe and place everything where it belongs makes more sense than billions of stars burning for billions of years without burning out, slowing down, or using up the available energy!
Interestingly, a new physics theory by Moshe Carmeli, claims that the universe has 5 dimensions, not 4. Piggybacking on Einstein's theory of general relativity, Carmeli has developed a formula which uses the folding and bending of the fabric of space and time. With this model, dark matter does not have to be invoked in order to explain how we can see light from a supernova 2 million light years away, when the earth is only 7,000 years old. This theory explains how God could have started in our area of the universe, and stretched out the heavens, as He said He did, and the light could have sped up as the objects moved rapidly away from us.4
There is also a theory about how the earth brought the light to earth during creation in a super-speed scenario: Dasha Theory
Until very recently, science supported the anthropic principle (anthropic = beneficial to man): Life would not be possible if the conditions in the universe varied even slightly.
Examples:
*The electromagnetic coupling constant binds electrons to protons in atoms. If it was smaller, fewer electrons could be held. If it was larger, electrons would be held too tightly to bond with other atoms. And the ratio of electron to proton is exactly right. Molecules could not form at a different ratio.
*Electromagnetic and gravitational forces are so finely tuned that only the right kind of star can be stable. Our sun is stable and is the right color for photosynthesis to work. It is also the right mass and right distance to not overwhelm us with radiation or pull the tides too high, or pull us too close to other planets.
*Our planet is the right distance from the sun for the water cycle to be stable (not freezing or boiling). And the gravity, axial tilt, rotation period, magnetic field, crust thickness, atmosphere concentration are just right.
• Discussion: What have you learned from astronomy or physics that supports your belief or disbelief in a creator?
1Dr. Markus Bliets, in and interview with Jonathan Sarfati; Busting Myths, 2015 Creation Ministries International, Powder Springs GA.
2Jastrow, Robert, “God and the Astronomers,” 1978, p. 16
3Bates, Gary, Alien Intrusion, 2018 Creation Ministries International, Powder Springs GA; p. 84. 4Carmeli, Moshe, “Cosmological Special Relativity”, 2002 World Scientific, Singapore
See also:
Sunday, January 19, 2020
Jesus: Lord or Lunatic?
The fact that Jesus was an actual, historical figure, living in first century Palestine is undisputed. His existence, life, and death accounts are supported in many secular, historical works from the time. But who was he? That is where the controversy lies. Christians believe Jesus was the Son of God, that he died for our sins, was raised from the dead, and is returning.
• Discussion: What are your thoughts, or what have you heard about who Jesus really was? Is it possible that he was and/or was not the Son of God?
C.S. Lewis says: “I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things that Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up as a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”1
*The Bible has much to say about who Jesus was, but can we trust this source? We have already looked at why we can trust the Bible, but when we talk about resurrection and other miracles, do we have any further evidence to support our trust in this Book? And why is this important?
First of all, the Bible uses eyewitness accounts when retelling the events in Jesus' life:
2 Peter 1:16 – 21: “For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain. We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” (emphasis added).
Most of the accounts we have in the Bible about Jesus are from eyewitnesses. They wrote what they saw, heard, experienced. (hand out list for later review; look up a few if time allows: Matt 28:9, 10, 16 – 20; Mark 16:9, 14 – 20; Luke 1: 1 – 3; Luke 24: 13 – 52; John 20:14 – 31; John 21: 1 – 23; Acts 1: 1 - 12; Acts 2:22; Acts 7: 55; Acts 9: 3 – 6; Acts 10: 39 – 42; Acts 22: 17 – 21; Acts 23:11; 1 Cor 15: 5 – 8; 1 Peter 5:1; 1 John 1: 1-4; 1 John 4:14).
The church was founded on the resurrection of Jesus. Disproving it would have ended the Christian movement, but no one could refute it! So they persecuted the Christians instead, intending to threaten and scare them out of believing.
So, let's take a look at the resurrection. If this event really happened, then we can trust that the rest of Jesus' story is true as well.
“If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised.” 1 Corinthians 15:13 – 15.
The most important fact is that the tomb was empty. No one ever refuted that. No one visited the empty tomb for years. Everyone knew Jesus wasn't there.
• What are some of the alternatives that you may have heard to explain away the empty tomb? List them.
Let's look at some of the alternative theories:
1. Was Jesus' resurrection a mass hallucination? He was seen alive by more than 500 people at once. (1 Corinthians 15:6). Thomas doubted until he was able to touch the risen Jesus' body. (John 20:27). Jesus was seen alive, after the resurrection by too many people, at too many times, and under too many circumstances for this to have been a hallucination.
2. Did the disciples make the whole thing up, maybe out of grief? The disciples were heavily persecuted, and all but one of them died a terrible death for their belief in the resurrection. For days after Jesus' death, the disciples hid in the upper room, and some even left town; they were afraid for their lives. Then, immediately upon seeing with their own eyes that Jesus was alive, they had a new boldness. Something had to have changed, dramatically, for them to have such a complete turnaround. They would not have risked their lives for a lie, rather, they would have left the ministry and gone off into hiding had Jesus not been raised to life, and changed their understanding and beliefs forever.
3. (Swoon theory) Maybe Jesus wasn't really dead. Read how he died: He was beaten, unrecognizable, too weak to carry the cross, hung on the cross, spear thrust through his side (water/blood proof of death); soldiers confirmed death (and they would know); afterward, he was wrapped in 100 lbs. of spices and linens. There was a huge stone in front of tomb, with trained soldiers guarding the tomb. Jesus could not have just awakened from a deep sleep, or even a coma, and walked away (7 miles to Emmaus).
4. Did they have the wrong tomb? (Ask why we know this couldn't have happened). Jesus was not buried in a cemetery where there would have been lots of other choices. And why would an alternate tomb be empty? Usually, a sepulcher like this would have had bones from many bodies; it was unusual for Jesus' tomb (originally Joseph's) to be new and unused. Also, the women had just been to this tomb hours before. What about the angel that was there in the morning? Peter and John went to the tomb as soon as they heard, and they arrived at the same place. Could they have all gone to the same wrong, empty tomb? Joseph or Nicodemus would have corrected them, if that was the case. Priests/guards would have produced the body if they had all gone to the wrong tomb.
5. The Jews propagated the lie that the disciples stole the body. (Matt 28: 11- 15). Could that be what happened?
Remember, the disciples were afraid already. They wouldn’t have had the courage to steal the body under guard. They didn't believe he was raised, they also didn't yet understand the prophecies or Jesus' own statements that he had to die. They wouldn't have had motive. Only 2 of them left to check it out when the women returned to the upper room to tell the disciples what had happened.
Guards: Matthew 27: 62 – 66. Guards were under penalty of death and were trained killers. They wouldn't have sat by and allowed their post to be invaded. They wouldn't have fallen asleep. If they had somehow fallen asleep, the large stone being rolled away would have awakened them. Could all of them fallen asleep at the same time? Also, the stone was sealed. It would have broken Roman law to break the seal, which carried the death penalty. The guards said they were asleep, AND the disciples stole the body. It couldn’t have been both. Which was it? If they were awake, why let anyone steal the body? If they were asleep, how did they know it was the disciples? They were paid off and protected by the priests. If they didn't have this protection, they would have been executed. If this story were true, the priest would not have protected them. The priests would have wanted them executed as well. The fact that they weren't executed further substantiates that this didn’t happen.2
Condition of the tomb: Read John 19: 38 – 42 and John 20:6-9. Linens and spices that had been wrapped around his body by Joseph and Nicodemus were still wrapped! Thieves wouldn't have re-wrapped the linens. John's description implies Jesus melted right through them. Seeing the placement of the linen wrappings, still folded, made a significant impact on John and made him a believer.
• Discussion: In light of all the evidence, what makes the most sense? What questions do you still have about the resurrection?
Conclusion: Jesus had previously predicted he would die and rise again. If what he said about this was true, can't we trust everything else he said? If God really came to earth as a man, and lived a substitute life for humanity, and allowed himself to experience death, we would expect him to come back to life, wouldn’t we? We believe God to be powerful enough to do this, since he created everything in the first place. If we believe he has the power of life and death, can we trust him to be a power in our lives?
1Lewis, C.S., Mere Christianity, chapter 3, C. S. Lewis Pte, Ltd., 1952
2McDowel, Josh, Evidence that Demands a Verdict, Volume I, Here's Life Publishers, San Bernardino, CA, 1979, chapter 10.
• Discussion: What are your thoughts, or what have you heard about who Jesus really was? Is it possible that he was and/or was not the Son of God?
C.S. Lewis says: “I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things that Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up as a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”1
*The Bible has much to say about who Jesus was, but can we trust this source? We have already looked at why we can trust the Bible, but when we talk about resurrection and other miracles, do we have any further evidence to support our trust in this Book? And why is this important?
First of all, the Bible uses eyewitness accounts when retelling the events in Jesus' life:
2 Peter 1:16 – 21: “For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain. We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” (emphasis added).
Most of the accounts we have in the Bible about Jesus are from eyewitnesses. They wrote what they saw, heard, experienced. (hand out list for later review; look up a few if time allows: Matt 28:9, 10, 16 – 20; Mark 16:9, 14 – 20; Luke 1: 1 – 3; Luke 24: 13 – 52; John 20:14 – 31; John 21: 1 – 23; Acts 1: 1 - 12; Acts 2:22; Acts 7: 55; Acts 9: 3 – 6; Acts 10: 39 – 42; Acts 22: 17 – 21; Acts 23:11; 1 Cor 15: 5 – 8; 1 Peter 5:1; 1 John 1: 1-4; 1 John 4:14).
The church was founded on the resurrection of Jesus. Disproving it would have ended the Christian movement, but no one could refute it! So they persecuted the Christians instead, intending to threaten and scare them out of believing.
So, let's take a look at the resurrection. If this event really happened, then we can trust that the rest of Jesus' story is true as well.
“If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised.” 1 Corinthians 15:13 – 15.
The most important fact is that the tomb was empty. No one ever refuted that. No one visited the empty tomb for years. Everyone knew Jesus wasn't there.
• What are some of the alternatives that you may have heard to explain away the empty tomb? List them.
Let's look at some of the alternative theories:
1. Was Jesus' resurrection a mass hallucination? He was seen alive by more than 500 people at once. (1 Corinthians 15:6). Thomas doubted until he was able to touch the risen Jesus' body. (John 20:27). Jesus was seen alive, after the resurrection by too many people, at too many times, and under too many circumstances for this to have been a hallucination.
2. Did the disciples make the whole thing up, maybe out of grief? The disciples were heavily persecuted, and all but one of them died a terrible death for their belief in the resurrection. For days after Jesus' death, the disciples hid in the upper room, and some even left town; they were afraid for their lives. Then, immediately upon seeing with their own eyes that Jesus was alive, they had a new boldness. Something had to have changed, dramatically, for them to have such a complete turnaround. They would not have risked their lives for a lie, rather, they would have left the ministry and gone off into hiding had Jesus not been raised to life, and changed their understanding and beliefs forever.
3. (Swoon theory) Maybe Jesus wasn't really dead. Read how he died: He was beaten, unrecognizable, too weak to carry the cross, hung on the cross, spear thrust through his side (water/blood proof of death); soldiers confirmed death (and they would know); afterward, he was wrapped in 100 lbs. of spices and linens. There was a huge stone in front of tomb, with trained soldiers guarding the tomb. Jesus could not have just awakened from a deep sleep, or even a coma, and walked away (7 miles to Emmaus).
4. Did they have the wrong tomb? (Ask why we know this couldn't have happened). Jesus was not buried in a cemetery where there would have been lots of other choices. And why would an alternate tomb be empty? Usually, a sepulcher like this would have had bones from many bodies; it was unusual for Jesus' tomb (originally Joseph's) to be new and unused. Also, the women had just been to this tomb hours before. What about the angel that was there in the morning? Peter and John went to the tomb as soon as they heard, and they arrived at the same place. Could they have all gone to the same wrong, empty tomb? Joseph or Nicodemus would have corrected them, if that was the case. Priests/guards would have produced the body if they had all gone to the wrong tomb.
5. The Jews propagated the lie that the disciples stole the body. (Matt 28: 11- 15). Could that be what happened?
Remember, the disciples were afraid already. They wouldn’t have had the courage to steal the body under guard. They didn't believe he was raised, they also didn't yet understand the prophecies or Jesus' own statements that he had to die. They wouldn't have had motive. Only 2 of them left to check it out when the women returned to the upper room to tell the disciples what had happened.
Guards: Matthew 27: 62 – 66. Guards were under penalty of death and were trained killers. They wouldn't have sat by and allowed their post to be invaded. They wouldn't have fallen asleep. If they had somehow fallen asleep, the large stone being rolled away would have awakened them. Could all of them fallen asleep at the same time? Also, the stone was sealed. It would have broken Roman law to break the seal, which carried the death penalty. The guards said they were asleep, AND the disciples stole the body. It couldn’t have been both. Which was it? If they were awake, why let anyone steal the body? If they were asleep, how did they know it was the disciples? They were paid off and protected by the priests. If they didn't have this protection, they would have been executed. If this story were true, the priest would not have protected them. The priests would have wanted them executed as well. The fact that they weren't executed further substantiates that this didn’t happen.2
Condition of the tomb: Read John 19: 38 – 42 and John 20:6-9. Linens and spices that had been wrapped around his body by Joseph and Nicodemus were still wrapped! Thieves wouldn't have re-wrapped the linens. John's description implies Jesus melted right through them. Seeing the placement of the linen wrappings, still folded, made a significant impact on John and made him a believer.
• Discussion: In light of all the evidence, what makes the most sense? What questions do you still have about the resurrection?
Conclusion: Jesus had previously predicted he would die and rise again. If what he said about this was true, can't we trust everything else he said? If God really came to earth as a man, and lived a substitute life for humanity, and allowed himself to experience death, we would expect him to come back to life, wouldn’t we? We believe God to be powerful enough to do this, since he created everything in the first place. If we believe he has the power of life and death, can we trust him to be a power in our lives?
1Lewis, C.S., Mere Christianity, chapter 3, C. S. Lewis Pte, Ltd., 1952
2McDowel, Josh, Evidence that Demands a Verdict, Volume I, Here's Life Publishers, San Bernardino, CA, 1979, chapter 10.
Saturday, January 11, 2020
Is the Bible just a book?
Lesson 7: IS THE BIBLE JUST A BOOK?
• The Old Testament was originally written in a Hebrew language that is no longer spoken. Can we know that the Bible we have today is essentially the same as the original?
• I've heard the Bible contradicts itself. Is this true? If so, how can we say it is reliable?
Let's first look at what Jesus had to say about the Bible. Keep in mind that when Jesus refers to the scriptures, he was referring to the Old Testament, not the Bible that we have, as the New Testament had not yet been written. According to the Bible, Jesus believed and taught from the scriptures. Luke 4:16 says, “He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. And he stood up to read.” (NIV). Throughout his ministry, Jesus taught the people about the Kingdom of God. He frequently referred to the scriptures in making his points. See Matthew 4:1-11; 5:17; 10:15, 12:40, 41; 24:37, 38; Luke 4:21. (Many more!) He asked his audience, “Have you not read?” 11 times in the gospels and “It is written” 30 times. Jesus obviously believed the Bible to be true and relevant. See John 17:17; Matthew 19:4-6.
The apostles also believed the Bible to be truth. According to the Bible, an apostle is someone who was an eyewitness to the resurrection of Jesus and was able, through the Holy Spirit, to perform miracles. See Acts 1:22; 1 Corinthians 9:1; and 2 Corinthians 12:12. If the Bible is true, then the apostles would be the perfect people to confirm it. “All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness...” (2 Timothy 3: 16, NIV). What "scripture" was Timothy referring to? See 2 Peter 1: 16-21 & 3:16.
Since it isn't enough to use the Bible to justify itself, what else can we know about the Bible and its translations that can help us test its reliability?
1. Archeology has corroborated the names, places, and customs written in the Bible. If the genealogies in the gospels and elsewhere in the Bible were not real people, what would be the purpose of listing them out in such detail?
2. The manuscripts we have are older and more numerous, and were written closer to the people and events they describe than any other ancient work of literature. Looking specifically at the New Testament, which was written around 2000 years ago, we can see that our sources are reliable. We have more than 24,000 early New Testament manuscripts. That compares to 643 copies of Homer's Iliad, which is the next most numerous ancient text. This is also a great text to use for comparison, as the Iliad was also considered a “sacred” text, was used to teach children in school, was illustrated in murals, and was referred to in many commentaries, so it would have had historical significance and a desire for preservation. No one questions the origin or authenticity of the Iliad. Using the same criteria, we cannot question the origin of the New Testament.
3. The copies we have of the New Testament manuscripts are from different geographical areas and were translated into different languages. The New Testament was copied soon after the time of the apostles into Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopian, etc., in effort to spread the gospels. This gives us distinct sources for comparison as to the reliability of the text we have now. We can know that no doctrines were affected during translation and copying, because when we compare the multiple translations that we have, we can see what the original would have said.
4. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947 attested to the authenticity of the Old Testament. These scrolls were very old manuscripts and were very well preserved. Some of them were dated to around 980 AD. This gave us the opportunity to compare the oldest manuscripts we previously had to these new discoveries, and the results were that our copies of the Old Testament were essentially unchanged over the centuries. The errors that were found were mostly spelling errors.
5. The Bible survived many attempts to abolish it. If it were just a storybook, no one would have fought to keep it and protect it as they did. The harder its enemies worked to destroy it, the faster it was copied and shared. Many people have risked their lives and died copying and distributing the pages in order to make them available to everyone. This is still happening today. People
that risked their lives to preserve the script would have taken the necessary care to be accurate in their work. And no one would have risked their lives to protect a book that was nothing more than made up stories.
7. If we had no early manuscripts, we could still rely on the many sermons, commentaries, and letters that exist from the early church fathers. So many, in fact, that we could reproduce all but 11 verses of the New Testament.1 For example, the apostle John's disciple, Polycarp (AD 69 – 155) and his disciple, Irenaes (AD 130 – 202), together quote 23 of the 27 New Testament books.
8. We have early manuscripts. Most scholars agree that the eyewitness accounts in the New Testament were written within 1 generation of the actual accounts. If they had been written after AD 70, they would logically have included accounts of the destruction of Jerusalem that year. In addition to that being a national tragedy, the genealogical records of the Jewish nation were destroyed in Jerusalem, except for the records of the Levites. If the writers came after 70 AD, they could not have proven the lines of Judah, Jesse, or David, which were cited in the ancestry of Jesus. The actual copies that we have (the originals were written on papyrus or animal skins that didn't age well and led to the need for copies) are dated within 300 years of the originals, and some are within 100 years. In comparison, the manuscripts in existence for other ancient works are much later. For example, the oldest text of Caesar's Gallic Wars is from 900 years after its origin. Other Greek manuscripts are 1000 years or more from their origins (Plato's works 1200 years, Aristotle's 1400 years post originals) yet no one questions their validity.
9. The first printing press was invented with the purpose of producing the Bible and making it available to the common people. This helped to provide multiple, consistent copies.
10. The story line of the Bible is not consistent with that of fiction. The “heroes” of the Bible are liars, murderers, adulterers, drunkards, prostitutes. The examples of their failures are preserved along with their successes. The Hebrew nation is shown as weak, backsliding, unfaithful and disobedient, yet God rescues and preserves them. The New Testament shows God offering his sinless Son to save sinners that don't deserve to be saved. This is not a typical fairy tale. The Bible also honors women, elevates the poor and disabled, slaves, and outcasts. This is not typical of any literature past or present, unless it is biographical.
11. The New Testament claims to be largely eyewitness testimony. See 2 Peter 1:6 for example. (we will explore this more in a future lesson). Many people believe that the Bible is full of contradictions, such as the difference in the Gospel accounts regarding the angel(s) at the tomb of Jesus after his resurrection. One says there was one angel, another says there were two. Eyewitness courtroom testimony is often like this. In fact, if witness testimony is too close, they are considered to be in collusion. In this example, the statement that there was one angel doesn't say ONLY one angel. There could have been two. And the resurrection story is the same, whether there were one or two angels.
Discussion: Does this information support our trust in the Bible's accuracy? Why or why not?
1Leach, Charles. “Our Bible. How we got it.” Chicago, Moody Press, 1878, pp. 35, 36.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
