BE SURE TO VISIT http://prophecy-watcher-weekly-news.blogspot.com/ FOR THE LATEST NEWS AS IT RELATES TO THESE LAST DAYS.
SPONSORED BY *CREATIONMOMENTS.COM*
Wednesday, January 2, 2013
Welcome to Creation Design. In this new blog, I would like to debate Creation. Since all beliefs can be categorized in one of two ways, either Creationism or Evolution, this blog is intended to weigh the facts on why and how we got here.
I will start out by saying that the earth is made perfectly. No matter how we try and explain it away, the finger print of God is everywhere.
Whether you believe in Alien life forms, the big bang or any other inventions of the mind, it comes down to one thing! Were we created or did we just happen to exist through a cosmic accident that defies all science and logic.
I created this website so that all can voice their opinions and through careful debates, we all can step back and seriously consider the facts. I have always loved apologetics which is a great tool of being able to validate our faith. Discussing these issues can take us on a journey that will either transform us or mature us in what we know to be the truth.
I hope that you will ask questions so that we can have a relaxed discussion and perhaps lead others to the Lord. I will check daily for the debates to begin......Terry
Clearly Seen: Constructing Solid Arguments for Design
Anybody in any culture at any time in history has watched something being created and knows that things don't create themselves. The same distinctive design features in human-designed things are clearly seen in humans and other organisms-thus, they too must have had a Creator.
In Clearly Seen: Constructing Solid Arguments for Design, medical doctor and professional engineer Randy Guliuzza provides a step-by-step teaching guide for using the living things that the Lord Jesus has made as a witness to His reality . . . and capably unwraps their astounding designs as a witness for His engineering genius.
This book confirms the biblical truth that the design in created things is clearly seen by everyone (Romans 1:18-20).
I have added a Bible look up to assist you in your debate. So please start out with a comment so that we can get the debates going. I will check often and as I said, it may take a little time for this to launch as I am looking for ways to promote this site.....Terry/PWNG
I’ll give this a try but I doubt it will get very far. I’ll state my position on a few things and you can tell me what you think of them.
First, quoting the bible as proof of a god will get you nowhere until you can prove that the bible is a reliable source of facts and information.
As soon as any book makes claims of supernatural events that can not be confirmed, it should be dismissed as an obvious fairytale.
The fact that science does not have an answer to every question asked is not a reason to jump to the conclusion that it must be god.
Questions for you.
As a creationist, do you believe that the earth is between 6 and 10 thousand years old and humans were placed here in their current form?
Do you believe that a book that endorses slavery, rape of young virgin girls, genocide and the killing of a child to punish it’s father is an acceptable source of moral guidance?
Hi there Virgil. I cannot do this in just one sitting. I have many articles that will help answer your questions, however I will work on one thing at a time. I will come back in a bit to answer those questions as I have dinner plans shortly. Terry
Hi Virgil, I have an article that can bring light to your question in regards to the Bibles reliability. I must say that there are 3000 Prophecies in the Bible that have been fulfilled exactly as Prophesied. The chances of atleast 3 being fulfilled would indicate a devine intervention and rule out a cosmic coincidence. I hope that you will read the article as it should at best cover some of your concerns. I will use this as the platform to begin testing the reliability of scripture. The Bible is the only writtings given to us by our creator that was penned by man to write exactly that which was told to them. No other religious writtings can make this boast. To begin, I think it to be important to lay the foundation and then to proceed with debating this concern. I am not here to trap you or to convert you. I just like a great discussion as growth comes in many faces. I hope that I have enough space to add the article but may have to send it to your email....Terry
Since Creation Ministries International is based on the Bible, the question arises, why should the Bible be trusted? How should we answer those who claim that it's been re-written so many times that we no longer have the original? And even if we do, was it written long after the events it claimed to report? Also, does archaeology disprove the Bible? Finally, even if it is true, what's the point?
Is our New Testament Text Reliable? Some critics doubt that we even have the original New Testament. This issue can only be settled by using bibliographical tests for reliability, similar to what would be used to judge the Iliad or Caesar's writings.
The NT was completely written by baptized Jews1 in the 1st century AD. We have at least 24,000 manuscripts of the NT, the earliest of which are dated within 100 years or so of its actual composition. The earliest known manuscript is the John Rylands papyrus fragment of John's Gospel known as P52, containing John 18:31-33, 37-38, dated to c. AD 125. Compare this to other great works (MSS = manuscripts):
Author Date Written Earliest MSS Time Span No. MSS Caesar 100-44 BC AD 900 1,000 yrs 10 Plato 427-347 BC 900 AD 1,200 yrs 7 Thucydides 460-400 BC AD 900 1,300 yrs 8 Tacitus AD 100 AD 1100 1,000 yrs 20 Suetonius AD 75-160 AD 950 800 yrs 8 Homer (Iliad) 900 BC 400 BC 500 yrs 643 New Testament AD 40-100 AD 125 25-50 yrs >24,000!
So, by applying the tightest standards scholars can muster (without eliminating all the other classical works), we can conclude that the NT we have is a trustworthy copy of the original.2 NT scholar F.F. Bruce (1919-1990) wrote:
"The evidence for our New Testament writings is ever so much greater than the evidence for many writings of classical authors, the authenticity of which no-one dreams of questioning. And if the New Testament were a collection of secular writings, their authenticity would generally be regarded as beyond all doubt."3
Reliability of the New Testament content Given that we have a trustworthy copy of the original, is the original itself trustworthy? Liberal scholars usually argue that the gospels were written long after the events they claim to record. They typically date Mark between AD 65-75, Matthew at mid 80s, Luke and Acts between 83-90 and John about the turn of the first century. So with a time gap of 35-75 years, there is allegedly no chance that the gospels are reliable records.However, there are cogent arguments by J.A.T. Robinson (1919-1983), who was a liberal and Bishop of Woolwich, for redating the gospels to between AD 40 and 65.4 If Robinson is right, the gospels were written in the lifetimes of people who knew Jesus personally (~6 BC - AD ~30 for His earthly lifetime). Matthew and Luke record Jesus' prophecy of Jerusalem's demise and the destruction of the Temple (Matthew 24:2, Luke 21:20-24) but do not record its fulfilment in AD 70.5 Matthew, especially, would not have failed to record yet another fulfilled prophecy if he had written after the event. Acts, written by Luke after he wrote his gospel, mentions neither the fall of Jerusalem, the horrific persecutions under Nero Caesar (mid 60s)-although other persecutions are mentioned-nor the martyrdoms of James (61), Paul (64) and Peter (65), so was probably written before then.6
The Swedish scholar Birger Gerhardsson has shown that the canonical gospels drew on a collective communal memory made strong by the oral teaching methods of the time. These techniques would have enabled 'very accurate communication between Jesus and his followers' and would have ensured "excellent semantic recall".7,8
So Jesus' disciples would have been very capable of recording His statements accurately, and they give evidence of having done so honestly. For example, they admit certain facts which forgers probably would have left out (e.g. the cowardice of the disciples, the competition for high places within the Kingdom, Peter's denial, the failure of Jesus to work many miracles in His hometown of Galilee (because of their unbelief-Matthew 13:58, Mark 6:6), references to accusations against His sanity and parentage, and that He didn't know the timing of His return.
If the gospels were written by church communities (as many skeptics argue) instead of the four evangelists, it is likely that they would have tried to solve their problems by putting solutions into the mouth of Christ. But the gospels do not mention some of the controversies of the early church (e.g. circumcision), but record things quite irrelevant to a mainly gentile church, such as Christ's being sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 10:5-6). Thus the internal evidence points to the gospels being written before many of the Church's problems arose.
Paul wrote even earlier: the summary of the gospel in 1 Corinthians 15 was written in c. AD 55, but Paul says he is reminding them of something he preached to them about 15 years earlier. Therefore Paul records a tradition which was well established within a decade of Christ's death.
Julius Müller (1801-1878) challenged 19th century skeptics to show anywhere in history where within 30 years, legends had accumulated around a historical person and become firmly fixed.9 But even if one accepts the late dates of most liberals, one must note that Prof. Sherwin-White (1911-1993), the eminent classical historian from Oxford University, has pointed out that legends require a time gap of more than two generations. Therefore, if the Gospels are legendary, the rate of legendary accumulation would need to be "unbelievable".10 He wrote:
"For Acts the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming . any attempt to reject its basic historicity, even in matters of detail, must now appear absurd. Roman historians have long taken it for granted."10
Also, John claims to be an eye-witness (John 21:24). Luke claims to have relied on eye-witnesses (Luke 1:1-4), and was a companion of the Apostle Paul (Colossians 4:14). He may have been Cleopas' un-named companion on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:13 ff.).11 Mark relied heavily on Peter, who claimed that he "did not follow cleverly devised tales" (2 Peter 1:16). Matthew, according to early church tradition, was written by the disciple and ex-tax-collector of that name.
Is there any archaeological confirmation for the Bible? In actual fact, we have many first-century non-Christian historians and writers who confirm the life and execution of Jesus: Cornelius Tacitus, Lucian of Samosata, Flavius Josephus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, Thallus, Phlegon, Mara Bar-Serapion, and references in the Talmud and other Jewish writings. Encyclopædia Britannica sums up the force of the data:
"These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries."
The gospels have also been supported by archaeology. Sir William Mitchell Ramsay (1851-1939), the archaeologist and professor from Oxford and Cambridge Universities, started investigating Luke's gospel with the assumption that Luke was mistaken in many areas. But Ramsay discovered time and time again that Luke was absolutely precise about place names and the many varied titles of rulers. Ramsay concluded:
'Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy . this author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians.'-Archaeologist Sir William Ramsay
"Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy . this author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians."12
The Old Testament has been supported repeatedly by archaeology. The Hittites were once thought to be a biblical myth, but their enormous ancient capital, Hattusa, was discovered at modern Boghazköy. Archaeology has also vindicated the war of four kings vs five in Gen. 14. and Belshazzar's kingship in Daniel.
What is the key teaching of the New Testament? So, given that Jesus existed, what are we to make of the reliability or unreliability of those documents that claim to give a historical account of His life and teachings? If we accept the historical evidence that the NT is a reliable record, what does it teach?
The bodily Resurrection of Christ is one of the key doctrines of Christianity, as it demonstrates His claims to deity (Romans 1:4), confirms the truth of all He said (Matthew 28:6), and shows that He conquered death, thus guaranteeing the resurrection of believers (2 Corinthians 4:14). The apostle Paul wrote:
". if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still dead in your sins. .. If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied. .. If the dead are not raised, let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die" (1 Corinthians 15:17, 19, 32b).
The Jews regarded the body as an integral part of Man, so the Resurrection must include the body:
"The notion that Jesus was resurrected in a totally spiritual sense, while his old body lay in the grave, is a purely modern conception. First-century Jewish thinking would never have accepted such a view and that is not how Jesus' Resurrection was proclaimed in the earliest accounts. It would have been impossible for Resurrection claims to survive in the face of a tomb containing the corpse of Jesus."13
One major difficulty for non-Christian scholars has been to explain what happened to Christ's body, as a plausible alternative to the Resurrection. Christ's enemies would not want to steal it, since that would promote the resurrection stories they wanted to quash-and they would have quashed them by simply producing the body. The disciples had no motive to confront a heavily armed Roman cohort and steal the body to promote Resurrection stories. The disciples were tortured and killed, and no-one would die for what he knows is a lie. However, one of the earliest arguments against the Resurrection was the story the Roman soldiers were bribed to say: "His disciples came by night and stole Him away while we were asleep" (Matthew 28:13). This is absurd: how could they know what happened if they were asleep? Also, any Roman soldier who slept on duty was executed.
Some critics try to explain away the empty tomb by claiming that there was no tomb, and that Jesus was buried in a common grave. However, Paul stated that Jesus was buried, which in Greek is etaphe, which literally means entombed (from en, 'in'; taphos, 'tomb'). Peter also contrasted Jesus, whose body did not "see decay" (NIV), with David, whose body still lay in his tomb (Acts 2:22-35).
Paul's statement of the gospel in 1 Cor. 15 cites an ancient tradition dating back to only a few years after the event. Mark's account of the empty tomb reflects the Aramaic, pointing to a very early source. Dr William Lane Craig gives much evidence for the reliability of the burial and empty tomb accounts.14 Also, James Patrick Holding provides at least 17 factors that meant Christianity could not have succeeded in the ancient world, unless it were backed up with irrefutable proof of the Resurrection.15
What's it to me? Scripture show that there is a God who created us and therefore owns us. He has set a perfect moral standard of which we fall short (Romans 3:23). He is perfectly just, so must punish transgressions. Since our transgressions offend His infinite holiness, the punishment must also be infinite.
Either we must suffer such punishment, or else a Substitute must endure it in our place (Isaiah 53). The Substitute must be fully human to substitute for humanity (Hebrews 2:14), and must be fully Divine to endure God's infinite wrath (Isaiah 53:10). To be the mediator between God and Man, Jesus must be both. 1 Timothy 2:5 states:
"For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus". We cannot earn salvation by any deeds we do (Romans 3:24, 4:2, Ephesians 2:8-9). These verses teach that justification, the declaration of legal innocence before God, is a gift. It takes place the moment one has faith in Christ (Romans 5:1).
The content of faith (the Greek is pistis = belief) is set out by Christ's chosen apostle Paul:
"Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures (1 Corinthians 15:1-4)."
Abstract: Scripture had supreme authority for the Old Testament saints, Christ and His apostles in all matters it touched upon. In particular, for Christ, what Scripture said, God said. Christ also directly affirmed many of the passages attacked by liberals. Objections to the inerrancy and suffiency of Scripture are refuted. The charge that Christ was mistaken or merely accommodating to His hearers is impossible for a consistent Christian to hold. The charge of circular reasoning fails on several counts: the internal and external cross-checks, and the role that axioms play in all philosophical systems.
I) Old Testament: 1) Moses Moses often testified that his writings were from God:
Exodus 24:4: 'Moses then wrote down everything the LORD had said .' See also v.7, Ex. 34:27-28, Nu. 33:1-2, Dt. 31:9,
Deuteronomy 31:11: 'when all Israel comes to appear before the LORD your God at the place he will choose, you shall read this law before them in their hearing.' 2) Joshua: Joshua 1:8: 'Do not let this Book of the Law depart from your mouth; meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do everything written in it. Then you will be prosperous and successful.' The book of the Law is the Torah, also called the Pentateuch, or the first five books of the Bible.
3) David (c. 1000 BC) Israel's greatest king clearly also regarded the Law very highly. At his stage in history, not too many books of Scripture had been written, but the Pentateuch was regarded as God's Law. Psalm 1:2: 'But his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night.'
II) New Testament 1) Jesus Christ: Matthew 19:3-6: 3 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, 'Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?' 4 'Haven't you read,' he replied, 'that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' 5 and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'? 6 So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.' Note:
Christ accepted the Genesis Creation account literally (see also But from the beginning of . the institution of marriage? In fact, Jesus believed the parts of Scripture most attacked by sceptics today - see Jesus Christ on the infallibility of Scripture) He cited from Genesis 1:27 and 2:24, showing that He did not regard Genesis 1 and 2 as separate contradictory creation accounts, but as complementary. See also Do Genesis 1 and 2 contradict each other? v.5, which in Genesis is an editorial comment, is equated with the word of the Creator. This is not the only place where the New Testament cites an Old Testament passage as 'God said'; compare the following pairs: Ps. 2:1 & Acts 4:24-25, Ps. 2:7 & Heb. 1:5, Ps. 16:10 & Acts 13:35, Ps. 95:7 & Heb. 3:7, Ps. 97:7 & Heb. 1:6, Ps. 104:4 & Heb. 1:7, Is. 55:3 & Acts 13:34. The converse is true in the following pairs: Gen. 12:3 & Gal. 3:8, Ex. 9:16 & Rom. 9:17; where a direct statement by God in the OT is cited as 'Scripture said'.
26 'Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. 27 People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all. 28 'It was the same in the days of Lot. People were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building. 29 But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all. 30 'It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed. 31On that day no one who is on the roof of his house, with his goods inside, should go down to get them. Likewise, no one in the field should go back for anything. 32 Remember Lot's wife!
Note: Christ took the accounts of Noah's flood, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and the calamity befalling Lot's wife literally. Those who dispute their historicity are therefore defying Christ. Matthew 12:39 ff. shows that Christ took the account of Jonah and the whale literally, and even used it as a type of His resurrection.
Luke 16:31: 'He (Abraham) said to him (the rich man in Hell), "If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead."'
Note: Christ clearly shows how important the Old Testament is. Many liberal evolutionary theologians who reject Moses also refuse to believe that Christ rose from the dead.
John 5:46-47: 46 If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me. 47 But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?
Note: a similar lesson can be learnt - liberals who doubt Moses often doubt what Jesus said (except of course for a selective use of His words if they could somehow be twisted to support a politically correct cause they happened to agree with).
Also, this shows that the 'JEDP/Documentary Hypothesis' of the Pentateuch is contrary to Christ, who clearly taught that the Pentateuch was edited by Moses. See Did Moses really write Genesis?
Matthew 22:23-34: 23 That same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. 24 "Teacher," they said, "Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and have children for him. 25 Now there were seven brothers among us. The first one married and died, and since he had no children, he left his wife to his brother. 26 The same thing happened to the second and third brother, right on down to the seventh. 27 Finally, the woman died. 28 Now then, at the resurrection, whose wife will she be of the seven, since all of them were married to her?" 29 Jesus replied, "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. 30 At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. 31 But about the resurrection of the dead - have you not read what God said to you, 32 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living." 33 When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at his teaching.
the Sadducees only accepted the Pentateuch as Scripture, while the Pharisees accepted the same books as the Protestant OT (as confirmed by the prologue to Ecclesiasticus (ca. 130 BC), Josephus (ca. AD 90), Melito (ca. AD 170)). Jesus accused the Sadducees of not knowing the Scriptures, because they did not accept the Prophets and Writings.
Even the Scriptures accepted by the Sadducees taught the resurrection: Christ demonstrated this with an argument depending on the present tense of the implied verb 'to be' implied - the patriarchs were living in a sense in Moses' day, centuries after they had died physically. This passage shows that the Lord believed in verbal plenary inspiration of Scripture.
Matthew 5:18: 'I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.'
Note: the 'jot' was the smallest Hebrew letter, and the 'tittle' was a small part of the letter. So Christ is supporting inspiration even down to the individual letters.
Return to Contents Matthew 23:35: 'And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.'
Jesus here gives the extent of the Canon of Scripture: The Pharisees' Bible is the same as the Protestant OT, but the order is different. The first book was still Genesis, but the last book was 2 Chronicles. That generation was to be held responsible for all God's people murdered in the OT, from Abel (Gen. 4:8) to Zechariah (2 Chron. 24:20-21). There were other martyrdoms recorded in the Apocrypha, but Jesus did not regard these writings as Scripture, and never cited them. Jesus agreed with the Pharisaic canon (John 5:39), but not the Saddusaic one.
The Apocrypha was not recognised as canonical by the Jewish scholars at Jamnia (AD 90), and the Talmud stated that the Holy Spirit departed from Israel after Malachi. Many Church Fathers agreed, e.g. Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Jerome. Athanasius, in his 39th Festal Letter of AD 367, listed the same canon as modern Protestants (with the exception of the book of Esther). He also stated that the Apocryphal books Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Sirach, Esther additions, Judith and Tobit were worth reading but not canonical. He made no mention of the books of Maccabees.1
The apocryphal books abound in geographical and historical errors,2 e.g. 2 Macc. 15:1 ff is inconsistent with 1 Macc. 2:41; Judith 1:1 has Nebuchadnezzar reigning in Nineveh rather than Babylon. The morality and doctrine of the apocryphal books also falls short of biblical standards: Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom teach morality based on expedience; God assists Judith in a lie (Judith 9:10,13); salvation by works (Tobit 12:9, 14:10-11); prayers for the dead (2 Macc 12:45-46), pre-existence of souls (Wisdom 8:19-20) and creation out of pre-existent matter (Wisdom 11:17). Even the books themselves disclaim divine inspiration: 1 Macc. 9:27 recognises that prophecy had disappeared in Israel, while 2 Macc. 15:37-39 admits that it was a human composition with possible flaws.
It's also important to note that each book was canonical as soon as it was finished, because its ultimate author was God Himself. Their canonicity did not have to wait for the Church to choose them. The NT scholar FF Bruce writes:
'The NT books did not become authoritative for the Church because they were formally included in a canonical list; on the contrary, the Church included them in her canon because she already regarded them as divinely inspired, recognising their innate worth and generally apostolic authority, direct or indirect.. [Church] councils [did] not impose something new upon the Christian communities but codif[ied] what was already the general practice of those communities.'3
John 10:35 '. and the scriptures cannot be broken.' - self-explanatory
John 14:26:'But the Counsellor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.'
Note: Christ here promises his disciples that they would be taught by the Holy Spirit. These teachings eventually became written down in the New Testament.
2 Timothy 3:15-17: 15 and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Note:
the Greek word for 'Scriptures' in v.15 is ???????? (grammata), and must refer to the OT alone, as these are the only Scriptures Timothy would have known from his childhood in v. 16, the word translated 'Scripture' is ????? (graphe), which would include the OT plus all the NT written by then (AD 63), i.e. all the NT except 2 Peter, Hebrews, Jude, and John's writings. As Paul's writings were divinely inspired, this statement would apply even to the latter books. 'God-breathed' is a correct translation by the NIV of the Greek word ??????????? (theopneustos). If Scripture is 'God-breathed' and God cannot err, it logically follows that Scripture cannot err. Scripture is able to make a man 'wise unto salvation' and 'thoroughly furnished unto all good works'. This implies that Scripture contains all the doctrine and moral law we need. But since v. 16 makes it clear that all Scripture is God-breathed, not just some, inerrancy applies to whatever the Bible affirms, and is not restricted just to those verses deemed to relate to faith and conduct. After all, doctrine is inextricably linked to history and science, so that whatever Scripture affirms on scientific or historical matters is also true. For example, the key doctrine of the Resurrection is linked to the historical fact that Jesus' body had vacated the tomb on the third day. It also impinges on science, because naturalistic scientists assert that it is impossible for dead men to rise. And the meaning of Jesus' death and resurrection is tied to the historical accuracy of the event recorded in Genesis (1 Cor. 15:21-22). And if we bow to uniformitarian 'science' in the area of origins, what should we do when Scriptural teaching on morality conflicts with 'science', e.g. the Bible's prohibition on adultery or homosexual acts vs 'scientific' assertions that such behaviours are 'in our genes'. Jesus asked Nicodemus 'I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?' (John 3:12). Paul brings up two positive uses of Scripture-teaching and training in righteousness-and two negative uses-reproof and correction. The former entails that there is nothing in Scripture that should mislead us into factual or moral error; the latter entails that Scripture should enable readers to reject ideas and practices that conflict with it. Any errors would undermine Scripture's dual role. 1 Tim 5:18 cites both Deut. 25:4 and Luke 10:7 as graphe; i.e. both the Old and New Testaments. This again shows that the NT was already regarded as Scripture even in apostolic times.
1 Timothy 2:12-14: 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
Note: Paul accepted the Genesis account as a historical narrative, and used it to teach on the role of men and women in Church.
Acts 17:1-3: 1 When they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a Jewish synagogue. 2 As his custom was, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3 explaining and proving that the Christ had to suffer and rise from the dead. 'This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Christ,' he said.
Note: this shows how important the Scriptures were to Paul's evangelism to Jews, who already accepted them as authoritative.
Acts 17:10-11: 10 As soon as it was night, the brothers sent Paul and Silas away to Berea. On arriving there, they went to the Jewish synagogue. 11 Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.
This shows that even Paul's teaching was subjected to the test of Scripture by people who were commended for it. So Christians today should follow that Berean example and test the teachings of any church (or scientist) by Scripture.
3) Peter: 2 Pet. 1:20-21: 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation.
21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.
Note: The chief Apostle, Peter, believed that God moved (literally 'carried along') the writers of Scripture so that they recorded exactly what He wanted. However, God did not usually dictate the words, but superintended the authors so that, using their own individual personalities, they recorded His revelation without error.
2 Peter 3:15-16: 15 Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
Note: Peter affirms that Paul's writings were also Scripture.
Return to Contents 4) Jude Jude 3: 'Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.'
N.B. If the faith was once delivered, then there is no need for additional revelations of doctrine after the canon of scripture was closed).
5) John: John 14:26: 'But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.'
Christ's promise in John 14:26 was to His disciples personally present. John was the last survivor, so his books are the last of the NT Canon. It is possible that Rev. 22:18-19 is an indication that this book closes the Canon.
Return to Contents 6) Church Fathers: All the NT except 11 verses could be reconstructed from the writings of the Fathers.4 For Irenaeus (c. AD 170), the fourfold Gospel was as axiomatic as the four quarters of the earth and the four winds. He cited 23 of the 27 NT books, omitting only Philemon, James, 2 Peter and 3 John. Ignatius (AD 50-115), Bishop of Antioch, cited 15 NT books. He recognised that the NT had a higher authority than he: 'I do not order you, as did Peter and Paul. They were Apostles and I am even until now a slave' (Letter to the Romans)
Augustine recognized the cardinal importance of biblical inerrancy:
For it seems to me that most disastrous consequences must follow upon our believing that anything false is found in the sacred books: that is to say, that the men by whom the Scripture has been given to us, and committed to writing, did put down in these books anything false. It is one question whether it may be at any time the duty of a good man to deceive; but it is another question whether it can have been the duty of a writer of Holy Scripture to deceive: nay, it is not another question - it is no question at all. For if you once admit into such a high sanctuary of authority one false statement as made in the way of duty, there will not be left a single sentence of those books which, if appearing to any one difficult in practice or hard to believe, may not by the same fatal rule be explained away, as a statement in which, intentionally, and under a sense of duty, the author declared what was not true. (First letter to Jerome)
Objections refuted 1) John 20:30: 'Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.'
This verse is used to suggest that perhaps the Church has preserved some essential doctrines not taught in Scripture. However, the next verse implies that what was written was enough (note all the NT had been written by the time that John was written, except for his letters and Revelation) - John 20:31:
'But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.' 2) 2 Thessalonians 2:15: 'So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.'
This verse is sometimes alleged to support the existence of essential tradition not recorded in scripture. However, this book was probably one of the first NT books written (AD 51), so the verse does not apply once all the essential traditions had been recorded in the NT. 1 Cor. 15:1 ff. is a good example of a well established oral tradition which Paul writes down.
3) 1 Timothy 3:15: 'if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.'
Paul was simply affirming the church as the support and bulwark - not the source - of God's truth. His words should not be stretched beyond this to claim that no-one can know the truth unless he depends on the teaching of some organised church or church group. Note:
The Greek word ecclesia means congregation or assembly, so this verse cannot rule out (say) Carindale Community Church of the Nazarene. Even a church founded by apostles could have its lampstand removed from its place (Rev. 2:5). 4) 'Jesus was mistaken, because in the Incarnation his omnipotence was masked.' Often this and the next blasphemous charge are made by liberal theologians or theistic evolutionists with pious-sounding talk about Jesus' humanity. But:
This confuses Limitation and misunderstanding:5 while the Second Person of the Trinity was incarnate in Jesus of Nazareth, He voluntarily limited His omniscience (Phil. 2:5-11). I.e., in His humanity, He did not know all things. But this does not entail that He was mistaken about anything He said. All human understanding is finite, but this doesn't entail that every human understanding is errant. Also, what Jesus did preach, He proclaimed with absolute authority (Mt. 24:35, 28:18), because He was speaking with the full authority of God the Father (John 5:30, 8:28), who is always omniscient. So if a liberal wishes to maintain his charge that Christ was mistaken because of His humanity, he must logically charge God the Father with error as well. Or else, if Jesus taught an inerrant Bible and attributed his teaching to the Father and such teaching is wrong, Jesus must be a charlatan in a hopeless muddle. Where do you draw the line? If Jesus was wrong in His view of Scripture, maybe He was wrong in other areas too. Who decides whether He is right or wrong? We must, so Jesus loses His authority.
5) 'Jesus deliberately accommodated Himself to the mistaken views of His audience.' But:
This confuses Adaptation to human finitude with accommodation to human error:5 the former does not entail the latter. A mother might tell her four-year-old 'you grew inside my tummy' - this is not false, but language simplified to the child's level. Conversely, 'the stork brought you' is an outright error. Similarly, God, the author of truth, used some simplified descriptions (e.g. using the earth as a reference frame, as modern scientists do today) and anthropomorphisms, but never error. Jesus often challenged His audience, so He would not have failed to point out their mistaken views on Scripture, if such they were. If Jesus acquiesced in this error, maybe He did so elsewhere as well. Who ultimately decides when Jesus is acquiescing? We must, so once again, Jesus loses His authority. The passages considered in section II(1) show that Jesus was not just acquiescing to the views of His audience on the inerrancy of Scripture, but was in fact reinforcing them. 6) 'Jesus was misreported, or we can't possibly know what He believed.' But:
First, it is absurd for liberals to claim to be 'Christian' if they cannot be sure that they are really following Christ. Even many liberal scholars believe that there is overwhelming historical evidence that Christ affirmed biblical inerrancy, although they disagree with Him. The evangelical scholar Harold Lindsell6 cites the liberal scholars H.J. Cadbury, Adolph Harnack, Rudolf Bultmann and F.C. Grant to prove this point. 7) 'This is circular reasoning.' In answer to that:
As shown, even many liberals believe that there is overwhelming evidence that Christ affirmed biblical inerrancy. Such independent support of Christ's statements proves that evangelicals do not necessarily commit the fallacy of arguing in a circle, of using the Bible to prove the Bible. It is not circular to use Matthew to prove Genesis (Mt. 19:3-6, cf. Gen. 1:27, 2:4), Paul to prove Luke (1 Tim 5:18, cf. Lk. 10:7) or Peter to prove Paul (2 Pet. 3:15-16). Finally, allegedly circular reasoning at least demonstrates the internal consistency of the Bible's claims it makes about itself. If the Bible had actually disclaimed divine inspiration, it would indeed be illogical to defend it. This is one argument against the canonicity of the Apocrypha - as shown above, 1 Macc. 9:27 and 2 Macc. 15:37-39 disclaim divine inspiration. Creation Ministries International accepts the authority of Scripture as an axiom or presupposition: i.e. as a starting point or assumption that requires no proof, and is the basis for all reasoning. All philosophical systems start with axioms. So it's not a question of a religious system starting from prior assumptions vs. a 'scientific' system without any prior assumptions, but which axioms are self-consistent and provide a consistent framework in which to fit the evidence. See also Creation: 'Where's the proof?' and Loving God With All Your Mind: Logic and Creation.
Jesus Christ on the infallibility of Scripture by Dr David Livingston
Published: 6 April 2004 (GMT+10) There is considerable debate these days concerning the inerrancy (infallibility) of Scripture. The authority of God's Word is the main issue. But, if one yields to the authority of Jesus Christ (Yeshua HaMashiach), he must, in turn, yield to Christ's view of the Scripture itself. Anyone and everyone who claims to be a Christian (a believer under the authority of Christ) must hold to the same view He did! What was it?
I. Negative aspects (an argument from silence-but a loud silence!) Jesus never belittled Scripture (as some modern critics do), or set it aside (as the Jewish leaders of His day had done with their Oral Traditions), or criticized it (although He criticized those who misused it), or contradicted it (although He rejected many interpretations of it), or opposed it (although He sometimes was free or interpretive with it), nor spoke in any way as 'higher' critics do of the Old Testament (Tanakh).
II. Christ's use of Scripture As Louis Gaussen has asserted, 'We are not afraid to say it: when we hear the Son of God quote the Scriptures, every thing is said, in our view, on their divine inspiration-we need no further testimony. All the declarations of the Bible are, no doubt, equally divine; but this example of the Savior of the world has settled the question for us at once. This proof requires neither long nor learned researches; it is grasped by the hand of a child as powerfully as by that of a doctor. Should any doubt, then, assail your soul let it behold Him in the presence of the Scriptures!'1
He knew the Scriptures thoroughly, even to words and verb tenses. He obviously had either memorized vast portions or knew it instinctively: John 7:15.2
He believed every word of Scripture. All the prophecies concerning Himself were fulfilled,3 and He believed beforehand they would be.4
He believed the Old Testament was historical fact. This is very clear, even though from the Creation (cf. Genesis 2:24 and Matthew 19:4, 5) onward, much of what He believed has long been under fire by critics, as being mere fiction. Some examples of historical facts:
Luke 11:51-Abel was a real individual Matthew 24:37-39-Noah and the flood (Luke 17:26, 27) John 8:56-58-Abraham Matthew 10:15; 11:23, 24 (Luke 10:12)-Sodom and Gomorrah Luke 17:28-32-Lot (and wife!) Matthew 8:11-Isaac and Jacob (Luke 13:28) John 6:31, 49, 58-Manna John 3:14-Serpent Matthew 12:39-41-Jonah (vs. 42-Sheba) Matthew 24:15-Daniel and Isaiah He believed the books were written by the men whose names they bear:
Moses wrote the Pentateuch (Torah): Matthew 19:7, 8; Mark 7:10, 12:26 ('Book of Moses'-the Torah); Luke 5:14; 16:29,31; 24:27, 44 ('Christ's Canon'); John 1:17; 5:45, 46; 7:19; ('The Law [Torah] was given by Moses; Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ.')5 Isaiah wrote 'both' Isaiah's: Mark 7:6-13; John 12:37-41 [Ed. note: Liberals claim that Isaiah 40-66 was composed after the fall of Jerusalem by another writer they call 'Deutero-Isaiah'. The only real 'reason' for their claim is that a straightforward dating would mean that predictive prophecy was possible, and liberals have decreed a priori that knowledge of the future is impossible (like miracles in general). Thus these portions must have been written after the events. However, there is nothing in the text itself to hint of a different author. See The Unity of Isaiah. In fact, even the Dead Sea Isaiah Scroll was a seamless unity. But as Dr Livingston said, since Jesus affirmed the unity of Isaiah, the deutero-Isaiah theory is just not an option for anyone calling himself a follower of Christ.] Jonah wrote Jonah: Matthew 12:39-41 Daniel wrote Daniel: Matthew 24:15 He believed the Old Testament was spoken by God Himself, or written by the Holy Spirit's inspiration, even though the pen was held by men: Matthew 19:4, 5; 22:31, 32, 43; Mark 12:26; Luke 20:37.
He believed Scripture was more powerful than His miracles: Luke 16:29, 31.
He actually quoted it in overthrowing Satan! The O.T. Scriptures were the arbiter in every dispute: Matthew 4; Luke 16:29, 31.
He quoted Scripture as the basis for his own teaching. His ethics were the same as what we find already written in Scripture: Matthew 7:12; 19:18, 19; 22:40; Mark 7:9, 13; 10:19; 12:24, 29-31; Luke 18:20.
He warned against replacing it with something else, or adding or subtracting from it. The Jewish leaders in His day had added to it with their Oral Traditions: Matthew 5:17; 15:1-9; 22:29; (cf. 5:43, 44); Mark. 7:1-12. (Destroying faith in the Bible as God's Word will open the door today to a 'new' Tradition.)
He will judge all men in the last day, as Messiah and King, on the basis of His infallible Word committed to writing by fallible men, guided by the infallible Holy Spirit: Matthew 25:31; John 5:22, 27; 12:48; Romans 2:16.
He made provision for the New Testament (B'rit Hadashah) by sending the Holy Spirit (the Ruach HaKodesh). We must note that He Himself never wrote one word of Scripture although He is the Word of God Himself (the living Torah in flesh and blood, see John, chapter 1). He committed the task of all writing of the Word of God to fallible men-guided by the infallible Holy Spirit. The apostles' words had the same authority as Christ's: Matthew 10:14, 15; Luke 10:16; John 13:20; 14:22; 15:26, 27; 16:12-14.
He not only was not jealous of the attention men paid to the Bible (denounced as 'bibliolatry' by some), He reviled them for their ignorance of it: Matthew 22:29; Mark 12:24.
Nor did Jesus worship Scripture. He honored it-even though written by men.
The above leaves no room but to conclude that our Lord Jesus Christ considered the canon of Scripture as God's Word, written by the hand of men.
Although some religious leaders profess to accept Scripture as 'God's Word,' their low view of 'inspiration' belies the fact. They believe and teach that Scripture is, to a very significant degree, man's word. Many of their statements are in essential disagreement with those of Jesus Christ. From the evidence of their books, we conclude that some Christian leaders are opposite to Christ in His regard for the authority, the inspiration, and the inerrancy of Scripture.
III. Jesus Christ was subject to Scripture Jesus obeyed the Word of God, not man. He was subject to it. If some leaders' view of inspiration were true, Jesus was subject to an errant, rather casually thrown-together 'Word of Man.' Jesus would have been subject, then, to the will of man, not the will of God.
However, in all the details of His acts of redemption, Jesus was subject to Scripture as God's Word. He obeyed it. It was His authority, the rule by which He lived. He came to do God's will, not His own, and not man's. Note how all of His life He did things because they were written-as if God had directly commanded. He fulfilled Old Testament prophecies about Himself. The passages are found all over the Old Testament. We cite here only a very few quoted in the New Testament: Matthew 11:10; 26:24, 53-56; Mark 9:12, 13; Luke 4:17-21; 18:31-33; 22:37; 24:44-47.
He Himself is the Word of God. All the words from His lips were the Word of God. (John 3:34). If He had desired, He could have written a new set of rules and they would have been the Word of God. But, He did not. He followed without question the Bible already penned by men.
This is the sensible thing for every believer to do. May all who read this adopt Jesus' attitude and become subject both to Him as Living Word (living Torah) and to the Bible as the infallible, written Word of God.
This was the foundation to begin the next step. The probabilities using mathamatical calculations proves that the writtings of the Bible are so accurate that there is no such number to fully understand the magnitude of so many scriptures being fulfilled 100% of the time. Thos numbers will be my next posting.
Applying the Science of Probability to the Scriptures Do statistics prove the Bible's supernatural origin? by Dr. David R. Reagan
For years I have been quoting a book by Peter Stoner called Science Speaks. I like to use a remarkable illustration from it to show how Bible prophecy proves that Jesus was truly God in the flesh.
I decided that I would try to find a copy of the book so that I could discover all that it had to say about Bible prophecy. The book was first published in 1958 by Moody Press. After considerable searching on the Internet, I was finally able to find a revised edition published in 1976.
Peter Stoner was chairman of the mathematics and astronomy departments at Pasadena City College until 1953 when he moved to Westmont College in Santa Barbara, California. There he served as chairman of the science division. At the time he wrote this book, he was professor emeritus of science at Westmont.
In the edition I purchased, there was a foreword by Dr. Harold Hartzler, an officer of the American Scientific Affiliation. He wrote that the manuscript had been carefully reviewed by a committee of his organization and that "the mathematical analysis included is based upon principles of probability which are thoroughly sound." He further stated that in the opinion of the Affiliation, Professor Stoner "has applied these principles in a proper and convincing way."
The book is divided into three sections. Two relate directly to Bible prophecy. The first section deals with the scientific validity of the Genesis account of creation.
Part One: The Genesis Record Stoner begins with a very interesting observation. He points out that his copy of Young's General Astronomy, published in 1898, is full of errors. Yet, the Bible, written over 2,000 years ago is devoid of scientific error. For example, the shape of the earth is mentioned in Isaiah 40:22. Gravity can be found in Job 26:7. Ecclesiastes 1:6 mentions atmospheric circulation. A reference to ocean currents can be found in Psalm 8:8, and the hydraulic cycle is described in Ecclesiastes 1:7 and Isaiah 55:10. The second law of thermodynamics is outlined in Psalm 102:25-27 and Romans 8:21. And these are only a few examples of scientific truths written in the Scriptures long before they were "discovered" by scientists.
Stoner proceeds to present scientific evidence in behalf of special creation. For example, he points out that science had previously taught that special creation was impossible because matter could not be destroyed or created. He then points out that atomic physics had now proved that energy can be turned into matter and matter into energy.
He then considers the order of creation as presented in Genesis 1:1-13. He presents argument after argument from a scientific viewpoint to sustain the order which Genesis chronicles. He then asks, "What chance did Moses have when writing the first chapter [of Genesis] of getting thirteen items all accurate and in satisfactory order?" His calculations conclude it would be one chance in 31,135,104,000,000,000,000,000 (1 in 31 x 1021). He concludes, "Perhaps God wrote such an account in Genesis so that in these latter days, when science has greatly developed, we would be able to verify His account and know for a certainty that God created this planet and the life on it."
The only disappointing thing about Stoner's book is that he spiritualizes the reference to days in Genesis, concluding that they refer to periods of time of indefinite length. Accordingly, he concludes that the earth is approximately 4 billion years old. In his defense, keep in mind that he wrote this book before the foundation of the modern Creation Science Movement which was founded in the 1960's by Dr. Henry Morris. That movement has since produced many convincing scientific arguments in behalf of a young earth with an age of only 6,000 years.
Peter Stoner's Calculations Regarding Messianic Prophecy Peter Stoner calculated the probability of just 8 Messianic prophecies being fulfilled in the life of Jesus. As you read through these prophecies, you will see that all estimates were calculated as conservatively as possible.
The Messiah will be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2). The average population of Bethlehem from the time of Micah to the present (1958) divided by the average population of the earth during the same period = 7,150/2,000,000,000 or 2.8x105.
A messenger will prepare the way for the Messiah (Malachi 3:1). One man in how many, the world over, has had a forerunner (in this case, John the Baptist) to prepare his way? Estimate: 1 in 1,000 or 1x103.
The Messiah will enter Jerusalem as a king riding on a donkey (Zechariah 9:9). One man in how many, who has entered Jerusalem as a ruler, has entered riding on a donkey? Estimate: 1 in 100 or 1x102.
The Messiah will be betrayed by a friend and suffer wounds in His hands (Zechariah 13:6). One man in how many, the world over, has been betrayed by a friend, resulting in wounds in his hands? Estimate: 1 in 1,000 or 1x103.
The Messiah will be betrayed for 30 pieces of silver (Zechariah 11:12). Of the people who have been betrayed, one in how many has been betrayed for exactly 30 pieces of silver? Estimate: 1 in 1,000 or 1x103.
The betrayal money will be used to purchase a potter's field (Zechariah 11:13). One man in how many, after receiving a bribe for the betrayal of a friend, has returned the money, had it refused, and then experienced it being used to buy a potter's field? Estimate: 1 in 100,000 or 1x105.
The Messiah will remain silent while He is afflicted (Isaiah 53:7). One man in how many, when he is oppressed and afflicted, though innocent, will make no defense of himself? Estimate: 1 in 1,000 or 1x103.
The Messiah will die by having His hands and feet pierced (Psalm 22:16). One man in how many, since the time of David, has been crucified? Estimate: 1 in 10,000 or 1x104.
Multiplying all these probabilities together produces a number (rounded off) of 1x1028. Dividing this number by an estimate of the number of people who have lived since the time of these prophecies (88 billion) produces a probability of all 8 prophecies being fulfilled accidently in the life of one person. That probability is 1in 1017 or 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000. That's one in one hundred quadrillion!
Part Two: The Accuracy of Prophecy The second section of Stoner's book, is entitled "Prophetic Accuracy." This is where the book becomes absolutely fascinating. One by one, he takes major Bible prophecies concerning cities and nations and calculates the odds of their being fulfilled. The first is a prophecy in Ezekiel 26 concerning the city of Tyre. Seven prophecies are contained in this chapter which was written in 590 BC:
Nebuchadnezzar shall conquer the city (vs. 7-11).
Other nations will assist Nebuchadnezzar (v. 3).
The city will be made like a bare rock (vs. 4 & 14).
It will become a place for the spreading of fishing nets (vs. 5 & 14).
Its stones and timbers will be thrown into the sea (v. 12).
Other cities will fear greatly at the fall of Tyre (v. 16).
The old city of Tyre will never be rebuilt (v. 14). Four years after this prophecy was given, Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Tyre. The siege lasted 13 years. When the city finally fell in 573 BC, it was discovered that everything of value had been moved to a nearby island.
Two hundred and forty-one years later Alexander the Great arrived on the scene. Fearing that the fleet of Tyre might be used against his homeland, he decided to take the island where the city had been moved to. He accomplished this goal by building a causeway from the mainland to the island, and he did that by using all the building materials from the ruins of the old city. Neighboring cities were so frightened by Alexander's conquest that they immediately opened their gates to him. Ever since that time, Tyre has remained in ruins and is a place where fishermen spread their nets.
Thus, every detail of the prophecy was fulfilled exactly as predicted. Stoner calculated the odds of such a prophecy being fulfilled by chance as being 1 in 75,000,000, or 1 in 7.5x107. (The exponent 7 indicates that the decimal is to be moved to the right seven places.)
Stoner proceeds to calculate the probabilities of the prophecies concerning Samaria, Gaza and Ashkelon, Jericho, Palestine, Moab and Ammon, Edom, and Babylon. He also calculates the odds of prophecies being fulfilled that predicted the closing of the Eastern Gate (Ezekiel 44:1-3), the plowing of Mount Zion (Micah 3:12), and the enlargement of Jerusalem according to a prescribed pattern (Jeremiah 31:38-40).
Combining all these prophecies, he concludes that "the probability of these 11 prophecies coming true, if written in human wisdom, is... 1 in 5.76x1059. Needless to say, this is a number beyond the realm of possibility.
Part Three: Messianic Prophecy The third and most famous section of Stoner's book concerns Messianic prophecy. His theme verse for this section is John 5:39 — "Search the Scriptures because... it is these that bear witness of Me."
Stoner proceeds to select eight of the best known prophecies about the Messiah and calculates the odds of their accidental fulfillment in one person as being 1 in 1017.
I love the way Stoner illustrated the meaning of this number. He asked the reader to imagine filling the State of Texas knee deep in silver dollars. Include in this huge number one silver dollar with a black check mark on it. Then, turn a blindfolded person loose in this sea of silver dollars. The odds that the first coin he would pick up would be the one with the black check mark are the same as 8 prophecies being fulfilled accidentally in the life of Jesus.
The point, of course, is that when people say that the fulfillment of prophecy in the life of Jesus was accidental, they do not know what they are talking about. Keep in mind that Jesus did not just fulfill 8 prophecies, He fulfilled 108. The chances of fulfilling 16 is 1 in 1045. When you get to a total of 48, the odds increase to 1 in 10157. Accidental fulfillment of these prophecies is simply beyond the realm of possibility.
When confronted with these statistics, skeptics will often fall back on the argument that Jesus purposefully fulfilled the prophecies. There is no doubt that Jesus was aware of the prophecies and His fulfillment of them. For example, when He got ready to enter Jerusalem the last time, He told His disciples to find Him a donkey to ride so that the prophecy of Zechariah could be fulfilled which said, "Behold, your King is coming to you, gentle, and mounted on a donkey" (Matthew 21:1-5 and Zechariah 9:9).
But many of the prophecies concerning the Messiah could not be purposefully fulfilled — such as the town of His birth (Micah 5:2) or the nature of His betrayal (Psalm 41:9), or the manner of His death (Zechariah 13:6 and Psalm 22:16).
One of the most remarkable Messianic prophecies in the Hebrew Scriptures is the one that precisely states that the Messiah will die by crucifixion. It is found in Psalm 22 where David prophesied the Messiah would die by having His hands and feet pierced (Psalm 22:16). That prophecy was written 1,000 years before Jesus was born. When it was written, the Jewish method of execution was by stoning. The prophecy was also written many years before the Romans perfected crucifixion as a method of execution.
Even when Jesus was killed, the Jews still relied on stoning as their method of execution, but they had lost the power to implement the death penalty due to Roman occupation. That is why they were forced to take Jesus to Pilate, the Roman governor, and that's how Jesus ended up being crucified, in fulfillment of David's prophecy.
The bottom line is that the fulfillment of Bible prophecy in the life of Jesus proves conclusively that He truly was God in the flesh. It also proves that the Bible is supernatural in origin.
It appears to me that you have done an awful lot of research to validate your preconceived belief in a god and very little research in search of the truth. All of the documentation you can provide will never convince me to believe that a book with claims of extraordinary supernatural events is a valid trustworthy book. No rational minded person reading the Sunday paper would ever believe a story of a man living in the belly of a fish for three days, or dead bodies rising from their tombs (Matthew 27:51-53) or the Red Sea being parted with the wave of a cane. Why in the world does anyone believe these kinds of tall tales when they are written by superstitious authors in a centuries old book. Tall tales such as these are all I need to dismiss this book as an absolute fairytale. As for evolution vs. creationism. I am a believer in science and proven knowledge. This earth was not created for us, it just happened to have the right conditions that it takes to support life. The chances of those conditions existing are astronomical, but conceder the fact that we live on a small planet orbiting an average star in one of billions of galaxies, each of which contains billions of stars. This makes the odds pretty good that the proper conditions could exist somewhere in the cosmos. Science knows all of the elements necessary to create/support life as we know it. The only thing left to figure out is how to trigger it to start growing. Lack of this knowledge is in no way a reason to jump to the conclusion that "it must be god". Science will figure this out in time. Science looks at a question and then searches for an answer and follows the evidence where ever it leads. No scientific evidence has ever led to a theory of a magical creator. If it did then the next question would be, where did the creator come from? Evolution is a fact that is easily proven by simply looking at all of the different dog species there are and the fact that you need a different flue shot each year and what about the looming crises of the new drug resistant bacteria's that are emerging.
Lets assume that your bible is 100% accurate as you seem to claim. Then your god is a tyrant! He drowns infant babies in a flood, orders the killing of all Midianite men and non virgin women, commands Saul to attack the Amelekites and totally destroy all of them, endorses slavery and then there is Leviticus 24:16 which demands that "He who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall be put to death". Consider the 10 commandments, 4 out of 10, that’s 40% are about believing, worshiping and obeying god. This seems to be more important to god than being a good person. It would take several pages to list all of the atrocities that god has committed in the bible. And I haven't even touched on the inconsistences in the bible. You can go to this web site and see a partial list of gods atrocities and many of the inconsistences for yourself. http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/page/refuting-the-bible The bible has nothing to do with good morality and has everything to do with blind obedience. "Human decency is not derived from religion. It precedes it." Christopher Hitchens. Here is how I see the christian religion. God creates everything, including man. Then he creates woman, who must be subservient to man. Then he creates a talking snake (remember god created everything) to tempt Eve into partaking of fruit from the tree of knowledge, which she couldn't have known was wrong because she had no knowledge of right and wrong until after she eats the fruit. So god endows all of her descendants to be born with original sin. Then he impregnates a young virgin girl with himself as his son to be born so he can be hideously murdered as a human sacrifice to himself in order to save mankind from the sin that he alone bestowed on all of mankind in the first place. All of this done in an obscure little corner of the world while ignoring other great civilizations that were thriving at the time in China and the Americas. Believing in superstition and mythology such as this is the source of the vast majority of violence and injustice on this planet. It is the excuse people use to burn witches, hunt albino children in Africa for their body parts and kill people who do not believe in the same superstitions. I am absolutely certain that the world would be a much better and more peaceful place if mankind would stop believing in religion, mythology and the supernatural, all of which can not and never will be proven to be true. As for me, I am at peace with the knowledge that I am one of very few who have been lucky enough to spend a short time in the reality that is life on this planet. So I live my life the best that I can and do my best to do no harm to another human being or creature that I share this life with. I do not do this because of fear of punishment or anticipation of reward when my time here is finished, I do it because I know it is the right thing to do, and I do not need an ancient book to explain this to me. I can only say that I am sorry that you will never know the freedom that comes from being released from the shackles of religious dogma. I wish you the best in the time you have left in this the only life you will ever know.
Wow!!!! Thats a tall order, so I will do my best here. This may take a little time as I was prepared for addressing one thing at a time. In regards to the different nature that seperates the New Testament from the Old Testament, it can only be summerized with one word, and that is Jesus. From the time of creation, God had given man one rule. God said not to eat of the tree or you shall surely die. Because this rule was broken, the nature of man became inherently evil meaning that sin was already in place and God was setting the standard for obediance. Every mother and father do the same thing for their child to protect that child. The old Testament was full of super natural happenings and often times a bit mystical. I was also bothered by this as God seemed like a vicious and out of control God. When learning scripture, I came to the conclusion that God was neither out of control or vicious. History records that creation constantly rejects it's creator. The reason for this is because sin had crept into the world by the one who hates God so much. That is satan himslf. Satan was given dominion over the earth as this further complicated the hearts of mankind. All God wanted was for his creation to love him. So God would teach and scold his creation like a parant would to to the child. Because man constantly ignores God and wishing only to do what he wants to do, a division between man and God would seperate that Love. God knew that their would be death and sickness and violence but he still searches the heart of everyone of us. One must not forget that our time on earth was meant to be only for a time and that our true home is being prepared for us. We view death as being a terrible thing and for those of us that are alive and witnessing the death of someone still remains painful. But death is not death but rather a new beginning and one that is eternal.
There is answers to all of your questions, that I promise. But trying to explain the large picture will help to explain the smaller picture. God patiently gave man a chance to stop doing the things that were wrong and man kept ignoring him, so as like a parant, God had to do what he had to do which is a God thing. After years of wanting to know these tough questions, I became satisfied with the answers that explained the whole story of creation. It makes sence now and if we as parants can look at it from a parantel standpoint, then we will be able to start understanding Gods intentions. God knew from the moment of creation that satan would undo his perfect plan for mankind, by infecting creation with a sinful heart. One must consider that the Old Testament is a Prophetic and Historical account of creation and that the New Testament would be a fullfillment of the Old Testament. This is why the N.T. looks so different from the O.T. God in a sense stepped out of eternity in the form of Christ to witness personally what we had to endure as a human being in the midst of a wicked world. Now we are without excuse. How much love can God give then to send his only begotten son to die a horrible death to save all of humanity. Since we know that God's realm cannot have sin in it, the only way for God to justify this was to send Jesus as a final sacrifice which upon all things will be made new. When you take the time and really understand the human story, then the only conclusion is that this is a love story between God and his creation. It does seem fair tale-ish, but it makes absolute sense when one gets the whole picture.
I am not a puppet on a string, I have spent my whole life wondering why and how I got here. Evolution and Creation are the only answers by which all will fit into. Another words, everything that we can come up with whether it is aliens, evolution, or what ever elso that you can dream of will only fall under these two catagories. No matter what we come up with it always comes back to a creator as even the big bang had to originate from something as there cannot be anything that comes from nothing. I have soooo much more to say as I would be more then happy to explore these things further. I do have some rather mind blowing testamonies that will confirm all that I have spoken of. This journey is a leap of faith as it takes the same leap of faith to be an athiest. So the answer really is, lets start with the facts.....more after you respond....
One last thought. Firstly, please excuse the grammer and spelling as I do not have spell check or grammer utilites on this site.
secondly, I would like to continue with this if you are interested in debating this topic. I am nearly 49 years old and have spent my life on a journey for only the truth. Since Truth and Untruth can not both be right.....Terry
would like to suggest that we go at this from a different angle. I do much better in starting with the foundation first. I would like to debate creation and evolution to lay the foundation. One cannot pull the cart before the horse. I have to prove that there is a God before I can tackle scripture. I have always been one for using logic to prove or disprove the initial theory then after that is done then I advance to the next level. It would be like me trying to prove that there is steam without first proving that there is water. So, if you would like to tell me why you believe in Evolution as opposed to creation so that we can begin a hearty debate. If for no other reason, it helps us both to find sollice in our sharing of information.....
I will start out by saying that the earth is made perfectly. No matter how we try and explain it away, the finger print of God is everywhere.
ReplyDeleteWhether you believe in Alien life forms, the big bang or any other inventions of the mind, it comes down to one thing! Were we created or did we just happen to exist through a cosmic accident that defies all science and logic.
I created this website so that all can voice their opinions and through careful debates, we all can step back and seriously consider the facts. I have always loved apologetics which is a great tool of being able to validate our faith. Discussing these issues can take us on a journey that will either transform us or mature us in what we know to be the truth.
I hope that you will ask questions so that we can have a relaxed discussion and perhaps lead others to the Lord. I will check daily for the debates to begin......Terry
Clearly Seen: Constructing Solid Arguments for Design
ReplyDeleteAnybody in any culture at any time in history has watched something being created and knows that things don't create themselves. The same distinctive design features in human-designed things are clearly seen in humans and other organisms-thus, they too must have had a Creator.
In Clearly Seen: Constructing Solid Arguments for Design, medical doctor and professional engineer Randy Guliuzza provides a step-by-step teaching guide for using the living things that the Lord Jesus has made as a witness to His reality . . . and capably unwraps their astounding designs as a witness for His engineering genius.
This book confirms the biblical truth that the design in created things is clearly seen by everyone (Romans 1:18-20).
I have added a Bible look up to assist you in your debate. So please start out with a comment so that we can get the debates going. I will check often and as I said, it may take a little time for this to launch as I am looking for ways to promote this site.....Terry/PWNG
ReplyDeleteI’ll give this a try but I doubt it will get very far. I’ll state my position on a few things and you can tell me what you think of them.
ReplyDeleteFirst, quoting the bible as proof of a god will get you nowhere until you can prove that the bible is a reliable source of facts and information.
As soon as any book makes claims of supernatural events that can not be confirmed, it should be dismissed as an obvious fairytale.
The fact that science does not have an answer to every question asked is not a reason to jump to the conclusion that it must be god.
Questions for you.
As a creationist, do you believe that the earth is between 6 and 10 thousand years old and humans were placed here in their current form?
Do you believe that a book that endorses slavery, rape of young virgin girls, genocide and the killing of a child to punish it’s father is an acceptable source of moral guidance?
Virgil Anderson
Hi there Virgil. I cannot do this in just one sitting. I have many articles that will help answer your questions, however I will work on one thing at a time. I will come back in a bit to answer those questions as I have dinner plans shortly. Terry
ReplyDeleteHi Virgil, I have an article that can bring light to your question in regards to the Bibles reliability. I must say that there are 3000 Prophecies in the Bible that have been fulfilled exactly as Prophesied. The chances of atleast 3 being fulfilled would indicate a devine intervention and rule out a cosmic coincidence. I hope that you will read the article as it should at best cover some of your concerns. I will use this as the platform to begin testing the reliability of scripture. The Bible is the only writtings given to us by our creator that was penned by man to write exactly that which was told to them. No other religious writtings can make this boast. To begin, I think it to be important to lay the foundation and then to proceed with debating this concern. I am not here to trap you or to convert you. I just like a great discussion as growth comes in many faces. I hope that I have enough space to add the article but may have to send it to your email....Terry
ReplyDeleteShould we trust the Bible?
Deleteby Jonathan Sarfati
Since Creation Ministries International is based on the Bible, the question arises, why should the Bible be trusted? How should we answer those who claim that it's been re-written so many times that we no longer have the original? And even if we do, was it written long after the events it claimed to report? Also, does archaeology disprove the Bible? Finally, even if it is true, what's the point?
Is our New Testament Text Reliable?
Some critics doubt that we even have the original New Testament. This issue can only be settled by using bibliographical tests for reliability, similar to what would be used to judge the Iliad or Caesar's writings.
The NT was completely written by baptized Jews1 in the 1st century AD. We have at least 24,000 manuscripts of the NT, the earliest of which are dated within 100 years or so of its actual composition. The earliest known manuscript is the John Rylands papyrus fragment of John's Gospel known as P52, containing John 18:31-33, 37-38, dated to c. AD 125. Compare this to other great works (MSS = manuscripts):
Author Date Written Earliest MSS Time Span No. MSS
Caesar 100-44 BC AD 900 1,000 yrs 10
Plato 427-347 BC 900 AD 1,200 yrs 7
Thucydides 460-400 BC AD 900 1,300 yrs 8
Tacitus AD 100 AD 1100 1,000 yrs 20
Suetonius AD 75-160 AD 950 800 yrs 8
Homer (Iliad) 900 BC 400 BC 500 yrs 643
New Testament AD 40-100 AD 125 25-50 yrs >24,000!
So, by applying the tightest standards scholars can muster (without eliminating all the other classical works), we can conclude that the NT we have is a trustworthy copy of the original.2 NT scholar F.F. Bruce (1919-1990) wrote:
"The evidence for our New Testament writings is ever so much greater than the evidence for many writings of classical authors, the authenticity of which no-one dreams of questioning. And if the New Testament were a collection of secular writings, their authenticity would generally be regarded as beyond all doubt."3
Reliability of the New Testament content
DeleteGiven that we have a trustworthy copy of the original, is the original itself trustworthy? Liberal scholars usually argue that the gospels were written long after the events they claim to record. They typically date Mark between AD 65-75, Matthew at mid 80s, Luke and Acts between 83-90 and John about the turn of the first century. So with a time gap of 35-75 years, there is allegedly no chance that the gospels are reliable records.However, there are cogent arguments by J.A.T. Robinson (1919-1983), who was a liberal and Bishop of Woolwich, for redating the gospels to between AD 40 and 65.4 If Robinson is right, the gospels were written in the lifetimes of people who knew Jesus personally (~6 BC - AD ~30 for His earthly lifetime). Matthew and Luke record Jesus' prophecy of Jerusalem's demise and the destruction of the Temple (Matthew 24:2, Luke 21:20-24) but do not record its fulfilment in AD 70.5 Matthew, especially, would not have failed to record yet another fulfilled prophecy if he had written after the event. Acts, written by Luke after he wrote his gospel, mentions neither the fall of Jerusalem, the horrific persecutions under Nero Caesar (mid 60s)-although other persecutions are mentioned-nor the martyrdoms of James (61), Paul (64) and Peter (65), so was probably written before then.6
The Swedish scholar Birger Gerhardsson has shown that the canonical gospels drew on a collective communal memory made strong by the oral teaching methods of the time. These techniques would have enabled 'very accurate communication between Jesus and his followers' and would have ensured "excellent semantic recall".7,8
So Jesus' disciples would have been very capable of recording His statements accurately, and they give evidence of having done so honestly. For example, they admit certain facts which forgers probably would have left out (e.g. the cowardice of the disciples, the competition for high places within the Kingdom, Peter's denial, the failure of Jesus to work many miracles in His hometown of Galilee (because of their unbelief-Matthew 13:58, Mark 6:6), references to accusations against His sanity and parentage, and that He didn't know the timing of His return.
If the gospels were written by church communities (as many skeptics argue) instead of the four evangelists, it is likely that they would have tried to solve their problems by putting solutions into the mouth of Christ. But the gospels do not mention some of the controversies of the early church (e.g. circumcision), but record things quite irrelevant to a mainly gentile church, such as Christ's being sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 10:5-6). Thus the internal evidence points to the gospels being written before many of the Church's problems arose.
Paul wrote even earlier: the summary of the gospel in 1 Corinthians 15 was written in c. AD 55, but Paul says he is reminding them of something he preached to them about 15 years earlier. Therefore Paul records a tradition which was well established within a decade of Christ's death.
Julius Müller (1801-1878) challenged 19th century skeptics to show anywhere in history where within 30 years, legends had accumulated around a historical person and become firmly fixed.9 But even if one accepts the late dates of most liberals, one must note that Prof. Sherwin-White (1911-1993), the eminent classical historian from Oxford University, has pointed out that legends require a time gap of more than two generations. Therefore, if the Gospels are legendary, the rate of legendary accumulation would need to be "unbelievable".10 He wrote:
"For Acts the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming . any attempt to reject its basic historicity, even in matters of detail, must now appear absurd. Roman historians have long taken it for granted."10
DeleteAlso, John claims to be an eye-witness (John 21:24). Luke claims to have relied on eye-witnesses (Luke 1:1-4), and was a companion of the Apostle Paul (Colossians 4:14). He may have been Cleopas' un-named companion on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:13 ff.).11 Mark relied heavily on Peter, who claimed that he "did not follow cleverly devised tales" (2 Peter 1:16). Matthew, according to early church tradition, was written by the disciple and ex-tax-collector of that name.
Is there any archaeological confirmation for the Bible?
DeleteIn actual fact, we have many first-century non-Christian historians and writers who confirm the life and execution of Jesus: Cornelius Tacitus, Lucian of Samosata, Flavius Josephus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, Thallus, Phlegon, Mara Bar-Serapion, and references in the Talmud and other Jewish writings. Encyclopædia Britannica sums up the force of the data:
"These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries."
The gospels have also been supported by archaeology. Sir William Mitchell Ramsay (1851-1939), the archaeologist and professor from Oxford and Cambridge Universities, started investigating Luke's gospel with the assumption that Luke was mistaken in many areas. But Ramsay discovered time and time again that Luke was absolutely precise about place names and the many varied titles of rulers. Ramsay concluded:
'Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy . this author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians.'-Archaeologist Sir William Ramsay
"Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy . this author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians."12
The Old Testament has been supported repeatedly by archaeology. The Hittites were once thought to be a biblical myth, but their enormous ancient capital, Hattusa, was discovered at modern Boghazköy. Archaeology has also vindicated the war of four kings vs five in Gen. 14. and Belshazzar's kingship in Daniel.
What is the key teaching of the New Testament?
DeleteSo, given that Jesus existed, what are we to make of the reliability or unreliability of those documents that claim to give a historical account of His life and teachings? If we accept the historical evidence that the NT is a reliable record, what does it teach?
The bodily Resurrection of Christ is one of the key doctrines of Christianity, as it demonstrates His claims to deity (Romans 1:4), confirms the truth of all He said (Matthew 28:6), and shows that He conquered death, thus guaranteeing the resurrection of believers (2 Corinthians 4:14). The apostle Paul wrote:
". if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still dead in your sins. .. If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied. .. If the dead are not raised, let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die" (1 Corinthians 15:17, 19, 32b).
The Jews regarded the body as an integral part of Man, so the Resurrection must include the body:
"The notion that Jesus was resurrected in a totally spiritual sense, while his old body lay in the grave, is a purely modern conception. First-century Jewish thinking would never have accepted such a view and that is not how Jesus' Resurrection was proclaimed in the earliest accounts. It would have been impossible for Resurrection claims to survive in the face of a tomb containing the corpse of Jesus."13
One major difficulty for non-Christian scholars has been to explain what happened to Christ's body, as a plausible alternative to the Resurrection. Christ's enemies would not want to steal it, since that would promote the resurrection stories they wanted to quash-and they would have quashed them by simply producing the body. The disciples had no motive to confront a heavily armed Roman cohort and steal the body to promote Resurrection stories. The disciples were tortured and killed, and no-one would die for what he knows is a lie. However, one of the earliest arguments against the Resurrection was the story the Roman soldiers were bribed to say: "His disciples came by night and stole Him away while we were asleep" (Matthew 28:13). This is absurd: how could they know what happened if they were asleep? Also, any Roman soldier who slept on duty was executed.
Some critics try to explain away the empty tomb by claiming that there was no tomb, and that Jesus was buried in a common grave. However, Paul stated that Jesus was buried, which in Greek is etaphe, which literally means entombed (from en, 'in'; taphos, 'tomb'). Peter also contrasted Jesus, whose body did not "see decay" (NIV), with David, whose body still lay in his tomb (Acts 2:22-35).
DeletePaul's statement of the gospel in 1 Cor. 15 cites an ancient tradition dating back to only a few years after the event. Mark's account of the empty tomb reflects the Aramaic, pointing to a very early source. Dr William Lane Craig gives much evidence for the reliability of the burial and empty tomb accounts.14 Also, James Patrick Holding provides at least 17 factors that meant Christianity could not have succeeded in the ancient world, unless it were backed up with irrefutable proof of the Resurrection.15
What's it to me?
ReplyDeleteScripture show that there is a God who created us and therefore owns us. He has set a perfect moral standard of which we fall short (Romans 3:23). He is perfectly just, so must punish transgressions. Since our transgressions offend His infinite holiness, the punishment must also be infinite.
Either we must suffer such punishment, or else a Substitute must endure it in our place (Isaiah 53). The Substitute must be fully human to substitute for humanity (Hebrews 2:14), and must be fully Divine to endure God's infinite wrath (Isaiah 53:10). To be the mediator between God and Man, Jesus must be both. 1 Timothy 2:5 states:
"For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus".
We cannot earn salvation by any deeds we do (Romans 3:24, 4:2, Ephesians 2:8-9). These verses teach that justification, the declaration of legal innocence before God, is a gift. It takes place the moment one has faith in Christ (Romans 5:1).
The content of faith (the Greek is pistis = belief) is set out by Christ's chosen apostle Paul:
"Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures (1 Corinthians 15:1-4)."
The authority of Scripture
Delete© Jonathan Sarfati, CMI-Australia
First published in
Apologia 3(2):12-16, 1994
Abstract: Scripture had supreme authority for the Old Testament saints, Christ and His apostles in all matters it touched upon. In particular, for Christ, what Scripture said, God said. Christ also directly affirmed many of the passages attacked by liberals. Objections to the inerrancy and suffiency of Scripture are refuted. The charge that Christ was mistaken or merely accommodating to His hearers is impossible for a consistent Christian to hold. The charge of circular reasoning fails on several counts: the internal and external cross-checks, and the role that axioms play in all philosophical systems.
I) Old Testament:
Delete1) Moses
Moses often testified that his writings were from God:
Exodus 24:4: 'Moses then wrote down everything the LORD had said .'
See also v.7, Ex. 34:27-28, Nu. 33:1-2, Dt. 31:9,
Deuteronomy 31:11: 'when all Israel comes to appear before the LORD your God at the place he will choose, you shall read this law before them in their hearing.'
2) Joshua:
Joshua 1:8: 'Do not let this Book of the Law depart from your mouth; meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do everything written in it. Then you will be prosperous and successful.'
The book of the Law is the Torah, also called the Pentateuch, or the first five books of the Bible.
3) David (c. 1000 BC)
Israel's greatest king clearly also regarded the Law very highly. At his stage in history, not too many books of Scripture had been written, but the Pentateuch was regarded as God's Law. Psalm 1:2: 'But his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night.'
II) New Testament
Delete1) Jesus Christ:
Matthew 19:3-6:
3 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, 'Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?'
4 'Haven't you read,' he replied, 'that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'
5 and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'?
6 So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.' Note:
Christ accepted the Genesis Creation account literally (see also But from the beginning of . the institution of marriage? In fact, Jesus believed the parts of Scripture most attacked by sceptics today - see Jesus Christ on the infallibility of Scripture)
He cited from Genesis 1:27 and 2:24, showing that He did not regard Genesis 1 and 2 as separate contradictory creation accounts, but as complementary. See also Do Genesis 1 and 2 contradict each other?
v.5, which in Genesis is an editorial comment, is equated with the word of the Creator. This is not the only place where the New Testament cites an Old Testament passage as 'God said'; compare the following pairs: Ps. 2:1 & Acts 4:24-25, Ps. 2:7 & Heb. 1:5, Ps. 16:10 & Acts 13:35, Ps. 95:7 & Heb. 3:7, Ps. 97:7 & Heb. 1:6, Ps. 104:4 & Heb. 1:7, Is. 55:3 & Acts 13:34. The converse is true in the following pairs: Gen. 12:3 & Gal. 3:8, Ex. 9:16 & Rom. 9:17; where a direct statement by God in the OT is cited as 'Scripture said'.
Luke 17:26-32:
Delete26 'Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man.
27 People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all.
28 'It was the same in the days of Lot. People were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building.
29 But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all.
30 'It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed.
31On that day no one who is on the roof of his house, with his goods inside, should go down to get them. Likewise, no one in the field should go back for anything.
32 Remember Lot's wife!
Note: Christ took the accounts of Noah's flood, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and the calamity befalling Lot's wife literally. Those who dispute their historicity are therefore defying Christ. Matthew 12:39 ff. shows that Christ took the account of Jonah and the whale literally, and even used it as a type of His resurrection.
Luke 16:31: 'He (Abraham) said to him (the rich man in Hell), "If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead."'
Note: Christ clearly shows how important the Old Testament is. Many liberal evolutionary theologians who reject Moses also refuse to believe that Christ rose from the dead.
John 5:46-47:
Delete46 If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me.
47 But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?
Note: a similar lesson can be learnt - liberals who doubt Moses often doubt what Jesus said (except of course for a selective use of His words if they could somehow be twisted to support a politically correct cause they happened to agree with).
Also, this shows that the 'JEDP/Documentary Hypothesis' of the Pentateuch is contrary to Christ, who clearly taught that the Pentateuch was edited by Moses. See Did Moses really write Genesis?
Matthew 22:23-34:
23 That same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question.
24 "Teacher," they said, "Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and have children for him.
25 Now there were seven brothers among us. The first one married and died, and since he had no children, he left his wife to his brother.
26 The same thing happened to the second and third brother, right on down to the seventh.
27 Finally, the woman died.
28 Now then, at the resurrection, whose wife will she be of the seven, since all of them were married to her?"
29 Jesus replied, "You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.
30 At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.
31 But about the resurrection of the dead - have you not read what God said to you,
32 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living."
33 When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at his teaching.
Note:
Deletethe Sadducees only accepted the Pentateuch as Scripture, while the Pharisees accepted the same books as the Protestant OT (as confirmed by the prologue to Ecclesiasticus (ca. 130 BC), Josephus (ca. AD 90), Melito (ca. AD 170)). Jesus accused the Sadducees of not knowing the Scriptures, because they did not accept the Prophets and Writings.
Even the Scriptures accepted by the Sadducees taught the resurrection: Christ demonstrated this with an argument depending on the present tense of the implied verb 'to be' implied - the patriarchs were living in a sense in Moses' day, centuries after they had died physically. This passage shows that the Lord believed in verbal plenary inspiration of Scripture.
Matthew 5:18: 'I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.'
Note: the 'jot' was the smallest Hebrew letter, and the 'tittle' was a small part of the letter. So Christ is supporting inspiration even down to the individual letters.
Return to Contents
Matthew 23:35: 'And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.'
Jesus here gives the extent of the Canon of Scripture:
The Pharisees' Bible is the same as the Protestant OT, but the order is different. The first book was still Genesis, but the last book was 2 Chronicles. That generation was to be held responsible for all God's people murdered in the OT, from Abel (Gen. 4:8) to Zechariah (2 Chron. 24:20-21). There were other martyrdoms recorded in the Apocrypha, but Jesus did not regard these writings as Scripture, and never cited them. Jesus agreed with the Pharisaic canon (John 5:39), but not the Saddusaic one.
The Apocrypha was not recognised as canonical by the Jewish scholars at Jamnia (AD 90), and the Talmud stated that the Holy Spirit departed from Israel after Malachi. Many Church Fathers agreed, e.g. Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Jerome. Athanasius, in his 39th Festal Letter of AD 367, listed the same canon as modern Protestants (with the exception of the book of Esther). He also stated that the Apocryphal books Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Sirach, Esther additions, Judith and Tobit were worth reading but not canonical. He made no mention of the books of Maccabees.1
The apocryphal books abound in geographical and historical errors,2 e.g. 2 Macc. 15:1 ff is inconsistent with 1 Macc. 2:41; Judith 1:1 has Nebuchadnezzar reigning in Nineveh rather than Babylon. The morality and doctrine of the apocryphal books also falls short of biblical standards: Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom teach morality based on expedience; God assists Judith in a lie (Judith 9:10,13); salvation by works (Tobit 12:9, 14:10-11); prayers for the dead (2 Macc 12:45-46), pre-existence of souls (Wisdom 8:19-20) and creation out of pre-existent matter (Wisdom 11:17). Even the books themselves disclaim divine inspiration: 1 Macc. 9:27 recognises that prophecy had disappeared in Israel, while 2 Macc. 15:37-39 admits that it was a human composition with possible flaws.
DeleteIt's also important to note that each book was canonical as soon as it was finished, because its ultimate author was God Himself. Their canonicity did not have to wait for the Church to choose them. The NT scholar FF Bruce writes:
'The NT books did not become authoritative for the Church because they were formally included in a canonical list; on the contrary, the Church included them in her canon because she already regarded them as divinely inspired, recognising their innate worth and generally apostolic authority, direct or indirect.. [Church] councils [did] not impose something new upon the Christian communities but codif[ied] what was already the general practice of those communities.'3
John 10:35 '. and the scriptures cannot be broken.' - self-explanatory
John 14:26:'But the Counsellor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.'
Note: Christ here promises his disciples that they would be taught by the Holy Spirit. These teachings eventually became written down in the New Testament.
2) the Apostle Paul:
Delete2 Timothy 3:15-17:
15 and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Note:
the Greek word for 'Scriptures' in v.15 is ???????? (grammata), and must refer to the OT alone, as these are the only Scriptures Timothy would have known from his childhood
in v. 16, the word translated 'Scripture' is ????? (graphe), which would include the OT plus all the NT written by then (AD 63), i.e. all the NT except 2 Peter, Hebrews, Jude, and John's writings. As Paul's writings were divinely inspired, this statement would apply even to the latter books.
'God-breathed' is a correct translation by the NIV of the Greek word ??????????? (theopneustos). If Scripture is 'God-breathed' and God cannot err, it logically follows that Scripture cannot err.
Scripture is able to make a man 'wise unto salvation' and 'thoroughly furnished unto all good works'. This implies that Scripture contains all the doctrine and moral law we need.
But since v. 16 makes it clear that all Scripture is God-breathed, not just some, inerrancy applies to whatever the Bible affirms, and is not restricted just to those verses deemed to relate to faith and conduct. After all, doctrine is inextricably linked to history and science, so that whatever Scripture affirms on scientific or historical matters is also true. For example, the key doctrine of the Resurrection is linked to the historical fact that Jesus' body had vacated the tomb on the third day. It also impinges on science, because naturalistic scientists assert that it is impossible for dead men to rise. And the meaning of Jesus' death and resurrection is tied to the historical accuracy of the event recorded in Genesis (1 Cor. 15:21-22). And if we bow to uniformitarian 'science' in the area of origins, what should we do when Scriptural teaching on morality conflicts with 'science', e.g. the Bible's prohibition on adultery or homosexual acts vs 'scientific' assertions that such behaviours are 'in our genes'. Jesus asked Nicodemus 'I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?' (John 3:12).
Paul brings up two positive uses of Scripture-teaching and training in righteousness-and two negative uses-reproof and correction. The former entails that there is nothing in Scripture that should mislead us into factual or moral error; the latter entails that Scripture should enable readers to reject ideas and practices that conflict with it. Any errors would undermine Scripture's dual role.
1 Tim 5:18 cites both Deut. 25:4 and Luke 10:7 as graphe; i.e. both the Old and New Testaments. This again shows that the NT was already regarded as Scripture even in apostolic times.
1 Timothy 2:12-14:
Delete12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.
13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
Note: Paul accepted the Genesis account as a historical narrative, and used it to teach on the role of men and women in Church.
Acts 17:1-3:
1 When they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a Jewish synagogue.
2 As his custom was, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures,
3 explaining and proving that the Christ had to suffer and rise from the dead. 'This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Christ,' he said.
Note: this shows how important the Scriptures were to Paul's evangelism to Jews, who already accepted them as authoritative.
Acts 17:10-11:
10 As soon as it was night, the brothers sent Paul and Silas away to Berea. On arriving there, they went to the Jewish synagogue.
11 Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.
This shows that even Paul's teaching was subjected to the test of Scripture by people who were commended for it. So Christians today should follow that Berean example and test the teachings of any church (or scientist) by Scripture.
3) Peter:
Delete2 Pet. 1:20-21:
20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation.
21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.
Note: The chief Apostle, Peter, believed that God moved (literally 'carried along') the writers of Scripture so that they recorded exactly what He wanted. However, God did not usually dictate the words, but superintended the authors so that, using their own individual personalities, they recorded His revelation without error.
2 Peter 3:15-16:
15 Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.
16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
Note: Peter affirms that Paul's writings were also Scripture.
Return to Contents
4) Jude
Jude 3: 'Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.'
N.B. If the faith was once delivered, then there is no need for additional revelations of doctrine after the canon of scripture was closed).
5) John:
DeleteJohn 14:26: 'But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.'
Christ's promise in John 14:26 was to His disciples personally present. John was the last survivor, so his books are the last of the NT Canon. It is possible that Rev. 22:18-19 is an indication that this book closes the Canon.
Return to Contents
6) Church Fathers:
All the NT except 11 verses could be reconstructed from the writings of the Fathers.4 For Irenaeus (c. AD 170), the fourfold Gospel was as axiomatic as the four quarters of the earth and the four winds. He cited 23 of the 27 NT books, omitting only Philemon, James, 2 Peter and 3 John. Ignatius (AD 50-115), Bishop of Antioch, cited 15 NT books. He recognised that the NT had a higher authority than he: 'I do not order you, as did Peter and Paul. They were Apostles and I am even until now a slave' (Letter to the Romans)
Augustine recognized the cardinal importance of biblical inerrancy:
For it seems to me that most disastrous consequences must follow upon our believing that anything false is found in the sacred books: that is to say, that the men by whom the Scripture has been given to us, and committed to writing, did put down in these books anything false. It is one question whether it may be at any time the duty of a good man to deceive; but it is another question whether it can have been the duty of a writer of Holy Scripture to deceive: nay, it is not another question - it is no question at all. For if you once admit into such a high sanctuary of authority one false statement as made in the way of duty, there will not be left a single sentence of those books which, if appearing to any one difficult in practice or hard to believe, may not by the same fatal rule be explained away, as a statement in which, intentionally, and under a sense of duty, the author declared what was not true. (First letter to Jerome)
Objections refuted
Delete1) John 20:30: 'Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.'
This verse is used to suggest that perhaps the Church has preserved some essential doctrines not taught in Scripture. However, the next verse implies that what was written was enough (note all the NT had been written by the time that John was written, except for his letters and Revelation) - John 20:31:
'But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.'
2) 2 Thessalonians 2:15: 'So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter.'
This verse is sometimes alleged to support the existence of essential tradition not recorded in scripture. However, this book was probably one of the first NT books written (AD 51), so the verse does not apply once all the essential traditions had been recorded in the NT. 1 Cor. 15:1 ff. is a good example of a well established oral tradition which Paul writes down.
3) 1 Timothy 3:15: 'if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.'
Paul was simply affirming the church as the support and bulwark - not the source - of God's truth. His words should not be stretched beyond this to claim that no-one can know the truth unless he depends on the teaching of some organised church or church group. Note:
The Greek word ecclesia means congregation or assembly, so this verse cannot rule out (say) Carindale Community Church of the Nazarene.
Even a church founded by apostles could have its lampstand removed from its place (Rev. 2:5).
4) 'Jesus was mistaken, because in the Incarnation his omnipotence was masked.' Often this and the next blasphemous charge are made by liberal theologians or theistic evolutionists with pious-sounding talk about Jesus' humanity. But:
This confuses Limitation and misunderstanding:5 while the Second Person of the Trinity was incarnate in Jesus of Nazareth, He voluntarily limited His omniscience (Phil. 2:5-11). I.e., in His humanity, He did not know all things. But this does not entail that He was mistaken about anything He said. All human understanding is finite, but this doesn't entail that every human understanding is errant. Also, what Jesus did preach, He proclaimed with absolute authority (Mt. 24:35, 28:18), because He was speaking with the full authority of God the Father (John 5:30, 8:28), who is always omniscient. So if a liberal wishes to maintain his charge that Christ was mistaken because of His humanity, he must logically charge God the Father with error as well. Or else, if Jesus taught an inerrant Bible and attributed his teaching to the Father and such teaching is wrong, Jesus must be a charlatan in a hopeless muddle.
Where do you draw the line? If Jesus was wrong in His view of Scripture, maybe He was wrong in other areas too. Who decides whether He is right or wrong? We must, so Jesus loses His authority.
5) 'Jesus deliberately accommodated Himself to the mistaken views of His audience.' But:
DeleteThis confuses Adaptation to human finitude with accommodation to human error:5 the former does not entail the latter. A mother might tell her four-year-old 'you grew inside my tummy' - this is not false, but language simplified to the child's level. Conversely, 'the stork brought you' is an outright error. Similarly, God, the author of truth, used some simplified descriptions (e.g. using the earth as a reference frame, as modern scientists do today) and anthropomorphisms, but never error.
Jesus often challenged His audience, so He would not have failed to point out their mistaken views on Scripture, if such they were.
If Jesus acquiesced in this error, maybe He did so elsewhere as well. Who ultimately decides when Jesus is acquiescing? We must, so once again, Jesus loses His authority.
The passages considered in section II(1) show that Jesus was not just acquiescing to the views of His audience on the inerrancy of Scripture, but was in fact reinforcing them.
6) 'Jesus was misreported, or we can't possibly know what He believed.' But:
First, it is absurd for liberals to claim to be 'Christian' if they cannot be sure that they are really following Christ.
Even many liberal scholars believe that there is overwhelming historical evidence that Christ affirmed biblical inerrancy, although they disagree with Him. The evangelical scholar Harold Lindsell6 cites the liberal scholars H.J. Cadbury, Adolph Harnack, Rudolf Bultmann and F.C. Grant to prove this point.
7) 'This is circular reasoning.' In answer to that:
As shown, even many liberals believe that there is overwhelming evidence that Christ affirmed biblical inerrancy. Such independent support of Christ's statements proves that evangelicals do not necessarily commit the fallacy of arguing in a circle, of using the Bible to prove the Bible.
It is not circular to use Matthew to prove Genesis (Mt. 19:3-6, cf. Gen. 1:27, 2:4), Paul to prove Luke (1 Tim 5:18, cf. Lk. 10:7) or Peter to prove Paul (2 Pet. 3:15-16). Finally, allegedly circular reasoning at least demonstrates the internal consistency of the Bible's claims it makes about itself. If the Bible had actually disclaimed divine inspiration, it would indeed be illogical to defend it. This is one argument against the canonicity of the Apocrypha - as shown above, 1 Macc. 9:27 and 2 Macc. 15:37-39 disclaim divine inspiration.
Creation Ministries International accepts the authority of Scripture as an axiom or presupposition: i.e. as a starting point or assumption that requires no proof, and is the basis for all reasoning. All philosophical systems start with axioms. So it's not a question of a religious system starting from prior assumptions vs. a 'scientific' system without any prior assumptions, but which axioms are self-consistent and provide a consistent framework in which to fit the evidence. See also Creation: 'Where's the proof?' and Loving God With All Your Mind: Logic and Creation.
Jesus Christ on the infallibility of Scripture
Deleteby Dr David Livingston
Published: 6 April 2004 (GMT+10)
There is considerable debate these days concerning the inerrancy (infallibility) of Scripture. The authority of God's Word is the main issue. But, if one yields to the authority of Jesus Christ (Yeshua HaMashiach), he must, in turn, yield to Christ's view of the Scripture itself. Anyone and everyone who claims to be a Christian (a believer under the authority of Christ) must hold to the same view He did! What was it?
I. Negative aspects (an argument from silence-but a loud silence!)
Jesus never belittled Scripture (as some modern critics do), or set it aside (as the Jewish leaders of His day had done with their Oral Traditions), or criticized it (although He criticized those who misused it), or contradicted it (although He rejected many interpretations of it), or opposed it (although He sometimes was free or interpretive with it), nor spoke in any way as 'higher' critics do of the Old Testament (Tanakh).
II. Christ's use of Scripture
DeleteAs Louis Gaussen has asserted, 'We are not afraid to say it: when we hear the Son of God quote the Scriptures, every thing is said, in our view, on their divine inspiration-we need no further testimony. All the declarations of the Bible are, no doubt, equally divine; but this example of the Savior of the world has settled the question for us at once. This proof requires neither long nor learned researches; it is grasped by the hand of a child as powerfully as by that of a doctor. Should any doubt, then, assail your soul let it behold Him in the presence of the Scriptures!'1
He knew the Scriptures thoroughly, even to words and verb tenses. He obviously had either memorized vast portions or knew it instinctively: John 7:15.2
He believed every word of Scripture. All the prophecies concerning Himself were fulfilled,3 and He believed beforehand they would be.4
He believed the Old Testament was historical fact. This is very clear, even though from the Creation (cf. Genesis 2:24 and Matthew 19:4, 5) onward, much of what He believed has long been under fire by critics, as being mere fiction. Some examples of historical facts:
Luke 11:51-Abel was a real individual
Matthew 24:37-39-Noah and the flood (Luke 17:26, 27)
John 8:56-58-Abraham
Matthew 10:15; 11:23, 24 (Luke 10:12)-Sodom and Gomorrah
Luke 17:28-32-Lot (and wife!)
Matthew 8:11-Isaac and Jacob (Luke 13:28)
John 6:31, 49, 58-Manna
John 3:14-Serpent
Matthew 12:39-41-Jonah (vs. 42-Sheba)
Matthew 24:15-Daniel and Isaiah
He believed the books were written by the men whose names they bear:
Moses wrote the Pentateuch (Torah): Matthew 19:7, 8; Mark 7:10, 12:26 ('Book of Moses'-the Torah); Luke 5:14; 16:29,31; 24:27, 44 ('Christ's Canon'); John 1:17; 5:45, 46; 7:19; ('The Law [Torah] was given by Moses; Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ.')5
DeleteIsaiah wrote 'both' Isaiah's: Mark 7:6-13; John 12:37-41 [Ed. note: Liberals claim that Isaiah 40-66 was composed after the fall of Jerusalem by another writer they call 'Deutero-Isaiah'. The only real 'reason' for their claim is that a straightforward dating would mean that predictive prophecy was possible, and liberals have decreed a priori that knowledge of the future is impossible (like miracles in general). Thus these portions must have been written after the events. However, there is nothing in the text itself to hint of a different author. See The Unity of Isaiah. In fact, even the Dead Sea Isaiah Scroll was a seamless unity. But as Dr Livingston said, since Jesus affirmed the unity of Isaiah, the deutero-Isaiah theory is just not an option for anyone calling himself a follower of Christ.]
Jonah wrote Jonah: Matthew 12:39-41
Daniel wrote Daniel: Matthew 24:15
He believed the Old Testament was spoken by God Himself, or written by the Holy Spirit's inspiration, even though the pen was held by men: Matthew 19:4, 5; 22:31, 32, 43; Mark 12:26; Luke 20:37.
He believed Scripture was more powerful than His miracles: Luke 16:29, 31.
He actually quoted it in overthrowing Satan! The O.T. Scriptures were the arbiter in every dispute: Matthew 4; Luke 16:29, 31.
He quoted Scripture as the basis for his own teaching. His ethics were the same as what we find already written in Scripture: Matthew 7:12; 19:18, 19; 22:40; Mark 7:9, 13; 10:19; 12:24, 29-31; Luke 18:20.
He warned against replacing it with something else, or adding or subtracting from it. The Jewish leaders in His day had added to it with their Oral Traditions: Matthew 5:17; 15:1-9; 22:29; (cf. 5:43, 44); Mark. 7:1-12. (Destroying faith in the Bible as God's Word will open the door today to a 'new' Tradition.)
He will judge all men in the last day, as Messiah and King, on the basis of His infallible Word committed to writing by fallible men, guided by the infallible Holy Spirit: Matthew 25:31; John 5:22, 27; 12:48; Romans 2:16.
He made provision for the New Testament (B'rit Hadashah) by sending the Holy Spirit (the Ruach HaKodesh). We must note that He Himself never wrote one word of Scripture although He is the Word of God Himself (the living Torah in flesh and blood, see John, chapter 1). He committed the task of all writing of the Word of God to fallible men-guided by the infallible Holy Spirit. The apostles' words had the same authority as Christ's: Matthew 10:14, 15; Luke 10:16; John 13:20; 14:22; 15:26, 27; 16:12-14.
He not only was not jealous of the attention men paid to the Bible (denounced as 'bibliolatry' by some), He reviled them for their ignorance of it: Matthew 22:29; Mark 12:24.
Nor did Jesus worship Scripture. He honored it-even though written by men.
The above leaves no room but to conclude that our Lord Jesus Christ considered the canon of Scripture as God's Word, written by the hand of men.
Although some religious leaders profess to accept Scripture as 'God's Word,' their low view of 'inspiration' belies the fact. They believe and teach that Scripture is, to a very significant degree, man's word. Many of their statements are in essential disagreement with those of Jesus Christ. From the evidence of their books, we conclude that some Christian leaders are opposite to Christ in His regard for the authority, the inspiration, and the inerrancy of Scripture.
And now, the most important point.
III. Jesus Christ was subject to Scripture
DeleteJesus obeyed the Word of God, not man. He was subject to it. If some leaders' view of inspiration were true, Jesus was subject to an errant, rather casually thrown-together 'Word of Man.' Jesus would have been subject, then, to the will of man, not the will of God.
However, in all the details of His acts of redemption, Jesus was subject to Scripture as God's Word. He obeyed it. It was His authority, the rule by which He lived. He came to do God's will, not His own, and not man's. Note how all of His life He did things because they were written-as if God had directly commanded. He fulfilled Old Testament prophecies about Himself. The passages are found all over the Old Testament. We cite here only a very few quoted in the New Testament: Matthew 11:10; 26:24, 53-56; Mark 9:12, 13; Luke 4:17-21; 18:31-33; 22:37; 24:44-47.
He Himself is the Word of God. All the words from His lips were the Word of God. (John 3:34). If He had desired, He could have written a new set of rules and they would have been the Word of God. But, He did not. He followed without question the Bible already penned by men.
This is the sensible thing for every believer to do. May all who read this adopt Jesus' attitude and become subject both to Him as Living Word (living Torah) and to the Bible as the infallible, written Word of God.
This was the foundation to begin the next step. The probabilities using mathamatical calculations proves that the writtings of the Bible are so accurate that there is no such number to fully understand the magnitude of so many scriptures being fulfilled 100% of the time. Thos numbers will be my next posting.
DeleteApplying the Science of Probability to the Scriptures
ReplyDeleteDo statistics prove the Bible's supernatural origin?
by Dr. David R. Reagan
For years I have been quoting a book by Peter Stoner called Science Speaks. I like to use a remarkable illustration from it to show how Bible prophecy proves that Jesus was truly God in the flesh.
I decided that I would try to find a copy of the book so that I could discover all that it had to say about Bible prophecy. The book was first published in 1958 by Moody Press. After considerable searching on the Internet, I was finally able to find a revised edition published in 1976.
Peter Stoner was chairman of the mathematics and astronomy departments at Pasadena City College until 1953 when he moved to Westmont College in Santa Barbara, California. There he served as chairman of the science division. At the time he wrote this book, he was professor emeritus of science at Westmont.
In the edition I purchased, there was a foreword by Dr. Harold Hartzler, an officer of the American Scientific Affiliation. He wrote that the manuscript had been carefully reviewed by a committee of his organization and that "the mathematical analysis included is based upon principles of probability which are thoroughly sound." He further stated that in the opinion of the Affiliation, Professor Stoner "has applied these principles in a proper and convincing way."
The book is divided into three sections. Two relate directly to Bible prophecy. The first section deals with the scientific validity of the Genesis account of creation.
Part One: The Genesis Record
Stoner begins with a very interesting observation. He points out that his copy of Young's General Astronomy, published in 1898, is full of errors. Yet, the Bible, written over 2,000 years ago is devoid of scientific error. For example, the shape of the earth is mentioned in Isaiah 40:22. Gravity can be found in Job 26:7. Ecclesiastes 1:6 mentions atmospheric circulation. A reference to ocean currents can be found in Psalm 8:8, and the hydraulic cycle is described in Ecclesiastes 1:7 and Isaiah 55:10. The second law of thermodynamics is outlined in Psalm 102:25-27 and Romans 8:21. And these are only a few examples of scientific truths written in the Scriptures long before they were "discovered" by scientists.
Stoner proceeds to present scientific evidence in behalf of special creation. For example, he points out that science had previously taught that special creation was impossible because matter could not be destroyed or created. He then points out that atomic physics had now proved that energy can be turned into matter and matter into energy.
He then considers the order of creation as presented in Genesis 1:1-13. He presents argument after argument from a scientific viewpoint to sustain the order which Genesis chronicles. He then asks, "What chance did Moses have when writing the first chapter [of Genesis] of getting thirteen items all accurate and in satisfactory order?" His calculations conclude it would be one chance in 31,135,104,000,000,000,000,000 (1 in 31 x 1021). He concludes, "Perhaps God wrote such an account in Genesis so that in these latter days, when science has greatly developed, we would be able to verify His account and know for a certainty that God created this planet and the life on it."
The only disappointing thing about Stoner's book is that he spiritualizes the reference to days in Genesis, concluding that they refer to periods of time of indefinite length. Accordingly, he concludes that the earth is approximately 4 billion years old. In his defense, keep in mind that he wrote this book before the foundation of the modern Creation Science Movement which was founded in the 1960's by Dr. Henry Morris. That movement has since produced many convincing scientific arguments in behalf of a young earth with an age of only 6,000 years.
Peter Stoner's Calculations Regarding Messianic Prophecy
ReplyDeletePeter Stoner calculated the probability of just 8 Messianic prophecies being fulfilled in the life of Jesus. As you read through these prophecies, you will see that all estimates were calculated as conservatively as possible.
The Messiah will be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2).
The average population of Bethlehem from the time of Micah to the present (1958) divided by the average population of the earth during the same period = 7,150/2,000,000,000 or 2.8x105.
A messenger will prepare the way for the Messiah (Malachi 3:1).
One man in how many, the world over, has had a forerunner (in this case, John the Baptist) to prepare his way?
Estimate: 1 in 1,000 or 1x103.
The Messiah will enter Jerusalem as a king riding on a donkey (Zechariah 9:9).
One man in how many, who has entered Jerusalem as a ruler, has entered riding on a donkey?
Estimate: 1 in 100 or 1x102.
The Messiah will be betrayed by a friend and suffer wounds in His hands (Zechariah 13:6).
One man in how many, the world over, has been betrayed by a friend, resulting in wounds in his hands?
Estimate: 1 in 1,000 or 1x103.
The Messiah will be betrayed for 30 pieces of silver (Zechariah 11:12).
Of the people who have been betrayed, one in how many has been betrayed for exactly 30 pieces of silver?
Estimate: 1 in 1,000 or 1x103.
The betrayal money will be used to purchase a potter's field (Zechariah 11:13).
One man in how many, after receiving a bribe for the betrayal of a friend, has returned the money, had it refused, and then experienced it being used to buy a potter's field?
Estimate: 1 in 100,000 or 1x105.
The Messiah will remain silent while He is afflicted (Isaiah 53:7).
One man in how many, when he is oppressed and afflicted, though innocent, will make no defense of himself?
Estimate: 1 in 1,000 or 1x103.
The Messiah will die by having His hands and feet pierced (Psalm 22:16).
One man in how many, since the time of David, has been crucified?
Estimate: 1 in 10,000 or 1x104.
Multiplying all these probabilities together produces a number (rounded off) of 1x1028. Dividing this number by an estimate of the number of people who have lived since the time of these prophecies (88 billion) produces a probability of all 8 prophecies being fulfilled accidently in the life of one person. That probability is 1in 1017 or 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000. That's one in one hundred quadrillion!
ReplyDeletePart Two: The Accuracy of Prophecy
The second section of Stoner's book, is entitled "Prophetic Accuracy." This is where the book becomes absolutely fascinating. One by one, he takes major Bible prophecies concerning cities and nations and calculates the odds of their being fulfilled. The first is a prophecy in Ezekiel 26 concerning the city of Tyre. Seven prophecies are contained in this chapter which was written in 590 BC:
Nebuchadnezzar shall conquer the city (vs. 7-11).
Other nations will assist Nebuchadnezzar (v. 3).
The city will be made like a bare rock (vs. 4 & 14).
It will become a place for the spreading of fishing nets (vs. 5 & 14).
Its stones and timbers will be thrown into the sea (v. 12).
Other cities will fear greatly at the fall of Tyre (v. 16).
The old city of Tyre will never be rebuilt (v. 14).
Four years after this prophecy was given, Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Tyre. The siege lasted 13 years. When the city finally fell in 573 BC, it was discovered that everything of value had been moved to a nearby island.
Two hundred and forty-one years later Alexander the Great arrived on the scene. Fearing that the fleet of Tyre might be used against his homeland, he decided to take the island where the city had been moved to. He accomplished this goal by building a causeway from the mainland to the island, and he did that by using all the building materials from the ruins of the old city. Neighboring cities were so frightened by Alexander's conquest that they immediately opened their gates to him. Ever since that time, Tyre has remained in ruins and is a place where fishermen spread their nets.
Thus, every detail of the prophecy was fulfilled exactly as predicted. Stoner calculated the odds of such a prophecy being fulfilled by chance as being 1 in 75,000,000, or 1 in 7.5x107. (The exponent 7 indicates that the decimal is to be moved to the right seven places.)
Stoner proceeds to calculate the probabilities of the prophecies concerning Samaria, Gaza and Ashkelon, Jericho, Palestine, Moab and Ammon, Edom, and Babylon. He also calculates the odds of prophecies being fulfilled that predicted the closing of the Eastern Gate (Ezekiel 44:1-3), the plowing of Mount Zion (Micah 3:12), and the enlargement of Jerusalem according to a prescribed pattern (Jeremiah 31:38-40).
Combining all these prophecies, he concludes that "the probability of these 11 prophecies coming true, if written in human wisdom, is... 1 in 5.76x1059. Needless to say, this is a number beyond the realm of possibility.
Part Three: Messianic Prophecy
ReplyDeleteThe third and most famous section of Stoner's book concerns Messianic prophecy. His theme verse for this section is John 5:39 — "Search the Scriptures because... it is these that bear witness of Me."
Stoner proceeds to select eight of the best known prophecies about the Messiah and calculates the odds of their accidental fulfillment in one person as being 1 in 1017.
I love the way Stoner illustrated the meaning of this number. He asked the reader to imagine filling the State of Texas knee deep in silver dollars. Include in this huge number one silver dollar with a black check mark on it. Then, turn a blindfolded person loose in this sea of silver dollars. The odds that the first coin he would pick up would be the one with the black check mark are the same as 8 prophecies being fulfilled accidentally in the life of Jesus.
The point, of course, is that when people say that the fulfillment of prophecy in the life of Jesus was accidental, they do not know what they are talking about. Keep in mind that Jesus did not just fulfill 8 prophecies, He fulfilled 108. The chances of fulfilling 16 is 1 in 1045. When you get to a total of 48, the odds increase to 1 in 10157. Accidental fulfillment of these prophecies is simply beyond the realm of possibility.
When confronted with these statistics, skeptics will often fall back on the argument that Jesus purposefully fulfilled the prophecies. There is no doubt that Jesus was aware of the prophecies and His fulfillment of them. For example, when He got ready to enter Jerusalem the last time, He told His disciples to find Him a donkey to ride so that the prophecy of Zechariah could be fulfilled which said, "Behold, your King is coming to you, gentle, and mounted on a donkey" (Matthew 21:1-5 and Zechariah 9:9).
But many of the prophecies concerning the Messiah could not be purposefully fulfilled — such as the town of His birth (Micah 5:2) or the nature of His betrayal (Psalm 41:9), or the manner of His death (Zechariah 13:6 and Psalm 22:16).
One of the most remarkable Messianic prophecies in the Hebrew Scriptures is the one that precisely states that the Messiah will die by crucifixion. It is found in Psalm 22 where David prophesied the Messiah would die by having His hands and feet pierced (Psalm 22:16). That prophecy was written 1,000 years before Jesus was born. When it was written, the Jewish method of execution was by stoning. The prophecy was also written many years before the Romans perfected crucifixion as a method of execution.
Even when Jesus was killed, the Jews still relied on stoning as their method of execution, but they had lost the power to implement the death penalty due to Roman occupation. That is why they were forced to take Jesus to Pilate, the Roman governor, and that's how Jesus ended up being crucified, in fulfillment of David's prophecy.
The bottom line is that the fulfillment of Bible prophecy in the life of Jesus proves conclusively that He truly was God in the flesh. It also proves that the Bible is supernatural in origin.
It appears to me that you have done an awful lot of research to validate your preconceived belief in a god and very little research in search of the truth. All of the documentation you can provide will never convince me to believe that a book with claims of extraordinary supernatural events is a valid trustworthy book. No rational minded person reading the Sunday paper would ever believe a story of a man living in the belly of a fish for three days, or dead bodies rising from their tombs (Matthew 27:51-53) or the Red Sea being parted with the wave of a cane. Why in the world does anyone believe these kinds of tall tales when they are written by superstitious authors in a centuries old book. Tall tales such as these are all I need to dismiss this book as an absolute fairytale. As for evolution vs. creationism. I am a believer in science and proven knowledge. This earth was not created for us, it just happened to have the right conditions that it takes to support life. The chances of those conditions existing are astronomical, but conceder the fact that we live on a small planet orbiting an average star in one of billions of galaxies, each of which contains billions of stars. This makes the odds pretty good that the proper conditions could exist somewhere in the cosmos. Science knows all of the elements necessary to
Deletecreate/support life as we know it. The only thing left to figure out is how to trigger it to start growing. Lack of this knowledge is in no way a reason to jump to the conclusion that "it must be god". Science will figure this out in time. Science looks at a question and then searches for an answer and follows the evidence where ever it leads. No scientific evidence has ever led to a theory of a magical creator. If it did then the next question would be, where did the creator come from? Evolution is a fact that is easily proven by simply looking at all of the different dog species there are and the fact that you need a different flue shot each year and what about the looming crises of the new drug resistant bacteria's that are emerging.
Virgil Anderson
Lets assume that your bible is 100% accurate as you seem to claim. Then your god is a tyrant! He drowns infant babies in a flood, orders the killing of all Midianite men and non virgin women, commands Saul to attack the Amelekites and totally destroy all of them, endorses slavery and then there is Leviticus 24:16 which demands that "He who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall be put to death". Consider the 10 commandments, 4 out of 10, that’s 40% are about believing, worshiping and obeying god. This seems to be more important to god than being a good person. It would take several pages to list all of the atrocities that god has committed in the bible. And I haven't even touched on the inconsistences in the bible. You can go to this web site and see a partial list of gods atrocities and many of the inconsistences for yourself. http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/page/refuting-the-bible The bible has nothing to do with good morality and has everything to do with blind obedience. "Human decency is not derived from religion. It precedes it." Christopher Hitchens. Here is how I see the christian religion. God creates everything, including man. Then he creates woman, who must be subservient to man. Then he creates a talking snake (remember god created everything) to tempt Eve into partaking of fruit from the tree of knowledge, which she couldn't have known was wrong because she had no knowledge of right and wrong until after she eats the fruit. So god endows all of her descendants to be born with original sin. Then he impregnates a young virgin girl with himself as his son to be born so he can be hideously murdered as a human sacrifice to himself in order to save mankind from the sin that he alone bestowed on all of mankind in the first place. All of this done in an obscure little corner of the world while ignoring other great civilizations that were thriving at the time in China and the Americas. Believing in superstition and mythology such as this is the source of the vast majority of violence and injustice on this planet. It is the excuse people use to burn witches, hunt albino children in Africa for their body parts and kill people who do not believe in the same superstitions. I am absolutely certain that the world would be a much better and more peaceful place if mankind would stop believing in religion, mythology and the supernatural, all of which can not and never will be proven to be true.
DeleteAs for me, I am at peace with the knowledge that I am one of very few who have been lucky enough to spend a short time in the reality that is life on this planet. So I live my life the best that I can and do my best to do no harm to another human being or creature that I share this life with. I do not do this because of fear of punishment or anticipation of reward when my time here is finished, I do it because I know it is the right thing to do, and I do not need an ancient book to explain this to me. I can only say that I am sorry that you will never know the freedom that comes from being released from the shackles of religious dogma. I wish you the best in the time you have left in this the only life you will ever know.
Virgil Anderson
Wow!!!! Thats a tall order, so I will do my best here. This may take a little time as I was prepared for addressing one thing at a time. In regards to the different nature that seperates the New Testament from the Old Testament, it can only be summerized with one word, and that is Jesus. From the time of creation, God had given man one rule. God said not to eat of the tree or you shall surely die. Because this rule was broken, the nature of man became inherently evil meaning that sin was already in place and God was setting the standard for obediance. Every mother and father do the same thing for their child to protect that child. The old Testament was full of super natural happenings and often times a bit mystical. I was also bothered by this as God seemed like a vicious and out of control God. When learning scripture, I came to the conclusion that God was neither out of control or vicious. History records that creation constantly rejects it's creator. The reason for this is because sin had crept into the world by the one who hates God so much. That is satan himslf. Satan was given dominion over the earth as this further complicated the hearts of mankind. All God wanted was for his creation to love him. So God would teach and scold his creation like a parant would to to the child. Because man constantly ignores God and wishing only to do what he wants to do, a division between man and God would seperate that Love. God knew that their would be death and sickness and violence but he still searches the heart of everyone of us. One must not forget that our time on earth was meant to be only for a time and that our true home is being prepared for us. We view death as being a terrible thing and for those of us that are alive and witnessing the death of someone still remains painful. But death is not death but rather a new beginning and one that is eternal.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThere is answers to all of your questions, that I promise. But trying to explain the large picture will help to explain the smaller picture. God patiently gave man a chance to stop doing the things that were wrong and man kept ignoring him, so as like a parant, God had to do what he had to do which is a God thing. After years of wanting to know these tough questions, I became satisfied with the answers that explained the whole story of creation. It makes sence now and if we as parants can look at it from a parantel standpoint, then we will be able to start understanding Gods intentions. God knew from the moment of creation that satan would undo his perfect plan for mankind, by infecting creation with a sinful heart. One must consider that the Old Testament is a Prophetic and Historical account of creation and that the New Testament would be a fullfillment of the Old Testament. This is why the N.T. looks so different from the O.T. God in a sense stepped out of eternity in the form of Christ to witness personally what we had to endure as a human being in the midst of a wicked world. Now we are without excuse. How much love can God give then to send his only begotten son to die a horrible death to save all of humanity. Since we know that God's realm cannot have sin in it, the only way for God to justify this was to send Jesus as a final sacrifice which upon all things will be made new. When you take the time and really understand the human story, then the only conclusion is that this is a love story between God and his creation. It does seem fair tale-ish, but it makes absolute sense when one gets the whole picture.
ReplyDeleteI am not a puppet on a string, I have spent my whole life wondering why and how I got here. Evolution and Creation are the only answers by which all will fit into. Another words, everything that we can come up with whether it is aliens, evolution, or what ever elso that you can dream of will only fall under these two catagories. No matter what we come up with it always comes back to a creator as even the big bang had to originate from something as there cannot be anything that comes from nothing. I have soooo much more to say as I would be more then happy to explore these things further. I do have some rather mind blowing testamonies that will confirm all that I have spoken of. This journey is a leap of faith as it takes the same leap of faith to be an athiest. So the answer really is, lets start with the facts.....more after you respond....
ReplyDeleteOne last thought. Firstly, please excuse the grammer and spelling as I do not have spell check or grammer utilites on this site.
ReplyDeletesecondly, I would like to continue with this if you are interested in debating this topic. I am nearly 49 years old and have spent my life on a journey for only the truth. Since Truth and Untruth can not both be right.....Terry
would like to suggest that we go at this from a different angle. I do much better in starting with the foundation first. I would like to debate creation and evolution to lay the foundation. One cannot pull the cart before the horse. I have to prove that there is a God before I can tackle scripture. I have always been one for using logic to prove or disprove the initial theory then after that is done then I advance to the next level. It would be like me trying to prove that there is steam without first proving that there is water. So, if you would like to tell me why you believe in Evolution as opposed to creation so that we can begin a hearty debate. If for no other reason, it helps us both to find sollice in our sharing of information.....
Delete