America’s Most Pressing Concern by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=3577

America’s Most Pressing Concern

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Many concerns occupy the minds of those who are disturbed by what is happening to the United States: bloated deficits, oppressive taxation, alleged global warming, rampant crime, and the influx of intruders who do not share the values and worldview of Americans. What are the central issues and topics that the average American pinpoints as of greatest concern? What issues stir widespread social and political fervor? For example, in the recent election, what concerns were most important to Americans as they cast their votes? By far, the top issue among all party groups was the economy. Healthcare was #2, followed by the size and power of federal government (“Economy Top Issue...,” 2010). But make no mistake: “The economy in general and the specific economic problem of unemployment or lack of jobs far outpace all other issues when Americans are asked to name the most important problem facing the country” (“Economy, Jobs...,” 2010, emp. added).

Beyond the economy, contemplate for a moment a few of the other issues that occupy the concern of many Americans:

War in Iraq/Afghanistan	Illegal immigration	Federal deficit
Education	Environmental issues	Energy availability
Terrorism	Foreign affairs	Social security and Medicare

Many other issues might be listed, but these are sufficient to make the point: Most Americans are more concerned about physical and financial matters than spiritualmatters. When one contemplates the multitude of pressing concerns, it is easy to feel “scattered” and overwhelmed as to (1) what the real problem is and (2) the antidote.

While these matters certainly merit the attention and due concern of citizens, the fact of the matter is that the Founders of our Republic pinpointed a much more critical, logically prior issue. Consider the forthright remarks of three:

In a letter written to fellow Founder and signer of the federalConstitution, James McHenry, on November 4, 1800, Declarationsigner Charles Carroll of Carrollton declared:

[W]hat motive can be stronger than the belief, founded on revelation, that a virtuous life will be rewarded by a happy immortality? Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure...are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments (as quoted in Steiner, 1907, p. 475, emp. added).

Consider carefully the admonitions of Founder Noah Webster regarding the indispensable nature of Christianity to the existence of our Republic:

[O]ur citizens should early understand that the genuine source of correctrepublican principles is the Bible, particularly the New Testament or the Christian religion.... [T]he religion which has introduced civil liberty, is the religion of Christ and his apostles, which enjoins humility, piety, and benevolence; which acknowledged in every person a brother, or a sister, and a citizen with equal rights. This is genuine Christianity, and to this we owe our free constitutions of government.... [T]he Christian religion ought to be received, and maintained with firm and cordial support. It is the real source of all genuine republican principles.... The religion of Christ and his apostles, in its primitive simplicity and purity, unencumbered with the trappings of power and the pomp of ceremonies, is the surest basis of a republican government.... [T]hose who destroy the influence and authority of the Christian religion, sap the foundations of public order, of liberty, and of republican government.... (1832, pp. v,247,310-311, emp. added).

The United States commenced their existence under circumstances wholly novel and unexampled in the history of nations. They commenced with civilization, with learning, with science, with constitutions of free government, and with that best gift of God to man, the Christian religion (as quoted in Scudder, 1881, p. 242, emp. added).

In his 1780 inaugural address as the governor of his home state of Massachusetts,Declaration signer John Hancock reminded his fellow citizens of the importance of Christianity to the perpetuation of the nation:

Sensible of the importance of Christian piety and virtue to the order and happiness of a state, I cannot but earnestly commend to you every measure for their support and encouragement.... A due observation of the Lord’s Day is not only important to internal religion, but greatly conducive to the order and benefit of civil society.... Manners, by which not only the freedom, but the very existence of the republics, are greatly affected, depend much upon the public institutions of religion and the good education of youth (as quoted in Brown, 1898, p. 269, emp. added).

There you have it. The Founders repeatedly articulated the #1 concern—the paramount, ultimate, most pressing issue facing the nation. Without this singular, critically important quality—if America does not get this one matter correct—the economy will be the least of our worries. Stated succinctly, that all-consuming, quintessential, premiere concern is: We the citizens, and our leaders, must reinstateacknowledgement of God and His religion (i.e., Christianity), and turn to Him in humble, penitent obedience. According to the Founders themselves, the God of the Bible was solely responsible for the establishment and perpetuation of the Republic. And that national recognition is the only thing that will preserve and sustain us, as it has done for over two centuries. Even if we could snap our fingers and fix all our economic woes instantaneously, without God’s favor we remain in deadly danger. Indeed, rather than fearing terrorists or economic depression, the time has come to reinstate a healthy, sober fear of God (Proverbs 1:7,29-33; Ecclesiastes 12:13; Hebrews 10:31; 12:29—seeMiller, 2003; Miller, 2009).

Unless America can get this one, critical issue sorted out; unless a sizable percentage of Americans will go back to God, Christ, and the Bible, and recognize their foremost need of receiving divine favor; unless citizens can restore moral and sexual sanity to their behavior based on Christian principles, the country is destined to destruction. “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people” (Proverbs 14:34). May God bless America.

REFERENCES

Brown, Abram (1898), John Hancock: His Book (Boston, MA: Lee & Shepard Publishers).

“Economy, Jobs Easily Top Problems in Americans’ Minds” (2010), Gallup, September 21, http://www.gallup.com/poll/143135/Economy-Jobs-Easily-Top-Problems-Americans-Minds.aspx.’

“Economy Top Issue for Voters; Size of Gov’t. May Be More Pivotal” (2010), Gallup, October 26, http://www.gallup.com/poll/144029/Economy-Top-Issue-Voters-Size-Gov-May-Pivotal.aspx.

Miller, Dave (2003), “Who Believes in Hell Anymore?”http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2258.

Miller, Dave (2009), “God’s Fierce Anger,”  http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2242.

Scudder, Horace (1881), Noah Webster (Boston, MA: Houghton, Mifflin, & Co.).

Steiner, Bernard (1907), The Life and Correspondence of James McHenry (Cleveland, OH: Burrows Brothers).

Webster, Noah (1832), History of the United States (New Haven, CT: Durrie & Peck).

A Sponge with Fiber Optics by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=961

A Sponge with Fiber Optics

by	Kyle Butt, M.Div.

The last time you picked up a phone to call your business partner about a work project, you might have been using fiber optics. The last time you logged onto the World Wide Web from your home computer, you might have been using fiber optics. We hear much about fiber optics these days, but what, exactly, is meant by the term “fiber optics”? In simple terms, a fiber-optic cable has a core (center) made of very thin glass. Light can travel through the glass and relay light signals that can reproduce sound and other information. Fiber-optic cables stretch thousands of miles all across the world, and can send information quickly and efficiently.

But there are some problems with these cables. First, since they are glass, they can be brittle, which means they can crack and break. Digging up the cables and replacing them is very expensive. Second, in order to produce the cables, factories must use very high heat, which also is very expensive. Fiber optics are amazing, but they could use some improvement.

Interestingly, scientists have found an amazing sponge that has wonderful fiber-optic “cables.” The sponge, called the Venus Flower Basket, lives in the deep waters of the ocean. This sponge produces several fiber-optic cables that grow out of its base. These tiny cables are about as wide as a single human hair, and grow to be anywhere from 2 to 7 inches long.

The fibers produced by the Venus Flower Basket have several advantages over the manmade ones. First, they are produced in cool temperatures. If we humans could learn to copy this, we could save millions of dollars. Second, the fibers from the sponge are very strong and flexible, and do not crack and break like the ones humans produce. In fact, the fibers from the sponge are so flexible they can be tied into a knot. If scientists could learn to make such strong, flexible fibers, we would not have to spend as much time and money repairing our current fiber-optic cables.

Dan Vergano, in an article for USA Today, wrote about the Venus Flower Basket. He quoted several researchers who had been working with the fiber-optic cables of the sponge, or some other facet of biomimetics (the science of copying nature). George Matsumoto, a marine researcher of the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute in Moss Landing, California, said: “Nature often provides us with a better way of doing thing [sic].” He went on to comment that sponges have evolved varied traits over more than 400 million years (2003).

It is amazing that many scientists who are working in the field of biomimicry do not acknowledge the implications of their work. It is a self-evident truth that where there is design, there must of necessity, be a designer; where there is a painting, there must be a painter. Those who study biomimicry freely acknowledge design in nature. For example, what seems to be the official Web site on biomimicry offers a course from its home page titled “Biologists at the Design Table.” In the course summary, under the heading of “Workshop Logistics,” the site describes the participants in the course as those who are “biologists and naturalists with a passion for the natural world, an understanding of sustainability and an interest in applying nature’s elegant design strategies to human challenges” (n.d., “Biomimicry,” emp. added).

Supposedly, then, over a period of billions of years, nature developed “elegant design strategies”—the likes of which even our most educated, brilliant minds have yet to plumb the depths. And yet we are to believe that this “design” somehow originated by a process of blind, evolutionary chance. Such a conclusion steps beyond bounds of logic.

Intelligent scientists have been working on fiber-optic cables for many years, just to get them to work as well as they do now. Yet, the Venus Flower Basket has strong, flexible fibers that are produced in cool temperatures. If there is design, which is even more intricate and efficient than that produced by highly intelligent humans, then the designer of such must have an intellect equal to or greater than the humans themselves. The writer of Hebrews accurately noted: “For every house is built by someone, but he who built all things is God” (3:4). God’s design in the sponge’s fiber-optic “cables” proves that animals like the Venus Flower Basket did not evolve. Design demands a Designer.

REFERENCES

“Biomimicry,” (n.d.) [On-line], URL: http://www.biomimicry.org/intro.html.

Vergano, Dan (2003), “Sponge Goes Man-made Fiber Optics One Better,” USA Today, [On-line], URL: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techinnovations/2003-08-20-sponge-fibers_x.htm.

Question and Answer: What is “The Beast”? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=1732

Question and Answer: What is “The Beast”?

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Q.

Are you aware of the movie that is scheduled for release next summer called The Beast? I heard it was filmed in an effort to convince people that Jesus never lived. Is that true?

A.

According to the movie’s Web site (www.thebeastmovie.com), The Beast is scheduled to be released in theaters worldwide on June 6, 2006 (or 6/6/06—which I can assure you is no accident). And, yes, it does appear that the movie’s main focus will be to persuade audiences of the alleged “fact” that “Jesus Christ never existed.” It is a story about a young person named Danielle whose father mysteriously disappears after stumbling across “a cover-up of Christianity’s best-kept secret: That Jesus Christ never existed.” Brian Flemming, the movie’s director, supposedly dives “into factual territory” that is “well-explored by scholars but largely hidden from the view of the public” (http://www.thebeastmovie.com/about/index.html). Although The Beast is listed as “fictional,” based upon the movie’s Web site, the director’s aim will be to persuade his audiences that Jesus is equally fictional.

While I have not seen the movie (and certainly do not encourage Christians who are simply seeking to be entertained to view and support such an anti-Christian film, which will simply poke more fun at “fundamentalist Christians”), I can only imagine how the many sources that do testify to Jesus’ historicity will be critiqued. The historically reliable (not to mention inspired) New Testament documents likely will be dismissed with the slightest of ease. Even though every one of the New Testament writers testified to the reality of Christ, they must be rejected as liars or lunatics. Similarly, statements about Jesus from such reputable first and early second-century historians as Josephus, Tacitus, and Seutonius will also have to be explained away somehow (if even mentioned at all).

Who knows if this movie will even make it into theaters next summer? (My prayer is that it will not.) But, if it does, Christians do not have to be alarmed about some new piece of evidence that supposedly proves Jesus never lived. When all of the facts are gathered, the honest individual will come to the same conclusion that the French humanist Ernest Renan came to more than 100 years ago: “[A]ll history is incomprehensible without him [Jesus—EL]” (http://www.lexilogos.com/document/renan/life_jesus.htm).

By the way, Apologetics Press is scheduled to release a new book on the historicity and deity of Christ in the spring of 2006—sometime before the release of The Beast.

Christ and the Gadarene Demoniac: A Criticism Answered by Wayne Jackson, M.A.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=122

Christ and the Gadarene Demoniac: A Criticism Answered

by	Wayne Jackson, M.A.

On the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee, Jesus once encountered a man who was possessed of demons. When the Lord commanded the unclean spirits to leave the gentleman, they requested permission to enter a herd of swine feeding nearby. Christ granted that request. The demons entered the hogs, who, in turn, rushed down an embankment into the sea and drowned. Bible critics have charged Jesus with destroying the property of others. It is alleged that His conduct was reprehensible in connection with this event. There are several things that may be said in response to this baseless accusation.

First, no charge can be made against the Lord unless the event actually happened. Those who criticize Christ must concede, first, that this account represents a factual incident; otherwise, their allegation is baseless. Are they willing to admit that Jesus actually cast out demons? If so, exactly what did that circumstance prove?

Second, if Christ is a Divine Being, then He is sovereign over the entire creation and, in reality, everything belongs to Him (cf. Colossians 1:16). God said: “For every beast of the forest is mine, And the cattle upon a thousand hills” (Psalm 50:10). Hogs, too! Thus, in the interest of a higher good, the Lord had every right to allow this incident to occur.

Third, swine were unclean according to Old Testament regulations (Leviticus 11). It is entirely possible that the owners of these pigs were Jews, engaged in an unlawful enterprise. If such was the case, the Savior’s economic rebuke certainly would have been warranted.

Fourth, as the scholarly R.C. Foster once observed, Christ “permitted the destruction of the swine knowing that it would awaken the Gergesenes from their indifference and ultimately assist in the salvation of a multitude in the community.” There are things that transcend the material, and hardship can have a benevolent result in the final ordering of one’s affairs.

In view of these factors, no legitimate indictment can be leveled against the Son of God in connection with this episode.

Blind Faith by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=444

Blind Faith

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D.

A common misconception among atheists, humanists, and evolutionists is that those who reject evolution in order to hold to a fundamental, literal understanding of the biblical documents are guided by “blind faith.” Robinson articulated this position quite emphatically when he accused Christians of abandoning rationality and evidence in exchange for intellectual dishonesty and ignorance of the truth (1976, pp. 115-124). Many within the scientific community labor under the delusion that their “facts” and “evidence” are supportive of evolution and opposed to a normal, face-value understanding of the biblical text. They scoff at those who disagree with them, as if they alone have a corner on truth.

The fact of the matter is that while most of the religious world deserves the epithets hurled by the “informed” academicians, those who espouse pure, New Testament Christianity do not. New Testament Christians embrace the biblical definition of faith, in contrast to the commonly conceived understanding of faith that is promulgated by the vast majority of people in the denominational world.

The faith spoken of in the Bible is a faith that is preceded by knowledge. One cannot possess biblical faith in God until he or she comes to the knowledge of God. Thus, faith is not accepting what one cannot prove. Faith cannot outrun knowledge—for it is dependent upon knowledge (Romans 10:17). Abraham was said to have had faith only after he came to the knowledge of God’s promises and was fully persuaded (Romans 4:20-21). His faith, therefore, was seen in his trust and submission to what he knew to be the will of God. Biblical faith is attained only after an examination of the evidence, coupled with correct reasoning about the evidence.

The God of the Bible is a God of truth. Throughout biblical history, He has stressed the need for the acceptance of truth—in contrast with error and falsehood. Those who, in fact, fail to seek the truth are considered by God to be wicked (Jeremiah 5:1). The wise man urged: “Buy the truth, and sell it not” (Proverbs 23:23). Paul, himself an accomplished logician, exhorted people to love the truth (2 Thessalonians 2:10-12). He stated the necessity of giving diligence to the task of dealing with the truth properly (2 Timothy 2:15). Jesus declared that only by knowing the truth is one made free (John 8:32). Luke ascribed nobility to those who were willing to search for and examine the evidence, rather than being content to simply take someone’s word for the truth (Acts 17:11). Peter admonished Christians to be prepared to give a defense (1 Peter 3:15), which stands in stark contrast to those who, when questioned about proof of God, or the credibility and comprehensibility of the Bible, triumphantly reply, “I don’t know—I accept it by faith!”

Thus, the notion of “blind faith” is completely foreign to the Bible. People are called upon to have faith only after they receive adequate knowledge. In fact, the Bible demands that the thinker be rational in gathering information, examining the evidence, and reasoning properly about the evidence, thereby drawing only warranted conclusions. That, in fact, is the essentiality of what is known in philosophical circles as the basic law of rationality: one should draw only such conclusions as are justified by the evidence. Paul articulated exactly this concept when he wrote: “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21). John echoed the same thought when he said to “test the spirits” (1 John 4:1). These passages show that the New Testament Christian is one who stands ready to examine the issues. God expects every individual to put to the test various doctrines and beliefs, and then to reach only such conclusions as are warranted by adequate evidence. Man must not rely upon papal authorities, church traditions, or the claims of science. Rather, all people are obligated to rely upon the properly studied written directives of God (2 Timothy 2:15; John 12:48; 2 Peter 3:16). Biblical religion and modern science clash only because the majority of those within the scientific community have abandoned sound biblical hermeneutics and insist upon drawing unwarranted, erroneous conclusions from the relevant scientific evidence.

The Bible insists that evidence is abundantly available for those who will engage in unprejudiced, rational inquiry. The resurrection claim, for example, was substantiated by “many infallible proofs,” including verification through the observation of more than five hundred persons at once (Acts 1:3; 1 Corinthians 15:5-8). Many proofs were made available in order to pave the way for faith (John 20:30-31). Peter offered at least four lines of evidence to those gathered in Jerusalem before he concluded his argument with “therefore…” (Acts 2:14-36). The acquisition of knowledge through empirical evidence was undeniable, for Peter concluded, “as you yourselves also know” (Acts 2:22, emp. added). John referred to the auditory, visual, and tactile evidences that provided further empirical verification (1 John 1:1-2). Christ offered “works” to corroborate His claims, so that even His enemies did not have to rely merely on His words—if they would but honestly reason to the only logical conclusion (John 10:24-25,38). The proof was of such magnitude that one Pharisee, a ruler of the Jews, even admitted: “[W]e know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him” (John 3:2).

Nevertheless, there are always those who, for one reason or another, refuse to accept the law of rationality, and who avoid the warranted conclusions—just like those who side-stepped the proof that Christ presented, and attributed it to Satan (Matthew 12:24). Christ countered such an erroneous conclusion by pointing out their faulty reasoning and the false implications of their argument (Matthew 12:25-27). The proof that the apostles presented was equally conclusive, though unacceptable to many (Acts 4:16).

The proof in our day is no less conclusive, nor is it any less compelling. While it is not within the purview of this brief article to prove such (see Warren and Flew, 1977; Warren and Matson, 1978), the following tenets are provable: (1) we can know (not merely think, hope, or wish) that God exists (Romans 1:19-20); (2) we can know that the Bible is the verbally inspired Word of God, and intended to be comprehended in much the same way that any written human communication is to be understood; (3) we can know that one day we will stand before God in judgment and give account for whether we have studied the Bible, learned what to do to be saved, and obeyed those instructions; and (4) we canknow that we know (1 John 2:3).

By abandoning the Bible as a literal, inerrant, infallible standard by which all human behavior is to be measured, the scientist has effectively rendered biblical religion, biblical faith, and New Testament Christianity sterile—at least as far as his or her own life is concerned. Once the Bible is dismissed as “figurative,” “confusing,” or “incomprehensible,” one has opened wide the doors of subjectivity, in which every man’s view is just as good as another’s. The more sophisticated viewpoint may be more appealing, but it remains just as subjective and self-stylized.

REFERENCES

Robinson, Richard (1976), “Religion and Reason,” Critiques of God, ed. Peter A. Angeles (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus).

Warren, Thomas B. and Antony G.N. Flew (1977), The Warren-Flew Debate (Jonesboro, AR: National Christian Press).

Warren, Thomas B. and Wallace I. Matson (1978), The Warren-Matson Debate (Jonesboro, AR: National Christian Press).

Did the Hebrew Writers Borrow from Ancient Near Eastern Mythology? by Dewayne Bryant, M.A.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=4538

Did the Hebrew Writers Borrow from Ancient Near Eastern Mythology?

by	Dewayne Bryant, M.A.

For centuries, the bulk of the people in the West regarded the Bible as the Word of God. They saw it as the inerrant and inspired revelation of God to His creation. Beginning in the mid-1800s, some academicians began rejecting the inspiration of the Bible. This came, in part, after the discovery of ancient mythological texts. Upon examining the textual evidence, skeptics highlighted the Bible’s similarities with other literature and claimed it to be only one sacred book among a larger body of myth. After studying the Bible’s differences from ancient mythology, other scholars viewed these discoveries as confirmations of the Bible’s uniqueness. 

Perhaps the most dominant viewpoint in biblical studies concerning the biblical text is that the Bible contains significant amounts of mythology borrowed from Israel’s neighbors (although we should quickly add that truth is not determined by majority opinion). This presumption has dominated biblical studies for nearly two centuries. But as additional texts have surfaced, more cautious scholars have backed away from this viewpoint. Indeed, myth was once seen as pure fiction, but now scholars are beginning to realize that this may not necessarily be the case. The belief that myth may contain small nuggets of historical truth is gaining popularity, even if we recognize that tales of the gods were nothing more than the work of inventive scribes. So where does this leave the Bible? The question we must ask is this: is the Bible pure myth, or is it something else?

We must first determine what we mean by “myth.” It is a notoriously difficult term to define, and scholars use it with a variety of nuances (see Kreeft and Tacelli, 1994, pp. 212-213). Some define it as any story including the supernatural. Most separate myth from legend, with the former being stories about the gods, and the latter being stories—with varying degrees of historical truth—about human beings. In modern parlance, some use it to refer to fiction, especially the body of stories about a particular character (e.g., the mythology of Superman or Captain America). But if we look at the term as it bears on the sacred texts of the religions in the ancient Near East, it has a clearly defined usage.

In his book The Bible Among the Myths, Old Testament scholar John Oswalt notes the radical differences between mythological texts and the Hebrew Bible (2009). The Bible and ancient myth came from two fundamentally different worldviews. Although he identifies nearly a dozen different points, we will examine four in particular.

THE MORAL CHARACTER OF DEITY

In the Bible, God’s moral character is    identified with holiness and righteousness. To be more accurate, it is His character that defines holiness. His attributes set the standards for behavior. They are ethically and morally pure and upright. Furthermore, since He is perfect and cannot fundamentally change (Malachi 3:6), He can become neither any better nor any worse. His goodness is celebrated throughout the Bible (Psalm 16:2; 31:19; 107:1). He cannot be tempted or tempt another (James 1:17), or look upon evil with any measure of approval (Habakkuk 1:13). Individuals mirror God’s holiness, in part through ethical living (Leviticus 11:44; 1 Peter 1:16).

The gods of the ancient Near East often commit evil acts and frequently give themselves over to debauchery. In Egyptian myth, the chaotic god Seth murders his brother Osiris and dismembers the body. In an Egyptian myth titled “The Contendings of Horus and Seth,” Seth attempts to rape his nephew Horus during a contest over who will take Osiris’ place (Lichtheim, 2006, 2:219). Rape is a common theme in the Greek myths, where women and even goddesses are violated with a frequency that would shock many modern readers. In the Atrahasis Epic, the gods are outraged because humanity is keeping them awake at night. They attempt to silence humanity through various means, including disease and famine, and finally send a flood to destroy humanity for the sake of a good night’s sleep (see Foster, 1997). The gods are not above getting drunk, either. In one Ugaritic text, called “The Myth of El’s Banquet,” the Canaanite god El (or Ilu) becomes inebriated, and on his way home meets an unidentified animal which causes him to soil himself and fall down into his own excrement (see Pardee, 1997). Such inglorious stories are nowhere to be found in the Bible about God. The God of the Bible can in no way be compared to deities of human invention.

THE VIEW OF MANKIND

The biblical account of mankind’s creation is the most complete and noble of any in ancient Near Eastern literature. Other accounts of man’s creation must be pieced together from various fragments (as in Egypt), or else depict man as little more than an afterthought (as in Mesopotamia). Regardless of the specific tradition, the requirements are clear: man is created to serve the gods, to perform services for them, and, should they fail, incur divine wrath. As Walton observes:

while Israelites viewed man as created to rule, Mesopotamians viewed him as created to serve…. The fact that the Israelites viewed man as the centerpiece of creation afforded him a certain dignity, undergirded by the fact that he was created in the image of God. In contrast, Mesopotamians did not see man as created with dignity. Human beings achieved their dignity by the function they served (1989, p. 29).

He adds that humanity was originally created “in a barbarous state,” with humanity being “an unplanned afterthought, created for the sake of convenience” (p. 30).

The biblical account of Creation is vastly different from its Near Eastern counterparts. Man is the apex of creation. He has dignity because of who he is, not what he does. He is created as a kind of governor or viceroy charged with stewarding God’s creation (Genesis 1:28). Furthermore, this creation was prepared with man in mind (cf. Genesis 1:29-30), for his use and enjoyment. Although he is also created to worship his Creator, it is not a wearisome task. The New Testament further reveals that worship is also meant for the benefit of fellow believers (Acts 2:46-47; Ephesians 5:19), in addition to giving honor to God.

THE REQUIREMENTS OF DEITY

What the gods required of humanity in other cultures could not be known with any accuracy. The most a person could do was to infer the will of the gods based on their circumstances. If all was well and life was going smoothly, then it was apparent that the person was indeed doing the gods’ will. Should they suffer misfortune or tragedy, it must have meant that the person had offended the gods. It became their task to determine which god they might have offended through omens and offer the appropriate sacrifices. This was no easy task, and could be viewed as something of a guessing game. In contrast, God clearly outlined what He expected of mankind with precision through His spokesmen. His will is revealed clearly as a matter of public record, made known through readings to the people (Deuteronomy 31:9-13). The people were warned before punishment, rebuked afterwards, and told specifically what needed to be done to please God.

HISTORIOGRAPHY

The biblical authors had a worldview by which history was viewed as linear. The past, present, and future all had great importance. Specifically, the past served as a reminder, which God makes clear is important enough to signify with memorials, such as piles of stones (e.g., Joshua 4:19-24), or the institution of the Lord’s Supper (Matthew 26:17-30; Mark 14:12-26; Luke 22:7-39). The future is also important in the biblical worldview, as we see in the prophet Joel’s concern about the coming Day of the Lord (Joel 2:1-11), or Christ’s teaching about His impending return (Matthew 24:30; 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17). The biblical writers considered all phases of time to be important.

There was virtually no understanding of history in the modern sense among the cultures of the ancient Near East. The Near Eastern view of history was cyclical and assigned little importance to the past or to the future. The ancient Greek historian Herodotus (circa 484-425 B.C.) is called the “father of history” for good reason—prior to his time there was little or no recording or analysis of the past for its own sake. Historiography, as we know it, did not exist (an exception may be seen in the Babylonian chronicles, which record the history of Babylon from the eighth century through the third century B.C.). The past had very little importance outside its use as propaganda by monarchs interested in glorifying themselves (see Oswalt, 2009, pp. 111-137).

CONCLUSION

Mythology is much more than exciting stories filled with fantastic monsters, magic, and imaginative details. It is a way of thinking—a worldview. Careful comparison of the biblical text with myth makes it clear that the Bible and ancient Near Eastern mythology are not merely different from one another—they are radically so. Even a cursory reading is enough to give most people a feeling that the Bible and myth are quite different, even if they immediately may not be able to put their finger on why. Thanks to the discovery and study of ancient texts, the differences are easy to detect. The Bible, unlike Near Eastern mythology, has an air of dispassionate objectivity that puts it in a category by itself. The Bible and ancient mythology are so different from one another that any allegations of wholesale borrowing on the part of the biblical authors must be rejected by those who handle the ancient evidence with care.

REFERENCES

Foster, Benjamin R., trans. (1997), “Atra-Hasis” in The Context of Scripture, Vol. 1: Canonical Compositions from the Biblical World, ed. William W. Hallo and K. Lawson Younger (Leiden: Brill).

Kreeft, Peter and Ronald Tacelli (1994), The Handbook of Catholic Apologetics: Reasoned Answers to Questions of Faith (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press).

Lichtheim, Miriam (2006), Ancient Egyptian Literature, Volume 2: The New Kingdom(Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).

Oswalt, John N. (2009), The Bible Among the Myths: Unique Revelation or Just Ancient Literature? (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).

Pardee, Dennis, trans. (1997), “Ilu on a Toot” in The Context of Scripture, Vol. 1: Canonical Compositions from the Biblical World, ed. William W. Hallo and K. Lawson Younger (Leiden: Brill).

Walton, John H. (1989), Ancient Israelite Literature in its Cultural Context (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).

The Quran and Throwing Stars by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=8&article=299

The Quran and Throwing Stars

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D.

In order for a book to demonstrate a divine origin, it must possess the attributes that accompany such a claim. For example, it must refrain from making statements that are outlandish and indicative of an author who was a simply a product of his times, and who shared in the common superstitions, mythology, and misconceptions that afflict humans unaided by supernatural agency.

With this in mind, examine the the Quran of the Muslim religion. The Quran makes several statements regarding heavenly “lamps” and their relationship to “devils.”

And verily in the heaven We have set mansions of the stars, and We have beautified it for beholders. And We have guarded it from every outcast devil, save him who stealeth the hearing, and them doth a clear flame pursue(Surah 15:16-18, emp. added).

Lo! We have adorned the lowest heaven with an ornament, the planets; with security from every forward devil. They cannot listen to the Highest Chiefs forthey are pelted from every side, outcast, and theirs is a perpetual torment; save him who snatcheth a fragment, and there pursueth him a piercing flame (Surah 37:6-10, emp. added).

And (the Jinn who had listened to the Quran said): We had sought the heaven but had found it filled with strong warders and meteors. And we used to sit on places (high) therein to listen. But he who listened now findeth a flame in wait for him (Surah 72:8-9, emp. added).

And verily We have beautified the world’s heaven with lamps, and We have made them missiles for the devils, and for them We have prepared the doom of flame (Surah 67:5, emp. added).

The reader is given the distinct impression that Allah uses shooting stars, or meteors, as missiles to drive evil spirits or demons away from heaven (to prevent them from listening to heavenly conversations) and to torment them. Such language cannot be dismissed as merely figurative, poetic, or phenonmenal. Of course, Muslim apologists recognize the absurdity of the idea of physical objects being hurled at spiritual beings, so they offer an alternative explanation. They claim the verses in question refer to soothsayers and astrologers who seek signs from the stars, but who become frightened by meteorological phenomena (see Pickthall, n.d., pp. 408,417). We leave the reader to judge whether this interpretation accounts adequately for the wording of the quranic text.

REFERENCES

Pickthall, Mohammed M. (n.d.), The Meaning of the Glorious Koran (New York: Mentor).

From Mark Copeland... "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS" Chapter Ten

                  "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS"

                               Chapter Ten

OBJECTIVES IN STUDYING THIS CHAPTER

1) To realize the possibility of apostasy

2) To appreciate the help of God in times of temptation

3) To understand the importance of properly applying the principle of
   expediency

SUMMARY

In this chapter Paul brings to a conclusion his discussion concerning 
things offered to idols.  Reminding them about the example of Israel's 
apostasy and the danger of their own, he commands them to "flee 
idolatry" (1-14).  He describes the communal implications of religious
feasts and warns against provoking the Lord to jealousy by having
fellowship with demons (15-22).  This is probably a rebuke to the sort
of practice alluded to in chapter 8, verse 10, where some at the church 
in Corinth thought nothing of eating sacrificial meat even in an idol's 
temple!  He closes by giving specific instructions concerning meat that 
was later sold in the market place, or offered at the dinner of an 
unbeliever to which they might be invited; that they not be concerned 
unless someone specifically associates it with having been offered to 
an idol, and then to refrain out of consideration for the other's 
conscience (23-30).  An overriding principle?  Do all to the glory of 
God, and provide no occasi on for others to stumble (31-32).  In other 
words, imitate Paul, who sought to save others just as Christ did 
(33-11:1).

OUTLINE

I. EXAMPLES OF ISRAEL'S APOSTASY (1-14)

   A. APOSTASY IN SPITE OF BLESSINGS (1-5)
      1. Blessings received in the crossing of the Red Sea (1-2)
      2. Blessings received as they sojourned in the wilderness (3-4)
      3. Still, with most of them God was not pleased, and they died in
         the wilderness (5)

   B. THE EXAMPLE OF ISRAEL SHOULD SERVE TO WARN CHRISTIANS (6-14)
      1. Their example of apostasy to warn us (6)
         a. Not to become idolaters (7)
         b. Not to commit sexual immorality (8)
         c. Not to tempt Christ (9)
         d. Not to murmur (10)
      2. Their history recorded to admonish us (11)
         a. For we can just as easily fall (12)
         b. Though God is faithful to provide help in dealing with
            temptation (13)
      3. Therefore, flee from idolatry! (14)

II. RELIGIOUS FEASTS AND THEIR COMMUNAL IMPLICATIONS (15-22)

   A. THE EXAMPLE OF THE LORD'S SUPPER AND THE SACRIFICES OF ISRAEL
      (15-18)
      1. Paul speaks as to those capable of making wise judgments (15)
      2. Partaking of the Lord's Supper is a communion of the Lord's
         body and blood (16-17)
      3. The priests of Israel who ate the sacrifices were sharing in
         the services offered on the altar (18)

   B. APPLIED TO THINGS SACRIFICED TO IDOLS (19-22)
      1. Not to say that an idol is anything, nor that which is offered
         to the idol (19)
      2. But those who offer the sacrifices do so to demons, not God;
         and Paul would not want them to have fellowship with demons
         (20)
      3. They cannot eat and drink at the Lord's table and then do the
         same at the tables of demons (21)
      4. Such would provoke the Lord to jealousy (22)

III. CONCLUSION REGARDING THINGS SACRIFICED TO IDOLS (23-11:1)

   A. SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS (23-30)
      1. Seek for those things that are helpful, being considerate of
         the well-being of others (23-24)
      2. Concerning things sold in the market, eat without question
         (25-26)
      3. When you are invited to a dinner with an unbeliever (27-30)
         a. Eat what is set before you, asking no question for  
            conscience's sake (27)
         b. But if someone should point out that the food had been
            offered to an idol, don't eat (28-30)
            1) For the sake of the one who pointed it out (28a)
            2) For the sake of another's conscience (28b)
               a) Lest your liberty be judged (condemned?) by the
                  other's conscience (29)
               b) Lest you be evil spoken of concerning that for which
                  you gave thanks (30)

   B. GENERAL PRINCIPLES (31-11:1)
      1. Whatever you do, do all to the glory to God (31)
      2. Give no offense to Jews, Greeks, or the church of God (32)
      3. Just as Paul sought to please others rather than himself, that
         others may be saved (33)
      4. Imitate him, as he imitated Christ (11:1)

REVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE CHAPTER

1) List the main points of this chapter
   - Examples Of Israel's Apostasy (1-14)
   - Religious Feasts And Their Communal Implications (15-22)
   - Conclusion Regarding Things Sacrificed To Idols (23-11:1)

2) What Old Testament account illustrates the possibility of apostasy?
   (1-11)
   - The exodus and wilderness wanderings of the Israelites

3) What attitude is most likely to precede one's fall? (12)
   - Thinking that by standing there is no danger of falling

4) What promises do we have that should encourage us in times of
   temptation? (13)
   - That God will not allow us to be tempted beyond what we are able
     to bear
   - That He will provide a way of escape to bear it

5) What is the Lord's Supper according to verse 16?
   - A communion (or sharing) of the body and blood of the Lord

6) What does partaking of the one bread demonstrate? (17)
   - That we are one body

7) In considering a matter, what must be considered besides its
   lawfulness? (23-24)
   - Is it helpful; does it edify one another

8) To whom are we to give no offense (an occasion of stumbling)? (32)
   - Jews, Greeks, the church of God

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2015

 

From Mark Copeland... "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS" Chapter Eleven

                 "THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS"

                             Chapter Eleven

OBJECTIVES IN STUDYING THIS CHAPTER

1) To ascertain if Paul's instructions concerning the veil were meant
   to be applied today, or if he was simply admonishing them to abide
   by what was a social custom of their day

2) To notice the purpose of the Lord's Supper and the manner in which
   it is to be observed

SUMMARY

Having spent three chapters discussing the issue of eating things
sacrificed to idols, Paul now quickly covers two separate matters in
this one chapter.  The first pertains to women praying and prophesying
with heads uncovered (2-16).  In view of what we are able to glean
about the society of Corinth, and from comments made by Paul in this
chapter and elsewhere, I believe that the problem Paul addresses is one
that was occurring out in public and not in the assembly.  Beginning in 
verse 17 and continuing through chapter 14, Paul covers issues 
affecting their assemblies as a church, the first being the manner in 
which they abused the observance of the Lord's Supper (17-34).

OUTLINE

I. WOMEN PRAYING AND PROPHESYING WITH HEADS UNCOVERED (2-16)

   A. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS (2-5a)
      1. Commendation for having kept the apostolic traditions
         delivered to them (2)
      2. A reminder concerning the proper line of authority (3)
      3. Concerning praying and prophesying (4-5a)
         a. Every man who does so with head covered dishonors his head
            (Christ)
         b. Every woman who does so with head uncovered dishonors her
            head (man)

   B. EXPLANATORY COMMENTS (5b-16)
      1. A woman praying or prophesying uncovered would make her appear
         as one shorn or shaved (5a)
         a. If a woman is not covered, let her be shorn (6a)
         b. If to be shorn or shaved is shameful, let her be covered
            (6b)
      2. It is proper for a man not to cover his head (7-9)
         a. Man is the image and glory of God, while woman is the glory
            of man (7)
         b. Man did not come from woman, nor was created for woman (8-9)
      3. It is appropriate for a woman to have a symbol of authority on
         her head, because of angels (10)
      4. This is not to say that man is independent of woman (11-12)
         a. Especially in the Lord (11)
         b. For as the woman is from the man, so the man is through the
            woman (12a)
         c. And all things are from God (12b)
      5. Judge this matter for yourselves (13-15)
         a. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with uncovered 
            head? (13)
         b. Does not even nature teach you? (14-15)
            1) That long hair on a man is a dishonor to him? (14)
            2) That long hair on a woman is a glory to her, and 
               provides a covering? (15)
      6. But if anyone is contentious about this matter... (16)
         a. We have no such custom (i.e., this is not an "apostolic
            tradition")
         b. Nor do the churches of God

II. CONCERNING THE LORD'S SUPPER (17-34)

   A. THE CONDUCT AT CORINTH IN REGARDS TO THE LORD'S SUPPER (17-22)
      1. He cannot praise them for their conduct in their assemblies
         (17-19)
         a. Their coming together is not for the better, but for the
            worse (17)
         b. He has heard of their divisions, of which the only good
            thing that could be said is that it does show who is really
            approved among them (18-19)
      2. Especially in regards to the Lord's Supper (20-22)
         a. Their divisiveness made it impossible to eat properly, and
            led to severe abuses (20-21)
         b. They despised the church and shamed the poor, for which 
            Paul could not praise them (22)

   B. THE INSTITUTION AND PROPER OBSERVANCE OF THE LORD'S SUPPER
      (23-34)
      1. The institution as received by Paul directly from the Lord
         (23-25)
      2. Properly observed, it is a proclamation of the Lord's death
         (26)
      3. Properly observed, it is accompanied by self-examination
         (27-32)
         a. Which enables us to observe it without bringing judgment to
            ourselves (27-29)
         b. Otherwise, we will be judged and chastened by the Lord,
            that we might not be condemned with the world (30-32)
      4. Concluding instructions (33-34)
         a. When you come together to eat the Supper, wait for one
            another (33)
         b. If you are hungry, eat at home (34a)
         c. Paul will have more to say when he comes to Corinth (34b)

REVIEW QUESTIONS FOR THE CHAPTER

1) List the main points of this chapter
   - Women Praying And Prophesying With Head Uncovered (2-16)
   - Concerning The Lord's Supper (17-34)

2) For what does Paul commend the church in Corinth? (2)
   - Remembering him and keeping the traditions as he delivered to them

3) What is the proper order of authority? (3)
   - God, Christ, Man, Woman

4) What evidence is there that Paul is discussing praying and
   prophesying out in public, and not in the assembly?
   - His commendation in verse 2 (they were keeping the apostolic
     traditions delivered to them)
   - His question in verse 13 (they would have answered "yes" if they
     were being asked concerning women in a religious assembly in
     Corinth; see The Expositors' Greek Testament)
   - His remarks in verses 17-18 (he at this point begins to address
     abuses in their assemblies)
   - His commandments in 14:34-37 (concerning women in the assembly)

5) What evidence is there that Paul is encouraging them to act in
   harmony with the customs of their day?
   - His comments in verses 5-6 (arguing on the basis of "IF it is
     shameful...")
   - His appeal to propriety in verse 13 ("is it proper...?")
   - His conclusion in verse 16 (this is not an "apostolic" or "church"
     custom)

6) How did Paul feel about eating common meals in the assemblies?
   (22, 34)
   - He did not approve, and strongly condemned those who did

7) What is the purpose of the Lord's Supper? (24-26)
   - A memorial in which we proclaim the Lord's death

8) How should one observe the Lord's Supper? (27-29)
   - In a worthy manner
   - With self-examination
   - Discerning the Lord's body

9) How can we avoid the judgement of God? (31)
   - By judging ourselves

10) What is God's purpose in judging His children? (32)
   - To chasten, that we not be condemned with the world

11) What appears to be an important element in observing the Lord's
    Supper? (33; Acts 20:7)
   - That it be done "together"

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2015

 

From Gary.... Wisdom comes in all sizes

Such insight, at such a young age!  I didn't think such profound thoughts at this age, did you?  Whatever age, thinking positive thoughts in a not-so-positive world is amazing!!  

And, what about Jesus?

Luke, Chapter 2 (WEB)
 21  When eight days were fulfilled for the circumcision of the child, his name was called Jesus, which was given by the angel before he was conceived in the womb. 

  22  When the days of their purification according to the law of Moses were fulfilled, they brought him up to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord  23 (as it is written in the law of the Lord, “Every male who opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord”), 24 and to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, “A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons.”

  25  Behold, there was a man in Jerusalem whose name was Simeon. This man was righteous and devout, looking for the consolation of Israel, and the Holy Spirit was on him.  26 It had been revealed to him by the Holy Spirit that he should not see death before he had seen the Lord’s Christ.  27 He came in the Spirit into the temple. When the parents brought in the child, Jesus, that they might do concerning him according to the custom of the law,  28 then he received him into his arms, and blessed God, and said, 
  29 “Now you are releasing your servant, Master,
according to your word, in peace;
  30 for my eyes have seen your salvation,
  31 which you have prepared before the face of all peoples;
  32 a light for revelation to the nations,
and the glory of your people Israel.”

  33  Joseph and his mother were marveling at the things which were spoken concerning him,  34 and Simeon blessed them, and said to Mary, his mother, “Behold, this child is set for the falling and the rising of many in Israel, and for a sign which is spoken against.  35 Yes, a sword will pierce through your own soul, that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.” 

  36  There was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Asher (she was of a great age, having lived with a husband seven years from her virginity,  37 and she had been a widow for about eighty-four years), who didn’t depart from the temple, worshiping with fastings and petitions night and day.  38 Coming up at that very hour, she gave thanks to the Lord, and spoke of him to all those who were looking for redemption in Jerusalem. 

  39  When they had accomplished all things that were according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city, Nazareth.  40 The child was growing, and was becoming strong in spirit, being filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was upon him.

Jesus was someone special and people realized it from a very early age. Since the last verse says that he was "filled with wisdom"- I can only wonder at the things he might have said!!!

I am quite sure that if God had wanted us to know, HE would have told us. Ultimately, Jesus  DID GROW UP AND THE PROPHECY OF SIMEON WAS FULFILLED!!!!