W.F. Albright May Be Right

Many years ago, before our books got misplaced in a move in Korea, we read one of WF Albright’s books. Unfortunately, it has been many years since that time and we cannot remember the title.

But we do remember one very important comment he wrote and I believe it was in the very first chapter on the very first page he made this comment. We will paraphrase here as the exact wording is not remembered either and we are going by memory only.

The gist of his wording went like this–” No ancient nation except for Israel, remembers their roots or where they came from. Not the Indian, the Chinese, the German, or even the Persians, the Greeks, or the Egyptians…”

He may have gone on to list more ancient nations, but we can’t be sure. So many years after reading those words, we bought different books to see if his words were true. Three specific books are 1). The Tribes of Britain, by David Miles; 2). Histories of Nations, edited by Peter Furtado; and 3) A History of India, by Hermann Kulke & Dietmar Rothermund.

We also remember a blurb from the Mayan Popol Vuh and a lot of our other studies have investigated many different sources in an indirect manner. We were hoping to find some scholarship on this issue but the contents of those books and other sources did not go back that far into history.

The Popol Vuh, done from memory as well, only stated that the ancestors of the Mayan came from over the sea. it made no comment on the specific identity of the people who made that journey.

It is sad that the Spanish destroyed so many ancient South American texts or we may have been able to find out more about the Inca, the Aztecs, the Olmecs, and the many smaller tribes of people whose ancestors also made that same journey. There were no indigenous people who evolved in that continent and were not from another place.

For the book Tribes of Britain, the author used an evolutionary time scale and simply called the first population hunter-gathers and similar labels. There was no identification of those groups until many years later when those groups had a British, Welsh, Scottish identity or close to it.

The History of Nations fared no better, with only about one author making even an attempt to try to identify their original settlers. He did not come up with a name for them. The Egyptian author merely followed the party line and started with ‘king’ Menes. It is hard to get objectivity out of Islamic authors.

Finally, The History of India could not identify the original groups that settled in that subcontinent. The authors gave it a good go but they were stuck on the mythical Aryans who may or may not have been a real people.

There is a real debate on that issue, especially if they came as conquerors or in a peaceful manner. If the former then that indicates that there was an unidentified group or groups of people making up the Indian population at its earliest stages.

However, on a side note, those authors may have recorded some more good and solid evidence for Noah’s flood. Right now we just do not have the time to investigate that information.

The same goes for the Mexicans, The Chinese, and other nations we have studied over the years. Not one of these nations knows who or where they came from. One coincidence, all these nations do not follow God nor have his help in finding, writing, and keeping that origin.

They are lost to time forever or unless someone makes a startling discovery. It has been done before. But the nation or people of Israel are different from all the rest of the world’s nations.

They were called out from the world and God recorded their history, telling them the exact person whence they descended from and how it all came to be. The people of Israel exist today because of a promise made by God. That existence and promise should give all true believers hope that their salvation is real and not in vain.

Some of the Muslim nations may be able to pinpoint Abraham as well since they descended from Ismael, another son of Abraham. It is hard to say which ones did as the Muslim religion clouds the past and mixes many different peoples under one identity.

Abraham had many sons besides Isaac and Ishmael. Genesis 25 records those names, or at least the few that came from his second wife:

Now Abraham took another wife, [a]whose name was Keturah. She bore to him Zimran and Jokshan and Medan and Midian and Ishbak and Shuah. Jokshan [b]became the father of Sheba and Dedan. And the sons of Dedan were Asshurim and Letushim and Leummim. The sons of Midian were Ephah and Epher and Hanoch and Abida and Eldaah. All these were the sons of Keturah. Now Abraham gave all that he had to Isaac; but to the sons of [c]his concubines, Abraham gave gifts while he was still living, and sent them away from his son Isaac eastward, to the land of the east.

Whether all of these sons started their own nations is not known from that text. We do know that the Edomites were the descendants of Esau making them related to the people of Israel through Isaac.

As to the concubine children, we do not know exactly where they were sent and any link to Abraham is lost as we do not have their names in the Biblical text.

There are today, as well as throughout recent history, many Bible scholars, religious teachers, and other people, who claim that the OT is full of myths and it does not record true history. If those claims were true, that would make Israel the very first nation to be incapable of recording their past.

Of course, those dissenters do not produce a verifiable, accurate, or even close to true alternative history that can be shown to have interacted with the surrounding nations and accepted by those nations as a viable nation with its own history.

Dr. Finkelstein may claim, as do other archaeologists, that the Israelites sprouted up internally via the Canaanite people. But neither he nor the others can prove that claim and have very little evidence to support their ideas. A population explosion, as stated by Kenneth Kitchen in his book The Reliability of the OT, is not evidence for such thinking.

The Israelites have a verifiable history and it has been shown to be factual through archaeological and historical records. None of the detractors can claim such evidence or support.

But there is one other nation that can pinpoint to a specific ancestor even though this ancestor never had children. The Israelites are not the only fortunate people to know their history and identity.

Christians can point to Christ as their founding ancestor as he did found Christianity and sent his disciples throughout the world to convert the lost. Each believer takes on a new identity as stated in the NT and becomes a member of a new kingdom with its own specific culture.

Like the Israelites, true Christians are called out from the world and be a light unto the nations. They are to show the wisdom, caring, and other factors of the God who has called them to be his children. His rules are not meant for oppression but to show unbelievers how caring he is.

Jesus only asks that we obey him like the Israelites were to obey his Father. While members of other nations could join the Israelites, like Rahab and Ruth, their reach was not that wide. Christians can have a myriad of people joining them and no color, gender, or cultural source is excluded.

Like the people who joined the OT Israelites who had to change loyalties to the Hebrew nation and ways, new believers also have to give up their sin and old loyalties putting Christ first. If they wanted to reap the rewards God has for them.

Christianity isn’t a matter of just being religious, it is a commitment and a very complete change. It means living in this world yet pursuing different goals, objectives, and removing earthly things from their priorities.

Christians have a helping hand as Jesus lived that life before anyone did so when things get tough we have our founder to go to and receive help. The Israelites were not so lucky as Abraham eventually died and his example only lives on through the OT.

In the end, the believer can live with confidence because like the Israelites, they know whence they came and who they are. Plus, they have the instructions they need to lead the Christian life correctly.

A Very Good Quote 4

We won’t be doing much commentary here this time as we will let the quotes speak for themselves. Suffice it to say, these quotes, along with the Bible and God, provide good support for what we have said over the years and in our books.All quotes come from the book Bones of Contention by Dr. Lubenow

#1. While science thrives on observation and experimentation in the present frame of reference, it has no mechanism to observe the past with the same authority it has to observe the present. The scientific method…applies to the past only indirectly, if at all….Not without reason did Oxford scholar R G Collingwood say that the study of the past is really a study of the human mind, indicating that there is a high degree of subjectivity in all scientific reconstructions of the past.  it is unfortunate that many scientists think that because they are able to make authoritative statements about present processes of nature, this allows them to speak dogmatically about the past history of our planet, ignoring historical documents such as Genesi (Pg. 145).

#2. When the first fossil human was discovered (the original Neanderthal) several competent medical authorities stated that the peculiar apish shape of the bones was caused by rickets. In 1872, Rudolf Virchow published a carefully argued and factual diagnosis that the original Neandertal individual had been a normal human who suffered from rickets in childhood and arthritis in adulthood. Virchow’s diagnosis has never been refuted (pg.150).

One interjection here. That means that whoever tells you that they have neanderthal DNA, you know that they have been misinformed. There is no such thing as Neanderthals and that DNA is just pure human and nothing else.

#3. Nevertheless, despite all of this, Virchow was guilty of an unpardonable sin: He was quite skeptical of Darwin’s theory of natural selection, feeling it lacked sufficient demonstration (pg. 150)

#4. A more recent identification of fossil humans and rickets was made by Francis Ivanhoe in a paper in Nature. Ivanhoe said that’…every Neanderthal child skull studied so far shows signs compatible with severe rickets (Pg. 151).

#5. because the human fossils are used today as evidence for human evolution, it is natural for us to assume that the concept of human evolution grew out of fossil evidence….But such is not the case. When Charles Darwin published his famous Origin in 1859, he had been working on his theory for thirty years…The original neanderthal fossils were found in 1856. While Darwin was undoubtedly aware of them, there is no evidence that he had ever seen the fossils when he published the Origin, or even when he published The Descent of Man.

In other words, the allegedly scientific concept of human evolution was well established before the relevant fossil evidence was discovered (Pg. 152-3)

Another interjection. This is true as the book Darwin’s Ghosts documents many of the men who believed and pursued the evolutionary theory long before Darwin published his books. Also, the evolutionary concept does go back to the first century BC approx, if not further. 2000 years prior to the Neanderthal fossil discovery.

#6. It is surprising how unscientific evolutionists can be when their theory is under stress. There is no excuse to ignore the large body of evidence of rickets as the more probable explanation for the morphology of many fossil humans (pg. 156).

A Very Good Quote 3

Actually, there will be more than one today as we take a few words from the book Return to Sodom & Gomorrah by Dr. Charles Pellegrino. After the quotes, we will add a few comments.

#1. The Hebrew scribes who compiled the Bible about 550 BC had access to ancient texts which. according to Babylonian scientists, suggested that the world was nearly 500,000 years old. The Hebrews shortened the Earth’s [past to 3,500 years (before their time), thus banishing all hints of geological time scales (pg 346).

Every time we read content like that we get a little perturbed. First, there is no evidence that the Israelites copied anything from the Babylonians, and second, there is no evidence the OT was compiled in 550 BC. Saying it was is saying that the Bible is a man-made book and can be ignored as the content is from a secular nation and not a holy God.

Then even if the Babylonian books suggested a 500,000 year history for the Earth, there is no verification for that time frame and no evidence that the Earth is older than 6 to10,000 years. Plus, how would a blind, deceived, alternative god worshipping nation come across the truth when the Israelites could not?

We do agree that the Israelites had access to many different ancient books, not just because the Babylonians were ferocious copiers but because they lived in a time and different nations that had ancient books. They even had quite a few themselves.

Finally, there is no such thing as geological time. That is a made-up clock designed to support the fake evolutionary theory and time scale. Not one geologist, ancient or modern, has proven that the rocks of this world assembled as claimed or took the time the claim it took to form. Looking at rocks is not good investigative techniques and the dating systems are filled with assumptions and errors.

#2. What the biblical writers probably never anticipated was that more than 2,000 years later, scientists would rediscover and surpass the older Babylonian chronology (pg. 346).

First off, it is not the Babylonian chronology that matters here. The Biblical one is the one that matters. Second, the biblical chronology came from Moses, not the Babylonians long before 550 BC. If it came from the Babylonians, there is no God and we do not exist.

#3. Gould regarded science and religion as being of equal dignity, and seemed to be echoing Hawking. “The two should not conflict,” he said, “because science treats factual reality, while religion struggles with human morality. I do not view moral argument as a whit less important than factual investigation.” (pg. 347)

He may have had a point if science actually dealt with the truth and facts, as well as being free from bias. But science is a mere tool that can be wielded by anyone for any purpose they may have. When it comes to origins, science is the interloper here and doe snot deal with any factual reality. That field of research is in the Bible’s domain and spreading lies.

The Bible is the book that is correct about our origins. Since it is a revelation, it does not have to be scientific, only true. Then since the just, holy God wrote down what he did, and he cannot lie, then the Bible is true and science fails to connect with factual reality.

Instead, it allows for sin, corruption, personal bias, and other faulty and unholy influences to create a false narrative about our origins and other aspects of life. Science can’t even figure out that the ancient builders had more tools than a bronze age knife or a rock as a hammer.

Science is blind to the past and rarely deals in facts when investigating it.

Something We Rarely Do

We have mentioned the odd blog on our website and recommend our readers to visit and read their content. Yet, we very rarely recommend a business website. But this is an exception to the rule.

We have known about this Christian discount bookstore for many years, starting back when we were in Korea. We were a customer then as it was easy to get mail sent to us, unlike the country we are living in now and they have some very good prices on their stock.

The company is called DiscountBible.com, maybe you have heard about it. We know the owners and he started it to help his son struggling with MS. We would like to suggest you check them out and see if there are any products you can use

Their website URL is: https://www.discountbible.com/bible-store/SF.html and they do have some interesting items. Unfortunately, for us, their archaeology and similar products are few. But they have a great selection of Bibles, homeschooling material, and other products you may find helpful.

Check them out and see what they have to offer and thank you for doing that. Don’t forget to pass the word about this Christian bookstore.

A Very Good Quote 2

We are re-reading the book Bones of Contention by M.L Lubenow as it was a rare find in the used bookstores in this country. It is a well-written book and we have come across a second portion of the author’s words that we want to pass on to you.

It is not unusual for people to begin with the wrong idea of what the Bible teaches…and then reject the entire Bible because “the Bible is unscientific.” This is what Darwin did. Most people think that Darwin disproved biblical creationism and proved evolution….Not so. In the words of Harvard biologist Ernst Mayr, the Darwin Revolution was actually a philosophical revolution from a theistic worldview to a world view in which God was not involved in any way.

Darwin did not reject biblical creation; he knew nothing about it. Even though he studied for the ministry at Cambridge, it is obvious from his writings that he did not have a clue as to what the Bible actually taught regarding special creation. Darwin heavily criticized criticized special creation in The Origin of Species. He claimed that the imperfections of nature demonstrated that a wise and all-powerful God could not have done such a sloppy job. He seemed oblivious to the fact that those imperfections of nature were the result of the Fall, and that the world is not now the way God originally made it (pgs. 94-5)

A few words on our part

#1. the Bible is unscientific.— another misconception held by people is that for something to be true, it must be proven true by science, verified by science, or replicated by science. That is false. Science holds no authority over what is true, what has happened, or what can be done in this world. The Bible does not have to meet science’s standards. Rather science has to meet God’s.

#2. to a world view in which God was not involved in any wayThis is the pride and arrogance of the unbelieving world. They do not want to be subservient to God nor humble themselves and obey him. This is also deception at work telling the unbeliever that they do not need God nor believe his words. They can create their own origin. Unfortunately, too many believers fall for this lie. If you can’t believe God, who can you believe?

#3. Darwin did not reject biblical creation; he knew nothing about it This is something the believer has to grasp if they want to do apologetics the right way. They need to understand that most unbelievers do not know anything about biblical creation. They only know what they have been taught by other unbelievers. This applies to the gospel and other parts of the Bible as well.

There is an ancient Chinese book called The Art of War by Sun Tzu and in it, he says to conduct warfare correctly you need to know your enemy. Believers often fail at knowing where the unbeliever is coming from, what they know, and how they have been taught. Correcting this mistake will help them win others to the Lord.

#4. He claimed that the imperfections of nature demonstrated that a wise and all-powerful God could not have done such a sloppy job Darwin was not alone in this. People often look at the world in its current state and then criticize God, judge and condemn him for something he did not do. The late George Carlin was another famous person who held this view.

To get the right idea of what God actually did, one must read Genesis 1 & 2 and see that everything was perfect and in perfect working order. This is why we can say that there has never been a scientific evolutionary experiment conducted at any time in the world’s history.

What people scientists are looking at is God’s corrupted creative act interacting with other parts of God’s corrupted creative acts. There is no such thing as micro or macroevolution, as those mutations being used to say evolution is true do not lead to more intelligent life forms nor show that evolution actually exists.

#5. He seemed oblivious to the fact that those imperfections of nature were the result of the FallSo are many unbelievers and they need to be taught the difference. We cannot show them any genetic or other materials from that short pre-Fall era and must take God at his word on faith.

The Bible is very clear that God’s work was corrupted when Adam sinned and what we see today is only a distorted glimpse of God’s handiwork. Re-read Genesis 1 & 2 with this in mind and see that God did not do sloppy work at all.

God does not lie. But he does require us to use faith and believe his every word even when science disagrees.