Caring In The Church

I have not been a fan of the redesign and focus on Christianity Today’s website. I wrote them a letter some time back asking where were all the articles by older, more mature, wiser Christians who could build the faith of those younger. I am disappointed that the majority of articles I see are written by too young, inexperienced, immature believers who should still be learning from those with greater spiritual experience… I never received a reply. Kind of sad though because the secular drive for youth led organizations should not be affecting the church.

Teachers of others should be older, wiser, more experienced and that includes those who write magazine or other articles about faith, life and how to handle problems in the family or one’s personal life. Case in point is the following article. I do  like some of the things said in it but other things leave deep questions in my mind.

#1. Abortion is difficult for almost any post-abortive woman to discuss

A very long time ago I wrote a book on abortion and I really didn’t find that to be true. Maybe in the church women have a hard time talking about it because abortion is sin and too many church people condemn long before they try to understand.  My main question for this point is why are these women not talking to their husbands about this issue? If they are single, why are they not talking to their trusted family members who can give solid spiritual guidance?

Men, it may take us a while to wrap our heads around the fact that the woman we love has had an abortion but love ‘bears all things’ thus we should be there for our wives and help them through it. The phrase, ‘you are not the woman I married’ or ‘i do not know who you are anymore’ do not work if you actually love your mate (this goes for women as well). it doesn’t matter, love bears her burdens as well as your own.

#2. According to the Guttmacher Institute, one in every five women who gets an abortion identifies as a born-again, evangelical, charismatic, or fundamentalist Christian. Given that more than a million women abort each year in the US, this means a staggering 200,000 Bible-believing Christians annually. And according to Christian ministries working with this population, a vast majority of them will never reveal their secret.

Identifies does not mean actually are a Christian and I wonder how broadly these terms are applied.BUT the main question here is why are these women making a decision that has them disobeying God? What drives them to this act? If we can answer those questions, maybe we can see where the solution lies. If these women are getting pregnant doing pre-marital sex, or adulterous affairs then we know where to target our energies.

Christian women know better so we need to know their honest reasons why they are aborting their children. Statistics mean nothing except to say that biblical teaching is not sinking home in a large number of women. or that a large contingent of women are alone and seeking some companionship through sinful acts and when the pregnancy comes they continue down that road. Their vulnerability and lack of support may play a role as they are overwhelmed by the many men, both Christian and not, who seek sex only and first.

These women know they are sinning so condemnation is not going to help matters or keep these women in the faith. But to act, we need to know the real reasons why, so we can stop this behavior before it gets to this point.

#3. In interviews with about a dozen post-abortive Christian women, I heard each say they deeply regret their abortions and experienced profound emotional and spiritual trauma as a result. Without a place to confess and seek recovery, women who’ve had abortions remain shackled by fear, grief, and guilt.

This is why I said in a previous article that the church should strive to be a sanctuary so that its members can confess their sins, receive forgiveness from God and then grow from their experience. The church should not be the leader in kicking out those who make mistakes or fall in their Christian lives. Remember what Jesus said, ‘he who is without sin, cast the first stone.’

That message wasn’t just to the Pharisees and other religious leaders of his day. It was to all believers who need to remember that they sin and God forgives them so we must be more compassionate to those people who are in pain over committed sin. But my question here is, why limit that confessional for only those who have abortions? This place to confess and seek recovery must be made for all sins committed by people.

That is one reason why the church exists because believers do not automatically become sinless upon conversion.  They will fall or make mistakes throughout their Christian lives thus they all need a place that is safe to go, where they will not be ostracized , and looked down upon but guided by experienced, mature believers who know the answers and do not resort to fads and gimmicks.

#4. Certainly, the church has grown in its ability to minister to these women. In the past 20 years, abortion recovery groups have multiplied in churches nationwide. Surrendering the Secret has trained about 2,500 leaders in churches and crisis pregnancy centers.

Although this is good to hear, my questions concern the content of those recovery groups and training given. Is it biblical? Is it free of secular thinking? Is the content-free from pet scriptures and denominational answers? This last question is important as the quality and maturity of the counselors and their material is vital.  Just having people pass a training session or counseling degree then saying now you are counselors, is not enough.

When I was seeking one of my advanced degrees, I noticed that a lot of Christian universities were focusing on counseling. It kind of bothered me as I wondered how educated, wise and serious those graduates would be. As I have told many westerners in this country, waving a piece of paper around saying you are a teacher does not make you a teacher. Anyone can meet the requirements and graduate with an education degree and the same applies to counseling. Having a piece of paper saying yo met the requirements for the training or degree doe snot make you a counselor.

The biblical verses for following the truth, not listening to the deceived secular and so on apply to counseling as they do for history teaching, archaeology, science and education. Being a biblical counselor means we follow the HS to the truth and seek the right answers for those in need.

#5. Leaders in post-abortion recovery ministry say the church remains reluctant to fully face the impact of abortion within their own congregations. Rutledge said she once gave her testimony to a group of women at a megachurch in the South and by the end, several women were “practically bawling.” Yet, when Rutledge asked about doing a follow-up, the group’s leader said, “None of my women have had an abortion… and even if they did, they don’t need to be speaking about it.”

As I wonder about how some people were able to become teachers, principals and education officials, I wonder how some people were able to become Pastors and elders or other church leaders. Their words and actions do not always line up with spiritual qualifications. Unspiritually influenced personal opinions hurt everyone in the church, not just women who have had abortions.

The church is not the personal domain of those who lead it or consider themselves the prominent members. The church belongs to Christ and pastors and church leaders need to be reminded of this fact. They are not the boss, but the employee of God thus they need to change their personal views and behavior.l if they are not leaning on God and looking to him for guidance but resort to their own understanding then they need to step down until they make the right changes.

If they don’t then they are not helping the church but hurting it. All people need the church to be biblically correct. Sin is sin and it has to be dealt with correctly, no matter the offense or innocence of the victim. If the person has had one abortion and has no intention of practicing that act then tossing them from the church is not an option. Being excluded from the church is only an option for those who refuse to repent of their sins, not for those who made a wrong decision. Of course, believers make many wrong decisions in their lives but even number of them is not ‘practicing sin’.

We need to be discerning when it comes to dealing with those who need to confess sin and make the right decisions in how to respond to them. The wrong decision means one has sinned and i sin need of a place for confession and healing.

#6. Nancy Kruezer, who serves as Chicago Regional Coordinator for Silent No More, said some pastors express fears that if they address abortion, it will “open the floodgates,” and they will be overwhelmed by wounded people. Others object because they say the topic is too political—or that discussing abortion might actually make it more acceptable.

For ‘the floodgates’ concern that is what church is for. You can’t have a healthy membership if you do not heal ALL the wounded.  being overwhelmed is only for a short-term as each healed person lessons the number needing help and those healed in turn can help those waiting their turn to receive forgiveness, making the work load even less as time goes on.

If there is one area where the church should not be afraid of it is the area of healing those in need. Jesus wasn’t afraid of healing the many who came to him, neither should the church. That is our business and by healing, we can eventually win souls for they will see God in action and that he is interested in them thus they will want to come to know him as their savior. No we should not be afraid of healing those in need.

As for the ‘political’ option, abortion is not a political issue. It has become one because the legal merits are discussed year after year and the right stance can mean the difference between winning and losing an election. BUT the reality of the abortion issue is–it is SIN.  Thus spiritual leaders need to step up and take the bull by the horns and deal with the issue as Christ wants it dealt with.

To some abortion is murder but the last time I looked, murder was not the unforgivable sin thus we need to treat those who have had an abortion with the same care we would if a murderer came to the church looking for forgiveness. The real problem for most believers though is the age and innocence of the victim and that view distorts how they respond to those who have made that sinful mistake. BUT God’s justice does NOT include age or innocence of the victim as criteria for determining how the offender is to be treated in response to their sins.

We cannot let our eyes be blinded by personal feelings or emotions.

#7. (not to mention the men who carry regret over their wives’ or girlfriends’ abortions).

Sorry but I missed this quote so it is out-of-order. One of the biggest misconceptions in this issue is the lie that it is the woman’s body thus it is her decision. That is a secular lie, and it should not even be considered by the church people. It is contrary to biblical teaching because 1). once you have mated with another person ownership of your body transfers to the other person. Paul spoke on this quite clearly.

2). The body being killed does not belong to the woman and she has no right to dispose of it. There is nothing written anywhere that says the unborn child’s body belongs to the woman. Woman do not have the right to decide to terminate the unborn child. Also, since the pregnancy now makes you a family, the father is the head of the family and the woman need to submit to his decision as long as that decision doesn’t have her sinning against God and disobeying his word.

In other words, men, you are to be a part of the decision-making and following the world’s thinking makes you guilty of sin because you disobeyed God by listening to the unchurched world and walked away from your duty as a man.

The child is as much the fathers baby as it is the woman’s and the fact that it is her body that gets pregnant does not change the father’s standing in the issue. Whose body does the work during pregnancy doe snot determine who gets to make the decision. Christian men are to follow God’s word correctly even in this issue. But of course, those words only will have an effect on those who care about listening to God and his word and given the nature of the predicament, most people do not care what God says or how many sins they rack up in this issue.

The thing is, men if you do not want regret, then do not let your wife, girlfriend or lover abort your child. Man up and take responsibility for your actions. The last part are words commonly heard when I was a child going on back into history. Only since about the 80’s, possibly the 70s, has the idea of taking the easy way out been popular. Oh, people took the easy way prior to that but it was not common and it was not supported by the public in general.

#8. Walker told the congregation that she had had three abortions before becoming a believer and one after coming to Christ. Her fourth abortion happened when she was a brand-new believer, unmarried and uncertain if she was ready to have a baby.

If one has had an abortion before they were a Christian, the stigma is not as great as if one had been a good believer for most of their lives. A woman was under the influence of evil, deceived and the support for an abortion far greater than it would have been if the person was a believer. Yet, with that said, it is still a sin and it need to be repented of and forgiveness needs to be sought for those acts. Then, if one has had an abortion or three before salvation, those sins are confessed and forgiveness given at redemption.

The act of becoming a believer usually covers all prior sins so it would be the one abortion after her conversion that would be the troublesome one. The reasons she gave are not good enough to abort a life. Adoption is far better of an option than abortion, even though the struggles to give birth then give up the child seem too great one must find a way to be strong, carry the child to term then answer some childless couple’s prayers by making that sacrifice.

Enduring through that is far better than taking the easy way of abortion out of a bad situation. Pregnant women should be seeking God’s guidance long before they decide for an abortion for their sinful act can be turned into something good. Part of the problem in this issue is that God is ignored throughout the whole decision-making process. People have a distorted view about sexual sins and feel that God will hate them for their actions but guess what, Jesus said,

1 John 1:9
If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
Women do not need to be afraid to go to Jesus and confess their sins BEFORE they decide for an abortion, then they can have his support so that they do not make the mistake of aborting their child. They will also have his strength to help them make that sacrifice and let someone else adopt their child. There is no need for Christian women to consider abortion because if they repent if their sexual sins, they will find God there with open arms waiting to help them through the mess. There is also no reason for anyone to wait till after the abortion to find out how loving and forgiving God can be.
#9. Our churches need to regularly communicate that they are safe places for women like Jackie. While we cannot whitewash the sin of abortion, we also can’t ignore those who at one time have had abortions and are suffering. We must let them know that Jesus’ blood covers all sin, including theirs.
Being a safe place can only be experienced. Communicating that you are a safe place usually means it isn’t a place one can go and confess without condemnation.  I could never trust a person who said, ‘you can trust me.’ Usually those are the people you can trust the least. The Church needs TO BE a safe place but not just for women, for men as well. For men commit sexual sins just as much as the women do, if not more. Their sexual activities are just harder to spot.
This is why I said the church needs to strive to be a sanctuary for its people. ALL people need to be able to trust the church and know that they have a safe haven when needed. This is one of the reasons I had trouble with this article, it ignores the sins of men and their need for a sanctuary as well. Men need a safe place to confess as well for we have different ideas about sharing than women do. A safe place for men may not constitute the same format as one for women.
If the church wants to help women, keep it biblical and make sure truly spiritual older, more mature women are leading the healing instead of a male pastor or elder. The pastor and elders can train those women but let women work with the women to keep problems to a minimum.

Much To Talk About- 102

Time to play catch-up.

#1. Sons of God

Anticipating an issue which has come up in the current debate about monotheism and polytheism in ancient Israel and classical and later Greece and Rome, David Clines suggests that this split between human and divine options may not be so clear-cut, in particular with respect to rulers, and even more in particular to antediluvian rulers:

I have talked about this before and I think scholars are over-thinking the issue.  The term ‘sons of God’ is not referring to divine beings, angels, evil spirits or even the line of Seth.  It simply refers to those men who are believers in God. We just need to look at the following verse

26 To Seth, to him also a son was born; and he called his name Enosh. Then men began to call [s]upon the name of the Lord.

As you can see, the word men is a general usage which means that the descendants of all Adam’s and Eve’s children started to walk with God.  Sons of God simply refers to humans who followed God and the words ‘daughters of men’ means those women who did not follow after God.

#2. It Gets Tiring

What such critics fail to realize is that they are reading the Apostle Paul through the lens of a 21st century perspective, rather than the 1st century world to which Paul wrote originally.”

Land, who is also the executive editor of The Christian Post, explained that in the 1st century women were considered property with few rights or protections. In his writings, Paul describes husbands and wives as equals even in the most intimate parts of their relationships.

When people continue to make these type of arguments. They say that some Christians are looking at the teachings of Paul through 21st century eyes when arguing against women in the pulpit or authority over man, yet fail to realize that they are looking at the word ‘equality’ through those exact same lenses and apply a 21st century meaning to a 1st century passage.

I do not want to get into an argument over whether women were considered property or not that is not the issue here. The issue here is whether or not Paul wrote God’s guidelines for God’s church or not. If he didn’t then where are God’s guidelines for the church and who actually wrote them? For me, Paul did write God’s guidelines for God’s church thus this argument is moot. It is not about equality or property but that God has ordained that his church be led by godly men.

This push for ‘equality’ is not God-driven but secular motivated.

#3. It Gets Tiring II

I say men and women are equal when it comes to spiritual authority in ministry! My mother has been preaching, prophesying and working hard along side my father in the church all my life,” Haddon said on Instagram. “My mother never got it twisted. When she went home she was a mother, a wife and never tried to be the man of the house or took her spiritual position into our home.”

Haddon went on to further insert his opinion on the matter by saying, “I say yes to a female pastor, bishop or whatever office God calls her to if she can respect her husband as the pastor of her home.What do you think?? #PreachersofDetroit.”

Unfortunately for him,  a mother’s example or life is not enough to change God’s word. it doesn’t matter if she didn’t twist her role at home or not, she twisted her role in the church.

#4. If You Are Going To Fight For Equality

Campus housing specifically for 15 alternative sexualities, including sadomasochists, is acceptable, but fraternities that just allow men are not, at Wesleyan University.

Wesleyan University housing has an option for students who want to live with others identifying with one of 15 categories — LGBTTQQFAGPBDSM. The university’s inclusiveness excludes, however, male-only fraternities.

Then you need to be completely equal. The reach for equality is going way to far and into the absurd.

The letter stated: “Because fraternities are male-exclusive and the possessors of some of our campus’ largest party spaces, they explicitly and implicitly cultivate a gender-based power dynamic that privileges men, the hosts, over women, who are among the guests. This power dynamic engenders sexual assault because women are institutionally encouraged to ‘repay’ men for their hospitality, often with sex, and men are institutionally provided with a control over their guests, especially women.”

This is not a good enough reason to be unequal. It shows revenge, retribution, injustice, favoritism and discrimination against men.  The arguments made for minorities work for single men as well.

#5. True Christianity

I’ve known a fair number of Christians who think this way about their own denomination, no matter how small–in fact, the smaller the denomination, the more likely one might be to think this way. (And I know in my student days in seminary I felt I was drawn this “chosen few” mentality.)

Most, though, bristle at the notion that one tradition has a corner on the mystery of the Christian faith.

After all, if you keep narrowing things down to your own tradition, you encourage a process of endless theological fine-tuning, that often ends on one very small group (or even one person) within a micro-movement, within a small denomination, within one of hundreds of Protestant denomination, etc., etc., being correct.

Jesus said, ‘my sheep hear my voice’ and that is a good boiled down definition to identify true Christianity. People who make these arguments doubting true Christianity, are those who have stopped listening to Jesus’ voice and have started to listen to the voices of unbelievers. They toss out a lot of the bible, alter different texts to fit their new beliefs, anything but actually humbling themselves and listen to the voice of Jesus.
Then they attack those who do listen to Jesus’ voice.
A South Carolina judge has denied a motion to reconsider a ruling made in a $500 million property dispute case in favor of a diocese that voted to leave the Episcopal Church due to the national denomination’s increasing acceptance of homosexuality.
I know that this is a standard practice with the different organized denominations. The Alliance has the same clause yet I feel that such clauses are unfair and unChristian. It is the local congregation who spends the money, not the denomination thus the buildings of the local church belong to the people not the denomination.
To grab property that one has not paid for is equal to stealing and if more Christian denominations have this clause in their agreements with local churches then they need to amend those agreements so that they can erase one sin that is hindering their work for Christ.
Some well-meaning Christians regularly use Christ’s words in Matthew 7:21-23 to push people to “do more” in order to prove they are genuine believers. But this is a misguided approach. While it is true that some professing believers are not connected at all to the Lord, it is also true that the real problem lies with a lack of repentance and a lack of faith.
It is a good article and worth reading

“I meet so many young people who come from Christian homes or maybe went to a Christian school, K through 12, and yet they get to college they have a real faith crisis,” McFarland said. “It always breaks my heart when I see young people that really become agnostic, if not atheist, because they get to the university and they’re confronted with the objections to the faith and they don’t know how to answer it.”

McFarland also told CP that “we’re trying to evangelize the young people” so as to “equip them” to “defend their faith.”

We believe that it’s time for a whole new generation to experience 1st Peter 3:15 in becoming ready always to give an answer, a defense for the faith,” continued McFarland.

But I would change the word ‘evangelize’ to the word ‘teach’ or ‘educate’. The latter words imply a deeper effort, one that actually helps students learn how to correctly defend their faith with real information.

“It was trying to get something a little bit more mobile that wasn’t as big, as expensive and that we can hit a lot of churches around the country, equipping them biblically.”

I would also change the word ‘hit’ to something far more biblical and appropriate.  Attitude plays a large part in equipping believers and sometimes attitude gets in the way of success. Maybe they should take this a little more seriously. If they already do, it doesn’t come across in their terminology and the wrong terminology does influence people away from your goals.

#9. I Like This Idea

The Rock Church’s Marriage and Parenting Pastor Darren Carrington says parents need to teach their children from an early age about dating and marriage so they can spot “counterfeit” Christians who attend church but show no spiritual growth.

Not much to add to that thought.

Not Of The World

As I was reading the book Liberty and Justice for Some, my mind kept going back to the Larry King show of many years ago where he had a panel of religious leaders on discussing the, I believe, the church’s response to Bush43’s decision to go to war with Iraq. My mind has held on to John MacArthur’s response where he abdicated the church’s role of dissenting against sinful actions and built a defense for blind obedience to government.

He used the verse talking about Christians are to obey their government but that verse never said Christians are to support sinful acts of government. It was sad to see such a travesty take place as the church should be the moral conscience of a nation keeping it on track encouraging doing what is right, just, fair and so on. Instead we have many churches who turn a blind eye to the sin committed by a government, rarely challenging it to mend it ways.

The church should strive towards being two things, amongst everything else it needs to do:

#1. It needs to be Nathan, who was not afraid to stand up to King David and tell him he was wrong

2 Samuel 12:7
Nathan then said to David, “You are the man! Thus says the Lord God of Israel, ‘It is I who anointed you king over Israel and it is I who delivered you from the hand of Saul.
The church needs to get its spiritual act together and become the moral voice of God to those in the wilderness. It needs to practice what it preaches honestly and be the light unto the dark world that Jesus wants. It needs to put aside earthly thinking and objectives and strive to be holy once again.
#2. It needs to be a sanctuary, a safe place for people to go where they can deal with their problems without hassle or condemnation. The church cannot be an extension of law enforcement or any political party but a separate entity dedicated to healing God’s creation. It needs to be a real spiritual hospital where sins are excised not accepted or supported and people are directed and led to the right path not someone’s pet doctrine.
For too long the church has held the reputation that it shoots its wounded well that reputation needs to be replaced and changed to one that tells everyone that they will be healed from their sins, that they can have a safe place to go, where sin is not allowed to enter and people can get their lives straightened out. it needs to be a place where real justice and fairness is taught and applied.
I do not think that many people can handle reading that book mentioned above because it is hard-hitting as it points out the injustice and sin committed by BOTH political parties and their leaders, including presidents. Those who like a particular president may not like the reality of their political heroes and may not want them to have a tarnished image but the truth is, they are not heroes and they are tarnished.
Here are some quotes from the last chapter, American Justice’s Second Tier, and one of its sub-sections, Prisons for Profits. You can decide if you can handle the contents of that book or not:
#1. Like all private companies, the prison industry has an insatiable appetite for more business, thus it agitates in favor of greater demand for services– demand created through longer prison sentences, fewer opportunities for parole, and constant increases in the number of transgressions deemed prison-worthy. (pg. 254)
#2. America’s war on drugs set in motion some of the most brazen systematic attacks on equality under the law in the modern era. But the ‘war on terror’ has taken those attacks to new depths of injustice. (pg. 258)
#3. The American justice system relentlessly ‘looks backward”, however, to seek out and punish the crimes of ordinary Americans and Obama has done nothing to retard the booming growth of America’s prison state. (pg. 259)
#4. While immunizing high-level lawbreakers, the Obama administration not only has failed to extend the protective shield of immunity to America’s whistle blowers but has pursued them with uncommon vigor. (pg. 259)
#5. It’s true, of course, that leaking classified information is a crime. That’s what makes whistle blowers and leakers so courageous. And if all the wrongdoing, including that of the politically powerful, were always fully punished according to the law, one could accept whistle-blower prosecutions. But that is not the situation that prevails. (pg. 262)
#6. Since September 2001, the ‘war on terror’ has opened up an entire dimension in which the rule of law simply vanishes. For those who are accused of being terrorists–even if they are never charged with any crime– there is now a limbo world in which there is exists not even the pretense of due process, let alone equality. (pg. 263)
#7. This is how the multitiered justice system preserves itself: by targeting those with the weakest voices, the smallest constituencies, and the least ability to resist. (pg. 266)
#8. Thus did the pardon of Richard Nixon — justified in 1974 as a onetime exception necessitated by unique circumstances– lay the foundation for elite immunity: a lawbreaking license that spread throughout the political class and then to its partners in the private sector. (pg. 266)
#9. The proclamation of John Adams that we are ‘a nation of laws, not men’ now rings hollow as does Thomas Jefferson’s insistence that the essence of America is that ‘the poorest laborer stands on equal ground with the wealthiest  millionaire…(pg. 266)
#10. And Madison’s proud declaration in federalist 57 that America’s political class, by definition, ‘can make no law which will not have its full operation on themselves and their friends,as well as the great mass of society,; now seems to describe a country entirely other than our own. (pg. 267)
The church needs to learn what God’s justice is and begin to apply it not only to its own members but to the nations of the world as well.If you read that book, you will see how because no one stops them, the politicians and the wealthy continue to subvert and avoid justice while turning the screws on the little guy. I remember reading a little article on one of the lawyers, Barry Scheck, for OJ Simpson. He was trying a case in New York and the judge in the trial spoke directly to Mr. Scheck and said, ‘i will have none of those hijinks you pulled in Lance Ito’s court during the Simpson trial.  Mr. Scheck’s response to that judge was,’ Well Judge Ito let me get away with it.’
In other words, Judge Ito never followed through on any of his disciplinary threats and Mr. Scheck kept doing the same thing over and over because he knew nothing was going to happen to him. That is the way it is with politicians and the wealthy of America. No one is going to stop them so they get to keep on being unfair, unjust and so on because they know nothing is going to happen to them.
The church needs to step up and be heard, bringing disciplinary action so that the wealthy and the politicians know they will be disciplined for their sinful behavior. Right now, the church is ignored, a mere footnote because it does nothing to discipline those who do wrong. Mr. Franklin Graham can spout all he wants to the news media about how America had turned its back on God,
the politicians and the wealthy do not care because they know nothing is going to be done to them. Mr. Graham has no real authority and is just another weak voice in a crowd of weak voices.
Time for the church to stand up for justice, fight for the little guy, and make the elite pay for their sins and crimes.
Here is a link to one website that fights for the little guy
I have heard that there are similar Christian organizations but I do not have any information on them to pass on. We do not blindly follow government nor do we allow them to sin and commit crimes.

While I Am Away-2

Just some quotes from Manetho. He is the person so many Egyptologists base their Egyptian and biblical chronology upon even though his work only survives via quotes from other ancient authors. All quotes will be from the same book, whose information will be given after the first quote.

#1. Tutimaeus.3 In his reign, for what cause I know not, a blast of God smote us; and unexpectedly, from the regions of the East, invaders of obscure race marched in confidence of victory against our land. By main force they easily seized it without striking a blow;4 and having overpowered the rulers of the land, they then burned our cities ruthlessly, razed to the ground the temples of the gods, and treated all the natives with a cruel hostility, massacring some and leading into slavery the wives and children of others. Finally, they appointed as king one of their number whose name was Salitis.1 He had his seat at Memphis, levying tribute from Upper and Lower Egypt, and always leaving garrisons behind in the most advantageous positions. Above all, he fortified the district to the east, foreseeing that the Assyrians,2 as they grew stronger, would one day covet and attack his kingdom.

Manetho. (1964). History of Egypt and Other Works. (W. G. Waddell, Trans., T. E. Page, E. Capps, L. A. Post, W. H. D. Rouse, & E. H. Warmington, Eds.) (pp. 79–81). Cambridge, MA; London: Harvard University Press; William Heinemann Ltd.


#2. Sesôstris, for 48 years: he is said to have been 4 cubits 3 palms 2 fingers’ breadths in stature. In nine years he subdued the whole of Asia, and Europe as far as Thrace, everywhere erecting memorials of his conquest of the tribes. Upon stelae [pillars] he engraved for a valiant race the secret parts of a man. for an ignoble race those of a woman. Accordingly he was esteemed by the Egyptians as the next in rank to Osiris.


#3. Thereafter, he says, there came a revolt of the kings of the Thebaïd and the rest of Egypt against the Shepherds, and a fierce and prolonged war broke out between them. By a king whose name was Misphragmuthôsis,2 the Shepherds, he says, were defeated, driven out of all the rest of Egypt, and confined in a region measuring within its circumference 10,000 arûrae,3 by name Auaris. According to Manetho, the Shepherds enclosed this whole area with a high, strong wall, in order to safeguard all their possessions and spoils. Thummôsis, the son of Misphragmuthôsis (he continues), attempted by siege to force them to surrender, blockading the fortress with an army of 480,000 men. Finally, giving up the siege in despair, he concluded a treaty by which they should all depart from Egypt and go unmolested where they pleased. On these terms the Shepherds, with their possessions and households complete, no fewer than 240,000 persons,1 left Egypt and journeyed over the desert into Syria. There, dreading the power of the Assyrians who were at that time masters of Asia, they built in the land now called Judaea a city large enough to hold all those thousands of people, and gave it the name of Jerusalem


#4. In another book3 of his History of Egypt Manetho says that this race of so-called Shepherds is, in the sacred books of Egypt, described as “captives”; and his statement is correct. With our remotest ancestors, indeed, it was a hereditary custom to feed sheep; and as they lived a nomadic life, they were called Shepherds.4 On the other hand, in the Egyptian records they were not unreasonably styled Captives, since our ancestor Joseph told the king of Egypt5 that he was a captive, and later, with the king’s consent, summoned his brethren to Egypt. But I shall investigate this subject more fully in another place.1


#5. The Fifteenth Dynasty consisted of Shepherd Kings. There were six foreign kings from Phoenicia,3 who seized Memphis: in the Sethroïte nome they founded a town, from which as a base they subdued Egypt.


#6. The Seventeenth Dynasty were Shepherds and brothers:3 they were foreign kings from Phoenicia, who seized Memphis.
The first of these kings, Saïtês, reigned for 19 years: the Saïte nome4 is called after him. These kings founded in the Sethroïte nome a town, from which as a base they subdued Egypt.
2. Bnôn, for 40 years.
3. Aphôphis, for 14 years.
After him Archlês reigned for 30 years.
Total, 103 years.
It was in their time that Joseph was appointed king of Egypt.


#7. The Seventeenth Dynasty consisted of Shepherds, who were brothers1 from Phoenicia and foreign kings: they seized Memphis. The first of these kings, Saïtes, reigned for 19 years: from him, too, the Saïte nome2 derived its name. These kings founded in the Sethroïte nome a town from which they made a raid and subdued Egypt.
The second king was Bnon, for 40 years.
Next, Archles, for 30 years.
Aphophis, for 14 years.
Total, 103 years.
It was in their time that Joseph appears to have ruled in Egypt.3


#8. Thus Manetho has given us evidence from Egyptian records upon two very important points: first, upon our coming to Egypt from elsewhere; and secondly, upon our departure from Egypt at a date so remote that it preceded the Trojan war3 by wellnigh a thousand years.4 As for the additions which Manetho has made, not from the Egyptian records, but, as he has himself admitted, from anonymous legendary tales,5 I shall later refute them in detail, and show the improbability of his lying stories.


#9. Moses was the leader of the Jews, as I have already said, when they had been expelled from Egypt by King Pharaôh whose name was Tethmosis. After the expulsion of the people, this king, it is said, reigned for 25 years 4 months, according to Manetho’s reckoning.


#10. About this time Moses led the Jews in their march out of Egypt. (Syncellus adds: Eusebius alone places in this reign the exodus of Israel under Moses, although no argument supports him, but all his predecessors hold a contrary view, as he testifies.)


#11. The first writer upon whom I shall dwell is one whom I used a little earlier as a witness to our antiquity. I refer to Manetho. This writer, who had undertaken to translate the history of Egypt from the sacred books, began by stating that our ancestors came against Egypt with many tens of thousands and gained the mastery over the inhabitants; and then he himself admitted that at a later date again they were driven out of the country, occupied what is now Judaea, founded Jerusalem, and built the temple.1 Up to this point he followed the chronicles: thereafter, by offering to record the legends and current talk about the Jews, he took the liberty of interpolating improbable tales in his desire to confuse with us a crowd of Egyptians, who for leprosy and other maladies1 had been condemned, he says, to banishment from Egypt. After citing a king Amenôphis, a fictitious person,—for which reason he did not venture to define the length of his reign, although in the case of the other kings he adds their years precisely,—Manetho attaches to him certain legends, having doubtless forgotten that according to his own chronicle the exodus of the Shepherds to Jerusalem took place 518 years2 earlier.


#12. Manetho has made one concession to us. He has admitted that our race was not Egyptian in origin, but came into Egypt from elsewhere, took possession of the land, and afterwards left it. But that we were not, at a later time, mixed up with disease-ravaged Egyptians, and that, so far from being one of these, Moses, the leader of our people, lived many generations earlier, I shall endeavour to prove from Manetho’s own statements.


#13. It remains for me to reply to Manetho’s statements about Moses. The Egyptians regard him as a wonderful, even a divine being, but wish to claim him as their own by an incredible calumny, alleging that he belonged to Hêliopolis and was dismissed from his priesthood there owing to leprosy. The records, however, show that he lived 518 years1 earlier, and led our forefathers up out of Egypt to the land which we inhabit at the present time.


#14. According to Manetho, Moses was called Osarsêph. These names, however, are not interchangeable: the true name means “one saved out of the water,” for water is called “mō-y” by the Egyptians.1
It is now, therefore, sufficiently obvious, I think, that, so long as Manetho followed the ancient records, he did not stray far from the truth; but when he turned to unauthorized legends, he either combined them in an improbable form or else gave credence to certain prejudiced informants.


#15. Now, among the Egyptians there is current an old chronography,1 by which indeed. I believe, Manetho2 has been led into error.


#16. The illustrious Egyptian Manetho, writing of these same 30 Dynasties, and obviously taking this as his starting-point, is widely divergent thereafter in the dates he gives, as one may learn both from what I have already said above, and from the remarks that will follow immediately. For in his three books, 113 generations are recorded in 30 Dynasties, and the time which he assigns amounts in all to 3555 years, beginning with Anno mundi 1586 and ending with 5147 [5141], or some 15 years before the conquest of the world by Alexander of Macedon.


These are just food for thought as I concentrate on the other project at this time.