RSS

Category Archives: history

3 Words

–Racism, sexism & change. When it comes to the first two words, racism and sexism, Christians cannot jump on one or the other side of the argument.They must jump to God’s side and brig the truth to the issue. They must cast light on the problem showing the rest of the world what is really at the heart of the issue.

#1. Racism—  the believer must point out, and accept, the fact that there are not different races in the world. There is only one and no matter what color of skin everyone is a member of that one race.That race of humans all came from Adam and Eve.  No matter what scientists say about Cro-magnon man, Neanderthals and any other proto-human, those creatures did not exist and are distortions of ancient skeletal remains. Darwin got it wrong as do all evolutionists.

#2. sexism-– There are no winners in this issue. If a person favors men then they are accused of being sexist towards women. Both sexism and racism are terms thrown about loosely in attempts to bully those who disagree with those who misapply such terms. But the argument of sexism cuts both ways. Once you favor women over men then you are being sexist towards men. As we said, you cannot win in this issue if you play the sexist card.

The truth of this issue can be seen in the qualifications of both genders but men are biblically charged with taking care of their families. The verse ‘if a man doe snot provide for his family he is worse than an infidel’ (paraphrase) plays a role in this charge to the male gender. of course there are other verses like, ‘if a man shall not work neither shall he eat’. Women d not receive such divine instructions for they are not the head of the family. They are men’s helpmeets, fulfilling roles and duties to aid the man not replace him.

Being a helpmeet does not mean a woman cannot work. it just means that they are not the primary employable person of the family unit. If a company hires a man over a woman, they are not being sexist but helping the man fulfill his biblical responsibilities. The secular world does not want God’s ways in either the race or sexist issues thus they distort both in order to achieve their own selfish adjectives. They need true Christians to provide not only the light but wise counsel as well as knowledgeable insight to guide the unbeliever,and the believer, in what s the right thing to do

#3. Change— This word is often used by evolutionists to describe their false theory of life development. They claim that change is evolution. But there is a danger that comes with being so ambiguous. By using such a broad term the evolutionist has effectively removed the standard of right and wrong from all scientific work. This move also undermines ethical standards as well as the application of the term implies that all change is good.

The true believer knows that idea is not so and they also know that such terminology indicates that any change in life forms is okay and nothing is found to be in error.No one can be corrected for their work because there is no standard of the right and wrong way of doing things. Change has taken place thus it must be studied and accepted. Nothing is wrong and nothing has to be corrected.

Change is declared as an evolutionary advance but with no standard measurement guiding the experiments or the scientists, how can they determine if that change was the correct one and in line with evolutionary thought? How does the scientist know he is on the right track with nothing to guide him or her?

What the ambiguous application of the word ‘change’ does is leave the theory of evolution flexible enough so that it can be altered at an evolutionist’s convenience when part of their theory is shown to be unworkable. We have had evolutionists tell us that the theory of evolution is not the same as the one Darwin imagined when he constructed his version of the theory. if this is so, how can anyone trust what any evolutionary scientist declares? He is not working within the framework of Darwin’s theory but some altered version that has no standard telling the modern evolutionist if they got it correct or not.

Each evolutionist is working with their own version of the theory of evolution not a truth. That means that any modern idea of evolution is purely subjective and has no hope of being verified at any time.They can’t be because there is no model of how evolution works to guide the evolutionist. There is no standard of right and wrong either informing the evolutionist when they have made an error in their calculations or thinking. anything and everything becomes ‘evidence’ for the theory but all that means is that evolutionists will distort ‘change’ in a move of desperation as they try to support their fictional ideas on life development.

Predictions cannot do it as those are not 100% accurate and are a tool of pseudo-science not real science.Predictions do not come with a standard of right and wrong informing the evolutionist that they are mistaken, all they have is a failed experiment for it did not produce the predicted result. This failure does not motivate the evolutionist to throw out their theory; instead they just keep making predictions, like they are doing a multiple choice quiz and keep picking a letter till they get the question right. Predictions do nothing but reinforce wrong ideas.

Change is not a good determiner when trying to figure out a theory that has no hope of being verified. All change does is lead people down the wrong paths to look in the wrong places for the wrong answers. Change is not evolutionary. All change tells us is that something is not the same and that alteration may not be correct.Life forms are placed in grave danger because evolutionist misunderstand them and misapply their results.

Change is not always good nor is it scientific. It could mean that someone violated the process and committed a great wrong. We need the standard of right and wrong to guide us to the right answers not so someone can ‘do science’. Right and wrong provide us great help in determining if we are on the right track and evolution i snot the right track for there is nothing that verifies it, no matter how loud the evolutionist howls.

 

This Is A Good Article

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/israeli-warehouse-clues-jesus-life-death-46240622

In a cavernous warehouse where Israel stores its archaeological treasures, an ancient burial box is inscribed with the name of Jesus.

Not THAT Jesus. Archaeologists in Israel say Jesus was a common name in the Holy Land 2,000 years ago, and that they have found about 30 ancient burial boxes inscribed with it.

Ahead of Easter, Israel’s antiquities authority opened up its vast storeroom to reporters on Sunday for a peek at unearthed artifacts from the time of Jesus. Experts say they have yet to find direct archaeological evidence of Jesus Christ, but in recent years have found a wealth of material that helps fill out historians’ understanding of how Jesus may have lived and died.

“There’s good news,” said Gideon Avni, head of the archaeological division of the Israel Antiquities Authority. “Today we can reconstruct very accurately many, many aspects of the daily life of the time of Christ.”

Israel is one of the most excavated places on the planet. Some 300 digs take place each year, including about 50 foreign expeditions from as far away as the United States and Japan, the Antiquities Authority said.

About 40,000 artifacts are dug up in Israel each year. A third of all the antiquities found attest to the ancient Christian presence in the Holy Land, Avni said. Historians now know how long it took to travel between cities and villages where Jesus preached, and what those places looked like at the time.

we will let you read the rest for yourselves.

 

Sodom & Tel El-Hamman

It now seems that  Dr. Stephen Collins and associates have uncovered a ‘palace’ at this site:

 

http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2017/02/28/For-Dust-Thou-Art-and-Unto-Dust-Shalt-Thou-Return.aspx

 

Two views of the sun-dried mudbrick walls of an ancient palace at Tall el-Hammam, Jordan, where the author is currently excavating. These mudbrick walls were later burned in a fire. Note a lone mudbrick sitting on the wall to the left. It was found in destruction debris above the floor of this room.
It is amazing the number of palaces archaeologists ‘discover’ in the ancient world. Almost as many as temples. It is as if the ancients had no other interests, business ventures or needs. Since there are no surviving documents describing this find, we will not join in the identification of this building. Archaeologists are well known to create a past that they want to see and not proclaim the past that actually was.
While God made this statement to Adam in the Garden of Eden (Gen 3:19), it reminds me of what I’ve spent so much of my time with these days. I am writing this article from the Holy Land where I am excavating the palace on an ancient acropolis. It has thick walls of mudbrick constructed on stone foundations. When uncovered, we have found that a number of the walls have disintegrated badly during the last few thousand years. They really were manufactured from dust and back to dust they have gone!
We really do not need mud bricks to teach us this lesson. We have millions upon millions of graves which remind us of God’s declaration to Adam.
Archaeological excavations suggest the earliest dwellings in the ancient Near East were natural shelters – caves and rock formations. Where available, they would have been sufficient for small groups of people and frequently served as non-permanent habitation. That meant people could only settle in places where such natural shelter was available.
This sells the ancient sort and makes them seem like unintelligent knuckle draggers. While some people may have taken shelter in caves it does not mean they all did or that they all did not use their brains to solve their housing problems.What that author forgets, though he reminds us of the erosion of mud bricks back into dust, is that housing material will rot, erode, rust over time thus it would be impossible to find all the shelter that ancient man used. To make the assumption that author does means he commits a disservice to the past and his readers by misrepresenting what took place in ancient times.
God made us from the dust of the ground – in a miraculous way – and we become someone of value and important to him. Yet in the beginning and in the end we are just dust!
Just to clarify a point here, it is our human bodies that return to dust not our spirits. If people are going to draw a spiritual example, they need to get the information correct so that they tell the truth and not mislead the people. If you want proof of that, how can a spirit return to dust when it was not made of dust?
But getting back to the idea that Tel El Hamman is Sodom. We vigorously disagree with Dr. Stephen Collins on his identification of that ancient city with the one destroyed by God. He states in his season ten report the following:
As is now widely accepted, Tall el-Hammam remains far-and-away the most logical candidate for biblical Sodom based on a detailed analysis of the relevant biblical and historical materials regarding the chronology and location of the city (http://nebula.wsimg.com/9a161034ecbdd5c976d2608ac7eb2d09?AccessKeyId=AD0C503627C3B88E5A7F&disposition=0&alloworigin=1)
It may be widely accepted but that acceptance is wrong. Tel el-Hamman is nowhere close to being Sodom. It is like saying a future archaeologist excavating in what is now L.A. has discovered New York City. That is how off the mark Dr. Collins and his associates are.
That the enduring and powerful presence of Tall el-Hammam and its associated towns and villages on the eastern Jordan Disk during the Bronze Age gave rise to the Cities of the Plain tradition reflected in the stories of Genesis 10-19 is a reasonable theory commensurate with all of the available geographical and archaeological data.
This is impossible for Sodom and the cities were destroyed and made examples for those who would live ungodly lives (see Jude 7 and 2 Peter 2:6). You can’t be made an example by hiding the destruction for thousands of years and telling no one where the example is.God never promised to restore those cities and there is no scripture stating they were restored.Tell el-Hamman, and we use the Israeli word ‘tell’ not the Arabic word ‘tall’, is not Sodom. Dr. Collins misleads so many people and provides an excellent example of our point that archaeologists create their own past not the one that actually was.
Sadly for Dr. Collins and his associates., they have been calling this site Sodom for over ten years now and when they finally realize that they are wrong their reputations will take a great hit. Not only as archaeologists but also their claim to being Christian. Christians cannot afford to get these things wrong nor can they afford to misrepresent something for such a long period of time. We have too many people watching for us to make mistakes and capitalize on them. We are not just living in this world as our actions have eternal consequences for many.  I call on Dr. Collins to admit his error now and make things right before it is too late for him and his associates.
As you can tell we are not a fan or a supporter of his but we also do not want to see him be embarrassed by this gigantic error. No Christian wants to see someone claiming to be a Christian made a fool of, be embarrassed by their mistakes or do badly in their chosen profession.It is not a Christian attitude to want those things. Dr. Collins may be gaining support for his identification but support does not mean one is correct in their identifying the remains they are excavating. It means that those people believe him over God. We have talked directly to Dr. Collins and his associates many times over the years and unfortunately, we doubt he and they will admit their error. It is sad to see.
Sodom and Gomorrah have been discovered but those cities are not near Tell el-Hamman, they are at Bab el-Dhra and Numeria a very desolate wilderness where nothing lives. Dr. Collins and some of his early associates asked why would anyone build cities in such a barren and god forsaken land. Well they were looking at the land AFTER the destruction and not when Lot saw it.That error has led Dr Collins and friends to take the wrong path and mis-identify another tell.e need to correct our mistakes as believers and get back on the right path before we go too far and cannot return to the straight and narrow. Now is the time to do so and this applies to all areas of life not just archaeology
 

Distorting Creationists’ Views

We have crossed swords with Age of Rocks before and usually it has been a good encounter as both sides present their views. However, this post of his

Mr. Creationist Goes to Court

is a blatant and gross distortion of creationists’ views concerning our origins.  The author of that piece assumes far too much. For example he assumes that secular science has been charged with the duty of discovering our origins. It has not. He assumes that secular science has found and maintains the truth about our origins. It has not.He assumes that secular science is infallible when it comes to the information it uncovers. It isn’t.

He assumes that secular science or any science knows more than God does. It doesn’t. He assumes that evil plays no role in the work of secular scientists work, thinking and presentations, as well as those scientists who call themselves Christian. He would be in error. He assumes that secular science is an authority and has the final say on all matters of life. Again he errs.

Secular science is the blind leading the blind and that is the best thing we can say about that field of research. We include all those scientists,like Francis Collins, who claim to be Christian yet contradict God and his word by including evolutionary ideas and models in with God’s creative act.Those people are very misguided and deceived.

The other important aspect that author assumes is that only those who do secular science can do rational and logical thought or are the only people who know anything. I am sure he is one of the group of anti-creationists who will say creationists lie when they disagree with the claims of secular scientists but they have to prove an actual lie has been told willingly.  Disagreeing with the results of secular science is not lying nor is honestly producing information one believes to be the truth. Sometimes people repeat information that they think is the truth because they were taught that information was true. That is not lying.

Then that author thinks that one has to be a scientist to rebut anything secular science declares.That s far from the truth for even an office assistant can know the truth because they listen to the God who did the actual creating over the fallible human who was not even an adviser to the creator of the universe, life and its development. The secular scientist is the one who does not know anything about our origins not the lowly uneducated believer of the Most High God.

In fact, it is smarter to be the latter than the former. It is rational and logical to be a believer in the one who did the actual creating than follow the one who rejects  him and his revelation.Making fun of those who believe God and the Bible is also not an intelligent, rational or logical move. That behavior only exposes the ignorance of the one who rejects God and his word. Science, any variety, is a lowly creation and not greater than the one who created it. Science was created by God so we would understand him more and learn about him. It was not created to usurp authority nor declare that God was or is wrong. Nor was it created to be  the authority or final word on all aspects of life.

Sadly, too many people,including those who claim to be Christian, have thrown God out of his own creation and try to do science on their own. All they have done is open the door to evil and let it destroy any truth science could uncover. You cannot throw the God of truth out and expect to come to the truth when you are influenced and led by the father of lies.

Secular science and scientists need to humble themselves and recognize that they are not the supreme being and acknowledge God as above them. Then they need to repent of their sins and get right with God so that science can be used correctly, leading people to the truth and to a greater understanding of God. Currently, science is being used to lead people to lies, to say God did things he did not say he did, and to distort the evidence we have to fit their humanistic views. Science is being misused and abused by those who reject God and that is wrong.

The church is not against science especially when science gets things correct– like orbits and other factual members of the universe.It is against the lies of that secular science produces. Lies like Darwin’s theory of evolution, natural selection and other human alternatives to the truth of Genesis 1 and 2. Science does not belong in the affairs of our origins for that is not a mystery. We know where we came from, how it all came about and we do not need secular science meddling in what we already know to be the truth.

Secular science and its human alternatives bring confusion and confusion, as the Bible tells us, is not of God. This fact tells the believer to reject what unbelieving scientists say because they are disagreeing with God and the Bible. Anything that disagrees with God and the Bible are the ones in error. God does not lie and he does not make mistakes so we take God’s word over the word over those who ‘do science’. That is the right and Christian thing to do.

 

A Word Or Two On Scholars

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/bible-interpretation/first-person-misogyny-in-the-bible/

It is an interesting article on a topic we are fully aware. We do not agree with Mr. Shanks or Dr. Rollston as neither person has the spirit of truth guiding them to the truth. This is the confusing thing about scholarship. Many people claim to be Christian, who are scholars, yet they throw out God’s rules that would guide them to the truth of a topic and embrace the rules of man. Rarely do scholars come to the truth using that formula. They try to please men, not God.

Christopher Rollston is one of the world’s leading paleographers of ancient Near Eastern inscriptions. I have been harshly critical of some of his views, principally regarding unprovenanced inscriptions—inscriptions that have surfaced only from the antiquities market, not from a professional archaeological excavation. They may be forgeries, he argues. Although my criticism of Chris’s position is intense,1 we remain good friends and regularly share a meal.

Yes he is a leading scholar but we find his answer wanting and lacking in anything that is helpful to the believer. We know this as he refused to provide a direct answer to some our questions when we asked him point-blank, when does a Hebrew script mean a Hebrew script? Scholarship should be dedicated to finding the truth and informing the people of that truth. Sadly, too many Christians opt for constructing new theories for discussion and avoid the truth like the plague. This is why we used the word ‘confusing’ earlier. Even Christian scholars bring confusion to the church and confusion is not of God. These men and women are trained  in ancient languages and other disciplines thus they are in a unique position to help the church…unfortunately, this rarely happens.

Rollston finds the marginalization of women obvious and “clear” in the Ten Commandments: “The wife is classified as her husband’s property, and she’s listed with the slaves and work animals. There is also a striking omission in this commandment: Never does it say, ‘You shall not covet your neighbor’s husband.’”

People like Rollston tend to read too much of their own or some other secular person’s views into scripture and make a mole hill into a mountain.  When the word woman is or wife is used in the 10 commandments she is not being listed as property. That is an idea that is read into the passage of scripture. The idea that women were ancient men’s property is more of a secular cultural idea than a spiritual one for we never read any passage of scripture instructing men to make women their property. But when a couple marries and becomes one they do belong to each other and no one else. it is a different concept than the one proposed by Dr. Rollston.

Men have specific instructions from God on how to treat women and none of them tell the man to make a woman their property.But these passages are ignored when scholars, like Dr. Rollston, publish their views on scripture.

Rollston continues with other examples:

An unmarried woman could be compelled to marry her rapist, as long as the rapist could pay the standard bride price and the woman’s father was comfortable with the marriage (Deuteronomy 22:28–29). Polygyny (a man having multiple wives at the same time) was not condemned, but was an accepted and legal custom (Deuteronomy 21:15–17; Genesis 4:19–24; and 2 Samuel 3:2–5). A woman’s religious vow could be nullified by her father or her husband (Numbers 30:3–15). And the assumption of the text is that the priesthood is all male (Leviticus 21). In short, within the legal literature of the Bible, women were not accorded the same status as men.

What we find when scholars make these type of points is that it is not God who is in error. Rather, it is the scholar who does not understand scripture properly and attack the passage from their own understanding not using God’s wisdom or spirit of truth to help them grasp what God is saying. Dr. Rollston, there, is pulling passages out of context and without proper exegetical work to understand why God said what he said. Scholars cherry pick as well. They also ignore passages that would clarify what God is saying for those passages stop the scholar from writing what they do.

But there’s more: “Let a woman learn in silence and full submission. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to be silent” (vv. 11–12). The author’s rationale: “For Adam was formed first, then Eve, and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor” (vv. 13–14). According to this text, women were to be silent in worship gatherings (and men were certainly not told to be silent)

Another example of cherry picking a verse to support a bad agenda and another example of understanding what God is saying. Does the word silent mean that women cannot worship or pray? We do not think so. Most likely the women was not to teach or preach to men but as you can read it looks like Dr. Rollston is importing his own ideas to the text and not taking out exactly what God means. We get a clue when men are not told to be silent. Dr. Rollston seems to forget that if men are to be silent then there is no teaching, preaching or worship going on in the service, everyone just sits around watching each other grow. This is the problem with scholars and scholarship. They leave God out of the process and think their conclusions trump what God wants for his church. God owns the church thus he gets the say how it will operate.

Rollston recently told us in writing what we already knew. This criticism of the Bible led to his “forced ouster” from Emmanuel Christian Seminary.

We know this story and yes there was nothing wrong with his ouster. He was teaching contrary to the ideology of the institution that employed him and he taught things that were not of God.This is the result of scholarship when you leave the spirit of truth out of helping–you leave God and speak something God did not teach or say. Dr. Rollston, then, becomes a false teacher and those people have no place in God’s academic institutions or churches. He has no business teaching young Christians nor do those pastors who do not believe God’s word any more. The Bible warns us against false teachers and the church and academic institution must obey God and get rid of those who do not teach what God wants or commanded. There is no alternative to that position.

If you cannot believe, preach or teach what God wants, then you have no right to teach or preach in what is God’s. Christian scholars are to be servants of God and they must present what God wants– the truth in love– not contrary theories or lead people to false teaching. They are to obey God in all areas of life and cannot adopt secular ideas to guide them in their work. Christian scholars need to bring the truth for they have a great responsibility given to them by God and they fail God and the people when they allow themselves to be led astray by those who reject God, Jesus and the aid of the Holy Spirit.

 

Another Discovery

http://www.christianheadlines.com/blog/palace-of-biblical-king-sennacherib-discovered-under-tomb-of-prophet-jonah.html

The ancient palace of the Assyrian King Sennacherib, who is mentioned in the Bible, has been uncovered after Islamic State militants destroyed the tomb of the prophet Jonah which was on top of the palace.

As the Islamic State is pushed out of areas in Iraq and Syria that they controlled since 2014, archaeologists are being given the chance to study new discoveries. It is thought that the Islamic State has ransacked various ancient tombs and landmarks to collect valuables to sell on the black market in order to fund their operation.

“I can only imagine how much Daesh discovered down there before we got here,” archaeologist Layla Salih told The Telegraph.

“We believe they took many of the artifacts, such as pottery and smaller pieces, away to sell. But what they left will be studied and will add a lot to our knowledge of the period,” Salih added.

The palace of King Sennacherib dates back to the seventh century B.C. The Assyrian King is mentioned in the Bible in II Chronicles 32:1 which says, “After all that Hezekiah had so faithfully done, Sennacherib king of Assyria came and invaded Judah. He laid siege to the fortified cities, thinking to conquer them for himself.”

 

 

A Discovery In Archaeology

THE ROMAN ARMIES BREACHED THE WALLS OF JERUSALEM

And when he drew near and saw the city, he wept over it, saying, “Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation.” – Luke 19:41-44 (ESV)

Archaeologists have found remnants of a wall, believed to be the Third Wall of Jerusalem. This physical evidence likely puts to rest the debate about its location and gives additional insight to “The Fall of Jerusalem,” which occurred in AD 70 when Roman armies dug a trench and besieged the city. The Romans built a wall that would eventually be as high as the third wall of Jerusalem. This third wall was built to protect newer sections of the city that had been growing outside the protection of the first and second walls. The third wall was the weakest and would prove to be the easiest to defeat.

For I have set My face against this city for harm and not for good,” declares the LORD. “It will be given into the hand of the king of Babylon and he will burn it with fire. – Jeremiah 21:10 (ESV)

According to the Israel Antiquities Authority, “During the course of the excavation archaeologists discovered the remains of a tower jutting from the city wall. Opposite the tower’s western facade were scores of ballista and sling stones that the Romans had fired from catapults towards the Jewish guards defending the wall, who were stationed at the top of the tower.

This discovery made last year included finding the ground littered with more than 70 ballista and sling stones outside the wall, believed to be remnants from the Roman attack in the First Jewish Revolt. The finds were made in a location that will house the new campus of Bezalel Academy of Arts & Design, in the historic district known as the Russian Compound in central Jerusalem.

Dr. Rina Avner and Kfir Arbib, the excavation directors of the site, expressed that
“This is a fascinating testimony of the intensive bombardment by the Roman army, led by Titus, on their way to conquering the city and destroying the Second Temple. The bombardment was intended to attack the sentries guarding the wall and provide cover for the Roman forces so they could approach the wall with battering rams and thereby breach the city’s defenses”.

These finds support the record of historian Flavius Josephus, an eye witness to the war, who provided many details about the battle and this wall. According to him, the wall was designed to protect the new quarter of the city that had developed outside its boundaries, north of the two existing city walls. This quarter was named Beit Zeita. The building of the Third Wall was begun by Agrippa I; however, he suspended its construction so as not to incur the wrath of Emperor Claudius and to dispel any doubts regarding his loyalty. The construction of the Third Wall was resumed some two decades later by the defenders of Jerusalem, as part of fortifying the city and the Jewish rebels’ preparations for the Great Revolt against Rome.

The article comes from the Patterns of Evidence newsletter so we really do not have a very good link to place here. This is most of the story You can get to the story through the following link

http://patternsofevidence.com/blog/

 
 
 
%d bloggers like this: