Daily Bible Nugget #393, Isaiah 42:1

Posted on January 23, 2016 by Jerry

The Nugget:

Isa 42:1 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.

 

 

My Comment:

I answered the following excellent question in an ongoing discussion taking place in the “Islam and Christianity Debate Group” today:

Thank you for your answer. My question to you is: If the Trinity does indeed represent the truth about the nature of God, then why was it not preached by the prophets prior to Jesus, and even by Jesus himself? And why is the word “Trinity” nowhere in the Bible?

 

My Response:

That is a very good question, Farid EL Moustain. I believe there is evidence in the Hebrew Scriptures that suggests the Hebrew prophets did indeed know about the Trinity, though that insight may seem to us not very distinctly declared.
 
That is why to dig deeper into the truths revealed in the Old Testament we must learn to use the proper study tools and procedures. The procedures are at least suggested by what I call the “Rules of Interpretation.” I have listed 24 or so of these elsewhere, and have mentioned one of them here repeatedly, namely, the Rule of Necessary Inference. The tools readily available freely to all would be modern Bible study software which includes a resource called The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, a collection of cross references which permit the Bible to explain itself by comparing Scripture with Scripture.
 
Isaiah 42:1 may be one passage in the Old Testament prophets which gives at least a hint of the Trinity:  “Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth;  I have put my spirit upon him:  he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.” The Trinity is seen here, for we have the Father as the speaker; the Son as the servant, the Messiah;  and the Holy Spirit.  All three persons of the Trinity are also mentioned together in Matthew 3:16, 17;  Matthew 28:19;  Luke 1:35;  John 14:16, 26;  John 15:26;  Romans 15:30;  1 Corinthians 12:4-6;   2 Corinthians 13:14;  Ephesians 2:18;  Ephesians 4:4-6;  2 Thessalonians 3:5;  Hebrews 9:14;  1 Peter 1:2;  1 John 5:7;  Jude 20, 21;  Revelation 1:4, 5.
 
It is an interesting fact that the word “Trinity” occurs nowhere in the Bible that I have seen. But this is true of many matters connected with Bible truth. The term “rapture”  is not in the Bible either, nor “age of accountability,” nor “eternal security,” a much discussed Bible doctrine among Christians.
 
Some other things not named in the Bible in terms with which we speak of them today include shekinah glory, theophany, incarnation, supernatural, battle of Armageddon,  personality, spiritual Israel, last judgment, general judgment, second coming, legalism, intermediate state, infant baptism, believer’s baptism. My list of these extends much further, but this may give you some idea that there are many things common to the discussion of Bible teaching or doctrine that are spoken of in terms today using words not in the Bible itself.
 
Watson remarks, “So the word Trinity is not to be found in Scripture, but there is there that which is equivalent to it. ” Watson further states “Though the word infant baptism is not in Scripture, yet the thing is,” Body of Divinity, page 381.
 
You may well understand that my Baptist friends would disagree with Watson about infant baptism. Nevertheless, Watson was a careful student of Scripture, and on both issues he most certainly is correct.
 
So, the fact that a term used to discuss a Bible doctrine is not found in the Bible is not really an evidence against the truth of the doctrine.
 
By observing carefully many disparate statements in Scripture, we may, by considering them together, see quite plainly that there are three Persons who are each called God, or are found doing things only God can do, or who have attributes only possessed by God.
 
There are statements starting with Genesis chapter 1 which support my claim. For example, we obviously have God the Father mentioned in Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”
 
In Genesis 1:2,   we read in part, “And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” The word “moved” may be translated “was brooding.” J. B. Rotherham, translator of the Emphasized Bible, note i on Genesis 1:2, remarks “The beautiful word ‘brooding’–an exact rendering of the Hebrew–is most suggestive; since it vividly describes the cherishing of incipient life, as a preparation for its outburst. The partial form of such a word clearly denotes a process, more or less lengthened, rather than an instantaneous act. Standing where it does, it crowns the description of the condition of things on which the first creative mandate of six days took effect.”
 
When I first read that comment by Rotherham, I recalled a graduate seminar in linguistics at Wayne State University in Detroit where we discussed at length the interesting feature of language that reveals whether what is spoken of is a person or not a person.
 
Applying this simple linguistic insight to the Bible I arrive at the following conclusion. Since only a person can “brood,” this is evidence that the Holy Spirit is a person. Compare “grieve” as used in the New Testament at Ephesians 4:30, “And grieve not the Spirit of God,” which likewise determines that the Holy Spirit must be a person. A non-person cannot brood, nor can it brood, grieve, or be grieved by an act of delegation. One cannot grieve an influence or an active force (Matthew 12:31), as is the notion of the non-personhood or non-personality of the Holy Spirit of God expressed by some, like the Jehovah Witnesses, who deny the doctrine of the Trinity.
 
In the Bible, the act of Creation is ascribed to the work of all three persons of the Trinity in cooperation:
 
(1) God the Father, Genesis 1:1;
(2) the Son, John 1:2, 3;
(3) the Holy Spirit, Genesis 1:2.
 
For each of those three points in outline there is likely more material in the Bible in passages which can be located using a good source of Bible cross references such as The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, and newer works I wrote titled The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, available in software, and Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible.

To dig deeper into Isaiah 42:1 by means of cross reference Bible study, read the cross references I share below for this verse:

  1. my servant.   +Is 37:35.  43:10.  *Is 49:3, 4, 5, 6.  *Is 52:13.  *Is 53:11.  +Ex 28:39 (girdle).  =Le 2:4.  Nu 4:49.  7:5.  Jsh 1:2.  1 Ch 17:19.  Jb 1:8.  =Ps 106:23.  Zc 3:8.  >Mt 12:17-21.  Lk 23:35.  Jn 8:29.  10:36.  14:28.  *Phil 2:6-8.   whom I uphold.  ver. Is 42:6.   Is 49:2, 7,  8.   50:4-10.  Ps 16:5.  37:17.  54:4.  63:8.  73:23.  89:21.  119:116.  Jn 10:36.  16:32.  mine elect.  Ps 89:3, 19, 20.  Hg 2:23.  Lk 23:35.  +**Lk 24:27n, Lk 24:44.  *Jn 6:27.  Ro 8:33.  Col 3:12.  1 P 2:4, 6.  my soul.  Heb. nephesh, +Ge 34:3;   +Le 26:11n.   FS22A1,  +Le 26:11.  Je 9:9.  Am 6:8h.  *Mt 3:17.   *Mt 17:5.  Mk 1:11.  Lk 3:22.  *Ep 1:4, 6.  Col 1:13mg.  He 10:38.  delighteth. or, is well-pleased.  Is 53:10.  2 S 15:26.  22:20.  1 K 10:9.  2 Ch 9:8.  Est 6:6.  Ps 22:8.  Pr 8:30.  **Mt 17:5.  Mk 12:6.  Jn 3:35.  10:17.  15:10.   I have.   *Is 11:2, 3, 4, 5.  59:21.  61:1.  Mt 3:16.  Mk 1:10.  Lk  3:22.   Jn 1:32, 33, 34.   **Jn 3:34.   Ac 10:38.  **2 P 1:17.   my spirit.   Heb. ruach, +Ge 6:3;  +Ge 41:38.   +*Is 48:16.  +*Lk 4:18.  Ac 1:2.  +*Ac 5:4n.  He 9:14.  The Trinity is seen here,  for we have the Father as the speaker;  the Son as the  Servant,  the  Messiah;   and the Holy  Spirit.   All  three persons  of  the Trinity are also mentioned together in Mt  3:16, +*Mt 3:17;  +**Mt 28:19n;  Lk 1:35;  Jn 14:16, 26;  15:26;  *Ro 15:30;  *1 Cor 12:4-6;   2 Cor 13:14;  Ep 2:18;  4:4, 5, 6;  2 Th 2:13, 14;  3:5;  He 9:14;  1 P 1:2;   1 J 5:7;   Jude 20,  21;  Re 1:4, 5.  he shall bring forth.  Is 32:16.  49:6.  Mic 4:2.  Lk 4:43.  Ac 26:6.  judgment. or, justice. ver. +Is 42:4.  +*Is 30:18.  32:16.  51:4.  Ps 110:6.  Mt 12:18.   to the Gentiles.   Is 11:10.  49:1, 6, 22.  54:3.  +Ge 49:10.  +Ps 96:3.  Zc 2:11.  Ml 1:11.  $Mt 12:17, 21.  Lk 2:31.  $Jn 10:16.  Ac 9:15.  $Ac 10:45, 47.  11:18.  13:47.  26:17.  28:28.  *Ro 15:8-16.  Ep 1:12.  3:8.

 

Posted in Apologetics Issues--Other Faiths, Daily Bible Nuggets, Doctrinal Discussions | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Daily Bible Nugget #392, Mark 13:32

Posted on January 22, 2016 by Jerry

The Nugget:

Mar 13:32 But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father. 

My Comment:

In my continuing question and answer discussion in the “Islam and Christianity Debate Group,” I responded to the following interesting question:

If Jesus was indeed omniscient as you claim, how could he not know about the hour? That clearly demonstrates that he isn’t as omniscient as God the Father, for if he was he should have known that. This also contradicts the claim that all persons of the Trinity are equal because the fact that Jesus didn’t know about the hour makes it crystal clear that they are not.

This is a most interesting question centered upon a fascinating statement found in Mark 13:32. I have encountered questions about this verse when having discussions with Jehovah Witnesses, who came to my apartment years ago to teach me more about the Bible. I had responded to their offer of Bible instruction with the comment, “If you can prove any doctrine is taught by the Bible, I will surely believe it, for I do believe what the Bible teaches.” They came for four years, every Monday evening, from 7:00 pm until we finished the lesson or discussion. I must say, that experience motivated my further study of the Bible, and I learned much about Bible doctrine. Clearly, though, the Jehovah Witnesses did not convert me to their view, though they tried valiantly to do so! I found that by following the Rules of Interpretation (of which I have listed about 24 in the October 2010 Archives accessible easily immediately to the right on this page), by comparing Scripture with Scripture using cross references, and by always taking note of the immediate context–what comes before or what comes after–any verse the Jehovah Witnesses appealed to in support of their mistaken doctrines, I was always able to come up with the correct answer from the Bible itself.

My Response:

The answer to your question resides in the voluntary relations sustained by the equal members of the Trinity. In these relationships as displayed in Scripture, Jesus Christ the Son of God is subordinate to the Father, as many of the very good Biblical references you yourself have cited show.

 
But one key to understanding these relations is to grasp that subordination does not imply inequality.
 
I am aware that such an idea runs directly counter to Islamic belief. But the issue is not Islamic belief, but what does the Bible itself state? What does the New Testament reveal about God, about Jesus the Messiah, and about the Holy Spirit?
 
There are a good many facts about God revealed in Scripture. If we read Scripture itself with discerning eyes and an open heart to what God reveals in His written word found only in the Bible, we will discover by the Rule of Necessary Inference that God does indeed exist in Three Persons Who alone share the incommunicable attributes of God.
 
How else can we account for good Jewish individuals like Peter and James and John, strict monotheists, who scrupulously kept the Law of Moses, who personally walked for over three years daily with Jesus Christ, yet came to recognize Jesus as Messiah, the Son of God, who, like Thomas, came to perceive that Jesus was in some sense not merely a man, but directly called Jesus God, as in John 20:28?
 
John the Baptist was clearly on a human level born about six months before Jesus was born. Yet John the Baptist exclaimed of Jesus, “This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me:  for he was before me” (John 1:15), and again, “This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me:  for he was before me” (John 1:30).
 
Such statements by John the Baptist point to the fact of the pre-existence of Jesus Christ, a fact directly prophesied of the Messiah in Micah 5:2, and witnessed throughout the Hebrew Scriptures, as is evident when one observes very closely and carefully what is said about the Angel of Jehovah. And speaking of Jehovah, the New Testament very frequently attributes to Jesus Christ statements in the Hebrew Scriptures which are spoken of Jehovah.
 
John the Baptist is spoken of in Mark 1:3 as “The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.” This is a quotation from Isaiah 40:3 where this is said of Jehovah. Mark’s citation thus attributes to Jesus Christ what in the Old Testament is spoken of Jehovah. This is so frequent in the New Testament that it is evident that Jesus Christ is in some sense spoken of as Jehovah. Some have asked me, “Does this mean you believe Jesus is the Father?” I reply, “No, this means there are actually two Jehovah’s to be seen in the Hebrew Scriptures:  that there are two is clear when the two are on the same scene at the same time, as in Genesis 19:24.”
 
But looking a moment more at Isaiah 40:3, in the Old Testament this passage reads, “make straight in the desert a highway for our God.” The New Testament record repeatedly applies this to Jesus Christ, thus John the Baptist prepared the way for Jesus Christ in fulfillment of Isaiah 40:3, but the prophecy specifies further, this preparation of the highway was for the coming of “our God.” Thus, by necessary inference, Jesus Christ the Messiah is called God.
 
There are many such texts in Scripture which alert the discerning reader that though Jesus Christ is surely a man, yet He is in His Divine Nature more than just a man.
 
Take another interesting text from John 3:13, “And no man hath ascended to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.” Here, Jesus asserts that He came down from heaven yet at that very moment of speaking He asserted He was then in heaven at the same time.
 
This passage teaches that Christ came down from heaven when He became incarnate: and having become incarnate, is said to have ‘ascended up to Heaven,’ and ‘to be in Heaven,’ because ‘the Son of Man,’ who was not in heaven before, by virtue of the hypostatical union was thenceforward evermore ‘in heaven.’
 
“Hypostatical union” is a term representing Christ as possessing two natures in one person, human and divine. The Son of God has assumed the human nature into so strict a personal union, that what is proper to either nature is ascribed to the person under whatsoever name; for, saith he, “the Son of man which is in heaven,” which is not to be understood, as if either his human nature came from heaven (for he is speaking of what still is there) or that his human nature were in every place, but that the same person who is the Son of man according to our nature is in heaven according to his divine nature, and yet but one person still.
 
Therefore, it is evident, that God the Son possesses the incommunicable divine attribute of immensity.
 
All this to conclude that when Mark reports that Jesus said He did not know the day and hour of His Second Coming, and that the angels in heaven did not know, but only the Father knows (Mark 13:32), we have displayed the relations of the Persons of the One Godhead, where the Father did not grant that Jesus Christ as the Son of man should at that time He was speaking know this particular thing. In His human nature Jesus Christ was subject at times to limitations, but this does not diminish the fact that Jesus frequently displayed the attribute of omniscience as I set forth from Scripture in some detail here before.

To dig still deeper into Mark 13:32 study the cross references shared below:

  1. of that day.  ver. Mk 13:26, 27.  Jb 14:13.  Zc 14:7.  +*Mt 24:36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42.  *Mt 25:6, 13, 19.  *Jn 14:11.  *Ac 1:7.  *1 Th 5:2.  *2 P 3:10.  *Re 3:3.  and that hour.  Jb 14:13.  Am 4:12.  knoweth.  Note:  “To preclude the curiosity of men,” says Dr. Hammond, “and to engage their vigilance, Christ is pleased to tell them, that no dispensation of God, either by man (as Daniel), or by angels, or, which is the highest, by the Son of man, had ordered us thus to know the seasons;  this being no part of the prophetic office, or within the commission of Christ himself.”  +*Dt 29:29.  Mt 25:13.  %Jn 13:7.  16:12.  %*Ro 13:11.  1 C 13:12.  %Ep 3:5.  *1 Th 5:1, 2, 4.  in heaven.  Da 4:12.  neither the Son. Note.—On these words see a Note of Granville Penn, shewing by a comparison of MSS. that it is highly probable that we should read for o uios here, oios; according to which the Lord’s declaration is,—”not even the angels which are in heaven, neither can (know), but my Father only; (not however to the exclusion of the Son, see Jn 5:19, 10:30, 14:9-11, 16:15); and the prophecies of that day by Christ in this very chapter, and the Apocalypse, shewing his knowledge of the minutest particulars connected with it (William De Burgh, New Marginal Readings and References to the Gospels, p. 152).  T#70.  ver. **Mk 13:26.  Is 42:6.  Mt 11:27.  +Mt 14:23 (T#64), Mt 14:33.  #Mt 24:36.  +*Mt 28:19.  Lk 10:22.  *Jn 3:35.  **Jn 5:19-23, 25, 26, 30.  %Jn 6:30, +Jn 6:38 (T#72), Jn 6:57.  8:28, 29.  %+*Jn 10:30.  14:10.  20:17.  +Ac 1:4.  +**1 Cor 15:28.  2 Cor 13:4.  Phil 2:6, 7.  *Re 1:1.  19:12.  but the Father.   %+**Ho 8:4.  Zc 14:7.  %+*Mt 10:32.  %*Jn 5:20.  +*Jn 14:28.  *Ac 1:7.

This entry was posted in Apologetics Issues–Other Faiths, Daily Bible Nuggets, Doctrinal Discussions and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Edit
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Daily Bible Nugget #391, John 20:31

Posted on January 21, 2016 by Jerry

The Nugget:

Joh 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

My Comment:

Muslims seem unable to grasp the concept that Christians are monotheists because they believe in only one true God. The difference is, genuine Bible-believing Christians base their knowledge of God on what the Bible itself teaches. We do not gloss over the evidence that demonstrates that there are three, and only three, Persons in the One Godhead. This understanding of the Bible is based upon the rule of Biblical hermeneutics I have chosen to label the Rule of Necessary Inference (See the October 2010 Archives to the right, where I have listed at least 24 all-important rules or guides to correct Biblical interpretation, and for the Rule of Necessary Inference I have supplied some Biblical examples of the application of this Rule).

Muslims are not the only ones who stumble at this profound Biblical truth. The Jews (if they have not carefully studied their Hebrew Scriptures), Oneness Pentecostals, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Unitarians have all failed to understand and believe this Bible doctrine.

But Muslims are in even further error, because, if I understand them correctly, Muslims deny that God has a Son, and therefore do not believe that Jesus is the Son of God. Yet Muslims claim to believe the Bible. I think the evidence is clear:  the Bible declares Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God.

In my on-going discussions with Muslims in the “Islam and Christianity Debate Group,” I furnished the Biblical evidence which fully demonstrates that the very text of the Bible declares repeatedly that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, as follows:

[I was responding to this comment by Farid EL Moustain:

 From the Islamic standpoint, the teachings of all prophets are the same; they all came with the same message: montheism. So in that capacity not only do the Muslims follow the teachings of Muhammed alone, but rather follow the true teachings of Jesus, Moses, Abraham, and David as well. And the fact Jesus never sinned does not make him the Son of God. What I also noticed in this post of yours is that you only referred to Jesus as “Son of God”, and you don’t seem to be alluding to him as being God himself. There seems to be no unanimous consensus among you, Christians, concerning the nature of Christ. Some of you claim that Jesus is the son of God; others believe that he is God, and then others claim that he is both. I find this very puzzling!]

Farid EL Moustain, a careful reading of the New Testament will remove your puzzlement, I’m sure.

 
John the Apostle, the one who wrote the Gospel of John, affirmed towards its close that the purpose he had in writing the Fourth Gospel was “that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name” (John 20:31).
 
There you have it in plain English, translated from plain Greek, that John affirmed that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
 
But John is not the only one.
 
The Angel that announced the miraculous virgin birth of Jesus Christ also used the same language when he said “The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee:  therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35).
 
Mark begins his Gospel account with these words:  “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God” (Mark 1:1).
 
After a most decided miracle demonstrating the omnipotence of Jesus Christ when He by His command stilled the storm at sea, we read the reaction of the disciples in the boat, “Then they that were in the boat came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth, thou art the Son of God” (Matthew14:33).
 
When Jesus later asked His disciples, “But whom say ye that I am?” Peter answered and said, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16).
 
Nathaniel, who immediately perceived the supernatural omniscience of Jesus Christ, asking Jesus, “Whence knowest thou me?” (John 1:48), exclaimed of Jesus Christ, “Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel” (John 1:49).
 
Later in John’s Gospel, Martha confessed her faith in Jesus Christ, saying “Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world” (John 11:27).
 
That this was the continuing faith and affirmation of the New Testament church is witnessed by Paul’s statement at the opening of his great doctrinal Epistle to the Romans, which states “And declared (or, determined, marginal reading) to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead” (Romans 1:4).
 
It is therefore the universal declaration of the New Testament Scriptures that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
 
Anyone who rejects this clear testimony does not believe the record that God gave of His Son, and is therefore an unbeliever, and worse, any such person is calling God a liar, as John states in his first epistle, “He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son” (1 John 5:10).
Posted in Apologetics Issues--Other Faiths, Daily Bible Nuggets, Doctrinal Discussions | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Daily Bible Nugget #390, John 21:17

Posted on January 20, 2016 by Jerry

The Nugget:

John 21:17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

Muslims have a different view of Jesus than those of the Christian faith. I supplied the following response to the first objection of five to the Christian belief about Jesus on the “Islam and Christianity Debate Group” Facebook discussion.

But first, let me share the introductory statement posted by Farid EL Moustain:

The Islamic view of Jesus (Peace Be Upon Him) lies between two extremes. The Jews, who rejected Jesus as a prophet of God, called him an imposter. The Christians, on the other hand, considered him to be the son of God and worship him as such. Islam considers Jesus to be one of the great prophets of God and respect him as much as Abraham, Moses, Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Them) to mention but a few.

This is in conformity with the Islamic view of the oneness of God, the oneness of divine guidance, and the complementary role of the subsequent mission of God’s messengers. As the notion of trinity contradicts the oneness of God. Now, let us examine facts about Jesus one by one, to get a clear picture of him.

1- God Is All Knowing … But Jesus Was Not
When speaking of the day of judgement, Jesus clearly gave evidence of a limitation on his knowledge when he said, “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in Heaven, neither the son, but the Father” (Mark 13: 32 and Matt 24:36). But God knows all. His knowledge is without any limitations. That Jesus, of his own admission, did not know when the day of judgement would be, is clear proof that Jesus is not all-knowing, and that Jesus is therefore not God.

This is a question my elderly friend, Uncle Frank, delighted to pose. Uncle Frank’s answer to the question, “If Jesus is God, why did He not know when He would return?” was that Jesus chose not to know at that time, for reasons probably known only to Himself and the Father. The statements in Matthew and Mark do not preclude Jesus having the Divine attribute of omniscience, as is most evident when one considers the rest of the testimony of the New Testament.

1. God is all-knowing, but Jesus is not.

The question is, does the New Testament record of Jesus Christ support the doctrine that Jesus is all-knowing, or to use the theological term, is Jesus omniscient?

John 21:17. Peter, speaking to Jesus, said, “Lord, thou knowest all things.”

The Greek word for “knowest” is very significant: oida, which specifies intuitive, complete knowledge which cannot be improved upon.

This statement by Peter ties in to many other declarations found in the Bible, which may be learned by following carefully the cross references given for this statement, some of which I share below.

John 2:24, 25. But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men,
Joh 2:25 And needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man.

John 4:16. Jesus saith unto her, Go, call thy husband, and come hither.
Joh 4:17 The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said unto her, Thou hast well said, I have no husband:
Joh 4:18 For thou hast had five husbands; and he whom thou now hast is not thy husband: in that saidst thou truly.
John 4:25. The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.
Joh 4:26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.
John 4:28. The woman then left her waterpot, and went her way into the city, and saith to the men,
Joh 4:29 Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?

How explain that Jesus knew the past life history of this woman, a woman He had never met before, to such a degree that the woman exclaimed, “Come see a man, which told me all things that ever I did”?

Surely this knowledge possessed by Jesus Christ of another person demonstrates His omniscience–He is all-knowing.

John 5:5. And a certain man was there, which had an infirmity thirty and eight years.
Joh 5:6 When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had been now a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt thou be made whole?

How did Jesus know the man had been a long time in that case?

John 5:38. And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.
Joh 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
Joh 5:40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.
Joh 5:41 I receive not honour from men.
Joh 5:42 But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you.

How did Jesus know the inner spiritual state of the men He was addressing?

John 6:60. Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard this, said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?
Joh 6:61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?
Joh 6:62 What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?
Joh 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
Joh 6:64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.

That Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not and who should betray him is yet another example of His omniscience.

John 11:11. These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep.
Joh 11:12 Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well.
Joh 11:13 Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep.
Joh 11:14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.
Joh 11:15 And I am glad for your sakes that I was not there, to the intent ye may believe;

They did not have cell-phones and instant messaging in that day. How did Jesus know that his close friend Lazarus was dead when Jesus was a good distance away, no messenger having brought Him word of this death? Surely this is another remarkable instance that shows Jesus was all-knowing, and omniscient.

This is already a long post for Facebook, and I have barely scratched the surface on this one issue–evidence that Jesus is omniscient–to be found in the New Testament. Let me jump ahead in the cross references to show just one more very remarkable incident recorded in Matthew 17:24-27,

Matthew 17:24. And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute?
Mat 17:25 He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?
Mat 17:26 Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free.
Mat 17:27 Notwithstanding, lest we should offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money: that take, and give unto them for me and thee.

As Peter returned to where Jesus was, before Peter could get a single word out of his mouth, Jesus knew where Peter had been and what had transpired.

Then Jesus gave directions to Peter on how He and Peter would obtain the necessary finances to pay the Temple tax for them both. How did Jesus know that the poor fish was swimming uncomfortably in the water with the proper change in his mouth, and that when Peter went fishing that this particular fish is the one Peter would catch?

If that is not a display of the omniscience of Jesus Christ, I do not know what is. Surely the evidence I have presented from the New Testament historical record demonstrates Jesus was indeed omniscient, and Peter was most justified when under duress he exclaimed to Jesus, “Lord, thou knowest all things.” Peter knew by repeated personal experience that this was so.

Posted in Apologetics Issues--Other Faiths, Daily Bible Nuggets, Doctrinal Discussions | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Stirring the Pot: “Natural Born Citizen”

Posted on January 19, 2016 by Jerry

I have listened to presentations on the Internet and read various news sources, which inform me that there is an ongoing controversy regarding the meaning of “Natural Born Citizen” as that expression is used in the Constitution.

So far, all I have heard and read is so much nonsense.

Even a Constitutional Law professor from Harvard Law School gets it wrong, if what I read in The New York Times article yesterday reported his statements accurately. That, of course, is something today’s agenda-driven news sources often fail to do.

Here is a snippet from that New York Times article:

Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, a Republican presidential candidate, is the latest White House contender to have his natural born credentials challenged. Born in 1970 in Calgary, Alberta, to an American mother and a Cuban father, Mr. Cruz has seen his legitimacy disputed both by an opponent, Donald J. Trump, and in a new lawsuit filed in Texas — possibly the first of several.

Mr. Cruz says his legal standing is not in doubt, but it is not so simple.

The overarching problem is that the Supreme Court has never been forced to interpret the clunky clause, leaving persuasive legal interpretations that range from arguing that the entire debate is nonsensical to asserting that only those born to certified American parents on verifiable American soil can aspire to the White House.

New York Times article link

After some years of study on my part of this issue, I assert:

1. Contrary to the assertion of the cited Harvard professor, these words in the American Constitution are not superfluous.

2. The words must be taken in their original sense–the meaning the words had when the American Constitution was written.

I saw quite a discussion on Facebook yesterday mocking the idea that the Constitution ought to be interpreted in its original sense. Objections to this idea are on their face logically fallacious. Writers of legal documents write to be understood. You cannot legitimately bend and stretch the meaning of words in legal documents, particularly legal national founding documents, to suit your convenience. The Facebook commenters were committing the ad hominem fallacy at the time of that discussion, for they were very much against Hillsdale College and its provision of a free online course on the American Constitution.

The same issue arises when it comes to interpreting the Bible. There is such a thing as the science of Biblical hermeneutics. While many modern authors, supposed “scholars,” have taken unjustified liberties with the subject of Biblical hermeneutics, its proper principles still stand. I have presented 24 or so of these principles on this site, readily accessible in the October, 2010, archives immediately to the right.

3. The expression “natural born citizen” as used and understood at the time of the writing of the American Constitution requires that a candidate for the office of President must be born to two persons, father and mother, who at the time of that birth were both citizens of the United States of America.

This understanding does not require that the candidate have been born in the United States itself. A child of a diplomat of the United States serving in another country, say India or France, if born to two United States citizens, would qualify.

Therefore, where the child was born does not enter into the issue.

The issue of where the child’s own parents were born does not enter into the issue if both parents were citizens of the United States at the time of the child’s birth.

Using the above-stated standards and definition of the meaning of “natural born citizen,” both our current President and the current Republican seeking that office, Mr. Ted Cruz, fail to meet the requirement. Our current President’s father was not a United States citizen when the President was born, though his mother was. I understand that Mr. Cruz was born to a mother who was at the time a United States citizen, though living in Canada, but his father was not a United States citizen until some time after his birth. Thus, neither the current President of the United States, nor Mr. Ted Cruz, qualify under the “natural born citizen” requirement specified in the American Constitution.

Why was such a provision inserted into the American Constitution in the first place? Our founding fathers wisely considered that the President of the United States should not be a person with any potential, hidden, lurking allegiance to another country, especially since the President is the Commander and Chief of the American military.

The founding fathers placed this provision where they did, in a place that would be very hard to remove or change. I suspect that they felt it a most wise and important requirement for any President to meet.

Perhaps the caution stated in the Bible is relevant here: “Remove not the old landmark” (Proverbs 23:10).

Posted in Politics and the Bible | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

My Answer to “How the Bible Lies To Us”

Posted on January 18, 2016 by Jerry

I happened this morning upon an interesting post written by a Muslim against the Bible on the “Islam and Christianity Debate Group,” a post which reads as follows:

ONE LIE IS WHAT IT TAKES FOR PEOPLE TO LOSE INTEREST IN YOU, and No Longer Can I get Any Interest In The Book That Makes All These Lies!

“AHAZIAH WAS 42 YEARS OLD WHEN HE BEGAN TO REIGN, AND HE REIGNED ONE YEAR IN Jerusalem. 2 Chronicles 22:2.”

“AHAZIAH WAS 22 YEARS OLD WHEN HE BEGAN TO REIGN, AND HE REIGNED ONE YEAR IN JERUSALEM! 2 Kings 8:26.”

Truly, We Would be Bible Believers Today, BUT WHO WOULD BE THERE SPINNING BECAUSE HE IS DEFENDING THESE FAT LIES??

We Are Told that When Jesus Was Effacing, he Told his Disciples To

“Go and teach ALL NATIONS, BAPTISING THEM IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER, And Of THE SON, And Of the Holy Spirit. Matthew 28:19.”

And The Demented Man, Who Spoke Whatever he Dreamt, And Spoke Only Nuisance, 2 Corinthians 11:17, 1 Corinth 7:6, 25, Daniel 7:27, Etc,

CAME SAYING:

“FOR JESUS SENT ME NOT TO BAPTISE, BUT TO PREACH THE GOSPEL! 1 Corinthians 1:17.”

If Jesus Told The Rest to GO BAPTISING, HOW WOULD HE TELL ONLY THE RAVENOUS WOLF aka SAUL, Genesis 49:27, To NOT TO BAPTISE??

And How Did Those He Preached to EMBRACED CHRISTIANITY WHEN EVERY ENTRANT INTO IT MUST OUGHT TO BE BAPTISED FIRST AS A FUNDAMENTAL TENET????

You Just Wonder!

WAS AHAZIAH 42 YEARS, OR 22 YEARS, when He began to Reign??

Brother Sidi Ought NOT TO MISS THIS POST! I am almost Getting Tired of these Lies!!

Hope This Isn’t A Serious Matter!

MAY ALLAH BE PLEASED WITH YOU BROTHER AKBAR SIDI. You Did A great Work by Relaying All the Infos about these Lies Dear!

My Answer:

There are no lies in the Bible, unless it records truthfully the lies of others. 2 Kings 8:26 gives the correct age of Ahaziah as 22 years. The passage in 2 Chronicles 22:2 contains a transcription error. [See the explanatory note in The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge]

If 2 Chronicles 22:2 were the correct reading, that would make Ahaziah 2 years older than his father!

Let it be clearly understood that when a supposed error in the Bible can be answered rationally and factually so as to provide a clear resolution, bringing up such a supposed error is actually dishonest. These questions have been investigated and fully answered by scholars before.

And as for Paul stating it was not his commission to baptize, but to preach the Gospel, it is clear that converts under the ministry of Paul most certainly were baptized, but he had fellow workers in his ministry who performed the actual baptisms most of the time. Paul was thankful that he himself had not personally performed very many baptisms in Corinth because that would have contributed to the divisions that were forming there, and Paul’s goal was Christian unity.

So once again, your objection or criticism is not sustained upon a more careful reading of the context in the whole of Scripture.

May I gently suggest as a now retired former English teacher that those who would suppose they can find and support the notion of contradictions in the Bible first take care that they have thoroughly done their homework first!

Posted in Apologetics Issues--Other Faiths | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Is each divine being of the Trinity omnipotent?

Posted on January 11, 2016 by Jerry

This question, “Is each divine being of the Trinity omnipotent?” was asked in a Facebook discussion group, “Islam and Christianity Debate Group,” a kind soul made me a member of.

I placed the following answer to that very good question posed by a Muslim participant today:

The answer is absolutely yes. All three divine beings of the trinity are declared in the Bible to be omnipotent. I already gave the Scripture for some of the related incommunicable attributes above, but since “omnipotence” is not included in my list of the incommunicable attributes of God shared by each member of the Trinity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, I will share them now. Let me make this clearer by giving you the specific Scriptures that state this:

God the Father is omnipotent:

Job 42:2. “I know that thou canst do every thing, and that no thought can be withholden from thee.”

In my new resource for Bible study I give the following cross references to other related verses in the Bible which shed light on the keywords “thou canst do every thing”: Genesis 17:1. 18:14. Psalm 115:3. 135:6. Isaiah 40:12. 43:13. Jeremiah 32:17, 27. Habakkuk 3:6. Matthew 15:27. 19:26. Mark 10:27. 14:36. Lk 1:37. 18:27. Acts 26:8. Contrast Titus 1:2. Revelation 19:6.

God the Son is omnipotent:

1 Corinthians 1:24. “But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.”

In my new resource for Bible study I give the following cross references to other related verses in the Bible which shed light on the keywords “the power of God”:

1 Corinthians 1:18. 4:20. 8:6. Exodus 38:7. Joshua 3:14. Job 36:5. Psalm 110:2. Isaiah 9:6. 53:1. 63:5. Matthew 8:16, 28-32. 14:25 note. Mt 28:18, 19. Mark 1:23-27. Luke 4:35-41. 7:12-15. 8:22-24 note, Lk 8:25, 33 note, Lk 8:41, 42, 49-55. John 1:3, 10. 2:19. 5:21, 25. 10:17, 18. 11:25. 12:38. 16:15. 17:2. Acts contrast Ac 8:10. Romans 1:4, 16. contrast Romans 15:19. 2 Corinthians 6:7. 12:9. Ephesians 1:19, 20. Philippians 3:20, 21. Colossians 1:16, 17. 1 Thessalonians 1:5. Hebrews 1:3. 2:14. 4:12. 1 Peter 1:5. 1 John 3:8. Revelation 1:8, 18.

God the Holy Spirit is omnipotent:

Acts 10:38. “How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.”

In my new resource for Bible study I give the following cross references to other related verses in the Bible which shed light on the keywords “and with power”:

God the Holy Spirit is omnipotent (Matthew 28:19 note). The omnipotence of the Holy Spirit is also implied by His work in creation (Genesis 1:2. Job 26:13. Psalm 104:30). Acts 1:8. Luke 1:35. 6:19. Romans 8:11. 15:13, 19. 1 Thessalonians 1:5. 2 Timothy 1:7. 1 Peter 3:18.

Since the Bible is not written in the form of a systematic theology, one of the best ways to learn what it teaches is to consult a full source of cross references. Cross references show where a particular theme or doctrine is mentioned elsewhere in the Bible. That is why I have taken the time to share these cross references for they are not available elsewhere in this completeness.

Posted in Apologetics Issues--Other Faiths, Doctrinal Discussions | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Daily Bible Nugget #389, Genesis 6:13

Posted on January 9, 2016 by Jerry

The Nugget:

Gen 6:13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

My Comment:

When anyone engages in sinful behavior, in wrongdoing, God takes most careful note of that fact. Unless that person seeks God, and obtains forgiveness through personal faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, that person will face punishment from God.

This is not likely to be a very popular message from the Bible. Too bad. The truth is declared repeatedly in the Bible. If you have read your Bible, you certainly cannot have missed this truth.

By studying cross references given to show where else in the Bible this or any given theme mentioned in the Bible can be found, you will discover the theme is mentioned far more often than you remember or might suppose. The fact that this theme is repeated in the Bible demonstrates its importance.

What may not be understood by many is that God declares he punishes sin and wrongdoing both in the “here and now,” as well as “hereafter.”

The Bible proof of this truth can be learned by carefully reading and considering the cross references for Genesis 6:13 which I share immediately below. These references are “live,” so that if you hover your mouse pointer over each reference in turn, a “pop-up window” will appear which contains or displays the verse the reference points to. That makes it a very easy matter for you to read all the references given. I hope you will take the time to do just that for a very instructive and sobering lesson from the Bible itself.

Genesis 6:13,

  1. And God.  Ex 15:2n.  Ps 45:6.  136:25.  said unto Noah.  Ge 8:15.  Am 3:7.  He 1:1.  The end.  Ge 8:21.  Is 34:1-4.  Je 51:13.  Ezk 7:2-6.  Am 8:2.  Ro 3:19.  10:4.  *1 P 4:7.  flesh.  FS171E1, +Ge 6:12.  FS171Q8.  Figure of speech Synecdoche of the Part F/S 643;  “flesh” is put for all living beings.  For other instances of this figure see  Ge 6:17.  Ps 136:25.  is come.  Is 60:1.  Mt 12:28.  He 12:22n.  filled with violence.  ver. Ge 6:4, 11, 12.  Ge 49:5.  Ezk 8:17.  Ho 4:1, 2.  Lk 17:26.  1 P 3:20.  and, behold.  ver. Ge 6:17.  destroy.  T#566 (Future punishment presaged by temporal judgments).  The following cross references form a major study demonstrating God sometimes punishes evil here and now in this life, as well as hereafter.  Ge 7:4, 21.  18:20, 21.  19:24, 25.  37:35n.  Ge 42:21.  +*Ex 22:23, 24.  23:22.  +**Nu 32:23 (T#733).  Dt 15:9.  Jg 9:24n.  *2 S 3:39.  4:11.  +*1 K 8:32 (T#1751).  +Est 7:9.  +*Jb 4:8.  +*Jb 31:2, 3.  *Ps 31:23.  34:16.  +Ps 37:9 (T#87).  Ps 54:5.  58:10, +Ps 58:11 (T#630).  Ps 91:8.  +*Ps 109:17.  Pr 3:33.  *Pr 13:15.  **Pr 22:22, 23.  24:17, *Pr 24:18.  28:13.  +**Is 66:24.  +Ezk 39:23 (T#486).  +*Da 4:31.  Ho 2:6.  Jl 3:7.  Hab 1:6.  2:8.  +*Zc 5:3.  +*Ml 3:5.  Mt 18:6, 10.  +*Lk 18:7, 8, 30.  +*Ro 1:27.  **Ro 12:19.  Col 3:25.  2 Th 1:6.  1 P 3:12.  2 P 2:4, 5, 6, 7.  +*Re 11:18.  with. or, from.  Ge 7:23.  Ps 37:9, 10.  the earth.  Jb 12:15.  Je 4:23-28.  Ro 8:20.  He 11:7.  *2 P 3:6, 7, 10-12.
Posted in Daily Bible Nuggets, Practical Application Bible Studies, Practical Application Studies | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

My suggestion for the New Year

Posted on January 4, 2016 by Jerry

Happy New Year to everyone!

Resolve to read the New Testament every day.

It will make a great impact on your life.

If you can find time for reading other books or watching TV or the like, you surely can find time for reading God’s Word!

Not to do so is to starve yourself spiritually–not a good idea in the light of eternity, and certainly a great loss of God’s encouragement, guidance, and blessing in the “here and now.”

Don’t kid yourself–if you want the best for your life, let God speak daily to you through His written Word!

Related Bible Verses:

Matthew 12:3.  Jesus asked the question, “Have ye not read?”  That shows Jesus expects us to read and understand the Bible.

Matthew 24:15.  Jesus asserts, when He states, “Let him that readeth understand,” that even difficult portions of the Bible like the prophecies of Daniel which He was just then talking about, are written to be understood, and that with careful reading and study, we can understand them.

John 5:39.  Jesus literally commands, “Search the Scriptures.” Learn more about how to do that by reading what I have posted on this site. Make use of the cross references in the center or side column of your Bible, if you are fortunate enough to have a reference Bible. Use the search feature at the very top right-hand corner of this page to enter a Bible reference or topic to see if I have included it here. I have shared the cross references for over 300 different Bible verses in more complete form here than you will likely find anywhere else.

1 Peter 2:2. Peter gives the commandment, “As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby.” I believe that anyone who is not feeding themselves spiritually by both reading and studying the Bible as regularly as he or she feeds themselves physically is in danger of dying spiritually.

Posted in How to Study the Bible | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

I encountered an atheist discussing my favorite subject

Posted on January 3, 2016 by Jerry

I read a discussion on Facebook yesterday that centered around an atheist’s objection to Romans 10:9.

Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

A bit into the conversation the atheist wrote, “Remember your claim is…”believe in your heart that god raised Jesus from the dead.” I don’t necessarily have a problem with “Jesus rose from the dead.”

As an English teacher, let me enter my protest to writing “god” when English grammar and convention requires “God.” Some atheists, among others, are in the habit of doing this. What really is a pet peeve of mine is when Christians write “bible” when English grammar and convention requires “Bible.” That is a poor testimony. You surely ought to have learned better in English class!

The atheist in the discussion brought forward his belief that there have been several people who came back from the dead and lived to tell about it, so Jesus was not necessarily returned to life by God.

Of course, that fails to account for the fact that Jesus Himself, and the prophets in the Bible before Him, predicted His death and resurrection after three days.

The atheist repeatedly brought forward his argument that one convinced person can easily persuade others to believe his lie. Then those persons, convinced of the truth of what really is a lie because impossible, can easily convince others to believe what they do. Leslie in his work, Four Marks: A Short and Easy Method with the Deists, fully refutes such reasoning.

My friend on Facebook responded to the atheist, “The issue then becomes your determination to deny God.”

The atheist responded:

“It’s not a determination to deny God…its a simple logical argument that doesn’t follow. Jesus rose from the dead doesn’t necessarily follow to “God did it.” I know at least 3 stories where people rose from the dead, did God raise them also? And if they claimed it…would you believe them?”

Then the atheist responded to another well-stated affirmation by another person writing in the discussion thread:

“The best way to interpret the text in Corinthians [1 Corinthians 15:3 and context] is that this is a belief which was commonly held, with witnesses that were still alive and could be consulted (and hence, proven to be false) if the claim was untrue”

  1. That’s not the best way to interpret Corinthians
  2. A Witnesses claim cannot be proven false
  3. A LOT can happen in 20 years [alluding to Paul writing that long after the event]…correspondence is the key. It only takes ONE to convince someone of something. Keeping in mind, most of the bible is contradictory…especially the gospels.
  4. There are MANY other possibilities, the idea that a god did it, especially when there is no evidence for a god…is very far on the back burning [sic., writer meant “back burner”]. Bart Ehrman [Erhman] does a great job of explaining some of this.

Every PIECE of information you gave is BIASED towards the subject matter. So what I will prematurely accuse you of is an account of special pleading. The historicity of Jesus’s Resurrection suddenly exists in a class of its own where evidence that would normally not be used by historians to prove an event happened suddenly is allowed to be used.

 

Shortly after this point in the discussion I jumped in with the following comment:

“This is a good discussion of the validity of belief in the resurrection of Christ. Citing Bart Ehrman is hardly relevant to the issue, for he himself is clearly an unbeliever, and his scholarship is slipshod. Some years ago I wrote against his claims against the “Johanine coma” to show his claims were unfounded and did not conform to known documentary evidence that refuted his claims. Citing him is mere poisoning the well.

“Suggesting you know of three stories of people who have come back to life after experiencing death has no relevance to the record of the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ not only came back from the dead, he kept on living and did not die physically a second time.

“The death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is a matter of historical record. Gilbert West and Lord Lyttleton have written solid defenses of the truth of the Biblical record about these matters. William Paley’s Horae Paulinae is a solid, probably irrefutable argument in behalf of the veracity of the Apostle Paul. Far as I know, his argument has never been addressed, let alone actually refuted.

“There is no other major event of past history [that far back] that has as much evidence and testimony on its behalf as the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. And that evidence is contemporaneous to the event. We have the written testimony of eight direct witnesses to the facts of these events. Read Leslie’s Short and Easy Method with the Deists. Leslie’s argument actually does not depend directly on the records of that time.  Read Simon Greenleaf’s Testimony of the Evangelists.  C. S. Lewis has likewise argued ably in his writings, and he was once an atheist. Norman Geisler and many other careful writers and scholars have likewise in our own day written good defenses of the truth of the New Testament accounts.

“To suggest the New Testament accounts are untruthful or unreliable is nonsense. Read the writings of Sir William Ramsey who specialized in his research on these very matters.”

 

The atheist answered me as follows:

“Bart was a believer and then became an unbeliever after he looked at the evidence. That’s much more convincing than somebody who already has a preconceived idea that Jesus Christ must have been raised from the dead and then proves it. And his statements are very relevant…he’s a scholar in the field. And I’m sure you think you’ve refuted him but I’m positive he would disagree…as would I. Keeping in mind also we’re talking about reasonable belief. Bart doesn’t deny that it could have happened he simply says you can’t justify it reasonably through historic study. Which is why neither I nor he affirms it happened.

“Actually, everything about citing the case of someone coming back to life IS relevant. Since it’s about a comparison to a similar experience and whether you believe it ALSO was a divine miracle. And how you can tell if it wasn’t. It shows that you special plead the case for Christ whereas you would hold a reasonable belief with the rest of us that we don’t know or the body heals itself sometimes.”

My Facebook friend gave a short but powerful reply:

“Your body doesn’t heal itself from a spear into the chest cavity and a burst heart.”

 

A little later in the discussion the atheist shares some personal information that sheds light on his current position regarding spiritual things:

  1. I’m not talking about events not occurring, I’m talking about reasonable belief.
  2. In China a grandmother was in her casket for 6 days. One day the family awoke to her being alive and making breakfast. [Another poster provided a link to this event which shows the grandmother was determined to not have been clinically dead at the time of burial–if I were better at this Internet/Facebook stuff I would share the link:  Chinese woman, 95, comes back to life by climbing out of her coffin six days after she ‘died’].
  3. I once believed in a god and was a JW as you know and then realized how fallacious the reasoning truly is. I am now an agnostic atheist and I see no reason to believe in God for the same reason I see no  reason to believe in Santa Claus.

 

The word count for this post already exceeds 1244 words.

I will simply comment that there are NO atheists who have ever read through carefully with understanding even ONE of the classic works written in defense of the Bible and/or Christianity.  At least that is the life-long conclusion drawn by Irwin H. Linton, author of A Lawyer Examines the Bible. That is so far my conclusion, too, for I have never yet personally met such a person, nor even read of one. I debated informally the head of the law firm in Dearborn, Michigan that does the legal work for Ford Motor Company, at the request of one of the members of the Lamplighter’s Sunday school class who worked for him. It was an amiable discussion. I asked him to share with me, if he would, what had led to his loss of faith in Christ and the Bible. It turns out he had read and been convinced by several books, including Thomas Paine’s Age of Reason and other works of unbelievers and atheists. Then I asked him what scholarly works had he carefully read and studied that have been written in defense of the truth of the Bible and Christianity. He said he indeed had read some, but could no longer remember the titles. I said, “That is fine. I’ll start naming authors and titles, and when we reach one you recall reading, we can discuss it.” I started naming authors and titles, and finally reached one he thought he recalled reading. I pulled the book out of my briefcase, handed it to him, and began the discussion. It was not long before he had to admit that no, he had not read that one, nor any other. I hope that visit from me that day helped point him in the right direction.

I commend the reading of the resources I have given in my comments above for any atheist who thinks he or she can honestly withstand the evidence and logic brought forth in these solid works. Some of the works are not currently in print, but many if not all can be found archived at Google books, where they can be read on that site, or downloaded for free as PDF documents.

Gilbert West, The Resurrection of Christ, and George Lyttleton, The Conversion of Saint Paul, were both written by unbelievers who set out to examine the evidence to prove the Bible, the New Testament, and Christianity wrong. They were not believers special pleading to support a case for Christianity. I dare you to read them.

Simon Greenleaf wrote The Testimony of the Evangelists Examined by the Rules of Evidence Administered in Courts of Justice. This was his field of expertise. He was a noted legal scholar, and wrote a two-volume work on the laws of evidence. Chief Justice Fuller, of the United States Supreme Court, once asserted of Greenleaf that “he is the highest authority cited in our courts.” The London Law Journal wrote in 1874, “Upon the existing law of evidence (by Greenleaf) more light has shone from the New World than from all the lawyers who adorn the courts of Europe.”

Disagree with me? Let’s talk. Post a comment below. I promise, I won’t eat you alive!

So far on this site, atheists continue to remain strangely silent, despite my invitation to participate here.

Posted in Apologetics Issues--Atheism | Tagged , , | Leave a comment