The Bible Text has not been Corrupted

Posted on May 22, 2024 by Jerry

 

The Texts:

Psalm 119:89  LAMED. For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven. (KJV)

Psalm 119:89  O LORD, your word is established in heaven forever. (GW, God’s Word translation)

Isaiah 40:8  The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever. (KJV)

Isaiah 40:8  Grass dries up, and flowers wither, but the word of our God will last forever. (GW)

The Challenge:

PixelMistakePicasso You state that:

“If you actually read the entire Bible, you will see that the Bible was corrupted, which is why it often contains contradictions. However, the central message from Jesus that he is not God is still present.”

My Response:

I am by profession a reading specialist. I was made a reading specialist because by teaching all my classes in a large high school, Southeastern High School, in Detroit, Michigan, USA, I enabled my students to improve their reading comprehension.

My classes improved so much that Southeastern High School was found to be the most improved high school in reading out of the then 22 high schools in Detroit at that time. The authorities did an investigation to try to learn how and why that happened and traced the results directly to the students in my American History classes.

To raise my students’ reading comprehension, I wrote a reading program called The Language Enrichment Program which is now available worldwide on Amazon under that title under my name. It works for readers of all ages, about age eight and above, from third grade to graduate school, for English language learners, for gifted and talented students, for students who are below grade level in reading comprehension. It helps all users to improve their inference skills.

I mention this as part of my background to let you know that I am here to help, not hinder, all readers to understand what they read, including understanding how to read the Bible more accurately.

I explained to some of you that the text of the Bible in its original languages has not been corrupted. I mentioned to you that the original Hebrew manuscripts and Greek manuscripts show very, very little difference among them when comparing the oldest to the latest extant copies.

For example, the oldest known complete Hebrew text for the book of Isaiah found among the Dead Sea Scrolls differs little from printed Hebrew texts in modern printed Hebrew Bibles of today. What differences there are to be found are given in the printed critical texts of the Hebrew Bible and the Greek Bible (LXX) and the Greek New Testament. What differences there are are very minor.

I have studied this subject in great depth since 1955 and have the personal print library to prove it. I also have a six-volume critical text of Shakespeare which shows the manuscript variations for Shakespeare’s plays and poetry. The text of the Greek New Testament is more certain than the text of Shakespeare in my judgment. There are more handwritten ancient manuscripts for the text of the Greek New Testament than there are for the much later text of Shakespeare. The sheer abundance of textual evidence for the New Testament accounts for the greater number of variations which have been found. Among those many variations, very few are significant enough to have any bearing upon translations into modern languages like English.

This being true, I trust that you will learn from what I have presented to you as fact, not mere opinion. Having learned the truth about the actual condition of the original language Bible texts, that you will retract your mistaken claims and not repeat them. Should it happen that you refuse to cease from promulgating falsehoods, you shall have proven yourself untruthful, which would unfortunately place you in a very bad position in the light of eternity according to the text of Revelation 21:8. I would wish that upon no one!

Revelation 21:8  But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Posted in Apologetics Issues--Other Faiths, Apologetics--Christian, Bible Historicity and Validity, Education Issues, The Language Enrichment Program | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

My Answer to Ten Unprofitable Bible Critics

Posted on May 21, 2024 by Jerry

The Challenge:

It is hard to study the Bible when Bible scholars keep questioning the authenticity of the Bible and provide evidence of mistakes.

Ten Negative Critics:

  1. Bart D. Ehrman

– Findings: Ehrman has written extensively on the textual inconsistencies and historical inaccuracies within the New Testament. In his book *Misquoting7 Jesus*, he details how scribes altered the texts, either intentionally or accidentally, which has led to significant variations in the manuscripts.

  1. John Dominic Crossan

– Findings: A co-founder of the Jesus Seminar, Crossan argues that many of the gospel accounts are not historical records but rather theological constructs. He suggests that the resurrection stories and many miracle accounts were later additions to enhance the divine image of Jesus.

  1. Richard Carrier

– Findings: Carrier is a proponent of the Christ myth theory, arguing that Jesus of Nazareth is a mythical figure rather than a historical person. He points out numerous historical and textual inconsistencies within the gospels and other New Testament writings.

  1. Gerd Lüdemann

– Findings: Critiques the historical reliability of the New Testament, particularly the resurrection narratives. He argues that many of the events described are theological constructions rather than historical events.

  1. Robert M. Price

– Findings: Another advocate of the Christ myth theory, Price argues that much of the New Testament is mythological rather than historical. He highlights numerous parallels between Christian texts and earlier mythological stories, suggesting that early Christians borrowed heavily from surrounding cultures.

  1. Thomas Paine

– Findings: In his work “The Age of Reason”, Paine critiques the Bible from a deist perspective, arguing that it contains numerous contradictions and immoral teachings. He questions the authenticity of many of the biblical books and highlights inconsistencies in the narrative.

  1. Julius Wellhausen

– Findings: Wellhausen is known for his documentary hypothesis, which suggests that the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible) is a compilation of documents from different sources rather than a single, cohesive work. He identifies inconsistencies and duplications that support this theory.

  1. Karen Armstrong

– Findings: Armstrong explores the historical context of biblical texts, arguing that many stories in the Old Testament are not historical accounts but rather mythological narratives that reflect the beliefs and experiences of ancient Israelite society.

  1. Hector Avalos

– Findings: Avalos critiques the Bible from a secular humanist perspective, arguing that it is a human creation full of errors, contradictions, and outdated moral teachings. He examines the historical and cultural contexts in which the texts were written to highlight their human origins.

  1. Thomas L. Thompson

– Findings: Thompson, a proponent of the Copenhagen School of biblical criticism, argues that much of the Old Testament is mythological rather than historical. He suggests that many of the stories, such as the Exodus and the conquest of Canaan, are literary creations rather than historical events.

 

MY ANSWER:

PixelMistakePicasso Why bother with the negative views of unbelieving and/or apostate Bible scholars?

That is not the way to study any literature. I have several volumes in my personal library which argue that Shakespeare did not write Shakespeare. I certainly do not go first to them to learn how to understand Shakespeare!

Neither should you give any credence to the opinions of any of the scholars you mention in your Opening Post before you have become absolutely familiar with the content of the Bible itself by taking the steps I previously described for you:

Read three chapters of the Gospel of John each day of the week so that you read the Gospel of John’s 21 chapters weekly for two months. This reading should enable you to become so completely familiar that you can literally think your way through the Gospel of John chapter by chapter “with your eyes closed.”

Next, read the New Testament through three times or more by reading it long enough each day (for a total of at least 20 minutes). This does not mean 20 minutes at one sitting. My suggestion is that the cumulative total for the day add up to 20 minutes or more. Read the New Testament often enough each week (at least four days a week) on a continuing basis to experience the benefits such reading will bring.

Continue, beyond that, to read the rest of the Bible (the Old Testament or Hebrew Scriptures) three times or more until you are very familiar with its content, especially its narrative and wisdom literature and historical portions.

I have found it helpful to study the Bible topically by studying the topics of special interest to me by using such resources as Nave’s Topical Bible or one of its several modern equivalents and the Thompson Chain Reference Bible.

To dig still deeper, I have found it helpful to consult the cross references found in standard editions of what are called Reference Bibles and far more completely in the original Treasury of Scripture Knowledge and now in The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge and The Ultimate Cross Reference Treasury.

As for the so-called Bible scholars you have named in the Opening Post:

(1) Bart Ehrman. When he is writing for the academic and scholarly audience about the field of his expertise (textual criticism, not historical or literary criticism) he is sometimes helpful and more level-headed. When writing for a general audience he may be sensational but he is sensationally wrong.

(2) John Dominic Crossan. Pay no attention to the so-called “Jesus Seminar.” They are proceeding upon wrong principles to start with. They may be out to make a name for themselves but their alleged “findings” are nonsense.

(3) Richard Carrier. Anyone who thinks our Lord Jesus Christ is a “myth,” in whatever sense this word is taken, is making a fool of him or herself. The historicity of the life of Christ is proven fact, as is the historicity of the 27 primary source first century documents now compiled in the New Testament.

(4) Gerd Lüdemann. Anyone who thinks the historical record contained in the New Testament of the resurrection accounts are merely “theological constructions” rather than records of actual historical events shows their utter lack of understanding of the nature and purpose of the Gospel records. They are thinking anachronistically–applying the standards of historical writing employed by scholars today by imposing them upon the writings of the First Century. Rather, readers must read “very old books” sympathetically and approach them on their own terms.

(6) Thomas Paine. Benjamin Franklin once criticized Paine for having written his Age of Reason. Franklin told Paine he was spitting into the wind and the wind would drive his spit back on to his face. Paine has been thoroughly answered by a number of authors. Deism has been resoundingly and irrefutably answered by Charles Leslie in his work titled “A Short and Easy Method with the Deists.” I have presented Leslie’s argument in modern English in detail on my Real Bible Study site. Just enter “Leslie” in the search box to access my article.

(7) Julius Wellhausen. The “Documentary Hypothesis” is nonsense. I have recently spent considerable time studying this unfruitful theory. No two exponents of the theory agree with one another. To suggest that just because the names of God within the text are used by different writers is nonsense. For a scholarly refutation of Wellhausen and his followers study carefully the writings of Oswald T. Allis, including his titles The Five Books of Moses as well as The Old Testament: Its Claims and Critics.

(8) Karen Armstrong. I believe Karen Armstrong’s claims are overblown. I prefer the expertise in these matters represented by John D. Currid, as in his book Against the Gods: The Polemical Theology of the Old Testament.

9. Hector Avalos. I am not familiar with Avalos. I can say that such views need to be contrasted with two titles which certainly demolish his views. Vishal Mangalowadi, The Book that Made Your World: How the Bible Created the Soul of Western Civilization and Alvin J. Schmidt, How Christianity Changed the World.

10. Thomas L. Thompson. Anyone who questions the historicity of the Exodus and the conquest of Canaan must be living on another planet. I just lately purchased and read two books by Steven Collins titled Let My People Go! Using Historical Synchronisms to Identify the Pharaoh of the Exodus and Discovering the City of Sodom: The Fascinating True Account of the Discovery of the Old Testament’s Most Infamous City. The work of Charles Leslie I previously mentioned likewise supplies irrefutable proof of the historicity of the Exodus event recorded in the Bible.

Link to my summary of Leslie’s unanswerable argument:

Daily Bible Nugget #600, 2 Peter 1:16

Posted in Apologetics Issues--Other Faiths, Bible Historicity and Validity, Bible Study Tools, How to Study the Bible | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Daily Bible Nugget #852, Genesis 2:17

Posted on May 20, 2024 by Jerry

 

The Nugget:

Genesis 2:17  But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

The Challenge:

Adam lived for hundreds of years after eating the fruit. This means Genesis 2:17 is wrong!

My Answer:

I have furnished in my Bible study resource, The Ultimate Cross Reference Treasury, the following note on Genesis 2:17 which should answer your question directly:

Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

surely. Materialists in theology (like the ancient Arians and their modern day counterpart the Jehovah’s Witnesses, among others) misconstrue Gen 2:17, where God threatened death for eating of the forbidden tree. They take the “death” threatened to be physical death. This interpretation is flawed because:

(1) Adam and Eve did not physically die immediately on the very day that they ate from the forbidden tree;

(2) That they did immediately die spiritually is most evident because they:

(a) became conscious of shame and nakedness;

(b) feared meeting Jehovah in the garden, whose presence they once welcomed and enjoyed.

(c) attempted to hide from Jehovah, all indicating a change in spiritual status and relationship;

(3) This relationship was not restored until God:

(a) made specific provision for them when He clothed them with animal skins (representing the need for blood sacrifice in the atonement) which in type reflect the later animal sacrifices under the Mosaic law which prefigured the priestly-sacrificial atonement of our Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ; and

(b) promised a coming Redeemer (Gen 3:15);

(4) in Gen 3:15 God presented to Adam and Eve the first promise of the Divine Redeemer who would ultimately atone for their sins, making their salvation possible;

(5) if one traces the term “death” through the pages of Scripture it becomes clear that it is used in at least two senses: physical death (which is NOT in view here in Gen 2:17) and spiritual death, which is undoubtedly the meaning to be given here, as proven by the context and such usage found in Eph 2:1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6; 1Ti 5:6; +**1Pe 4:6; 1Jn 5:16, and numerous other passages, including texts in the Hebrew Scriptures (Eze 18:4 note, *Eze 18:21 note);

(6) Scripture shows the threatened death was not physical, but spiritual, though assuredly physical death was also a consequence (Rom 5:12), but not immediately.

(7) These mistaken interpreters fail to take into account the presence of figures of speech used here by God for emphasis: the emphasis requires that they die in the very day that the disobedience occurs. The figure emphasizes that as soon as they violated God’s commandment, they immediately would suffer the penalty. Some assert that since Adam died before he was 1000 years old, the threat was fulfilled. But there is nothing in the context of Genesis to suggest any such connection of unrelated texts.

 

Levi Akamigbo responded:

HalleluJAH

Abundant Blessings, Sir Jerome Smith.

PixelMistakePicasso replied:

Jerome Smith try to let the Bible speak for itself without personal interpretation and opinion to make the verse work for what you believe. Then you will see the truth. What you are doing now is that you have already set your mind on what the outcome should be, then you try to justify the verse with anything, including figures of speech.

My Reply:

PixelMistakePicasso It seems to me that it is you who fail to let the Bible speak for itself. I am not giving you personal opinion to make the verse work for what I believe.

If you disagree with me about a point of interpretation, present your case! Address the evidence! Discuss one point at a time.

By your comment, it appears that you have an objection to my references to Figures of Speech in the Bible.

That shows me that you would be helped by learning more about how figures of speech are used in the Bible. They are most often used for emphasis.

My resources, The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge and The Ultimate Cross Reference Treasury contain the most complete guide to the figures of speech in the Bible available in English.

Figures of Speech are crucial to the correct understanding of Genesis 2:17.

I did not provide you all the information about the Figures of Speech in Genesis 2:17 in my comment above, so here is that additional information:

17. of the tree. ver. 9. Ge 3:1-3, 11, 17, 19. Ac 5:30. 10:39. 1 P 2:24. Re 2:7. 22:2.

good and evil. Dt 6:4. Ro 3:20.

in the day. Ezk *33:12. ƒ171T2A. Figure of speech Synecdoche; or, Transfer B652: the exchange of one idea for another associated idea. Here, Of the Part, when a part is put for the whole: “in the day” is put for an indefinite time. A noun with the preposition followed by the verb in the infinitive, as here, becomes an adverb of time, and means simply “when,” or “after then,” or “after that.” For other instances of this figure see Ge 2:4. Le 13:14. 14:57. Dt 21:16. 2 S 21:12. *1 K 2:37, 42. 2 K 20:1. Ps 18:18. Is 11:16. Je 11:4, 7. 31:32. 34:13. Ezek 20:5, 6. 36:33. 38:18.

FS121I2, Figure of speech Metonymy of the Subject F/S 570, when the subject (the thing or action) is put for that which is connected with it. Here, of verb, where the action is put for the declaration concerning it. The meaning is not that he would die that very day, but that he would be sentenced to die “in that day.” For other instances of this figure see Gen 27:37; Gen 30:13; Gen 34:12; Gen 35:12; Gen 41:13, Exo 13:2; Exo 20:7, Lev 13:3, Deut 9:1, 2Sa 7:22, Isa 6:10; Isa 8:13, Jer 1:5; Jer 1:10; Jer 4:10; Jer 38:23, Eze 13:19; Eze 13:22; Eze 20:25-26, Hos 6:5, Mat 6:13; Mat 13:14; Mat 16:19, Mar 4:12, Luk 7:29; Luk 7:35; Luk 8:10; Luk 10:29; Luk 16:15, Joh 12:40; *Joh 20:23, Act 10:15; Act 28:26, 27, Rom 7:9; Rom 11:8, 2Co 3:6, Gal 3:23, Jas 2:21-22; Jas 2:24, 25.

thou shalt surely die. Heb. dying thou shalt die. FS147B. Figure of speech Polyptoton, +Gen 2:16. Here again Eve in Gen 3:3 alters the Word of God by saying “Lest ye die”! Thus she changes a certainty into a contingency. Not only does she thus diminish from and alter the Word of God but she adds to it the words “neither shall ye touch it,” which the Lord God had not spoken!

Gen 2:16  And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

thou mayest freely eat. Heb. eating thou shalt eat. Gen 2:9, Gen 3:1, 2, *1Ti 4:4; *1Ti 6:17. FS147B. Figure of speech Polyptoton F/S 272: verb with infinitive or participle, involving the repetition of the same part of speech in different inflections for emphasis. May be used in strong and emphatic affirmation, or in strong negation. Here it is used in strong affirmation or exhortation. The conjugated verb is strengthened and emphasized by the infinitive preceding it. This infinitive Eve omitted in Gen 3:2, and thus “diminished” from the word of God. For other instances of this figure see *Gen 2:17; Gen 3:16; Gen 28:22; Gen 37:33, Exo 3:16; Exo 19:12-13, Jos 24:10, 2Ki 3:23, Job 27:22 mg. Psa 40:1; Psa 118:18, *Isa 6:9, Jer 22:10; Jer 23:17; Jer 51:58, Dan 11:13, Zec 8:21, Mat 13:13, 14, Mar 4:12, Luk 8:10, Joh 12:40, Act 7:34; Act 28:26, 27, Rom 11:8; Rom 12:15, Heb 6:14.

Posted in Apologetics Issues--Other Faiths, Bible 'Contradictions' Answered, Bible Study Tools, Daily Bible Nuggets, Doctrinal Discussions, False Religions, How to Interpret the Bible Correctly, How to Study the Bible | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Paul versus James in Acts

Posted on May 19, 2024 by Jerry

5-6-24 Paul versus James in Acts

The Text:

Act 21:21  And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs.

The Challenge:

Tell me, When James and Paul was having confrontation at Jerusalem (Acts 21 ) WHY Paul did not tell James that Jesus met him(Paul) and chosen him to preach the abandonment of Law of Moses and circumcision????

 

My Reply:

It seems to me I may have explained Acts 15 and 21 before.

Act 21:17 And when we were come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly.

Therefore, Luke and Paul were very graciously welcomed in Jerusalem.

Act 21:18 And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present.

Paul, Luke, and those who accompanied Paul were known to and welcomed by the church elders of the Jerusalem church.

Act 21:19 And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry.

Paul gave testimony to how God was working through his ministry among the Gentiles.

Act 21:20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:

Here is where the trouble starts. Though James is the leader at the Jerusalem church, he was not as knowledgeable of the principles of the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ as he ought to have been.

James thought that it was a good thing that thousands of Jews believed, “and they are all zealous of the law.”

The fact is that Jesus fulfilled the requirements of the Law (the only person to have ever done so perfectly), and because of Who Jesus is (the very Son of God, John 3:16), was qualified to make atonement for the sins of all mankind (2 Corinthians 5:15. 1 John 2:1, 2. 2 Peter 3:9), confirmed by the FACT that Jesus rose bodily from the dead on the third day, as He himself repeatedly predicted.

The evidence as given in the New Testament, therefore, confirms that James had not yet come to realize the extent of the benefits wrought by our Lord Jesus Christ through His Priestly-Sacrificial Atonement (1 Peter 2:24).

James and the elders of the church at Jerusalem were surely acquainted with the facts and circumstances of Paul’s conversion to belief in Christ.

 

Reply to me:

you need more improvement on biblical exegesis

Please read ALL and feel free to cross examine me

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/vkSVmus1X1arUfUt/?mibextid=cR73hX

 

My Response:

Abe San I visited the page that you linked to just now. I noted that it begins with a reference to Acts 21:21,

“Lets start On Acts 21:21
JAMES asks Paul the hard questions!
With a raised eyebrow, James looks at Paul and says:
And they are informed of thee that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to “FORSAKE” Moses, saying that they ought NOT to “CIRCUMCISE” their children, NEITHER to walk after the “CUSTOMS.” ACTS 21:21”

As for the proper exegesis of this text, here is what I have placed at Acts 21:21 in my digital Bible study resource, The Ultimate Cross Reference Treasury:

Acts 21:21
informed. or, instructed. It implies oral communication and instruction. The circumcision party had been growing in numbers, influence, and bigotry since the council of Jerusalem, and had assiduously maligned and opposed St. Paul not only in Jerusalem but also in Galatia, Achaia, and elsewhere. They seem to have had their appointed emissaries and instructors (Walker). Act 21:24; Act 21:28, Act 18:25, +Luk 1:4 g.

that thou teachest. Act 21:28, Act 6:13, 14; Act 16:3; Act 28:17, Rom 14:1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 1Co 9:19, 21, Gal 4:12; *Gal 5:1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6; Gal 6:12, 13, 14, 15.

all Jews which. This, of course, was not the case. The apostle had only claimed full liberty for Gentile Christians (Walker). Joh 7:35, Jas 1:1.

to forsake. or, apostasy from. Gr. apostasia (S# G646, only here and 2Th 2:3; compare aphistēmi, S# G868, +Luk 2:37 and 1Ti 4:1 note). An undesigned coincidence here demonstrates the conformity between the argument of Paul’s epistle to the Romans and this history of Paul in Acts. Here in the history he is charged with having taught the Jews to forsake Moses. This is a very natural inference from Paul’s teaching in Romans, that justification is by faith alone, and not by the works of the law. His object in the Epistle was to put Gentiles on an exact parity with Jews. The effect (here in Acts) is entirely consistent with the cause (in the Epistle); but the consistency is indirect and obviously undesigned (see listing of related notes at Act 12:12). 2Th 2:3 g, note (the falling away).

Moses. FS121A6, +Luk 16:29. +Act 3:22; *Act 6:11; *Act 15:1; *Act 15:21, Mat 8:4.

saying. or, bidding. Act 21:28, 2Jn 1:10, 11.

ought not to circumcise. His action in the case of Timothy (Acts 16:3) was sufficient in itself to rebut such a charge, but party spirit and rumour always misrepresent and pervert facts, wilfully or unconsciously (Walker). Act 15:19, 20, 21; %**Act 16:3, Rom 2:28, 29, 1Co 7:18, 19, Gal 5:11.

to walk. Act 21:24, Mar 7:5, Gal 2:14, Heb 13:9.

customs. +Act 6:14; Act 26:3, *Mar 7:5, 1Co 11:16.

Acts 16:3

Acts 16:3. Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him, and he took him and circumcised him because of the Jews who were in those places, for they all knew that his father was a Greek. (English Standard Version)

Act 16:3  Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek. (King James Version)

And for the proper exegesis of this text, here is what I have placed at Acts 16:3 in my digital Bible study resource, The Ultimate Cross Reference Treasury:

Acts 16:3
would. Act 15:37; Act 15:40; Act 19:22, Php 2:22.

and took. Act 15:20, 21, Gen 17:23, 1Co 7:19; *1Co 9:20; *1Co 9:21, *Gal 2:3; *Gal 2:8; %*Gal 5:1, 2, 3; %*Gal 5:6; Gal 6:15.

and circumcised. On the principle of expediency (1Co 6:12). Paul had resisted the proposed circumcision of Titus (Gal 2:3, 4, 5) because the rite was then claimed as essential to salvation (Act 15:1). Now, however, as the bearer of the conciliar letter of Gentile liberty (Act 16:4), he carried clear evidence that such a tenet had been officially repudiated, and he could afford to circumcise Timothy without danger of being misunderstood. In order to prevent needless friction with Jewish communities along his line of travel, he deemed it expedient, especially since Timothy was half-a-Jew by birth, to remove any unnecessary ground of offence (1Co 9:20), now that no vital principle was involved in his action. Apparently, the Judaizing teachers tried to make capital out of his action at a later date and to accuse him, though most unfairly, of inconsistency (Gal 1:8, 9, 10; Gal 5:11). We may fairly place Timothy’s ordination also here (1Ti 4:14, 2Ti 1:6, 7) [Walker].

because of the Jews. Act 21:21, 1Co 2:15; **1Co 9:19, 20, 21, 22, %**Gal 5:2; Gal 5:11.

they knew. Gr. oida, Joh 8:55 note.

his father. Act 16:1.

was. or, was by race. Gr. huparchō. Not the verb “to be,” but meaning subsists or exists. Luk 9:48 g. Php 2:6 (being). Php 3:20 (is).

a Greek. Act 16:1, Act 17:4.

 

Reply to me:

dont try to teach me of your TSK or Faulty exegesis… What you are doing is merely copy pasting,

Read the article and explanation, refute it… I am waiting

 

My response:

You can’t have it both ways. When I wrote my explanation above of a portion of Acts 21 verse by verse, you accused me of faulty exegesis.

When I then provided you my exegesis of Acts 21:21 with Acts 16:3 as given in my resource, The Ultimate Cross Reference Treasury, you accused me of “copy and pasting.”

Get real and respond to the evidence instead of evading it.

 

You state above:

“dont try to teach me of your TSK or Faulty exegesis… What you are doing is merely copy pasting,”

Your comment is just rude nonsense because as you well know I am the person who wrote the resource I am citing, The Ultimate Cross Reference Treasury. I personally typed every word of my resource. I own the copyright. It is a standard scholarly Bible study reference work. In my scholarly work I of course cite scholarly resources when they clarify the meaning of the verse.

At the time I wrote The Ultimate Cross Reference Treasury (2016), I was not focused upon the mistaken Bible interpretations often posted by followers of Islam. I was focused upon errors of interpretation and doctrine of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, who had previously held a four-year Bible study in my home.

But I am surprised at the applicability of the notes I furnished when it comes to answering mistaken interpretations posted by Muslims who often utterly misunderstand what the Bible teaches.

I suggest that you actually go back and carefully read what I posted regarding the correct understanding of Acts 21:21. My notes most certainly refute your position.

As time permits, I will answer more of your referenced article shortly.

 

 

Posted in Apologetics Issues--Other Faiths, Bible Study Tools, Doctrinal Discussions, False Religions, How to Interpret the Bible Correctly, How to Study the Bible | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Daily Bible Nugget #851, John 20:31

Posted on May 18, 2024 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.

The Questions:

We are talking about God. Why did God make it so complicated to know Him? You have to jump from one Gospel to another, which was written many years apart by different authors. Why wasn’t everything written in the first Gospel? You also need to use Bibles from different versions. I don’t think this is the correct way to explain God.

My Answer:

PixelMistakePicasso You ask:

“Why did God make it so complicated to know Him? You have to jump from one Gospel to another, which was written many years apart by different authors. Why wasn’t everything written in the first Gospel? You also need to use Bibles from different versions. I don’t think this is the correct way to explain God.”

Thank you for asking such good questions this time!

My answer:

Let me explain the answer to this question again for you.

The Gospel of John was written with the explicit purpose to make the way of salvation plain to everyone who will read it:

John 20:30  And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
John 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.

Consider very carefully: if you refuse to read and reread the Gospel of John until you know its text so well that you can literally think it through chapter by chapter, and if you refuse to believe what the Gospel of John teaches, you will never “have life through his name” until you do.

I suggest by my long experience that if you begin by reading the Gospel of John, you can read it through once a week by reading three chapters a day, since it has 21 chapters. Do this for a month or two, and you will reach the level of knowing the text that I have described.

I further suggest that you read the Bible, starting with John and then the rest of the New Testament first, then the rest of the Bible, by reading the Bible long enough each day (for a total of at least 20 minutes) and often enough each week (for a total of at least four days a week) on a continuing basis to benefit from the results such reading will bring. Remember, I have done this myself since August of 1953, and it changed my life for the better as a result. I continue to this day to read and study the Bible.

As for using different English versions and English translations when explaining what the Bible teaches, I have seen you do the same, if my memory is correct. I use several different translations and versions quite often because some translations or versions are clearer on some points than others.

As I have explained to you and all before, the Bible is not written topically. To learn all that the Bible teaches about any given subject or Bible doctrine or point of Bible prophecy, it is necessary to read all that the Bible has to say about that particular subject or theme.

To find out where else a subject is spoken of in the Bible, you could start with using a Bible concordance. This would be a good start, but often a subject is expressed in different words than the words you may have chosen to look up in a resource like Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance to the Bible.

You could use a resource like Nave’s Topical Bible or the Thompson Chain Reference Bible. These excellent resources will get you further, but you still would likely miss important information because even these extensive resources are limited in the number of topics they have chosen to cover.

Therefore, to find the rest of what the Bible says about the subject of your interest it is necessary to consult as complete a source of Bible cross references as you can find to use. The most complete cross reference Bible study resources include The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, Nelson’s Cross Reference Guide to the Bible (which is no longer in print), and The Ultimate Cross Reference Treasury.

Set your prejudices against the text of the Bible aside and read it sympathetically, seeking to understand its message on its terms, not yours. Let the Holy Spirit enlighten your mind and heart as you read the New Testament to let Him enable you to understand it. I followed this procedure that I now recommend to you. It changed my life. It will change yours if you are open to its truth.

If you have further questions, I would consider it a privilege to help you with the answers.

 

Posted in Apologetics Issues--Other Faiths, Bible Promises, Bible Study Tools, Daily Bible Nuggets, How to Study the Bible | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Daily Bible Nugget #850, John 1:1

Posted on May 17, 2024 by Jerry


The Nugget:

John 1:1  In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

The Challenge:

“If God is eternal and exists outside of time, why do scriptures like John 1:1 use temporal language such as ‘In the beginning’ to describe the existence of God? Does this imply a beginning to God’s existence?”

My Answer:

PixelMistakePicasso You state:

“This verse does not make sense. First, it is said that the Father, Son (Jesus), and Holy Spirit are one as God. Now, when it comes to John 1:1, it is claimed that this verse is only about the existence of Jesus. You have to pick one; it cannot be both. If Jesus was created by God in the beginning, then Jesus is not God. But if you say Jesus is God, then something else must have created God after time was created.”

That the verse may not make sense to you has no bearing on the fact it makes sense to most Bible believing readers of this text today.

You are correct to say that the Bible teaches that “the Father, Son (Jesus), and Holy Spirit are one as God.” This is specifically affirmed in Matthew 28:19 where it is stated:

Mat 28:19  Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Note the use of the singular word “name” not the plural word “names.”

You state:

“Now, when it comes to John 1:1, it is claimed that this verse is only about the existence of Jesus.”

As a matter of fact, some Believing Bible Scholars have affirmed in their academic scholarly studies that the term “Logos” was adopted by John because it is a reflection of Hebrew usage in the Old Testament involving the related term “Memra,” as I recall from my recent reading.

Then you state:

“You have to pick one; it cannot be both.”

I respond: says who, and on what basis? Your comment may reflect a misreading of the text.

You further state:

” If Jesus was created by God in the beginning, then Jesus is not God. ”

Jesus was not created by God. Jesus had no beginning. Jesus is God. Jesus the man clearly as man had a physical beginning when He was born of the virgin Mary in what is called in theology the hypostatic union of His eternal divine nature with the newly added human nature which took place in time.

Since God is spirit (John 4:24) He is invisible. Therefore it is understood that instances of visibility when God was seen in the narratives in the Old Testament are either theophanies (when God made Himself visible in human or angelic form) or more likely and far more often they are Christophanies when the Second Person of the Godhead made Himself visible in human or angelic form to persons in the Old Testament.

Lastly, in your comment you claim:

“But if you say Jesus is God, then something else must have created God after time was created.”

This seems to represent faulty or mistaken logic.

Since all three Persons of the Godhead, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, are all eternal, they have always existed and nothing in the Bible suggests that in their eternal nature that they were ever created.

You conclude with the question:

“By the way, did this verse come from Jesus’ mouth?”

These words clearly come from the pen of John, Jesus’s closest disciple. There is no reason to doubt them. John is the divinely inspired author of his Gospel, and he surely is wiser and better informed than his negative critics!

John was there when these events happened. That his Gospel is the last and latest written of the four canonical Gospels does not diminish its authenticity or authority but increases it.

John records incidents and the words of our Lord Jesus Christ that are not always included in the synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke.

They, for example, do not tell about the resurrection or resuscitation of Lazarus for reasons of prudence, for the Jewish leadership in their official rejection of their Messiah (see John 5:15, 16 and context. John 9:22 and context) sought to kill Lazarus for he was a standing miracle wrought before their very eyes and they could not deny it (John 11:46, 47, 48, 53).

The fact that John carefully records the inside debates of the Jewish leadership confirms that John had a close connection to those leaders as elsewhere revealed incidentally in his Gospel (John 18:16).

This confirms John, not a later author, wrote these things. John records the raising of Lazarus from the dead at the much later writing of his Gospel after any possibility of harm to Lazarus had passed. This is just one more positive proof of the authenticity and historicity of the Gospel of John.

 

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

Daily Bible Nugget #849, Mark 1:15

Posted on May 16, 2024 by Jerry

 

The Nugget:

Mar 1:15  And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

The Question:

Which “gospel” was Jesus referring to in Mark 1:15 when none of the New Testament texts had yet been written?

My Answer:

PixelMistakePicasso You are asking the wrong question. This is probably the case because you have not taken the time and effort to read the New Testament and the Bible as a whole enough to understand its central themes.

The Kingdom of God is a central theme across all of the Bible, Old Testament and New. Very few Christians, even Bible believing Christians, have had or taken the opportunity to study this subject thoroughly. There is a lot more to it than you likely know at the present time.

There is a Bible scholar from the nineteenth century by the name of George N. H. Peters who wrote three whole volumes (each about 700 pages long) carefully exploring and explaining the subject of the Kingdom of God. His volumes are titled The Theocratic Kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ.

In a (long!) sentence summary I can explain that Peters shows that the Kingdom was promised in the Old Testament and described in the Abrahamic Covenant and the Davidic Covenant as to its provisions, which are further amplified in the Prophets, then offered and preached by our Lord Jesus Christ (as in Mark 1:14, 15) and His disciples and Apostles, then rejected by the Jewish leadership, then postponed (Matthew 21:43, a point most students of Scripture, even Bible scholars, have missed), then promised to take place on this earth upon the requisite repentance of the nation of Israel as carefully explained by Peter in Acts 3:13-26,

Act 3:13  The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.
Act 3:14  But ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you;
Act 3:15  And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.
Act 3:16  And his name through faith in his name hath made this man strong, whom ye see and know: yea, the faith which is by him hath given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all.
Act 3:17  And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers.
Act 3:18  But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.
Act 3:19  Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
Act 3:20  And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:
Act 3:21  Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.
Act 3:22  For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
Act 3:23  And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.
Act 3:24  Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days.
Act 3:25  Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.
Act 3:26  Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

Notice particularly Acts 3:19-21,

Act 3:19  Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;
Act 3:20  And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you:
Act 3:21  Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

The timing of the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ is determined by and depends upon the repentance and conversion of Israel.

When our Lord Jesus Christ returns, He will set up His eternal Kingdom of God here upon this earth as taught in Luke 1:31-33,

Luk 1:31  And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
Luk 1:32  He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
Luk 1:33  And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

Were you to become fully aware of what the Bible teaches about the promised Kingdom of God, you would understand how far astray your question about the Gospel of the Kingdom actually is. I trust that what I have written will genuinely assist your understanding of this most important subject.

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

Daily Bible Nugget #848, John 5:18

Posted on May 15, 2024 by Jerry

 

The Nugget:

Joh 5:18  Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

The Challenge:

John 5:18 points out that Jesus calling God His Father led to a serious misunderstanding. The Jews of His time saw this as making Himself equal with God, but this interpretation was their perspective, leading to conflict, rather than a clear declaration by Jesus of His divinity.

My Reply:

You claim above:

“Lastly, the verse right before this passage, John 5:18, points out that Jesus calling God His Father led to a serious misunderstanding. The Jews of His time saw this as making Himself equal with God, but this interpretation was their perspective, leading to conflict, rather than a clear declaration by Jesus of His divinity.”

My claim is that the Jews and their reaction to what Jesus said were there when it happened. If the Jews were mistaken, why did Jesus not carefully correct their misunderstanding on the spot?

Instead, Jesus backs up His claim by presenting the witnesses that support or supported His claim.

Therefore, contrary to your denial of the claim Jesus made, Jesus Himself defended it.

For a more detailed exposition and defense of my correct interpretation, see the notes and cross references I have given for John 5:18 in The New Treasury of Scripture Knowledge or The Ultimate Cross Reference Treasury:

making himself. At no point does Jesus in the following discourse deny the inference drawn by the Jews, but emphatically supports his claim to equality with God in his nature (Joh 5:18) by claiming equality in power and works (Joh 5:19, 20), in resurrection power (Joh 5:21), in judgment (Joh 5:22), in honour (**Joh 5:23), in giving eternal life (Joh 5:24, 25), in self-existent life (Joh 5:26), in power over death and eternal destiny (Joh 5:28, 29), in absolute justice (Joh 5:30), supported by the witness of John (Joh 5:33), his own works (Joh 5:36), the Father (Joh 5:37, 38), and the Scriptures (Joh 5:39). Clearly their inference was correct, unlike modern day Arians who refuse to acknowledge what the words must mean. To suggest “John is describing what the unbelieving Jews incorrectly thought Jesus meant, that he was ’making himself equal with God,’” and that “This is evident from the fact that they also incorrectly accused Jesus of breaking the Sabbath” (The Watchtower, vol. 105, No. 3, February 1, 1984, p. 6) is to deduce from this passage the very opposite of what it says, in the effort to bolster the faulty argument “Why do we not find opposing Jews attacking the doctrine that to them would have been abhorrent?” The Jews, of course, did attack Jesus, seeking to kill him (Joh 5:18; Joh 10:30, 31, 32, 33) for this very doctrine. “For the Jews…it would have been blasphemous to suggest that Christ was equal to God as the second person of the Trinity” (The Watchtower, p. 6). In Joh 10:33, blasphemy is the very charge leveled at Jesus by the Jews: upon what other scriptural grounds could they justify stoning him? Clearly Jesus said what he meant, and the Jews correctly understood him. If not, why did not Jesus simply deny their accusation, and correct their alleged misunderstanding? Joh 5:23, Joh 10:30; Joh 10:33; Joh 19:7, Php 2:6.

Muslim Reply to Me:

In John 5:18, the Jews accused Jesus of making Himself equal with God, but Jesus’ response emphasized His dependence on the Father, saying He could do nothing by Himself but only what He saw the Father doing (John 5:19). This shows a relationship of obedience and submission rather than equality in essence. Additionally, Jesus frequently clarified His role as the Son of God, distinct from God the Father, as seen in John 14:28, where He states, “The Father is greater than I,” indicating a hierarchy within their relationship. The Jews’ accusation of blasphemy was based on their misunderstanding of Jesus’ claim to be the Son of God. In John 10:33, 34, 35, 36, when accused of blasphemy, Jesus quoted Psalm 82:6, illustrating that His claim was consistent with Jewish scripture. Jesus often spoke of being sent by the Father and doing the works of the Father (John 5:36), indicating a role as a divine agent rather than being co-equal with the Father. His mission was to reveal God and bring people to understand Him, emphasizing His role as the Messiah rather than making an explicit claim to be God. In addressing misunderstandings, Jesus’ teachings and actions consistently pointed to His unique relationship with the Father. For instance, in John 17:3, Jesus prays, “Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent,” differentiating between God and Jesus. Thus, while Jesus did not directly deny the Jews’ accusations, His responses and teachings emphasized His role as the Son of God, sent by the Father, and dependent on Him, suggesting a relational distinction rather than a claim of equality with God.

My Reply:

Your careful extended response does not address the argument or evidence I presented.

Let me address an important consideration from what is stated by our Lord Jesus Christ in John 5:21, 22.

Joh 5:21  For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.
Joh 5:22  For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: (KJV)

Joh 5:21 For just as the Father raises the dead and makes them live on, so the Son too makes alive any whom He chooses to.
Joh 5:22 For the Father passes sentence on no one, but He has committed all judgment to the Son, (Williams NT)

Joh 5:21  In the same way that the Father brings back the dead and gives them life, the Son gives life to anyone he chooses.
Joh 5:22  “The Father doesn’t judge anyone. He has entrusted judgment entirely to the Son (God’s Word translation)

Notice that our Lord Jesus Christ claims that just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, so the Son will raise the dead and give life to those He chooses.

No mere prophet has ever been given this authority.

Note further that the Father has entrusted judgment entirely to the Son.

No human being could ever take on such a responsibility. To carry out such judgment, the judge must be omniscient. Jesus is omniscient (all knowing).

Omniscience is an incommunicable attribute of God alone.

Therefore, in this sense, Jesus possesses an important attribute of God or the Godhead, and so in this sense must be acknowledged as God the Son. This is a proof of the Deity of Christ.

Posted in Apologetics Issues--Other Faiths, Bible Study Tools, Daily Bible Nuggets, Doctrinal Discussions, False Religions, How to Interpret the Bible Correctly | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Daily Bible Nugget #847, 2 Corinthians 11:13

Posted on May 14, 2024 by Jerry

 

The Nugget:

2Co 11:13  For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.

The Challenge:

Pagan Paul calls Jesus’s apostles Matthew, Peter, Mark, John, etc., of being false apostles of Christ, deceitful workers. 2 Corinthians 11:13.

My Response:

MD You need to learn to read the New Testament more accurately.

Paul is not calling Matthew, Peter, Mark, or John false apostles of Christ nor is he calling them deceitful workers in 2 Corinthians 11:13.

2Co 11:13  For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
2Co 11:14  And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
2Co 11:15  Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

In the larger context, Paul is defending himself against the false claims lodged against him by the false teachers who were the Judaizers who attempted to teach a counterfeit Gospel. Paul reaches the climax of his argument in 2 Corinthians 13:5 and context where he reminds the Corinthians that they were saved and believed in Christ as a result of his teaching. How could they be saved if Paul had presented them a false Gospel?

In the very chapter you are citing, Paul states in 2 Corinthians 11:26,

2Co 11:26  In journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren;

Notice Paul’s reference to “perils among false brethren.”

The same underlying word of the translated Greek text is found at Galatians 2:4,

Gal 2:4  And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:
Gal 2:5  To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.

Notice that Paul steadfastly defended the true Gospel of Christ and utterly rejected the false Gospel of Christ being promoted by the Judaizing false teachers of his day:

Gal 1:6  I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Gal 1:7  Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
Gal 1:8  But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9  As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Peter likewise makes reference to these false teachers in that time and warns of their continuing presence:

2Pe 2:1  But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
2Pe 2:2  And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.
2Pe 2:3  And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.

Read these words of Scripture carefully. To falsely accuse Paul is to tread on very dangerous ground. Paul did not appoint himself to be an Apostle of our Lord Jesus Christ. Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself appointed Paul to be His Apostle to the Gentiles in particular, as well as He appointed Paul to testify before kings as well as to bear His name before the children of Israel:

Act 9:15  But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
Act 9:16  For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name’s sake.

Be very careful not to be one of those who speak evil of the truth.

Posted in Apologetics Issues--Other Faiths, Bible Historicity and Validity, Daily Bible Nuggets, Doctrinal Discussions, False Religions | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Paul did not invent his own Gospel

Posted on May 13, 2024 by Jerry

 

The Text:

2Ti 2:8  Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:

The Challenge:

“2 Timothy 2:8. Paul states this fake story of the resurrection was his writings.”

My Response:

MD, You state above:

“2 Timothy 2:8. Paul states this fake story of the resurrection was his writings.”

By so saying, you demonstrate you have not read the New Testament carefully enough to understand what it teaches.

First of all, Paul carefully documents the sources of his true Gospel:

(1) 1 Corinthians 15:1-8

1Co 15:1  Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
1Co 15:2  By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
1Co 15:3  For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
1Co 15:4  And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
1Co 15:5  And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
1Co 15:6  After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
1Co 15:7  After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
1Co 15:8  And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

Note particularly 1 Corinthians 15:3, where Paul uses a very special and technical expression to affirm he faithfully “delivered” that which he “also received,” thus bearing witness to the exact words of the older creedal statement given in verses 3-7. This creedal statement is dated by careful scholars to no later than 35 AD. Paul uses this earliest creedal statement to confirm the historicity of the belief in the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.

(2) Romans 2:16

Rom 2:16  In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

The statement “my gospel” does not mean Paul invented his own Gospel of Christ but rather “my” is in contrast to the false and Judaizing teachers referenced in Romans 16:25 and 2 Timothy 2:8, not in contrast to the Gospel of the other Apostles of Christ.

(3) Romans 16:25

Rom 16:25  Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

Romans 16:25 must be understood in the light of the immediately preceding context as given in Romans 16:17-19,

Rom 16:17  Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
Rom 16:18  For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.
Rom 16:19  For your obedience is come abroad unto all men. I am glad therefore on your behalf: but yet I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil.

This passage (Romans 16:17-19) is a reference to the false teachings and false gospel of the Judaizers who were perverting the Gospel of Christ by insisting on full obedience and participation in the Law of Moses and its accompanying ritual observances.

(4) 2 Timothy 2:8

2Ti 2:8  Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:
2Ti 2:9  Wherein I suffer trouble, as an evil doer, even unto bonds; but the word of God is not bound.

In context, Paul is encouraging Timothy to stay strong in the faith despite any opposition he encounters from false teachers and teach others what he has learned from Paul “among many witnesses”:

2Ti 2:1  Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus.
2Ti 2:2  And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.
2Ti 2:3  Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ.

Paul focuses upon two centrally important themes: (1) that our Lord Jesus Christ is of the seed of David, and is therefore the only possible true Messiah who fulfills the promises of the Davidic Covenant, and (2) that our Lord Jesus Christ was raised from the dead, the full proof that God verified the Messiahship and message of our Lord Jesus Christ by such a stupendous miracle before many witnesses.

Your expressed view that Paul concocted this false gospel or “fake story” as a gospel he invented by himself is utterly contrary to the historical record contained in and witnessed to by the first century primary source New Testament written records I just shared with you.

Posted in Apologetics Issues--Other Faiths, Bible Historicity and Validity, Doctrinal Discussions, How to Interpret the Bible Correctly | Tagged , , | Leave a comment