Response to "Why is Jesus not the Messiah for Jews?"

I have been engaged in some apologetics discussion on Twitter of late. I've been challenge by OlderMusicGeek who says that Jesus does not fulfill Old Testament prophecy for the Messiah. I asked him to provide a prophecy that Jesus did not fulfill and he sent me this link to Why is Jesus not the Messiah for Jews? The interesting thing to note is that Jesus defended His claims to be Messiah during His earthly ministry. Paul and the other apostles did the same. It is from these sources I will respond.

Question
I attend a Pentecostal church and my pastor spoke about how Jews rejected Jesus as their messiah. Why do Jews not accept Jesus as God? I just wanted a Jewish perspective.

Here the answer given with my comments in red.


It is important to understand the biblical-historical context of Judaism. Rather than using the term that Jews “reject” Jesus as our messiah. It is better to state that Jews “do not accept” Jesus as our messiah.

Jesus was a Jewish Pharisaic rabbi who kept Shabbat, was circumcised, and observed Pesach. His ideas were carried by his followers and canonized in the Christian Bible.

Many Jews no longer believe in a personal messiah, and now believe in a Messianic Era which involves all of us perfecting the world through tikkun olam (“reparation of the world”).

While it is conceivable that some of today's Jews may now reject the idea of a personal messiah, no one can argue that the first century Jews held that view. They were looking for a personal Messiah to come. Changing the definition now, does not make sense and the author gives no valid proof for change in view. It seems much the same way that many people no longer believe in a personal god either. Looks like "New Age" thinking has permeated Judaism as it has everything else. Moses believed in a person coming.

¹⁴ The nations you will dispossess listen to those who practice sorcery or divination. But as for you, the LORD your God has not permitted you to do so. ¹⁵ The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to him. ¹⁶ For this is what you asked of the LORD your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly when you said, "Let us not hear the voice of the LORD our God nor see this great fire anymore, or we will die." Deuteronomy 18-14-16

In the first century of the common era so did the Jewish leaders. They expected that the one whom Moses spoke of and the Messiah were the same person.


Christians accept Jesus as God incarnate and as the sacrifice for their sins. According to Judaism, the messiah is a human and is not God. Also, human sacrifice was prohibited by God at the binding of Isaac; therefore, Jesus cannot be a human sacrifice. A polemic question often posed by Jews and non-Jews is, “How God can die?”

Ok, if the Messiah human, then that mean the Messiah is personal. This knocks down the discussion above this paragraph because the author conflicts with himself. The question of" how God can die"can best be answered in more full detail in another post. This essay concentrated on Jesus' claim to being messiah so i I will do the same.

Jews believe that we must observe the commandments, behave righteously, and atone through ourselves for our own transgressions and not make those transgressions again. We do not require an intermediary to provide atonement.

What? Judaism does not require an intermediary to provide atonement? That's not what God said through Moses.

"If a person sins and does what is forbidden in any of the LORD's commands, even though he does not know it, he is guilty and will be held responsible. ¹⁸ He is to bring to the priest as a guilt offering a ram from the flock, one without defect and of the proper value. In this way the priest will make atonement for him for the wrong he has committed unintentionally, and he will be forgiven. ¹⁹ It is a guilt offering; he has been guilty of wrongdoing against the LORD." - Leviticus 5:17-19

And this is not the only place that the Torah recognizes that people are unable to keep the Law themselves and be righteous at the level God demands. Of course we need a mediator between us and God. That was Moses role. That is what he did for the people. Moses was a picture of what the Messiah would be.



The Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) establishes and enumerates criteria that the messiah must fulfill, which we have determined that Jesus does not qualify. I do not present these to disparage your Christian beliefs, but I do this to clarify the Jewish position. Jews believe that non-Jews are just as righteous as Jews, and are only obligated to fulfill the seven Noahide laws.

Jews do not accept Jesus as the messiah because:

1) Jesus did not fulfill the messianic prophecies.
2) Jesus did not embody the personal qualifications of the Messiah.
3) Biblical verses "referring" to Jesus are mistranslations.
4) Jewish belief is based on national revelation.

At the end of this article, we will examine these additional topics:

5) Christianity contradicts Jewish theology
6) Jews and Gentiles
7) Bringing the Messiah

Fair enough. Let's look at each of these point in turn.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

1) JESUS DID NOT FULFILL THE MESSIANIC PROPHECIES

What is the Messiah supposed to accomplish? The Bible says that he will:
A. Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28).
B. Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6).
C. Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore." (Isaiah 2:4)
D. Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: "God will be King over all the world -- on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One" (Zechariah 14:9).

The historical fact is that Jesus fulfilled none of these messianic prophecies.

Christians counter that Jesus will fulfill these in the Second Coming, but Jewish sources show that the Messiah will fulfill the prophecies outright, and no concept of a second coming exists.

I'm glad he said that no Jewish sources confirm a second coming, but I would like to ask "what about all the messianic prophecies about the messiah dying - being betrayed, tortured, and vindicated?" Those Jews who hold that the Messiah must fulfill those scriptures outright also believe that the Messiah must fulfill scriptures like Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 outright also? If the Messiah must also fulfil these, then when will he do that...before or after he fulfills: Ezekiel 37:26-28,Isaiah 43:5-6,Isaiah 2:4, and Zechariah 14:9? Now unless you wanna argue that there are two Messiahs, then you have to ask are we waiting for two or for one? S0, can't have it both ways, unless we agree that there is one Messiah and He fulfills all these scriptures at different times.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

2) JESUS DID NOT EMBODY THE PERSONAL QUALIFICATIONS OF MESSIAH

A. MESSIAH AS PROPHET

Jesus was not a prophet. Prophecy can only exist in Israel when the land is inhabited by a majority of world Jewry. During the time of Ezra (circa 300 BCE), when the majority of Jews refused to move from Babylon to Israel, prophecy ended upon the death of the last prophets -- Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi.
Jesus appeared on the scene approximately 350 years after prophecy had ended.

First, where does the Hebrew Bible say "Prophecy can only exist in Israel when the land is inhabited by a majority of world Jewry."? From Ezekiel and Jeremiah through Malachi there was prophecy and the land was not mostly inhabited by Jews. Jesus prophesied the destruction of the 2nd Temple. He made the prophecy before 33 AD and Rome destroyed the Temple and Jerusalem about 70 AD.

¹As he was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, "Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!" ²"Do you see all these great buildings?" replied Jesus. "Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down. - Mark 13:1,2

There are other example of Jesus telling the Future. He told Peter that Peter would deny Jesus before the rooster crows and Peter did.

B. DESCENDENT OF DAVID

The Messiah must be descended on his father's side from King David (see Genesis 49:10 and Isaiah 11:1). According to the Christian claim that Jesus was the product of a virgin birth, he had no father -- and thus could not have possibly fulfilled the messianic requirement of being descended on his father's side from King David!
What about his Mother's? Mary was also a descendant of Kind David. Not just Joseph. By the way, thanks for accepting the virgin birth.
C. TORAH OBSERVANCE

The Messiah will lead the Jewish people to full Torah observance. The Torah states that all mitzvot remain binding forever, and anyone coming to change the Torah is immediately identified as a false prophet. (Deut. 13:1-4)
Throughout the New Testament, Jesus contradicts the Torah and states that its commandments are no longer applicable. (see John 1:45 and 9:16, Acts 3:22 and 7:37)

I think the first reference may be a typo, but let's look at the second. In the context of John 9:16, the Jewish Leaders were angry with Jesus because they said He broke the sabbath. Look at the text. How did Jesus break the sabbath in their opinion? What crime did Jesus commit? Jesus healed a Blind man who had been blind from birth! Jesus did not break the sabbath, only the man-made rules that people put up around the sabbath. I challenge anyone to tell me how healing someone on the sabbath is breaking the Torah. As for Acts 3:22 and 7:37 These are Peter and Steven equating the Prophet Moses spoke of with Jesus. How does this help the author's argument?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

3) MISTRANSLATED VERSES "REFERRING" TO JESUS

Biblical verses can only be understood by studying the original Hebrew text -- which reveals many discrepancies in the Christian translation.

A. VIRGIN BIRTH

The Christian idea of a virgin birth is derived from the verse in Isaiah 7:14 describing an "alma" as giving birth. The word "alma" has always meant a young woman, but Christian theologians came centuries later and translated it as "virgin." This accords Jesus' birth with the first century pagan idea of mortals being impregnated by gods.
Look at the verse in question: Isaiah 7:14

Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.

This is a bad argument. "Virgin" was used by the Jewish translators of the Old Testament into Greek - the Septuagint. This is the bible that the Jews and the first Christians Used. Y'know...before and while the New Testament was being written. So Why is "virign" the correct translation? Every where alma is used, "virigin" can be used without qualification. Also in the verse the word translated "sign" always refers to special and distinctive actions. Therefore a virgin birth of Christ is in reference here. Also in context this will be a special child. "Immanuel" means "God with us"! God incarnated and dwelling among His people!

B. CRUCIFIXION

The verse in Psalms 22:17 reads: "Like a lion, they are at my hands and feet." The Hebrew word ki-ari (like a lion) is grammatically similar to the word "gouged." Thus Christianity reads the verse as a reference to crucifixion: "They pierced my hands and feet."

I'm thinking that the author's argument that Jesus' crucifixion excludes Him from being Messiah, but I don't understand why. Psalm 22 is about the Messiah and attributed to King David.

C. SUFFERING SERVANT

Christianity claims that Isaiah chapter 53 refers to Jesus, as the "suffering servant."
In actuality, Isaiah 53 directly follows the theme of chapter 52, describing the exile and redemption of the Jewish people. The prophecies are written in the singular form because the Jews ("Israel") are regarded as one unit. The Torah is filled with examples of the Jewish nation referred to with a singular pronoun.
Ironically, Isaiah's prophecies of persecution refer in part to the 11th century when Jews were tortured and killed by Crusaders who acted in the name of Jesus.
From where did these mistranslations stem? St. Gregory, 4th century Bishop of Nanianzus, wrote: "A little jargon is all that is necessary to impose on the people. The less they comprehend, the more they admire."
I disagree. How does Isaiah 53 refer to Israel and not the Messiah? I don't see how any of the prophecy could possibly refer to Israel. For example, when have the people of Israel ever fit this picture?

¹⁰ Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the LORD makes span his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his days, and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.

¹¹ After the suffering of his soul,
he will see the light of life and be satisfied ;
by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many,
and he will bear their iniquities.

Fits Jesus really well though - 700 years before His Birth. The whole chapter fits him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

4) JEWISH BELIEF IS BASED SOLELY ON NATIONAL REVELATION

Of the 15,000 religions in human history, only Judaism bases its belief on national revelation -- i.e. God speaking to the entire nation. If God is going to start a religion, it makes sense He'll tell everyone, not just one person.
Judaism, unique among all of the world's major religions, does not rely on "claims of miracles" as the basis for its religion. In fact, the Bible says that God sometimes grants the power of "miracles" to charlatans, in order to test Jewish loyalty to the Torah (Deut. 13:4).
Maimonides states (Foundations of Torah, ch. 8):
The Jews did not believe in Moses, our teacher, because of the miracles he performed. Whenever anyone's belief is based on seeing miracles, he has lingering doubts, because it is possible the miracles were performed through magic or sorcery. All of the miracles performed by Moses in the desert were because they were necessary, and not as proof of his prophecy.
What then was the basis of [Jewish] belief? The Revelation at Mount Sinai, which we saw with our own eyes and heard with our own ears, not dependent on the testimony of others... as it says, "Face to face, God spoke with you..." The Torah also states: "God did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us -- who are all here alive today." (Deut. 5:3)
Judaism is not miracles. It is the personal eyewitness experience of every man, woman and child, standing at Mount Sinai 3,300 years ago.
Amen. The same is said about Jesus. We believe Moses and Jesus through relationship. The Torah is based on Relationship. We now have better. We can have a closer and deeper relationship than they did at the foot of Mt Sinai. Through Jesus, you can come to God's very throne. Justified in Jesus' righteousness.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----

5) CHRISTIANITY CONTRADICTS JEWISH THEOLOGY

The following theological points apply primarily to the Roman Catholic Church, the largest Christian denomination, and the one most familiar to the Western world.


A. GOD AS THREE?

The Catholic idea of Trinity breaks God into three separate beings: The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost (Matthew 28:19).
Contrast this to the Shema, the basis of Jewish belief: "Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is ONE" (Deut. 6:4). Jews declare the Shema every day, while writing it on doorposts (Mezuzah), and binding it to the hand and head (Tefillin). This statement of God's One-ness is the first words a Jewish child is taught to say, and the last words uttered before a Jew dies.
In Jewish law, worship of a three-part god is considered idolatry -- one of the three cardinal sins that a Jew should rather give up his life than transgress. This explains why during the Inquisitions and throughout history, Jews gave up their lives rather than convert.

Fundamental misunderstanding of the Trinity. I don't have the time to give the full treatment this deserves, so instead I will state the doctrine correctly. God is one in being and essense. Three in person. From a human stand point sing being equal single personhood. However, God is not not bound by this. We agree with the Shema. "The Lord, our God, the Lord is ONE". Now the question is "One what?" One being? One person? What? We believe God is "One what?" - Being. And "Three Whos" - Father, Son. and Holy Spirit.

B. MAN AS GOD?

Christians believe that God came down to earth in human form, as Jesus said: "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30).
Maimonides devotes most of the "Guide for the Perplexed" to the fundamental idea that God is incorporeal, meaning that He assumes no physical form. God is Eternal, above time. He is Infinite, beyond space. He cannot be born, and cannot die. Saying that God assumes human form makes God small, diminishing both His unity and His divinity. As the Torah says: "God is not a mortal" (Numbers 23:19).
Judaism says that the Messiah will be born of human parents, and possess normal physical attributes like other people. He will not be a demi-god, and will not possess supernatural qualities. In fact, an individual is alive in every generation with the capacity to step into the role of the Messiah. (see Maimonides - Laws of Kings 11:3)

Not to disparage Maimonides but Abraham and Moses said different. Look at Genesis 18. The best explanation I have heard for this is in the form of a song called Theophanies.

C. INTERMEDIARY FOR PRAYER?

The Catholic belief is that prayer must be directed through an intermediary -- i.e. confessing one's sins to a priest. Jesus himself is an intermediary, as Jesus said: "No man cometh unto the Father but by me."
In Judaism, prayer is a totally private matter, between each individual and God. As the Bible says: "God is near to all who call unto Him" (Psalms 145:18). Further, the Ten Commandments state: "You shall have no other gods BEFORE ME," meaning that it is forbidden to set up a mediator between God and man. (see Maimonides - Laws of Idolatry ch. 1)
Most Protestant Denominations agree with the author of this article on this point. I know I do.

D. INVOLVEMENT IN THE PHYSICAL WORLD

Catholic doctrine often treats the physical world as an evil to be avoided. Mary, the holiest woman, is portrayed as a virgin. Priests and nuns are celibate. And monasteries are in remote, secluded locations.
By contrast, Judaism believes that God created the physical world not to frustrate us, but for our pleasure. Jewish spirituality comes through grappling with the mundane world in a way that uplifts and elevates. Sex in the proper context is one of the holiest acts we can perform.
The Talmud says if a person has the opportunity to taste a new fruit and refuses to do so, he will have to account for that in the World to Come. Jewish rabbinical schools teach how to live amidst the bustle of commercial activity. Jews don't retreat from life, we elevate it.

Again this is where not all Chrisitians would like to be lumped in with Roman Catholicism. I don't agree with them but with you..except for refusing to taste new fruit being a sin. ...but i get the point being made and I agree.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

6) JEWS AND GENTILES

Judaism does not demand that everyone convert to the religion. The Torah of Moses is a truth for all humanity, whether Jewish or not. King Solomon asked God to heed the prayers of non-Jews who come to the Holy Temple (Kings I 8:41-43). The prophet Isaiah refers to the Temple as a "House for all nations."
The Temple service during Sukkot featured 70 bull offerings, corresponding to the 70 nations of the world. The Talmud says that if the Romans would have realized how much benefit they were getting from the Temple, they'd never have destroyed it.
Jews have never actively sought converts to Judaism because the Torah prescribes a righteous path for gentiles to follow, known as the "Seven Laws of Noah." Maimonides explains that any human being who faithfully observes these basic moral laws earns a proper place in heaven.

For further study of the Seven Laws of Noah, see:

Bnei Noah of Fort Worth
http://www.fastlane.net/~bneinoah/

The above link does not work

Path of the Righteous Gentile
http://www.chabad.org/gopher/outlook/7laws/index.html
Hey, these laws being referred to are based on the same laws in the Torah and I agree with everyone of them. If we apply the same rules such as break one of them (even in thought) is tantamount to breaking them all, we are back in the same place. Dead in sin and cut off from God without remedy. This is why Jesus came. Galations 2:16 says:

know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----

7) BRINGING THE MESSIAH

Maimonides states that the popularity of Christianity (and Islam) is part of God's plan to spread the ideals of Torah throughout the world. This moves society closer to a perfected state of morality and toward a greater understanding of God. All this is in preparation for the Messianic age.
Indeed, the world is in desperate need of Messianic redemption. War and pollution threaten our planet; ego and confusion erode family life. To the extent we are aware of the problems of society, is the extent we will yearn for redemption. As the Talmud says, one of the first questions a Jew is asked on Judgment Day is: "Did you yearn for the arrival of the Messiah?"
How can we hasten the coming of the Messiah? The best way is to love all humanity generously, to keep the mitzvot of the Torah (as best we can), and to encourage others to do so as well.

Despite the gloom, the world does seem headed toward redemption. One apparent sign is that the Jewish people have returned to the Land of Israel and made it bloom again. Additionally, a major movement is afoot of young Jews returning to Torah tradition.

The Messiah can come at any moment, and it all depends on our actions. God is ready when we are. For as King David says: "Redemption will come today -- if you hearken to His voice."

This was a great article despite it's problems. The thing is the Messiah is coming back soon. We all agree with this - Jew and Christian. We Christians agree that the Messiah will get rid of all war and establish an outward Kingdom to which everyone will submit. Judgement Day is coming. The thing is that Messiah is Jesus. And for those Jews that don't accept Jesus as Messiah when they are asked "Did you yearn for the arrival of the Messiah?", they will have to answer "No".

What Hollywood Believes - Jack Nicholson

Nicholson once said,

"I don't believe in God now. But I can still work up an envy for someone who has faith. I can see how that could be a deeply soothing experience."

The quote does not say what robbed Jack of his faith but I feel sorry for him. It is by faith that we walk with God. Without it life has got to be empty.

Mary Jo Sharp vs. Ehteshaam Gulam Debate: Did Jesus Die on the Cross? MP3 Audio - Apologetics 315

I just found out about a great post on Apologetics 315. It's a debate between Mary Jo Sharp (on the right) and Muslim apologist Ehteshaam Gulam on the topic: Did Jesus Die on the Cross? It's a good to see a woman taking an active role in Apologetics. I have seen few women in the field and I think she can reach some people that men cannot reach. I liked the Debate. Sharp is articulate knowledgeable and explains the material really well. I've hared her arguments before but that doesn't make them any less true. There is a consensus of quite a few scholars of which is one. As for her opponent. Gulam, made me wonder what planet he is from. Instead talking about if the Tomb was empty, they seemed to focus a lot more on the question about where or not Jesus was alive after the crucifixion and did not die. I can't believe that. I think Sharp proved the fact the Jesus was dead. All the modern tools of forensics brought to bear on the texts and history show that Jesus really died - "grave-yard dead". Not knad a dead. Given what crucifixion was and what they did to you...He was dead. Don't forget that He was beaten and whipped before Jesus even touched the cross. I'm glad Gulam rejected the "substitution theory" but he seems to favor the "swoon theory" and can't seem to read what the gospels really say. I mean come'on. Sharp did a great job not loosing her cool.

You can find the audio at the following link
Mary Jo Sharp vs. Ehteshaam Gulam Debate: Did Jesus Die on the Cross? MP3 Audio - Apologetics 315

There is even a link to Mary Jo's blog, Confident Christianity, that contains a video. The video is a the following link:

Mary Jo Sharp vs. Ehteshaam Gulam "Did Jesus Die on the Cross?"

Confident Christianity also provides a great, 44-slide presentation that gives evidence for Jesus' resurrection.

MJ_s_Evidence_for_the_Resurrection

Uploaded on authorSTREAM by mmcelhaney | Upload your own presentation

No Whining!

Remember how recently Sarah Palin has decried the way the media has been dealing with covering her and her family. I agree that it sucks. It's not right. It's interesting to hear her comments regarding Hilary Clinton when she made much the same comments complaining about the media.





And for fun: Hitler Finds Out Sarah Palin Resigns

Why You Should Be A Christian. Response to Richard Carrier Pt 1/6

A well-written essay is on the internet called, "Why I am Not Christian" by Richard Carrier (on the left). It's long, respectful, and well written. It compels a response. His criticisms of Christians are well founded but his charges against God are mistaken and unfounded. The essay was written in 2006 and is divided into six parts. I'm going to interact with his responses and divide my essay also into six parts. His words will be in black and mine will be red. His Top four reasons for rejecting Christianity are: 1. God is Silent. 2. God is inert. 3. Inadequate evidence for God. 4. Christianity predicts a different universe.

Introduction

A fellow freethinker by the name of John Ransom engaged me to compose a statement of why I am not a Christian. I should summarize my case, he said, simply and clearly so everyone can understand where I'm coming from. John was especially frustrated by Christians who routinely come up with implausible excuses to defend their faith, which they don't really examine--as if defending the faith with any excuse mattered more than having a genuinely good reason to believe in the first place. Discussing our experiences, we realized we'd both encountered many Christians like this, who color their entire perception of reality with the assumption that they have to be right, and therefore the evidence must somehow fit. So they think they can make anything up on the spur of the moment and be "sure" it's true. This is the exact opposite of what we do. We start with the evidence and then figure out what the best explanation of it all really is, regardless of where this quest for truth takes us.

I would like to know who these Christians are that Carrier has been interacting with. They aren't like many Christians I know. Of course we should follow the evidence and act and believe the truth. Not all Christians accept ideas and then look for evidence to support them.This is the wrong way to honor God. God expects us to act in truth.

¹ LORD, who may dwell in your sanctuary?
Who may live on your holy hill?

² He whose walk is blameless
and who does what is righteous,
who speaks the truth from his heart

³ and has no slander on his tongue,
who does his neighbor no wrong
and casts no slur on his fellowman, - Psalms 15:1-3

John and I also shared the same experiences in another respect: when their dogmatism meets our empiricism, slander is not far behind. I have increasingly encountered Christians who accuse me to my face of being a liar, of being wicked, of not wanting to talk to God, of willfully ignoring evidence--because that is the only way they can explain my existence. I cannot be an honest, well-informed pursuer of the truth who came to a fair and reasonable decision after a thorough examination of the evidence, because no such person can exist in the Christian worldview, who does not come to Christ. Therefore, I must be a wicked liar, I must be so deluded by sin that I am all but clinically insane, an irrational madman suffering some evil psychosis.

It was wrong to assume that Carrier is knowingly being evil. We cannot look down on him as a dishonest person suppressing evidence. The Bible says that we all, before coming to Christ, suppress the knowledge that God has made known to us. We were all deluded by sin, and we can only be made free by trusting in Jesus.

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. - Romans 1:18 -25

There is nothing I can do for such people. Nothing I ever show or say to them will ever convince them otherwise--it can't, because they start with the assumption that their belief in Christ has to be true, therefore right from the start everything I say or do is always going to be a lie or the product of some delusion. They don't need any evidence of this, because to their thinking it must be true. Such people are trapped in their own hall of mirrors, and for them there is no escape. They will never know they are wrong even if they are. No evidence, no logic, no reason will ever get through to them. When we combine this troubling fact with the observation that their religion, like every other, appears tailor-made to justify their own culture-bound desires and personal vanities--as if every God is made in man's image, not the other way around--then we already have grounds for suspicion. The fact that even the Christian idea of God has constantly changed to suit our cultural and historical circumstances, and is often constructed to be impervious to logic or doubt, is reason enough to step back and ask ourselves whether we're on the wrong track with the Christian worldview.

Carrier correctly describes the errors of the Church. His charges against Christians who trust in blind faith without thinking about the implications and why they should believe are true. Some Christians have tried to use their religion to substantiate "culture-bound desires and personal vanities" such as mysognistic oppression of women and chattle slavery. No argument. But you can't use the Bible to prove that this is correct. The church has changed its ideas about God, but that does not mean that God changed. Niethert has the Bible. The Bible says the same thing as it has since 90 AD. Unforunately, many people have perverted the Gospel of Christ, while stating they are servants of Christ.

This essay will never convince Christians who have locked themselves inside a box of blind faith like this. But for other Christians out there who actually have an open mind, a good summary of my reasons for rejecting Christianity will help show why I am not a deluded liar, but an honest and reasonable man coming to an honest and reasonable decision. What follows is not meant to be a thorough exploration of every nuance and problem, nor an exhaustive account of all the arguments and evidence. Rather, it's a mere summary of the four most important reasons I am not a Christian. This is only the beginning of the story, not the whole of it.[1] That's what John asked for: a simple but well-written explanation of why I am not a Christian.

I don't think that Carrier is a deluded liar...just locked in his own "box of blind faith". I hope that my responses to his issues will show where his misunderstands are and show that there is a God and that the Bible deserves a better look as to what it says.

I shall assume here that C.S. Lewis was correct when he said "mere Christianity" consisted in the belief that "there is one God" who "is quite definitely good or righteous," "who takes sides, who loves love and hates hatred, who wants us to behave in one way and not in another," and who "invented and made the universe." But this God also "thinks that a great many things have gone wrong" with the world and thus "insists, and insists very loudly, on our putting them right again," and to this end arranged the death and resurrection of "His only Son," Jesus Christ, who is or embodies or represents the Creator, and can alone "save" us from "eternal death" if we now ask this Jesus to forgive our sins. That's as quoted and paraphrased from his aptly titled Mere Christianity.

I will accept C.S. Lewis' definition of Christianity as Carrier has defined it.

If this is what Christianity is (and most Christians appear to believe so), there are four major reasons why I do not believe a word of it. And all four would have to be answered with a clear preponderance of evidence and reason before I would ever change my mind. I'm serious about this, too. If all four points are ever refuted with solid, objective evidence, then any other quibbles I have beyond these four would not stop me from declaring faith in Christ. For surely any other problem I or anyone might find with the Christian worldview could easily be solved from within the faith itself--if it weren't for the following four facts.

In part 2, Carrier argues that God is silent. I disagree. I will provide evidence and reasons why we can believe and understand that God is not silent.

Answering Askegg via Twitter

For the past few days I have been...um...dialoguing with a person on twitter about the nature of God, evidence for his existence, and human free will. He felt compelled to write a full blog post in response to the discussion. I feel honored. He obviously put a lot of thought into it. I've decided to respond in kind. In addition this essay is a lot more respectful and articulate that some his tweets. My words will be in red and his will be in black.

Compelled to choose freely

// July 8th, 2009 // Blog

I am in the midst of a discussion regarding the truth (or otherwise) of Christianity with @mmcelhaney on Twitter (his blog can be found here). Of course, it is a difficult task to distil complex notions about existence, philosophy, science, and theology into 140 characters of less. As a consequence may points span multiple tweets, spawning multiple threads in reply, which inevitably bring up new topics and a raft of new points to discuss and refute.

One of these points which we have been hitting back and forth is the conflict between free will and omniscience. Marcus’s latest explanation is this (starting at this tweet):

You are right billions of people are going to hell. But billions of people are also going to heaven and God knows who is going where.

Instead of asking why you got to go to hell, you are missing the fundamental question: Why do people go to hell?

People don’t go because God doe not go against their free will or that they chose the wrong religion. Everyone has failed to meet the standard for holiness that God has set. By definition, every human being capable of choosing to to disobey God deserves hell. Even those of us who are saved deserve hell. The only difference is that God has chosen to save some of humanity through faith in Christ – Ephesians 2.

Yes, God knows who will go to hell, and He could force every single person to repent. But he does not. Why? For reasons known only to Him. No one comes to Christ against their own will. Everyone who rejects him does so willingly.

If you interviews anyone in hell and tell them that all they have to do is serve God and they can get out of hell, they will refuse and walk right back into hell. Think I’m wrong? Well, you are making the same stupid decision today if you reject Jesus.

What a jumbled mess of theology and poor logic this is, but let’s see if we can unravel some of Marcus’s ahhh… misunderstandings.

The “fact” billions might be destined for Heaven has zero bearing on the “fact” that billions are also destined for Hell. There is a dichotomy in Marcus’s head. On one hand he has an all loving God who is willingly to kill his own son in order to save us from this fiery fate (not himself mind you, unless you want to delve into the murky depths of the trinity). Marcus wishes to ignore the terrible fate of those who “choose” to spend eternity in Hell to keep his precious image of Heaven intact. Marcus – will you have a good view from Heaven where you can witness the damned being tortured?

I think for the purposes of our discussion we will continue to leave the Trinity out of the discussion and save it for some other time. This guy is the one who misunderstands. The son willingly gave himself for us as the propitiation for our sins and no one deserves it.

Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. - Hebrew 12:2

The other point is that Jesus did not die and stay dead He is alive. He rose.

But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him. - Acts 2:24

I'm not ignoring the fact fate that many people are going to spend eternity in Hell. It bothers me. I don't want anyone to go to Hell. That is why I want to tell everyone I can that God has provided us a way to escape the fate that will befall us without God's intervention. God does not take joy in people going to hell.

I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." - Luke 5:32

The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. - 2 Peter 3:9

In heaven there is no reason to think that those in heaven will be able to see or know anything about the torture in Hell. Where is that in the Bible, just an appeal to emotion...no substance to the argument.

The second part of that sentence is very telling: “and God knows who is going where”. This is classic cognitive dissonance in action, and has been my point throughout the discussion.

Marcus, imagine a time before creation. God could have created any one of an infinite number of possible universes. Being omniscient he would have known out each would play out and how their eventual destruction would come about. He would have known the intricate details of every molecule, dust speck, and living organism within each possible universe before he lifted his transcendental finger. He would have foreseen the creation of multiple religions and the false Gods that millions would bow down to. He knew which universes would contain billions of people who would end up “choosing” to reject his divinely invisible love and point themselves towards the burning gates of Hell. Yet to spite all of this he went ahead and created this universe – one in which billions do fall for the lies of “false religions”, following “false Gods” or no god at all, and wind up having the flesh burnt from their writhing bodies for all eternity. On this basis alone I would reject such a monstrosity of a being is such a thing existed (luckily there is no evidence for such a beast).

Andrew, you are missing one very important point. How would you know that any of us would exist if God had not allowed this kind of universe, neither you nor your children would exist as you exist now. God has a purpose in choosing this universe rather than another. I don't know what it is. However, I do know that God has only good intentions for His creation and not one of us knows enough of what's going on to challenge the decisions He has made. How do you know that things would not have been worse had God not allowed another universe? We don't. That's what being a Christian is about. Trusting God even if we don't know what the whole masterpiece looks like.

According to the theology of Christianity, God took human form as his own son so that he could pay the price of sin. Naturally, no one has been able to sufficiently answer why death is the price of sin, or why God, in his all loving mercy, could not adjust the price of sin to something less severe. You see, an all loving being would do anything and everything within his power to prevent harm from coming to those he loves, yet this is exactly what we do not see in the world. God routinely ignores prayer, sits idly by as thousands starve to death everyday, and allows his perfectly designed bacteria to infest, overcome, maim, and kill his beloved children. This is not a God I would be interested in worshipping.

Another attempt to use emotion rather than logic. This analogy does not fit where humanity is spiritually before coming to Christ. People who end up in hell are not Children of God (Joun1;1 John 3). The other things asking why would God not lower the price of sin to something less severe is a silly idea. Lowering the bar for righteousness is not Justice. It's about the character of God that sets the bar. Righteous is who He is. To lower the standard would be going against himself. Even our own secular wisdom says: "To your own self be true". Why shouldn't God do the same? As for disease and pain and suffering God has a purpose and I don't know what it all is yet, but God promises in His Word that.

Anyway, back to Marcus’s tweets:

“Everyone has failed to meet the standard for holiness that God has set.”

So why did God set the standard so high – surely he knew the organisms in this universe were not capable of attaining such lofty heights of morality without the mandated shedding of animal sacrifice, reaching its crescendo with the most perfect of all human sacrifices in the murder of Jesus himself? Oh, I am forgetting “free will” again, aren’t I?

When God first created everything, man was perfect able to meet that standard. Again Jesus rose from the dead so although his crucifixion was the worse thing that ever happened, Jesus won. He triumphed.

For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority. In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.

When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross. And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.^{d]"> - Colossians 2:9-15}

^d]">

No, I never said that Free Will comes into this at all. I'm not suggesting that our will trumps God's at all. I reject that humans have free will in that God must do anything according to our will. We do have will. We do have desires but they are subject to God's ultimate will. And don't forget we all go to Hell by default until we turn to God. Now how does that happen? How does God do that? Why doesn't He do that for everyone? No man can say...least of all me. All I know is if you haven't turned to God in total submisson and obedience you do not belong to Him.

The only difference is that God has chosen to save some of humanity through faith in Christ.

Wait a minute, I thought we had free will to choose to between eternal bliss, or complete agony? If God has already chosen who to save through “faith in Christ” then what can I do to change the ultimate outcome? Especially when God selected this particular universe from an infinite number of alternatives. This universe, where I would reach the inevitable and logical conclusion that such a being is impossible, not to mention terrifying.

Sorry to break it to you. We do choose, but not because of anything in us or from us. Read Romans 9. However the conclusion you draw is stupid. You are not free from sin and death until you come to God. Before that you are in slavery to sin. If you want to be free you got to go to Jesus. That is what the Bible teaches. Complaining about the fact that God has selects whom he has mercy on is silly. If you want to be saved then God has called you to be saved. If you don't then He didn't and you don't want to be saved anyway.

God knows who will go to hell, and He could force every single person to repent. But he does not. Why? For reasons known only to Him.

So God chooses not to save those people in Hell because that would somehow interfere with free will, to spite the “fact” he is omniscient and knows every decision anyone has or will make until the end of time.

I have never said that. You are going by a characature of what some Christians say they believe, which I reject because the Bible does not support it. As an unbeliever, you have nothing to add to that debate.

No one comes to Christ against their own will. Everyone who rejects him does so willingly.

Read those two sentences above again. Now again. Let it sink in. So is it only those people who know about Christ and willingly rejecting him who are destined for Hell? What about those billions who have never even heard the name of Jesus, or the millions of babies who die before being giving the chance to accept Jesus into their hearts, or have in thrust upon them in a baptism? How is this fair to those of us who have honestly evaluated the evidence for Christ (or any other prophet) and found it lacking? My head just exploded, but I suppose I should become familiar with that sensation now given where I am headed according to Marcus.

If you interviews anyone in hell and tell them that all they have to do is serve God and they can get out of hell, they will refuse and walk right back into hell. Think I’m wrong?

Hell yes! Who wants to have white hot pokers shoved into their eyes and their intestines gnawed by rats? This really shits me – how can you have a just and perfect loving god who allows such things?

Several points to make. Andrew, why do you think that is what Hell will be like. Nothing in the Bible talks about the torture you describe. Stick to the text please.

Let me give you a quick parallel: I have two beautiful daughters who want to play on the busy road outside. Now I love my kids, but I cannot interfere with their free will. I know playing on the road is dangerous and there is a good chance they will be badly injured or killed if they go out there, but what can I do? Is it their fault when they are struck by a truck and spread all over the bitumen?

You cannot interfere with your children's free will, but God can and does. He is in complete control of everything. Sometime he restrains what we do and sometimes He doesn't. For reasons and purpose we don't fully understand He works out the reality we experience. Your analogy fails because it attempts to explain something so infinite in finite terms that cannot possibly measure up.

Well, you are making the same stupid decision today if you reject Jesus.

There are many religions in the world today (not to mention now dead religions) which threaten eternal damnation for those who are foolish enough to reject their doctrines. The two most prevalent modern examples are Christianity and Islam, but it’s by no means limited to these two. If I am to avoid timeless suffering I must be sure of the faith I select, since both renditions of God are quite intolerant of disbelief.

God is not hiding if you want to know what the truth is you can find it. Read Isaiah 45.

Without substantiating your claim that Jesus is the only way to attain access to Heaven, then I can simple assert that you are making the same stupid decision if you reject the teachings of the final prophet of Allah. Your empty threats mean nothing without proving your case first. The scare tactics you have demonstrated here may have worked in the dark ages, but the church and your antiquated theology can no longer stand the education and rational thinking modern society has attained – fighting religion at every stage.

Jesus substantiated that claim when He walked out of that tomb with all power in His hand. We've been through this in Twitter. I've presented links to you for evidence for the resurrection and yet you haven't provided a shred of rebuttal for rejecting the fact that Jesus is what He said. All other religions deny this. Every single one of them. Hell is not a scare tactic. I serve God not because I'm afraid of goint to hell but because I love Him because He first loved me. I'm not better than anyone else. He has done nothing but show me love and kindness my whole life. Why would I not serve Him? He deserves it. Even if he had never done a thing for me other than allow my birth, I owe Him everything. You owe Him also. It's irrational to avoid the evidence just because you don't like where it points. You agreed with me that the standards God asks us to meet according to the Bible are too high for any person to attain. I agree. That is why Jesus came. He made up the difference for us. He lived the life we can't. Just like Adam damned us all through His disobedience, Jesus saves us through His obedience, life, sacrifice, and resurrection. All we have to do is accept it. IF you can't accept it, it isn't because God rejected you. It is because you have rejected Him.

You silly religion will be thrown on the scrape heap of history, like all those that came before it.

Dude, It's been 2000 years (5000 yrs or more if you count the Old Testament) and Christianity is sitll growing and people are still coming to Jesus. God loves you and desire a relationship with you. Seek Him and be truly free. As a parting point, I'm not suggesting that Babies go to hell and that a person would need to absolutely know about Jesus to be saved. I was talking about people who are alive now and have an opportunity to know who Jesus is. Babies go back to God automatically if they die. (see 2 Samuel 12:22-24 for an example of what happens when a Baby dies). I think what is more important is the realization that there were a lot of people who lived and died and yet we believe they are in heaven and did not have access to the the same knowledge of Jesus as we do now (see Hebrews 11). These men and women just followed after God with what they knew at the time. Jesus also said that all those who seek him would find him. I believe that this is true no matter what. So that anwers the problem of those who aren't born into Christianity or were born before Christ came. I'm sure that there were billions of people born before Christ will also be in heaven.

Terminology Tuesday: Inference to the Best Explanation - Apologetics 315

Here is the next installment of the series of posts explaining terms from Apologetics from Apologetics 315 blog.

Inference to the Best Explanation: Type of reasoning in which the truth of a theory or proposition is affirmed on the grounds that it best accounts for all of the available evidence. This type of inference is sometimes called "abduction" by those who think it is a type of reasoning distinct from induction or deduction.

Inference to the best explanation is common in daily life, the detective story and science. Advocates of cumulative case apologetics appeal to this kind of argument pattern in arguing for the existence of God.

Terminology Tuesday: Inference to the Best Explanation - Apologetics 315

Favorite Deadliest Warrior Episodes - Wallace vs Shaka Zulu

I found this video at


William Wallace Vs Shaka Zulu

I've blogged about this episode before, but now here is the video.

Richard Carrier vs William Lane Craig Debate MP3 Audio - Apologetics 315

Here is a debate posted on Apologetics 315 between Richard Carrier and William Lane Craig. They are debating about if Jesus'resurrection is true. Here is the Video.

This was a good debate. To be honest Richard Carrier is far more a formidable debater than I thought. I disagree with Dr. Craig that you can have this debate without questioning the veracity of the Bible. Carrier was perfectly in his rights to bring up if the Bible is true or not. I think Carrier is wrong that the gospels are fictitious symbolism. He rejects the idea that the reason why there are so many parallels is because God is painting a picture. Jesus is described as the sacrificial lamb that takes away the sin of the world. If you notice that every part of Jesus' life recorded for us mirrors the Old Testament as to what happens for Yom Kappur (Day of Atonement) and Passover. Why? God told Israel to keep those practices so that we can see Jesus fulfill them. Including there being a scape goat counterpart to Jesus in Barabbas, the murderer that was released instead of Jesus.

I have problems with Carrier equating the accounts by the apostles of Jesus' Resurrection with visions and hallucination. It's a proven scientific fact that two people can't have the same vision. In 1st Corinthians 15, Paul say that 500 people saw Jesus at once! And Paul had no reason to hallucinate Jesus. He was killing Christians! Before He saw Jesus for himself, Paul did not believe Jesus resurrected from the Dead. Carrier is wrong. I did like many of Craig's rebuttals especially about the testimony of women during the first century. Carrier tries to push metaphor and symbolism too far. He also asserted that some Old Testament prophecies were not fullfilled so people reinterpreted them. He offers no proof.

Richard Carrier vs William Lane Craig Debate MP3 Audio - Apologetics 315

Mr. Matthew Bellisario to Appear on the Dividing Line

I just heard that Matthew Bellisario will be on James White's webcast next Thursday, July 9m 2009. Bellisario will be defending Roman Catholic teachings on the Pope. TurrintinFan, one of the bloggers on AOM.org has been gracious enough to pull together resources for anyone who wants to understand what the discussion will be about. Get the information here. This I got to hear!

What Hollywood Believes - Billy Ray Cyrus

Billy Ray Cyrus most definitely has a Christian upbringing and worldview. I sure hope that he is passing this treasure to his children.

"If you're going to stand up for Jesus, your life will be a battle between light and darkness. And for everything that God will bring into your life that represents the light, the devil, he's such a sly fox, will come at you with two times more attributes of evil..."

"I made a lot of mistakes, but I was fortunate that I was brought up in a church where I heard about God's love and His forgiveness. I might have gotten a little wild, but I never left my faith. Luckily, teachings from the Bible were instilled so deep inside me that no matter how far I would stray, I'd still hear that voice that said, "You have a purpose, you have a reason you were put on this earth. you've got to be the person God wants you to be.'"

"By no means...am I proclaiming that I'm this perfect, religious person. I'm not. I'm not all of a sudden stepping up on a pedestal and saying I'm holier than tho, because I'm not. I'm a very imperfect person, but isn't that why God sent his son Jesus to earth? To save sinners like me?"

And like me. I liked this quote. It's not luck that he never forgot what was instilled into him, it's a gift from God.

Palin Announces Resignation on Video

I found a couple of videos of reports of the resignation of Sarah Palin as governor of Alaska. I think it's interesting to contrast Fox News' presentation versus CNN's


Fox News:


CNN:

I have no idea where this is going. We need to pray.

Sunday Quote: Isaac Newton on the Bible - Apologetics 315

Once again we have a great quote from a noted, world-famous scholar from Apologetics 315. This week its Isaac Newton

Sunday Quote: Isaac Newton on the Bible - Apologetics 315:

“I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God, written by those who were inspired. I study the Bible daily.”

- Sir Isaac Newton

Isaac Newton is considered one of the greatest scientist ever. From his 3 laws of motion, you can derive all of classical mechanics in physics.

1. Object stay at rest or stay in motion unless acted upon by an outside force
2. Force = change in momentum over change in time - or more famous - force = mass times acceleration.
3. For ever action there is an equal and opposite reaction.

He was the first to propose the inverse-square law that correctly predicts how the force of gravitation (and electric) fields decrease as you move away from the source. He is credited as one of the men who simultaneous developed derivative calculus! God used this man to contribute much to our knowledge of his creation. While I disagree with some of his theology (he rejected the Trinity as a Biblical doctrine for example) and although he studied mysticism and alchemy, I still admire him a great deal. He was a great scientist and he believed the Bible was true even though none of us completely understand it. He endeavered to understand it just as much he struggled to understand things like gravity and motion.

What Hollywood Believes - Hugh Hefner

This quote from Hefner comes as no surprise but its interesting to look into anyway.

"If a man has a right to find God in own way, he has the right to go the devil in his own way also... Religious leaders can attempt to persuade us of the correctness of their beliefs - they have this right, and indeed it is expected of them. They have no right, however, to attempt in any way to force their belief on others."

I halfway agree with Hefner. The Bible tells us that we don't get to go to God in our own way. Jesus is the only way. This does not mean that there aren't multiple paths, only that they all go through Jesus Christ. I agree that we have no right to force anyone to agree with us but we should warn and inform as much as we can.

What Hollywood Believes - Stephen King

Stephen King said:

"I think he's always been there [his work]...G0d is different in different books because it depends on the people you're writing about. I don't see myself as God's stenographer. As someone who believes in God, believes that God is a logical outgrowth of the fact that life fits together as well as it does, but that doesn't mean that we know God's mind."

King was discussing the existence of God and I agree with him. The fact that life and the universe fits so well together does point to God's existence and there is no way we can know all of God's mind except for what he has revealed to us. I could not tell if King believes that God has revealed himself or how. As a Christian I know the Bible is that revelation.

Ding Dong...Palin Is Gone

I just heard that Sarah Palin has announced today that she is resigning from her post as governor of Alaska. Some suggest that she doing this to free herself for traveling the country so she can run for President in 2012. The thought is that she won't be the target of investigations anymore for what she spends and where her time goes. On the Black Snob blog it's suggested that perhaps some scandal dealing with money will be coming out and she's getting out of the way of the explosion. I think that might be true.

source

What Hollywood Believes - Howard Stern

Howard Stern said:

"I'm sickened by all religion. Religion has divided people. I don't think there's any difference between the pope wearing a large hat and parading around with a smoking purse and an African painting his face white and praying to a rock."

I'm disappointed by Stern's remarks. No shocked, but concerned because of the platform he has. People listen to him. We as people mistakenly equate religion with spirituality. In the West we are great at compartmentalizing. Religion becomes a set of rituals and behaviors we follow for a definite time each week. Otherwise we live as we choose regardless of what those rituals say we believe. It's a lie. While those who worship rocks and other idols (worshiping anything outside of God is an idol) are often way more sincere and consistent in how what they say and do matches what they say they believe. However they believe a lie. Ultimately it's equally sad to live a lie as it is to believe a lie. I disagree with Stern there is a difference. Being a Christian is more than just rituals and behaviors. It should afgfect everything we say and do - how we live.

Truthbomb Apologetics: Featured Article: It Does Not Matter What the Bible Means to You by C Michael Patton

Chad has posted a link to great post on a theology blog, called Parchment and Pen. The article is called It Does Not Matter What The Bible Mean to You. The article points out that the people approach the Bible subjectively when they read it. At worse, some Christians believe that God will miraculously give them a message just for them and only them, and at even more worse people use their own culture, experience, and ideas to interpret the Bible without thinking about if it really is saying what they think it is. Okay, I'm not sure which is worse, but either hermaneutic (method of interpretation) will lead you down the wrong path. This is how some people could read Matthew 27:52,53 and conclude that the Bible has zombies! Iknow, try not to laugh.

⁵²The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. ⁵³They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus' resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

This article by Michael Patton goes a long way in explaining how this happen and why. He also councils that when we read the Bible we should be informed about the circumstances, culture, historical background of the writer when we read the Bible. He's not saying that men wrote the Bible. God inspired these people to write and guided them, but he didn't dictate it. He used their personalities and style to write the scriptures. 2 Peter 1:19-21 says:

And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

I highly recommend this essay!

Source:
Truthbomb Apologetics: Featured Article: It Does Not Matter What the Bible Means to You by C Michael Patton

Terminology Tuesday: Epistemology - Apologetics 315

There is a great series of 10 posts coming out every Tuesday over at Apologetics 315. Each post will define a different term from Apologetics jargon. This week's term is "Epistemology" and it's the first term defined. Check it out. I can't wait to see what next week's term will be! I'm looking forward to expanding my vocabulary

Terminology Tuesday: Epistemology - Apologetics 315

Truthbomb Apologetics: A Pre-Release Strike: The Lost Symbol by Dan Brown

Over at Truthbomb Apologetics, Dan Brown's new book is being announced and resources for finding out the truths behind the book are listed. This post is important. I am certain that a movie will be made based on this move too.

Truthbomb Apologetics: A Pre-Release Strike: The Lost Symbol by Dan Brown

Is It Gospel? Hazakim's" Book of Books"

I love this song....let me just get that out first. The important thing to understand that the duo, two brothers, making up the group Hazakim refer to their music as "Hip Hop Hopologetics". They use hip hop music to praise God and teach apologetics. I enjoy the way they put their music together and the messages they convey. They have a new album coming out June 23, 2009.

This particular post is about Hazakim's song "Book of Books". I like this song because it talks about how important the Bible is. It reminds me that it really is a gift from God. In the Bible we get to hear the voice of God as he moved people to write down and record his messages. The Bible is extremely relavent for us today as it is for all time. This song is a great apologetic.

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. - 2 Timothy 3: 16-17

Take a listen to the track:

Hazakim - Book of ...

This song is most definitely a gospel song.

Astrophysics Points to the God of the Bible MP3 Audio by Hugh Ross - Apologetics 315

Over at Apologetics 315 - Astrophysicist, Hugh Ross explains how the fine tuning of the universe is evidence for the existence of the God described in the Bible. Listen to the mp3.

I like the lecture a lot. Hugh Ross did a good job of showing that the Universe was created out of nothing and points to a cause who is just like the God described in the Bible. The evidence says that the cause must be external to the space-time continuum.


Astrophysics Points to the God of the Bible MP3 Audio by Hugh Ross - Apologetics 315

The Surahs of the Qur'an in Chronological Order

On his blog, James White posted a chart containing a chart placing the Surah of the Koran in a possible Chronological order.

96	68	73	74	1	111	81	87	92	89	93	94	103	100
108	102	107	109	105	113	114	112	53	80	97	91	85	95
106	101	75	104	77	50	90	86	54	38	7	72	36	25
35	19	20	56	26	27	28	17	10	11	12	15	6	37
31	34	39	40	41	42	43	44	45	46	51	88	18	16
71	14	21	23	32	52	67	69	70	78	79	82	84	30
29	83	2	68	3	33	60	4	99	57	47	13	55	76
65	98	59	24	22	63	58	49	66	64	61	62	48	5
8-9	110

What Hollywood Believes: James Taylor

James Taylor was quoted in What Hollywood Believes as saying that he believes that spirituality is an important part of recovery from drugs and alcohol. However he did say that his songs were "spirituals for agnostics." I think what is really telling is his answer to the question: "Does not having faith in a person God make it harder to stick with a 12-step recovery program?" He said:

"Twelve step programs say an interesting thing: Either you have a God, or you are God and don't want the job."

This freaked me out. I hope not all programs teach such a bad idea. It really speaks to where we are in our culture however. People have taken god off the thrones of their lives and replaced Him with themselves. This is why we are in the state we are in as a species and society.

James White debates Imam Shams

Last week Dr. James White debated the leader of the largest Mosque in New York, Imam Shams. I've had the opportunity to see portions of it. Hopefully we will get to see and hear more of it considering that it was well-documented. Dr White commented on it in his blog and he was on the Iron Sharpens Iron radio program discussing it. The link is on his blog. He even was nice enough to post some of the debate on YouTube

What Hollywood Believes: Bob Dylan

What Hollywood Believe records two thought from Bob Dylan that I find interesting. In the first one Dylan said:

"I feel a heartfelt God. I don't particularly think that God want me thinking about Him all the time. I think that would be tremendous burden on Him, you know. He's got enough people asking Him for favors. He's got enough people asking Him to pull string."

I get his sentiment, I just don't agree. God can do anything and can hear the prayers and thoughts of every human being every where and every when at the same time. I agree we should be more concerned with serving Him rather than what He will do for us.

When Dylan was asked about the nature of religion I really liked what he said.

"Well, religion is repressive to a certain degree. Religion is another form of bondage which man invents to get himself to God. But that's why Christ came. Christ didn't preach religion. He preached the Truth, the Way and the Life. He said He'd come to give life and life more abundantly. He talked about life, not necessarily religion... "

"A religion which says you have to do certain things to get to God...,which is by works: you can enter into the Kingdom by what you do, what you wear,what you say, how many times a day yopu pray, how many goood deeds you may do...That type of religion will not get you into the Kingdom, that's true. However there is a Master Crerator, a Supreme Being in the Universe."

Paul's Earthly Remains Found?

Fox news is reporting that the remains of Apostle Paul's body has been found under the bascillaca that bears his name in Rome. I've got two points:

1. What kind of remains were found? It's been 2 thousand years under most circumstances a human body would have long fallen into dust.
2. I think it's debatable as to whether or not Roman Catholic doctrine really reflects the writing of Apostle Paul.

Sunday Quote: John Polkinghorne on Fine-Tuning - Apologetics 315

Here is another great Sunday quote from Apologetics 315. This was awesome.

Sunday Quote: John Polkinghorne on Fine-Tuning - Apologetics 315:

“When you realize that the laws of nature must be incredibly finely tuned to produce the universe we see, that conspires to plant the idea that the universe did not just happen, but that there must be a purpose behind it.”

– John Polkinghorne

I fully agree because when you study the order of the universe...its structure...its qualities and characteristics you must can't help but be struck by the sheer awesomeness and the unmistakable fact that it is bigger than you. Something that has such intricate and ingenius design - from the galaxies to the Solar Systems to the planets to our bodies to subatomic particles - point to a mind that thought it up and carried it out. It's the only logical conclusion.

Gospel According To Transformers 2

One of the criticisms of Transformers Revenge of the Fallen is that it has no plot, no deepness. There are those who think that there is nothing of philosophical value in this movie. I could not disagree more. Yes there were plenty of action, spectacular special effects, and Megan Fox. Plenty of eye candy but nothing to make you think about anything important, right? Wrong. I saw duty and sacrifice modeled and exampled as themes in this movie and its predecessor. From the first film the theme "No sacrifice, no victory." was also drawn upon. We see several human and Autobots choose to do what was right to protect others no matter the cost to themselves. Another point is that came up is that we can choose to be good or bad like Jetfire or Wheelie. See the film to see what I am referring to. One of the quotes from the film that got my intention was when Optimus Prime said to Sam Witwicky:

"Fate rarely calls upon us at a time of our choosing."

That is profound especially our culture seems to be scizophrenic when it comes to what we believe about free will and destiny. Which is it? Do you choose your lot in life or does it choose you or does God orchistrate everything?

"Fate" is defined as follows:

1.	something that unavoidably befalls a person; fortune; lot: It is always his fate to be left behind.

2.	the universal principle or ultimate agency by which the order of things is presumably prescribed; the decreed cause of events; time: Fate decreed that they would never meet again.

3.	that which is inevitably predetermined; destiny: Death is our ineluctable fate.

4.	a prophetic declaration of what must be: The oracle pronounced their fate.

5.	death, destruction, or ruin.

6.	the Fates, Classical Mythology. the three goddesses of destiny, known to the Greeks as the Moerae and to the Romans as the Parcae.

–verb (used with object)

7.	to predetermine, as by the decree of fate; destine (used in the passive): a person who was fated to be the savior of the country.

While "destiny" is defined:

1.	something that is to happen or has happened to a particular person or thing; lot or fortune.

2.	the predetermined, usually inevitable or irresistible, course of events.

3.	the power or agency that determines the course of events.

4.	(initial capital letter) this power personified or represented as a goddess.

5.	the Destinies, the Fates.

It seems to me that fate and destiny are almost the same thing. I'd say that we don't have the complete control over the circumstances that come up in life or what our ultimate purpose is in the plans and purposes of God, but we do have choice about our attitude and how we respond to that destiny.

What Hollywood Believes: Arnold Schwarzenegger

Arnold Schwarzenegger said that he believes in God, but he defines that with respect to the fact he know evil exist. He seems to hold to the duality picture of reality. If there is evil then there must be good. I bought this for a while until I realized that there was point in the past where there was only God. No Angels, No Universe. Nothing but God. God is good. Therefore good can exist without evil! God's existence is not contingent on anything. But everything including the devil is contingent on Him.