Here Charlotte has gone mostly beyond theology, into science. This is a theological blog, so I will focus on the claims that the Scriptures cannot possibly support an old earth interpretation. This is simply not true.
The Hebrew word for day is "yowm". It has been shown to be used as a literal day or a figurative day, depending on the context it is used. For example:
Genesis 2.4 : "At the time when God made the earth and the heavens." (Period of time, not day)
(Above is traslation in The Bible: An American Translation)
How about the usage of "evening" ('ereb) and "morning" (boqer)? Surely these must show that it's a literal day, right? Wrong. They are used as a segment of time as well, such as in Psalm 55.17: "Evening, morning and noon I cry out in distress, and he hears my voice". Also in Daniel 8.26: "The vision of the evenings and mornings that has been given to you is true, but seal up the vision, for it concerns the distant future." Mornings and evenings are used frequently to show periods of time, not specific times of day.
Boquer also doesn't always even mean morning. It is figuratively translated in the English Lexicon and The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew as "of bright joy after a night of distress". After all this, boqer and 'ereb can be the following:
Boqer: Ending, morning, dawning light
'Ereb: Beginning, evening, darkness
After the meanings of "yowm", "boqer", and "ereb" are explained, it is clear that Genesis could be very easily interpreted as an age. Isaac E Mozeson is a Christian linguist. He, along with many others, holds that Hebrew is the language from which almost all others stem. Here's an excerpt from his book "The Word":
"While the Hebrew Letter Yod'/Y is more likely to take an I/i in Greek, the Yod takes an A in AEON as well as in AGONY. Any theological agony over the geological age of the earth is unnecessary, as YOM (Day-Gen 1.5) is better translated as AEON (an age). YOM is the term used in phrases like "ancient times" and "the middle ages". Juma is a week in Swahili. YOM can infer any period of time."
Helpful sources:
http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth/genesis1.html#NTxMKhRBScih
http://www.accuracyingenesis.com/day.html
Mozeson, Isaac E. "The Word"
Friday, February 26, 2010
Friday, January 15, 2010
CTS- Biblical Intolerance
Here Charlotte is arguing that Christians are intolerant of others. Intolerance means a refusal to tolerate or respect anothers' beliefs. Charlotte takes this even farther to say that the Bible demands that Christians be intolerant to others. Then a list begins with many verses pertaining to intolerance of other religions, so here we go. These are not numbered, so I'm going to list them by verses. For this section, I'd like to make readers aware that if you follow another religion, than this section may be strongly offensive to you.
Killing non-Christians:
Throughout the Old Testament non-Christians were killed because of worshipping other gods. Worship of other gods is worship of demons. From the very beginnings of civilization demons have been leading men astray using many methods. A very key one is possessing or conversing with humans to begin a new religion. For example, look at the many similarities between Mormon and Islam. For a list click here. It is the same thing with witches and other users of dark magic. Those powers are very real, but they come from pacts with Satan. These pacts are never worth it, the cost always far outweighs the initial power. These followers of other religions were killed so that people know the gods their families followed had no actual power. They were either worshipping demons or carved material. In the New Testament there are reminders that non-Christians will ultimately be judged and found guilty.
Ignorance is bliss:
1) This verse says to not let the deceivers into your house or welcome them. Charlotte has interpreted "deceiver" to mean "non-Christian", which is not the case. John was actually writing a warning about false teachers. The teachers have claimed to be Christians, but preached heresy such as "Jesus wasn't really God" "All religions get you to heaven" and the like.m To allow heretics into your house would be the equivalent of inviting them to share their message, a lie.
2 John 1
2) This is the same idea as 2 John above. Heretics were twisting Scripture and misleading people so that denominations without legitimate truth were being created, such as Docetists and Arianists. They did these things for their own benefits, so the Romans were to stay away from them so they weren't at risk.
Romans 16
3) Again Charlotte makes empty insults, and misrepresents Scripture. "The verse see to it that you are not taken captive by hollow and deceptive philosophy." It wouldn't make sense to encourage Evangelism and then tell Christians to avoid philosophers, would it? The funny thing is, it says later "which depends on human traditions and the basic principles of this world rather than Christ". Sounds a lot like Naturalism, doesn't it?
Colossians 2
Judge others for not following Christ:
Charlotte shows here a lack of understanding the process of Justification. When we accept Jesus Christ His blood fulfills the requirements of the Law, and were become "of God". The people who have not accepted Jesus have yet to fulfill the requirements of the Law because they cannot on their own. This is why people go to Hell. Recall that Scripture is inspired by God, this is God judging non-believers, not Christians. Also, as I've said above, in 2 John it is not referring to nonbelievers as deceivers and anti-Christs, it is referring to heretics of the Christian faith. As for non-Christians having evil hearts, all humans have evil hearts. Once we accept Atonement and are Justified, the process of Sanctification. This process continues throught the our lifetimes and it is only through this process that God purifies our hearts.
Charlotte's favorites:
1) Charlotte's commentary was "Everyone will worship Jesus--whether they want to or not." Since when is bowing worship? Bowing your knee to Jesus is submission, not worship. Jesus has been exalted to the Highest Place because of His sacrifice on the Cross, and will be revealed in all His glory at the 2nd Coming. Jesus has so much glory that one can do nothing but submit, it's something that, once that time comes, you will be glad to do, not forced.
Phillipians 2
2) Here the commentary was "you can't judge a Christian for a wrongful act". The key word is judge. This doesn't mean judge as in convict of a crime, but rather to make a statement about the Christian's relationship with God or personal character. It is reiterated many times that Christians make mistakes, we are human and forgiven.
Romans 8
Killing non-Christians:
Throughout the Old Testament non-Christians were killed because of worshipping other gods. Worship of other gods is worship of demons. From the very beginnings of civilization demons have been leading men astray using many methods. A very key one is possessing or conversing with humans to begin a new religion. For example, look at the many similarities between Mormon and Islam. For a list click here. It is the same thing with witches and other users of dark magic. Those powers are very real, but they come from pacts with Satan. These pacts are never worth it, the cost always far outweighs the initial power. These followers of other religions were killed so that people know the gods their families followed had no actual power. They were either worshipping demons or carved material. In the New Testament there are reminders that non-Christians will ultimately be judged and found guilty.
Ignorance is bliss:
1) This verse says to not let the deceivers into your house or welcome them. Charlotte has interpreted "deceiver" to mean "non-Christian", which is not the case. John was actually writing a warning about false teachers. The teachers have claimed to be Christians, but preached heresy such as "Jesus wasn't really God" "All religions get you to heaven" and the like.m To allow heretics into your house would be the equivalent of inviting them to share their message, a lie.
2 John 1
2) This is the same idea as 2 John above. Heretics were twisting Scripture and misleading people so that denominations without legitimate truth were being created, such as Docetists and Arianists. They did these things for their own benefits, so the Romans were to stay away from them so they weren't at risk.
Romans 16
3) Again Charlotte makes empty insults, and misrepresents Scripture. "The verse see to it that you are not taken captive by hollow and deceptive philosophy." It wouldn't make sense to encourage Evangelism and then tell Christians to avoid philosophers, would it? The funny thing is, it says later "which depends on human traditions and the basic principles of this world rather than Christ". Sounds a lot like Naturalism, doesn't it?
Colossians 2
Judge others for not following Christ:
Charlotte shows here a lack of understanding the process of Justification. When we accept Jesus Christ His blood fulfills the requirements of the Law, and were become "of God". The people who have not accepted Jesus have yet to fulfill the requirements of the Law because they cannot on their own. This is why people go to Hell. Recall that Scripture is inspired by God, this is God judging non-believers, not Christians. Also, as I've said above, in 2 John it is not referring to nonbelievers as deceivers and anti-Christs, it is referring to heretics of the Christian faith. As for non-Christians having evil hearts, all humans have evil hearts. Once we accept Atonement and are Justified, the process of Sanctification. This process continues throught the our lifetimes and it is only through this process that God purifies our hearts.
Charlotte's favorites:
1) Charlotte's commentary was "Everyone will worship Jesus--whether they want to or not." Since when is bowing worship? Bowing your knee to Jesus is submission, not worship. Jesus has been exalted to the Highest Place because of His sacrifice on the Cross, and will be revealed in all His glory at the 2nd Coming. Jesus has so much glory that one can do nothing but submit, it's something that, once that time comes, you will be glad to do, not forced.
Phillipians 2
2) Here the commentary was "you can't judge a Christian for a wrongful act". The key word is judge. This doesn't mean judge as in convict of a crime, but rather to make a statement about the Christian's relationship with God or personal character. It is reiterated many times that Christians make mistakes, we are human and forgiven.
Romans 8
Thursday, December 3, 2009
CTS-Do not ignore OT
Charlotte is right here, the Old Testament is certainly not to be ignored. It shows the story of God pursuing man throughout history despite continual sin, and man's continual rejection because of convenience. That being said, this does not mean that the Law is still ruling over Christians, see below.
1-10) You must understand the purpose of the Law to understand why we no longer are required to follow all of it. Many parts of it address things that would be wrong in a practical sense during the time period. Modern advances has reduced the need for such guidelines because this has become common knowledge, such as mixing cotton and linen in clothes. The Law is still in effect, Salvation is based on a legal system. All human beings are subject to the Law, which is why it endures, unless they call on the name of Jesus Christ and have accepted Him during their lifetime. All humans are sinful, so none will pass the Law without Jesus. The reason that Christians are not longer under the Law is because Jesus fulfilled it for them and created a New Covenant. This New Covenant is between God and Jesus coming on our behalf, and Jesus fulfilled his side with the crucifixion. This puts Christians under grace, not the Law. However, the reason we are still called to do things like abstain from sexual immorality, gluttony, etc is because they hurt our relationship with the Lord. We are now called to spread the Gospel and grow in relationship with Christ, which is our ultimate purpose.
11) The first two are both examples of judgement commanded by God toward the Egyptians. It wasn't theft because the Israelites had been in unpaid slavery, this was at least some compensation. The next part was borrowing a colt, that's not stealing. Furthermore, it must be remembered that God created everything, so even that colt was ultimately His.
12) The judging being condemned here is the act of passing judgment on another person based on your limited knowledge of them. The phrase Jesus used in John 7 is actually used to provoke thought. People are limited many times by what they see, and if they allow themselves to be limited like that then they cannot make a right judgement. Jesus is telling them to get past mere appearances, not to judge people.
13) A better translation in 1 Corinthians is the one used in the NIV, it merely says earnestly desire. Coveting as used in Exodus is being jealous of another's possessions, rather than earnestly wanting. So, don't be jealous, but a holy desire is fine.
14) The lying spirit mentioned in 1 Kings was Satan, and God was allowing Satan to test Ahab. Satan makes requests of God to test people, and God allows it, such as the case with Job. It wasn't God that was forcing them to lie, it was Satan and God was testing their faith.
26) This was already addressed in the article "Rape in the Bible". For that click here. Basically they have inserted a lot of words into the verse. To understand it you must understand the historical context. Virgins were considered "pure" and therefore allowed to live as a servant for the soldiers' households. Men were even allowed to marry them if they so chose, but never rape them.
27) The link from layhands.com posted below is really helpful. Drunkenness is a sin because your judgement is impaired and you are very prone to additional sin. Drinking in moderation is not a sin, but for it not to be you must examine your motive for drinking. Drinking for a "buzz" is an early stage of drunkenness, or and fitting in is dealt with in James 4:4. Proverbs 31 uses win and beer as a symbol, obvious if you keep in mind the genre of the book.
31) Already answered in #24 above.
32) We are not required to keep the Sabbath day because of the New Covenant. Jesus had come to teach us the New Covenant and do away with the altered original Law that were keeping man from growing towards God because of fear of His commands. He came to save us, and didn't even violate the Sabbath. The Pharisees had messed up the Sabbath day with all kinds of restrictions, and Jesus was attacked for healing someone, not working for personal gain at all.
33) A graven image here means an idol. An idol is an object of worship. "You shall worship none but the Lord your God". The Cherubim on the Ark were never objects of worship, therefore they are not the graven images described. The rest were also not objects of worship, they were made for the temple for worship of God.
Sources:
1-10) You must understand the purpose of the Law to understand why we no longer are required to follow all of it. Many parts of it address things that would be wrong in a practical sense during the time period. Modern advances has reduced the need for such guidelines because this has become common knowledge, such as mixing cotton and linen in clothes. The Law is still in effect, Salvation is based on a legal system. All human beings are subject to the Law, which is why it endures, unless they call on the name of Jesus Christ and have accepted Him during their lifetime. All humans are sinful, so none will pass the Law without Jesus. The reason that Christians are not longer under the Law is because Jesus fulfilled it for them and created a New Covenant. This New Covenant is between God and Jesus coming on our behalf, and Jesus fulfilled his side with the crucifixion. This puts Christians under grace, not the Law. However, the reason we are still called to do things like abstain from sexual immorality, gluttony, etc is because they hurt our relationship with the Lord. We are now called to spread the Gospel and grow in relationship with Christ, which is our ultimate purpose.
11) The first two are both examples of judgement commanded by God toward the Egyptians. It wasn't theft because the Israelites had been in unpaid slavery, this was at least some compensation. The next part was borrowing a colt, that's not stealing. Furthermore, it must be remembered that God created everything, so even that colt was ultimately His.
12) The judging being condemned here is the act of passing judgment on another person based on your limited knowledge of them. The phrase Jesus used in John 7 is actually used to provoke thought. People are limited many times by what they see, and if they allow themselves to be limited like that then they cannot make a right judgement. Jesus is telling them to get past mere appearances, not to judge people.
13) A better translation in 1 Corinthians is the one used in the NIV, it merely says earnestly desire. Coveting as used in Exodus is being jealous of another's possessions, rather than earnestly wanting. So, don't be jealous, but a holy desire is fine.
14) The lying spirit mentioned in 1 Kings was Satan, and God was allowing Satan to test Ahab. Satan makes requests of God to test people, and God allows it, such as the case with Job. It wasn't God that was forcing them to lie, it was Satan and God was testing their faith.
15) Charlotte made a mistake here. The commandment says "do not murder" meaning do not wrongfully kill other human beings. All of the instances of killing throughout the Bible are a result of war or capital punishment. For a complete list click here.
16) Here Charlotte attempts to play the card of slavery. Slavery in Biblical times was not as we understand it now. Then it was what we now call indentured servitude. Families would sell themselves or children into slavery for a period of time in order to pay a debt, like Jacob did in order to marry Rachel. They were also not treated as badly because of the Bible's laws governing it. For a complete explanation with examples click here.
17) First of all, Luke 12:3 says nothing about improvidence. The giving spoken of in Luke 6 is generosity, not improvidence. Jesus is telling the disciples to lend to those who need it because they need it, not because you will get something in return. This type of generosity is pleasing to God. The improvidence condemned later is actual improvidence. Verse 6 reads: "The widow who lives for pleasure even while she lives is dead". This places the verse into the context of selfishness, the family is not being provided before because of the satisfaction of sinful desires.
18) Anger is something acknowledged in the Bible, but not condemned. We are warned against it because it can cloud our judgement, but is not sinful in and of itself. We are told not be be well-acquainted with angry men because of their tendency to lack self control as well.
19) Jesus is acknowledging a careful boundary Christians have regarding our works. We are to do good works for the benefit of mankind and to show the kind of things God can do through people because of Jesus. This is being light for mankind. The other side is doing good works for the purpose of getting patted on the back by men. We are supposed to do good works for general benefit and for God, not for men. Also, this is outside of the Old Testament, so why is his here?
20) Charlotte did not incorporate the context into her interpretation of Matthew 6. Verse 5 reads: "And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for the love to pray standing in the synagogues and on street corners to be seen by men". God enjoy public prayer, but not when it is simply, like #19, for the sake of being seen as righteous. Jesus says go into your rooms and pray privately so that you don't fall to the temptation of doing it for show, not sincerity. God enjoys it greatly when people gather together in order to pray and learn because it shows their love for Him.
21) Hair was important in ancient cultures as a sign of vitality and life. The Nazirites were a people God had set apart, like Sampson. He required them to grow out their hair in order to show their distinction, especially from priests who were forbidden to shave their heads but frequently trimmed it. This also showed their sanctity along with the other vows they had to take, prohibition from drinking wine and not being allowed to touch corpses. In the New Testament long hair was the modern day equivalent of cross dressing. Paul is prohibiting this because it encourages homosexuality and deciding you know better than God which gender you should be.
22) In the OT the Israelites were circumcised to show that God had set them apart. Modern medicine also shows that circumcision decreases chances of infection and diseases. It was because of this requirement that people began to see circumcised people as more holy than others because the Israelites were God's people. The Galatians passage was reminding them that just because they were once set apart as an Israelite does not make them any better than others. That was a passage condemning pride, rather than condemning circumcision.
23) It is not imperative that Christians keep kosher. Like I said, not every single law was intended to point out sin. There's a practical application here. The first source explains why we don't follow the Old Testament, but the reason for many of these laws of kosher were intended to preform a ceremony giving glory to God and to eat healthy foods. A new covenant is now in effect, so we don't need to keep these laws, and now our society has ways of making them more healthy. Peter's vision in Acts 10 was a metaphor used to remind Peter that God has now accepted all peoples. Peter understood the vision after he was given the opportunity to witness to a non-Jewish family. This fact is just a reminder of the intention of the verse, but Galatians and 1 Corinthians deal with kosher.
24) Oaths are allowed. Taking oaths in God's name is a method of worship and confession. What God was acting against when He condemned it was taking His name in vain or asking Him to confirm a lie. People throughout the Bible took oaths in God's name. In Matthew Jesus was telling people not to take oaths based on earthly things because they will eventually pass away. This would implie the oath is temporary.
25) Marriage is a good thing. This is a verse saying that God is impartial to couples versus single people. Marriage is a symbol of Christ and the church, and there are many metaphors of marriage throughout Scripture. 1 Corinthians 7:2 even states that it is good for every man to get married because of all the immorality around, namely fornication. This is prevalent even today, just turn on the TV.26) This was already addressed in the article "Rape in the Bible". For that click here. Basically they have inserted a lot of words into the verse. To understand it you must understand the historical context. Virgins were considered "pure" and therefore allowed to live as a servant for the soldiers' households. Men were even allowed to marry them if they so chose, but never rape them.
27) The link from layhands.com posted below is really helpful. Drunkenness is a sin because your judgement is impaired and you are very prone to additional sin. Drinking in moderation is not a sin, but for it not to be you must examine your motive for drinking. Drinking for a "buzz" is an early stage of drunkenness, or and fitting in is dealt with in James 4:4. Proverbs 31 uses win and beer as a symbol, obvious if you keep in mind the genre of the book.
28) Women do have rights. Men were appointed by God to be leaders of their families. The relationship of man and woman is representative of Christ and the church. Men are called to love their wives like Christ does the church, which would mean men aer to show their wives respect. When women become the authority in the house it gives a lopsided view of Christ and the church. This relationship does not by any means require that God only use men. God uses women throughout history both to show the Israelites that He is not limited by their expectations and to speak to a different audience. God sees men and women as equal.
29) We are not to usurp authority unless they are going against God's will. All authority was put in place by God, be it to test our faith or to learn from them. God says "Be not servants of men". He is just clarifying that we are ultimately under His authority, no righteous authority can go against His will.
30) This was already answered in #1-#10 above.31) Already answered in #24 above.
32) We are not required to keep the Sabbath day because of the New Covenant. Jesus had come to teach us the New Covenant and do away with the altered original Law that were keeping man from growing towards God because of fear of His commands. He came to save us, and didn't even violate the Sabbath. The Pharisees had messed up the Sabbath day with all kinds of restrictions, and Jesus was attacked for healing someone, not working for personal gain at all.
33) A graven image here means an idol. An idol is an object of worship. "You shall worship none but the Lord your God". The Cherubim on the Ark were never objects of worship, therefore they are not the graven images described. The rest were also not objects of worship, they were made for the temple for worship of God.
Sources:
www.lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVarticles/WhyWeDontFollowTheOldTestament.htm www.wcg.org/lit/law/otl/
www.conservapedia.com/Naziritewww.layhands.com/CanChristiansDrinkAlcohol.htm
www.hcna.us/columns/why_arent_christians_kosher.htm
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
CTS- End Times
Here Charlotte examines the many prophecies made by Jesus and His disciples concerning the End Times. Many are the same points reiterated by several people. Charlotte accused apologists as "weaseling out of it" by making the argument Jesus was speaking of His later apostles. Charlotte blatantly ignores the relative nature of the word "soon". She also interprets verses out of context in order to prove her point. She also uses phrases like "lives and dies on the resurrection and end times" which are nowhere to be found in the Bible. The Bible lives and dies on every verse disprove any one and it cannot be trusted. However, it has yet to really debunked, so that should say something. There's also a website which has a complete list of prophecies fulfilled modern day, for that click here.
In many of these examples the word that Charlotte points out time and time again is the word "soon". She neglects to mention the subjective nature of the word. Keep in mind any amount of time relative to eternity would seem short. Also, the knowledge of the time period and the nature of the followers of Jesus must be kept in mind. Because of the disciples' deep relationship with the Lord, they were able to look at it from an eternal standpoint. Jesus also called His followers to "make disciples of all nations". Keep in mind that the Americas and much of the world were not discovered then, so this prophecy could not have been fulfilled yet at this time, there were nations not yet made disciples of. Now, let's get started.
1) All Jesus said was "You will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and riding on the clouds of heaven". He never said you will live to see it, but even those in Hell will witness the End Times. He never said in his lifetime, either, merely "you will see". (Matthew 26:64 and Mark 14:62)
2) This first example could not be more out of context. Jesus is condemning the Pharisees for their hypocrisy and is prophesying that prophets and apostles will be crucified and flogged because of them. He finishes with "all things will come upon this generation" referring to these very Pharisees witnessing these acts against the church. (Matthew 23:36).
In the next part, Charlotte is fussing over the word roughly translated as generation. In fact, a more accurate translation would be tribe, meaning that Judah will never cease to exist as a distinct people, and they still have not. (Matthew 24:20-35)
3) The phrase Charlotte is now scrutinizing is the phrase "some who are standing here will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming into his kingdom". This is not referring to End Times at all, but rather to the Ascension that shortly followed the Crucifixion. Christ ascended into his kingdom to make ready a place for the church. (Matthew 16:28)
4) This is the same exact speech from Matthew 24 above. Jesus is referring to the line of Judas when he says generation, and they have yet to pass away. (Mark 13:30-31). Mark 9:1 is also the same thing as the verse in #3.
5) Apparently Charlotte is unaware that the four Gospels are all accounts of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. This is the same phrase as Mark 9:1 and Matthew 16. There were 500 people who witness the resurrected Jesus before he ascended to heaven, plus 11 disciples. (Luke 9:27)
6) Jesus does not in any way imply that John will survive until the End Times. Peter asked about John and he replied "If I want him to remain alive, what is it to you?" This is essentially "don't worry about him, just worry about following me." (John 21:22)
7) Again Charlotte fails to realize that the different Gospels are all accounts of the life of Jesus Christ. This has been answers already. The word that is roughly translated as generation can also be translated more accurately to mean race. Clearly, the Jews have not passed away, have they? (Luke 21:25-33)
8) "Shortly" is a very subjective word. It is because of Jesus' influence on the disciples that they are able to see time through the knowledge of eternity. Eternity makes every other period time seem extremely short, hence the "soon" and "shortly". (Revelation 1:1-3)
9) This is essentially the same idea as above. John was able to see the world through the knowledge that the world would pass away, but there was an eternity afterwards. (Revelation 22:7, 12, & 20)
10) First of all, let's clear up who, or what, the antichrist is. The antichrist is Satan manifested as a human, much like Jesus was. He has done this throughout history in order to trip up God's people. John recognizes that Satan is doing this more often now because Satan's time is up on Judgment Day. Satan wants to stamp out the Christian faith, and does it in a number of ways including making it seem irrational, killing Christians, and twisting God's Word. No Christians means that Revelation's predictions cannot come true, and this is what Satan wants. (1 John 2:18)
11) Apparently Charlotte did not know the above statement, the fact that the antichrist is Satan. Satan has been around longer than humanity has. He is still around today, deceiving those he is able to and "seeking whom he may devour". The spirit of the antichrist is still around today. (1 John 4:3)
12) Again, Jesus is able to see time from an eternal standpoint. Everything would seem "soon", it's a subjective word. Soon is accurate as well because Jesus has called us to make disciples of all nations, and the more time we get the more people will end up in heaven. Because of the sheer number of non-Christians, we need time to accomplish this. (Revelation 3:11, 22:7, 12 & 20)
In many of these examples the word that Charlotte points out time and time again is the word "soon". She neglects to mention the subjective nature of the word. Keep in mind any amount of time relative to eternity would seem short. Also, the knowledge of the time period and the nature of the followers of Jesus must be kept in mind. Because of the disciples' deep relationship with the Lord, they were able to look at it from an eternal standpoint. Jesus also called His followers to "make disciples of all nations". Keep in mind that the Americas and much of the world were not discovered then, so this prophecy could not have been fulfilled yet at this time, there were nations not yet made disciples of. Now, let's get started.
1) All Jesus said was "You will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and riding on the clouds of heaven". He never said you will live to see it, but even those in Hell will witness the End Times. He never said in his lifetime, either, merely "you will see". (Matthew 26:64 and Mark 14:62)
2) This first example could not be more out of context. Jesus is condemning the Pharisees for their hypocrisy and is prophesying that prophets and apostles will be crucified and flogged because of them. He finishes with "all things will come upon this generation" referring to these very Pharisees witnessing these acts against the church. (Matthew 23:36).
In the next part, Charlotte is fussing over the word roughly translated as generation. In fact, a more accurate translation would be tribe, meaning that Judah will never cease to exist as a distinct people, and they still have not. (Matthew 24:20-35)
3) The phrase Charlotte is now scrutinizing is the phrase "some who are standing here will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming into his kingdom". This is not referring to End Times at all, but rather to the Ascension that shortly followed the Crucifixion. Christ ascended into his kingdom to make ready a place for the church. (Matthew 16:28)
4) This is the same exact speech from Matthew 24 above. Jesus is referring to the line of Judas when he says generation, and they have yet to pass away. (Mark 13:30-31). Mark 9:1 is also the same thing as the verse in #3.
5) Apparently Charlotte is unaware that the four Gospels are all accounts of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. This is the same phrase as Mark 9:1 and Matthew 16. There were 500 people who witness the resurrected Jesus before he ascended to heaven, plus 11 disciples. (Luke 9:27)
6) Jesus does not in any way imply that John will survive until the End Times. Peter asked about John and he replied "If I want him to remain alive, what is it to you?" This is essentially "don't worry about him, just worry about following me." (John 21:22)
7) Again Charlotte fails to realize that the different Gospels are all accounts of the life of Jesus Christ. This has been answers already. The word that is roughly translated as generation can also be translated more accurately to mean race. Clearly, the Jews have not passed away, have they? (Luke 21:25-33)
8) "Shortly" is a very subjective word. It is because of Jesus' influence on the disciples that they are able to see time through the knowledge of eternity. Eternity makes every other period time seem extremely short, hence the "soon" and "shortly". (Revelation 1:1-3)
9) This is essentially the same idea as above. John was able to see the world through the knowledge that the world would pass away, but there was an eternity afterwards. (Revelation 22:7, 12, & 20)
10) First of all, let's clear up who, or what, the antichrist is. The antichrist is Satan manifested as a human, much like Jesus was. He has done this throughout history in order to trip up God's people. John recognizes that Satan is doing this more often now because Satan's time is up on Judgment Day. Satan wants to stamp out the Christian faith, and does it in a number of ways including making it seem irrational, killing Christians, and twisting God's Word. No Christians means that Revelation's predictions cannot come true, and this is what Satan wants. (1 John 2:18)
11) Apparently Charlotte did not know the above statement, the fact that the antichrist is Satan. Satan has been around longer than humanity has. He is still around today, deceiving those he is able to and "seeking whom he may devour". The spirit of the antichrist is still around today. (1 John 4:3)
12) Again, Jesus is able to see time from an eternal standpoint. Everything would seem "soon", it's a subjective word. Soon is accurate as well because Jesus has called us to make disciples of all nations, and the more time we get the more people will end up in heaven. Because of the sheer number of non-Christians, we need time to accomplish this. (Revelation 3:11, 22:7, 12 & 20)
13) In Philippians Paul merely writes "the Lord is near". The Lord is always near to us, regardless of how close Judgment Day is. He is listening to our prayers and actively working in our society, so how could he be doing that and not be near? In fact, Judgement isn't even mentioned in Philippians 4. (Philippians 4:5)
14) Paul has deemed our time and his the "Last Days" because all that is left for God to do is to set everything in motion for Final Judgement. These are the days between Christ's 1st and 2nd coming, and the title is also meant to give us a sense of urgency, because we don't know the "time or dates the Father has set by His own accord". (Hebrews 1:2)
15) Again, from an eternal standpoint the time between the early days of the Church and Christ's 2nd coming is not a long time. This language is also thought to be used in order to create urgency within the Church because every minute people die, and it is up to us to make sure those people are going to heaven. (Hebrews 10:37)
16) Charlotte makes a large assumption here. Paul says "we who are still living" in the passage, and she interprets that to mean that Paul is sure he will be living when it happens. He merely means that he is alive at this moment in time, and, if it were to happen now, he would be brought into the sky with the saints. The rest of the passage is a prophecy. (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17)
17) This is again one of Charlotte's arguments dealing with the word "soon". This subjective word must be understood in light of eternity. The only difference is that it is now James. (James 5:8)
18) This is dealing with the word "soon" again. The only difference is it is now Peter. (1 Peter 1:20 & 4:7)
Not even one of these can go without an explanation, yet more evidence for the inerrancy of the Bible. These "contradictions" are pointed out either because of the use of the word "soon" or something being unclear because of grammar or translation.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
CTS-Evils of the Torah
This is Charlotte's first essay on the "evils" committed in the Torah, the first five books of the Bible. To start off let us again point out that moral relativism, the belief that morals are subjective to the individual, is non-existent. This article in itself asserts that there are evils that cannot be denied as evil. For these to exist there must be a law that states as such, and for there to be a law there must be a law-giver. Any human created law will ultimately have flaws in it, which must leave the perfect law of a perfect God. Granted, if these turn out to actually be evil, that God will not be perfect, fragmenting the law, so let's take a look at a few of these examples.
Gen 2. 16-47: God did not create us with rebellion, that was a product of the Fall. Adam and Eve knew full well what they were doing by disobeying. They put a created thing over their relationship with God, and Satan played a vital role in this. Remember, God never said don't touch it. They actually even could have picked all of the fruit and burned it if they wanted, but they didn't. Adam and Eve knew exactly what they were doing.
Gen 3.16: This was a product of sin entering the world. Adam and Eve caused it, not God.
Gen 4.3-5: This "favoritism" came from Abel being the one following God's commands, Cain was offering whatever he had left over. Read Gen 3, God gives guidelines. He even pursued Cain in verses 6 and 7 and reminded him he could still please God.
Gen 7.23: Look back 1 chapter to Gen 6:5, "every inclination was evil to them". Every single person on earth, save Noah, had a heart that had no inclinations toward good any more. This revealed the need for a law, and to start again, they were beyond redemption.
Gen 16.7-9: God never told Hagai to have any children, Sarai told Abram to sleep with Hagai, her maidservant. He did this and Hagar got pregnant, so Sarai mistreated her. God told Hagai that if she went back he would turn her into a great nation, so he was rewarding her obedience. Nowhere did God tell Abram to sleep with her, else this wouldn't have happened.
Gen 19.23-25: Not only were they homosexual, the wanted to rape God's angels! They came to visit Lot in Gen 19.5 "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them to us so that we can have sex with them!" God is not a fan of rape.
Gen 38.7: Isn't "He was wicked in the sight of the Lord" enough? A perfect God wouldn't lie.
Gen 38.10: Incest is illegal sex within one's immediate family. This was only to take place because Er had no given Tamar a son, and that was seen as a dishonor, so it was fixed. Remember in the verse it says "to keep from producing offspring for his brother". He was killed for selfishness, not refusing to commit incest. He actually still had sex with her anyways, merely practiced birth control, defeating the purpose.
Ex 12.29: The Egyptians were enslaving, beating, and murdering the Israelites. God was judging them for this. Each plague was also aimed at showing the lack of power of the Egyptians gods that they were worshipping, so maybe they would turn to Him. Dr. Geisler, a prestigious scholar, even says that God did not harden Pharaoh's heart directly, Pharaoh initiated the process which God then facilitated. For a better explanation click here.
Ex 20.5 & 34.7: They apparently missed "forgiving wickedness, rebellion, and sin." in Exodus 34.7. Inherent sin is a doctrine well-explained within Scripture, for some information on sin click here. They don't have to be punished, God always provides a way out and that was denied.
Ex 21.2-6: This has already been explained, see "Slavery in the Bible" here.
Ex 21.7: Explained again. Daughters were sold in order to pay off debts, and slavery in Bible times was what we know today as indentured servitude, not the slavery of America's history.
Ex 22.18: God orders the death of these magicians because their powers come from Satan. They are relying on evil forces such as demons for their convenience, and manipulating the public.
Ex 32.27: Harsh? Arguing with opinions has no merit, capital punishment was understood by all of the Israelites, and yet the did it anyway.
Lev 20.9-10: Again, Charlotte is arguing with her opinions. They ignored the law and violated what God had commanded them, in spite of saving them from countless enemies and creating the very world we stand on. You can't validly argue against capital punishment with opinions.
Lev 20.13: This is violating the purpose of sex, and doing something very unnatural. Homosexuality is condemned throughout scripture, more about this here. Women were created as a completion of man, the two to become one and reproduce. This violates the sanctity of marriage.
Lev 21.16-23: First off all, let's clear things up. This is dealing with the duties of the High Priest. These blemishes are not allowed because people generally look down on those who have defects, thus injuring the influence of the High Priest. God simply knows how sinful people work.
Lev 26.29: Charlotte put verse 30, but the quoted part is verse 29. God was predicting one of the results of the judgements of Israel for unfaithfulness, and was fulfilled in 2 Kings 6:29. This is condemned, not condoned.
Lev 27.28-29: This was a capital punishment for completely giving oneself to Satan, not at all a human sacrifice. Also, I've already dealt with human sacrifice in the Bible, click here.
Num 16.31-32: Another verse issue. These men were punished for attempting a rebellion against Moses, God's chosen leader.
Num 16.35: The princes were killed for heavy involvement in the rebellion. The rest of the people directly went against God's judgement and tried to kill Moses and Aaron.
Num 21.1-3: The Israelites were migrating to a new land and were attacked by the Canaanites, who are frequently attacking them. God destroys them for attacking his chosen people, I suppose Charlotte objects to war?
Num 21.27-35: Again, Charlotte is objecting to war. These were nations committing the very acts the Bible condemns, such as human sacrifices, idolatry, sex slavery, etc. The Israelites were following God's commands of judgement, and the nations always could have joined the Israelites, there was a ritual established in which they could essentially become Jews, but they denied God's mercy.
Num 31.17-18: God had told the Israelites to attack the nation of Moab because they had been practicing idolatry and trying to force the Israelites to do so.This, again, was war. They had won and taken the spoils, including flocks. However, they had also taken the Midianite women, who they weren't supposed to. Throughout Scripture taking these women to be wives ended up in going against God and worshipping idols, like Solomon did. This is why God told them to kill the women. He spared the virgins because women captured through war were to be slaves, let free after a while. Virgins were, in God's eyes, considered clean. This was God showing mercy.
Deut 3.3-7: It is worth pointing out that when the word destroy is used, it means giving over to the Lord. This was God's judgement of cities doing all the things EB condemns so easily, sacrificing humans, raping sex slaves, and worshipping false idols and demons. They were utterly destroyed because to keep some and integrate them into your society leads to pressure into worshipping false idols, which the Israelites were prone to do.
Deut 7: This was, again, war. They were rival civilizations that hated the Israelites because of ties of their forefathers. The Lord ordered their total destruction because any sort of treaty and the cultures would begin to mix, and the other peoples would pressure the Israelites into worship of idols and false gods, resulting in things like human sacrifice. By the way, this is actually the beginning of chapter 7, not just verse 12. Verse 12 is actually talking about God's covenant of love with them.
Deut 20.16: This was for the exact same reasons as the last two examples. Other civilizations in the same area despised Israel because of how the nation was started, from a child branching of from lineages that can be traced through Genesis. See above.
Deut 23.2: The word "assembly" here means holding an office in Israel, not worshipping. Ruth was a Moabitess, and became a proselyte into the Jewish culture and was permitted to worship, wasn't she? Many Israelites weren't even permitted high offices, most were reserved for Levites.
So ends Charlotte's first article, the attempt on showing various acts of evil within the Torah. God's law was perfect, and, like EB's article on murder, most every killing here falls within Capital Punishment, a commonly debated idea which Charlotte cannot condemn with the emotional argument found here. Keep in mind "Got Questions", "Reformed Answers", and "Resources for growing Christians" all have answers to some of these as well, so check them out.
Gen 2. 16-47: God did not create us with rebellion, that was a product of the Fall. Adam and Eve knew full well what they were doing by disobeying. They put a created thing over their relationship with God, and Satan played a vital role in this. Remember, God never said don't touch it. They actually even could have picked all of the fruit and burned it if they wanted, but they didn't. Adam and Eve knew exactly what they were doing.
Gen 3.16: This was a product of sin entering the world. Adam and Eve caused it, not God.
Gen 4.3-5: This "favoritism" came from Abel being the one following God's commands, Cain was offering whatever he had left over. Read Gen 3, God gives guidelines. He even pursued Cain in verses 6 and 7 and reminded him he could still please God.
Gen 7.23: Look back 1 chapter to Gen 6:5, "every inclination was evil to them". Every single person on earth, save Noah, had a heart that had no inclinations toward good any more. This revealed the need for a law, and to start again, they were beyond redemption.
Gen 16.7-9: God never told Hagai to have any children, Sarai told Abram to sleep with Hagai, her maidservant. He did this and Hagar got pregnant, so Sarai mistreated her. God told Hagai that if she went back he would turn her into a great nation, so he was rewarding her obedience. Nowhere did God tell Abram to sleep with her, else this wouldn't have happened.
Gen 19.23-25: Not only were they homosexual, the wanted to rape God's angels! They came to visit Lot in Gen 19.5 "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them to us so that we can have sex with them!" God is not a fan of rape.
Gen 38.7: Isn't "He was wicked in the sight of the Lord" enough? A perfect God wouldn't lie.
Gen 38.10: Incest is illegal sex within one's immediate family. This was only to take place because Er had no given Tamar a son, and that was seen as a dishonor, so it was fixed. Remember in the verse it says "to keep from producing offspring for his brother". He was killed for selfishness, not refusing to commit incest. He actually still had sex with her anyways, merely practiced birth control, defeating the purpose.
Ex 12.29: The Egyptians were enslaving, beating, and murdering the Israelites. God was judging them for this. Each plague was also aimed at showing the lack of power of the Egyptians gods that they were worshipping, so maybe they would turn to Him. Dr. Geisler, a prestigious scholar, even says that God did not harden Pharaoh's heart directly, Pharaoh initiated the process which God then facilitated. For a better explanation click here.
Ex 20.5 & 34.7: They apparently missed "forgiving wickedness, rebellion, and sin." in Exodus 34.7. Inherent sin is a doctrine well-explained within Scripture, for some information on sin click here. They don't have to be punished, God always provides a way out and that was denied.
Ex 21.2-6: This has already been explained, see "Slavery in the Bible" here.
Ex 21.7: Explained again. Daughters were sold in order to pay off debts, and slavery in Bible times was what we know today as indentured servitude, not the slavery of America's history.
Ex 22.18: God orders the death of these magicians because their powers come from Satan. They are relying on evil forces such as demons for their convenience, and manipulating the public.
Ex 32.27: Harsh? Arguing with opinions has no merit, capital punishment was understood by all of the Israelites, and yet the did it anyway.
Lev 20.9-10: Again, Charlotte is arguing with her opinions. They ignored the law and violated what God had commanded them, in spite of saving them from countless enemies and creating the very world we stand on. You can't validly argue against capital punishment with opinions.
Lev 20.13: This is violating the purpose of sex, and doing something very unnatural. Homosexuality is condemned throughout scripture, more about this here. Women were created as a completion of man, the two to become one and reproduce. This violates the sanctity of marriage.
Lev 21.16-23: First off all, let's clear things up. This is dealing with the duties of the High Priest. These blemishes are not allowed because people generally look down on those who have defects, thus injuring the influence of the High Priest. God simply knows how sinful people work.
Lev 26.29: Charlotte put verse 30, but the quoted part is verse 29. God was predicting one of the results of the judgements of Israel for unfaithfulness, and was fulfilled in 2 Kings 6:29. This is condemned, not condoned.
Lev 27.28-29: This was a capital punishment for completely giving oneself to Satan, not at all a human sacrifice. Also, I've already dealt with human sacrifice in the Bible, click here.
Num 16.31-32: Another verse issue. These men were punished for attempting a rebellion against Moses, God's chosen leader.
Num 16.35: The princes were killed for heavy involvement in the rebellion. The rest of the people directly went against God's judgement and tried to kill Moses and Aaron.
Num 21.1-3: The Israelites were migrating to a new land and were attacked by the Canaanites, who are frequently attacking them. God destroys them for attacking his chosen people, I suppose Charlotte objects to war?
Num 21.27-35: Again, Charlotte is objecting to war. These were nations committing the very acts the Bible condemns, such as human sacrifices, idolatry, sex slavery, etc. The Israelites were following God's commands of judgement, and the nations always could have joined the Israelites, there was a ritual established in which they could essentially become Jews, but they denied God's mercy.
Num 31.17-18: God had told the Israelites to attack the nation of Moab because they had been practicing idolatry and trying to force the Israelites to do so.This, again, was war. They had won and taken the spoils, including flocks. However, they had also taken the Midianite women, who they weren't supposed to. Throughout Scripture taking these women to be wives ended up in going against God and worshipping idols, like Solomon did. This is why God told them to kill the women. He spared the virgins because women captured through war were to be slaves, let free after a while. Virgins were, in God's eyes, considered clean. This was God showing mercy.
Deut 3.3-7: It is worth pointing out that when the word destroy is used, it means giving over to the Lord. This was God's judgement of cities doing all the things EB condemns so easily, sacrificing humans, raping sex slaves, and worshipping false idols and demons. They were utterly destroyed because to keep some and integrate them into your society leads to pressure into worshipping false idols, which the Israelites were prone to do.
Deut 7: This was, again, war. They were rival civilizations that hated the Israelites because of ties of their forefathers. The Lord ordered their total destruction because any sort of treaty and the cultures would begin to mix, and the other peoples would pressure the Israelites into worship of idols and false gods, resulting in things like human sacrifice. By the way, this is actually the beginning of chapter 7, not just verse 12. Verse 12 is actually talking about God's covenant of love with them.
Deut 20.16: This was for the exact same reasons as the last two examples. Other civilizations in the same area despised Israel because of how the nation was started, from a child branching of from lineages that can be traced through Genesis. See above.
Deut 23.2: The word "assembly" here means holding an office in Israel, not worshipping. Ruth was a Moabitess, and became a proselyte into the Jewish culture and was permitted to worship, wasn't she? Many Israelites weren't even permitted high offices, most were reserved for Levites.
So ends Charlotte's first article, the attempt on showing various acts of evil within the Torah. God's law was perfect, and, like EB's article on murder, most every killing here falls within Capital Punishment, a commonly debated idea which Charlotte cannot condemn with the emotional argument found here. Keep in mind "Got Questions", "Reformed Answers", and "Resources for growing Christians" all have answers to some of these as well, so check them out.
Monday, November 9, 2009
Introduction to "Church of Theists Suck"
This leads us to the second section of evilbible.com, a list of essays copied from a website entitled "Theists suck". The fact that this is entitled with a name slandering the belief in any god whatsoever should tell you something about the author, Charlotte. She is an atheist woman who's tone in each of her essays is one of very strong anger. The fact that she names some of her sermons (as she likes to call them) "Christians are hypocrites", "Christians are liars", and "evils of the Torah" show that she obviously has the same impression EB did when they posted "Top 10 Signs of Fundamentalist Christians".
This next section will be started with a CTS-(name of article here) to show that it is a "Church of Theist's suck" article. I'll be taking a look at all the articles, beginning from the top down.
This next section will be started with a CTS-(name of article here) to show that it is a "Church of Theist's suck" article. I'll be taking a look at all the articles, beginning from the top down.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Ritual Human Sacrifice in the Bible
Another much pointed at article when it comes to the inerrancy of the Bible: the occurrence of ritual human sacrifice. Remember, reader, that merely because it is mentioned in the Bible does not mean it is condoned by God. Frequently these are followed by judgment because of disobeying commands. The same goes for any wrongful act that Scripture in other areas condemns. This is the case with many acknowledgements of ritual human sacrifice in the Bible, mentioned here or not.
Like virtually everyone other article on evilbible.com, keep in mind that the author is arguing against something that is "unjust" in their own opinion. They are using opinions, and not even giving criteria, on what is considered unjust. Even more so, the commonly held atheist belief is that morality evolved as well along with civilization, so they cannot condemn these actions within their worldview, only express outrage! Here, however; I agree that ritual sacrifice of humans would be, in fact, unjust. Let's take a look and see how their examples stack up:
1) Isaac being offered (Genesis 22: 1-18): This, as is said in the verse, was a test of Abraham's faith. First of all, let's get some inaccuracies out of the way. Abraham never lied to Isaac, the ram was provided. Also, Abraham never put a knife to Isaac's throat. Verse 10 says "and took the knife to slay his son." When information not in the text is added, the meaning of scripture gets clouded. Now, moving on to the explanation. In early history every civilization had a god of some sort, and human sacrifice was extremely common. Abraham, having come from the pagan city of Ai, would not have thought this out of place. God used this to show that He was different from other gods; He does not accept human sacrifice. This also showed the trust that Abraham had for God, and rightly so. There is also a sort of logic to this from Abraham's perspective; God had promised "In Isaac your seed shall be called". This would show Abraham that even if he did have to sacrifice Isaac, he seed would continue. The only explanation would be God raising him from the dead, so either way he knew his son would live
2) Consecrations of children (Exodus 13:2): these talks about God's command to consecrate every man and beast out of the womb to God, for they are His. EB's commentary reads as follows: "It is clear from the context that consecrate means a burning sacrifice." WHAT!!?? The Hebrew word written here is qadash, meaning "sanctified, prepared, and dedicated". There is no burning involved. If they wanted to mean destroy or burn, the word chadam would have been used.
3) No redemption (Leviticus 27: 28-29): It is common for atheists to pull bits and pieces of different verses together in order to show a point, which is happening here. This was actually part of #2, so keep that in mind. EB says that this verse shows that those firstborns have no chance of redemption because they are being referred to as "doomed". Since ritual human sacrifice wasn't even a part of the Leviticus Law, those first born couldn't have been referred to. They weren't even sacrificed in the first place, look back at #2.
4) Jepthah Burns His Daughter (Judges 11: 29-40): Now, first of all, note that the NLT is used here. Mariano looked at 20 different translations and found not a single other that said she died, and the Hebrew (and Greek) doesn’t say that, either. Another funny thing worth noting about the NLT is when it says "I will give to the Lord the first thing that greets me when I return home in triumph. I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering", it omits a very important word that appears in 18 other translations. That word is "and" (or in Robert Young's Literal Translation, "or"), and this completely changes the meaning of the verse. To offer a virgin to the Lord in the OT was to serve in the sanctuary as a nun, who was not to marry, hence, dying a virgin. This also draws a distinction between an animal and person, if a clean animal was to greet him, it would have been sacrificed, a person was to be consecrated (remember this doesn't mean burned!).
5) God commands burning humans (Joshua 7:15): Again EB makes a huge assumption. They see "burned with fire" and immediately think burnt offering. This is a verse talking about Capital Punishment, which has been a part of God's Law throughout the Old Testament. There is no sacrifice.
6) Josiah and human sacrifice (1 Kings 13:1-2 and 2 Kings 23:20-25): This was not a case of human sacrifice, but merely another case of Capital Punishment. Manasseh, the previous king, had built High Places all over Israel where pagan gods were worshipped. Josiah, full of zeal, killed all of the false priests who were worshipping these false gods. The meaning of talking to the altar in 1 Kings was that Josiah was mocking the false power of the idols by burning the dead priests on the altars, and during that time there is no way that would have been tolerated by gods. Obviously, there was nothing truly there with power.
7) Human sacrifice (Wisdom 3:5-7): The book Wisdom of Solomon is part of the Catholic Bible commonly known as 2nd Canon or Apocrypha. These books are treated by Jewish rabbis like we treat Bible commentaries, useful but not inspired by God. This stance is shared by Protestants. See more information here: www.lifeanddoctrinepurgatory.com/2005/11/apocryphageneral-commentsthe-books.html. Furthermore, does it really need to be pointed out that this is a psalm, and therefore its language uses frequent literary devices such as metaphors? This is the case here.
8) Child sacrifice (Wisdom 14:21-23): EvilBible here is quite correct about one thing; the passage does mention actual child sacrifice. EB even admits here that it was being condemned. The verse even says: "It was not enough for them to err in their knowledge of God, but they live in great strife due to ignorance." This was a case of people making massive errors by no fault of God's. That doesn't mean Scripture was by any means wrong. Also, this is also quoted from the apocrypha; see the link in #7 for an explanation of these books.
9) Humans are fuel for fire (Ezekiel 21:33-37): This is the same deal and number 6, this is a metaphor. I'm sure you have heard the expression "on fire for Christ". This means that you are excited about sharing Him and learning more about Him. This is the case here; the context does not lend any credibility to the idea of humans literally burning. The fire is spreading because of the Christian's call to share His word throughout the world, not literally.
10) Burn Nonbelievers (Deuteronomy 13:13-19): This was a messy time in Israel's history. The cycle of sin kept bringing the Israelites to turn away from God, and He would have a nation conquer them in order to get them to turn to Him again. They frequently had to attack and destroy nations that worshipped other gods and mocked the Lord in order to do His work and even to defend themselves. God put this law in place so that Israel would not continue to turn away from Him. EB assumes that it meant the town and its inhabitants, when in fact the inhabitants are mentioned earlier. The verse says "then you must pile all of the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the Lord." The inhabitants aren't mentioned. In fact, the NIV says this: "completely burn the town and its plunder as a burnt offering to the Lord". The inhabitants are not mentioned and were dealt with in an earlier verse. EB has assumed wrong.
The conclusion, more unfounded assumptions show EvilBible's neglect for the context and true meaning of Scripture. The Bible does not contain ritual human sacrifice any more than it contains rape or murder. For another look check this out:www.atheismisdead.blogspot.com/2009/06/atheism-ritual-human-sacrifice-in-bible.html Addendum: www.atheismisdead.blogspot.com/2009/07/addendum-to-atheism-ritual-human.html
Like virtually everyone other article on evilbible.com, keep in mind that the author is arguing against something that is "unjust" in their own opinion. They are using opinions, and not even giving criteria, on what is considered unjust. Even more so, the commonly held atheist belief is that morality evolved as well along with civilization, so they cannot condemn these actions within their worldview, only express outrage! Here, however; I agree that ritual sacrifice of humans would be, in fact, unjust. Let's take a look and see how their examples stack up:
1) Isaac being offered (Genesis 22: 1-18): This, as is said in the verse, was a test of Abraham's faith. First of all, let's get some inaccuracies out of the way. Abraham never lied to Isaac, the ram was provided. Also, Abraham never put a knife to Isaac's throat. Verse 10 says "and took the knife to slay his son." When information not in the text is added, the meaning of scripture gets clouded. Now, moving on to the explanation. In early history every civilization had a god of some sort, and human sacrifice was extremely common. Abraham, having come from the pagan city of Ai, would not have thought this out of place. God used this to show that He was different from other gods; He does not accept human sacrifice. This also showed the trust that Abraham had for God, and rightly so. There is also a sort of logic to this from Abraham's perspective; God had promised "In Isaac your seed shall be called". This would show Abraham that even if he did have to sacrifice Isaac, he seed would continue. The only explanation would be God raising him from the dead, so either way he knew his son would live
2) Consecrations of children (Exodus 13:2): these talks about God's command to consecrate every man and beast out of the womb to God, for they are His. EB's commentary reads as follows: "It is clear from the context that consecrate means a burning sacrifice." WHAT!!?? The Hebrew word written here is qadash, meaning "sanctified, prepared, and dedicated". There is no burning involved. If they wanted to mean destroy or burn, the word chadam would have been used.
3) No redemption (Leviticus 27: 28-29): It is common for atheists to pull bits and pieces of different verses together in order to show a point, which is happening here. This was actually part of #2, so keep that in mind. EB says that this verse shows that those firstborns have no chance of redemption because they are being referred to as "doomed". Since ritual human sacrifice wasn't even a part of the Leviticus Law, those first born couldn't have been referred to. They weren't even sacrificed in the first place, look back at #2.
4) Jepthah Burns His Daughter (Judges 11: 29-40): Now, first of all, note that the NLT is used here. Mariano looked at 20 different translations and found not a single other that said she died, and the Hebrew (and Greek) doesn’t say that, either. Another funny thing worth noting about the NLT is when it says "I will give to the Lord the first thing that greets me when I return home in triumph. I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering", it omits a very important word that appears in 18 other translations. That word is "and" (or in Robert Young's Literal Translation, "or"), and this completely changes the meaning of the verse. To offer a virgin to the Lord in the OT was to serve in the sanctuary as a nun, who was not to marry, hence, dying a virgin. This also draws a distinction between an animal and person, if a clean animal was to greet him, it would have been sacrificed, a person was to be consecrated (remember this doesn't mean burned!).
5) God commands burning humans (Joshua 7:15): Again EB makes a huge assumption. They see "burned with fire" and immediately think burnt offering. This is a verse talking about Capital Punishment, which has been a part of God's Law throughout the Old Testament. There is no sacrifice.
6) Josiah and human sacrifice (1 Kings 13:1-2 and 2 Kings 23:20-25): This was not a case of human sacrifice, but merely another case of Capital Punishment. Manasseh, the previous king, had built High Places all over Israel where pagan gods were worshipped. Josiah, full of zeal, killed all of the false priests who were worshipping these false gods. The meaning of talking to the altar in 1 Kings was that Josiah was mocking the false power of the idols by burning the dead priests on the altars, and during that time there is no way that would have been tolerated by gods. Obviously, there was nothing truly there with power.
7) Human sacrifice (Wisdom 3:5-7): The book Wisdom of Solomon is part of the Catholic Bible commonly known as 2nd Canon or Apocrypha. These books are treated by Jewish rabbis like we treat Bible commentaries, useful but not inspired by God. This stance is shared by Protestants. See more information here: www.lifeanddoctrinepurgatory.com/2005/11/apocryphageneral-commentsthe-books.html. Furthermore, does it really need to be pointed out that this is a psalm, and therefore its language uses frequent literary devices such as metaphors? This is the case here.
8) Child sacrifice (Wisdom 14:21-23): EvilBible here is quite correct about one thing; the passage does mention actual child sacrifice. EB even admits here that it was being condemned. The verse even says: "It was not enough for them to err in their knowledge of God, but they live in great strife due to ignorance." This was a case of people making massive errors by no fault of God's. That doesn't mean Scripture was by any means wrong. Also, this is also quoted from the apocrypha; see the link in #7 for an explanation of these books.
9) Humans are fuel for fire (Ezekiel 21:33-37): This is the same deal and number 6, this is a metaphor. I'm sure you have heard the expression "on fire for Christ". This means that you are excited about sharing Him and learning more about Him. This is the case here; the context does not lend any credibility to the idea of humans literally burning. The fire is spreading because of the Christian's call to share His word throughout the world, not literally.
10) Burn Nonbelievers (Deuteronomy 13:13-19): This was a messy time in Israel's history. The cycle of sin kept bringing the Israelites to turn away from God, and He would have a nation conquer them in order to get them to turn to Him again. They frequently had to attack and destroy nations that worshipped other gods and mocked the Lord in order to do His work and even to defend themselves. God put this law in place so that Israel would not continue to turn away from Him. EB assumes that it meant the town and its inhabitants, when in fact the inhabitants are mentioned earlier. The verse says "then you must pile all of the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the Lord." The inhabitants aren't mentioned. In fact, the NIV says this: "completely burn the town and its plunder as a burnt offering to the Lord". The inhabitants are not mentioned and were dealt with in an earlier verse. EB has assumed wrong.
The conclusion, more unfounded assumptions show EvilBible's neglect for the context and true meaning of Scripture. The Bible does not contain ritual human sacrifice any more than it contains rape or murder. For another look check this out:www.atheismisdead.blogspot.com/2009/06/atheism-ritual-human-sacrifice-in-bible.html Addendum: www.atheismisdead.blogspot.com/2009/07/addendum-to-atheism-ritual-human.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
