https://apologeticspress.org/video/do-dating-techniques-prove-the-earth-is-old-5587/
CLICK ON THE LINK ABOVE AND FOLLOW THE PATHS PROVIDED.
posted by Believer | 1:30 AM
|
0 comments
Modern American politics has become increasingly characterized by “dirty tricks” and smear tactics that are intended to torpedo a candidate’s election potential. These days the usual accusation pertains to sexual matters—“unwanted sexual advances” and the like. One cannot help but be skeptical of such allegations since the accusers fixate on sexual matters—not other criminal behaviors. On the one hand, there are politicians whose checkered pasts deserve to be brought to light due to relevant reflection on suitability for office. On the other hand, political opponents seek to discredit an otherwise innocent and qualified candidate—not merely digging up legitimate concerns from his past, but fabricating charges and “evidence” for no other reason than they disagree with his views (e.g., on abortion). Regardless of one’s political affiliation, such circumstances ought to be distasteful.
More troubling than even these tactics is the seemingly widespread acceptance of the idea that a mere accusation constitutes adequate proof of guilt. The longstanding, bedrock adage of “innocent until proven guilty” has fallen by the wayside in the minds of many. Many individuals appear so deluded by their political and moral ideology that they have literally come to redefine the meaning and nature of “justice,” “fairness,” and “impartiality.” They have jettisoned any sense of what it means to be dispassionate, emotionless, and evenhanded in assessing truth. Indeed, if an accusation is accompanied by the presence of tears, the accusation becomes more credible and the likelihood of its veracity becomes certain. Tears carry more weight than truth. “Due process” is defined as giving a hearing to the accusation and then accepting it at face value as true.
The concept of “presumed innocent until proven guilty”1 is inherent in just law and self-evidently true. The accuser has the obligation to prove the accusation beyond a reasonable doubt. In the 1895 U.S. Supreme Court case Coffin vs. United States, writing the opinion of the Court, Justice White included the following observation:
Ammianus Marcellinus relates an anecdote of the Emperor Julian which illustrates the enforcement of this principle in the Roman law. Numerius, the Governor of Narbonensis, was on trial before the emperor, and, contrary to the usage in criminal cases, the trial was public. Numerius contented himself with denying his guilt, and there was not sufficient proof against him. His adversary, Delphidius, “a passionate man,” seeing that the failure of the accusation was inevitable, could not restrain himself, and exclaimed, “Oh, illustrious Caesar, if it is sufficient to deny, what hereafter will become of the guilty?” to which Julian replied, “If it suffices to accuse, what will become of the innocent?”2
The American Founders agreed with this assessment of the presumption of innocence and often quoted the highly respected English jurist William Blackstone on the matter: “all presumptive evidence of felony should be admitted cautiously, for the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.”3
Apart from the legal system that has characterized American civilization from the beginning, the Bible speaks definitively regarding presumption of innocence. Indeed, the notion of “innocent until proven guilty” is inherent in the nature of God. Giving credence to an accusation without proof is evidence of blind prejudice and irrational human emotion rather than logic and reason. One wonders if those women who are quick to believe an unsubstantiated accusation made against a public official would react the same way if their own teenage sons were the recipients of similar allegations.
The bedrock truth that undergirded God’s law for Israel regarding criminal behavior centered on the presence of multiple witnesses:
Whoever kills a person, the murderer shall be put to death on the testimony of witnesses; but one witness is not sufficient testimony against a person for the death penalty (Numbers 35:30).
Whoever is deserving of death shall be put to death on the testimony of two or three witnesses; he shall not be put to death on the testimony of one witness (Deuteronomy 17:6).
These verses are adamant in their insistence that no one should be convicted on the basis of a single witness. This principle is carried over into church law in the New Testament (Matthew 18:16; 2 Corinthians 13:1; 1 Timothy 5:19; Hebrews 10:28; Revelation 11:3; Cf. Matthew 26:60; John 5:31; 10:37).
It is important to understand that the minimum two witnesses did not refer to a single witness who passes along his observations to another individual who then acts as a second witness. Rather, these verses require two or more independent witnesses, i.e., they were personal eye-witnesses to the alleged event. Nor do these verses justify bringing forward multiple witnesses to separate incidents (“me too”). The fact that a bank robber robs three separate banks on different occasions does not qualify a single witness from each bank robbery to serve as the “two or more witnesses.” There must be two or more eyewitnesses to the same event. God was so adamant on this point that He prescribed harsh penalties for violations of it:
One witness shall not rise against a man concerning any iniquity or any sin that he commits; by the mouth of two or three witnesses the matter shall be established. If a false witness rises against any man to testify against him of wrongdoing, then both men in the controversy shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges who serve in those days. And the judges shall make careful inquiry, and indeed, if the witness is a false witness, who has testified falsely against his brother, then you shall do to him as he thought to have done to his brother; so you shall put away the evil from among you. And those who remain shall hear and fear, and hereafter they shall not again commit such evil among you (Deuteronomy 19:15-20).
One wonders if this legislation were in effect in America today, would we have so many accusers speaking out without adequate evidence. Indeed, God declared: “Keep far from a false charge, and do not kill the innocent and righteous, for I will not acquit the wicked” (Exodus 23:7).
Under the Law of Moses, a woman subjected to sexual assault was under obligation to scream so that she could be rescued by those nearby. Otherwise, she was a consensual participant. The only exception to this requirement was if the sexual assault occurred in a secluded place (outside of town) where no witnesses or rescuers were available or able to come to her aid (Deuteronomy 22:22-27).
Also under the Old Law, Cities of Refuge were established to facilitate a person’s avoiding vengeance implemented by the kinfolk of the person he may have killed. He was permitted to flee to the city where he would be protected until guilt or innocence could be established. Hence, he was innocent until proven guilty. If he was assumed guilty at the outset, there would have been no reason to provide a city of refuge to determine otherwise.
Observe that with the advancement of scientific criminology, specifically the discoveries pertaining to DNA evidence, many convicted individuals have been exonerated. Oftentimes, they were originally convicted solely on the testimony of a single witness—a circumstance that violates God’s directives for ascertaining guilt. If God’s thinking had been employed, the innocent individual never would have been convicted in the first place.
But these principles imply that those guilty of heinous crimes will occasionally, perhaps even often, be allowed to go free. Nevertheless, in God’s sight, accusing and convicting an innocent person is a great miscarriage of justice. Recall the words of Blackstone and Emperor Caesar Julian: “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer”; “If it suffices to accuse, what will become of the innocent?”
1 A phrase attributed to English barrister, politician, and judge William Garrow. See Kenneth Pennington (2003), “Innocent Until Proven Guilty: The Origins of a Legal Maxim,” The Jurist: Studies in Church Law and Ministry, 106[63]; Richard Braby and John Hostettler (2010), Sir William Garrow: His Life, His Times and Fight for Justice (Loddon, England: Waterside Press); Coffin v. United States, 156 U.S. 432 (1895), https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/156/432/. The court stated: “A charge that there cannot be a conviction unless the proof shows guilt beyond a reasonable doubt does not so entirely embody the statement of presumption of innocence as to justify the court in refusing, when requested, to instruct the jury concerning such presumption, which is a conclusion drawn by the law in favor of the citizen by virtue whereof, when brought to trial upon a criminal charge, he must be acquitted unless he is proven to be guilty.”
3 Sir William Blackstone (1893), Commentaries on the Laws of England in Four Books (Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippincott), IV.XXVII.V.
REPRODUCTION & DISCLAIMERS: We are happy to grant permission for this article to be reproduced in part or in its entirety, as long as our stipulations are observed.
posted by Believer | 1:00 AM
|
0 comments
https://apologeticspress.org/video/jesus-fulfilled-ancient-prophecies/
Click on the link above and follow the paths provided.
posted by Believer | 1:30 AM
|
0 comments
Unlike many nations in human history, America has never really known want. Even the Great Depression of the 1930s does not begin to compare with the famines of antiquity that devastated entire civilizations and resulted in the starvation of millions of people. With such extreme prosperity dominating the United States, the average American cannot even begin to fathom the kind of hunger that has characterized large segments of humanity throughout history. Who can even conceptualize eating one’s own children? Yet such has not been uncommon in world history (cf. 2 Kings 6:28-29). In an article that appeared in National Geographic magazine in 1917, Ralph Graves surveyed historical occurrences of famine all the way back to the Egyptian pharaohs. The portrait is horrifying. For example, Graves observed:
Probably in no other country in the world has a people been brought to such a low ebb of morality or become so completely lost to all semblance of rational humanity as in the series of famines which swept over Egypt during the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth centuries, under Mohammedan rule.1
Cats, dogs, and horses were extremely expensive, women abandoned their jewels as worthless, and desperate people resorted to cannibalism—even selling human flesh in the market place. Babies were kidnapped for food, if not eaten by their own parents. Even the graves were ransacked for food.2 Savagery and moral degradation were the order of the day.
A famine in 1069 in England was so severe that peasants, no longer able to find dogs and horses to eat, sold themselves into slavery in hopes of being fed by the master.3 In 1314, a famine in England brought such misery and suffering that bodies lined the roadsides, everything imaginable was eaten (including dogs, cats, horses, and babies), and when new felons were cast into prison, starving inmates would tear them to pieces for food.4 France was plagued with devastating famines from the Middle Ages to the Revolution resulting in the deaths of millions. Staple fare included grass, roots, white clay, and exhumed bodies. The potato famines of Ireland in 1822 and again in 1845 resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands.5
“The pages of India’s history are black with the blotches of famine.”6 From 1770 to 1900, 22 famines resulted in the death of 15 million. Likewise, China has been particularly susceptible to famine, with 45 million dying during four famines from 1810 to 1849. Russian peasants died by the thousands in famines of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.7 During the 20th century, some 70 million people died from famines worldwide, including 30 million dying in China in the 1958 famine. Several famines afflicted the Soviet Union, including the Holodomor, a famine inflicted on Ukraine in 1932-33 by Stalin. Famine disaster struck both China and Bengal during World War II, while more recent famines include the Biafran famine in the 1960s, the disaster in Cambodia in the 1970s, the Ethiopian famine of 1984, and the North Korean famine of the 1990s.
Americans can hardly even contemplate the possibility that America could ever be subjected to such conditions. Yet, the Bible teaches that when people reject God and His Word, they set themselves up for disaster. In contrast to these shocking accounts of a lack of minimal sustenance to maintain human life, consider the far more catastrophic effect of a famine of spiritual sustenance: the Word of God. When any civilization lacks access and attachment to God’s thinking and God’s directives, a truly severe famine will ensue. This dearth will, in turn, merit a corresponding physical famine. As God declared to the population of Amos’ day:
“Behold, the days are coming,” says the Lord God, “That I will send a famine on the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD. They shall wander from sea to sea, and from north to east; they shall run to and fro, seeking the word of the LORD, but shall not find it” (Amos 8:11-12).
This description bears a striking similarity to the conditions now plaguing America. While Americans wallow in their plenty, a vast plague of spiritual starvation has swept across the land. Hear the words of God through Jeremiah warning another nation 2,700 years ago:
The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will relent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it…. “Thus says the LORD: ‘Behold, I am fashioning a disaster and devising a plan against you. Return now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good’” (Jeremiah 18:7-11).
And hear the words of God through Moses to another nation 3,500 years ago: “I will heap disasters on them; I will spend My arrows on them. They shall be wasted with hunger, devoured by pestilence and bitter destruction” (Deuteronomy 32:23-24). We must ask this sobering question: Will America’s spiritual famine facilitate national disaster?
1 Ralph Graves (1917), “Fearful Famines of the Past,” National Geographic, 32[1]:75, July, https://apologeticspress.page.link/FearfulFaminesofthePast.
2 Ibid., p. 79.
3 Ibid., p. 81.
4 Ibid., p. 82.
5 Ibid., pp. 83,86.
6 Ibid., p. 86.
7 Ibid., p. 89.
REPRODUCTION & DISCLAIMERS: We are happy to grant permission for this article to be reproduced in part or in its entirety, as long as our stipulations are observed.
posted by Believer | 1:30 AM
|
0 comments
“I heard a preacher on television say he can ‘prophesy’ using his trumpet. Is that possible?”
An example of this activity is seen on the charismatic website New Zealand Prophetic Network in an article that asserts the following:
Holy Spirit ministry functions through many and varied means. One of the not so common today is that of musicians prophesying on their instruments: that is, the ability to play prophetically on their instruments in such a way as to release the anointing to the people…. This is the realm where musicians can play prophetically, whereby the anointed tune—even a new tune—can actually enable the Holy Spirit to interpret the feeling and/or message of the tune to our hearts. As we listen intently while the musician plays (can be singular or plural), we “pick-up” the heartbeat of God, and the theme of that heart beat is interpreted to us in the realm of our understanding. When that happens we can experience deep peace, joy, inspiration, even tears, as the Holy Spirit speaks. Yet no words have been spoken; only the playing of an anointed tune on an instrument.1
Those who make this claim seek justification for the practice in 1 Chronicles 25:1 which reads: “Moreover David and the captains of the army separated for the service some of the sons of Asaph, of Heman, and of Jeduthun, who should prophesy with harps, stringed instruments, and cymbals.” However, this claim is a misconception based on a faulty exegesis of the text. Even on the face of it, a trumpet or other mechanical instrument cannot “prophesy” since the word “prophesy” in Hebrew refers to speaking, i.e., articulating meaningful concepts via oral or written words.2 The only way a musical instrument can convey specific meanings is if it is used as a signaling device with a prearranged, mutually understood meaning attached to a specific tune or tones. Historically, armies have used trumpets and bugles to sound a particular movement by the troops—whether “charge,” “retreat,” “call to quarters,” etc. But the instrument itself has no intellectual content, meaning, or message inherent in the sound it is capable of making. Paul made this very point when he chided the Corinthian Christians for their failure to make certain that their tongue-speaking and prophesying was comprehended by the assembly. Noting that instruments are “without life,” even they must make sounds that are understood by those intended to be the recipients of the pre-decided message being conveyed (1 Corinthians 14:7).
When the Bible speaks of “prophesying with harps, etc.,” it is not suggesting that a harp can prophesy. Rather, the grammar of the passage makes clear that the prophesying is done by the human prophet who, in turn, is merely accompanied by the instrument. The word “with” in the NKJV flags this fact.3 It is made even clearer by a quick consideration of other English translations:
| 1 Chronicles 25:1 | |||
| prophesy | with | harps, stringed instruments, and cymbals | NKJV |
| for the ministry of prophesying | accompanied by | harps, lyres and cymbals | NIV |
| prophesied | to the accompaniment of | lyres and harps and cymbals | NABRE |
| to preach | and play | harps, lyres, and cymbals | NCV |
| prophesy | to the accompaniment of | harps, and lutes, and cymbals | WYC |
So why accompany a prophet’s message from God with musical instruments? History does not answer this question definitively. However, consider a couple of possibilities that do not contradict other plainly established biblical realities. First, perhaps the instruments were intended to capture the attention of the Israelites, who would have constituted a large assembled crowd, in an effort to announce the commencement of the proclamation of the prophet’s divine message. This circumstance would have been analogous to court musicians who herald the arrival of the king or queen—a “fanfare”—defined as “a short ceremonial tune or flourish played on brass instruments, typically to introduce something or someone important.”4 Second, since prophetic messages throughout the Old Testament are typically couched in standard Hebrew metrical verse, perhaps the instrumental accompaniment was intended to reinforce the rhythmic nature of Hebrew poetry. The Bible does not inform us as to the activities of scores of prophets that we know ministered to Israel by prophesying. Keep in mind that the predictive element of our English word “prophesy” is secondary and sometimes even nonexistent in Hebrew prophecy. The majority of Hebrew prophecy was simply inspired preaching in which the prophet instructed, rebuked, corrected, and challenged his hearers with regard to their misbehavior/misconduct. In such a case, the prophets were something like the roving minstrels of the Middle Ages who traveled around the countryside and from town-to-town conveying messages via poetry accompanied by their strumming on a lute.5 In this way, Hebrew prophets would have permeated Israelite society on a daily basis, reminding the people of their spiritual and moral responsibility to conform every day to God’s will. This very scenario seems to be what we find in 1 Samuel 10:5.6
In any case, when a televangelist in our day claims to “prophesy” simply by playing a tune on a trumpet or other instrument, he does so without biblical precedent for such claims. After all, instruments are “without life.”
1 Rodney Francis (2016), “Prophetic Ministry Through Musical Instruments and Singers,” NZ Prophetic Network, https://www.nzpropheticnetwork.com/prophetic-ministry-through-musical-instruments-and-singers-by-rodney-w-francis.
2 Francis Brown, S.R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs (1906), The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2000 reprint), p. 612; William Gesenius (1847), Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1979 reprint), p. 525-526.
3 The Hebrew word for “harp” is kin-nohr (which is plural in the text) and has the inseparable preposition B= as a prefix which means “with.” Also in verse 3.
4 “Fanfare” in Angus Stevenson, ed. (2010), Oxford Dictionary of English (Oxford: Oxford University Press), third edition, p. 632.
5 Of course, the use of musical instruments to worship God according to New Testament Christian worship protocol is unauthorized. See Dave Miller (2007), Richland Hills and Instrumental Music: A Plea to Reconsider (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press).
6 As further proof that the prophesying was distinct from the playing on an instrument, notice that Samuel informed Saul that God’s Spirit would come upon him and enable him to join in the prophesying. Obviously, that did not mean that Saul picked up an instrument and began playing it. In fact, Saul apparently could not soothe himself by playing an instrument, which provided the occasion for enlisting the instrumental skill possessed by David (1 Samuel 16:14ff.). See also 2 Kings 3:15. Observe further that no prophet could play a trumpet while simultaneously prophesying since the trumpet requires the use of the mouth and lips in order to play it—which would prevent the prophet from using his mouth in order to prophesy an intelligible message from God.
REPRODUCTION & DISCLAIMERS: We are happy to grant permission for this article to be reproduced in part or in its entirety, as long as our stipulations are observed.
posted by Believer | 1:30 AM
|
0 comments
Why did God wait approximately 20 years after the Church was established to begin writing the New Testament? Why such a long span of time?
Normally when we discuss the penning of the New Testament, we do so in view of the fact that God inspired men to write about Jesus and His will for the Church within only about 20-65 years of the Savior’s death and resurrection. Perhaps even more impressive is the abundant amount of evidence for the New Testament’s first-century origin. Due to the volume of ancient manuscripts, versions, and citations of the New Testament documents, even many liberal scholars have conceded the fact that the New Testament must have been completed by the end of the first century. Whereas the extant copies of Plato, Thucydides, Herodotus, Tacitus, and many others are separated from the time these men wrote by 1,000 years, manuscript evidence for the New Testament reaches as far back as the early second century, which has led most scholars to rightly conclude that the New Testament is, indeed, a first-century production.1 As Irwin H. Linton concluded regarding the Gospel accounts: “A fact known to all who have given any study at all to this subject is that these books were quoted, listed, catalogued, harmonized, cited as authority by different writers, Christian and Pagan, right back to the time of the apostles.”2
Still, some wonder why God chose to wait approximately 20 years to begin writing the New Testament. Why didn’t the first-century apostles and prophets begin penning the New Testament as soon as the Church was established?
The simple, straightforward answer is that we cannot say for sure why God waited two decades to begin penning the New Testament. [NOTE: Conservative scholars generally agree that the earliest written New Testament documents, including Galatians and 1 and 2 Thessalonians, were likely written between A.D. 48-52.] We could ask any number of things regarding why God did or did not do something: Why did God wait some 2,500 years after Creation and some 1,000 years after the Flood to write a perfect, inspired account of these events? Why did God only spend 11 chapters in the Bible telling us about the first approximately 2,000 years of human history, and 1,178 chapters telling us about the next 2,000? Why did God discontinue special, written revelation for over 400 years (between Malachi and the New Testament)? There are many questions, even specific ones about the makeup of God’s written revelation, that we would like to know about that He simply has not specifically revealed to us.
Having made that disclaimer, we can suggest a few logical reasons why God waited to inspire first-century apostles and prophets to pen the New Testament. First, the early Church had the treasure of the Gospel “in earthen vessels” (2 Corinthians 4:7). That is, the apostles were miraculously guided by the Spirit in what they taught (Galatians 1:12; 1 Corinthians 2:10-16). The Spirit of God guided them “into all Truth” (John 16:13). Also, those on whom the apostles chose to lay their hands in the early churches received the miraculous, spiritual gifts of prophecy, knowledge, wisdom, etc. (Acts 8:14-17; 1 Corinthians 12:1-11). Even though the Church was without the inspired writings of Paul, Peter, John, etc. for a few years, God did not leave them without direction and guidance. In a sense, they had “walking, living New Testaments.” When the miraculous-age ended (1 Corinthians 13:8-10),3 however, the Church would need some type of continual guidance. Thus, during the miraculous age, God inspired the apostles and prophets to put in permanent form His perfect and complete revelation to guide the Church until Jesus’ return (cf. 2 Timothy 3:16-17).
Second, it was necessary for God to wait a few years to write the New Testament, and not pen it immediately following the Church’s establishment, because the books and letters that make up the New Testament were originally written for specific audiences and for specific purposes (though they are applicable to all Christians). For example, the epistles that Paul wrote to the church at Corinth could not have been written until there was a church at Corinth. If the church at Corinth was not established until the apostle Paul’s second missionary journey (ca. A.D. 49-52), then Paul obviously wrote to the Christians in Corinth after this time. Furthermore, since in 1 Corinthians Paul dealt with specific problems that had arisen in the church at Corinth (e.g, division, immorality, etc.), he could not have explicitly addressed these matters in detail until after they had come to pass. Thus, there was a need for time (i.e., a few years) to pass before the New Testament documents were penned.
Although some may be bothered by the fact that God waited approximately 20 years to begin penning the New Testament through His inspired writers, we can rest assured that He had good reasons for this relatively brief postponement. Admittedly, God did not explicitly indicate why He delayed putting His last will and testament in written form. Yet, logical reasons exist—most notably, the fact that the documents that make up the New Testament were written to specific peoples and for specific purposes. We must all continually humble ourselves before God and His Word. We need to check the condition of our spiritual lives, always making sure that we are not letting pride, arrogance, complacency or any other sin get in the way of us being the humble servants that we ought to be. “Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and He will lift you up” (James 4:10 NKJV). God can do amazing things in our lives and in the work of the church, but we must remain humble servants who are constantly looking into the Word and relying on God to give the increase (1 Corinthians 3:6-7). Like Paul, let us all “…press on, that I may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has also laid hold of me. Brethren, I do not count myself to have apprehended; but one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind and reaching forward to those things which are ahead, I press toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 3:12-14). It does not take special events for us to realize the need for spiritual renewal. Let us all be renewed day by day as we dive deeper into the Word of God.
1 Cf. F.F. Bruce (1953), The New Testament Documents—Are They Reliable? (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), fourth edition; Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix (1986), A General Introduction to the Bible (Chicago, IL: Moody), revised edition; Philip W. Comfort and David P. Barrett (2001), The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House).
2 Irwin H. Linton (1943), A Lawyer Examines the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker), sixth edition, p. 39.
3 Cf. Dave Miller (2003), “Modern-Day Miracles, Tongue-Speaking, and Holy Spirit Baptism: A Refutation—Extended Version,” Apologetics Press, https://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=11&article=1399.
REPRODUCTION & DISCLAIMERS: We are happy to grant permission for this article to be reproduced in part or in its entirety, as long as our stipulations are observed.
posted by Believer | 1:30 AM
|
0 comments
