Atheists and unbelievers like to point to the size of the universe as a supposed refutation of the book of Genesis account of creation which centers around the creation of human life. I was blessed to have once heard a lecture by Christian astrophysicist Hugh Ross, in which he explained that scientific facts point to the very opposite conclusion- the universe seems designed to support human life. The universe must be the size that it is (it must have the exact mass that it has) in order for there to be the array of scientific elements that there are, and those elements are needed to support life on Earth. God created the universe as a whole (as well as human life) and designed the universe and the earth specifically to support human life.
I was able to dig up for my readers here some of Dr. Ross's writing on the same subject. http://www.reasons.org/articles/anthropic-principle-a-precise-plan-for-humanity
Dr. Ross did write a complete book on the subject matter, as well, and the book is available on Amazon.com, called Why the Universe Is the Way It Is.
Friday, April 14, 2017
Thursday, March 23, 2017
Confronting the objection: “What do modern believers have anything to do with Jesus and His promises?”
The
objection as stated has the bias that believers in Christ are somehow removed
from His promises so that they cannot claim them as their own. The perpetrators of the objection would have us to think that Jesus was just some guy who lived centuries ago and in no way can modern "believers" in Him claim any link, relationship, or benefit. The idea must
have its roots in ignorance or a false view Jesus Christ.
The inerrancy, infallibility, and especially
the historical reliability of the Scriptures has to be established. I cannot be
your sole source of information for everything. There are plenty of good
articles on the internet which have that information and good arguments in
favor of inerrancy, infallibility, and historical reliability. Here are two
such articles: http://www.findingtruthmatters.org/articles/inerrancy/
Once those things are understood, then
we’ve established that the gospel books of the New Testament contain the
historically accurate record of the life of Jesus Christ. It is not really
incumbent upon me to prove all that, because having understood what the Bible
is and having tested it for errors yourself, you would come to know its
inerrancy and properties as God’s Word.
From the promises spoken by Jesus as
recorded in the gospel books, we can know as a fact that those who believe in
Him receive his promise of eternal life, among other promises. Here are just two of the quotes that promise eternal
life to those who believe:
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." John 3:16-18
"This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day." John 6:39-40
The specific sins of the specific people that Jesus saves were punished when Jesus died upon the cross. The well-known concept of "expiation" is literally the idea that the sins of those who believe in Jesus are placed on Him on the cross for God to punish and thereby annul. "Expiation" as an idea has it roots in the Old Testament as the concept of atonement in Numbers 8:7, Deuteronomy 32:43, Psalms 65:3, 79:9. Expiation through Jesus is first of all prophesied in Isaiah, declared in the words of John the Baptist, implied in the words of Jesus, and spelled out further in the letters and epistles of Paul and Peter, and in the book of Hebrews.
(in the prophecy of Isaiah): "But He was pierced through for our transgressions,
He was crushed for our iniquities;
The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him,
And by His scourging we are healed.
All of us like sheep have gone astray,
Each of us has turned to his own way;
But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all
To fall on Him." Isaiah 53:5-6
(as declared by John the Baptist):
"The next day he saw Jesus coming to him and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! This is He on behalf of whom I said, 'After me comes a Man who has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me." John 1:29
(as declared by Jesus):
"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." John 3:36
(by Jesus, after His resurrection):
"Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and He said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things." Luke 24:45-48
(Paul):
"He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." 2 Corinthians 5:21
"Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us- for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree" - in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith." Galatians 3:13
(the author of Hebrews):
"so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him." Hebrews 9:28
(Peter):
"and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness, for by His wounds you were healed." 1 Peter 2:24
Jesus's promises are extended to those alive past his first advent (his first bodily time on Earth). They do not only apply to the disciples that were in His immediate presence while He was on Earth. They apply to any believers in Christ shortly thereafter until the present day. The following quotes are from the words of Jesus to support that conclusion. They tend to indicate that following him by being obedient to His words and loving Him place a person in His good grace and love. One would not have to have literally followed him around in bodily form to do that. In John 14 Jesus is explaining how the exact situation is going to work that He is leaving them and "going to the father."
(Jesus):
"He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him." John 14:21
"If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me." John 14:22
"These things I have spoken to you while abiding with you. But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you." John 14:25
"You heard that I said to you, 'I go away, and I will come to you.' If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I go to the Father, for the Father is greater than I." John 14:28
"If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love. These things I have spoken to you so that My joy may be in you, and that your joy may be made full." John 14:10
Jesus gave the disciples in his presence "the great commission," but instructed them to make more disciples in the absence of his bodily earthly presence. That would not be the case if Jesus only wanted the disciples in His immediate presence to believe in Him and receive His promises. The continuing intercession of Jesus from heaven after His ascension is described in the book of Hebrews and 1 John. His continuing role as mediator between God and man is spoken of in Hebrews and in 1 Timothy.
(Jesus): "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Matthew 28:18-20.
"And He said to them, 'Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned." Mark 16:15-16
(the author of Hebrews): "Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them. Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them." Hebrews 7:25
(John): "My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world." 1 John 2:1-2
(Paul): "For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." 1 Timothy 2:5
(the author of Hebrews): "But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises." Hebrews 8:6
Thus, the promises for eternal life to those who believe in Christ are clearly stated in the Bible. The Bible is the inerrant and infallible word of God (2 Timothy 3:16, Matthew 15:6). It is clearly indicated throughout the Scriptures that the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross takes away the sins of the world- those who would believe in Him. The literal sins of those specifically who believe in Jesus were placed on Jesus and punished at the cross so that Jesus takes away all of their blame, shame, and guilt. The Scriptures clearly indicate that that and all the other promises given to believers are still valid for those who believe in Jesus even after He ascended to heaven.
While I have focused mainly on the eternal promises for salvation, the initial objection, "what do believers have anything to do with Jesus," also dangerously and incorrectly seeks to nullify the truth of what is currently involved in believers' relationships with Christ while they are still alive on earth- that is to say, the "temporal blessings" that come from Christ. Believers in Jesus are members of "the body of Christ" which is the church (the people that comprise the church) and have an identity in Christ. (Romans 12:4-6, 1 Corinthians 12:12; 12:27). Believers have Christ in them (Romans 8:10). So to say that modern believers have nothing to do with Jesus is totally incorrect.
I have focused first on, and emphasized the salvific/redemptive dimension of all this, but to not do so is to downplay the the severity and consequences of the Fall of Man. "So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness, there resulted justification of life to all men" (Romans 5:18). That is to say, I have tried to give it proportionately the same emphasis as the Scriptures. From Christ to those who believe and are saved comes "every spiritual blessing," even temporally (Ephesian 1:3). The first chapter of the book of Ephesians contains a good explanation of the many blessings and "inheritance" promised to those who can claim "adoption as sons" through Jesus Christ. We have a good savior who cares. He does not redeem us for heaven later just to simply leave us in disregard on Earth. Believers in Christ can claim all the promises of the Scriptures, including being "sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God's own possession, to the praise of His glory," (Ephesians 1:13-14), and many other promises.
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." John 3:16-18
"This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day." John 6:39-40
The specific sins of the specific people that Jesus saves were punished when Jesus died upon the cross. The well-known concept of "expiation" is literally the idea that the sins of those who believe in Jesus are placed on Him on the cross for God to punish and thereby annul. "Expiation" as an idea has it roots in the Old Testament as the concept of atonement in Numbers 8:7, Deuteronomy 32:43, Psalms 65:3, 79:9. Expiation through Jesus is first of all prophesied in Isaiah, declared in the words of John the Baptist, implied in the words of Jesus, and spelled out further in the letters and epistles of Paul and Peter, and in the book of Hebrews.
(in the prophecy of Isaiah): "But He was pierced through for our transgressions,
He was crushed for our iniquities;
The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him,
And by His scourging we are healed.
All of us like sheep have gone astray,
Each of us has turned to his own way;
But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all
To fall on Him." Isaiah 53:5-6
(as declared by John the Baptist):
"The next day he saw Jesus coming to him and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world! This is He on behalf of whom I said, 'After me comes a Man who has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me." John 1:29
(as declared by Jesus):
"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." John 3:36
(by Jesus, after His resurrection):
"Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and He said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things." Luke 24:45-48
(Paul):
"He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." 2 Corinthians 5:21
"Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us- for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree" - in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith." Galatians 3:13
(the author of Hebrews):
"so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him." Hebrews 9:28
(Peter):
"and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness, for by His wounds you were healed." 1 Peter 2:24
Jesus's promises are extended to those alive past his first advent (his first bodily time on Earth). They do not only apply to the disciples that were in His immediate presence while He was on Earth. They apply to any believers in Christ shortly thereafter until the present day. The following quotes are from the words of Jesus to support that conclusion. They tend to indicate that following him by being obedient to His words and loving Him place a person in His good grace and love. One would not have to have literally followed him around in bodily form to do that. In John 14 Jesus is explaining how the exact situation is going to work that He is leaving them and "going to the father."
(Jesus):
"He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him." John 14:21
"If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me." John 14:22
"These things I have spoken to you while abiding with you. But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you." John 14:25
"You heard that I said to you, 'I go away, and I will come to you.' If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced because I go to the Father, for the Father is greater than I." John 14:28
"If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love. These things I have spoken to you so that My joy may be in you, and that your joy may be made full." John 14:10
Jesus gave the disciples in his presence "the great commission," but instructed them to make more disciples in the absence of his bodily earthly presence. That would not be the case if Jesus only wanted the disciples in His immediate presence to believe in Him and receive His promises. The continuing intercession of Jesus from heaven after His ascension is described in the book of Hebrews and 1 John. His continuing role as mediator between God and man is spoken of in Hebrews and in 1 Timothy.
(Jesus): "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Matthew 28:18-20.
"And He said to them, 'Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned." Mark 16:15-16
(the author of Hebrews): "Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them. Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them." Hebrews 7:25
(John): "My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world." 1 John 2:1-2
(Paul): "For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." 1 Timothy 2:5
(the author of Hebrews): "But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, by as much as He is also the mediator of a better covenant, which has been enacted on better promises." Hebrews 8:6
Thus, the promises for eternal life to those who believe in Christ are clearly stated in the Bible. The Bible is the inerrant and infallible word of God (2 Timothy 3:16, Matthew 15:6). It is clearly indicated throughout the Scriptures that the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross takes away the sins of the world- those who would believe in Him. The literal sins of those specifically who believe in Jesus were placed on Jesus and punished at the cross so that Jesus takes away all of their blame, shame, and guilt. The Scriptures clearly indicate that that and all the other promises given to believers are still valid for those who believe in Jesus even after He ascended to heaven.
While I have focused mainly on the eternal promises for salvation, the initial objection, "what do believers have anything to do with Jesus," also dangerously and incorrectly seeks to nullify the truth of what is currently involved in believers' relationships with Christ while they are still alive on earth- that is to say, the "temporal blessings" that come from Christ. Believers in Jesus are members of "the body of Christ" which is the church (the people that comprise the church) and have an identity in Christ. (Romans 12:4-6, 1 Corinthians 12:12; 12:27). Believers have Christ in them (Romans 8:10). So to say that modern believers have nothing to do with Jesus is totally incorrect.
I have focused first on, and emphasized the salvific/redemptive dimension of all this, but to not do so is to downplay the the severity and consequences of the Fall of Man. "So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness, there resulted justification of life to all men" (Romans 5:18). That is to say, I have tried to give it proportionately the same emphasis as the Scriptures. From Christ to those who believe and are saved comes "every spiritual blessing," even temporally (Ephesian 1:3). The first chapter of the book of Ephesians contains a good explanation of the many blessings and "inheritance" promised to those who can claim "adoption as sons" through Jesus Christ. We have a good savior who cares. He does not redeem us for heaven later just to simply leave us in disregard on Earth. Believers in Christ can claim all the promises of the Scriptures, including being "sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God's own possession, to the praise of His glory," (Ephesians 1:13-14), and many other promises.
Thursday, October 27, 2016
Visiting the prisoners
Some people have wondered if they should have been visiting people that they knew were prisoners. One place in the Scriptures that gives ...
ThiS iS hOw wE HAve To coMmuniCAte riGht NOW: Visiting the prisoners:
ThiS iS hOw wE HAve To coMmuniCAte riGht NOW: Visiting the prisoners:
Monday, October 24, 2016
Going Against One's Word or Breaking Vows
"Inherent in the problem having to do with breaking a vow that one has previously made (from a Biblical point of view) is the classic distinction between "law" and "grace"....."
(for the rest of the post, click here)- ThiS iS hOw wE HAve To coMmuniCAte riGht NOW: Going Against One's Word or Breaking Vows: .
(for the rest of the post, click here)- ThiS iS hOw wE HAve To coMmuniCAte riGht NOW: Going Against One's Word or Breaking Vows: .
Friday, October 21, 2016
My Doctrine
It has become more and more apparent to me that giving a doctrinal statement somewhere would help my ministry and life efforts, so I am going to freely give it right here. (thankfully, I won't have to write or rewrite a whole creed or confession.) I am hoping that it will help heal schisms, mainly through persons being reconciled to God through Christ Jesus (2 Corinthians 5:18).
My doctrine is Protestant and Reformed. The closest confession or creed to how I actually believe is the Westminster Confession of Faith. I hold to the five points of Calvinism in "tulip" form which are: 1) Total Depravity 2) Unconditional Election 3) Limited Atonement 4) Irresistible Grace and 5) Perseverence of the Saints. I hold to Sola Scriptura and agree the canon is closed. I am noncessationist on the topic of spiritual gifts. The modern giving of prophecy, however, is not equivalent to revelation of canonical importance unless it's mirroring something already said in the scriptures (like what I wrote about here), and in that case since it's already in the Bible, and so then one is not adding to canon in that case anyway. The Scriptures contain sufficient teaching for life, morals, and salvation. I am not the only person with a Reformed Theological stance who is a noncessationist when it comes to spiritual gifts. With me on that viewpoint of noncessationism would also be Vincent Cheung and Wayne Grudem.
My doctrine is Protestant and Reformed. The closest confession or creed to how I actually believe is the Westminster Confession of Faith. I hold to the five points of Calvinism in "tulip" form which are: 1) Total Depravity 2) Unconditional Election 3) Limited Atonement 4) Irresistible Grace and 5) Perseverence of the Saints. I hold to Sola Scriptura and agree the canon is closed. I am noncessationist on the topic of spiritual gifts. The modern giving of prophecy, however, is not equivalent to revelation of canonical importance unless it's mirroring something already said in the scriptures (like what I wrote about here), and in that case since it's already in the Bible, and so then one is not adding to canon in that case anyway. The Scriptures contain sufficient teaching for life, morals, and salvation. I am not the only person with a Reformed Theological stance who is a noncessationist when it comes to spiritual gifts. With me on that viewpoint of noncessationism would also be Vincent Cheung and Wayne Grudem.
Saturday, October 1, 2016
The Nihilism Hypothesis
The Nihilism Hypothesis is a hypothesis which I have generated from current societal observation. My hypothesis is that the epistemological failure of evidential apologists is resulting in philosophical nihilism on the parts of many people in society, perhaps on a grand scale. The essence of the problem is that who would subscribe to a worldview that they cannot know for sure to be true? I myself would not. Yet, I subscribe to a worldview that I know to be true beyond a reasonable doubt. I am not sure that evidential apologists can say that they know their worldview is true to the same capacity as that. I have had online discussions which seem to indicate that that may very well be the case of the matter.
The way that philosophical nihilism is being expressed by the madding crowds is in the form of sayings and platitudes, like "no one cares," and "I don't care." That this point of view would result in people acting and talking like modern Philistines is not surprising. They don't have the right view of themselves and others, so cannot give an honest assessment of anything at all in the realm of knowledge.
I praise God that I can know for sure my worldview is true, and that I can know beyond a reasonable doubt that Jesus of Nazareth lived, died on the cross, and resurrected. I know that "saving knowledge" can be held way beyond reasonable certainty.
One could accuse me of arguing from subjectivity, but what do the Scriptures say? "that their hearts may be encouraged, having been knit together in love, and attaining to all the wealth that comes from the full assurance of understanding, resulting in a true knowledge of God’s mystery, that is, Christ Himself, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." 2 Colossians 2:2-3 NASB
One could accuse me of arguing from subjectivity, but what do the Scriptures say? "that their hearts may be encouraged, having been knit together in love, and attaining to all the wealth that comes from the full assurance of understanding, resulting in a true knowledge of God’s mystery, that is, Christ Himself, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." 2 Colossians 2:2-3 NASB
Monday, June 27, 2016
Dismantling of Documentary Hypothesis in Favor of Mosaic Authorship of Deuteronomy (Supplemental Approach)
The internal evidence for Mosaic authorship of Deuteronomy is in fact, strong, so if you ask my real opinion, the main issue at hand in regards to the question of Mosaic authorship has more to do with faith than evidence or logic. Since the Scriptures are the infallible Word of God, the narrative histories as presented therein are genuine, priceless, and true, as are the various assertions. The original name in Hebrew for this book meant "These are the words..." taken from the first verse of it which says "These are the words which Moses spoke to all Israel across the Jordan in the wilderness..." And that preface sentence introduces the whole book? I don't know how unbelievers and liberal theologians find their way around that except for the fact that their foolish hearts are darkened and the scholars have engaged in a strange level of skepticism, rationalism, and prideful conjecture that undermines what should be the primary aims of their field. Nonetheless the documentary hypothesis, one of the main fallback notions for those who reject Mosaic authorship, can be easily disproven and disregarded for the fact that it rests on and finds its impetus from a series of false premises.
Generally, the documentary hypothesis was a theory to explain authorship of the pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible). This approach to Scripture dates back to the Age of Reason. These "scholars" argued in favor of at least four different sources for the pentateuch. In this hypothesis, Deuteronomy itself is conjectured as a different "source" from the four other Mosaic books and they thought it was from hundreds of years after the death of Moses. They simply think it was written at the time of the reform of king Josiah in 2 Kings 22. I beg to differ. While the text of 2 Kings indicates that Josiah's staff found the lost and forgotten book of the Law (the Old Testament up to that point), there is no indication that Josiah or his people wrote, rewrote, or revised any of the Scriptures. While I am arguing for Mosaic authorship of Deuteronomy in particular, I seek to dismantle this entire documentary hypothesis approach which deals with all five books of the pentateuch. If the hypothesis as a whole is undermined, the the approach to Deuteronomy that it provides is undermined as well, due to the fact that it depends on several essential premises and presuppositions to make it seem right. According to Oswald T. Allis, there were four main areas considered by these critics when supporting the documentary hypothesis: 1) the variations in the divine names in Genesis 2) the secondary variations in diction and style 3) the parallel or duplicate accounts 4) the continuity of the various sources (from Allis, Oswald T. The Five Books of Moses. Phillipsburg, New Jersey: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1949. p. 22.) My readers might also want to check out several respectable sources on the documentary hypothesis, such as:
http://carm.org/documentary-hypothesis#footnote1_ce4nxrn and http://www.theopedia.com/jedp-theory
Let me begin to discuss here several of the main problems with the documentary hypothesis.
1) HEBREW WRITING AT THE TIME OF MOSES
Those in favor of the documentary hypothesis support it in part from the premise that they think there was no writing at the time of Moses (or let's face it- they're so lacking in faith that they may think Moses never lived even). There's abundant evidence from archaeology that written alphabets existed before the time of Moses indeed. Some examples are:
1- The Code of Hammurabi- from the period of 2000-1700 B.C.
2- a Ras Shamra tablet showing Ugartic alphabet is the same as modern Hebrew
3-water pitcher from city of Lachish from about 1600 B.C.
For the scholarship and references on these three artifacts, see this article on the same subject- https://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=13&article=36
2) VARYING NAMES OF GOD DOESN'T MEAN DIFFERENT WRITERS
The use of different names for God in the Pentateuch does not lead to, of logical necessity, the conclusion that there must have been a group of different writers or sources. The proponents of the documentary hypothesis use the different names of God present in the writing as the main premise for finding the conclusion that there were different writers or documents. Moses easily could have known these different names of God. He, after all, visited with the Lord face to face as a man speaks with his friend (Exodus 33:11). The different Hebrew names of God used in Deuteronomy have a different meaning, emphasis and import as to God's attributes, but the explanation of this is best explained in the Jewish writings. The use of the different names does not of logical necessity indicate different writers or documents, when it could also be a literary tool to emphasize different attributes and qualities of God. What is more likely the case of the matter is that Moses knew the different names Elohim and Yahweh and used them expressively in the speeches and writing in the five books of the pentateuch. http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Names_of_G-d/Elohim/elohim.html
3) APPEAL TO AGE (BACKWARDS) FALLACY
Implied in the arguments of those who don't support Mosaic authorship of Deuteronomy in any capacity, whether it be the supplementary approach, the documentary hypothesis, or otherwise, is a logical fallacy of a backwards appeal to age. The fallacy of appeal to age is supposed to be, generally, assertions that previous generations had superior wisdom to modern man, and thus conclusions that rely on this wisdom are seen as more true. One cannot say if previous generations had better wisdom, knowledge, or information or not until it is tested and proven logically. To say that they did or didn't as an unproven premise is vapid intellectually. I can visit my local hoe-down and give them a six-pence to receive that level of thinking and information. Proponents of the documentary hypothesis and other late authorship theories seem to rely on the basic idea that understanding of the things of God developed and accumulated slowly over time. Their approach to the names of God indicates this intellectual bias. While it is true the Scriptures exhibit a foundational principle of progressive revelation, the first five books of the Bible are rich and deep with the basics of theology. It is not understood all that Moses knew, because only the canonical writings seem to have survived (most other writings can be debunked, such as the Zohar which is considered pseudepigrapha and not trustworthy). The reasoning here is somewhat circular because I am depending on the historical narratives of Scripture for the fact that Moses lived. The question at hand is in regards to authorship, though. A lot of the respected scholarship takes for granted that Moses lived, but those scholars merely seek to answer in their research and writing whether the historical figure Moses wrote Deuteronomy. They're committing a similar mistake, though, by reasoning in a circle, pre-assuming Moses' existence (it's highly implied in their work, typically, I think).
It is better to keep things simple and just say that Mosaic authorship of Deuteronomy cannot be debunked from a backwards appeal to age. The book is well attested to in ancient manuscript documentation. It is part of one of the most excellent preserved histories of ancient Israel- which is the Old Testament.
The idea that the book seems too ancient to have been preserved and transmitted across generations very well is similarly fallacious. One cannot assume that it was not preserved just because it is an ancient text. It does not follow of logical necessity that it is impossible that the original text has been preserved and transmitted accurately just because it is an ancient text purportedly from the time of Moses. One possibility is that the original text has been preserved perfectly, and that is the viewpoint I adhere to. [An understanding of cold hard propositional logic is necessary to understand what I'm saying here. I am not employing mathematical probability or historical understanding, just propositional logic].
4) THE RATIONALISM AND LIBERAL SCHOLARSHIP INVOLVED ARE THEMSELVES MERELY A PHILOSOPHY
Generally, the documentary hypothesis is outdated pseudo-scholarship with deep philosophical biases from doubt, atheism, secularism, and unbelief. From such a starting point as that, there is no way for scholars to trust the authority of the Scriptures, as well as the inerrancy and infallibility of the Scriptures. To apply literary criticism and textual criticism to try to reconstruct the writing of the pentateuch would obviously result in an intellectual travesty and the scandalous of undermining of the faith of many. Simply taking a historian's approach to the document "Deuteronomy," I do not think there really is a problem with treating it as generally what it appears to be (by and large the words of Moses to his people). See my previous blog post about extra-biblical evidence for the link to the "truthbomb apologetics" article on how historians examine ancient documents. http://thereformerblog.blogspot.com/2016/03/extra-biblical-evidence-for-historical.html Even though this article is primarily about New Testament scholarship, the same problems exist in terms of a great need to bridge people's thinking across disciplines in order to see that there are perhaps other valid scholarly approaches to Scripture besides those approaches maintained by unbelieving scholars and believed by their deceived followers. The documentary hypothesis was supposed to be just that- a hypothesis, not a fully proven theory. The unbelieving atheistic philosophy of the original scholars shaded and darkened their approach to the Scriptures a great deal.Their approach, their intellectual tools, and their hypothesis is a worldly philosophy, and shouldn't be a considered a respected academic research. Since the hypothesis is old and kind of outmoded, it is fun for me to "pick on," but I don't think there will be many proponents of it who will be very concerned. There a variety of other theories and models that they rely on. I might touch upon a few of these others in a future blog post here.
5) PARALLEL/DUPLICATE ACCOUNTS ARE NOT NECESSARILY EVIDENCE FOR DIFFERENT SOURCES
The name Deuteronomy means "the second law" and is derived from the language of the Septuagint- an ancient version of the Old Testament in Greek (Latinized form of the LXX title). This is a misnomer, however, because the book is simply the words of Moses giving the same law again to a second generation- those who had not died in the plague in the wilderness on the journey to the promised land (Deuteronomy 4:3 and Numbers 25). Twenty-four thousand people died in the plague mentioned in Numbers 25. The words of Moses in Deuteronomy were originally intended for the remaining people- the next generation, ostensibly, who found themselves old enough at that point to receive Moses's reiteration of God's law. The different and new audience could definitely explain the differences in style and voice from the previous books. Moses's love and care for them, that they receive and understand what God expected was outstanding and excellent. Since Moses was reiterating Israel's history and God's law, promises, and covenant to a people group whose membership had significantly changed (though a lot of them were there before, just young), we can expect a change in style and voice which is well-put and tailored to that group receiving and understanding. Add in to the equation the fact that by that point Moses had a greater amount of leadership experience compared to the time of the Exodus.
The book of Deuteronomy details the giving of the law again to a next generation of Israelites who had survived the plague. It is repetitive with previous material for that reason. To miss that point in scholarly endeavors is really asinine. When scholars postulate such theories as the documentary hypothesis, what they actually seem to cover over and hide is God's love, care, and concern, and Moses's care and concern for his people in making sure they understood God's law and what would be expected when they finally took the promised land.
If repetitive passages at the micro-level are the concern, it is known that Deuteronomy contains chiastic structures which are simply a literary device. There is no evidence to say that Moses couldn't have known how to use chiasms by the end of his life. There is evidence to say he did in fact know about them, because chiasms are used in the book of Genesis even.
I support the viewpoint that Deuteronomy is largely the work of Moses himself, but there could easily have been a redactor or secretary involved in penning the autograph. I tend to think that second person was a contemporary of Moses's. The intro in 1:1-5 and the account of Moses's death could easily have been written by such a person.This viewpoint fits into what scholars call a "supplementary" approach or hypothesis, and would actually be very acceptable academically, I think.
Generally, the documentary hypothesis was a theory to explain authorship of the pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible). This approach to Scripture dates back to the Age of Reason. These "scholars" argued in favor of at least four different sources for the pentateuch. In this hypothesis, Deuteronomy itself is conjectured as a different "source" from the four other Mosaic books and they thought it was from hundreds of years after the death of Moses. They simply think it was written at the time of the reform of king Josiah in 2 Kings 22. I beg to differ. While the text of 2 Kings indicates that Josiah's staff found the lost and forgotten book of the Law (the Old Testament up to that point), there is no indication that Josiah or his people wrote, rewrote, or revised any of the Scriptures. While I am arguing for Mosaic authorship of Deuteronomy in particular, I seek to dismantle this entire documentary hypothesis approach which deals with all five books of the pentateuch. If the hypothesis as a whole is undermined, the the approach to Deuteronomy that it provides is undermined as well, due to the fact that it depends on several essential premises and presuppositions to make it seem right. According to Oswald T. Allis, there were four main areas considered by these critics when supporting the documentary hypothesis: 1) the variations in the divine names in Genesis 2) the secondary variations in diction and style 3) the parallel or duplicate accounts 4) the continuity of the various sources (from Allis, Oswald T. The Five Books of Moses. Phillipsburg, New Jersey: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1949. p. 22.) My readers might also want to check out several respectable sources on the documentary hypothesis, such as:
http://carm.org/documentary-hypothesis#footnote1_ce4nxrn and http://www.theopedia.com/jedp-theory
Let me begin to discuss here several of the main problems with the documentary hypothesis.
1) HEBREW WRITING AT THE TIME OF MOSES
Those in favor of the documentary hypothesis support it in part from the premise that they think there was no writing at the time of Moses (or let's face it- they're so lacking in faith that they may think Moses never lived even). There's abundant evidence from archaeology that written alphabets existed before the time of Moses indeed. Some examples are:
1- The Code of Hammurabi- from the period of 2000-1700 B.C.
2- a Ras Shamra tablet showing Ugartic alphabet is the same as modern Hebrew
3-water pitcher from city of Lachish from about 1600 B.C.
For the scholarship and references on these three artifacts, see this article on the same subject- https://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=13&article=36
2) VARYING NAMES OF GOD DOESN'T MEAN DIFFERENT WRITERS
The use of different names for God in the Pentateuch does not lead to, of logical necessity, the conclusion that there must have been a group of different writers or sources. The proponents of the documentary hypothesis use the different names of God present in the writing as the main premise for finding the conclusion that there were different writers or documents. Moses easily could have known these different names of God. He, after all, visited with the Lord face to face as a man speaks with his friend (Exodus 33:11). The different Hebrew names of God used in Deuteronomy have a different meaning, emphasis and import as to God's attributes, but the explanation of this is best explained in the Jewish writings. The use of the different names does not of logical necessity indicate different writers or documents, when it could also be a literary tool to emphasize different attributes and qualities of God. What is more likely the case of the matter is that Moses knew the different names Elohim and Yahweh and used them expressively in the speeches and writing in the five books of the pentateuch. http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Names_of_G-d/Elohim/elohim.html
3) APPEAL TO AGE (BACKWARDS) FALLACY
Implied in the arguments of those who don't support Mosaic authorship of Deuteronomy in any capacity, whether it be the supplementary approach, the documentary hypothesis, or otherwise, is a logical fallacy of a backwards appeal to age. The fallacy of appeal to age is supposed to be, generally, assertions that previous generations had superior wisdom to modern man, and thus conclusions that rely on this wisdom are seen as more true. One cannot say if previous generations had better wisdom, knowledge, or information or not until it is tested and proven logically. To say that they did or didn't as an unproven premise is vapid intellectually. I can visit my local hoe-down and give them a six-pence to receive that level of thinking and information. Proponents of the documentary hypothesis and other late authorship theories seem to rely on the basic idea that understanding of the things of God developed and accumulated slowly over time. Their approach to the names of God indicates this intellectual bias. While it is true the Scriptures exhibit a foundational principle of progressive revelation, the first five books of the Bible are rich and deep with the basics of theology. It is not understood all that Moses knew, because only the canonical writings seem to have survived (most other writings can be debunked, such as the Zohar which is considered pseudepigrapha and not trustworthy). The reasoning here is somewhat circular because I am depending on the historical narratives of Scripture for the fact that Moses lived. The question at hand is in regards to authorship, though. A lot of the respected scholarship takes for granted that Moses lived, but those scholars merely seek to answer in their research and writing whether the historical figure Moses wrote Deuteronomy. They're committing a similar mistake, though, by reasoning in a circle, pre-assuming Moses' existence (it's highly implied in their work, typically, I think).
It is better to keep things simple and just say that Mosaic authorship of Deuteronomy cannot be debunked from a backwards appeal to age. The book is well attested to in ancient manuscript documentation. It is part of one of the most excellent preserved histories of ancient Israel- which is the Old Testament.
The idea that the book seems too ancient to have been preserved and transmitted across generations very well is similarly fallacious. One cannot assume that it was not preserved just because it is an ancient text. It does not follow of logical necessity that it is impossible that the original text has been preserved and transmitted accurately just because it is an ancient text purportedly from the time of Moses. One possibility is that the original text has been preserved perfectly, and that is the viewpoint I adhere to. [An understanding of cold hard propositional logic is necessary to understand what I'm saying here. I am not employing mathematical probability or historical understanding, just propositional logic].
4) THE RATIONALISM AND LIBERAL SCHOLARSHIP INVOLVED ARE THEMSELVES MERELY A PHILOSOPHY
Generally, the documentary hypothesis is outdated pseudo-scholarship with deep philosophical biases from doubt, atheism, secularism, and unbelief. From such a starting point as that, there is no way for scholars to trust the authority of the Scriptures, as well as the inerrancy and infallibility of the Scriptures. To apply literary criticism and textual criticism to try to reconstruct the writing of the pentateuch would obviously result in an intellectual travesty and the scandalous of undermining of the faith of many. Simply taking a historian's approach to the document "Deuteronomy," I do not think there really is a problem with treating it as generally what it appears to be (by and large the words of Moses to his people). See my previous blog post about extra-biblical evidence for the link to the "truthbomb apologetics" article on how historians examine ancient documents. http://thereformerblog.blogspot.com/2016/03/extra-biblical-evidence-for-historical.html Even though this article is primarily about New Testament scholarship, the same problems exist in terms of a great need to bridge people's thinking across disciplines in order to see that there are perhaps other valid scholarly approaches to Scripture besides those approaches maintained by unbelieving scholars and believed by their deceived followers. The documentary hypothesis was supposed to be just that- a hypothesis, not a fully proven theory. The unbelieving atheistic philosophy of the original scholars shaded and darkened their approach to the Scriptures a great deal.Their approach, their intellectual tools, and their hypothesis is a worldly philosophy, and shouldn't be a considered a respected academic research. Since the hypothesis is old and kind of outmoded, it is fun for me to "pick on," but I don't think there will be many proponents of it who will be very concerned. There a variety of other theories and models that they rely on. I might touch upon a few of these others in a future blog post here.
5) PARALLEL/DUPLICATE ACCOUNTS ARE NOT NECESSARILY EVIDENCE FOR DIFFERENT SOURCES
The name Deuteronomy means "the second law" and is derived from the language of the Septuagint- an ancient version of the Old Testament in Greek (Latinized form of the LXX title). This is a misnomer, however, because the book is simply the words of Moses giving the same law again to a second generation- those who had not died in the plague in the wilderness on the journey to the promised land (Deuteronomy 4:3 and Numbers 25). Twenty-four thousand people died in the plague mentioned in Numbers 25. The words of Moses in Deuteronomy were originally intended for the remaining people- the next generation, ostensibly, who found themselves old enough at that point to receive Moses's reiteration of God's law. The different and new audience could definitely explain the differences in style and voice from the previous books. Moses's love and care for them, that they receive and understand what God expected was outstanding and excellent. Since Moses was reiterating Israel's history and God's law, promises, and covenant to a people group whose membership had significantly changed (though a lot of them were there before, just young), we can expect a change in style and voice which is well-put and tailored to that group receiving and understanding. Add in to the equation the fact that by that point Moses had a greater amount of leadership experience compared to the time of the Exodus.
The book of Deuteronomy details the giving of the law again to a next generation of Israelites who had survived the plague. It is repetitive with previous material for that reason. To miss that point in scholarly endeavors is really asinine. When scholars postulate such theories as the documentary hypothesis, what they actually seem to cover over and hide is God's love, care, and concern, and Moses's care and concern for his people in making sure they understood God's law and what would be expected when they finally took the promised land.
If repetitive passages at the micro-level are the concern, it is known that Deuteronomy contains chiastic structures which are simply a literary device. There is no evidence to say that Moses couldn't have known how to use chiasms by the end of his life. There is evidence to say he did in fact know about them, because chiasms are used in the book of Genesis even.
I support the viewpoint that Deuteronomy is largely the work of Moses himself, but there could easily have been a redactor or secretary involved in penning the autograph. I tend to think that second person was a contemporary of Moses's. The intro in 1:1-5 and the account of Moses's death could easily have been written by such a person.This viewpoint fits into what scholars call a "supplementary" approach or hypothesis, and would actually be very acceptable academically, I think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)