"Because theological and ethical statements cannot be verified by empirical methods does not mean, as the positivists erroneously and arbitrarily conclude, that they are beyond verification. Such a judgment stems purely from the metaphysical theory that only empirical experience supplies evidence about reality."
-Carl Henry
God, Revelation and Authority, Volume 1, p. 247
Monday, August 15, 2011
Sunday, August 7, 2011
Philip the Apostle
Tomb Discovery
Hurriyet Daily News reported that Professor Francesco D’Andria, is thought to have found the tomb of Philip the Apostle, one of Jesus' original twelve disciples. BAR Magazine (Biblical Archaeology Review) has the full story here.
According to D’Andria, “Until recently, we thought the grave of St. Philip was on Martyrs’ Hill, but we discovered no traces of him in the geophysical research conducted in that area. A month ago, we discovered the remnants of an unknown church, 40 meters away from the St. Philip Church on Martyrs’ Hill. And in that church we discovered the grave of St. Philip,” The excavation of the tomb is expected to begin sometime in the near future.
An Eye Witness Testimony
Not to be confused with Philip the Evangelist, Philip the apostle was preaching the Gospel in northern Asia which culminated in him being scourged, thrown into prison, and afterwards crucified, on a tree upside down with irons in his heels and ankles in Hierapolis in Asia Minor, in A.D. 54. Once again, the importance of such a faithful witness to the resurrected historical Jesus breaks forth on my mind. The old question, could the disciples have been willing to die for a lie, is just as applicable today as ever. One might suggest that numerous people would be willing to die for their beliefs, take Islamic Jihadists for example. There is an important difference, however, the disciples were contemporaries of Jesus and actual eye witnesses of his resurrection. As such, Philip's martyrdom becomes more than just a human interest story, it is a powerful testimony to the bodily resurrection of Jesus.
The Gnostic Gospel of Philip
Before I go on, I thought it important to mention that neither Philip the Apostle nor Philip the Evangelist authored the Gospel of Philip, which is a Gnostic book of the Nag Hammadi Library. These texts are not based on the life of Jesus, rather they are collections of sayings which were put together long after the New Testament Gospels were written. They are not only unreliable, they are also in complete opposition to the doctrines of the Apostles and were rejected by the early Christian church. Because these Gnostic writings use the Apostle's names it can be very misleading to the unaware.
Philip and Undesigned Scriptural Coincidences
Now then, there is something that has recently captured my attention in regard to the textual reliability of the Gospels and it pertains to our Apostle. Professor Timothy McGrew has recaptured what is called, undesigned scriptural coincidences, as he explains, "it is a cumulative case argument that the Gospels reflect, to an important extent, independent knowledge of actual events." In other words, as the Bible continues to be the target of liberals' attacks, questioning its reliability and historicity, this becomes powerful evidence of the trustworthiness of the Gospels.
In this instance, the setting is the feeding of the five thousand. Jesus and his disciples were going away for a rest and in John 6:5, it reads, 'Therefore Jesus, lifting up His eyes and seeing that a large crowd was coming to Him, said to Philip, "Where are we to buy bread, so that these may eat?"' So the question is, why would Jesus ask Philip of all people? Why not Peter or John? There is nothing that stands out in the context that would offer an explanation. Furthermore, if we cross examine the parallel passages, we still would find no hint to help us and they omit this little detail altogether.
Just imagine for a moment, if we were to write our own gospel account, we might find all sorts of reasons to use another disciple's name, especially if it were just a made up story. We could say that James and John the sons of Zebedee were fishermen and might be familiar with some of the trading posts, not to mention that this Gospel does bare John's name. Of course, Matthew was a tax collector and may also have something to say. Then there was also Judas, the treasurer. Peter is always the most outspoken of the disciples, why not him? Whoever we may choose, as one who is almost completely ignored in the Gospels, Philip would be a most unlikely candidate.
As it turns out, if we turn to the parallel passage in Luke's Gospel we find a new tid bit of information, it says that "he [Jesus] withdrew... to a city called Bethsaida" (Luke 9:10). Now this is where it gets interesting. If we turn back over to John 1:44, when Jesus is selecting his disciples, we discover that "Philip was from Bethsaida." The reason why Jesus asked Philip where to buy food was because he was from Bathsaida. There is no way that this could have been intentionally crafted by the authors considering the way it is laid out. This speaks to the credibility of the Gospel reports as first hand eye witnesses.
To dig deeper into these undesigned scriptural coincidences, Tim McGrew has some interesting material available here and here.
http://www.about-jesus.org/martyrs.htm
http://www.exclassics.com/foxe/foxecont.htm
http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/content/Parchmentandpen/DeathoftheApostles.pdf
http://nobtsapologetics.com/magazine/speakers/dr-timothy-j-mcgrew/
http://historicalapologetics.org/blunt-john-james/
Hurriyet Daily News reported that Professor Francesco D’Andria, is thought to have found the tomb of Philip the Apostle, one of Jesus' original twelve disciples. BAR Magazine (Biblical Archaeology Review) has the full story here.
An Eye Witness Testimony
Not to be confused with Philip the Evangelist, Philip the apostle was preaching the Gospel in northern Asia which culminated in him being scourged, thrown into prison, and afterwards crucified, on a tree upside down with irons in his heels and ankles in Hierapolis in Asia Minor, in A.D. 54. Once again, the importance of such a faithful witness to the resurrected historical Jesus breaks forth on my mind. The old question, could the disciples have been willing to die for a lie, is just as applicable today as ever. One might suggest that numerous people would be willing to die for their beliefs, take Islamic Jihadists for example. There is an important difference, however, the disciples were contemporaries of Jesus and actual eye witnesses of his resurrection. As such, Philip's martyrdom becomes more than just a human interest story, it is a powerful testimony to the bodily resurrection of Jesus.
The Gnostic Gospel of Philip
Before I go on, I thought it important to mention that neither Philip the Apostle nor Philip the Evangelist authored the Gospel of Philip, which is a Gnostic book of the Nag Hammadi Library. These texts are not based on the life of Jesus, rather they are collections of sayings which were put together long after the New Testament Gospels were written. They are not only unreliable, they are also in complete opposition to the doctrines of the Apostles and were rejected by the early Christian church. Because these Gnostic writings use the Apostle's names it can be very misleading to the unaware.
Philip and Undesigned Scriptural Coincidences
Now then, there is something that has recently captured my attention in regard to the textual reliability of the Gospels and it pertains to our Apostle. Professor Timothy McGrew has recaptured what is called, undesigned scriptural coincidences, as he explains, "it is a cumulative case argument that the Gospels reflect, to an important extent, independent knowledge of actual events." In other words, as the Bible continues to be the target of liberals' attacks, questioning its reliability and historicity, this becomes powerful evidence of the trustworthiness of the Gospels.
In this instance, the setting is the feeding of the five thousand. Jesus and his disciples were going away for a rest and in John 6:5, it reads, 'Therefore Jesus, lifting up His eyes and seeing that a large crowd was coming to Him, said to Philip, "Where are we to buy bread, so that these may eat?"' So the question is, why would Jesus ask Philip of all people? Why not Peter or John? There is nothing that stands out in the context that would offer an explanation. Furthermore, if we cross examine the parallel passages, we still would find no hint to help us and they omit this little detail altogether.
Just imagine for a moment, if we were to write our own gospel account, we might find all sorts of reasons to use another disciple's name, especially if it were just a made up story. We could say that James and John the sons of Zebedee were fishermen and might be familiar with some of the trading posts, not to mention that this Gospel does bare John's name. Of course, Matthew was a tax collector and may also have something to say. Then there was also Judas, the treasurer. Peter is always the most outspoken of the disciples, why not him? Whoever we may choose, as one who is almost completely ignored in the Gospels, Philip would be a most unlikely candidate.
As it turns out, if we turn to the parallel passage in Luke's Gospel we find a new tid bit of information, it says that "he [Jesus] withdrew... to a city called Bethsaida" (Luke 9:10). Now this is where it gets interesting. If we turn back over to John 1:44, when Jesus is selecting his disciples, we discover that "Philip was from Bethsaida." The reason why Jesus asked Philip where to buy food was because he was from Bathsaida. There is no way that this could have been intentionally crafted by the authors considering the way it is laid out. This speaks to the credibility of the Gospel reports as first hand eye witnesses.
To dig deeper into these undesigned scriptural coincidences, Tim McGrew has some interesting material available here and here.
http://www.about-jesus.org/martyrs.htm
http://www.exclassics.com/foxe/foxecont.htm
http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/content/Parchmentandpen/DeathoftheApostles.pdf
http://nobtsapologetics.com/magazine/speakers/dr-timothy-j-mcgrew/
http://historicalapologetics.org/blunt-john-james/
Saturday, August 6, 2011
Science as Religion
Science as the sole bedrock of truth, carries with it certain presumptions. Scientism is the view that science is the single source of knowledge and understanding of reality. Empiricism, verification and falsification have their benefits, as does the other trademarks of science, but they are in no way capable, either individually or together, of offering an exhaustive comprehension of reality. Modern science is made to work under the constraints of methodological naturalism and thereby confined to a particular metaphysical point of view; when viewed as the single arbiter of truth, it can no longer be taken as a scientific discipline, it becomes religion.
Monday, July 4, 2011
Pain and Suffering: Comparing Worldviews
What is perhaps the most frequent challenge raised by atheists and one of the most perplexing questions that troubles many Christians, is the problem of pain and suffering. What is often overlooked is that it is not only a question that Christians must answer, but because it is a thunderstrike at the very core of man's existence, it is a troubling issue that we ALL must face. Before a person thinks his faith shipwrecked, he or she should consider the alternatives, which are less than satisfying if I do say so myself.
According to atheism/naturalism/materialism, pain and suffering have no purpose or redeeming quality, they are just meaningless brute facts of nature. Typical response is to attain relief, although there is no foundation for such assumed human dignity. As there is no life-after, the meaninglessness in suffering is multiplied at death. There remains no hope for the clinically ill, death is final and absolute; after all, man is a mere animal.
Pantheism/reincarnation: Pain and suffering are things that we must accept as the natural cycles of life. They are the ultimate result of one's karma. Any attempt to alleviate the situation could jeopardize a person's future by prolonging the suffering in the person's next life cycle.
Buddhism/Christian Science: Suffering is an illusion. According to Buddhism, to end this suffering, we must cease all desire. For the Christian Scientist, we must attain Christ Consciousness.
Judeo/Christian: Suffering is the result of sin, the fall of creation and thereby, an abnormality. Man also forfeited his authority over the world to Lucifer. Jesus gave the mandate to nurse and care for those who are suffering, as an expression of love toward our neighbor. Being created in His image, it is a matter of human dignity. At the cross, Jesus partook of all our pain and suffering, offering redemption in the midst of our hopelessness and despair. In the end, when God's kingdom is fully manifested, for those who have placed their faith in Christ, suffering will be no more .
Incidentally, I have come to believe that pain serves very important functions that are unique to suffering, which may not necessarily be the result of the fall; but according to The Bible, it does appear to be absent in the new world to come. For more on the subject, I recommend Paul Brand and Phillip Yancey's The Gift of Pain.
According to atheism/naturalism/materialism, pain and suffering have no purpose or redeeming quality, they are just meaningless brute facts of nature. Typical response is to attain relief, although there is no foundation for such assumed human dignity. As there is no life-after, the meaninglessness in suffering is multiplied at death. There remains no hope for the clinically ill, death is final and absolute; after all, man is a mere animal.
Pantheism/reincarnation: Pain and suffering are things that we must accept as the natural cycles of life. They are the ultimate result of one's karma. Any attempt to alleviate the situation could jeopardize a person's future by prolonging the suffering in the person's next life cycle.
Buddhism/Christian Science: Suffering is an illusion. According to Buddhism, to end this suffering, we must cease all desire. For the Christian Scientist, we must attain Christ Consciousness.
Judeo/Christian: Suffering is the result of sin, the fall of creation and thereby, an abnormality. Man also forfeited his authority over the world to Lucifer. Jesus gave the mandate to nurse and care for those who are suffering, as an expression of love toward our neighbor. Being created in His image, it is a matter of human dignity. At the cross, Jesus partook of all our pain and suffering, offering redemption in the midst of our hopelessness and despair. In the end, when God's kingdom is fully manifested, for those who have placed their faith in Christ, suffering will be no more .
Incidentally, I have come to believe that pain serves very important functions that are unique to suffering, which may not necessarily be the result of the fall; but according to The Bible, it does appear to be absent in the new world to come. For more on the subject, I recommend Paul Brand and Phillip Yancey's The Gift of Pain.
Friday, May 20, 2011
The King James Version: 400 Years of Celebration and Controversy
I was a bit surprised to find NPR and so many other news outlets reporting on the birthday of the KJV. Born at a time when the reformation was spreading across Europe, King James ordered what has arguably become the most beloved English translation of the Bible. Incidentally, there is no evidence that he actually gave it his final approval, although it has come to be called the “Authorized Version.” Nevertheless, there are those who attack it on account of King James I being suspected of homosexuality, although he was not involved in the translation process (I'm sure that if it was under the direction of his father it would have been otherwise). Others hold the translation as being directly overseen by God to guarantee against all human error, as called the King James Only camp.
The Authorized King James Version was based on a Greek New Testament by the Catholic scholar Erasmus in 1516, known as the Textus Receptus (received text), which William Tyndale and Martin Luther also used for their translations. According to a computer analysis approximately eighty-five percent of the words of the KJV originated with Tyndale,1 who was rewarded by being burned at the stake for his work. While I do not claim to be a scholar or an expert on the subject of translations—although I do know a little Greek, he owns a restaurant down the road, but he's really not very little (lol)—most Christian scholars consider the original text to have been inspired and inerrant, rather than the translations.2 Contrary to Islamic tradition, in which adherents are expected to learn Arabic to have the pure form of the Qur'an, for Christians this has never been an issue, at least that is, not until the late 1900s.3 This recent debate has probably stemmed in part from certain fundamentalists which insisted on literal interpretations,4 along with the on-going discovery of earlier manuscripts.
To be precise, it is the Alexandrian manuscript that has actually spurred so much of the contention. As noted in my previous blog, the long ending in the Gospel of Mark as well as other passages are not included in earlier manuscripts. Although they do not change any doctrines, they have been referenced in support of certain doctrines.
As posted on Wikipedia, James White breaks the movement down to five primary categories:5
- "I Like the KJV Best" - Though White lists this group as a division of the King James Only group, this division does not believe that the KJV is the only acceptable version, thus disqualifying them from being "King James Only". This group simply prefers the KJV over other translations because their church uses it, because they have always used it, or because they like its style.6
- "The Textual Argument" - This group believes that the KJV's Hebrew and Greek textual bases are the most accurate. These conclude that the KJV is based on better manuscripts. Many in this group may accept a modern version based on the same manuscripts as the KJV. White claims Zane C. Hodges is a good example of this group.7 However, Hodges would consider that the Majority Text "corrects" the Received Text as seen e.g., in the Majority Text textual apparatus of the New King James Version. The Trinitarian Bible Society would fit in this division; however, "the Trinitarian Bible Society does not believe the Authorized Version to be a perfect translation, only that it is the best available translation in the English language",8 and "the Society believes this text is superior to the texts used by the United Bible Societies and other Bible publishers, which texts have as their basis a relatively few seriously defective manuscripts from the 4th century and which have been compiled using 20th century rationalistic principles of scholarship."9
- "Received Text Only" - Here, the traditional Hebrew and Greek texts are believed to be supernaturally preserved. The KJV is believed to be an exemplary translation, but it is also believed that other translations based on these texts have the potential to be equally good. Donald Waite would fall into this category.
- "The Inspired KJV Group" - This faction believe that the KJV itself was divinely inspired. They see the translation to be preserved by God and as accurate as the original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts found in its underlying texts. Sometimes this group will even exclude other language versions based on the same manuscripts claiming the KJV to be the only Bible.
- "The KJV As New Revelation" - This group claims that the KJV is a "new revelation" or "advanced revelation" from God, and it should be the standard from which all other translations originate. Adherents to this belief may also believe that the original-language Hebrew and Greek can be corrected by the KJV. This view is often called "Ruckmanism" after Peter Ruckman, a staunch advocate of this view.
Another argument that has been leveled at modern versions is the issue of copyrights. I've heard it argued that nobody can place a copyright on the word of God, thus the KJV wins by default. Of course, with all the expenses involved in research and translation work, who can blame publishers from wanting to stay in the black. Yes, there is profit to be had in any case. But, the original manuscripts are the real conflict and they are not copyrighted.
As someone who grew up on the KJV, I am one of the few who still enjoy reading the old Elizabethan English. I no longer subscribe to the KJV as the only viable translation (when I was young I actually condemned all alternative versions to our basement). There's one thing I've found true and I think Mark Twain said it best, “It ain't those parts of the Bible that I can't understand that bother me, it is the parts that I do understand.” I think the same can be said for the various modern Bible translations. In celebration of the KJV and its predecessors, I am happy to enjoy both the freedom of access and the availability of such a rich storehouse of treasures.
Hebrews 4:12
For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. NIV201010
For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. KJV11
1 The Bible in English, David Daniell, cited in From Tyndale to Madison, Michael Farris
2 Dr. Norman Geisler, Dr. William Lane Craig,
3 Chick Publications helped circulate this position in their materials. They also promoted Gail Riplinger's New Age Bible Versions which has been totally refuted by Dr. James White in their debate as well as his book, The King James Only Controversy. According to Wikipedia, the controversy dates to at least 1987: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King-James-Only_Movement.
4 A good method of interpreting Scripture is to recognize that only those things that were intended to be taken literally should be interpreted literally. i.e. Revelation depicts Jesus with a sword coming out of his mouth; it is understood to be symbolic, not literal. This may be an extreme example, one that is not actually disputed (except by atheists), but it serves to illustrate the point.
6 The Breath and Heartbeat of God, Gail Riplinger; In Awe of Thy Word, http://www.chick.com/reading/books/284/0284_09.asp.
7 The King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust Modern Translations?, James White
8 The Accuracy of the Authorized Version, Malcolm H. Watts
9 The Text of the Bible used by the Trinitarian Bible Society, http://trinitarianbiblesociety.org/site/principles.asp
C.S. Lewis, Reflecting on Nagging Doubts
“Just as the Christian has his moments when the clamour of this visible and audible world is so persistent and the whisper of the spiritual world so faint that faith and reason can hardly stick to their guns, so, as I well remember, the atheist too has his moments of shuddering misgiving, of an all but irresistable suspicion that old tales may after all be true, that something or someone from outside may at any moment break into his neat, explicable, mechanical universe. Believe in God and you will have to face hours when it seems obvious that this material world is the only reality: disbelieve in Him and you must face hours when this material world seems to shout at you that it is not all.”
Religion: Reality or Substitute by C.S. Lewis
Christian Reflections, p. 41
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Chrysanthus and Daria, Third Century Christian Martyrs
After more than 1500 years, the Catholic Church has recently decided to allow what has been thought to be the remains of the early Christian martyrs, Chrysanthus and Daria, to be examined by scientists and historians, and apparently the results are in the affirmitive.
Chrysanthus was born in Egypt and his father brought him back to Rome where he was educated in the finest manner of the era, including the paganism of his day. After reading books that criticized Christianity, he wanted to read Christian writings for himself. He got hold of the New Testament and began reading the Acts of the Apostles.1
“Seeking someone to instruct him in the Holy Scriptures, he found the presbyter Carpophoros hiding from persecution, and received holy Baptism from him. After this, he began to preach the Gospel. Chrysanthus' father tried to turn his son from Christianity, and finally married him to Daria, a priestess of Minerva” whom he managed to convert to Christ.2
After suffering much persecution for their faith and evangelistic efforts, they were eventually both buried alive.
According to the Daily Mail Reporter, "Two skeletons discovered in a crypt in an Italian cathedral are those of Christian saints who were martyred in ancient Rome, experts have claimed. Scientists say all the evidence suggests the bones do belong to Chrysanthus and Daria, who were killed in 283AD for spreading Christianity."3
Chrysanthus was born in Egypt and his father brought him back to Rome where he was educated in the finest manner of the era, including the paganism of his day. After reading books that criticized Christianity, he wanted to read Christian writings for himself. He got hold of the New Testament and began reading the Acts of the Apostles.1
“Seeking someone to instruct him in the Holy Scriptures, he found the presbyter Carpophoros hiding from persecution, and received holy Baptism from him. After this, he began to preach the Gospel. Chrysanthus' father tried to turn his son from Christianity, and finally married him to Daria, a priestess of Minerva” whom he managed to convert to Christ.2
After suffering much persecution for their faith and evangelistic efforts, they were eventually both buried alive.
According to the Daily Mail Reporter, "Two skeletons discovered in a crypt in an Italian cathedral are those of Christian saints who were martyred in ancient Rome, experts have claimed. Scientists say all the evidence suggests the bones do belong to Chrysanthus and Daria, who were killed in 283AD for spreading Christianity."3
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)