Dakotas Christian Believers Arena
Come on in and browse 
   Home      Points to Ponder
 
{There are 20 articles on this page}
 
This section’s purpose is to highlight certain statements scholars and archaeologists say and respond in an annotated manner. These comments will come from different sources which will be listed so the reader can seek out the full work and read the context from which the quotes were taken.
Unlike the Food for Thought section, these response will be very directed and to the point without any excess verbiage. There will be no ‘filler’ comments to waste time or misdirect the reader’s attention and concentration.
 

1. The Garden of Eden by Dr. Eric Cline  http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/eden357918.shtml

“Many scholars would agree that it is only when we get into periods marked by the invention of writing (that is, after 3000 b.c.) that we have any hope of corroborating the biblical accounts. This means that the stories presented in the first chapters of Genesis may be more difficult to corroborate than stories that appear later in Genesis and certainly much harder to corroborate than stories that appear in the other books of the Hebrew Bible”

Finding the location of the Garden of Eden will be an impossibility but because the secular academic world refuses to accept Noah’s global flood they keep trying. In Gen. 6:13 God tells Noah that He is going to destroy both the living things and the earth. This would include the Garden of Eden and the 4 rivers that flowed out from it.

We know that God did that because of the recent publication of research which has discovered many cities and monuments buried beneath the seas. Not only were the cities destroyed but the geography was changed as well via the upheavel that came with the flood. It is a pointless search to try and locate pre-flood locations because nothing was left to attest to their existence, including the Garden of Eden, save for the Bible. Thus it requires faith to accept their creation and most academics do not want faith they want sources and evidence.

2. Forget about Noah's Ark; There Was No Worldwide Flood by Dr. Robert Cargill http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/flood357903.shtml

“The worldwide flood described in Genesis 6-9 is not historical, but rather a combination of at least two flood stories, both of which descended from earlier Mesopotamian flood narratives”

Yet he was not there to see what really took place. This is the problem with most academics, they refuse to believe something because it doesn’t involve science. Well science is not the field that God said to use when it came to His word. He said ‘use faith’ because He knew that the travel through human time would destroy much evidence for the flood.

These same academics who dismiss the historicity of Noah’s flood do so even though much evidence has been uncovered to show that there was. (See Noah’s flood section) We do not need the ark to confirm the biblical record and the author of that quote has no evidence that the biblical authors copied from other sources. Instead, those flood myths from secular societies were copied down because the very real and biblical flood was still impressed upon their memory. We even have record of ancient post-flood people settling on high ground because of flood fears. It was historical and real.

3. Ibid

“In order to even entertain the possibility of a worldwide flood, one has to bypass all laws of physics, exit the realm of science, and enter into the realm of the miraculous”

Academics fear the miraculous because their test tubes and artifacts cannot follow. They are comfortable with the realm of science because it means that they are in charge not God and they get to say what did or did not happen. They like control thus they dismiss anything that removes that authority and control from their grasp.

Secular science is designed to follow the wrong path which goes in the wrong direction to the wrong answers because they do not want God part of the picture. If they include God then they have to include the book of Revelation which tells of their eternal destination and they do not want to think about the coming judgment.

The flood does not bypass the laws of physics and it was not a scientific event, it was a judgment with a big lesson for all and the secular academic world doesn’t like not being the final authority, they want to be the supreme being but they can’t so they omit the supernatural at every opportunity but like the elephant in the room, the supernatural always has a presence to remind them that they are not in charge and in need of a Saviour.

4. The Genesis Factor: Myths & realities ed. By Ron Bagalke Jr. (a book, no link) pg. 228

“So young earth creationism is not a comfortable position to hold, especially for scientists or ambitious students and it would be tempting either to give it up…or else just to say it really does not matter how or when God created…as long as we believe that He is our Creator…But it does matter.”

One of the things that bothers me about evangelicals and conservatives is that they automatically take the immediate opposite side of an argument simply because the non-believer or liberal takes the other side. Sometimes the secular or cult world has some of the truth if they didn’t they would not be able to deceive others into following their teachings.

This is one of those cases where the YEC takes a position when it is not totally correct. A believer should be a Biblicist not an ideologist and side with the Bible. Does it matter how the earth and universe was created—yes, simply because God told us how He did it. Does it matter when He created everything? NO, simply because God did not tell us when He created.

Two things: A. The Bible simply says in Gen. 1:1 “IN the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Basically by stating it that way God is telling us that fighting over the age of the universe is a distraction from the important details of creation. Those details are  God created and He did it in 6 24 hour days.

B. The heavens and earth were created BEFORE human time (Gen. 1:3)was making it very impossible to put a date upon the initial creative act. What God has hidden no man can find out and that is done for a reason so believers , and the rest, will focus on God and His who He is.

Does this mean that Christians can believe the old earth creation theories? Of course not for the details of creation came after human time was put into place. The order found in Genesis one has a purpose and there is no room for evolution, progressive creationism nor theistic evolution.

Those who advocate those three aspects of origins do so because they have rejected God’s word and sought their own solutions. They have made a choice to put science over God and that is where they go wrong. The believer puts God over science because God was there and science was not.

5. Ibid. contribution by T. Mortenson pg. 45

“The other closely related lesson was that the Church will make big mistakes if it tries to tell scientists what to believe about the world.”

This is included because it deals with heliocentric ideas and sadly because of the misguided early Roman catholic leaders the atheist has had much material in criticizing and condemning the Church .

These problems arise in the modern church as well as church history simply because misguided people failed to learn from the Holy Spirit what the Bible really teaches. The Bible never taught that the sun revolved around the earth, just like it doesn’t teach that the world is flat (4 corners of the globe).

People who were church leaders simply did not follow the Holy Spirit to the truth and made big fools of themselves because their misguided thinking led them in the wrong direction. They have and are causing a lot of problems for the Church today because the simply do not research with the aid of the Holy Spirit. Also, they want their church ideology not the truth.

The Church can tell scientists what to believe about the earth and if the scientist is honest he will see that their observations will back up those words. But the church has to be honest with itself first and get on the same page as God’s word and see what it really teaches.

6. Did God Have a Wife by Dr. Wm. Dever (a book) pgs. ix & 83.

“This is a book that, although it hopes to be true to the facts we know, does not attempt objectivity; for that is impossible and perhaps even undesirable…And not since the death of 19th century positivism have any respectable historians been naïve enough to think that they could be entirely objective.”

The secular academic world calls for objectivity all the time. When debating against the believer they claim that the latter’s words are not valid because they do not have any objectivity. They also claim that good science is done objectively. Both are logical fallacies because objectivity, not only shown by Dr. Dever’s words above but also God when He says there are only 2 sides to the issue, cannot be obtained.

Even the secular scientist has his own agenda and influences that taint his or her research or experiments. For the secular scientist comes from the unbelieving part of the world and that state of unbelief reflects greatly in their work and how the make the rules to follow for their work.

Secular science is designed to look for natural answers and that construction immediately tells the believer that no objectivity is involved in their pursuit of answers. (Though they now claim that science is not about answers; which brings to the believers mind the question—then what good is secular science?)

Without objectivity or answers all the secular scientist is doing is practicing brainwashing and censorship. The answers are there but because they do not want God or the supernatural as part of the equation they suppress both to derive the result they want, rendering their work tainted and ruined because they cannot follow their own rules.

The quoted words above undermined because of the double standard employed by the unbelieving academic world (and other unbelievers). On page 71 of the same book we find these words of Dr. Dever’s: “The perspective of all the biblical writers is a factor that limits their usefulness in another regard. It is no exaggeration to say that all the biblical literature…constitutes what is essentially propaganda. The writers make no pretense to objectivity.”

Thus we see that the secularist refuses to live by the rules they place upon the Bible and its writers. Christians do not follow secular rules, they follow God’s thus we do not have to be objective but preach and teach the truth regardless of the complaints of the secularist.

7. Two Burials of Jesus of Nazareth and The Talpiot Yeshua Tomb by Dr. James Tabor

http://sbl-site.org/publications/article.aspx?articleId=651

“One must assume that the corpse was taken and reburied, perhaps as soon as the Sabbath was over just after sundown Saturday night”

The very problem with those words and the idea of the disciples re-burying Jesus’ body is found in Mat. 27:62-66. The passage talks about the guard that was placed on the tomb to ensure that the disciples did not spirit the body away. The passage states that it was the next day the chief priests and Pharisees approached Pilate concerning Jesus’ words about rising again on the third day.

They got the guard and secured the tomb thinking they stopped the disciples from stealing the body on the third day and proclaiming Jesus’s words true and that he kept His prophecy.

The guards only had to remain until the fourth day to make sure Jesus lied and his disciples thwarted. BUT in Mat. 28:2-4 we read that the guards were eye-witnesses to the resurrection and could not stop Jesus’ rising. They also reported everything that took place (v. 12) to the chief priests, which gives us the record that Jesus’ enemies knew the truth and could not refute it later when Jesus was seen by many witnesses.

There was no possible way for the disciples to have removed the body and because of the soldiers and other eye-witnesses to the resurrection there are NO 1st century works that refute its historicity or provides evidence to counter the gospels. The enemies of Jesus knew it took place and was real. They could not deny it but once the last eye-witnesses were dead, then we have the rise in attacks on the historical resurrection.

8. Regarding Magness and Talpiot by Kevin Kilty & Mark Elliott http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/kil368009.shtml

“All the Gospels agree that Jesus’ body is missing from the initial burial tomb. The tomb is empty in all the Gospel versions. And there is no record of anyone witnessing the resurrection. We have no records from the first century that indicate whether Jesus’ final burial tomb is known or unknown.”

The bolded words highlight the position of many secular scholars. They do not accept the Bible as a historical document nor a valid source for biblical matters or the history of Israel.

They are wrong of course as the Bible is an ancient document, written from as early as the 14th century BC approx. to 100 AD (from Moses to the Apostle John). The secular world would not take the same stance with the History of Thucydides or Herodotus as: “The History of Thucydides (c. 460-400 BC) is known to us from eight mss., the earliest belonging to c. AD 900, and a few papyrus scraps belong to about the early christian era. The same is true of the History of Herodotus (c. 488-428 BC). Yet NO classical scholar would listen to an argument that the authenticity of Herodotus or Thucydides is in doubt because the earliest mss. of their works which are of any use to us are over 1,300 years LATER than the originals.” (Capitalization mine) {taken from The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable by F.F. Bruce pg. 11}

The double standard doesn’t just apply to objectivity by in authenticity as well. There is no reason to doubt that the Bible is not a historical work or ancient document. It is the bias of the unbelieving world which seeks to have it removed from contention and influence on their work regarding Israel’s history and Jesus’ life.

The believer knows that God does not lie which means we can trust all the words of the Bible and its recording of history.

9. The Distortion of Archaeology and What We Can Do About It: A Brief Note on Progress Made and Yet To Be Made by Dr. Eric Cline http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/duke_357921.shtml

“We find similar situations every year in archaeology, for the junk science which is practiced by many pseudo-archaeologists and amateur enthusiasts (against which I have railed elsewhere) not only cannot withstand serious scrutiny, but in many cases the “results” themselves are not really results in the first place. However, when gratuitous claims of amazing finds, especially concerning Noah’s Ark, the Ark of the Covenant, and Sodom and Gomorrah, are first made, they are featured prominently in the media, but subsequent rebuttals are given little or no attention”

Dr. Cline has turned himself into a real whiner and doesn’t understand real life. He doesn’t get the fact that this is not a perfect world and that there are people out there trying to draw attention to themselves in many different ways. He also does not get the fact that there will always be abusers of research fields and religions. The sin nature leads people to many weird and horrific acts and archaeology will never be immune to such people.

The Bible tells us that false teachers will abound but Dr. Cline seems to have skipped that part as he takes to ranting against those he has no control over. He reminds me of a jealous elitist who wants to censor who gets to do what job and how they do it. Since the majority of 20th century discoveries has come from non-professionals it is easy to see why Dr. Cline is so upset. He is not making any profound discoveries and the fame given to amateurs escapes him.

Those amateurs also demonstrates that the professional cannot be everywhere at once thus the field of archaeology is too immense for them. They need help but instead of welcoming and instructing those amateurs, Dr. Cline acts like a spoiled baby stamping his feet whenever things do not go his way. He is like the boy who wants to take his ball and go home when others do not want to play by his rules.

Archaeology is not owned by anyone thus those who wish to participate in the field can do so, no matter how Dr Cline and others feel about it. They do not get to say who can do what as they do not have the authority nor ownership of any research field in existence.

He follows up those quoted words above with the following: “As many already know, I had reached the breaking point after doing research for my book From Eden to Exile: Unraveling Mysteries of the Bible and becoming incensed at the amount of misinformation that was being published by amateur enthusiasts and pseudo-archaeologists on the Internet and elsewhere.”

If you have read his book you will note that he is one of those who spreads misinformation on the internet and elsewhere. He follows the idea that if their isn’t real evidence for a location or event then it did not happen or exist and that is wrong. K. A. Kitchen stated an oft quoted comment: “The absence of evidence is not evidence for absence.” In other words, just because there is no physical evidence for something doesn’t mean it did not exist or take place.

God said to use faith not physical evidence for one’s belief, Dr. Cline doesn’t follow that instruction and leads people to the wrong information and conclusions. God knows that is followers need their faith supported thus He provides bits and pieces of physical evidence to do just that. We cannot expect more because then God would destroy what He says pleases Him. Too much physical evidence would destroy faith and that will never take place because faith is always part of the equation when it comes to the Bible and its content.

People like Dr. Cline should just shut up and concentrate on their work for they do not have the right to limit what others do in their lives. He really complains about himself when he rants against amateurs and pseudo-archaeologists. The true christian will have the Holy Spirit guiding them so they can work around those who give false reports and they will be able to find & print the truth even though people like Dr. Cline will get angry and call them names.

Dr. Cline is an exclusionist. Only those he approves of get to play in the sandbox and that is wrong. He is lazy also as he does not want the truth nor wants to search it out. The Christian cannot be so slothful for too much is at risk.

10. The Moses Myth, Beyond Biblical History by Brian Britt http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/Britt-Moses_Myth.shtml

“The Moses myth is so widespread that writing about him entails writing about culture. Recent books on the Moses myth include Dale Allison’s The New Moses: A Matthean Typology (Fortress, 1993), an excellent study of Moses in the Gospel of Matthew; Jan Assmann’s brilliant Moses the Egyptian (Harvard University Press, 1997); and Melanie Wright’s study of popular culture, Moses in America (Oxford University Press, 2003). All of these studies go beyond the obvious point that each generation makes Moses in its own image by exploring how and why these images are made.”

Jesus said in John 5:46-7 that believing Moses was vital in believing His words and this is so true. Those people who dismiss what Moses wrote in the Pentateuch also dismiss much of the New Testament as well because the NT is built upon the Old and removing the words from the Old removes many teachings in the New. Jesus and the disciples taught that creation and the flood were real just as Moses wrote. The same for Sodom and Gomorrah, Abraham, David and the list goes on.

If you cannot believe what Moses wrote how can you bring yourself to believe what The Gospels and other NT books say? This is where so many progressive creationists and theistic evolutionists trip themselves up. They say that their acceptance of Genesis 1 and other OT scriptures is not germane to their salvation but in reality it is. If they cannot believe the things they did not see or have evidence to in the past (creation, flood etc.) then how can they accept and believe those things that they have no evidence for in the future (salvation, heaven, eternity).

Believing what Moses wrote is essential for one’s salvation and it is essential for one’s impact for God.

11.. Shattering the Myth of Race by Dr. Dave Unander (book) pg. 50

“If races were the result of humans developing as several distinct species, one would expect different sets of DNA mutations within each race, just as species such as chimpanzees and gorillas differ, even though they may share many DNA similarities because they are primates.”

Genetic research has provided the world with lots of information and if the true believer stops listening to the secular world on DNA and other genes, microbes, etc., then they would see lots of evidence for the support of the Bible.

One such piece of evidence is the fact that there are not 3-4 different races in the world today as Darwin claimed. There is only 1—the human race. The Bible made this very clear long before genetic research was even thought of when it said ‘all men are descended from Adam’ and that ‘Eve was the mother of all humans’.

There is no scientific proof that supports Darwin or his evolutionary followers contention that 4 separate species of humans arose. The odds of just 1 happening by random chance are too astronomical but 4-that puts it deeper into the realm of utter impossibility.

For further reading look at the following links:

1. "Race is a social concept, not a scientific one," said Dr. J. Craig Venter, head of the Celera Genomics Corp. in Rockville, Md.” {http://www.augsburg.edu/education/edc210/race-myth.html}

2. “According to Craig Venter who led the private sector assault on the human genome, 'The Human Genome Project shows there is no such thing as race” {http://www.kenanmalik.com/lectures/race_cheltenham.html}

3. “It's an old-fashioned, even Victorian, sentiment. Who speaks of "racial stocks" anymore? After all, to do so would be to speak of something that many scientists and scholars say does not exist.”  {http://raceandgenomics.ssrc.org/Leroi/}

4. “The billions of pieces of human genetic code sequenced thus far are most notable for what they do not appear to contain—a genetic test to tell one race of people from another. All scientific finds point to the conclusion that race doesn’t exist” {http://www.africanbynature.com/newsletters/raceissocial.html}

12. Six Easy Pieces by Dr. Richard Feynman (book) pgs. 92 & 108

“The problem was, what makes the planets go around?...No machinery has ever been invented that explains gravity without also predicting some other phenomenon that does not exist.”

Gravity exposes the weakness and limitation of secular science. It cannot figure everything out nor explain all that we see or know exists in the world and universe today. Sometimes the believer is left with ‘God did it’ which isn’t an escape from the problem but the realization and acknowledgement that God has not revealed everything to man and there are some things out of his reach.

Gravity has been one of those things. It is difficult for man to grasp how gravity works, where its source of energy is, how it can both repel and attract at the same time , while letting some objects escape its grasp as it holds onto others.

God has left some evidence to His power, His existence, and His intelligence for all to see but those pieces of evidence do not always come in the forms we expect or want.

13. The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Bible by Robert j. Hutchinson (book) pgs.157,158 & 162

“The truth is that the savage cruelty of slavery has existed on a massive scale all over the world for most of human history—and still exists today in parts of the Islamic world and Asia—and yet it was first officially banned, by force of law, only in Christian Europe. No culture on earth questioned the morality of slavery until Christians did the questioning…The Hebrew word commonly translated as slave, eved…, comes from the root word avad, which means to work. Some Jewish translations of the Hebrew Bible, therefore, prefer the term ‘bondservant’ or ‘bondsman’ because as we shall see, a Hebrew eved was not really a slave in the modern understanding of the term.”

The whole chapter on this issue is quite well written and very informative. The true believer needs to look to the Holy Spirit to come to the intent of what God is saying in His word. One cannot leave it up to the unbeliever to ferret out the correct usage and definition of the word ‘slave’ because they do not care to find the truth.

They like to find nuggets in the Bible that justifies their unbelief thus they will stop at the surface use of the word, use the definition and usage they want to fit their purpose, or they just refuse to hear an explanation because such will allow them to excuse their choice and allow them to continue living their sinful lives.

It is up to the believer to seek the truth of the hard words in the Bible so they will not be caught or embarrassed when in discussion with the secular world with the wrong meaning of the word ‘slave’. This book is a good place to start in learning the true biblical meaning of the English word ‘slave’ and how it is used in the Bible. One example:

“Although today virtually unknown, these Christian writers in the early 19th century produced literally dozens of scholarly works proving that the Bible as a whole, far from tolerating chattel slavery, in fact denounced it.”

Research is needed by the Christian and Church leader, but it has to be honest, seeking the truth and following the Holy Spirit.

14. Scholars on the Record by Hershal Shanks (book) pg.12ff.

“First, I lost my fundamentalist faith because of my scholarship.”

This book talks with 4 scholars and how archaeology and academics changed their faith and theirs is not the only stories, many good believers go to post-secondary, graduate and post-graduate schools and run into something that makes them doubt, eventually steering them away from their beliefs.

The solution to this issue is quite simple—they took their eye off Jesus and put them on the world and its unbelief. They stopped listening to God’s word where it says in Ps. 1 “walk not in the counsel of the ungodly” and 2 Tim. 3 where Paul warns believers about ‘evil men deceiving and being deceived.’ (2 Tim. 3: 1-17).

Archaeology, physics, or science in general are very limited fields which are not immune to the sin and corruption that entered the world at Adam’s sin and do not have the Holy Spirit guiding them ( not all but a majority).

The rules of these fields were mostly laid by secularists who do not want the Bible true and have no interest in proving it so which means that the believe needs to stop listening to these men who have rejected Christ and His ways. They will not be led to the Jesus by the scholarship of these men and women.

If the believer doesn’t want to lose their faith then they must work at keeping their eyes on Jesus and listening to what He said and the biblical authors wrote. Archaeology does not dig up all the facts, it does not find every mss. Or explanation for artifacts discovered and the gaps are filled by the conjecture and assumptions of these scientific men and women thus these men and women cannot pass judgment on the biblical record.

They were also not present when the biblical events took place and do not have all the evidence on hand to make any sort of conclusion either way. Listen to God and the Bible stop listening to secular academics because they are not experts and have other ulterior motives. As Dr. Donald Wiseman once said, “No fact of archaeology so far discovered contradicts the biblical record.” Indeed not, what tries to contradicts the biblical record are the assumptions, conjectures and speculations made by unbelieving academics. Such activities are always proved wrong. Keep your eyes on Christ.

15. Dealing With Dawkins by John Banchard (book) pg. 14

“as Dawkins puts it, “We are all descended from what might have been something like bacteria.” He is so sure of this that he adds, “It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane.””

This is what happens when those with no real moral guideline to follow, do not like what others freely choose and believe. The christian needs to remember that they, like the atheist, has the right of free choice and it doesn’t matter what Dawkins or anyone else says or thinks they get to believe as they wish.

The Bible tells us that Jesus told the disciples that ‘the secular world hates them because they hate Him.” And that is correct. The believer needs to prepare themselves to face , counter and endure this hatred and not cave to its barbed attacks.

Jesus also said, “pick up your cross and follow me.” That means that the believer is not going to have a life filled with champagne and caviar every day they are alive. It means that the Christian life will be difficult but if one relies on Jesus to help them through it, then the reward will be far greater than imagined.

The Christian should not pray to stop all persecution but that they endure. The Christian life is the hardest one of all because few want it and they see those who live it as a threat, since the believer’s faith and life brings to light the sins of the unbelieving world and they do  not like that.

Dawkins is wrong of course and he is one of those people who are a false teacher and deceived. They need prayer not retaliation.

16. Creation, Science, and Genesis? By Charles David Isbell http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/create358023.shtml

“The past few years have seen an increase in the demands from conservative Christian groups that the teaching of the theory of evolution be banned in public schools.2 Failing to garner enough support for an outright ban, these groups have turned to the alternative of demanding that at the least “the” biblical view of creation should be taught alongside the theory of evolution”

There is a problem with pushing the pushing of teaching of creation alongside evolution in the science classroom. Creation was a one time, unrepeatable, supernatural act that we cannot test over and over. In other words, we can only test, study or experiment with the results of creation and see that everything goes according to God’s revelation in genesis 1 and other creation passages.

Many an unbeliever declares, ‘we can’t put God in a test tube.’ Of course they can’t. If they could that would mean that they were the supreme deity and they would not be in need of salvation or a Saviour. Another thing they cannot do is put the process of evolution in a test tube either.

So far, in all of the hundreds of thousands of supposed evolutionary experiments that have been conducted over the past 150-200 years, approx., not 1 real evolutionary experiment has taken place. Not one has studied or made one historical claimed evolutionary transition.

All of their experiments come from pre-existing developed genes and species then the predictions and results are credited to the theory even though not one evolutionist can prove that the process of evolution was the force responsible for those claimed changes. In fact, the evolutionist cannot even produce the original conditions that sparked life, or nurtured those supposed life-forms along nor can they produce one iota of proof that the process of natural selection or evolution actually exist.

The theory of evolution cannot be taught in the science classroom either as it is not scientific or even true.

17. Reflections on the Composition of Genesis by Bill T. Arnold http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/genesis.shtml

“From the Enlightenment in the eighteenth century, various scholars across Europe began speculation about sources used in the composition of Genesis. This source-critical approach crystallized in the nineteenth century in the works of Karl H. Graf and Julius Wellhausen in the so-called Graf-Wellhausen synthesis of the Documentary Hypothesis.2 This hypothesis inaugurated an era of general consensus on the documents behind the Pentateuch and their transmission history, in which it was taken for granted that earlier Yahwistic (J for Jehovistic) and Elohistic (E) sources were combined as a product of the early divided monarchy of ancient Israel. This so-called JE source was combined much later with a D source, which was essentially the core of the book of Deuteronomy composed in the seventh century BCE, and finally with a priestly source (P) produced as part of the postexilic restoration. Wellhausen so persuasively made the case for this four-source theory (the now familiar “JEDP”) that the hypothesis essentially convinced most of the scholarly world by the turn of the twentieth century”

The Documentary Hypothesis has had a long and rich history since its inception back in the time of J. Welhausen but happily it should be noted that those source doucuments have never existed. In his book On The Reliability Of The Old Testament, K.A. Kitchen has this to say on pg. 492: “ Where do J,E,P,D, belong, if the old order is chimera…They only exist in the minds of their modern creators…and as printed in their published studies, as theoretical works abstracted out of the standard text of the Old Testament books that we do have. This very simple fact needs to be stressed. Our resourceful biblicists are not sitting on some secret store of papyri or parchments that contain any such works. The Dead Sea Scrolls show no sign of them whatever…”

In other words, these sources are made up because some academics cannot grasp the fact that God has several names and He chooses which one He wants to be addressed by. For example a man is writing of his and his son’s encounter with a stranger. He records the fact that the stranger introduced himself differently to him and to his son. For the former he said to the man, ‘call me William.’ And to the son he said ‘call me Mr. Smith or Uncle Billy.’

The man used different names for different people depending upon whom was going to be doing the addressing. Does this mean that the original man’s account had different sources for those words? Of course not nor does the Bible. There is and was only 1 source for God’s word and that was God. He is the creator of all things, he gets to choose by what name He will be called and it depends upon whom is going to do the addressing and how familiar they are to God.

People have different names. Athletes have nicknames as od normal people. Does the newspapers’ use of those different names mean there was more than 1 source for the article? No. A different name does not indicate a different source but it does indicate the preference of the one holding those names.

All the supposed source documents (and I hear there are more than the 5 –JEPD & Q- now)are figments of the imagination of those academics who cannot accept the simple or believe that God has more than one name.

18. Big Bang by Simon Singh (book) pg.256

“This time the points stood obediently to attention along Hubble’s line. There was no escaping the implications of the data. The universe was really expanding …In short, the slightly blueshifted galaxies could be ignored as local anomalies that did not fit Hubble’s law.

The famed Hubble’s law and theory that the universe is expanding still, 14,000,0000,000 years after the suppose initial explosion. That must have been some blast to keep objects and the universe propelled outward for that amount of time.

There are several problems with Hubble’s law and theory and the first one is: Where did all this energy come from to cause such outward expansion? Second, what is the universe expanding into (is it pushing another object or collapsing it as it moves outward? Third, Galaxies are not the universe nor its boundaries thus measuring galaxies is not measuring the universe or its supposed movement. Fourth, What about those anomalies? Why should they be ignored?

Of course for secular academics ignoring the anomalies that disprove the theory is a way of life for them. James Tabor does it with the Mathew ossuary in the Talpiot tomb so why shouldn’t Hubble and the rest do the same for galaxies?

Since no man has ever seen the boundaries of the universe nor their original location it is impossible to say that it is expanding. Tracking the galaxies and extrapolating their movements is not measuring the universe no matter how many equations and laws you come up with.

Cars and trucks move around a country all the time but that doesn’t mean that the country’s borders are expanding, it just means that they have room to roam. The same for the universe. The galaxies were given room to roam by God so that those who study the stars can see His glory, His power, His work and humble themselves.

We do not know where the outer limits are for the universe, we do not know what is is abutting, if anything, and we do not know if the galaxies all started from the same point in the universe when they were created. God probably spread them around and gave them motion so His creation would be awed and turn from evil.

The universe is not expanding but as the Bible says it was made large enough to give room for all that God wanted to include so man would see that He existed and was amazing. Sadly, men love darkness rather than light tus they ignore what He has done and give credit to something else. Not smart.

19. Ibid. Pg. 76

“However, one particular question was conspicuously ignored, because scientists agreed that it was beyond their remit, indeed, inaccessible to rational endeavor of any kind. Nobody, it seemed was keen to tackle the ultimate question of how the universe was created.”

When man rejects God and His word they create lots of useless work to waste their time, energy and resources on. God already said how the universe was created it is just that most men toss rationality out the window and pursue something else.

It is not rational to ignore the true answer just because you do not like it and it is more irrational to throw millions of dollars away pursuing a false alternative simply because the answer does not fall into the category you want.

There is a reason why it is called ‘supernatural’ because God is supernatural and the origins of all things came into being in a supernatural manner. It is up to people to choose to accept that or reject it and it is not irrational to believe in a supernatural being whose power is greater than anything else in existence. It is irrational to throw all that away and search for non-existent alternative sources.

We already know how the universe came into existence—God created it- and the book of Genesis provides the answers not only for origins of life but for civilizations, languages, geography, and much more. Why waste time and money when both of those are needed for those in trouble? Forsaking your fellow man to go on wild goose chases is not rational; it is selfish and inconsiderate among other negatives.

20 After Dolly by Ian Wilmut & Roger Highfield (book) pg. 32

I believe in the right to protest. I believe equally that right wing religious paranoia is slowing the quest for treatment and , as a result, will harm people and cause suffering. I find it a constant cause of frustration that, in all public debate, the harm that can be done to future generations by neglecting a useful technology is rarely taken into account.”

Here this scientist, and probably others, thinks that the end justifies the means. This is the problem of secular science. The adherents of it feel that moral laws and rules should not apply to science because their cause is ‘honorable’.

Science and scientists need strict moral guidelines to guide their work or we just have created monsters who do not want to know right from wrong because in today’s scientific mind, ‘all science is good science’ and that is just not right.

If there is no wrong science then how can anyone put scientists on trial for their errors and harm to society? They can’t. By letting scientists be free off all constraints then any experiment is okay because it was done for a good cause (known only to the scientist) and it is done in the name of science. Doing something in ‘the name of science’ means nothing when those experiments violate all laws, morals, right and wrong and all human decency.

People forget what the Nazis did in the name of science. Absolute power cannot be given to the field of science nor scientists for absolute power corrupts absolutely and we have seen too many examples of that already in history. Strict rules with harsh punishments enforced strictly are needed to keep the scientist from going too far. Without boundaries anarchy takes over and anything goes and that is not a safe or smart place to end up. Science can be useful in the right hands but even the correct hands can be tempted and fall to temptation. Men crave power, they do not care how they get it and they will use science because it is an easy field to corrupt.