www.cantinesanpancrazio.it/components/lucusag/1003-copiare-rubrica.php The way they are arranged tell the computer program what to do. The DNA code in each of our cells is very similar. It's made up of four chemicals that scientists abbreviate as A, T, G, and C. There are three billion of these letters in every human cell!! Well, just like you can program your phone to beep for specific reasons, DNA instructs the cell. DNA is a three-billion-lettered program telling the cell to act in a certain way. It is a full instruction manual. Why is this so amazing? One has to ask These are not just chemicals. These are chemicals that instruct, that code in a very detailed way exactly how the person's body should develop.
Natural, biological causes are completely lacking as an explanation when programmed information is involved. You cannot find instruction, precise information like this, without someone intentionally constructing it. I was an atheist at one time. And like many atheists, the issue of people believing in God bothered me greatly. What is it about atheists that we would spend so much time, attention, and energy refuting something that we don't believe even exists?!
What causes us to do that? When I was an atheist, I attributed my intentions as caring for those poor, delusional people To be honest, I also had another motive. As I challenged those who believed in God, I was deeply curious to see if they could convince me otherwise.
Part of my quest was to become free from the question of God. If I could conclusively prove to believers that they were wrong, then the issue is off the table, and I would be free to go about my life. I didn't realize that the reason the topic of God weighed so heavily on my mind, was because God was pressing the issue. I have come to find out that God wants to be known. He created us with the intention that we would know him.
He has surrounded us with evidence of himself and he keeps the question of his existence squarely before us. It was as if I couldn't escape thinking about the possibility of God. In fact, the day I chose to acknowledge God's existence, my prayer began with, "Ok, you win I am not the only one who has experienced this. Malcolm Muggeridge, socialist and philosophical author, wrote, "I had a notion that somehow, besides questing, I was being pursued. Lewis said he remembered, " I gave in, and admitted that God was God, and knelt and prayed: perhaps, that night, the most dejected and reluctant convert in all of England.
Lewis went on to write a book titled, "Surprised by Joy" as a result of knowing God. I too had no expectations other than rightfully admitting God's existence. Yet over the following several months, I became amazed by his love for me. Why Jesus? Look throughout the major world religions and you'll find that Buddha, Muhammad, Confucius and Moses all identified themselves as teachers or prophets. None of them ever claimed to be equal to God.
Surprisingly, Jesus did. That is what sets Jesus apart from all the others. He said God exists and you're looking at him. Though he talked about his Father in heaven, it was not from the position of separation, but of very close union, unique to all humankind.
Jesus said that anyone who had seen Him had seen the Father, anyone who believed in him, believed in the Father. He said, "I am the light of the world, he who follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life. Unlike other teachers who focused people on their words, Jesus pointed people to himself. He did not say, "follow my words and you will find truth.
What proof did Jesus give for claiming to be divine? He did what people can't do. Jesus performed miracles. He healed people He had power over objects He performed miracles over nature The Greeks made many scientific discoveries, and they were pagans.
Move around the map, and you'll find the Arabs invented algebra, for instance. Harvey, Boyle, Faraday, and Maxwell were committed Christians. Boyle was a lay preacher, Faraday read only from the Bible for a sermon, and Maxwell said "Lord, it belongs not to my care, whether I die or live. To love and serve Thee is my share, and that Thy guard must give. A person's private faith and devotions really have no bearing on their professional work unless they make a point of bringing the two together.
These examples serve mainly to show that scientists of faith can be very good at compartmentalizing. Kepler believed science was a way to discover God's handiwork, Kelvin believed life came from a creator, and modern day science is based on the works of these Bible-believing men: Leonardo DaVinci Francis Bacon Samuel F. While all these men have done a great deal for the progress of science, they did not do any of this from revelations from the Bible.
Just as we stand on the shoulders of these innovators, they stood on the shoulders of those who came before them. Aristotle performed numerous dissection and vivisection experiments in animal anatomy and physiology — composing the most scientific range of zoological works then known. His successor, Theophrastus, extended this work to botany and plant physiology, and produces the first known works in pyrology, mineralogy, and other fields. A research institute was built in Alexandria, Egypt in the third century BCE, in which Ctesibius and Philo completed the first known scientific works in experimental pneumatics.
Herophilus became the first scientist to dissect human cadavers, and became known as "the Father of Anatomy". Also, he and his pupil Erasistrus originated neurophysiology, establishing with detailed experiments that the mind is a function of the brain and that specific mental functions were controlled by specific areas of the brain, and they distinguished motor from sensory nerves and mapped them throughout the body.
Altogether, their study of the human body and its bones, muscles, and organs was so thorough that we still use much of their anatomical terminology. In Rhodes, Hipparchus discovered and measured celestial precession, made the first scientific observation of a supernova, established the first detailed scientific star charts, made numerous advances in planetary theory, and developed the first scientific system for predicting lunar and solar eclipses.
Seleucus of Babylon discovered the effect of the Sun on the tides not just the Moon , and developed the first mathematical lunisolar tide theory. Just to name a few, Dioscorides in botany, mineralogy, and pharmacology Hero in mathematics, pneumatics, and theatrical robotics Ptolemy in astronomy, cartography, optics, and harmonics Galen in anatomy, physiology, and medicine The point is this: huge scientific contributions predate Christianity. The ancient Greeks who let's not forget were pagans were the first to use science; in fact they invented reason in the very sense he means, developing the formal sciences of logic, philosophy, mathematics, and rhetoric.
The reason why the scientists Ray Comfort quotes were "Bible believers" is because they came from a time when scientific inquiry that contradicted scriptures was prohibited, so they had to meld their work with spirituality or risk losing their career, freedom, or life. The Christian religion dominated the whole of the Western world from the fifth to the fifteenth century, and yet in all those thousand years there was no scientific revolution. Nor did any scientific revolution occur in the Eastern Christian world, such as the Byzantine Empire, even though the East was just as prosperous and was largely peaceful for five centuries.
Nobel Prize winners tend to be a smart bunch, but like having a Ph. Arthur Compton is tacking his religious preconceptions onto what he knows of physics—which doesn't detract from his work in the field, but doesn't add to it either. Basically, his scientific findings didn't lead him to a belief in God, and his belief in God didn't add to his scientific findings; it's simply colored the language he uses to describe them.
See also Nobel disease. Newton combined his work with his theology, believing that theology was more important. Newton, though a great scientist, believed many things that we would shake our heads at today—including alchemy.
Did you know that in every cell of our bodies there exists a very detailed instruction code, much like a miniature computer program? This is a charge skeptics, atheists and secularists often make about Jesus. These are facts in the scientific sense, meaning that they've been observed. Comfort provides the following: Dr. It is a later legendary reconstruction—made in the seventh century [BCE]—of a history that never happened.
Comfort gives a short bio of Lister: Joseph Lister — founded antiseptic surgical methods. Like Louis Pasteur, Lister was a Christian. Nothing wrong with Lister being a Christian—but again, critically, he based his contributions on the discovery of microorganisms made by Pasteur; he didn't develop antiseptic surgical methods because of what he read in the Bible. He laid the foundations for hydrostatics, hydrodynamics, differential calculus, and the theory of probability.
If, when he dies, there turns out to be no God and his faith was in vain, he has lost nothing—in fact, has been happier in life than his non-believing friends. If, however, there is a God and a heaven and hell, then he has gained heaven and his skeptical friends will have lost everything in hell! Not a great example, as Pascal's Wager has been shown to be fallacious on a number of counts. A religious scientist finds a sense of wonder in his subject matter, and attributes it to the god he was brought up to believe in.
It's common enough, but it doesn't really prove anything. Would Ray have found it a convincing argument for Islam if Herschel had happened to be Muslim? Comfort says Einstein was not an atheist as some claim, but admits that Einstein did not believe in the Bible. He knew that there was a Creator. This quote is taken out of context. Look what Einstein said afterwords: "Though I have asserted above that in truth a legitimate conflict between religion and science cannot exist, I must nevertheless qualify this assertion once again on an essential point, with reference to the actual content of historical religions.
However contrary to Ray's claim, Einstein also explicitly stated that he did not believe in a personal God. His religious beliefs were more complex or more nebulous? Comfort provides the following: Dr. He also laid a solid foundation for gynecology and predicted the discovery of the x-ray. Simpson was president of the Royal Medical Society and Royal Physician to the Queen, the highest medical position of his day. There is nothing incompatible between religion and science.
It was to know I am a sinner and that I could be saved by the grace of God. A man has missed the whole meaning of life if he has not entered into an active, living relationship with God through Christ. A Google search for the words "therefore supremely livable" quotes included as written in the quote returns no original source for the quote, making it impossible to tell where, when or even if Simpson actually said this.
A further search for the second part of the quote, "A man has missed the whole meaning of life", gives nine hits, of which five are in books credited to Ray Comfort. None gives an original source for this either. This would not be the first time Ray has played somewhat fast and loose with quotes he wants to use in support of his position. Given that we can't see any of the context in which Simpson allegedly said this, and it may be he never said it at all, this is a naked appeal to authority.
In any case it doesn't really matter, because again, we have a scientist who didn't use the Bible to make his discoveries, but instead attributed what he discovered through the scientific method to the God he was taught to believe in. The Bible and Plant Life Ray states that plants need water, sunlight and minerals to survive. If one is missing, they cannot produce chlorophyll. Ray notes the chronological order of events in Genesis.
Plants require sunlight, not light in the general sense.
This is why we expose plants to UV light. Note that the sun was created on the fourth day along with the moon and stars , BUT plants were created on the THIRD day - so God created plants before sunlight came to be. Of course, if the light Ray mentions Gen. Bible Statements Consistent With Biology Here, Ray argues that historically people dealt with health issues by bleeding the patients out, but Leviticus reveals "blood is the essence of life. Ray then goes into detail how blood affects the human body, and concludes that the Bible verse is correct that blood is the essence of life.
The view of blood as the essence for life predates the Bible. The Code of Hammurabi from Mesopotamia about B. Ugaritic and Egyptian sources also note the importance of blood Meyers Blood is not the essence of life. We would not survive long without lungs, lymph, muscles, nerves, etc. Our bones produce blood, but bones are nowhere mentioned or credited in the equation. Some animals are alive without blood at all jellyfish, sponges, etc. Therefore, blood is not the essence of life. Rather, living things are all made of cells, which, when alive, collectively form a living organism. The Bible and Biogenesis Ray argues that the Bible is consistent with the law of biogenesis: that living organisms develop from other living organisms.
Ray quotes Genesis ,12,21, and Ray points out the phrase "according to its kind" when the animals reproduce they bring forth after their "kind. Actually, if you look closely, you will notice that the Bible contradicts the law of biogenesis. Remember, the law of biogenesis says living organisms develop from other living organisms. Reading the Bible verses provided by Ray, note the multiple phrases that say "Let the Earth bring forth That is, the nonliving material of Earth produced living material.
Unfortunately for Ray, there are also transitional fossils in between families and genera. Louise Agassiz even argued that species are God's individual thoughts, made incarnate so that we might perceive both His majesty and His message. Species, Agassiz wrote, are 'instituted by the Divine Intelligence as the categories of his mode of thinking. This is a typical creationist quote mine of Stephen J. Godfrey that appeared in Science and Creationism Ashley Montagu, ed.
New York: Oxford University Press, pp. Within the article, Gould is not saying as the creationists would have it that creationism better explains the evidence. While the "common sense" notion that species are real "natural kinds" is well suited to creationism, there are at least three possible resolutions of the apparent but not substantial difficulty with evolutionary theory that arises when it is viewed as requiring constant change.
A more detailed explanation of this quote mine can be read here. All of this points to the shallowness of creationist use of quotes. In scholarly work, the use of quotations is intended to show an understanding of the relevant literature and is, in effect, a representation on the part of the person using the quote that she or he is intimately familiar with the author's work and positions. Either that. Ray argues the fulfilled prophecies in the Bible testify to its truth and validity, such as the Bible predicted that empires like Greece and Rome would fall in Daniel ,40 and predicted the destruction of Tyre and Sidon in Isaiah None of these prophecies is significant or convincing.
There are several mundane ways in which a prediction of the future can be fulfilled: Retrodiction. The "prophecy" can be written or modified after the events fulfilling it have already occurred. The prophecy can be worded in such a way that people can interpret any outcome as a fulfillment. Nostradamus's prophecies are all of this type, at best. Vagueness works particularly well when people are motivated to believe the prophecies. The prophecy can predict something that is almost sure to happen, such as the collapse of an empire.
Since nothing lasts forever, the empire is sure to fall someday. You'll note that prophecies of the fall of an empire, when they do seem to come true, were never specific about when they would occur thus including the vagueness aspect. If it has not yet , it can be said that according to prophecy, it will. One can claim that the fulfilling events occurred even if they have not. Or, more commonly, one can forget that the prophecy was ever made, or claim that it did come to pass, but in a symbolic way, or some other way that's not falsifiable as the original prophesy was.
This happened with Harold Camping's predictions of the end of the world, for instance. A person can act deliberately to satisfy a known prophecy. The restoration of Israel is a good example. There are no prophecies in the Bible that cannot easily fit into one or more of those categories. The prophecies from Daniel were written after the event took place, and it is inevitable that civilizations arise and fall.
Finally, Ray is pleased to present that Isaiah 23 was fulfilled when Alexander the Great conquered it. The sad thing is that Ezekiel 26 predicts that Nebudchadnezzar would destroy Tyre and make it "as a bare rock". Best of all, biblical scholars are in agreement that this book was written hundreds of years before Tyre was destroyed. Yet we know from history that it was Alexander the Great, not Nebudchadnezzar, who destroyed Tyre.
The Bible's Prediction of the Middle-East Conflict Ray says that in Genesis that the descendants of Ishmael are the Arabs, and the Bible says the descendants will be men and every man would be against them while they [the Arabs] dwell in the midst of their "brethren. See above about vagueness and inevitability. The Bible's Messianic Prophecies Ray quotes Micah born in Bethlehem , Isaiah born of a virgin , Zechariah ,13 betrayed for 30 pieces of silver , Psalm 22 die of crucifixion , and Isaiah buried in a rich man's tomb.
The prophecy if that is what it is does not refer to the Messiah, but rather to a military leader, as can be seen from Micah This leader is supposed to defeat the Assyrians, which, of course, Jesus never did. It should also be noted that Matthew altered the text of Micah by saying: "And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Judah" rather than "Bethlehem Ephratah" as is said in Micah He did this, intentionally no doubt, to make this verse appear to refer to the town of Bethlehem rather than the family clan.
This claim is false, for a few reasons: The Hebrew Text Behind the King James Version : Despite the claims of its accurate rendition of the original text, the Hebrew equivalent for "they pierced" was not found in the manuscripts available to the translators of the King James Version.
Finally, Isaiah 53 is not about a suffering messiah. As mentioned above, this is an example of self-fulfillment—Israel was created because the Bible predicted it. Comfort says this will happen after peace treaties have been achieved in Israel v. Signs of the Times Verify the Bible Comfort says the following signs reveal the Bible is correct about the coming end of days.
They are; There will be false Christs Wars and rumors of wars; Nation rising against nation Famines, disease pestilence , and there will be earthquakes in various places False prophets who will deceive many Lawlessness forsaking of the Ten Commandments The gospel will be preached in all the world.
Homosexuality will increase There will be blasphemy; cold-heartedness; intemperance; brutality; rebellious youth; hatred of those who stand up for righteousness; ungodliness; pleasureseeking; much hypocrisy. False Bible teachers will have many followers, be money-hungry, and slander the Christian faith see 2 Peter —3. Their motivation for hating the truth will be their love of lust 2 Peter —7. Comfort says "The Scriptures tell us that they make one big mistake. Their understanding of God is erroneous.
In truth, He is merely holding back His wrath, waiting for them to repent and escape the damnation of hell. Jesus warned that the sign to look for was the repossession of Jerusalem by the Jews. That happened in , after 2, years, bringing into culmination all the signs of the times. These are the "tell-tell" signs of the last days? While there certainly are countries where Christians are persecuted, they're a distinct minority.
Sorry Ray and other evangelicals , you're not persecuted in the United States; on the contrary Christianity is a strongly privileged religion here. Losing some of that special privilege doesn't constitute persecution and, frankly, makes you look like whiners when you claim persecution as a result of it.
Bible and Armageddon Comfort says "Joel —10 relates a striking account of the coming Battle of Armageddon, the greatest of all battles. As this vision which seems to entail flame-throwing tank warfare was given to him approximately 2, years ago, the prophet relates it to the only thing he has seen in battle—horse-drawn chariots. Think of modern warfare and compare: fire goes before them v.
Here, Ray Comfort is quoting the Tanakh, not the Bible. The Tanakh is a textual source of the several canonical editions of the Christian Old Testament. And they shall sever out men of continual employment, passing through the land to bury with the passengers those that remain upon the face of the earth, to cleanse it: after the end of seven months shall they search. Before the days of nuclear warfare, this portion of the Bible would have made no sense to the reader.
We are told that even the weapons left by the enemy will have to be burned Ezekiel So many will die that it will take those specially employed for the purpose seven months to bury the dead v. The Scriptures are very specific about the method of burial. When even a bone is found by searchers, a special marker is to be placed near the bone until the buriers have buried it. This would seem to be a clear reference to radioactive contamination after nuclear war.
This passage still makes little sense, even with current knowledge of nuclear warfare. Not only would bodies and weapons be sources of contamination, but so would tools, buildings, vehicles, etc. In fact burying wouldn't be enough because the ground itself would be contaminated. If you want a clear visual of what the aftermath of nuclear war is likely to look like, see the movie Threads.
This is certainly not something that could have been explained in 67 A. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare. Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to live holy and godly lives as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming. That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat. Fire was probably the most destructive weapon the Hebrews knew of, so it's not surprising they would predict the world to end in fire.
The Bible and Lights Here, Ray uses Genesis , that says God created the "lights" in the heavens "for signs, for seasons, for days and for years. Ray says it can only be divine revelation that Moses 3, years ago could know that "lights" were determining factors of year's length. What Ray does not take into account is that the Sumerians, thousands of years before Moses, already figured it out as well as the 24 hour cycle without the help of divine revelation or the book of Genesis.
The Bible and the Stars Jeremiah Ray says this was written 2, years ago "when no one knew who cast the stars were, since only 1, of them were visible. Ray also says 1 Corinthians tells us that each star is unique. Close inspection shows a difference in of light spectra.
Are there any good reasons to believe the Bible is true? Can an old book like the Bible really be trusted? There are, of course, many good. Why is the Bible so popular? The reason most often given is that those who are printing, distributing, and reading the Bible believe it is the inspired Word of God.
Ray does not provide any source that shows that only 1, stars were visible or explain if only that many were visible in one sector of the earth. Actually up to 10, or so stars can be seen over the course of the year under ideal conditions; on any given night, without light pollution, one can see around 3, stars.
A simple observation of the night sky, not divine revelation, could reveal that different stars have different brightnesses or special positions, and even different colors. The Bible and Outer Space Ray argues before the Hubble telescope, the Bible in Deuteronomy talked about 'the heavens' and 'the highest heavens.
This is quite a stretch of interpretation. Remember the bit about "vagueness" back in chapter 7. Also, astronomers knew before Hubble that the galaxies out there are very far away; in fact it was partly in order to see them that Hubble was constructed. Ray notes many people criticized this verse that it supported geocentrism. Now, science tells us that the sun moves at great speeds. Ray argues the "circuit" in the Bible verse supports this. Psalm refers to the Sun making a circuit around the Earth. It claims or strongly implies geocentrism, not heliocentrism.
Otherwise, why would the Church have insisted for so many centuries on geocentrism? The Bible and the Revolving Earth Ray argues that Jesus Christ will come back faster than the speed of light -Luke while some are asleep at night and others awake during their daytime activities. Ray concludes this must mean that the Bible knew the earth revolved, since day and night existed on earth at the same time. Ray also argues that science did not discover this until the 15th century. Luke  says "For as the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day.
The Bible and the Expanding Universe Ray says that the Bible mentions about seven times that God "stretches out the heavens like a curtain" but he only notes Psalm Ray says only recently is science understanding that the universe is expanding. Curtains don't expand; they're fixed in length. And "stretch[ing] out the heavens like a curtain" sounds very much like a reference to the "firmament", the solid dome of the sky above the Earth as the Israelites saw it, rather than an enormous three-dimensional universe going out billions of parsecs in all directions.
Astronomy Confirms the Bible In , Drs. Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson of Bell Labs discovered a noise coming from all directions, permeating the universe. This was hailed by physicists as "the radio echo of creation. He also said that "the creation of the universe is supported by all the observable data astronomy has produced so far.
Also Penzias's statement is no more meaningful than others who make religious claims for nonreligious discoveries; there are those who ascribe things to the Bible that aren't there, because they're predisposed to believe that kind of thing. It's worth noting that he didn't discover the microwave background radiation because of accurate scientific knowledge he found in the Bible—he read that into it after the radiation was discovered see "retrodiction" and "vagueness" above.
Ray then quotes Newton claiming that he found the Bible more historically authentic than any other. Newton also believed in alchemy and claimed it was the key to great understanding of nature, but one man's personal beliefs do not give any special credence to alchemy or the Bible. Samuel Morse Believed the Bible Morse created the telegraph, who claimed four years before his death that the closer he approached death he saw the divine origin in the Bible. An inventor who was also religious Napoleon Believed the Bible Ray provides a quote from Napoleon who finds the Bible very enjoyable and reads it daily.
Napoleon was neither a man of science nor a great moral example to follow. There's nothing wrong with him enjoying reading the Bible, but it doesn't prove anything. Woodrow Wilson Believed the Bible. Thomas Woodrow Wilson , the 28th President of the United States may have believed in the Bible, but what Ray does not share is that Wilson also believed in the theory of evolution : "May it not suffice for me to say He is among the last people Comfort should by citing. Thomas Jefferson Believed the Bible. More accurately, he believed parts of the Bible.
Jefferson was a deist , who eventually created his own Bible called the Jefferson Bible.
Jefferson stripped it of all its miracles and every instance when and where Jesus claimed to be divine. If Ray remained consistent with himself, he would label Jefferson an "idolater" - that is making a "god in his own image. Indeed, Jefferson also studied parts of the Quran, and was a strong supporter of religious tolerance.
In fact, he's the one who coined the term "Separation of Church and State". Herbert Hoover Believed the Bible. Hoover was a firm defender of religious tolerance: "I come of Quaker stock. My ancestors were persecuted for their beliefs. Here they sought and found religious freedom. By blood and conviction I stand for religious tolerance both in act and in spirit. John Quincy Adams Believed the Bible. He also believed the Earth was hollow. Franklin D. Roosevelt Believed the Bible. So too did the members of the Spanish Inquisition. Again, arguments from authority carry little weight in deciding what's true and what's false.
Lee Believed the Bible. Like Napoleon, not a great moral or scientific leader. Ulysses S. Grant Believed the Bible. Grant, commander of the Union Army in the American Civil War, may have been a Christian, but also he had some views Ray might take exception to. Sir Winston Churchill Believed the Bible. But again, arguments from authority are a poor indicator of what's true. Charles Dickens Believed the Bible. Dickens also did not like missionaries. He said, "Missionaries are perfect nuisances and leave every place worse than they found it. It contains more than all the libraries I have ever seen.
Know what else John Adams said? Ronald Reagan Believed the Bible. Ronald Reagan promoted the national day of Prayer, which has recently been ruled in court as unconstitutional. He believed in teaching biblical creation in science classrooms and believed God was the source of all knowledge. Reagan also believed that he was living in end times. If Ray is the suspicious type and it's reasonable to assume so , perhaps it would be interesting to share that for years Reagan was believed to be the antichrist. Everyone was on the lookout for a sign, particularly Counting each letter in Reagan's full name Ronald Wilson Reagan , each adds to 6 6 6.
It just so happens that Ronald Reagan's original address was St. Cloud Road, until he changed the address to George Washington Believed the Bible. George Washington may have been a Christian, perhaps more likely a deist , but above all things he was a secularist. Several other quotes Ray did not share cast doubt on Washington's views as Ray tries to portray them. Dwight Eisenhower Believed the Bible. Plain and simple argument from authority again. Nothing wrong with Ike, but he was no scientific expert or anything. Albert Schweitzer Believed the Bible. Albert Schweitzer was a French philosopher, physician, and musician who founded and spent much of his life at a missionary hospital in present-day Gabon.
However, did Albert Schweitzer believe the Bible? He entirely disputed the picture of Jesus in the classical Christian creeds: "There is nothing more negative than the result of the critical study of the life of Jesus. Calvin Coolidge Believed the Bible. Not only a poor authority on such matters, but an odd choice of authorities to bring up, since nobody particularly looks up to him.
Christopher Columbus Believed the Bible.
Let's take a look at how much of a good Christian Columbus was. Upon arriving in North America, he immediately began enslaving the natives. Among the first things to follow was a genocide much greater then that of the Holocaust. It should also be noted that Columbus was convicted in a Spanish court of "Crimes of Brutality" - which translates today as genocide. The original population under Columbus's direct control was 8 million in , which was reduced to 3 million by , many as a result of having their hands cut off and bleeding to death as punishment for failing to pay taxes Tribute.
By the time he was arrested and returned to Spain in the population was reduced to , - by no more than were left alive. Independent sources indicate that Columbus killed about 14,, people, whereas Hitler murdered about 10,, Columbus's description of the Native Americans who were not Christians was: "They traded with us and gave us everything they had, with good will..
They are very gentle and without knowledge of what is evil; nor do they murder or steal Your highness may believe that in all the world there can be no better people They love their neighbours as themselves, and they have the sweetest talk in the world, and are gentle and always laughing. Abraham Lincoln Believed the Bible.
This is disputed. While Lincoln was known to read the Bible, it was one of the few books he had access to as a child. Despite this, evidence indicates that he was a deist or an agnostic throughout his life. He was never part of any organized church, and never mentioned Jesus in any known speech.
Accounts from his friends and bodyguards indicate that at some points in his life he was skeptical of religion. Furthermore, Lincoln was an evolutionist, even though evolution was a newly discovered theory at the time. Deeply held religious convictions springing from the Holy Scriptures led to the early settlement of our nation Biblical teachings inspired concepts of civil government that are contained in our Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States Public Law Congress is a body of representatives elected by the American people, who are overwhelmingly Christian and who often would refuse to vote for someone who doesn't profess Christianity.
So it's unsurprising that Congress would make statements favorable to the Bible, since its membership is self-selecting. Archaeology and History Attest to the Bible The first section of this chapter was written by Richard Fales, PhD, who has been described as a professor of Archaeology, Greek, and Apologetics at the unaccredited, and apparently now defunct, Pacific International University. Other sites  indicate his credentials are completely fictitious.
However, Fales misdates the oldest manuscripts by upwards of half a century and he continues with the demonstrably false claim that "it can be proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the New Testament says exactly the same thing today as it originally did nearly 2, years ago. Corroborating Writings Next Fales sets up the straw man that critics claim "there are no ancient writings about Jesus outside the New Testament". Fales names Flavius Josephus A. While Fales does list a number of extra-biblical sources that refer to Jesus or simply to Christians, Fales falsely claims that these other sources confirm Jesus' "birth, ministry, death and resurrection".
This is followed by an extremely vague and extremely short history of the biblical canon. Fales claims that "Each document, being accepted as it was penned in the first century, was then passed on to Christians of the next century," obviously ignoring the "documents" written by Christians in the first century that didn't make it into the canon.
Further, those extra-biblical references either don't refer to Jesus at all only to Christians or, where they do mention him, those references are remarkably shaky. Here, Sheler is dead wrong. Comfort does not include anything by Sheler to present his arguments. Archeology does not support the Bible as much as Comfort wishes. There are no records that Herod slaughtered thousands of infants in search of the one prophesied to be the messiah; the Roman census in the gospels is a complete fiction; there is no evidence for the Exodus; the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites was a legend intended to explain the ruined cities and forts of the area.
They never came from abroad. This whole chain is broken. It is not a historical one. It is a later legendary reconstruction—made in the seventh century [BCE]—of a history that never happened. Despite the relatively harmless claims, Albright has been highly criticized with comments like "historical interpretation can make no claim to be objective, proceeding as it does from a methodology which distorts its data by selectivity which is hardly representative".
Also, it should be remembered that the Dead Sea Scrolls are writings of the Old Testament, and are not a source to support the New. Dating the Manuscripts Carbon dating is a reliable form of scientific dating when applied to uncontaminated material several thousand years old.
Results indicated an age of years with a year 10 percent variant. Paleography ancient writing forms and orthography spelling indicated that some manuscripts were inscribed before B. Albright set the date of the complete Isaiah scroll to around B. Interesting that Ray Comfort accepts Carbon as a legitimate method of dating whenever it supports his case, but whenever it is used in support of evolution it is automatically a "flawed" dating method and should be discarded.
Archeological Dating Collaborative evidence for an early date came from archaeology. Pottery accompanying the manuscripts was late Hellenistic c. The Essenes hid their treasured manuscripts in caves to prevent their destruction by the Romans. Hidden away they would be discovered two-thousand years later. The Bible both Old and New Testament were written over a period of time covering more than years. From B. C, to almost AD, the words of the Bible were written within the context of the historical events of the day.
If the Bible is to be considered accurate and true, the events recorded in the Bible should correspond with the recorded historical events outside of the Bible. This is understandable from an atheistic and secular world that reduces the Bible to fable of tribes gathered around campfires. Many Christian churches also would consider the story of Noah a fable that should be discounted when we read scripture.
The problem with what Carl Sagan says and what actually takes place in the science of Evolution are two different things. Many secular scientists preach scientific method yet in practice their work is anything but scientific method. Therefore many of the claims and conclusions put forward in the media are not met with skepticism because the source is considered reliable and objective.
As we shall see, this is not the case when it comes to the human fossil record. How old is the earth? According to science of the day the earth is 4. This mass of matter then gets locked into orbit around the Sun. The theory is this took place 4. After the earth was formed, the first cell accidently formed, life from non-life abiogenesis, this first life eventually evolved into the life of today, with all its variety and sizes. Within this theory a group of creatures known as Dinosaurs Terrible Lizards lived on the earth, according to the evolutionary model these dinosaurs lived million years ago and are now extinct.
The existence of dinosaurs, proved through the fossil record is evidence for many skeptics that Bible is in error. Is the Bible the Word of God? Some might respond that the Bible is just a book written by men, a mythology with little truth. That at least is the secular view of the Bible, but the Bible claims to have a supernatural source. The Bible claims to originate with the Creator of the Universe.
The Bible claims to correspond to truth, meaning the events and information contained within its pages are correlated in reality. This means if the Bible refers to historical figures and events, these events can be confirmed in history and time. So when the Bible refers to a city, did that city exist? When the Bible refers to a person, did that person exist? If that person or city did not exist, the Bible would not be true.
The problem is many people are not aware of the incredible archeological finds that affirm the Bible. For knack of knowledge many people think the Bible cannot be validated with facts. The problem is people just do not know the facts. The purpose of this paper is to give the reader a portion of the Biblical Archeological discoveries that validate scripture. This is evidence for the doubter as well as ammunition for the believer to show the truth of Scripture. This is by no means exhaustive, Biblical Archeology is a continual discovery of more detailed information that affirms the Bible.
This is only meant to give you a basic starting point in the evidence of Biblical Archeology. Israel is a nation that came into existence this century in May , a new nation, with an ancient history. Israel existence is not an accident, its land and very existence are tied to the Bible, the book claiming to be authored by God, through the prophets. Jacob was promised the same land promised to his father Isaac and Grandfather Abraham were promised. Why should anyone believe in Jesus? What proof do we have that he lived?
This is a charge skeptics, atheists and secularists often make about Jesus. How would you respond? What proof do we have that Jesus lived? Of course one response is we have a non-Christian witness to the life of Jesus, both Roman and Jewish historians wrote about him. Most of all, we have those who walked and talked with Jesus, they affirmed he exist in the New Testament era. One of the most powerful examples for any Christian to be armed with is Chapter 53 of Isaiah. Daniel lived years before the birth of Jesus, yet Daniel foretold one of the most profound prophecies about Jesus and the end of the age.
Daniel then proclaimed the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple would follow. He then gives us details of the final period of this age, the tribulation, when the Jews would build a third Temple in Jerusalem. Daniel was in his eighties, when the angel Gabriel appeared to him in a vision and set forth the timeline for his people and the city of Jerusalem.