With all the controversies surrounding the topic of race, especially in America today, one thing is for certain, race is still very much alive and prevalent. Just consider the aftermath of George Floyd, the controversial presidency of Donald Trump, the overindulging press received on police brutality, the doctrine of Critical Race Theory that promotes the sin of White Nationalism as the root of America’s founding, and the constant redefinition of America’s history that emphasizes racism such as the 1619 Project. It’s no wonder why racism continues to make headlines in the twenty-first century. This is not including the controversial celebrities such as Kanye West and Kyrie Irving along with the documentary Hebrews to Negroes that promoted antisemitic and anti-white propaganda, which motivated certain religious groups and even some Christians to raise their voice in the name of race identity. There are some religious sects that have devoted their entire theological philosophy towards elevating race over faith and have gone to such an extent to identify their denomination based on their ethnicity. Consequently, the question this episode will attempt to clarify, “Does Race Matter” is a highly sensitive topic that Satan has been able to use to his own advantage to widen the divide of God’s people, which he has been quite successful in accomplishing throughout the millennia.

Think about it…, race wars have been occurring way before the “Black” and “White” classifications were even invented and has been endemic towards every nation to ever exist. The genocides committed in the name of racism throughout history against humanity are simply unfathomable. In particular, the atrocities committed during the Holocaust which saw approximately six million Jews die because of their nationality is one notable example. Not to forget, the genocides committed by Stalin’s regime, Mao Zedong, the Cambodian massacre by Pol Pot, the Rwandan Massacre, and many more that killed millions upon millions of people. Too often, certain social justice movements overemphasize America’s struggle with racism while losing sight of the fact that although America had to contend with the dark legacy of slavery, the Civil War, and the civil rights movement, America’s struggle pales in comparison to the genocides mentioned above. Just consider the movie Tears of the Sun depicting the Civil War of Nigeria or Black Hawk Down that took place in Somalia where governments starved their own people to death. Now, this is not to minimize the pain and suffering many had to endure during those dark periods of America’s history, yet the point that is being made is how racism and hatred is the number one weapon used by the devil to accomplish his sole objective against all nations. No nation is exempt from Satan’s overall desire to seek, to kill, and to destroy, for he is the father of lies, the father of hatred, and the father of racism!  

So, to answer the question, “Does Race Matter,” obviously, Satan has made race matter for a long time now because he has been effectively using race to keep the people of God divided on a global scale. However, the larger question this episode desires to clarify is this: “Does Race Matter for a Believer?” Does race matter once a person comes to the saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ? Does race matter when it comes to their identity and purpose in Christ? Will race matter at the consummation of all things? Will race matter when every person has to make an account before God for how they lived their life on earth? Will their race factor into God’s decision of who spends eternity with Him or not? These are the overarching questions that this episode truly desires to clarify for anyone who may not know, or for anyone who may be trying to find the truth hidden among the weeds of false doctrine, or for anyone who may have fallen victim to the controversial hype campaigned by certain groups regarding the superiority of certain races over others. For instance, the Hebrew Israelite dogma asserts that people of dark skin color in America are the true descendants of Israel from the tribe of Judah, while the Jews currently living in the land of Israel are imposters. There are other doctrines along similar lines that elevates race and assert their salvific importance over faith in Christ. Some emphasize the necessity of discovering one’s true identity in their nationality in order to obtain a certain level of prominence in society and in the kingdom of God. There are all sorts of groups polarizing their particular viewpoints through the abundance of media channels available in an age of mass disinformation. For those trying to sort out the wheat from the weeds, here are a couple of pointers that can assist one in navigating this particular question, “Does Race Matter?”

First, whenever one encounters a person or religious group espousing a doctrine that appears to be focused on nationality, or the superiority of certain races over others and even over faith in Christ, ask this one question: “Is their movement or religious ideas rooted in ancient history?” Are their beliefs corroborated by ancient sources that can affirm their historical weight? Notice, that if a person does a little research regarding many of the movements that exist today such as the Hebrew Israelites, nationalistic societies, Moorish Science, Jehovah Witnesses, Mormonism, etc., they are modern organizations that were born not even 200 years ago. In other words, these modern religious movements are “ahistorical,” meaning, they are not rooted in ancient history. Now, why is this important? Well, in order to find the truth underneath the overgrown weeds of false doctrine, one way to navigate through the countless number of false doctrines is to ask the question, “Are their beliefs derivative from ancient belief or did someone just make them up?” The only way to discern if those ideas were made up or not is by asking that one simple question, “Is their movement or religious ideas rooted in ancient history?” If their ideas weren’t rooted in ancient history, as is the case with the groups mentioned above, they can’t be verified as true because no one believed their ideas in the approximately 5,000 years humanity has existed on planet earth. For example, in regard to the doctrine of the Hebrew Israelites that Black people are the true Israelites, the original descendants from the tribe of Judah, did anyone espouse this belief say…, before the time of America? Was this a relevant belief 500 years ago, 1000 years, 2,000 years ago, etc.? If not, what are the chances that a modern religious ideology about race could be true over conventional wisdom rooted in ancient history? Not likely at all. Yet, this is exactly what it is happening in the twenty-first century; modern doctrines are becoming superior to those rooted in antiquity. This is not to say that any movement grounded in antiquity is true since there are also many false doctrines that have been refuted throughout the ages and this is not to say that every modern idea is false since some of them have proven to be consistent with ancient belief. However, in reference to these modern movements espousing religious precedence or racial identity, they can be easily debunked by their lack of historical evidence.  

Second, consider the primary source that has stood the test of immeasurable scrutiny regarding the question about race…, the Holy Scriptures. Now, it’s important to remember that many religious groups also like to quote Scripture to prove their perspective, but often times they misquote the Bible by quoting it out of context, by isolating the verse devoid of its context, and by misapplying it to themselves. Those who fail to apply the proper hermeneutical principles of biblical interpretation will be susceptible to adding or taking away from the Word of God. Here are 6 verses of Scripture that speak for itself regarding the question, “Does Race Matter for a Believer?”

1). In Acts 17:26 Paul says, “From one man he made all nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth, and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands.” In the context, Paul is speaking to both Jews and Greeks in Athens and teaches them that God is not contingent upon his creation for anything and that he created all of humanity from one person, Adam, in the very beginning. The name Adam in the Hebrew language means mankind, the whole of the human race. Essentially, Paul is reminding his diverse audience in the text that God created only one race, the human race. And, this human race matters so much to God that He sent His One and only Son into the world that whosoever would believe in Him would never perish but have everlasting life. To rephrase the original question in this episode, “Does the Human Race Matter to God?” Absolutely! And should the human race matter to their fellow human brothers and sisters? Absolutely, for we are to love our neighbors as ourselves.

2). In Colossians 3:11 Paul says to the Gentile church, “Here there is no Gentile or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all.” In the context, Paul is debunking man-made classifications and reminding the church that such classifications are irrelevant in the body of Christ because faith in Him is all that truly matters when it comes to the salvation He provides for His people, not race. God made one race, the human race, but Satan made classifications to keep humanity divided into categories. In America, there are a multitude of classifications of skin color, classes of wealth, religion, political affiliations, age groups, sexuality, education, etc., and guess what, according to Scripture, none of these classifications will matter at the end of the age.

3). Notice what Paul says to the church at Philippi regarding his ethnicity and background. In Philippians 3:4-9 it says, “If someone thinks they have reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eight day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; as for zeal, persecuting the church; as for righteousness based on the law, faultless. But whatever were gains to me I now consider loss for the sake of Christ. What is more, I consider everything a loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ – the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith.”

Not only does Paul in this passage affirm that race does not matter when it comes to faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, but his circumcision does not matter, the tribe he comes from does not matter, his religious standing as a pharisee does not matter, nor his zeal for the law and for persecuting the church does not matter. In fact, he considers all of those classifications that he gained not only a loss, but he considers them rubbish in light of the saving knowledge he discovered in Christ Jesus. None of what he was before he found Christ matters, and likewise, none of what believers were before they found Christ matters either, not even their own race!

4). In the Gospel of John 1:12 says, “Yet to all who did receive Him, to those who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God – children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.” In other words, the only way into the kingdom of God is NOT by our race, not by our ethnicity, not by our achievements, not by our works, and not by our worldly status, but only by the grace of God through faith and only by being born again by the Spirit of God that transforms our wicked heart of stone into a heart of flesh! That’s it! The qualification to enter into the kingdom of God is none other than the precious blood of Jesus Christ that reconciles us back into a right relationship with the Father. All that is needed in response to this wonderful salvation provided by God through Christ is a willing heart to be transformed, a willing mind to repent, and a willing mouth to confess our sins to the Lord. The general impulse of the salvation provided to mankind is not based on race but based on pure faith!

5). In the letter to the church of Ephesus, Paul breaks down the wall of any racial tension that existed between the Jews and the Gentiles by reminding them in Ephesians 2:14-18 this: “For he himself is our peace, who has made two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility.” Did you pay attention to what Paul just said in the passage? God’s desire was to bring together both Jews and Gentiles as one new humanity by the cross of Christ just as God intended from the very beginning when he made mankind as one human race. The whole point of the Father sending His Son was not only to save humanity from their sin but to also break the barriers of hostility, captivity, race, death, and the power of Satan! Hallelujah!

6). The last verse this episode wants to draw attention to that will strike at the heart of this question, “Does Race Matter,” comes from Paul’s letter to the Romans. In Romans 11:17 Paul says, “If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, do not consider yourself to be superior to those other branches,” Now, Paul is addressing the Gentile church in Rome and encouraging them not to consider themselves more than they ought to since they are grafted into the faith that comes out of the tree of Judaism. The good news this episode wants to highlight is the fact that Gentile believers, those who are not from the nation of Israel are grafted into the kingdom of God by faith in Jesus Christ. All who would confess with their mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in their heart that God raised him from the dead shall be saved. No longer do believers have to search in vain for their identity in their ethnicity or attempt to find a place in the kingdom of God by their nationality, or have to figure out if they are a true Israelite or which tribe they belong to. Since God has poured out His Spirit on ALL people, whoever would call on the name of the Lord shall be saved; they will be grafted in! Praise the Lord! That’s the good news! The people of God do not have to exhaust themselves in figuring out their original ancestry or race, or where they are from if they know where they are going!

Besides, when a person is born again by the Spirit of God, they receive a new heart, they are made a new creation, God instills His desires inside them, He gives them a new identity, a new purpose, and clothes them with new spiritual attributes, and assigns them spiritual gifts to fulfill the will of God in their life. The only real question that will matter at the end of all things is this: “Is your name found in the Lamb’s Book of Life?” That’s the real question at stake, in which Satan wants you to lose sight of. And, for those wondering how they can be included into the Lamb’s Book of Life, first, you must understand that it’s not going to be based on race, but based on who you place your faith in. Did you place your faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as your savior and God, and did you serve, live, and obey everything that He spoke in the gospels? Second, remember that a person’s salvation will not be contingent upon how many people they have led to search for their original ancestry or ethnicity, but based on how they became co-laborers of Christ and how they participated in the Great Commission and made other disciples for His kingdom. Remember folks, the Kingdom of God that’s at hand is not based on worldly pursuits but based on a faithful pursuit of picking up your cross, denying yourself, following Jesus, joining him in bringing others to the kingdom, and preaching the gospel message that is centered on what Christ did for the salvation of the world, not figuring out what race you are, or what tribe you belong to. That’s not what the kingdom of God is about. It’s about reciprocation of what Christ initiated and established under the blood of His New Covenant!

So, to go back to the original question, “Does Race Matter to a Believer?” The overarching answer to that question should be a resounding NO! What matters more is salvation! What matters more is God’s grace upon grace! What matters more is the Lamb’s Book of Life! What matters more is bearing fruit in keeping with repentance! What matters more is that Gentile believers are grafted into the faith! What matters more is being holy as our Father in heaven is holy! What matters more is the new command to love one another! What matters more is our spiritual identity in Christ over our earthly identity! What matters more is how Christ broke the barriers of hostility! What matters more is our heavenly descent over our natural descent! What matters more is that all of humanity are of one race, the human race derived from Adam! And, what matters more is our obedience to testify to the greatest Gospel ever known to mankind! That’s what eternally matters more!!

#Misconceptions #Clarified #Episode #XXI #ByTheGraceOfGOD #FaithOVERrace

Welcome to Misconceptions Clarified Episode XX! When we began this series back on July 12th, 2016, with our very first article, “Is Christianity a Myth,” who would have ever thought that over 6 years later Christian Way Ministries would still be up to the task of clarifying misconceptions of the faith. Historically, the ministry originally started out as a blog called Trooth Therapy Ministries on November 12, 2014, exactly ten years after the Senior Pastor was baptized in Iraq with the initial intent to fulfill 2 Corinthians 10:5, to “demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God.” The next misconception this episode will be casting down is this notion that the King James English translation of the Bible is the “only” inspired translation of the Holy Scriptures. There are many groups and denominations that espouse KJV Onlyism while denouncing any other modern English translation including the New King James Version as corrupt.

Yet, the official authorized King James Version did not come out until the year 1611. If the KJV is the only inspired translation of Scripture, what about all the previous translations that led to the King James Version? What about the Geneva Bible, an earlier English translation? Or, what about the Latin Vulgate that was commissioned by Pope Damasus I, the bishop of Rome in 382 AD, over twelve hundred years prior to the 1611 KJV? Was that translation corrupted too? Or what about the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew language completed around 300 BC, which would be one of the primary translations used to develop other translations? Was this uninspired as well? This is not to mention the original languages of Scripture, the Hebrew and the Greek language? Surely, out of all the translations of Scripture, if there are any one of these versions that are more inspired than the rest, certainly it would be the original languages in which the Scriptures were first penned, right? Well, one of the held fundamental doctrines of the Christian church is the inerrancy of Scripture, which asserts that the original manuscripts (not in existence today) are without error or fault. The original manuscripts are the only version of the ancient Scriptures that was truly inspired by God and considered inerrant, not the subsequent translations of those original autographs. Now, this is not to say that God did not inspire the translators in their work of translating Scripture into other languages, but to make an assertion that the KJV 1611 is the only true inspired translation by God over all translations, how can this be so? What evidence is there to prove such a claim?

First, let’s consider the verse of Scripture that inspires those who only subscribe to the King James Version of the Bible. Proponents of KJV onlyism use Psalm 12:6 as inspiration to their conviction, which says, “The words of the Lord are pure words: As silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.” Obviously, the words of the Lord are pure as he originally spoke them through the authors of Scripture, but from a contextual perspective, Psalm 12:6 has nothing to do with the translation of Scripture from its original language to the English language. Some proponents of KJV onlyism assert that King David was speaking prophetically about the King James Version, yet, this assertion is simply based on feeling and preference, not the truth about God’s original intent of Psalm 12:6 in its proper context. Additionally, when it comes to the actual process of translation, remember that it was not a perfect process to translate the ancient Scriptures from Hebrew and Greek into other languages. This process in itself is a very complex task and required an indescribable amount of tedious study, contemplation, collaboration, and constant revising to create a single translation of the ancient Scriptures.

Take for instance, how the King James version came into existence prior to the year 1611. There was much controversy surrounding the church during that time between the Catholics and the Protestants. As the English language continued to evolve, the desire to have an English version of the Holy Bible continued to grow. The primary translation that existed in the Roman Empire was the Latin Vulgate, a Latin translation of the Greek Septuagint. Then came along the famous William Tyndale in 1525 who was the first to undertake the challenge of translating the very first Bible into English. Tyndale’s work led to the continuous desire to improve upon his translation that developed the Great Bible, the Bishop’s Bible, the Geneva Bible, and others. These translations were built upon the scholarly work of Desiderius Erasmus who took on the opportunity in the early 16th century to advance and polish the Latin and Greek translation of Scripture. Once King James was crowned over England in 1603 AD, he approved of a compilation to resolve any discrepancies of the English translations previously cited. A total of 47 scholars who were all from the church of England, were divided into six committees who took up the baton to develop the 1611 Authorized King James Version.

Fortunately, the King James version of the Bible would become the most popular translation of that era and is still revered by many in the 21st century, which proves its significant impact throughout the subsequent generations. The problem this episode is attempting to clarify is not in regard to the actual translation itself, which is a beautiful translation, but against this staunch belief that the KJV is the only true inspired translation while all the other modern translations are corrupt. It’s one thing to have a preference of one translation over another, but another thing to defend the translation as the only one inspired by God, especially since the KJV translation is not in itself a perfect translation. As a matter of fact, none of the translations of the ancient Scriptures into different languages are perfect. Only the original autographs are considered to be inerrant, which are not in existence today. Part of the reason why none of the translations are perfect is simply because of the many variances within the languages themselves. For instance, the differences between the Hebrew and English language are substantial. Hebrew reads from left to right, has 22 letters in their alphabet, each character possesses numerical value, and contains no vowels and no articles. The English language on the other hand reads from right to left, has 26 letters in their alphabet, has no numerical value, and contains vowels and articles. Additionally, the English language has a sizeable difference in vocabulary. The modern Hebrew language has about thirty-three thousand words in their dictionary compared to more than four hundred thousand in the English dictionary. The English language has a plethora of different words to choose from to describe something, which is part of the reason why there exists several modern English translations of the Bible. This is not including all of the variances of the other languages like Spanish, French, and many others from Hebrew and Greek. For KJV onlyism to claim that the 1611 version is the only true inspired translation of the ancient Scriptures is not based on truth for several reasons:

1). The KJV uses an old and outdated version of the English language that is no longer in use in the twenty-first century. For those that love the 16th century version of the English language, by any means, please continue to read the Word of God according to one’s preference. However, do not condemn those that decide to use a more contemporary version.

2). No translation from the original languages is perfect because of the many disparities between the ancient and modern languages.

3). The English language in itself is a language that derives from an inclusion of other languages. In other words, the English language is a completely borrowed language. To say that the KJV is the only true inspired translation is like saying that a mixed Beagador is the only true breed of Beagles.

4). The translators who were responsible for the 1611 Authorized King James version never claimed their translation was the only true English translation. If the original translators didn’t consider their own work the only inspired English translation by God, how can anyone else claim sole inspiration of the KJV?

5). The impetus that led to the development of the KJV include the alleged various discrepancies from the earlier English translations mentioned previously, which were influenced by the work of Erasmus who utilized Greek manuscripts that were limited in quantity and late in the date of the manuscripts called the Textus Receptus.

6). Modern translations such as the New International Version, the English Standard version, the New American Standard Bible, etc., use an older collection of manuscripts that were not discovered during the compilation of the KJV that date closer to the first century known as the Critical Text. There are two manuscripts traditions, the Byzantine which the KJV uses and the Alexandrian line that the modern translations pull from. The earlier manuscripts that the modern translations use do not contain some verses that are included in the later manuscripts that the KJV uses. For instance, passages such as John 7:53-8:11 and Mark 16:9-20 were not contained in the earlier manuscripts, yet the modern translation include those passages with side notes. For more information about the translation process, consult the New English Translation, the NET Bible that has compiled over sixty thousand translation notes so the average reader can gain a greater insight into all the nuances that are involved with obtaining a certain translation.

7). With access now to a conglomerate of manuscripts not available four centuries ago, with vastly improved technology, along with the evolvement of the English language, God has afforded His people an opportunity to understand who He is and what He has done with even greater clarity; thanks to the many manuscript discoveries such as the Dead Sea Scrolls found in 1947 along with the technological advancements.  

8). According to some reports, there are over four hundred thousand minor variances in the English translation of the ancient manuscripts, which none of those variances distorts the fundamental truths of the Gospel message. All of those minor variances are in reference to language disparities, which proves yet again that there is no such thing as a perfect translation or that God approves one English translation over the others, especially when the English language did not exist during the time Scripture was written.  

Lastly, regardless of whichever preference a person has when it comes to the translation they prefer to read, humanity is blessed beyond measure to have some version of the Word of God translated in more than two thousand languages around the world. The Bible is the most translated book, the most preserved book, the most sold book, the most given-away book, the most read book, and the most stolen book in all of human history. The Word of God is so powerful that regardless of the translation, God who created languages and the interpretation of those languages is able to reveal Himself regardless of human limitation. Not only that, but for those who are critical of the modern translations can be confident in the fact that with the thousands of manuscripts preserved around the world, the modern translations in circulation today are completely trustworthy, reliable, consistent, and have not distorted any fundamental truth of His Word. Therefore, let’s try not to put God in a box by limiting His word to one single translation. Let’s hope that the body of Christ does not get caught up in a translation war and condemn people who have a different taste of preference knowing this would play right into the hands of the enemy. Instead, let us be reminded of the real spiritual battle at hand, and remember that the KJV along with many other English translations (except the New World Translation or the Queen James version) are all unique, and point us to the One and only living God and to the One and only Savior of the World, Jesus Christ our Lord.

#MisconceptionsClarified #EpisodeXX

Welcome again to Misconceptions Clarified XIX where this episode will breakdown the popular phrase “do not judge” that is so often quoted within Christian circles. Notice that when this phrase is mentioned, it is done to dissuade people from coming to any conclusions regarding their actions or lifestyle that stands contrary to the moral standards of God outlined in Scripture. For instance, if someone is drinking too much alcohol and they know they are drinking too much, they would typically say to those that are witnessing their over-consumption, “don’t judge me,” or they may also say, “only God can judge me” to deflect from being held accountable for their immoral actions. The do-not-judge-me phrase is the default response that cautions people to refrain from making any moral inferences of their actions granting them a highway of all sorts of indulgences without having to deal with any traffic of culpability. The do-not-judge-me movement has afforded many a license to sin and has silenced many within the body of Christ from opposing a culture saturated in wickedness and immorality. And notice, that any time the phrase to not judge is mentioned, it’s always mentioned under the breath of wrongdoing. No one who is intentionally doing the right thing ever says, “do not judge me.” It’s only those who know in their hearts that they are doing something wrong who use this default response.

Not only that, but those who know they are in the wrong have often tried to justify their guilt by misapplying certain verses of Scripture in order to avoid accountability. The sad part about it is that many believers have come to believe their misinterpretation of certain passages that speak about judging the actions of others, and now many believers are fearful of speaking out against the ungodliness that has swept over the nation because they don’t want to be judged by God or by their peers for judging someone else’s actions. But is it true that God will judge those who judge others? Is it true what the Scripture says in Matthew 7:1, “Do not judge so that you will not be judged.” Well, first and foremost, it is a rule of thumb to never isolate scripture from the overall passage itself, which is where most of the biblical misconceptions derive from. In Matthew 7:1 Jesus wasn’t saying that his disciples could not judge at all, but that they shouldn’t judge hypocritically. In Matthew 7 verse 3, Jesus asks, “why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?” In other words, Jesus is cautioning his disciples from judging someone else’s sin while they haven’t checked their own sin. It does not say that they were to avoid judging entirely the actions of those that are morally right or morally wrong. Another passage that is often misquoted is 1 Corinthians 4:15 where Paul says, “Do not judge,” but ignore the second half of that verse that says, “before the appointed time.” Again, this verse of Scripture is not to be interpreted to mean that people cannot make general judgments on what is right or what is wrong, but Paul was cautioning the church at Corinth to not judge the true nature of his apostleship before the appointed time.

CWM has made it abundantly clear regarding the magnitude of interpreting Scripture within its context and to always ask the question, “What message did the Holy Spirit intent to communicate through the writers of Scripture during their particular context?” Many biblical misconceptions are born out of a negligence of dividing the word of truth correctly and interpreting the Word of God with a twenty-first century lens as if the Bible is a modern-day book written originally in the English language. Wrong! “The Bible was written over a period of roughly 2,000 years by 40 different authors from three continents, who wrote in three different languages,” one of them not being English.[1] So, it’s important that we understand the genre of scripture, avoid isolating certain verses in the Bible away from its context, and stop believing the perverted gospel of Satan that has deceived many into thinking that people cannot judge. In fact, in the Gospel of John 7:14-24 when Jesus was being accused of being demon-possessed for healing on the Sabbath, He tells them to do what? To “stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly.” In other words, when people judge, don’t judge a book by the cover alone, but judge according to the actual content contained in the book and ensure that you are not guilty of the same sin before you cast the first stone.

This idea that we are not to judge unless we are judged is a misconception that still needs to be clarified today. It is important to clarify that disciples are not to judge a person’s eternal destiny since Jesus is the only one who has access to the Book of Life. However, believers can admonish other fellow believers to repent from their sins so that they won’t be judged by the One whom we must all make an account. James 5:19-20 says, “My brothers and sisters, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring that person back, remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sin.” The doctrine of “do-not-judge” circumvents holding other believers accountable to God and His Word. Paul says in Galatians 6:1, “Brothers and Sisters, if someone is caught in a sin, you who live by the Spirit should restore that person gently.” But, if believers are to abide by the misunderstanding of do-not-judge-me, how can they restore that person from their sin without first judging that sin as sin according to the Word of God? Additionally, how can believers know them by their fruit, or test every spirit with the spirit without being able to make judgments? It’s not possible! When a child does something wrong, doesn’t a parent judge their bad choice? Well, at least that’s what parents did in the past when their children did something wrong. In the post-postmodern era in America, the misconception of do-not-judge has now influenced many households to allow their children to express themselves however they want without being judged right or wrong for their actions, which is playing right into the hands of the enemy. Satan subtly casts doubt on the word of God by doing what he did in the very beginning with Adam and Eve when he asked the question, “Did God really say that you cannot eat from any tree in the garden?” Unfortunately, Satan whispers the same doubt in today’s modern ears when he asks, “Did God really say we should judge anybody? Surely if you judge somebody you are going to be judged yourself, so don’t do it!” That’s how the enemy works, and we need to always go back to the Word of God and know it in its entirety so that believers are not deceived by the serpent’s cunning.

Even Paul goes as far as to say in 1 Corinthians 6:2, “Do you not know that the Lord’s people will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? Do you know that we will judge Angels? How much more the things of this life?” Now, this passage is dealing with disputes and legal matters within the church. Believers are to be ultimately concerned with matters pertaining to the body of Christ, not what unbelievers do, why? Because as the Scripture says in John 3:18, “Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.” Those who don’t believe in Jesus, those who do not live according to the Word of God, those who are classified as unbelievers, and those who are living in intentional sin and rejection against God stand under God’s judgment and wrath, which is why we need to pray without ceasing and pray that God will open doors for believers to witness the Gospel of Jesus Christ with a sense of urgency knowing that eternity is on the line! If anything, believers should be constantly praying that the Holy Spirit will continue to convict the hearts of mankind about sin and about righteousness so that they will be compelled to repent and return to the Shephard and Overseer of their souls. Believers need not to turn a blind eye to the sin of their brother and sister and judge them correctly and gently. If a believer cannot handle correct judgment by their own brothers and sisters in this life, they certainly will not be prepared to handle the gavel that’s going to be hammered down at the consummation of all things!

#MisconceptionsClarified #Episode XIX #JudgeUnlessYouBeJudgedByChrist

[1] 3. Unity of the Bible | Answers in Genesis

As America increasingly diversifies its pluralistic and religious landscape, the criticisms and misconceptions regarding the Christian faith likewise continues to also increase. For instance, Christians at some point in their journey of faith may be confronted with some questions that they might be ill-equipped to answer, such as, “Why do Christians use the English name of Jesus when His Hebrew name is Yeshua? Are Christians worshipping a different person when they call on the name of Jesus? Or, what about the pagan connotations associated with the name Jesus? Isn’t the name Jesus another name for the god of Zeus?” These are some of the questions that are posed by many non-Christian groups and even within some Christian circles accusing those who use the name Jesus of false worship and idolatry. Hopefully, in this episode of Misconceptions Clarified XVIII it will answer the question of the hour, “Can Christians use the English name of Jesus?”

Well, before this episode delves into the misconception at hand, it’s important to understand the origins of languages in general before this article can make any definitive conclusions. First, what was the original language spoken by Adam and Eve who were the first human beings to inhabit the planet earth? Did they speak original Hebrew or another language? Now, there are several theories as to which language they spoke in the very beginning in the book of Genesis. One of those theories comes from the Midrash, an ancient Jewish source, which they called the “Adamic language.” Some also believe that Adam and Eve used a form of the ancient Semitic language, and others believe they originally spoke Hebrew. Unfortunately, there are no ancient written records that have survived from their time to confirm which language they actually spoke. There are some reports that believe the Hebrew language is a translation or an offshoot of what Adam and Eve spoke, which if the case, debunks the notion that transliterated names and languages is against the will of God.

Furthermore, when considering the account of the Tower of Babel in Genesis chapter 11, the whole world at that time after the global flood of Noah spoke one language. Then mankind decided in their heart to build a city along with a tower that reaches to the heavens, and when the Lord came down to see the city and the tower they were building, the Lord said in verse 6 & 7, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.” After the Lord confused their language, meaning, made them speak other languages they could not interpret, it caused them to stop building the tower of Babel and were thus scattered over the face of the earth. The primary reason why this episode of Misconceptions Clarified mentions the account of the Tower of Babel serves as a critical reminder of who created languages in Scripture. It was God who gave mankind their mouth, it was God who confused their language, it was God who made them speak different languages, and it was God who scattered the inhabitants of the earth at that time to different places to speak their other languages. And if God is the responsible agent for the different languages that exist, wouldn’t He also be responsible for revealing Himself to those who speak a different language outside of the main languages spoken by God’s chosen people of Israel?

To answer the question above, “Today the Bible is the most translated book in the world. There are versions of the complete Bible in 704 of the 7,106 languages estimated to be spoken in the world, translations of the New Testament in 1,551 languages, and translation of parts of the Bible into 1,160 additional languages. The Bible is also the most printed book in history, as well as the best and the longest seller. According to the Guinness World Records, as of 2021 it outnumbered any other publications with an estimated 5 to 7 billion copies sold and distributed.” The Bible has been translated in whole and in part in over 3,000 thousand languages around the world, and it appears that God has taken the bull by the horns in ensuring that the end will not come until the Gospel of Christ has been preached across the world, which would not have been possible without the process of translation or if God had set such a stipulation that He could only be called by one name in one language. How would other cultures and other languages know who the true and living God is without translation? If God confused the languages in the beginning, translation would be a critical and necessary component in knowing who God is, right?

Now, when it comes to the misconception that Christian’s must be worshipping a different person since the English and Hebrew language are two very different languages. The Hebrew language only has 22 characters in its alphabet, it contains numeric value, it has no vowels, they read from right to left, and there is no letter J. On the other hand, the English alphabet has 26 characters, has vowels, reads left to right, has the letter J, and has a larger vocabulary. The ancient Hebrew language consists of approximately 7,000 words according to the Jerusalem Post, while the modern Hebrew language has increased to approximately 33,000 words. The English language however is estimated to have over a million words, but the “Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged, together with its 1993 Addenda Section, includes some 470,000 entries. The Oxford English Dictionary, Second Edition, reports that it includes a similar number.” Even if this episode takes the lower number of 470,000 words in the English language, it is still substantially greater than the Hebrew vocabulary, and it’s not even close. In other words, when it comes to translating the ancient Hebrew language from Greek to Latin to English, there is going to be some obvious differences, and one of those differences being the name of Jesus.

Yet, the name of Jesus may appear on the surface to be a different name, but is it really different in meaning? When Christians say the name of Jesus are they referring to a different person other than the person of Jesus mentioned throughout the New Testament? The name Jesus in the Greek New Testament is “Iesous” and derives from the Hebrew origin “Yehosua,” which means “Yehovah is salvation,” or God is salvation. The English translation of the name Jesus is an offshoot of the Hebrew name ‘Yehosua” also known as Joshua in English. So, in order to proclaim the name that is above all names, the name of Yeshua had to be translated from Hebrew to Greek to Latin, etc. in order for those who speak a different language can come to know who Jesus is. Think about it, if a missionary were to come to a country that speaks an entirely different language and attempts to explain who Yeshua is in his original language, which his name is spelled יְהוֹשׁוּעַ, they would have no idea who He is because the Hebrew language is foreign to that country. Remember, God confused the languages in the beginning and without the gift of interpretation, which is one of the gifts outlined in 1 Corinthians 12:7-11, the language barrier would prevent them from coming to know the One and True Living God. Not only that, but when it was time to advance the Gospel of Jesus Christ on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2:1-13 where the disciples received the Holy Spirit, they needed to speak in other tongues. The crowd present during that time heard their own languages being spoken to include the Parthians, Medes, Elamites, Cappadocia, Pontus, Asia, Phrygia, Pamphylia, Egypt, Libya, Cretans, and the Arabs all heard “them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues” according to Acts 2:11. The translation of the wonders of God through the disciples was necessary and continued to be necessary throughout the subsequent generations so that everyone will come to know who Jesus really is.

But, what about the Pagan connotations of Jesus name to the Greek god of Zeus? Again, the name of Jesus is an English Translation of the original Hebrew name. The name of Jesus is not the same as the name of Zeus in the Greek New Testament. In Acts 14:12, Acts 14:13, and Acts 19:35 mention the Greek name Zeus which is spelled, Ζεύς, and differs from Ἰησοῦς, the name of Jesus in the New Testament. The name of Jesus means salvation whereas the name of Zeus means Jupiter or “a father of helps,” which are totally two different names. Just because there appears to be some resemblance between Zeus and the name Jesus in the Greek, and just because it sounds similar to one another in the Greek language does not mean they are the same, and it does not mean that the name of Jesus has any associations to the name of Zeus. The name Martin and Martian sound and appear similar, but they are totally two different names with totally two different meanings, and if you are unaware of how to defend against the claims that you must speak the name of God or the name of Jesus Christ in their original language, you may find yourself doubting what you even believe.

Lastly, remember this one very important detail…, nowhere in Scripture does it command the people of God to call Jesus by His original Hebrew name, it was only commanded to Israel in the context of Exodus 3:14. Matter of fact, there is no exact certainty amongst Jewish circles of how to pronounce the Hebrew tetragammaton YHWH, the personal name of God, which they believe the pronunciation was lost over time. So, they used other alternatives such as Yehovah, Adonai, Elohim, just to name a few. When God revealed His personal name to Moses in Exodus 3:14, the first question you must ask is how did Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob who came before Moses manage to get by in their relationship with God without knowing His personal name? How was Adam and Noah, a preacher of righteousness able to navigate their relationship with the Creator of the universe without knowing His personal name? Why was God commonly referred to as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob even after he reveled himself to Moses? Furthermore, how was Jesus able to maintain a pure and perfect relationship with the Father without ever using the Hebrew tetragammaton or using the personal name, YHWH if this was the only name everyone who comes to faith were to use? Why did Jesus along with Peter refer to God as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in Matthew 22:32 and Acts 3:13 versus God’s personal Hebrew name? Why didn’t Jesus never correct anyone when they used the Greek translation of his name versus his Hebrew name? Could it be that God’s name is multifaceted and encompasses meaning that cannot be fully expressed in human terms, which is why He said in Exodus 3:14, “I Am Who I Am,” which is translated in Hebrew “Haya Aser Haya,” “I will be who I will be?” Let’s not forget that Jesus identifies with the same identification in John 8:58 where He said, “before Abraham, I am,” but instead of Hebrew, it was in Greek. Only the Lord knows the full extent of himself and why He decided to go about certain things in the manner that He did. But could it be that God’s name is multifaceted to provide other nations outside of the nation of Israel an opportunity to know who He is? Could it be that the reason why the Scriptures have been translated in more languages than any other book in the world is that He desires to save them in their own native tongues?

Either way, regardless of whatever your position may be on this particular episode regarding the English translation of the name of Jesus, there are a few things that are for certain:

1). The English name of Jesus which was translated from Greek to Latin derives from Hebrew origins.

2). The name of Jesus and the name Yeshua are the same name with the same meaning. Jesus is just a translation of the name Yeshua.

3). There is only one Jesus Christ from Nazareth born in Bethlehem from the tribe of Judah, from the line of David who died on the cross at Calvary for the sin of the world and resurrected on the third day from the grave, reappeared to the disciples for 40 days before He ascended to the right-hand throne of the Father in heaven. He’s the only one that did this regardless of the language his name might be translated in. So when Christians pray to God with this person of Jesus Christ in their heart, are they really worshipping somebody else?

4). The Greek god Zeus is not the same as the name of Jesus Christ, nor are there any pagan associations to the name of Jesus.

5). God created language in the very beginning, then confused the language to create many languages, and thus, He is responsible for revealing Himself to these languages.

6). Two out of the nine gifts of the Spirit in 1 Corinthians 12 include speaking in tongues, a known language, and the interpretation of tongues, interpretation of known languages.

7). On the Day of Pentecost, the disciples declared the wonders of God in 14 different languages, and those wonders include what God did through His One and only Son.

In conclusion, when it comes to answering the question, “Can Christians use the English name of Jesus?” First, it is important to clarify that anyone who decides to use the Hebrew name of Jesus is more than welcomed to follow their own convictions. There is nothing wrong with referring to Jesus in His original Hebrew or Greek language. Some people lose sight of the fact that the Greek language was the main language spoken during the time of Jesus, that the Hebrew Scriptures were translated into Greek 300 years prior to the time of Christ, and that the New Testament was primarily written in Greek. This is all God’s doing! If God only wanted His Word and His people to only stick with Hebrew, He is certainly All-Powerful enough to preserve His own Word however He desires, but yet, it was God that allowed His own Word to be translated into a different language. So, the answer to the question, “Can Christians use the English name of Jesus?” Not only can Christians use the English translation of Jesus Hebrew name, but any other language can use their translation for Jesus Hebrew name in order to come to know who Jesus really is. For this reason, we praise God that we can know Him regardless of whatever language we speak. And for those that have still yet to receive the Gospel of Jesus Christ in their native tongue, may the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob continue to advance the cause of translation so that the Word of God may reach all people, in Jesus holy name we pray, amen.

names - What is the correct pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton? - Mi Yodeya (stackexchange.com)

The Museum of the Bible in Washington D.C. (bitterwinter.org)

Continuing the unprecedented revival of the Hebrew language - Israel Culture - The Jerusalem Post (jpost.com)

How many words are there in English? | Merriam-Webster

G2203 - zeus - Strong's Greek Lexicon (nkjv) (blueletterbible.org)

G2424 - iēsous - Strong's Greek Lexicon (nkjv) (blueletterbible.org)

When it comes to the doctrine of eschatology also known as the doctrine of the end times, there are two main interpretations concerning the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. For instance, is Jesus going to return before the tribulation period, or is He going to return after the tribulation period? Before this episode of Misconceptions Clarified examines these two eschatological positions, it is important to note that the doctrine pertaining to the return of Christ is a secondary doctrine. Meaning, that even though this topic of discussion is very significant to the Christian faith, belief in either one of these two positions will not necessarily affect one’s salvation in Jesus Christ, unless they are trying to literally predict the Lord’s coming, which many have tried in the past and are still attempting to do so today. Nevertheless, the objective of this particular episode is not to convince someone to believe in one position over the other, but to explain them in a way that gives the reader a greater understanding so they can make an informed decision for themselves. Ultimately, whichever side you choose, try your best not to poke fun on those who may be leaning on the opposite side of the spectrum and remember, no one knows the time nor the hour of Jesus’ return.

Now, with that being said, Pretribulationalism and Posttribulationalism is pretty simple to explain by definition. Pretribulationalism refers to the Second Coming of Jesus “before” the Great Tribulation period and Posttribulationalism refers to the Second Coming of Jesus “after” the Great Tribulation period. What is the Great Tribulation? Well, according to GotQuestions.org, “The tribulation is a future seven-year period of time when God will finish His discipline of Israel and finalize His judgment of the unbelieving world.” According to Edward Hindson in his research, The Book of Revelation: Unlocking The Future, he defines the Great Tribulation as the “eschatological period of God’s wrath. It is not merely the persecution or troubles of John’s own time, but a time of future global retribution, called in Revelation 3:10 the hour of testing, and 6:16 the wrath of the Lamb.” The difficult part many people struggle with regarding the doctrine of the tribulation is the interpretation of certain passages of Scripture. Which side does the Bible actually support? Does the evidence lean toward pre or post-tribulationalism? Hopefully, after reading this episode you will have a greater understanding on the tribulation according to Scripture.

So, the first order of business that must be addressed is the root verse that tribulationalism derives from. A believer cannot gain a proper interpretation of the passages that refer to the tribulation in the New Testament unless they go back to the original source, which is the book of Daniel. In Daniel 9:25-27 it says, “Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven sevens, and sixty-two sevens, the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed. He will confirm a covenant with many for one seven. In the middle of the seven he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that cause desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.”

This passage in Daniel is loaded with eschatological meaning. So, without going into a comprehensive overview of this passage, the prophet Daniel receives a vision of the end times from the angel Gabriel in the context during the time of the Babylonian empire that is intended to bring hope to Israel in the immediate aftermath of their exile along with a future hope of the end-times. The seven-sevens is to be interpreted seven years multiplied by seven years, which is forty-nine years, and the sixty-two sevens is to be interpreted as sixty-two years multiplied by seven years, which is 434 years. Add 49 years plus 434 years equals 483 years. The passage says in verse 25, “From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven-sevens and sixty-two sevens. In other words, after the 483 years pass from the time “the word goes out,” which was around 450 B.C. when Nehemiah gives the command in Nehemiah 2:17, “Come, let us rebuild the wall of Jerusalem, and we will no longer be in disgrace,” until the “Anointed One will be put to death,” which refers to the crucifixion of Jesus Christ around 33 A.D. This is the main interpretation of the period of the sixty-nine sevens or the 483 years.

Before the seventieth-seven or the final seven, Daniel 9:26 says, “After the sixty-two sevens, the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed.” After the 483 years, after the sixty-two sevens, after Jesus Christ is put to death, and before the final seven, the rebuilt temple and Jerusalem would be destroyed again which occurred in 70 A.D. by Vespasian in his second year as emperor, and the nation will continue to be at war. Then in Daniel 9:27, it says, “He will confirm a covenant with many for one seven. In the middle of the seven he will put an end to sacrifice and offering. And at the temple he will set up an abomination that causes desolation, until the end that is decreed is poured out on him.” Many scholars agree that the seventieth seven in Daniel 9:27 is referring to a seven-year tribulation period where the Antichrist will deceive many to follow him. This seven-year period also prophesies the existence of a third temple where animal sacrifice will be performed once again in Israel and in the middle of this period, in three and a half years, the Antichrist will put an end to sacrifice and offering, and set up an abomination that causes desolation similar to what Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 164 B.C. did when he sacrificed a pig on an altar erected for Zeus in the temple of the Lord, which sparked the Maccabean Revolt along with the festival of Hanukkah that commemorates this historic rescue by the Maccabees.

Daniel’s vision from the angel Gabriel must be the backdrop of interpretation for any passage concerning the Great Tribulation period in the New Testament. What is widely agreed upon by scholars on both sides of the eschatological debate is the literal Second Coming of Christ, His literal millennial reign for a thousand years, the rapture of the church, the tribulation period, and the resurrection of the dead; one to everlasting life and one to everlasting condemnation. However, where scholars differ regarding the tribulation period pertains to the timing of the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. Is it before the Great Tribulation period, is it in the middle, or is it after the Great Tribulation period?

Let’s first consider the Posttribulational position. The verse that proponents of the Second Coming of Jesus believe occurs after the Great Tribulation is Matthew 24:29-31. which says, “Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.” Obviously, at first glance, the phrase, “immediately after the tribulation of those days” is evidence for those who believe in posttribulationalism that the Second Coming of Jesus Christ is going to occur after the tribulation as Jesus affirmed in the passage. Those who subscribe to the posttribulational perspective are of the mindset that the church will constantly experience tribulation of all sorts according to Scripture. Therefore, the church going through the period of the Great Tribulation will be something they have been prepared to experience and endure, which makes sense from those who believe in this point of view. In addition, after the tribulation not only will the Second Coming of Jesus occur, but Jesus will also be seen coming on the clouds from heaven, the angels will sound the trumpet, and then gather His elect, which insinuates the rapture of the church.

Another passage that posttribulationalists use to affirm their position comes from 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, which says, “For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.” The phrase at the end of verse 16, “the dead in Christ will rise first” is connected to the first resurrection in Revelation 20:5-6 that occurs after the Great Tribulation period. Anyone who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ when they died will rise during the first resurrection, and proponents of the posttribulational view believe the first resurrection to be one single event.

On the other hand, those who hold to the pretribulational perspective also use 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, but they do not connect the phrase “the dead in Christ will rise first” to the first resurrection in Revelation 20:5-6. Part of the reason why they do not connect the dots is simply because in the context of Revelation 20:4 it refers to “the martyrs,” also known as the “tribulation saints” who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word and they reigned with Christ a thousand years. The label, “tribulation saints’ derives out of Revelation 7:13-14, when one of the Elders questioned John about the great multitude wearing white robes and where did they come from. The Elder responded in verse 14, “These are they who have come out of the great tribulation: they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” One thing is certain regarding this particular passage is that there will be saints present who come to faith during the tribulation period who avoid the mark of the beast and remain faithful to the Lord Jesus Christ. Pretribulationalists do not believe the great multitude in Revelation 7 to refer to the actual church as they believe the rapture will occur before the Great Tribulation.

Additionally, the pretribulational point of view believes that the first resurrection is not one single event as the term may indicate but occurs in phases. According to GotQuestions.org, “The first resurrection takes place in various stages. Jesus Christ Himself (the “first fruits,” 1 Corinthians 15:20), paved the way for the resurrection of all who believe in Him. There will be the resurrection of “the dead in Christ” at the Lord’s return (1 Thessalonians 4:16) and the resurrection of the martyrs at the end of the Tribulation (Revelation 20:4).” Even the disciples of the disciples who sat under their tutelage believed that the doctrine of the end times would occur in phases. According to the Didache 16:5-8 says, “Then shall the creation of man come to the fiery trial of proof, and many shall be offended and shall perish; but they who remain in their faith shall be saved by the rock of offence itself. And then shall appear the signs of the truth; first the sign of the appearance in heaven, then the sign of the sound of the trumpet, and thirdly the resurrection of the dead not of all, but as it has been said, The Lord shall come and all his saints with him; then shall the world behold the Lord coming on the clouds of heaven.” Although this passage is not considered inspired Scripture and although this passage does not automatically assume a pretribulational position, it certainly can give insight into what the disciples of the disciples believed about the doctrine of eschatology. Considering early church history can be an additional hermeneutical tool applied in solving certain theological enigmas.

Furthermore, the passage in Matthew 24:29-31 that posttribulationists use regarding the Second Coming of Christ returning after the Great Tribulation is not considered to refer to the Great Tribulation period according to the pretribulational perspective, but interpreted to refer to the tribulation Israel would experience approximately 40 years later when Jerusalem and the temple that is referred to in the same context of Matthew 24:1-2 would be destroyed; mimicking God’s judgment against Israel in Ezekiel 5:9 and even in 1 Samuel 4:18-19 when Eli heard the Ark of God was captured by the Philistines. The tribulation Israel had to endure in witnessing the Romans destroy Jerusalem and the temple should not be overlooked in the context of Matthew 24:29-31 when interpreting the phrase, “after the tribulation.” Nor should we be quick to assume that when Jesus says “then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven” that it should be interpreted without a gap of time between the tribulation and His second coming knowing that a day is like a thousand years to the Lord and a thousand years like a day. It is completely plausible that there is a gap of time that needs to be considered between verse 29 and verse 30. It is also important to remember that the context of Matthew 24:29-31 is in reference to the temple and the nation of Israel, not the body of Christ since the church itself would not begin to advance the kingdom of God until the Day of Pentecost, 50 days after the resurrection. Although many on the side of posttribulationalism point to the verse that insinuates the Second Coming of Christ where all the peoples of the earth will see “the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.” It is not uncommon according to Hebrew genre to speak of the present things to come and in the next breath, speak of realities in the distant future. In other words, when it comes to Matthew 24:29 where Jesus says “immediately after the tribulation,” Jesus is pointing to the destruction of the temple, then in the very next verse, Jesus is pointing to His own Second Coming that no one knows the day nor the hour of His return, and then Jesus points his disciples to the lesson of the fig tree in verse 32-34 where Jesus says, “Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened,” speaking of those things the present generation would witness before they died. This back and forth is common in Hebrew narrative and we can find a good example of this in the book of Daniel where he speaks about King Nebuchadnezzar from chapters 1 - 4, then proceeds in chapter 5 to speak about King Belshazzar, Nebuchadnezzar’s successor, then focuses on King Darius who defeated the Babylonian Empire in chapter 6, then switches back to King Belshazzar in chapters 7 -8, and then reverts back to Darius and Cyrus in chapter 9 - 10. Another example can be found in the book of Ezra where he goes back and forth between the various Persian rulers, and this constant back and forth in the text can be a little confusing at times if one does not understand Hebrew genre.

It is so easy for people in the twenty-first century to apply modern day literary standards and interpret Scripture chronologically. The discipline required to apply the hermeneutical principles, especially passages relating to the doctrine of eschatology is absolutely essential. Again, when it comes to interpreting these difficult passages pertaining to the end times, deciphering author’s intent is what makes biblical interpretation very complex for those who are on the outside looking in and almost twenty centuries removed. How they spoke and how they wrote are not the same as we who live in America in the twenty-first century. So, it is incumbent upon the faithful people of God to handle the Word of truth correctly. In other words, certain questions must be asked when it comes to interpreting the passages relating to the end of times and Scripture in general. For instance, What did Jesus really mean to say in the context? What did Paul really mean to say to the church? And what did John’s vision really mean in the book of Revelation? Is there an Old Testament prophecy that can assist in interpreting a particular verse in the New Testament? The task of biblical interpretation is much more intricate than just reading a particular passage in the translated language of English. At face value, one can believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Word of God is clear on the doctrine of the Second Coming of Jesus. One can read the text in English and believe the author intended to mean exactly how it is read, but that’s not always the case.

For those on the side of posttribulationalism, the connection of the first resurrection and the dead in Christ will rise first is a clear point of evidence that cannot be refuted. However, those on the pretribulational side of the equation interpret the first resurrection to occur in phases beginning with Jesus as the First-Fruits of the resurrection along with those who came out of the tombs after the resurrection who went into the holy city and appeared to many people in Matthew 27:51-53. Three other points of disagreement posed by pretribulationists question the point of the rapture of the church after the Great Tribulation. What is the point of rapturing the church after the Great Tribulation just for the church to return immediately with Christ to reign with Him for a thousand years? If the church has to endure the Great Tribulation, after the seven years of God’s great wrath is fulfilled, the church should then remain on the earth to reign with Christ a thousand years. The other point of contention to the posttribulational perspective is the imminency of Christ return. There was a sincere belief throughout church history that Christ could return at any moment, but if posttribulationalism is true, Christ return cannot be imminent for a minimum of seven years because His return cannot occur until after the Great Tribulation. Some attempt to escape this quandary by ascertaining that the world is currently experiencing the Great Tribulation and that Christ return remains imminent. Additionally, at what point will the Restrainer be removed to inaugurate the rise of the antichrist if the church that is led by the power of the Holy Spirit endures the Great Tribulation? Or what about verses such as Romans 8:1, 1 Thessalonians 5:9, & Revelation 3:10 that reassures the church that she will not experience the wrath of God? The Great Tribulation period is supposed to be a great period of God’s wrath practically never seen before, and if the church is not raptured before God’s great demonstration of wrath, what is the ultimate purpose of the church being raptured up for? Can the Holy Spirit be present at the same time of God’s great demonstration of His wrath on the earth? These are all questions that should be considered.

Lastly, the Great Tribulation period is believed by many scholars to be for the nation of Israel not the church, which circles back to the beginning of this episode regarding the seventy-sevens prophecy of Daniel 9. The first sixty-nine sevens or the 483 years of Daniel’s prophecy are all in reference to events surrounding the nation of Israel, not the church. Likewise, it is assumed that the last seven years of Daniel’s prophecy, which refers to the Great Tribulation period is also in relationship to the events that are going to occur in Israel with the third temple that will be put to an end. In Revelation 11:2-4 it says, “they will trample on the holy city (in Israel) for 42 months. And I will appoint my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth. They are the two olive trees and the two lampstands, and they stand before the Lord of the earth.” Notice that the 42 months is symbolic to the “middle of the seven” in Daniel 9:27 where the holy city will be trampled, and the sacrifice and offering will be put to an end in the temple. Furthermore, the two olive trees and the two lampstands is directly tied to the prophecy of Zechariah chapter 4 regarding the events surrounding the nation of Israel. As God called two witnesses, the prophet Haggai and Zechariah to minister to the nation of Israel during the rebuilding of the temple, likewise, God is going to call two witnesses to minister to the nation of Israel as the holy city is being trampled on during the Great Tribulation. The church is ruled out as one of these two witnesses because the two witnesses are going to be two individuals called to minister during the tribulation similar to the prophecy of Zechariah.

Either way, regardless of which side of the equation one might believe in, there are four points that must be weighed to answer the question of this episode, “which one?” First, it’s important to remember that much of John’s vision in the book of Revelation pertaining to the tribulation is grounded in Daniel’s prophecy. Even the prophet Malachi alludes to the judgment of the Second Coming and how it is directed specifically towards the Levites, Jerusalem, and Judah, not the church. In Malachi 3:2 it says, “But who can endure the day of his coming? Who can stand when he appears? For he will be like a refiner’s fire or a launderer’s soap. He will sit as a purifier of silver, he will purify the Levites and refine them like gold and silver. Then the Lord will have men who will bring offerings in righteousness, and the offerings of Judah and Jerusalem will be acceptable to the Lord, as in days gone by, as in the former years.” Remember, Malachi’s ministry is during the Second Temple period when He rebukes the nation of Israel for not honoring their covenantal obligations to the temple, which means that his prophecy is pointing toward a future time after the judgment when they will finally honor their covenant as in the former years. It is always important to remember that one’s interpretation of Scripture such as the verses surrounding the Great Tribulation must be consistent with Old and New Testament passages combined. For example, does your interpretation of the Great Tribulation in the New Testament consistent with passages contained in the Old Testament? If not, one must reconsider their interpretation. Second, it is never recommended to isolate Scripture from its context to validate one’s theological persuasion. Often times, people isolate certain verses of Scripture devoid of its context to affirm their position, which will often lead to a misinterpretation of any given verse of Scripture. Third, understanding genre of Scripture goes a long way in effectively interpreting Scripture. How they wrote, how they spoke is different from how we write and how we speak. It is not uncommon in Hebrew narrative for them to bounce around within one particular context, or to go back and forth chronologically, or for a particular phrase to refer to multiple events. If we truly desire to understand author’s intent, we must take ourselves out of our own shoes and place ourselves in the shoes of the author and ask the question, “what does the author really mean in this passage.” A person must also utilize the six principles of hermeneutics (Scripture interpreting Scripture, Author’s Intent, Context, Original Language, Genre, Early Church History), and ask the Holy Spirit to lead you and guide you into all truth and understanding, which requires much practice! Lastly, our theological understanding must be consistent across the board of all our beliefs. One minute the church cannot preach that Christ return is imminent and in the next breath assert Christ cannot return until certain events have transpired. This is why pretribulationalism remains the most popular interpretation of the Great Tribulation because it is consistent with its message that Christ and the rapture can occur at any time, it is consistent with Daniel’s prophecy, and the church must be ready because the Lord will come like a thief in the night, for no one will know the time nor the hour of His coming!

Stay born-again my friends!  

1). What is the Tribulation? How do we know the Tribulation will last seven years? | GotQuestions.org

2). Hindson, Edward. The Book of Revelation: Unlocking the Future. AMG Publishers, Chattanooga, TN. 2002. 92.

3). What is the first resurrection? What is the second resurrection? | GotQuestions.org

4). Didache. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (translation Charles H. Hoole). (earlychristianwritings.com)

What Creflo Dollar said recently about the practice of tithing according to the customs of the Old Testament and how it does not apply to the “church” is contextually correct for these reasons mentioned below. This is not to say that this episode of Misconceptions Clarified XVI is in agreement with everything Creflo Dollar said, just the part regarding how tithing is not a specific command given to the Gentile church in the New Testament.

1). The command to tithe was given specifically to the nation of Israel through the law of Moses. For those that may be unaware, the Gentile church to whom half of the New Testament is written to is not addressed to the nation of Israel. The church that Jesus Christ built on the rock where the gates of hell shall not prevail where people from every nation, tribe, people, and language will worship Him in Spirit and in truth was established to fulfill God’s desire for all people who have confessed Jesus Christ as their Lord an Savior and who have repented of their sins to be redeemed to eternal life and have a seat at the Great Messianic Banquet at the consummation of all things.

2). The context of Malachi 3:10 is also different than the context of the Early Church. The differences include different empires (Persian vs. Roman), the sacrificial system versus no sacrificial system in place in the church, Malachi 3:11 involved only the Jews versus the Early Church composed of both Jews & Gentiles, and the temple located in Israel was eventually destroyed by the Romans in 70AD versus the church that continued to thrive globally, not just in one nation. The question God posed to Israel in Malachi 3:8, “Will a man rob God?” is in the context of the Second Temple where Israel developed a sense of forgetfulness from the seventy years of not being able to tithe into the storehouse because the temple was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586BC and Israel had to wait until the temple was rebuilt again in 515BC. The prophet Malachi was the messenger God chose during that time to question Israel’s lack of tithing to the storehouse after the temple was rebuilt.

3). To give a tithe according to the Old Testament was to give a literal tenth of your animal/crop sacrifices. No such command to give a tithe as was performed in the Old Testament is found in the New Testament. In Leviticus 27:30-33 its says, “A tithe of everything from the land, whether grain from the soil or fruit from the trees, belongs to the Lord; it is holy to the Lord. Whoever would redeem any of their tithe must add a fifth of the value to it. Every tithe of the herd and flock—every tenth animal that passes under the shepherd’s rod—will be holy to the Lord. No one may pick out the good from the bad or make any substitution. If anyone does make a substitution, both the animal and its substitute become holy and cannot be redeemed.” The tithe of everything the nation of Israel were commanded to give was in relation to the land, to the animals, and to the fruit and vegetation.

4). The command to bring your tithes to the storehouse is not attached to any form of currency in comparison to what is taking place in the church today with the giving of tithes. The temple of Israel possessed a literal storehouse to keep the tithes and a compartment within the storehouse known as the treasury was available to store gold and silver. The first century ekklesia/church had no such buildings to store anything as the early church operated in a non-legal status for the first 300 years. In Acts 4:32, the believers “shared” everything they had, not stored everything they had. The tithe was specifically for the Lord and for the levites, whereas the donations collected in the New Testament were made available to supply the needs to all within the local body of Christ/church, not just one group of people.

5). This command to tithe was not given to the Gentile church as evidenced in the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 when Gentile believers were flocking to the faith by the thousands. The Apostle James, the Lord’s brother said in Acts 15:19, “it is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.” Notice that nothing pertaining to the ceremonial law or the temple law such as tithing was included in these prohibitions outlined in Acts 15. In fact, no command exists in the New Testament that commands the church to tithe or to give an exact percentage. Paul commands the church at Corinth in 2 Corinthians 9:27 that, “Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.”

6). The temple and the church have similarities but also functioned differently; the high priest of the temple in Israel participated in the temporary sacrificial system to atone for sin on the Day of Atonement every year while the church serves and worships the One true messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ who became the ultimate sacrificial lamb on the cross for the sin of the world and became the High Priest in the order of Melchizedek once and for all. The church does not have to supply a tithe or a tenth according to the Old Testament tradition because no animal sacrifices were needed to atone for sin since Jesus fulfilled the sacrificial system with his own sacrifice, no storehouse existed in the early church, and no crops were offered to the church as was performed in the temple to supply the Levitical priesthood with food so they could continue to perform their temple duties, which was why the Lord commanded Israel to offer their tithes. The temple functions performed in the Old Testament strictly belonged to Israel. The church on the other hand composed of both Jew and Gentile believers gathered together in the name of Jesus at a designated location who put their resources together to supply the needs of all within the assembly.

7). Even when Paul addresses the rights of the levitical priests who received their food from the temple and their share of what was offered on the altar under the Old Covenant according to 1 Corinthians 9:13-15, Paul doesn’t command the church to pay a tithe, nor does Paul exercise his right to receive his living from the gospel, but only “that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.” Paul falls short of commanding the church to tithe as was practiced under the law of Moses because the church would adopt a variation of this practice that was similar in nature to tithing that could meet the needs of all the believers in the local body of Christ.

8). Even though the command to tithe a specific amount is nonexistent in the New Testament, the church did participate in offering. They shared everything they had, they sold property and possessions, and they collected money to support the cause of advancing the gospel and to distribute to anyone who had a need. So, even though the command to tithe does not apply contextually to the church, there was an alternate method of giving that the church utilized to expand the growth of the early church according to Acts 2:45, Acts 4:32-35, and 1 Corinthians 16:1-2.

In short, this episode of clarifying the misconception regarding whether or not the practice of tithing applies to the church is not insinuating that believers should refrain from offering from their heart what they feel convicted by the Holy Spirit to give. Instead, it is just simply clarifying that Israel’s practice of tithing contextually does not apply to the Gentile church upon further examination for the reasons stipulated above. To tithe meant to give a tenth of everything in correlation to the land regardless if it was in one’s heart to give. On the other hand, the practice of giving that was adopted in the church is a variation that involves a multitude of things that can be given freely from one’s heart for the sake of advancing the gospel and for providing the needs of all believers in the local assembly to include possessions, the sale of property, money, exercising one’s gift, time, and servitude. Additionally, the practice of offering in light of the New Testament goes beyond what a person gives physically. Paul says in Romans 12:1, “Therefore, I urge you brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God - this is your true and proper worship.” The greatest offering that a person can give to the Lord is not what a person can give physically or monetarily, but how they live and offer their life in obedience to His one and only Son Jesus Christ. A person can be committed to donating a specific amount of money to the church while their hearts are far removed from the Lord. In Isaiah 1:13, the prophet addresses this issue of vain offering when he says, “Stop bringing meaningless offerings!”

Again, offering is so much more than what someone gives physically to the church, but offering in the New Covenant now involves the heart of a person. The poor widow in Mark 12:41-44 and Luke 21:1-4 is a great example of this. While many were offering their money into the temple treasury, the poor widow gave two small copper coins, which Jesus tells his disciples that she put in more than all the others because she gave in faith out of her property, whereas everyone else gave out of their abundance. So, although the practice of tithing as performed under the Old Covenant does not apply contextually to the Gentile church, the principle of giving out of one’s heart to the Lord for all that He is, for all that He has done, and to advance His kingdom on earth as it is in heaven is still very much in effect for the church today.

#MisconceptionsClarified #ContextMatters #HermeneuticsMatters #SoundInterpretationMatters #GodsWordMatters #TheTruthMatters #CircumcisionOfTheHeartMatters #JesusChristMatters

When it comes to the Judaeo-Christian faith, there is so much to be said on the essentialness of being a true disciple of the Lord Jesus Christ, which is why Christian Way Ministries was beyond excited for the opportunity to host its very first Discipleship Conference featuring Professor Dr. Adam McClendon from the great Liberty University. There are no words to describe how fortunate we were to emphasize one of the most fundamental elements of our walk with God, and to have four lessons presented to our church on disciple-making by Dr. McClendon that included:

• The Plan for Disciple Making

• The Process for Disciple Making

• The Point for Disciple Making

• The Product for Disciple Making

• Question & Answer Session

Please click on the following videos below to gleam from these incredible teachings on the importance for disciples of Jesus to prioritize reciprocating the disciple-making process.

Matthew 28:18-20, “Then Jesus came to them and said, ‘All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always to the very end of the age.’”

In an age where people are being led further away from God and His Word, it is imperative for the church and the disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ to understand the magnitude of being intentional with making disciples and exercising the Great Commission; the only true solution to the steadily decreasing statistics to church growth, religious affiliation, and morality in America. This eight week course on Teaching Intentional Discipleship in an Age of Moral Relativism is going to cover a multitude of topics to include:

• The current statistics regarding church growth in America

• Some factors that have contributed to the decline of the church

• Some factors that have contributed to America’s moral decline

• Define Moral Relativism and describe the difference between Absolute vs Relative truth

• Outline some historical formulations that led to America’s Moral relativism

• Defend the premise that discipleship and the Great Commission are the only true remedies

• Unmask the spiritual battle along with Satan’s clever tactics through various movements

• A breakdown of what it means to be a disciple, the commission of the church, the essentials of the Great Commission, and what the Gospel consists of

• Clarify common misconceptions of the Christian faith, especially those pertaining to “optional” discipleship

• Review some barriers that prevent Christians from becoming true followers of the Lord Jesus Christ

These are just a few items to expect throughout this course on Teaching Intentional Discipleship that is contributing to the Thesis Ministry Project for a Doctorate in Ministry by Bishop David Martinez. Below you will find all the sessions completed so far. If you have any questions about this course, please do not hesitate to message us or click on our social media page found all the way at the bottom of our website to gain more information.

Welcome to Misconceptions Clarified Episode XV, “Was Christianity Birthed Out Of The Roman Empire?” 

Now, it’s been quite some time since the last episode was written back on May 17th 2019, but it’s great to be back! The purpose of this Misconception Clarified Series is twofold. First, it provides our ministry an opportunity to discuss the relevant issues surrounding the Christian faith and provide accurate information. And second, it allows us to fulfill the biblical command to always be prepared to give a reason for our hope and to cast down any argument that sets itself up against the knowledge of God according to 1 Peter 3:15 and 2 Corinthians 10:5. Hence, this episode is going to deal with the century-old theory that Christianity was originated and birthed out of the Roman Empire. In an age of social media and mass disinformation available at the touch of a button, there are many criticisms about Christianity, the Bible, and Jesus Christ that constantly appear on your timelines; one of them being, Christianity was a religion formulated by the Roman Empire to control the minds of the people by enslaving them with a bunch of lies in order to keep them subjugated. Although, this theory may sound new to some of your ears, it is nevertheless in the rotation of social media’s never-ending cycle of heresy. To take it a step further, there are many who actually believe that not only was Christianity developed by the Romans, but that the Romans were white people who invented the religion. Seldomly, does our ministry raise issues concerning race since we believe it’s one of many devices the devil employs to divide the people of God, but since this topic happens to incorporate race into the equation, this episode will briefly provide some clarification into this sensitive controversy. 

First, let’s say for instance that Christianity originated by people with a lighter skin complexion…. Would this automatically invalidate the entire Christian Faith? Not necessarily because race doesn’t get to the core of the issue relating to their specific beliefs. In order to falsify a particular religion, worldview, or position, one must examine the principals outlined under that institution, seek if certain claims came to fruition, and measure it with the available historical data. Unless, the religion in view is based off race itself, skin complexion is insufficient to falsify it, especially the teachings of Jesus Christ that contain a wide range of biblical principles. Simply condemning a religion because of the founder’s skin complexion cannot disprove a person's actual teachings. This is absurd! Should a student prior to registering for a course first ask the color of the teacher’s skin in order to determine their intellectual ability? Nonsense! Matter of fact, anyone who attempts to make such an assertion based on skin complexion alone is practically trying to take the escape route from doing any kind of extensive research! Saying that Christianity is a false religion because it was created by white people is just a lazy argument and a lazy excuse to reject the actual tenets of the Christian faith. Many times, critics will often resort to these kind of simplistic ideas because they have nothing else to stand on or to reject, and in order to make their position relevant, they have to attack the greatest threat to their own worldview. If Christianity was so false, why is there such a pressing desire to oppose it? Think about it…. Christianity is still the number one religion persecuted around the globe!! How could such a false religion pose such a monumental threat to the world? Could it be that Christianity is verifiably true that opponents can’t help but to smear the faith with a bunch of nonsensical lies and persecute those who follow Christ to their own death?

Anybody with a little sense of history can easily debunk this argument that Christianity is false due to the founder’s race or skin complexion. Anyone with a little sense of history would know that Jesus was a Jew and all 12 of His original disciples were Jewish who lived in present day Israel, which is a well-known fact across the isle of both believers and skeptics. And anyone with a little sense of history would know that early Christianity was a Jewish reproduction, not a Roman one. Jesus is from the tribe of Judah, born in Bethlehem, raised in Nazareth, and trained under Jewish laws and customs, not the Romans. So, if the founder of Christianity is Jewish and all of his original followers were Jewish, how does that equal Christianity being a white religion, or being birthed out of the Roman Empire? If anything, Christianity is a Jewish religion, not a white religion, not a black religion, not a purple religion, nor any other color from the crayon box. Christianity is a following of the one man Jesus Christ, a Jew, not a white man, and centered on a reverent relationship with Him according to the Scriptures! In Christ, “there is neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female, slave nor free, for all are one in Him” (Galatians 3:28 & Colossians 3:11). Science also asserts that all of humanity are shades of the one color, brown.

Now, if the argument is to say that Christianity was birthed out of the Roman Empire since it was the Romans who were in control of the land during the first century, then some credence can be granted towards that position. However, just because Christianity emerged during the reign of the Romans over the nation of Israel doesn’t mean they were responsible for its development, especially when considering the fact that the Romans were the ones who did not tolerate Christianity for almost three hundred years, who persecuted anyone who called themselves Christians, and who crucified its chief founder on the cross. Yet, the misconception resurfacing on your social media timelines does not pertain to Christianity being birthed while the Romans were in power over Israel during the first century. No! The proposition is that Christianity was created by Emperor Constantine in 325 AD at the first council of Nicaea approximately three hundred years after the time of Christ. Unless, Jesus who is the cornerstone of the Christian faith was somehow Roman by ethnicity (which no credible historian ascertained), then anyone with a little sense of historical understanding would know Christianity was not birthed out of the Roman Empire. Little do people know that nations do not begin with an ideology or a concept, they begin with an individual person who brings forth a certain perspective or rule. In this case, the Christian movement did not begin with the Romans or their ideology, but it began with the messianic prophesies inspired by God himself through the Old Testament prophets and fulfilled by Jesus Christ himself. Additionally, it is important to note that Christianity is not its own religion, but an offshoot of Judaism with Christ as the ultimate fulfillment, not the fulfillment of Roman mythology. Everything about early Christianity in the first couple of centuries post-Christ is all Jewish in nature and corroborated by external hostile non-biblical accounts to include Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, Thallus, Mara Bar-Serapion, Phelgon, Seutonius, Lucian of Samosata, and Celsus, which are all written before the time of Constantine. This idea that the Roman Empire is progenitors of the Christian faith is contrary to all of the actual historical evidence.

Furthermore, how could the Roman Empire be accountable for the origins of a belief system they intentionally persecuted and outlawed? The objective of the Roman Empire was to exert and demonstrate their force by stomping out any possible uprising, and being that early Christianity posed a significant threat to the empire due to its teaching of Jesus being the King of kings instead of the emperor, not only did they crucify Him, but they also murdered, humiliated, and imprisoned any of His followers. History proves that all but one of the original disciples were martyred for their faith. So, this idea that Christianity, a branch of the old Hebraic religion was created by the Roman Empire is nothing short of a misconception and a conspiracy theory. Just because Constantine issued the Edict of Milan to cease Christian persecution, just because Constantine made Christianity the empire’s state religion, and just because Constantine allegedly ordered the publication of fifty Bible’s does not mean Christianity began with the Roman Empire or make Constantine the original publisher of Scripture.

Essentially, all Constantine did was make a few declarations as the emperor to make peace and to organize what was already preexisting. By the time Constantine became the emperor, there was already a list of New Testament letters circulating the early church with the Gospels and the Pauline epistles themselves, Justin Martyr’s memoirs of the apostles, the Tetramorph asserted by Irenaeus, the Muratorian fragment, and Origen’s list of New Testament writings confirmed by Eusebius, all of which debunk the misconception that the Bible was also a Roman invention. Moreover, the Council of Nicaea had nothing to do with the formulation of the canon of Scripture, but it had everything to do with the Arian controversy. This notion that the Roman Empire concocted a hidden strategy to deceive billions of people into believing a false religion is found nowhere in early history. It is nothing short of a modern conspiracy theory, not even an ancient one! Interestingly, many of the criticisms made against the Christian faith weren’t made by the ancients, but are relatively recent advancements. Critics two thousand years removed from the historical scene of Christ are quick to speculate the original intent of the ancients who not once claimed plagiarism. Go figure!

Yet, in light of all the historical evidence supporting the origins of Christianity, it is no wonder why opponents choose to circumvent the evidence and make baseless claims against Christianity’s authenticity by suggesting that it is a white religion invented by the Romans in order to espouse their audience. Unfortunately, gullibility on behalf of those who accept this misconception minus any solid examination into the historical evidence is responsible for the resurrection of this delusion. This is the primary reason why Misconceptions Clarified exists here at Christian Way Ministries, to defend with gentleness and respect any pretension that seeks to deceive God’s people. So, please be careful where you obtain your information. Remember, that the eye is the lamp to the body according to Matthew 6:22, and feeding your mind with the lies of Satan is only going to instill doubt into your spirit. And lastly, when it comes to performing objective research, if the article or youtube video or book does not reference where they received their information from, that’s a red flag and a sign that you should proceed with caution.  

#Blessings
#MisconceptionsClarified
#EpisodeXV
#TruthOverLies
#JesusTheReigningKing

https://coldcasechristianity.com/writings/is-there-any-evidence-for-jesus-outside-the-bible/

http://cdn.bakerpublishinggroup.com/processed/esource-assets/files/678/original/hyperlink-02-01.pdf?1417317937

http://www.ntcanon.org/Origen.shtml

https://www.britannica.com/event/First-Council-of-Nicaea-325

Welcome to Misconceptions Clarified XIV where this episode will focus its attention on the highly sensitive subject of abortion. Now, before this article delves into the thick of the conversation, it is absolutely essential that whoever reads this understands the intention of this particular episode. It is by no means attempting to condemn anyone who has had to make the difficult decision to have an abortion or to tear anyone down. If you are reading this and had to make such a decision or you know somebody personally who has gone through the procedure, please know that the God of the Bible is a merciful and forgiving God. Exodus 34:6 says, “The Lord, the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness, maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion, and sin.” Paul also said in Romans 5:8 that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for the ungodly. Make no mistake about it, God loves you very much and He demonstrated his love for you by sending his one and only Son to this world to die for you. So, if you’re struggling with this particular area, God is inviting you to meet Him at the cross of Christ to receive the healing you are searching for, which only He can provide. Please know that there is no sin (except for blasphemy against the Holy Spirit) that is too big for our God to forgive.

Additionally, this episode on abortion is not geared towards the one percent; those who had to have an abortion because of rape, incest, abuse, or for medical reasons where the mother’s life was in jeopardy. Only the Lord knows the amount of suffering and trauma they had to endure. Please know that we at Christian Way Ministries are praying for you as a church, and are here to provide counseling if needed free of charge. It is also important this article clarify that abortion is not solely a woman’s issue, even though she has the ultimate decision to make. Abortion is a humanity issue! Abortion is the number one epidemic against humanity, and there are a magnitude of variables that has contributed to the overall number of abortions, in which this article cannot cover them all. However,  believe it or not, men (not all men) who are supposed to be the head of their own households play a significant role for why 50 million plus abortions have been performed since the landmark decision of Wade Vs. Roe in 1973. Now, before the men start screaming, “it’s the woman’s decision,” know that if men (not all men are guilty of this) stop treating women as sexual objects and start being the leaders God has called them to be, by reminding our women that they are precious in the sight of God, maybe we are not having this conversation. If men would encourage marriage first before sex, and form their families the way God has designed it to be, maybe abortion wouldn’t be as prevalent as it is today. So, when it comes to a woman having to make the ultimate decision on whether or not to keep their baby, if the man would step up as the leader and take responsibility to reassure the woman that he is going to provide and make the necessary commitments to her and the baby, maybe the woman wouldn’t have to face the pressures of having an abortion. Just maybe….

The same argument that can be used against the man for not stepping up to the plate of responsibility regarding his commitment to the family dynamic, can obviously be used against the woman as well, which is why abortion is an issue of humanity. If women would start setting their standards a little higher and start saving themselves for marriage with the right man, again, this could be a different conversation. Nevertheless, there is one thing that is for certain.., the people of God need to stop using sex as a means to try out their potential partner! Sex should not be practiced as a sport, sex should not be practiced whenever one has a sexual urge, and sex should not be practiced to see if you’re dating the right person. The people of God need to learn how to control their own sexual urges and desires. 1 Thessalonians 4:3 makes clear, “It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control your own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the pagans who don’t know God.” According to the Scriptures, sex is strictly reserved for marriage. The whole reason why this conversation on abortion exists today is because humanity has moved away from God and his intended purpose for sex within the confines of a marriage between a husband and a wife.

Unfortunately, the reality of abortion is still at 50 million and counting, and we need to seriously contemplate how humanity can curve the numbers? Maybe, if the laws allowing for abortion weren’t so lenient, the statistics wouldn’t be so high. Only time will tell the direction America will travel with all the new laws being passed at the state level. Yet, the purpose of this particular episode is to bring awareness to the reality of the current epidemic of abortion, and to answer the question, “Does God Condone Abortion” according to the Scriptures? Now, there are a variety of reasons why people believe it is a woman’s right to have an abortion, but one of the main factors that contributes to the idea that abortion is ok comes from the notion that your body belongs to you. “My body, my right!” However, there are a couple of objections this episode believes you should consider concerning this notion. First, what does God have to say about your body, and how should you treat your body according to the Scriptures. In today’s society, it is easy to get caught in the weeds of worldly deception, and many times the people of God set themselves on the throne of God, and become the final authority over their own life and how they treat their own bodies. Be careful! It is important to remember, especially for those who believe in God and who try to live by his Word what the Bible says in Ephesians 6:12; “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world, and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.” 1 John 5:19 also affirms that the whole world lies under the influence of the evil one. Meaning, the battle of humanity is against Satan himself, and one of the ways Satan wages war against God and his people is by influencing them to do the things that stand in direct opposition to God’s Word. For example, if God told Adam and Eve in the beginning not to eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, Satan’s main objective is to get them to eat the fruit. Likewise, if the Bible says in 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 that your bodies are not your own, but that you were bought with a price, Satan is on the attack to deceive the people of God into thinking that their bodies belong to them. If Satan can convince you that your body belongs to you, then this is how Satan can influence the people of God to do things with their bodies that stand contrary to the Word of God. This lie that Satan uses to deceive God’s people into thinking that their bodies belong to them is the small fire that sets the whole forest of your body ablaze.

Therefore, this episode wants to clarify this misconception that your body belongs to you! God bought you with the blood of his own Son Jesus Christ, and with that price tag come instructions on how you should live your life. Jesus said in Matthew 16:24-25, “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it.” In other words, once you become a follower of the Lord Jesus Christ, you no longer belong to yourself, you belong to God and must live by his Word. Which means, you can’t do whatever you please with your own body. Now, if you are reading this and do not believe in Christ, it will be difficult for you to make the argument from a naturalistic perspective that you own your own body when you did not create yourself. So, if you didn’t make yourself, how can you really justify rationally or philosophically that you own yourself? Who signed over the deed to your own life? Furthermore, the fact that you can’t number how long you will live, or prevent your body from succumbing to the reality of death is further proof that you really don’t own your life. Only God can set the parameters for life, which He did when He said in Genesis 6:3, “their days will be a hundred and twenty years.” On the other hand, what God did give humanity is the choice to do right or wrong with what God has given us, and the question that remains to be answered pertains to whether humanity is making the right choices with their bodies, with how they think about sex, and with how they are living their life? Are the people of God making the right choices surrounding the epidemic of abortion, and how we are to move forward as a human race? Is taking the life away from a baby really the right decision according to God’s Word? Again, this episode is not trying to point fingers at anyone or condemn anyone who had to make the difficult decision to abort, or to neglect the one percent mentioned earlier. The main objective of this episode is to point out the lies of Satan, to hold humanity accountable as a whole regarding the epidemic of abortion, and to clarify the misconception that our body and our life belong to us when they don’t.

It is clear from the scriptures that humanity is not the author of life, and thus does not have the authority to take life. The Bible says in Jeremiah 1:5, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you.” According to this particular verse, life begins before the moment of conception with the very knowledge of God. Of course, there are two sides of the debate regarding when the life of a baby actually begins in the womb, i.e., at the moment conception, when the baby has a heart beat, or when the baby is born. This episode does not have the room to tackle all of the complexities and dynamics involved with this conversation. However, it does make sense, and there are scientific arguments available to support this position that once a male sperm and a female egg come together, life begins. Once life begins, the question that we have to answer is, does humanity have the right to take life away? Does the woman have the authority by God to end the life of a baby in her womb? If the people of God could just remove their emotions out of the equation for one second and attempt to objectively answer the question, “does God condone abortion according to Scriptures,” the answer would be no. Again, can God forgive anyone who made the decision to abort their baby for whatever reason? Absolutely! But if humanity is going to make any lead way in curving the epidemic of abortion, it is important to know what God says in His Word about the issue.

Hence, if the answer is no that God does not condone abortion and if the answer is no to the question, do we own our own bodies, then what can humanity do to help curve abortion. The answer is to turn back to God and his Word! The answer is to practice abstinence and save yourself until you find the right person, which goes for both the man and the woman. The answer is to be aware of the mystery of lawlessness that is already at work in our society that is trying to influence you with the lies of Satan. The answer is to know that you cannot do whatever you want with your own body, that abortion is not condoned by God, and that it is not ok to have sex before marriage. The answer is for the people of God who know the Word, and for the church to become more engaged in this conversation and to become a voice in the wilderness on abortion and other prevalent issues instead of being idle. Silence is another contributing factor to why abortion reached the level that it did. The only way to scale back the atrocities that are occurring in our day and age is to return back to the living Word of God that instructs his people how they should live their life and what they are to do with their own bodies. That’s the answer that will afford our society the opportunity to overcome the tragedy of abortion. James 5:19-20 says, “My brothers and sisters, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring that person back, remember this: whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins.” Humanity as a whole needs to turn back to God, follow Jesus, obey the Word, and preach the truth out of love. If every person took on that responsibility, none of the epidemics humanity experiences today would exist.

Lastly, for those who have had to suffer the trauma and emotions of having an abortion, remember God is a merciful and graceful God, who forgives us of our sins if we confess them to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. God can work all things together for the good of those who love him, including our sin and the past decisions we made. We all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. But, once we come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ and his Word, it is important for us to turn away from our sins and become an advocate for righteousness. Once you know the truth that set you free, it’s imperative to share that truth so others don’t fall for the lies of the devil. And for those contemplating abortion, it is critical that you understand there are other options and resources available to you that you can take advantage of.

Please click on this website for further information on five alternatives to abortion: https://www.americanadoptions.com/pregnant/alternatives-to-abortion

Please remember that statistics show women will experience emotional distress following an abortion, and here go two more websites you can review to understand the emotional toll of having an abortion: https://americanpregnancy.org/unplanned-pregnancy/abortion-emotional-effects/

https://adviceandaid.com/the-very-real-effects-of-abortion-emotional-facts-you-need-part-2/

Also, know that there are a plethora of resources and assistance available in your particular state to single mothers, and to families who are struggling financially to provide for their children. For those living in the state of Virginia, here go a link to those resources:

http://www.singlemom.com/virginia-assistance/

Our church is not here to tear anyone down, but to build them up, to encourage them, to preach the truth in love, to bring awareness to contemporary issues, and to find solutions to those issues. Please know that if there is anything we can do for you as a church, please scroll down to the bottom of this page and you can email us, connect with us on Social Media, you can message us directly, you can visit us physically on Wednesday evening at 7:00 PM or on Sunday mornings at 10:00 AM, or you can call us at (757) 278-6460. It is our prayer that no matter how difficult the decision may be for you to keep your own baby, (even in the extreme case for rape) that you will know there are people who can help you, there are resources available to you, and that you will always choose life for your baby if possible and trust God. Deuteronomy 30:19-20 says, “Now choose life, so that you and your children may live and that you may love the Lord your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him. For the Lord is your life.”

May the Lord be with all of God’s people and may they always strive to do what is right!

In light of the nine-year-old boy, Jamel Myles who recently committed suicide after confessing to his mother that he was gay, the question that parents need to ask themselves is: “When is it appropriate to have a conversation about suicide, about your child’s sexuality, about their gender identity, and about marriage according to the Bible?” Too often many parents take for granted that their child will automatically make the right decision about these particular issues without explaining it to them, and when they go the opposite direction, they are left scratching their head for answers. In an era where homosexuality, transgenderism, and gender fluidity are being pushed down the throat of American society like never seen before in history, it’s no wonder why kids Jamel’s age are committing suicide! They are confused about who they are, they are confused about what they are, they are confused on what to believe, and there is a major lack of biblical training in the home that’s causing the confusion.

With the LGBT agenda forcing its way on TV, forcing its way in the public schools, and even forcing its way on cartoons, it’s definitely time to re-evaluate when to have this kind of conversation with your own children. Why? Because if the parents don’t initiate this conversation, Satan and the world would be honored to fill in the gap. 1 Peter 5:8 says, "The enemy prowls around like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour," and just like Satan devoured Jamel, believe it or not, he's after your child, along with all those who are weak-minded and limping in their faith. "The thief comes only but to seek, kill, and destroy," and the sooner people realize how real Satan is, the sooner people will prepare themselves and their children for spiritual warfare! What happened to Jamel Myles is not only tragic, but his suicide should cause grave concern to all parents. His death is the reason why it's imperative to train your children up in the ways of the Lord because if not, your child will become vulnerable and susceptible to the attacks of the devil. Teaching your children the ways of the Lord gives them a solid foundation to stand on whenever they confront the influences of the world. However, when the Bible says in Proverbs 22:6, "to train a child up in the way he should go," it’s important to know exactly what that means. Does training a child up include teaching them about the sin of suicide, their sexuality, their God-given biology, and biblical marriage? You better believe it! If the Bible speaks about it, you should teach your child about it! Moses said in Deuteronomy 6:6-9, “These words I am commanding you today must be kept in your mind, and you must teach them to your children and speak of them as you sit in your house, as you walk along the road, as you lie down, and as you get up. You should tie them as a reminder on your forearm and fasten them as symbols on your forehead. Inscribe them on the doorframes of your houses and gates."

There needs to be a major emphasis on the Word of God taught in the home in order for your children to be able to distinguish what’s right and what’s wrong whenever they encounter certain situations and whenever they come across certain teachings. According to Jason DeRouchie at desiringgod.org, "the overall context of Proverbs suggests the act of dedicating in Proverbs 22:6 is focused more on an intentional, sustained, God-dependent shepherding of our children’s hearts as they grow into adulthood — one in which the children themselves are aware of the parents’ trajectory-setting intentions. This is not a passive calling for dads and moms." In other words, training your child up in the ways of the Lord is not supposed to be some passive, unintentional, complacent, or cliche kind of upbringing. NO! Training your child up in the ways of the Lord has to be imperative, intentional, direct, and assertive! It needs to incorporate a teaching on the whole Word of God! Jesus said in John 17:17, "sanctify them with the truth, for your Word is truth." 

When it comes to teaching your children the ways of the Lord, this must include a multitude of teachings outlined in the Bible that should be taught to them throughout their entire childhood, which should be done out of love and out of awareness to the trends of contemporary society. This should include the moral law of God such as the Ten Commandments. It should include the greatest two commandments given by Jesus himself in Matthew 22; "to love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind, and to love your neighbor as yourself." It should include the Biblical definition of marriage given at the beginning of Genesis 1:27, and repeated by Jesus in Matthew 19:5. It should include the fact that God created them male and female, not what the world is teaching today that a child has the option to choose their own gender. It should include that every person was made in the image of God and knitted in their mother’s womb. It should include that life begins at the moment of conception when the Lord said in Jeremiah 1:5, “Before I formed you in your mother’s womb I chose you. Before you were born I set you apart.” Lastly, it's imperative for parents to teach their children that their bodies is not only a gift from God, but the body is also the temple of the Holy Spirit, and “whoever destroys the temple, God will destroy," according to 1 Corinthians 3:17.  These are just some of the teachings that need to be addressed in the household when it comes to suicide, sexuality, and marriage at an age-appropriate level. 

As for me and my household, the best way to train a child up in the ways of the Lord is to model the Christian lifestyle in the presence of your children. In other words, parents need to be intentional in demonstrating a life of holiness and biblical righteousness so that your children can know and understand what it means to live a Godly and righteous life; especially in an age where the world has an overwhelming influence on your child. If there has ever been a time to be intentional with your child, the time is most certainly now! When it comes to teaching your child about suicide, sexuality, and biblical marriage, first, your child has to understand that God’s Word is the foundation and final authority on morality and all truth! Psalm 19:7-11 says, “The law of the Lord is perfect, refreshing the soul. The statutes of the Lord are trustworthy, making wise the simple. The precepts of the Lord are right, giving joy to the heart. The commands of the Lord are radiant, giving light to the eyes. The fear of the Lord is pure, enduring forever. The decrees of the Lord are firm, and all of them are righteous. They are more precious than gold, than much pure gold; they are sweeter than honey, than honey from the honeycomb. By them your servant is warned; in keeping them there is great reward."

Once a child understands that God’s Word is the final authority, then you can begin to underline certain teachings in the Bible such as suicide, sexuality, gender identity, marriage, etc. Moreover, when your child witnesses something immoral on TV, on the internet, on a video game, or something their friends did, then you as the parent can point back to the Word of God and ask them, “What does the Bible say about this matter?” Training your children up in the ways of the Lord at an early age allows your children to always go back to the foundational truth of God’s Word whenever they witness something in the world or desire something that's contrary to what the Bible teaches. For instance, if your child witnesses two boys or two girls kissing each other on the lips, or hears another kid wanting to kill themselves they can automatically spot unrighteousness when they see it. Then parents can ask their children, what does God have to say about this in his Word? If the Bible is being taught appropriately and effectively in the home, then they should be able to answer the question biblically without hesitation, and if they can't, what a wonderful opportunity to present the truth of God's Word to them. 

Furthermore, it’s also important to make known to your children that when they see something they know is wrong, to not treat that child as an outcast or bully them, but to demonstrate the love of Christ to them despite their wrongdoing. The Golden Rule is always binding no matter the human encounter; "to treat others as you want to be treated." Children are not to criticize other children or talk down to them, but to demonstrate God’s love to them even when they are in the wrong. Doing this may provide an opportunity to lead them on the narrow road that leads to righteousness and to save them from whatever they are doing wrong. It's imperative to teach your children the ways of the Lord because if you don't, Satan will be thrilled to take your spot! Please keep the family of Jamel in your prayers, along with all the other children who are being led astray, and please provide a greater emphasis and teaching on the Word of God in your homes for the sake of your own children.

Below is an article that gives some tips on how to approach sexuality with your own kids.

https://www.christianitytoday.com/women/2015/september/how-to-teach-your-kids-about-homosexuality.html

Welcome to Misconceptions Clarified XIII, "Does The Bible Approve Same-Sex Marriage?" 

Since the Obergefell vs Hodges decision in 2015, the LGBT agenda has obviously grown tremendously in speech and practice to the extent that anyone who disagrees with their lifestyle has been labeled all sorts of derogatory names. The outcry for acceptance has been so loud that it has penetrated the mainstream church and caused several of them to split on this controversial issue, and unfortunately, it won’t be too long when the churches who advocate for traditional marriage will be in the minority. Just look at the Revoice Conference held at Memorial Presbyterian Church in St. Louis on July 26th-28th, a prominently conservative denomination of Christianity who are now opening their doors of accommodation to the LGBT agenda. The mission of the Revoice Conference “is to engage in "supporting, encouraging, and empowering gay, lesbian, same-sex-attracted, and other LGBT Christians so they can flourish while observing the historic, Christian doctrine of marriage and sexuality." Their whole intent is to essentially mix two brands of doctrine together as one. That’s how intentional and effective the voice of the LGBT community has become. 

Yet, the question that remains to be answered is... “Does the Bible approve of same-sex marriage?” Does the Word of God need to conform to the societal changes of the 21st century and be reinterpreted to accommodate the world? What about those who believe the Bible to be authoritative for traditional marriage? Do they now need to reopen their minds to same-sex marriage and just accept their interpretation of the scriptures? Or, what about the argument that the Bible doesn't actually mean what it says when it comes to homosexuality? Were the scholars who had a role in the English translation of the scriptures throughout the past five centuries in error? Moreover, did the writers of the Bible who spoke against same-sex relations and claimed inspiration by God misspoke? What about the Jewish culture where the scriptures actually derive from, did they have it wrong all these years that homosexuality was immoral? These are some of the questions that comes to mind whenever this controversial subject arises, which this article will briefly explore. 

Take for instance, Leviticus 18:22 which says, “Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, that is detestable.” Now, is this verse suppose to mean something different from what it says? When Moses was outlining what was sexually forbidden in Leviticus 18, he gave very specific examples such as sex with a relative, sex with your mother, sex with your sister, sex with your daughter, sex with your in-laws, sex with your father’s sister, sex with your brother’s wife, sex with a woman on her menstrual cycle, or sex with an animal were all specifically forbidden. In Leviticus 18, Moses is very detailed in this entire account, and if scripture means something different than what it says, does that mean that scripture is not plain when it says that “you should not have sexual intercourse with your mother?” Of course not! So, how is it different all of a sudden when Moses said, “Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman.” How is it different when Moses specifically said in Leviticus 20:13, “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own head.” If this clear command in scripture doesn’t mean what it says, then the command to not have sexual intercourse with your mother also doesn’t mean what it says, which opens Pandora’s Box of permissibility of everything sexually forbidden in Leviticus 18! 

You see, this is where a lack of knowledge is truly destroying the people of God! When it comes to the interpretation of the ancient scriptures, people interpret scripture with a 21st century lens by saying that it wasn't specific enough or it doesn't say verbatim this or verbatim that (even though the scripture above is obviously plain). Anyone who does any kind of cultural study on Judaism or an exegesis of the original languages understands that when the Bible speaks of “sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman,” or “sexual immorality” or that “men committed shameful acts with other men,” the audience of that era understood exactly what that meant. They spoke in terms their audience could identify with and understand, not with our 21st century standards of "form criticism," a methodology developed in the 19th century to examine scripture.

Moreover, when it comes to the forbidden sexual relations outlined in scripture, did God intend his word to be subjective to however his people want to interpret it? No!! God is not a man that he should lie nor the son of man that he should change his mind. Jesus is the same yesterday, the same today, and the same forevermore! The natural design of procreation is between a male and a female, no Bible is needed for that, and Paul says in Romans 1:20, "For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” 

In other words, God made it plain to humanity through his Word and through the "natural" order of creation of what's natural and what’s unnatural. In order to charge a cell phone the natural way, it needs a plug and a socket to get juice. Likewise, God designed his creation a natural way for them to be fruitful and multiple, and any other way outside this design would be deemed unnatural. Furthermore, God took it one step further by preserving his word that clearly says in Genesis 1:27 that He created them male and female to become one flesh. And then Jesus came into the picture and confirmed that Word that was in the beginning of Genesis when he said in Matthew 19:4-6, "Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” 

Even Paul was incredibly specific regarding what was included under the umbrella of sexual immorality when he said in 1 Corinthians 6:9, “do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men.” If this is not specific enough, the newer English translations are even more specific than ever before. For instance the NET Bible, a very recent translation says,  “Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God.” Notice the Greek word "arsenokoites" is translated as “practicing homosexual,” which means, “one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual.” So, this idea that the Bible isn’t specific enough is thrown right out the window with the newer English translations that’s steadily trying to keep up with the ever-evolving English language while getting rid of archaic terminology. Even during the days of the KJV in the 17th and 18th century, terms such as fornicators, effeminate, and abusers of themselves was very specific during that era. There was no ambiguity regarding what Leviticus 18:22, 20:13, Romans 1:27, 1 Corinthians 6:9, and 1 Timothy 1:10 meant. It was only at the turn of the 21st century where the LGBT community inserted the ambiguity, questioned the authority of scripture, and became law by the United States government in 2015. And while advocates of the LGBT agenda dispute the above verses, there is not one verse in all of scripture that God approves of same-sex anything. There is not one single instance in all of scripture that God said He created them male and male or female and female to become one flesh! The same argument of specificity used by the LGBT community against traditional marriage backfires on their own doctrine of homosexuality because there is no specific terminology or examples that someone can point to approving of any act of homosexuality. Not one!!! 

Unfortunately, the underlying problem that our church has continued to explore and make awareness of, is Satan’s influence in the world and how he’s constantly prowling around like a roaring lion seeking whom he can get to question the authority of scripture, just like he did in the beginning with Adam and Eve when he said, "Did God really say you must not eat from any tree in the garden?” The devil has been a liar since the beginning of creation and he's been questioning the Word of God on this particular topic by saying, "Did God really say that marriage is just between a male and a female?" Therefore, when it comes to the question, “Does the Bible approve same-sex marriage,” the answer is an astounding NO according to the scriptures. As mentioned previously, there’s nowhere in scripture that affirms same-sex relations or same-sex marriage. Matter of fact, every single English Translation (except the Queen James Bible that is obviously biased), all contain a consistent variation of interpretation that same-sex relations is a sin in need of repentance. The sin of homosexuality along with every other sin is exactly why Jesus stepped off his throne in heaven, became flesh, dwelt among men, was crucified, and rose from the dead to destroy the work of the devil, and to wash whoever accepts Him as Lord and Savior, and repents from their sin. In the same passage in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 Paul says at the end, “Some of you once lived this way (referring to those caught up in the sin of homosexuality and the other sins outlined in the passage), but you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.” 

"Is Jesus God?"

Welcome to Misconceptions Clarified XII; "Is Jesus God?"

It's difficult to believe that Christian Way Ministries is already on its twelfth episode of Misconceptions Clarified which started a year ago on July 12th, 2016 when we introduced our very first article; "Is Christianity a Myth?" Who would have ever thought (besides God alone) that Christianity would have to defend against so many criticisms throughout the centuries... It's disconcerting to read the bulk amount of misconceptions that clouds the water of Christianity like never seen before in the 21st century. This can be largely attributed to Satan, to the internet, and to the media-nites as Amir Tsarfati puts it. Reluctantly, the more the devil tries to seek, kill, and destroy God's people with his lies, the greater the opportunity for the body of Christ to stand firm on the faith and cast down every argument that sets itself up against the knowledge of God.

So, next up on our list of misconceptions to clarify is considered one of the most controversial questions there is to ask regarding the nature of Christ; "Is Jesus God?" Matter of fact, this question is so controversial that the answer to it has literally caused some kind of division in every single religion around the world today, which makes perfect sense why the answer to the question regarding the deity of Christ has caused so much schism. In John 14:6 Jesus made the greatest exclusive claim there is to make by any man; "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." Just this statement alone will either make a person rejoice in the Lord or retract a person all together from the faith. Additionally, the answer to who Jesus is has also caused many headaches within the church itself. The controversies such as Gnosticism, Arianism, and Docetism are just a few heresies the church had to contend with. The reality of the situation is that since the time of Christ, people have been debating the nature of Christ with questions such as... Is Jesus God? Is Jesus just a prophet? Is Jesus the messiah prophesied in the scriptures? Is Jesus just a religious fantasy? Or is Jesus truly the Son of God? 

There are so many questions, doubts, and answers to this very important question ("Is Jesus God") that it has become an arduous task to distinguish between the lies from the truth in this age of information we are engulfed in. The unfortunate part about it is that this article believe it or not is just another one in an Olympic-sized pool of swimmers trying to butter-fly stroke their way to the answer of infinite proportion. Even Jesus knew how controversial this question would be when He asked his disciples in Matthew 16:13, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?" And, they responded with not one, not two, not three, not four, but five different answers of some of the rumors that were circulating during that time. "Some say John the Baptist, some say Elijah, some say Jeremiah, some say one of the prophets," and Simon says, "you are the Son of the living God."  Furthermore, what's fascinating about their response is how the disciples caught wind of those various rumors before the days of the internet. On the other hand, if a person Googles the question "Is Jesus God?" on the internet it will populate approximately 141,000,000 results. Therefore, even though this article will probably not offer anything new that hasn't been thought of already, it is our prayer that the Holy Spirit will convict and lend some added substance to this question. 

Now, one of the more common criticisms that arises in this debate, especially in non-trinitarian and atheistic circles pertains to what Jesus said and what Jesus didn't say in the scriptures. For instance, the fact that Jesus didn't say word for word, "I am God" is one of the major points used to discredit the deity of Christ. However, this "exact-words" argument is insufficient by itself to discount the nature of Jesus because in order to prove a claim of deity, Jesus would have to prove beyond words that he was God. Hence, one can postulate that Jesus was well aware of this and tactically avoided making certain claims about himself until the time was right. For instance, an undercover law enforcement agent in a foreign context isn't going to reveal certain claims about himself that's going to compromise his mission, right? Well, likewise, Jesus didn't compromise his overall mission by revealing certain claims about himself before the time was right. As a matter of fact, there are several instances throughout the New Testament after Jesus performs a miracle where he tells them, "See that you don't tell anyone." Jesus commands them not to say anything because he was focused on the "greater" mission of salvation, not on making boisterous claims about himself that could have possibly compromised his overall objective beforehand. This is particularly important especially when he ultimately knew that his actions would speak for themselves. Besides, how likely were the people going to believe that Jesus was God if he went around protesting in Jerusalem with a sign that read, "I AM GOD" in big capital red letters... Not very likely! Instead, Jesus allowed the disciples to make up their own minds based off his own actions and teachings. To add some perspective to this, a mother can broadcast on a local news channel all day long that she is a parent to her child, but we all know that it's going to take more than words to prove that she is one, right? It's going to take action to fulfill the duties of a parent, and likewise it's going to take action to fulfill the claim of deity. As the old saying goes, "actions speak louder than words!" 

One last point that needs to be addressed regarding this "exact-words" claim pertains to those who actually made certain claims of deity throughout history. After doing some research, come to find out, the list of pseudo-messiahs who made verbal claims of being the messiah or the second coming of Christ was longer than anybody would have imagined. The claims of messiahship is actually humorous considering how their actions fell a thousand football fields short of their words. Not with Jesus though! The miracles Jesus performed throughout his ministry confirmed everything he spoke, which is a big difference! The resurrection of Jesus alone which is documented by several internal and externals sources overshadows every claim made by these pseudo-messiahs combined. Therefore, even though Jesus avoided the "exact-words" claim "I am God" during his ministry, his teachings along with his deeds in the scriptures paint a perfect picture of the "Real Jesus!"

Additionally, before this article goes any further, there is one more thing Jesus said that critics use in conjunction with the "exact-words" argument to diminish his deity. In John 14:28 when Jesus told his disciples in the context that they should be glad that he was going back to the Father, he told them that the Father is greater than he is. Now for many, this is solid proof that Jesus is not God. Why? Because Jesus clearly states that the Father is greater than him, and if the Father is greater than Jesus, then how can Jesus be equal to God? Well, this logic makes sense whenever we think of "greater" in terms of being better at something than another person. However, this is not what Jesus was essentially saying even though it appears like it. Sometimes, the English translation of the ancient scriptures doesn't capture the overall meaning of certain words. Anytime the Word of God is examined it's always important to research certain words in its original language. For instance, the Greek word for "greater" (meizon) can also mean greater in position. So, when Jesus says that the Father is greater than he is, Jesus wasn't saying that the Father was better than him. No! The "incarnate" Jesus (also known as "God in the flesh") was in a lower position in the flesh than the Father who is in heaven. In other words, Jesus stepped off his throne in heaven, took on flesh, took on a lower role, and took on a lower "earthly" position in order to reconcile humanity back to himself. Which means, that while Jesus was here on earth, the Father in heaven became greater than Jesus in position, not greater than him in nature. When a member in the military gets promoted to a higher rank above his peers, that member doesn't become some "super" human by nature over their peers (although some do feel that way). No! All it means is that one becomes greater in rank and in position, that's it! And likewise, this is exactly the scenario we find in the context of John's gospel.

Unfortunately, the problem many people have when discussing this particular topic pertains to the true nature of Christ. For some, Jesus is just some created being that did a lot of good works and taught a lot of good things. However, the scriptures paint a completely different story regarding the true nature of Jesus when they are examined with an aerial point of view. Meaning, when the whole Bible is taken into consideration. For instance, in John 1:1-3 it says that "In the beginning (key word beginning) was the Word (Logos/Jesus), and the Word was with God, and the Word was GOD." Then in verse 2 it says that "He (Jesus) was 'with' God in the beginning." Lastly, in verse 3 it says, "Through Him (Jesus) ALL things were made and without Him (Jesus) nothing was made that was made." Now, the question that still needs to be answered is, "who can create something besides God alone?" Nobody! The inventions attributed to humanity came out of preexisting material. But, the things Jesus created in the beginning was ex-nihilo; brought into existence out of nothing by his very word! 

Nonetheless, if this passage in the Gospel of John isn't convincing enough for you, journey with us to the book of Daniel 7:9 really quick. It says, "As I looked, thrones (not throne, but thrones) were set in place, and the Ancient of Days (God) took his seat. His clothing was as white as snow; the hair of his head was white like wool." Now, the next question that needs to be addressed is, if the Father is Spirit according to John 4:24, and the Holy Spirit is Spirit, who is this person whose clothing is white as snow and whose hair is white as wool? Has the light bulb turned on in your mind yet??? If not, hold on to your seats because it's about to get real bright in just a second! In Daniel 7:14 it says, "He (the son of man, which is the exact same title Jesus applies to himself in Luke 5:24) was given authority, glory, and sovereign power; all peoples, nations, and men of every language 'WORSHIPPED' him." This verse right here is a pen-dropping moment!! Who but God alone can receive worship?! Absolutely nobody. Only God can receive worship, and here we have scriptural evidence of Jesus being worshipped along with many other passages in the Bible to include Matthew 2:11, Matthew 14:33, Luke 24:52, Revelation 4:10, and Revelation 7:11. Which means that Jesus is God!! You see, in order to fully comprehend the true nature of Christ must fully open their minds to the entirety of the scriptures. One of the rules of engagement when it comes to biblical interpretation is context. Hence, for this particular topic, the context of the whole Bible should be taken into consideration in order to gain a full understanding of the nature of Christ. 

So, when it comes to the question, "Is Jesus God" there is so much more where that came from. According to the scriptures, Jesus is much more than a man, he is much more than a prophet, and he is much more than a teacher. In John 17:5, Jesus prays to the Father to glorify him with the glory he had with the Father before the world began. Meaning, to elevate Jesus back to his rightful equal position (not nature) he had with the Father in heaven before he willingly took on a lower earthly position to save his lower earthly creation. This interpretation aligns perfectly with everything else that Jesus said and everything else that Jesus did to demonstrate that He is in fact, God in the flesh. In other words, when it comes to the question "Is Jesus God?" we have to consider the totality of Jesus' life to answer this particular question. We can't look at the exact words he didn't say or isolate certain passages to conclude that Jesus isn't God. We can't make an objective verdict on a matter without taking into consideration the entirety of the available evidence. And we can't include "the Father is greater than I" in John 14:28, and exclude "the Father and I are one" in John 10:30 in our determination of the matter. That's not sound biblical interpretation! We can't exclude the abundance of evidence that demonstrates that Jesus is God, and include only what fits our preconceived agendas. 

The name of the game when it comes to researching the truth about anything is objectivity! And even though everyone has their own presuppositions, we can't exclude the obvious! We can't exclude the response of the Pharisees in Luke 5:21 ("who can forgive sins but God alone") when Jesus said to the paralytic "your sins are forgiven." We can't exclude the many works of healing, exorcisms, and miracles Jesus performed that no other man in the history of humanity has been able to duplicate. We can't exclude the fact that the Pharisees were ready to kill Jesus in John 5:18 and in John 10:33 because Jesus claimed to be God. We can't ignore the fact that Jesus was condemned to death by crucifixion for blasphemy because he claimed to be God. We can't exclude the one piece of revolutionary evidence that far outweighs any other deed in history; the resurrection from the grave on the third day! We can't ignore the passage in John 10:18 where Jesus says, "I have authority to lay my life down and authority to take it up again." We can't exclude the response by Thomas the skeptic when the Lord revealed his wounds to him when he said in John 20:28, "My Lord and my God." And we definitely can't exclude the fact that the disciples worshiped Jesus when they saw him after the resurrection in Matthew 28:17. We can't minimize all of this evidence that speaks volumes that Jesus is God just because Jesus didn't say these exact words, "I am God." This is not sound research, but a syllogism to reject the truth! 

Furthermore, if Jesus was to come down right now and say these exact words "I am God" people would still not believe. So, to use this "exact-word" argument to discredit the deity of Jesus is a cheap escape from the truth. It’s a total rejection of who Christ really is and it’s a lack of knowledge of the scriptures! When Jesus was before the council in Luke 22:70 they asked him, "are you then the Son of God?" Jesus didn't say no. He said, "You are right in saying I am." When the Jews were mocking Jesus in John 8:48-58 when they said, "you are not yet fifty years old and you have seen Abraham," Jesus didn't say, "ah, you got me, I've never seen Abraham before. Nope! Jesus said, "Before Abraham was born, I AM!" And when Paul was warning the church against deceptive philosophy in Colossians 2:8, Paul didn't say that all the fullness of Jesus' humanity lives in bodily form. Nope! Paul said, "For in Christ all the fullness of the 'Deity' lives in bodily form." So, even though Jesus didn't say the exact words, "I am God." Jesus and others had a lot more to say than those three words, which speaks more than volumes! Yet, all of this evidence is ignored, rejected, and overlooked all because Jesus didn't say the exact words of another person or from a poor hermeneutical application. For some, this is just a case of the misunderstanding, but for others, this is an intentional dismissal of the available evidence. Therefore, whoever makes the argument that Jesus is not God simply reject him from a lack of knowledge or reject him from a lack of faith, and depending on how you answer this question will determine where you spend the rest of eternity.

So again, we ask you the same question Jesus asked Peter two thousand years ago that is just as prevalent then as it is today; "Who do you say that Jesus is?" If Jesus is not God, then his sacrifice on the cross for the sins of the whole world is null and void because only a perfect God could save humanity from their sins and reconcile us back to himself!  

#JesusIsGod #TheTruthShallSetYouFree #Road2TheCross.Org

For more information, click on the links below, or click on the YouTube video by David Woods. 

https://www.gotquestions.org/is-Jesus-God.html

https://answersingenesis.org/jesus-christ/jesus-is-god/is-jesus-god/

"Did Jesus Go To Hell???"

Welcome again to Misconceptions Clarified, Episode XI where we are steadily casting down any argument that sets itself up against the knowledge of God according to Paul in 2 Corinthians 10:5. As you probably already know, we live in an era now where there exists so many different interpretations regarding the Bible, regarding Christianity, and regarding the life, death, and resurrection of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ that it becomes more and more challenging to filter out the truth. However, despite the various interpretations that exist today, this could actually be viewed as an opportunity to do the research and provide some clarity to the body of Christ on certain topics. For instance, this episode is going to deal with the ancient belief of Jesus' descension into hell after his death by crucifixion. Now obviously, the belief that Jesus descended into hell comes from an interpretation of several scriptures found in the Bible. The primary verse leading the charge in this particular doctrine comes from Paul's letter in Ephesians 4:9, "What does “he ascended” mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions?” In addition, there are other verses such as Psalm 16:10 which says that "He will not abandon my soul to Sheol," and 1 Peter 3:19 where it says he went and preached to the spirits in prison. Others point to Abraham's bosom in Luke 16:19-31 or to the fact that Jesus holds the keys to death and Hades according to Revelation 1:18. And even some refer to Ephesians 4:8 where he ascended on high to lead the captives captive or to Romans 10:6-7 where it says, "Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ (that is, to bring Christ down.)" These are all great verses of scripture utilized and interpreted to confirm the belief that Jesus descended into hell. 

Moreover, the interpretation of these verses led to the adoption of Jesus' descension into hell in the early church creeds such as the Apostle's Creed, which summarizes the tenets of the Christian faith. In line 7 and 8 of the Apostles Creed it says that he (Jesus) "Was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended into hell. On the third day he rose. He ascended into heaven." So, this belief that Jesus descended into hell is a long standing tradition that has been recited in the church for many centuries. To challenge a belief of the early church is risky business to say the least! However, part of the mission here at Christian Way Ministries is to take those risks of faith, not because it's our right, or because we want to go against a particular doctrine to gain some kind of attention, but only from the motivation of seeking the truth of God's Word. And from this motivation and from a closer look into the scriptures and into this particular doctrine, we are not entirely convinced to conclude that Jesus did in fact descend into hell according to the scriptures. Here's why.... 

First, it is very important to clarify the different terminology used to describe "hell" in the scriptures. For example, in the Old Testament the Hebrew word used to describe hell is "Sheol," which is defined as the underworld or the place where the wicked are sent, and is also defined as the designation for the abode of the dead, known in today's vernacular as the grave. Nonetheless, the complexity of the Hebrew language presents a significant challenge of interpretation in trying to determine which definition or version of a particular word the author is intending to use. For instance, in Psalm 16:10, King David says that "he will not abandon my soul to Sheol." But, does this mean that God will not abandon his soul to hell where the souls of the wicked are placed? Or, does this mean that God will not abandon his soul to the grave where the dead bodies of both the righteous and the wicked go? Well, the answer is not so clear of the author's intent by just scratching the surface of the scripture, and since it's not entirely clear, many have developed another theory that suggests King David was referring to the souls of the righteous being placed in an intermediate state of rest in hell until the resurrection of Jesus. Hence, the reason why many assume Jesus had to descend into hell in order to set the captives free. 

However, in order to figure out which version of Sheol King David was referring to, it's important to understand the portion in the verse that deals with the soul (nephesh), and since specific words in the Hebrew language can contain several different meanings, the interpreter is faced with trying to figure out which meaning the author is trying to use in the context. For example, if someone says, it's going to take a "minute" to put gas in the tank," it could mean a literal 60 seconds or it can be used in a figurative sense to mean a few minutes because the tank was empty. But, if you are on the outside looking in and don't understand the intent of a "minute" in the context, you might interpret it incorrectly by assuming from your own understanding of what a minute means to you, and not the person. Which is exactly why the author's intent along with the examination of the original language of certain words is so important. And believe it or not, after further investigation into the Hebrew word for soul (nephesh), come to find out, it can also refer to the living being, to the self, to the creature, to the mind, to the heart, and even to the will of a person.

So, when David says that he will not abandon my soul to Sheol, one has to figure out which meaning the author was trying to use for soul. In addition, notice also that in Genesis 1:21, the Hebrew word for soul (nephesh) is also used to describe every living creature (nephesh) that moves. Hence, we have the same Hebrew word (nephesh) used in 2 different contexts, written by 2 different authors in 2 different periods of history. Which means that the interpreter has to plug and play the different variations of soul (nephesh) along with Sheol in the context in order to gain the best possible interpretation of the author's intent. And unfortunately, this plug and play process is one of the reasons why there exists various interpretations for not only Psalm 16:10, but also for other passages throughout the Bible. Nevertheless, if one translates soul as the "living being" or the "self" in Psalm 16:10 and the "physical grave" for Sheol, it now translates that "he will not abandon my body, or my self to the grave." The New International Version of the Bible simply says, "because you will not abandon me to the grave." This makes for a better fit, especially when King David refers to the physical body in the very same verse that "the Holy One (Jesus' body) will not see decay," which is a messianic reference to how Jesus' physical body will not be abandoned to the grave, and likewise a futuristic hope of how our physical bodies will not be abandoned to the grave, but will receive a new and glorious body when the time comes. The consistency of this interpretation not only makes greater sense, but flows better, and it doesn't provide any room for the advancement of other theories such as the soul of the righteous going to an intermediate department in Sheol as some have suggested. 

Moreover, notice that there's a science to interpreting the ancient scriptures known as "hermeneutics" for those who are eager to go deeper into God's word. Reading the English translation of the Bible alone will give a person everything they need for their own salvation and how to be more like Christ. Nevertheless, when it comes to the more complicated doctrines like Jesus' descension into hell, a person must apply the four rules of engagement for biblical interpretation in order to gain a greater understanding, which includes: 1). Examining the original languages i.e. Hebrew and Greek. 2). Interpreting the verse in its context i.e. immediate context, context of the chapter, context of the whole book, and even the context of the whole Bible, along with the historical context. Additionally, part of understanding the context includes knowing the genre of a particular verse or book in scripture i.e. narrative, prophecy, wisdom, etc. 3). Knowing the author's intent or which definition the author is most likely trying to use for a particular word. 4). And scripture interpreting scripture. Are there any other verses in the Bible that confirm or correlate with another verse of scripture. And a bonus rule one can use to aid in their biblical interpretation is to investigate what the early church fathers had to say about a particular doctrine, since they were the closest to the situation. Now, this is not to say that the early church fathers got it right all the time, but knowing what they believed about one of these more difficult arguments will add some perspective. If a person applies all of these rules for biblical interpretation, the greater and the more sound the interpretation will be. 

So, now that this episode has established a greater understanding of the word Sheol in Psalm 16:10, the Greek word for hell (hades) in the New Testament is also defined as the place where the bodies of the dead go to, and it's also known as the place where the soul of the wicked go to as well. Essentially, Sheol and Hades contain the exact same meaning. However, 9 of the 11 instances the word Hades is used in the New Testament refers to the place where the souls of the wicked go, not the grave nor the "invented" holding place where the souls of the righteous go. On the other hand, the Greek word for grave (mnemeion) was more commonly used throughout the New Testament to refer to the actual place the bodies of the dead go to but, since Peter is quoting King David in Acts 2, it makes sense that he would use Hades instead of grave (mnemeion) because of its close association with the word Sheol in Hebrew. Therefore, for the purposes of interpretational clarity, since Peter is referring to the physical resurrection of Christ in the context of Acts 2:14-37, it's consistent to interpret his soul in verse 31 to his physical life just like it was interpreted in Psalm 16:10, that "He will not abandon his physical life to the physical grave, in order to fulfill the prophecies of a physical resurrection." Make sense... 

The only other word for hell used in the New Testament is Gehanna, which describes the activity in hell; a place of torment, a place of everlasting punishment, a place of fire, and a place of eternal separation from God. Gehanna is also used to describe a physical place south of Jerusalem known as the Valley of Hinnom mentioned in Joshua 15:8 where the filth and dead animals were cast out and burned. Outside of these terms, (Gehanna, Hades, Sheol, and mnemeion) to describe the grave and hell, the abyss is the only other place mentioned in the book of Revelation that's associated with hell where the evil spirits are detained in the bottomless pit. 

With that being said, notice how Paul uses neither of these terms in regards to Jesus' descension into hell in Ephesians 4:9. Why is that? Again, 9 out of the 11 references Hades is used in the New Testament refers to the place in hell where the souls of the wicked go, and the reference in Acts 2 is used to refer to the grave simply because Peter was quoting King David. But, notice also that Paul avoids using the Greek word mnemeion for grave. Why is that? Well, since Hades was normally associated with the abode where the souls of the wicked go after death, and since mnemeion was strictly used to refer to the grave or to a tomb, Paul avoids this terminology at the end of Ephesians 4:9 and instead says, that Jesus descended to the "lower earthly regions" to refer to a combination of his death, his burial, and in a sense to his incarnation. Not that Jesus' soul descended down to the place where the souls of the wicked go to in hell. This explains why Paul avoids using words like Hades, Gehenna, or even mnemeion (grave) in his description of Jesus' decsension to the lower earthly regions. Furthermore, in Luke 23:43, Jesus tells one of the criminals on the cross, "Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise." And 3 verses later, right before Jesus dies on the cross, he calls out with a loud voice and says, "Father into your hands I commit my Spirit." Now, there's no denying that when Jesus commits his Spirit to the Father, that the Father was in no other place but in paradise, also known as heaven itself. 

In regards to the passage in Luke 16 of Lazarus and the Rich Man, many consider Abraham's bosom to be that intermediate place where the souls of the righteous go, mainly the souls of the Old Testament Saints prior to the resurrection of Christ. However, one must take into consideration that Jesus was speaking in parable to his disciples to describe in general two destinations where the soul of the righteous and the wicked go after death where a great chasm exists. Meaning, once physical death occurs in our fleshly bodies, that's it! The soul will go to one of the two places, either to heaven or to hell where the soul will not be able to cross from one side to the other. To suggest that there's another place in hell, or to say that there's an intermediate place between heaven or hell, or to say that a person goes to a place called purgatory, or to say that paradise is the place the souls of the Old Testament saints went to until Jesus rescued them would be adding or taking away from the scriptures. Abraham's bosom is just a figurative illustration of where his soul rests and according to the Greek language, all it means is "Abraham's side," not this intermediate place of rest many suggest his bosom to be. Abraham's bosom doesn't give any evidence for an intermediate place nor does it give any weight to Jesus' decsension into hell. Furthermore, let's not forget that before the resurrection of Christ, Abraham was credited righteous in Genesis 15:6, Enoch walked with God and was taken away by God in Genesis 5:24, and 2 Kings 2:11 says that Elijah went up to heaven in a whirlwind. None of these references suggest an intermediate place of rest in Sheol or Hades, or any other place except the place where God resides in heaven.

The only other passage mentioned to advance this particular doctrine is 1 Peter 3:18-19 which says, "He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built." Now, according to this particular passage there is literally nothing that says Jesus' soul descended into hell. It says, that Jesus was made alive by the Spirit, through whom he (the Spirit) went and preached to the spirits in prison who disobeyed. The question that remains to be answered is how the Spirit went about making this proclamation of the Gospel to the spirits in prison. Did the Spirit have to actually descend into hell to make such a proclamation? Certainly not. Some scholars suggest that the resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ was so powerful in itself that His victory over death by crucifixion made that proclamation at that moment over the powers of evil sealing their condemnation forever. Meaning, Jesus nor the Spirit had to actually descend into hell to preach to the spirits in prison because the Lord's resurrection was so powerful in itself that it not only preached to the evil spirits in prison from where the resurrection occurred, but the resurrection still preaches to the living beings in the twenty-first century! Praise the Lord! That's how powerful the resurrection of Jesus was and is today. In Matthew 28:4, the resurrection was so powerful that the Roman guards who were executioners by employment were so afraid that they shook and became like dead men. Wow!

Therefore, when it comes to whether or not Jesus descended into hell, there's not enough evidence from the scriptures to suggest that He did. Now, this is not to say definitively that Jesus did not descend into hell, and that a person needs to believe one way or the other to be saved. No! We at Christian Way Ministries wants to provide clarity on some of these difficult doctrines and to challenge the body of Christ to go deeper into the scriptures by examining the original languages, and so forth. Even if that means challenging some of the longstanding traditions of the church just to make sure we are not adding or taking away from the Word of God according to Deuteronomy 4:2 and Revelation 22:18. And for those who are on the fence or have doubts about the doctrine of hell, please know that according to the scriptures, hell is indeed a real place of eternal separation from God. Which means, that if you haven't received the free gift of salvation which comes by grace alone, your soul and eternity is headed towards hell if you don't repent and accept Christ into your heart. Jesus said to the church of Laodicea in Revelation 3:20, "Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me." All you have to do is open the door of your heart so that Jesus can come in to your life! And all you have to do is confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead and you shall be saved (from spending eternity away from God, Romans 10:9). 

God bless all the Lord's people!  

For more information, please visit the links below:

https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/apostles_creed.cfm

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=10&article=851

Welcome to Misconceptions Clarified Episode X; "Who Were the Sons of God?" 

In Genesis 6:1-2 it says, “When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.” Now, when it comes to who the sons of God are in this passage, there are many competing views on the internet, on YouTube, and even passionately discussed in social circles. Some say they are fallen angels, some say they are powerful rulers, and some say they are the descendants of Seth who intermarried with the daughters of Cain. However, all of these answers cannot be true and this episode will briefly consider the two major positions between the fallen angels and the descendants of Seth to see which piece best fits the biblical portrait. 

The first position in question is the "fallen angels" perspective. Some interpret the "sons of God" in this particular passage to mean fallen angels. Now, those who side with this conclusion compare it to the passage in the beginning of Job chapter 1 and 2 where the sons of God present themselves before the Lord. According to the Blue Letter Bible, the Hebrew word for sons of God is "ben-elohiym," which includes angels as a possible definition. However, the translation for sons of God as "fallen angels" is where the ball begins to go out of bounds. For instance, the Hebrew word for fallen, "nephal" is not located in the passage, which begs the question; How can an assumption be made on the actual moral state of these sons of God minus the usage of the available Hebrew terms to describe their fallen condition, if they were truly sinful angels? For example, in Isaiah 14:12 the prophet uses the Hebrew word nephal to describe how Lucifer, the son of the dawn has fallen from heaven, but yet this is not the case for the sons of God in Genesis 6. Furthermore, the comparison by those who side with this fallen angel position of Genesis 6 and the book of Job are incoherent simply because many commentaries consider the sons of God in the book of Job to be holy angels, not fallen angels. In addition, there were three other words that could have been used in the Hebrew language to describe these sons of God as angels to include keruwb, seraph, and malak, and yet none of these words were used either. Which means that if the sons of God were really angels, why use ben-elohiym? This appears to be a very odd and inconsistent interpretation for the author to describe the sons of God as fallen angels while avoiding the Hebrew terminology used to describe them as fallen angels. 

If anything, the connotations associated with the description for the "sons of God" in scripture suggest the opposite of an upright moral being versus a fallen one. For instance, John 1:12-13 says that "all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become sons of God, children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God." Which means, that if we use the Lord's interpretation of who the sons of God are for Genesis 6, it would suggest a holy connotation instead of a fallen angel interpretation. It doesn't appear to be scripturally consistent for the sons of God in Genesis 6 to be morally depraved angelic beings while the sons of God in John 1 or even Job to be morally upright. In other words, if the sons of God in Genesis are truly sons of God, they cannot also be fallen angels. As Paul said in 1 Corinthians 10:21, "you cannot have a part in both the Lord's table and the table of demons." And this same concept can be applied in this episode to mean that you cannot interpret the "sons of God" as fallen angels. Therefore, if the sons of God in this passage were indeed fallen angels, it would make sense that God would have guided the author to use the available Hebrew terminology in order to avoid any confusion. But, then again, even if that was the case, other arguments would have surfaced to confuse the matter. 

Another problem with this viewpoint of the fallen angels interpretation pertains to how they were able to produce children from a biological standpoint with the daughters of men, especially when Jesus said to the Sadducees in Matthew 22:30, "that at the resurrection, people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like angels in heaven." Meaning, if God created the institution of marriage between male and female, and if that marriage dynamic is eliminated at the resurrection where God's people will be like angels, then this idea that the fallen angels reproduced children with the daughters of men doesn't appear to be likely. However, there are other instances in scripture of angels appearing in human form such as Jude 1:6-7 and 2 Peter 2:4-8. There's also a reference in the book of Enoch 6:1-3 which is a very popular Jewish account that speaks of "the sons of heaven saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: Come let us choose us wives from among the children of men and have children with them." So, there's definitely a held belief that there were angels that intermingled with humanity, but unfortunately, this article can't prove or disprove with any certainty either position. 

The second view in question is that the sons of God are really the sons of god or human beings from the descendants of Seth; in particular the sons of Enosh. Scholars who side with this position linked Genesis 4:26 to describe the sons of God in Genesis 6, which says; "And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the Lord.” And according to various other passages throughout the Bible, whoever calls on the name of the Lord will not only be saved, but will also have the right to be called sons and daughters of God according to 2 Corinthians 6:18. So, the interpretation that the sons of God are actually human descendants who called upon the name of the Lord is a more reasonable explanation and finds continuity throughout the rest of scripture. It also better explains from a biological perspective the whole intermarriage dynamic. Furthermore, it makes sense that the author contrasted the sons of God (those who called upon the name of the Lord) with the daughters of men (those who didn't call upon the name of the Lord), and how that can serve as a spiritual analogy for God's people today of the importance to marry someone who is equally yoked in Christ. Whereas the contrast wouldn't necessarily fit the puzzle as tight with the fallen angels perspective. 

Again, there is no conclusive evidence for who the sons of God are in Genesis 6. But, the position that gives the best reasonable explanation from the scriptures is that the sons of God are human descendants who feared the Lord. Exactly which descendants are in view in this particular passage is speculative. Nevertheless, the sons of God is best interpreted as human descendants  who feared God and married human daughters of those who didn't fear God. The fallen angels theory unfortunately leaves open more questions than it gives answers. 

Additionally, it's also important to clarify the misconception that the text in Genesis 6 doesn't actually state that the intermarriage between the sons of God and the daughters of men created the Niphilim, because it says in verse 4 that “There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them." The Nephilim were already present in the earth when the sons of God entered into the daughters of men, not that the Nephilim were created from this inter-marital relationship. Hence, just because the Nephilim, the sons of God, and the daughters of men are grouped together in the verse, doesn't conclude such an interpretation for the creation of the Nephilim. The Nephilim were in the earth in those days and even after according to the text. So, it's extremely important to stick with what the Bible actually says and be careful not to add or take away from the text by making unbiblical assertions. 

Lastly, the issue of who the sons of God are, or who the daughters of men represent, or whether or not the Nephilim were created by this marriage, is much larger than what this episode described. The real issue at hand is Satan who wants the body of Christ to focus and debate these secondary matters that have no bearing on salvation and have no bearing on exercising the Great commission to reach the lost. The more Satan can get the body of Christ to focus on these secondary matters, the less time spent on the battlefield winning souls for Jesus. Now, this is not to say that Christians shouldn't cast down every argument that sets itself up against the knowledge of God or to be prepared to give an answer for the hope that is within you as this episode has clearly tried to do, but that these secondary doctrines shouldn't provoke sharp disagreements or allow them to take us away from the true mission, which is to go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit, and teaching them everything Jesus commanded.

#Misconceptions #Clarified #FAQs #Road2TheCross.org

For more information on this particular topic, please click on the blue link below: 

http://www.scriptureoncreation.org/bible-question-answer/sons-of-god-in-gen-6/?view=mobile

http://biblehub.com/commentaries/job/1-6.htm

Welcome to Misconceptions Clarified episode IX; "Jesus Story Stolen?"

When considering the uniqueness along with the evidence for the case of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, there can only be one conclusion; that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God, who died on the cross by crucifixion, who rose from the dead on the third day, whose tomb was left empty, and who appeared to the multitudes in his post-resurrected body. The resurrection of Jesus Christ is the single greatest attested supernatural miracle in all human history. Unfortunately, there exists a numerous amount of criticism against the resurrection of Jesus by many unbelievers who assert that the resurrection is a myth stolen from other religions. Many critics of the Christian faith conclude that Christianity in general is not authentic, but only a copy of mythological antiquity. Therefore, the objective of this analysis will attempt to clear the air on whether the account of Jesus and the resurrection was a story stolen from other religions. This study will analyze Jesus side by side to Horus, Mithra, Dionysus, Attis, and Krishna to see if there exists any credible evidence to support the accusation of stealing.

Who is the Son of Man?

However, before this comparative study gets into the details, it's important to understand who the Son of Man is in the Bible. In the Gospel of Matthew 16:13, Jesus asked his disciples, “Who do people say the Son of Man is?” The replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” Now, fast forward to the twentieth-first century, and who do the contemporaries say the Son of Man is? The list of speculations regarding the person of Jesus Christ is so long that this article will not be able to cover them all. However, to make the long story short, many say Jesus was a myth, that his story was stolen from other religious accounts, and that he was just a great prophet and teacher. Furthermore, skeptics assert that Jesus did not die on the cross nor did he rise from the dead, but that he fell unconscious on the cross and that he was revived in the tomb in his mortal body. Even the chief priests and elders concocted a lie in Matthew 28:13 that the disciples stole Jesus’ dead body while they were sleeping. David Hume, one of the main opponents of the eighteenth century critically defends against the possibility of supernatural events, thus invalidating the case for the resurrection of Jesus Christ by saying, “there is not to be found, in all history, any miracle attested by a sufficient number of men.” The amount of theories and criticisms against Jesus and the Christian faith are so vast that a library could be built with books just on this subject alone. On the contrary, Christians respond to the question of who the Son of Man is just as Peter responded to Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew; that he is the Christ, the Son of the living God. Therefore, let’s begin this brief exploration by examining these allegations of plagiarism. 

Horus the Egyptian God

When considering the variety of theories pertaining to the account of Jesus Christ, there are obvious contradictions among them. For instance, the first theory pertains to the Egyptian account of Horus. According to Peter Joseph’s documentary Zeitgeist, Bill Maher’s documentary Religulous, Acharya S. The Christ Conspiracy, and Peter Gandy’s The Jesus Mysteries, these are just a few sources that insist Christianity copied the account of Horus and applied it to Jesus Christ. Horus was hypothetically born on the 25th of December, born of a virgin woman with a star in the east, adorned by three kings, had twelve disciples, baptized into ministry at the age of thirty, suffered death by crucifixion, and resurrected on the third day, almost identical to the account of Jesus Christ. At face value, this claim of Horus appears very attractive to the naked eye, but a closer look will reveal the truth. First, in the Bible, there are no references to Jesus being born on the 25th of December, nor a specific number of Magi that visited Jesus, which automatically voids these two claims. Furthermore, according to The Complete God and Goddess of Ancient Egypt, there is no mention of Horus being born of a virgin birth on the 25th of December, no mention of an eastern star, no mention of being baptized, no mention of being visited by three kings, nor any mention of twelve disciples. As a matter of fact, there are many accounts of Horus in Egyptian mythology and one of them says that he was born to his mother Isis who gathered her dead husband’s (Osiris) dismembered body parts, reunited them together, magically revived his phallus, and became impregnated giving birth to Horus posthumously. There is no specific mention of Horus dying, only his father Osiris was killed by his brother Seth. So, if there is no account of Horus death, how can he be resurrected? The concept of the resurrection, (an actual human having died and came back to life) was not rooted or believed it could happen in ancient mythology according to N.T. Wright. The idea of the resurrection pertained to human beings, not mythological gods such as Horus. Jesus Christ is a validated historical human being with several eyewitness testimonies to his resurrection, which is completely opposite to the mythical god Horus, who is a non-historical human being with no historical attestations. Additionally, death by crucifixion was not even practiced by the ancient Egyptians and this method of capital punishment did not come into existence until approximately twenty-five hundred years after the legend of Horus. In essence, the arguments regarding the similarities between Horus and Jesus have been refuted just within this brief examination. Moreover, how the disparity between Jesus and Horus originate on the same scale of comparison is incomprehensible after examining the evidence. The only conclusion this article can calculate is that it was invented with a priori objective to disprove the tenets of Christianity. 

Krishna the Indian God

In addition to Horus, there are other mythological accounts that make similar contentions to the historical Jesus of Nazareth. For instance, the Indian god Krishna is supposedly born of a virgin birth with a star in the east, along with a resurrection. According to Indian Mythology by Paul Hamlyn, these specific claims could not be further from the truth. Krishna was the last of eight sons born to his mother Devaka who was married to Vasudeva. There is no evidence in the legend of Krishna of a virgin birth, nor a star in the east. In regards to the resurrection of Krishna, once he dies by a passing hunter who mistakenly strikes his heel with a bow like Homer’s Iliad story of how Achilles died, there is no mention of Krishna resurrecting from the dead. The only other detail pertaining to Krishna’s death is that his body never goes through the process of deterioration and basically the story ends at Krishna’s death. So, how does a comparison between Jesus and Krishna even come into fruition? It more than likely derived from a blatant position to disapprove the case for Christianity, especially since these comparisons are not even in the vicinity of association.

Dionysus the Greek God

Another drastic example of this sort of comparison of Jesus comes from the Greek god Dionysus. On a side note, it is important to highlight that it is not the ancient Greeks, or the ancient Egyptians, or the ancient Indians, or the ancient Romans who are making these accusations that Christianity borrowed from their religion. These are modern day foreigners to these ancient cultures that are drawing up these outrageous charges against Jesus and the Christian faith attempting to dissuade the masses through their writings, through social media, through television, and through the internet. Now, Dionysus was also allegedly born of a virgin, performed miracles, and resurrected from the dead. Surprisingly, according to ancient Greek mythology, there is no reference to a virgin birth, and even the resurrection of Dionysus is greatly exaggerated in its comparison to Jesus. Furthermore, Dionysus did not suffer death by crucifixion as the adversary asserts, but was torn apart and eaten by titans. Again, how does this comparison equate to Jesus Christ being condemned to death on the cross by the Romans? Where are the similarities? Critics claim that Christianity forged the resurrection of Jesus from ancient mythology, but judging from the evidence thus far, this is hardly the truth. Skeptics are struggling to string together these scandalous theories to undermine the tenets of the Christian faith and the results of their formulations are pathetic. In regards to the resurrection of Dionysus, there is a reference to the god of wine being brought back to life from his tragedy of being eaten by the titans. However, according to the debate between Gary Habermas and Tim Callahan, there are no sources of the resurrection of Dionysus that actually predate Christianity.  In sum, it is plausible to conclude that it was not Christianity who borrowed from Greek mythology, but just the reversal.

Attis The Greek God

Again, it appears at this point in the investigation unfair to compare Jesus Christ, a validated historical human being to a bunch of mythical gods. Nevertheless, this analysis must continue to unravel the pieces of this comparative equation by dismantling the next contestant in the Greek god Attis. As with the other three ancient mythical gods mentioned above, Attis contains the exact same characteristics according to the exact same adversaries outlined in paragraph three. The account of Attis is not as widely attested to unlike the other gods mentioned in this investigation. As a matter of fact, several Greek mythological books in the local library did not even mention the Greek god Attis. Nevertheless, after examining the available information, the legend of Attis is even more far-fetched. For instance, the virgin birth of Attis consists of the Olympian gods casting away the male organs which turned into an almond tree. Once the almond tree was ripe enough, Nana the daughter of the Greek god Sangarius picked an almond, put it in her bosom and became pregnant, which is how Attis arrived on the mythical scene. If this sounds slightly awkward, the alleged crucifixion of Attis entails his own castration. Furthermore, the resurrection of Attis is murky considering the contradictory reports on whether or not there is an actual resurrection of Attis. According to Elliot Nesch’s refuted documentary on Zeitgeist, the resurrection account of Attis is practically non-existent, and what remains available does not predate Christianity. It is yet inconceivable to think how the mythical god Attis is seriously compared to the historical Jesus. Nonetheless, Ecclesiastes 1:9 says, “What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.” Therefore, what Christianity has to compete against in the twenty-first century regarding heretical worldviews is practically the same scenario the first-century church had to contend with, just with different contenders and with a different means in which information is communicated.

Mithra the Persian God

The last of the ancient gods that needs to be addressed regarding the major comparisons is the Persian god Mithra. As with the other gods, Mithra is also supposedly born of a virgin, crucified, and resurrected. Notice how all five mythological accounts are constructed together in effort to make a stronger case that Christianity plagiarized from these various myths. At minimum, they all claim a virgin birth, a performance of miracles, and a resurrection. After further evaluation into the fable of Mithra, the comparison is resoundingly more of a contrast. On a side note, there needs to be a distinction made between the Old Persian Mithra and the Roman Mithra. Since the allegations of this assignment refer to Christianity borrowing from ancient mythology, it is only logical to examine Mithra in the Persian context since Christianity predates the Roman Mithra. Examining the Roman Mithra will not do this brief investigation any justice to the criticisms because it could possibly lead to the opposite conclusion that the myth borrowed from Christianity. However, with that being said, Mithra’s birth record is a rather intriguing account of him emerging from a rock. Now, unless the rock was a virgin, this can hardly be a parallel to the virgin birth of Jesus by Mary who was impregnated by the Holy Ghost. In regards to the resurrection of Mithra, there are no sources predating Christianity that even mentions the death of Mithra. Therefore, a resurrection minus a record of death is implausible from a general understanding. As mentioned earlier, a resurrection is mainly thought to be a new life after a period of being dead. Without a period of being dead, there cannot be a new life in this sense.

No conclusive Evidence

Unfortunately, for the opponents of Christianity, the evidence for ancient mythology regarding their rising and dying gods is inadequate against the case for Jesus Christ. Generally, when considering the thousands upon thousands of gods that men have created in their imaginations, it might be possible to find a couple of accounts that appear similar to the historical Jesus. As a matter of fact, the disparity between Jesus and anybody else in all of human history is so great that people have to purposely invent theories to depreciate the love God has shown for his creation through his Son Jesus Christ. To advocate a comparison of Jesus Christ to a falcon-headed god in Horus, to a guardian of cattle in Mithra, to a castrated god in Attis, to an alcoholic god in Dionysus, and to a blue Indian god in Krishna is a complete insult and contempt to the Christian faith. To actually believe in the biased comparisons of ancient mythology to Jesus Christ shows a lack of commitment to objective academic research. Even in the community of nonbelievers there exists a division among them regarding the authenticity of Christianity. However, no matter what evidence exists to support the Christian faith, no matter what archaeology continues to uncover regarding anything biblically related, unbelievers will continue to find an alternate route around the destination of belief in Jesus and his resurrection. In the Gospel of Luke 16:31, Jesus said to his disciples, “If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.” Therefore, if first-century opponents were not convinced by the resurrection of Jesus, neither will opponents in the twenty-first century be slightly moved to believe in the case for Christianity. God could literally appear on the scene (which he did two thousand years ago) and say that He is God and many will still not believe. 

Miracles Comparison

The only other thing the gods of ancient mythology had slightly in common with the historical Jesus is that they all performed some type of miracles. However, the miracles performed by Jesus and the ancient gods are very different in nature simply because the miracles of the ancient gods are mythical and made-up, whereas the miracles of Jesus are historically attested and confirmed. For example, Krishna’s defeat of Naraka and how he captured Naraka’s sixteen thousand, one hundred virgins and married each one of them can be considered a miracle. The legend states, “Krishna now settled down with his sixteen thousand one hundred and eight wives (the eight wives he was already married to before the defeat of Naraka) and was able to delight them all simultaneously.” How Krishna satisfied more than sixteen thousand women at the same time is unimaginable to mentally process unless one believes a miracle occurred. Nevertheless, the rationale behind the mention of this particular miracle of Krishna is to show evidence of its imaginary nature. There are many other miracles attributed to the ancient gods of antiquity, however, nothing revolutionary was performed by these gods mentioned in this assignment.

Jesus Christ on the other hand performed signs and wonders no mythological god can compare to. In John 21:25 it says, “Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.” Again, the main reason why Jesus should not be equated to the ancient gods is simply because Jesus is a true validated historical person being compared to a bunch of myths, fables, and legends. It is like trying to compare apples and oranges. While both are considered fruit and while both can be compared, this does not mean they should be compared because when the comparison is conducted on both the apple and orange, the comparison turns into a contrast. Meaning, there are more differences than similarities. The same concept applies when examining the mythological accounts of Horus, Krishna, Attis, Dionysus, and Mithra, which are just fantasies developed in the imaginations of men linked to a man in Jesus who was not an invention, but a real person. It seems a little unfair to justify such an assessment and yet, even though the scales are unbalanced, the historical Jesus still overshadows anything men could fabricate in their own minds. Even if this analysis was to compare any other historical person to the historical Jesus, it still would not matter, because Jesus is the only way, the only truth, and the only life, and no one and no god can be objectively mentioned in the same sentence as the savior of the world.   

Additionally, while miracles are generally associated with deities, when comparing the apples to oranges concept of these miracles of the ancient gods to Jesus Christ in this analysis, they end up on opposite ends of the comparative spectrum. While there was enough room in the books that it would be written for every one of the miracles performed by the ancient gods, there was not enough room for the miracles performed by the historical Jesus. That’s the difference! When comparing the miracles of the ancient gods in this examination, there were no miracles of healing, no miracles of controlling nature, no miracles of raising actual people from the dead, no miracles of fulfilled prophecy, and no miracles of exorcisms. Furthermore, there are no references of large crowds gathering to hear the teachings of these gods, no encounters of civil authorities, and definitely no death by crucifixion, no empty tomb, no resurrection, and no post-resurrected appearances to the multitudes. At a closer examination of Jesus to the mythological gods of ancient paganism, the comparison is not even close!

Conclusion

In summary, as mentioned previously, this analysis was meant to be brief and there is so much more that could have been mentioned. One of the countless differences between the God of Christianity and the mythological gods of antiquity pertains to the actual teachings. After examining the many different portraits on the gods of ancient paganism, the teachings on morality was practically absent, whereas the moral teachings taught by Jesus Christ are transcendent. A comparison on Jesus’ teachings alone would require a separate investigation. Everything about Jesus is significantly different from all five pagan gods put together. However, the most noteworthy difference between the God of Christianity and the mythological gods of antiquity is that God sent his one and only son Jesus into the world to perform various miracles, and to separate himself from the mythical gods of stone through his bodily resurrection. The accomplishment over death changed the whole historical dynamic and provided a new hope for anyone who would come to believe in the Son of the Living God. Furthermore, Jesus is the only revolutionary figure to ever live who transformed the calendar from B.C., (Before the Common Era/before Christ) to A.D. (Anno Domini/after death). None of the ancient gods mentioned in this comparison are credited for changing the course of history in such a manner as Jesus did. These gods did not have this profound effect where thousands of people converted over to believe in them like they did in early Christianity. Moreover, there are no references to any martyrs for these mythological gods, yet, The Seed of the Martyrs is how Christianity grew exponentialy in the early church, in which critics have no answer for. Nevertheless, when performing an exhaustive investigation of any ancient god or any other human being side by side to the historical Jesus of Nazareth, there is no one who can do it like Jesus! What sets Jesus Christ apart from the rest of the playing field is his bodily resurrection! As Paul states in 1 Corinthians 15:54, “Death has been swallowed up in victory,” all because of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords!              

#Misconceptions #Clarified #Jesus #Is #Authentic  

For more information please consider the references below and click on the YouTube video debunking the Zeitgeist documentary for the "real truth."  

http://beginningandend.com/jesus-copy-horus-mithras-dionysis-pagan-gods/ Accessed January 26, 2015.

Habermas, R. Douglas Geivett and Gary. In Defense of Miracles; A Comprehensive Case for God's Action in History. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997.

Hamilton, Edith, and Steele Savage. Mythology / S. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1942.

Ions, Veronica. Indian Mythology. London: Paul Hamlyn, 1973.

Nesch, Elliot. "Zeitgeist REFUTED & DEBUNKED! (Religious Portion)." YouTube. Accessed March 3, 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFI6m6Icav4

Wilkinson, Richard H. The Complete Gods and Goddesses of Ancient Egypt. New York: Thames & Hudson, 2003.

Wright, N.T. The Resurrection of the Son of God. Great Britain: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 2003.

Welcome to Misconceptions Clarified episode VIII; "Adam's First Wife?" 

In today’s current generation, it is quite easy to be swept under the tsunami of information that's available at the touch of a button or at the sound of your voice. The advancement of technology has made it convenient enough that all a person has to do is just ask a question to either Siri on your cellphones, to Alexa on Echo, or to Google’s Assistant for the answer. It’s that simple! The age of information that we live in today is so accessible, so abundant, and so contradicting that if you are not careful, it will have you question your own personal beliefs. That’s why the Bible says in Colossians 2:8 to “see to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.”

For instance, the resurgence of the mythological tale of Lilith has many people second guessing if Adam had a "first-wife" before Eve in the book of Genesis. One of the main reasons why this legend is resurfacing on major social media platforms is not only due to the age of information we find ourselves engulfed in, but it also stems from a lack of understanding of the scriptures regarding how Cain obtained a wife. Since the Bible only mentions Adam and Eve's three sons, (Cain, Abel, and Seth) how did Cain find his wife? Furthermore, how was Adam and Eve going to fulfill the command by God to be fruitful and fill the earth with only sons??? Well, on the surface of this concern, it appears to be a legitimate question to ask considering that the Bible doesn't specifically give the answer to Cain's wife. However, this episode will dig beyond the surface of the matter to provide some clarity to its viewers regarding where Cain found his wife and if Adam's supposedly "first-wife" has any ring of truth. 

Unfortunately, one of the most common criticisms of the Bible is that it doesn’t provide all the answers. So, instead of just accepting the fact that the Bible isn’t comparable to the modern devices the world has at its disposal where a person can ask any question and it gives them the answer, some have tried to “fill-in-the-gap” themselves. Fortunately, there are a couple of explanations why the Bible may appear to be silent or lack certain details on specific situations, people, or events. First, the authors of ancient scripture more than likely didn’t have the critical methods of the twenty-first century on their minds when they were recording or transcribing their accounts. Meaning, Moses probably wasn’t thinking about accommodating biblical critics three thousand years into the future when he penned down the Torah.

Another reason why the Bible leaves out certain information is simply because God (the One who is responsible for the Bible’s entire composition) intentionally excluded those details. For some, this may not serve as a good enough answer, however, Paul says in Romans 9:20, “But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, why did you make me like this? Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?”

In regards to the account of Adam and Eve and their three sons, one of the primary reasons why the author focuses on Cain, Abel, and Seth was to provide a lineal history, that would lead to Jesus Christ, the ultimate promise of salvation! When it comes to interpreting the Bible, one of the rules of engagement is the context, and when you consider the context of the whole Bible, the only way the authors of the Bible could trace-back the lineage from Jesus to Adam was by recording the male ancestors of each generation. Moreover, notice that in Genesis chapter five the lineage from Adam to Noah doesn’t mention any of their wives by name. Why? Because some of them probably married multiple wives like Lamech did in Genesis 4:19, which would have complicated the genealogy. Furthermore, many of the wives had more than one child, and if the genealogy was recorded through the wives, the task would have been even more daunting for Moses to record the genealogy of all the wives and their children. Therefore, God saw it divinely appropriate to document and preserve the lineage of humanity through Adam in order to demonstrate how the covenantal promises were transferred down through the generations where it would find its ultimate fulfillment in His Son, Jesus Christ. It's simply all about Jesus!! 

Now, this is not to say that women didn’t play an important role in the grand scheme of God’s ultimate plan of salvation. For instance, not only is Eve the mother of all living according to Genesis 3:20, but there are five mothers mentioned in Matthew’s genealogy, which include Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, Solomon’s mother, and the mother who birthed the Savior of the world, Mary. Hence, these are the women Matthew documented to verify the family tree from Adam to Jesus.

So, there’s a reason why the authors of the Bible wrote what they wrote. They were carried along by the Holy Spirit in their writing, not by their own agendas. In 2 Peter 1:20 it says, “Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” Therefore, when it comes to the question, “where did Cain find his wife,” it is important to note that while the Bible didn't specifically mention Cain’s wife, the Bible does say in Genesis 5:4, “Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters.” This passage is extremely important because not only does it indirectly give us the answer to the question of where Cain found his wife, but it also cancels out this notion that Adam had another wife, or a “first wife.” 

Besides, the legend of Lilith originates from an ancient Sumerian poem found on a tablet dated back in 2,000 BCE. In the epic, Lilith is a demoness to Inanna where Gilgamesh kills the dragon and terrifies Lilith to flee to the desert. The myth of Lilith is completely legendary in its composition and nothing more. For a more in-depth description of Lilith, please click on the link: http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/lilith/

Intriguingly, there is one mention of “liyliyth” in Isaiah 34:14 who is identified as “the screech owl” in the text, and defined as the Babylonian female goddess known as a night demon who haunts the desolate places of Edom. However, nowhere in the Hebrew etymology is Lilith associated with Adam in general or as his "first wife.” Hence, the question that remains to be answered is, how did Lilith become associated as Adam’s wife in the first place??? Well, it wasn’t until fourteen centuries after the Septuagint was compiled in the third century BCE that Lilith was forged and attached to Adam from The Alphabet of Ben Sira in medieval Judaism. FOURTEEN centuries afterwards folks!!! This is way too late of an embellishment to be taken seriously! There are absolutely no ancient sources that associates Lilith as Adam’s “first-wife!” Even in the passage of Isaiah 34:14 fails to connect Lilith with Adam, yet, somehow and someway there are some people who still believe this to be true.

The fact that people actually consider Lilith as Adam's first wife with any smear of validity is beyond perplexing! How does a medieval advancement of an ancient mythological tale become a matter of serious inquiry to Adam in the book of Genesis? This doesn’t make any sense at all! Even after further examination on the legend of Lilith, there is not even the faintness ring of truth to Lilith being Adam’s “first wife.” The only other explanation of how this legend reemerged is Satan; who is the father of lies and who has been a liar since the beginning. The enemy is only out but, to seek, kill, and destroy! He is only prowling around like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour! And Satan only masquerades himself as an angel of light to deceive God’s people into the pit of informational abyss. Satan is utilizing the platforms of the twenty-first century such as the internet, Youtube, and social media to spread his lies, which is the only other possible explanation why the legend of Lilith has resurrected from the grave of fiction.

Therefore, please watch where you obtain your information from because we know that God is not the author of confusion, but of peace and sound mind. And, be careful not to add or take away from the Book of Life! In Deuteronomy 4:2 Moses says, “Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the Lord.” Proverbs 30:6 says, “Do not add to his words or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.” And John commands everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll in Revelation 22:18-19, “If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to that person the plagues described in this scroll. And if anyone takes words away from this scroll of prophecy, God will take away from the person any share in the tree of life and in the Holy City, which are described in this scroll.”

#Time4Truth #Misconceptions #Clarified

Welcome to Misconceptions Clarified Episode VII; “Biblical Creation and Noah’s Flood Plagiarized???"

It is with great joy that Christian Way Ministries has this wonderful opportunity and platform (glory be to God) to briefly investigate this claim of plagiarism on creation and Noah’s flood in the book of Genesis from ancient Near Eastern texts such as the Enuma Elish and the Epic of Gilgamesh. Often times critics of the Bible assert that the accounts of creation and Noah’s flood are not only mythological, but also nothing short of fabricated, borrowed, and plagiarized stories. Many critics say that the biblical writers picked certain ancient Near Eastern accounts and advanced them to formulate their own version of creation and the flood. In addition, some critics believe that since the ancient Near Eastern texts predate the biblical texts of the Bible, that any similarities contained in the accounts of the Bible to these ancient stories must have been copied. Hence, the purpose of this episode is to see if there is any truth to this claim of plagiarism.

Now, before this episode goes forth in its brief investigation, the first order of business that needs to be considered is the actual dates of these ancient accounts in view. First, it's true that the ancient Near Eastern texts are in fact older than the surviving biblical texts. For example, the Enuma Elish tablets date to approximately 1100 BCE and part of the Epic of Gilgamesh dates to approximately 1800 BCE. In contrast, the oldest surviving text from the Hebrew Bible, the Ketef Hinnom also known as The Silver Scrolls, which contains a fragment of the Priestly Blessing from the book of Numbers dates to approximately 650 BCE. Moreover, there are many other older archaeological findings that confirm places, people, and events in the Bible, but the Ketef Hinnom is the oldest biblical scroll found thus far. Nevertheless, it is important to highlight one of the possible reasons why archaeologists have yet to find any other scrolls that predate the Ketef Hinnom. The material utilized by the ancient Israelites to record their history were written on scrolls, which is a less durable material than the clay tablets the ancient Near East used to record their stories. In Exodus 17:14, “The Lord said to Moses, write this on a scroll (cepher) as something to be remembered and make sure that Joshua hears it.” Therefore, the means by which these ancient cultures used to record their traditions is one explanation as to why archaeologists could uncover older ancient Near Eastern texts than the Old Testament.  

On the other hand, even though the ancient Near Eastern texts predate the biblical texts, only a small portion of the Epic of Gilgamesh was dated around 1800 BCE, while the most preserved version of the seven tablets was dated way later around the 10th century BCE. Scholars also suggest that these ancient accounts are older than the actual dates given to the artifacts. Which means, that before writing came into existence, the only other method the ancients used to pass down their tradition was orally. The argument that the ancient Near Eastern accounts are earlier sources than the biblical accounts is very difficult to confirm with any kind of certainty when considering the oral tradition. Nevertheless, the question that remains to be answered is, "Are the biblical accounts of creation and the flood plagiarized from ancient Near Eastern texts?" 

Again, it is important to note that just because the ancient Near Eastern texts predate the ancient biblical texts does not automatically render a guilty verdict of plagiarism for any similarities that exist between these accounts. Furthermore, the term plagiarism is indeed a modern concept that is defined as “the practice of taking someone else’s work or ideas and passing them off as one’s own.” Meaning, that in order to charge someone of plagiarism, (like how a teacher may charge a student for plagiarizing another student’s work without referencing it) there must be some kind of evidence for plagiarism beyond highlighting mere similarities. Like word for word sentences or paragraphs, like strong exact details of a particular account when examined side by side, or like someone witnessing another person copying someone else’s work. As a former seminary student, when the teacher gave the whole class an assignment to write about, there were bound to be resemblances between the students papers. However, in order for a student to be accused of plagiarism the teacher had to find the above criteria of exactness.

So, when there is an accusation of plagiarism, there must be specifics and real evidence, not mere similarities. Additionally, I’m certain that Christian Way Ministries isn’t the only organization who tackled this controversy of biblical plagiarism before, and even though there may exist some comparable features between this article and other articles, this by itself does not automatically render a guilty verdict of plagiarism. If this was the case, then whenever a particular event occurs, or whenever a particular topic is spoken on, there should only be “one” agency to report on it in order to avoid any hint of plagiarism, which is ridiculous to say the least. Some kind of higher authority (like a teacher to student scenario) has to point the finger on specific ways Christian Way Ministries plagiarized information as its own, and likewise archaeology has yet to unearth a single ancient source that points the finger at the biblical authors for any kind of plagiarism. Only modern day critics who are at minimum 25 to 30 centuries removed from when these ancient accounts were penned down are making such outlandish assertions!  

With that being said, let’s briefly examine the creation/flood accounts of the ancient Near East and the Bible to see if any sort of plagiarism exists between the accounts themselves… First up is the Enuma Elish which contains the Seven Tablets of Creation, and for the sake of this episode, it will only quote the first 21 lines of the First Tablet, the first 25 lines of The Fifth Tablet, and first 16 lines of The Sixth Tablet. If you desire to read the whole Enuma Elish, please just click on this link; http://www.sacred-texts.com/ane/enuma.htm.

The First Tablet:

“When in the height heaven was not named,
And the earth beneath did not yet bear a name,
And the primeval Apsu, who begat them,
And chaos, Tiamut, the mother of them both
Their waters were mingled together,
And no field was formed, no marsh was to be seen;
When of the gods none had been called into being,
And none bore a name, and no destinies were ordained; 
Then were created the gods in the midst of heaven,
Lahmu and Lahamu were called into being...
Ages increased,...
Then Ansar and Kisar were created, and over them....
Long were the days, then there came forth.....
Anu, their son,...
Ansar and Anu...
And the god Anu...
Nudimmud, whom his fathers, his begetters.....
Abounding in all wisdom,...'
He was exceeding strong...
He had no rival -
Thus were established and were... the great gods.”

The Fifth Tablet:

“He (Marduk) made the stations for the great gods;
The stars, their images, as the stars of the Zodiac, he fixed.
He ordained the year and into sections he divided it;
For the twelve months he fixed three stars.
After he had ... the days of the year ... images,
He founded the station of Nibir [the planet Jupiter] to determine their bounds;
That none might err or go astray,
He set the station of Bel and Ea along with him.
He opened great gates on both sides,
He made strong the bolt on the left and on the right.
In the midst thereof he fixed the zenith;
The Moon-god he caused to shine forth, the night he entrusted to him.
He appointed him, a being of the night, to determine the days;
Every month without ceasing with the crown he covered him, saying:
"At the beginning of the month, when thou shinest upon the land,
Thou commandest the horns to determine six days,
And on the seventh day to divide the crown.
On the fourteenth day thou shalt stand opposite, the half....
When the Sun-god on the foundation of heaven...thee,
The ... thou shalt cause to ..., and thou shalt make his...
... unto the path of the Sun-god shalt thou cause to draw nigh,
And on the ... day thou shalt stand opposite, and the Sun-god shall...
... to traverse her way.
... thou shalt cause to draw nigh, and thou shalt judge the right.
... to destroy..."

The Sixth Tablet:

“When Marduk heard the word of the gods,
His heart prompted him and he devised a cunning plan.
He opened his mouth and unto Ea he spake
That which he had conceived in his heart he imparted unto him:
"My blood will I take and bone will I fashion
I will make man, that man may
I will create man who shall inhabit the earth,
That the service of the gods may be established, and that their shrines may be built.
But I will alter the ways of the gods, and I will change their paths;
Together shall they be oppressed and unto evil shall they....
And Ea answered him and spake the word:
"... the ... of the gods I have changed
... and one...
... shall be destroyed and men will I...
... and the gods .
... and they...”

Now compare for yourself the account of Genesis 1:1-31 side by side which you can click on the link to read for yourself.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1%3A1-31&version=NIV

Now, after examining the Enuma Elish and the Genesis account of creation side by side, where is the proof of plagiarism? Where are the word for word sentences or paragraphs? And, where are the verbatim exact details between these accounts? First, before Marduk and the details of creation enter the story in the Third Tablet, there was confusion and many wars between the many gods in the Enuma Elish. In contrast, Genesis 1:1 says, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” and before the beginning there was nothing else recorded. No war, no other gods begetting other gods, no clashing of gods, no confusion, no chaos, or nothing else recorded or existed before God (Elohim) brought it into existence. Another major difference between the two accounts is Tiamut the mother of heaven and earth who is defeated later in the Fourth Tablet; “And unto Tiamat, whom he had conquered.” So, here we have the so-called “creator” god Tiamat in the Enuma Elish who is defeated by a “created” god Marduk and becomes the chief god. The major difference is that the one who beget the unnamed heaven and the unnamed earth (Tiamat) in the beginning is later defeated in the Enuma Elish, whereas the creator God (Elohim) of the Bible is the only God of the whole Bible who can never be defeated and who has absolutely no rival. Isaiah 45:5 says, “I am the Lord, and there is no other; Besides me there is no God.”

Additionally, this episode can go on and on between the differences contained in both creation accounts like the names of the gods in the Enuma Elish is obviously different from the name of God (Yahweh Exodus 3:14) in the Bible.

-The creator god of the Enuma Elish is a mother god whereas the creator God (Elohim) in the Bible has masculine connotations in the Hebrew etymology.

-The Enuma Elish speaks of multiple gods involved in creation whereas Genesis speaks of only one God (Elohim) who is responsible for all creation.

-Marduk “ordained the year and into sections he divided it; for twelve months he fixed three stars,” whereas Genesis 1:14 says, “let the lights serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years.” There’s nothing in Genesis 1-2 where God ordains a divided year into twelve months.

-Marduk caused the “Moon-god to shine forth,” whereas God (Elohim) created the moon as a lesser light to govern the night.

-Marduk spoke, “My blood will I take and bone will I fashion, I will make man,” whereas Genesis 1:26 says, “Let us make mankind in our image and after our likeness,” and Genesis 2:7 says, “The Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground (not from my blood and bone) and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.”

-Marduk says, “I will alter the ways of the gods, and I will change their paths; together shall they be oppressed and unto evil shall they…,” whereas Genesis 1:31 says, “God (Elohim) saw all that he had made, and it was very good.”

-In the Genesis account, evil comes unto the scene from human disobedience to God after He saw everything He created was very good, not the other way around like the Enuma Elish.

Again, after considering the above references the charge for plagiarism is just not present when comparing the two creation accounts side by side. Yes, there are some minor similarities such as a created world, seven days, mankind, a moon, sun, and stars, but in the gritty details and even on the surface, they are vastly different. Furthermore, the Enuma Elish contains no hint of actual history in its account, whereas Genesis 2:13-14 contains examples of two major historical rivers known as the Tigris and the Euphrates along with two geographical locations in the land of Cush and Ashur. The Enuma Elish contains no genealogies of mankind from the very first man onward, whereas the Genesis account provides multiple detailed genealogies of the very first man and how long each of them lived. Lastly, the Enuma Elish doesn’t even provide a name for the very first created man. So, this charge of plagiarism by critics has no solid evidence to support their claim outside of the mere similarities, which by itself does not warrant a guilty conviction of plagiarism.

In regards to the Epic of Gilgamesh and Noah’s Flood in Genesis 6-7, below is a snippet of both accounts side by side. If you want to read the Epic of Gilgamesh in full, please feel free to click on the link. http://www.aina.org/books/eog/eog.pdf

“The ground-space was one acre, each side of the deck measured one hundred and twenty cubits, making a square. I built six decks below, seven in all, I divided them into nine sections with bulkheads between.”

Genesis 6:15-16 says, “This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be three hundred cubits long, fifty cubits wide and thirty cubits high. Make a roof for it, leaving below the roof an opening one cubit high all around. Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks.”

-Noah’s ark was more than doubled the size and half the decks of Gilgamesh’s boat. Big difference!!

“On the seventh day the boat was complete”

-Genesis doesn’t specifically say how long it took Noah to build the ark, however, from Genesis 5:32 and Genesis 7:6 when Noah entered the ark, it was approximately less than 100 years, not seven days. Even with modern technology and the latest equipment, it took Ken Ham and his crew approximately 2 years to build the Ark Encounter located in Kentucky per the specifications outlined in the Bible. For the Epic of Gilgamesh to state that an acre-sized boat measuring 120 cubits with six decks was built in only 7 days is as unrealistic as it gets no matter the manpower and technology. Big difference!!

“I loaded into her all that I had of gold and of living things, my family, my kin, the beast of the field both wild and tame, and all the craftsmen.”

-In Genesis 7:7 only Noah, his wife, his sons, and pairs of clean and unclean animals entered the ark, not Noah’s craftsmen too. Big difference!!

“Then Ishtar the sweet-voiced Queen of Heaven cried out like a woman in travail: "Alas the days -of old are turned to dust because I commanded evil; why did I command thus evil in the council of all the gods? I commanded wars to destroy the people, but are they not my people, for I brought them forth?”

In Genesis 6:5-7 says, “The Lord saw how great the wickedness of the human race had become on the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart was only evil all the time. The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth, and his heart was deeply troubled. So the Lord said, I will wipe from the face of the earth the human race I have created.”

-Unlike the Epic of Gilgamesh where Ishtar commanded evil, the reason for the flood in Genesis was because of mankind who was only evil “all-the-time.” Big, big difference!!

“I looked for land in vain, but fourteen leagues distant there appeared a mountain, and there the boat grounded; on the mountain of Nisir the boat held fast, she held fast and did not budge. One day she held, and a second day on the mountain of Nisir she held fast and did not budge. A third day, and a fourth day she held fast on the mountain and did not budge; a fifth day and a sixth day she held fast on the mountain. When the seventh day dawned I loosed a dove and let her go. She flew away, but finding no resting-place she returned. Then I loosed a swallow, and she flew away but finding no resting-place she returned. I loosed a raven, she saw that the waters had retreated, she ate, she flew around, she cawed, and she did not come back.”

In Genesis 8:4 it says, “and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat,” not on the mountain of Nisir.

-According to the Epic Gilgamesh it took 6 days for the flood to reside, whereas as in Genesis 8:3-4 it took Noah's flood 150 days to recede, which is more realistic for a "global" flood. Furthermore, in Genesis 8:6-12 Noah sent out a raven first, and then sent out a dove three times before the dove did not return, whereas Gilgamesh sends out in order a dove, a swallow, and a raven. Again, big difference!!

In conclusion, the exaggerated claim that the Bible plagiarized its accounts of creation and the flood from ancient Near Eastern texts contains not one solid piece of corroboration. After examining each account side by side, there are way too many differences than there are similarities. Mainstream scholarship is practically in agreement that the ancient Near Eastern texts are mythological in nature because they hardly contain any historical data that can be validated. On the other hand, even though some do consider the Bible to be mythological, there is a far greater consensus in academic circles that the genre in the book of Genesis is largely historical narrative, which again is, a big difference. The creation of the universe, the creation of mankind, along with the flood in the book of Genesis are very descriptive and differ from the mythological Near Eastern accounts on several major fronts as mentioned above.

Lastly, in order to prove that any kind of plagiarism took place, there has to be some type of evidence to support such a claim, which would be extremely difficult if not impossible to prove simply because we are so far removed from when these accounts were written. To say that the Bible plagiarized from the ancient Near Eastern texts is just a general unsubstantiated claim with no specifics. If ancient history itself didn't provide any external charges of plagiarism, then for anyone to make an assumption of plagiarism after 30 centuries is practically in vain. That's like trying to convict somebody for a crime 3 thousand years later... To say that the mere existence of minor similarities between these accounts is all that's needed lacks the ample support to convict either one of plagiarism. That’s also like saying, a person looks like this other person who committed a crime, and therefore because that person looks like the other person, it’s solid proof that the look-alike person committed the crime. That’s not how it works in a courtroom setting! Yet, this is exactly what critics do with the accounts contained in the Bible. If the Bible even has a small scent of similarity to any other document in antiquity, the critics gavel is immediately hammered down for plagiarism. This is not true objective research, but just an outright attempt to reject God and the Bible. I mean, for all we know the ancient Near East could have plagiarized from the oral tradition of the ancient Israelites, but there is just no way to prove such a claim unless archaeology discovers something to confirm it. Therefore, the verdict according to the available evidence examined is simply a unanimous, "not guilty!" 

For more information on where we received some of our information, please click on the links below. Thank you for tuning in, and hopefully you are more informed on this matter of controversy. God bless all the Lord’s people!

#Truth #Therapy #Misconceptions #Clarified #NoPlagiarism

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-c001.html

http://www.sacred-texts.com/ane/enuma.htm

http://www.aina.org/books/eog/eog.pdf

http://www.religioustolerance.org/noah_com.htm

http://www.ancient.eu/article/225/

http://www.ancient.eu/gilgamesh/

https://phys.org/news/2010-07-oldest-written-document-jerusalem.html

Welcome to Misconceptions Clarified episode VI, where this article will be focused on answering the question, "Can Religion and Politics Coexist?"

Now, with the recent political situation trending between presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, and with the current religious climate of pluralism in the United States of America, it is almost a sin to discuss religion and politics together in the same conversation. There is this very familiar phrase that often gets quoted at places of businesses or any other establishment like the church that religion and politics should not be mentioned under the same breath. Everyone pretty much knows the phrase, "Don't mix politics with religion," unless you are ready to do battle. That's how critical discussions involving religion and politics can reach because of certain beliefs, and when those beliefs get challenged by those with opposing views, tensions can rise really quick, which is the reason why many try to avoid such conversations. However, should religion and politics be kept separated just because people have different opinions? Or, can religion and politics coexist together?

You see, there is this huge misconception that religion and politics should be kept away from each other like a cat and mouse. Unfortunately, trying to keep a person's faith (which compromises one-third of the human make-up) away from the activities associated with the governance of a country is like trying to keep a male dog away from a female dog in heat in the same room. It's just not going to happen! Here's why... First, as mentioned previously, faith/spirituality is part of the human make-up. Second, politics also known as the activities associated with the governance of a country directly affects humanity because there are laws that govern every country in the world on matters pertaining to religion. For instance, the First Amendment of the United States Constitution "prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble, or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances."

Hence, the constitution itself (a political document) automatically clarifies the misconception that politics and religion can coexist because the very core document that governs the United States of America contains a clause respecting the free exercise of religion. Nevertheless, some might oppose this argument by citing the doctrine of separation of church and state to say that religion and politics cannot coexist. However, many who use this argument take the whole concept of separation of church and state out of context. When Thomas Jefferson wrote his letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802 regarding the separation of church and state, it was to ensure that those who practiced their religious beliefs would not be persecuted for their faith. His letter had nothing to do with a literal interpretation that politics and religion should be completely separated from our government, from our schools, and from our secular institutions. Yet, this faulty interpretation has caused many institutions across the United States from even discussing religion, especially anything pertaining to Christianity, which is the reason why prayer has been eliminated out of the public schools. This misinterpretation of Thomas Jefferson's letter written to a "church" was used as ammunition to exclude any discussion of religion, which goes completely against the vision of the American forefathers. And believe it or not, America was established by Christians and the language incorporated in the constitution was constructed on Christian principles. Therefore, this idea that religion and politics cannot coexist is just a lie from Satan, who by the way is the father of lies according to John 8:44.

On the flip side of things, what does the Bible have to say about the coexistence of religion and politics??? Well, as everyone probably already knows, the bible itself (a book of faith) is composed of many historical accounts that contain interactions between God and his people. However, little do people know that faith and politics are embedded throughout the pages of the Bible. For instance, Joseph became second in command to the Pharaoh in the Book of Genesis chapter forty-one. And as mentioned previously, politics involve the activities associated with the governance of a country. Hence, with Joseph being second in command, the position came with an enormous amount of responsibility that obviously involved politics, which is a great example of how religion and politics coexisted in the life of Joseph. Another figure in the Bible that contains a combination of religion and politics at work is Moses, who had the responsibility of governing a whole nation out of Egypt to the brink of the Promised Land. There are four books in the Bible (Exodus, Deuteronomy, Leviticus, and Numbers) that are dedicated alone to how Moses led Israel politically and spiritually. His responsibility was so great that Jethro his father-in-law had to give him some tips on how to better govern Israel in Exodus 18. In addition to that, the Bible also contains fifteen judges, and reluctantly Samuel (another great example) is someone who served in both capacities as a judge and priest. And if this isn't enough evidence that religion and politics can coexist, the Bible also contains the history of the kings of Israel in which many of them were very religious. King David in particular was a king and a man after God's own heart according to 1 Samuel 13:14.

Furthermore, majority of the American Forefathers such as John Adams, Patrick Henry, James Madison, George Washington and many others were Christians who served in major political functions. As a matter fact, George Washington said in his first general order to his own troops: "Every officer and man...to live, and act, as becomes a Christian Soldier defending the dearest rights and liberties of his country." In 1777, the Continental Congress approved $300,000 dollars to be spent on the purchase of Bibles and were to be distributed across the 13 colonies. Additionally, in 1782 the United States Congress approved the Holy Bible to be used in all schools. So, this idea that politics and religion cannot coexist or that separation of church and state had to be completely removed from each other was never the intent of the forefathers of this great nation. Only the Lord knows how the American patriarchs would react to the liberal climate of the twenty-first century...

In conclusion, not only is there evidence from the constitution along with the historical evidence of the American forefathers who loyally tangled their faith along with their politics together, there is also plenty of evidence in the Bible, which clarifies the misconception that religion and politics has coexisted historically and can coexist today. Unfortunately, the problem many people have when discussing the issues pertaining to religion and politics stems from a lack of understanding that people have different political and religious beliefs. And until we understand that there exists a difference of opinions, there will always be dissension that will arise anytime faith and politics are grouped together in the same conversation.

Lastly, Christians in all circumstances need to be wise as serpents and innocent as doves when it comes to this kind of dialogue. The Bible says in 1 Peter 3:15, that we are to always be prepared to give a reason for the hope that is within us, but we are to do it with gentleness and respect. This is the key for Christians anytime they are engaged in these kind of conversations involving religion and politics; to be gentle and to be respectful to everybody whose views may be different. There are ways to voice religious or political views with those who have opposing views, by being gentle, by being respectful, by being kind, by listening, and by asking the right questions. Christians need to cast down this misconception (gently and respectfully) that religion and politics cannot coexist, and start getting more involved with the activities governing this great nation. Unfortunately, it's because Christians believed this misconception that religion and politics cannot coexist, it's because Christians have disengaged from assuming political roles in our government, and it's because the church has taken a step back from the political scene that enabled this country to go from a known "Christian nation" to a "nation of citizens." So let’s pick up the mantle, let's run the race marked out for us with perseverance, and let's fight the good fight for the faith by getting more involved in the realm of religion and politics in order to restore the foundation God established in the beginning. 

#Misconceptions #Clarified #Religion #Politics #Can #Coexist

Want more information please check out David Barton's DVD series American Heritage or click on this link: http://faithofourfathers.net

Welcome to “Misconceptions Clarified V” where this episode will focus its attention on the slavery in the Bible. Now, before this article gets into the specifics, it is our prayer that whoever reads this article will be open to observing this sensitive topic from a different perspective. Unfortunately, the scars of slavery are cut so deep in history that anytime this subject is discussed, all kinds of emotions arise especially when it pertains to American slavery and the slavery mentioned in the Bible. There are many people who have very strong opinions against slavery (and rightly so), however, the agenda of this episode is not to stir up dissension, but to provide a better understanding. When people read about the slavery in the Bible, there are some who question its practice and question God on why he allowed such an institution to take shape. Moreover, some consider the slavery in the Bible to be immoral and reject God because of it.  However, was the slavery in the Bible considered immoral? Was the practice of slavery by the Israelites the same as the practice of slavery in America? And, why would a loving God tolerate such a tradition and develop laws governing the institution of slavery?

Critics specifically mention Leviticus 25:44-46, Exodus 21:20-21, and even magnify what Jesus said in Luke 12:47-48 to mean that Jesus not only approved slavery, but also condoned the beating of slaves. Nevertheless, is there any truth to these claims? Is the slavery found in the Bible really immoral? Well, the answer to this question is both “yes” and “no.” Here's why. First, when examining the slavery in the Bible, one must study the practice of slavery for each nation independently. Many times when the topic of slavery is discussed, there's this assumption that all slavery was the same in all nations when in fact, it’s not. For instance, Egyptian and Hebrew slavery in the Bible were two different types of slavery governed by two different set of laws. In Genesis 15:13, before slavery was even introduced, God told Abraham that his descendants would be strangers in their own land and enslaved in hard bondage for four hundred years. But, in Leviticus 25:44 when the Israelites were delivered out of captivity, Moses said that male and female slaves were going to come from the nations around them. Meaning, slaves from other nations were going to volunteer themselves into the hands of the Israelites, which is a big difference from being held against one’s own free will like what the Egyptians did to the Israelites. You see, the main difference between Egyptian and Hebrew slavery is that one was forced and the other was volunteer, which is why slavery must be examined independently within each nation, not grouped together as one universal tradition.

Another problem many critics have when it comes to the slavery in the Bible is that they unknowingly perceive the slavery in the bible to be similar to the form of American slavery, which is not true. In order to understand ancient scripture, one must remove themselves from their own context to really grasp what was going on. Obviously, what was practiced approximately 3500 years ago will not be exactly the same in the modern era. Now, this is not to say that some Hebrews didn't mistreat their slaves because there are always a few bad apples that fall from every tree. However, just like the Egyptians, American slavery was also a forced system, whereas Hebrew slavery was performed on a volunteer basis. There is this huge misconception that when Israel was delivered out of captivity that they left Egypt on some vendetta to see how many slaves they could capture like how it was in America. That's the wrong answer! As a matter of fact, people from other nations were throwing themselves at the mercy of the Israelites because they heard how God delivered them from the most powerful nation on earth at the time. Therefore, the Israelites didn't have to force people into slavery because they were volunteering themselves, which isn't slavery at all if one volunteers their labor in exchange for food, shelter, wages, or to satisfy a debt. A better term for this kind of volunteer service would be servitude or indentured servant, not the negative connotations associated with slavery.

Furthermore, Moses issues a decree against slave traders in Exodus 21:16 that somehow seems to get overlooked which says, “Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession.” In addition, Paul in the New Testament also condemns slave trading in 1 Timothy 1:9-10; “We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine” Which means that the reason the law of Moses contains laws pertaining to slavery was to protect those who volunteered themselves into service from any lawbreakers. And believe it or not, when you compare the Law of Moses to any other ancient law codes such as the Hammurabi or the Hittite laws, the Law of Moses was by far a better code that protected all people to include runaway slaves from other nations.

So, this idea that the law of Moses permitted forced slavery or that God approved the incarceration of the free will is a complete perversion of the scriptures. There is nothing immoral about a person volunteering their labor to satisfy a debt, to make a living, or to provide for their families. As a matter of fact, the law of Moses in Exodus 21:2-6 not only permitted servants to be released from their contractual obligations after 6 years like how athletes can become free agents after their contracts expire, but servants could serve their masters for life if they loved their masters, which many of them did. Why? Because life as an indentured servant was not a bad way to make a living contrary to popular belief. And for those wondering why male and female slaves from other nations would volunteer themselves as servants… The answer is simple! Because the law of Moses protected any "volunteer" slave from being mistreated. It says in Exodus 22:21, “Do not mistreat or oppress a foreigner, for you were foreigners in Egypt.” And in Deuteronomy 23:15 it says, “If a slave has taken refuge with you, do not hand them over to their master. Let them live among you wherever they like and in whatever town they choose. Do not oppress them.” Hence, little do people realize that the male and female slaves that volunteered themselves were already slaves to other nations. They volunteered their labor to the Israelites because the law of Moses protected them from being mistreated unlike the other nations, which proves the fact that God actually cares for all his people regardless of race, age, or status!

Therefore, this misconception regarding the immorality of slavery in the bible has been clarified. The answer to the question, "is the slavery in the bible immoral" depends on the nation under investigation. If it's in reference to ancient Egyptian slavery, then yes because people were forced beyond their own free will. But, if it's in reference to Hebrew slavery, then no because people volunteered themselves. There is nothing immoral about a person volunteering their labor in exchange for benefits, which is no different from those who live in the 21st century who volunteer their labor in exchange for a pay check. So, if you are reading this and have struggled with this issue, just remember that the practice of slavery was a night and day difference from Egypt to Israel to America, and needs to be examined independently in order to gain a better understanding. Many times walls are built up as soon as the word slavery is mentioned, and anyone seeking the truth must remove any prejudices out of the equation to find the truth. And, even though the institution of forced slavery is immoral, it’s not because of God that the institution of slavery existed in the first place. That’s the wrong answer again! In the Bible, it says in Genesis 1:31 that after God saw all that he made, it was very good. Unfortunately, slavery entered the scene of human history because of sin, because of disobedience to God’s holy commandments, and because humanity abused the authority, the dominion, and the free-will God created them to have in the beginning of creation. It’s not because of God that slavery existed, it’s because of his creation who abused the image they were made out of! That’s the reason why! The finger points back to creation, not to the Creator!

Oh, and before this article ends, one last item that needs to be clarified pertains to what Jesus said in Luke 12:47-48. Sadly enough, critics of the Bible love to isolate certain scriptures to prove their objections and one perfect example of this comes from the parable of Jesus that had nothing to do with his "approval" of beating slaves. Jesus was merely citing an example of how a master beats his slave for going "against" the master's will to demonstrate the need for the body of Christ to act accordingly even though we do not know when our Master in heaven will return back to earth to judge the living and the dead. Jesus' parable to the disciples had nothing to do with his approval of slavery. However, since the disciples were familiar with slavery, it was appropriate for Jesus at the time to use slavery as an example to teach the disciples how they need to keep a watchful eye on their Master's return. In order to understand exactly what Jesus was saying in the parable, one needs to read the whole context starting from Luke 12:35. The only reason why the slave in the context was being beat in the first place wasn't because the master was abusing his power over the slave, but it was because the slave was abusing his power by beating the menservants and maidservants because the master was taking a long time in his coming, and when the master found out what the slave did, he beat the slave with many blows. Again, this misconception that Jesus approves slavery is just a misinterpretation of the text, and clarified after further evaluation. This parable just demonstrates to us today that when we abuse our God-given rights as human beings, whether you believe in God or not, that God will punish the wicked, the evil doers, and the disobedient. God is always watching and his eyes run to and fro throughout the whole universe. So even though the Lord might seem to be taking a long time in his coming, everyone can rest assure that when He does come again that justice will be served. Hence, it is our prayer that anyone who might be on the border line of their faith reading this will reevaluate their objections, ask for forgiveness, and come to the true light of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Be blessed and see you on the next installment of Misconceptions Clarified.

#MisconceptionsClarified #Time4Truth #TruthTherapy

For more information, please click on the video below or purchase "Confound The Critics; Answers for Attacks on Biblical Truths" a book by Bodie Hodge that clarifies many of the misconceptions surrounding the Bible and Christianity.