This article is the first in a series of articles that introduce my idea of the on-demand print book "Day 4: Why the Bible is historically accurate."
When I was a college student, I was introduced to the unmistakable concept of the Bible. My pastor, Al Jackson of the Lakeview Baptist Church in Auburn, Alabama, satirized the Word of God, the Bible, "God breathed." He explained that since the Bible is "God breathes," it is like Adam, and so when God injects life into humanity in Genesis's book. The design of the Bible is like the creation of human beings, when God taught the forty authors what to write. The design of the Bible is that the entire book is the revelation of the human savior Jesus Christ. The Bible points to Christ in a very direct way by giving specific characteristics of human life. The Old Testament prophecy indicates that he will be born in Bethlehem, through Jesse's route and virginity. The spiritual aspect of Christ is implied in the symbol of atonement and sacrifice, in which the animal is placed on the altar and then sprinkled with salt, symbolizing the symbol of eternality, to represent the once and for all sacrifice that the Son of God will do. One day doing it on the cross. God coordinates all this information to Christ, God's plan for salvation for mankind.
Since my pastor explained these things to me, I have kept them in mind, and I have studied the Bible with the Bible in history and in a mentally correct manner. Conservative Christians use this philosophy in every subject covered by the Bible, except for a chronology. The research chronology of the historical timeline has been a subject, and it believes that the Christian community acknowledges failure. For whatever reason, modern Christians have reached compromises with scholars, many of whom are completely opposed to the Christian faith, so the biblical timeline will have the authenticity of historians.
An article in the Biblical Archaeological Review effectively measures the level of biblical confrontation that archaeology can demonstrate. Consider an excerpt from the opening paragraph entitled "The Minimalism in the Parade [Biblical Archaeological Review, January/February 2005, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 16-17]: "Recently At the Historical Conference on the Reconstruction of Israel held in Rome, the so-called biblical minimalist position was supported by many dominant philosophies. However, this position is not singular, and different minimalist schools emphasize different arguments.
* The Bible cannot be used as historical information. [Define the position of the Bible minimalist.]
* Archaeology can't, it can only tell us what ancient Israelis ate from a 20 or 30 cm wide bowl. The history of Israel based on archaeology is useless.
* No Exodus.
*The famous Tel Dan inscription unearthed by the Israeli archaeologist Avraham Biran mentions that David may be forged; the Hebrew text in the inscription "David's House [Dynasty]" may mean something else. .
*David and Solomon are just symbolic characters, not real characters.
* The biblical accounts of the United Kingdom and Israel under the rule of David and Solomon were only a prediction of a distant myth.
*Judas became a country only about a hundred years after David - if he is alive. "A scholar cited in this article, Giovanni Garbini of the University of Roga Lazapinza, published a particularly provocative comment in this article: "The name Jacob" Apparently the exiles of the post-in exile era [after Babylon]. These minimalists who seem to represent most archaeological circles do not believe that the Bible is historically accurate. In their objection: they do not believe David, Solomon or Jacob realized and did not believe that the Exodus had happened. These positions are in opposition to the conservative Christian biblical concept, because people can imagine why we [Christians] understand the history of the Bible. When such a valuable concept is expressed, should the advice of this group be sought? What is happening.
This is another question that relies on the scientific community to certify the Bible: they have a blind of "rationality." Scientists who distrust Christ are limited in their ability to investigate because they believe that certain phenomena are impossible even before the investigation begins. Because they consider themselves to be "rational" scientists, the assumption of an "irrational" event is incredible. Scientific methods basically allow anyone to make assumptions [any hypothesis], study or experiment with known facts and use research and/or experimentation to validate claims. When faced with the "irrational" assumption, these "rational" scientists simply skip the research and experimental process and claim that the hypothesis is invalid because they assume that the "irrational" assumption is impossible. So why are these "rational" scientists like this? Then, please consider the following possibilities. Let us assume an "irrational" event and group the information or experiment to confirm its validity. Let us say that irrational events have been verified. What is the response of "rational" scientists? More likely, completely denied. Such income would cause complete confusion in his philosophy, because his "rational" survey method, the scientific method, would be used to prove that "irrational" events are possible. So what is an "irrational" event? This is just another way of telling a supernatural event that is beyond our understanding. Can scientific processes be used to verify "irrational" events? Jesus Christ thinks so. In the New Testament [John 3:8], Jesus explained this "rebirth" idea to a Pharisee named Nicodemus: "The wind blows where it wants, you are here. Make a sound, but you don't know where it comes from or where it goes. So everyone is born in the Holy Spirit. "Nicodemus is obviously confused about the concept of this "rebirth", but Jesus said that even if you disagree or I believe that this supernatural phenomenon may occur, something as invisible as the wind, there will be a clear evidence.
Of course not all scientists believe in this way, but most scientists do. How many of these scientists will look at the Bible without a preconceived notion? When these scientists read in the Bible that the earth was created within seven days, they would not think it was true because they had been trained to believe that the universe had been billions of years old. When these scientists read that a person lived in the Bible until 969, they regarded it as a myth or fairy tale, because men don't live so old now. They will not consider the possibility of a man's longevity in history. When these people read Noah's reports and world-wide floods, they always blamed it on the "local" flood. This may have some authenticity, because until that time, according to the Bible, the world is a land [the world is in one place, the local]. According to the Bible, the life of the continent until the descendant of Noah's descendant Peleg split. Similarly, scientists will certainly not agree with this theory of land mass transfer because they insist that this geological process will take millions of years to adapt to the movement of continental land masses. Since these archaeologists disagree with Christians on many of the basic issues described in the Bible, how do we agree on a historical timeline?
The chronological Bible model is now based on a mixture of biblical truth and theoretical historical models. I believe it is time to consider a new method of biblical chronology. The model I proposed is based entirely on the information in the Bible. If the Bible is true, the historian will confirm the theologian's results [assuming the theologian correctly explained the Bible]. Why does the Word of God have to be certified by men? If the Bible is truly trustworthy, then the truth of the Bible should be placed in the eyes of the people and respond to its truth. In 1995, the Egyptian scientist David Rohl wrote his book "Timely Testing, Presenting a completely different chronology theory." He proposed a timetable based on some biblical evidence. In fact, the date of Solomon's rule proposed by Rohr is consistent with the timetable formed by my literal interpretation of the Bible. What is even more surprising about David Rohr is that he was described by archaeologists as an extremist. He believes that the Bible is historically accurate, but he describes himself as a spiritual "agnostic". If David Rohr is an extremist, then I am a "biggest" extremist. Someone must be David Lohr's point of view, because I believe that the Bible is historically accurate and indeed God. The words because it claims to be. Therefore, I believe that my views on the Bible chronology are different from anything you have heard before.
The purpose of my book "Fourth Day: Why the Bible is Historically Accurate" is to prove a biblical concept that I believe will synchronize the events recorded in the Bible with Egyptian history, Babylonian history, Persian history and archaeology. The recognition of this concept will enable the reader to combine all of these areas of research so that when viewed together, there is no difference between the Bible and these other elements of ancient history. The recognition of this concept will also explain...
Orignal From: Old Testament History Revision - What if the Bible is correct for history?
No comments:
Post a Comment