From a Russian pastor who saw the fall of the Soviet Union:
“Growing up, we only had one Bible among a 600-person congregation. Sadly, after communism fell we got a number of people who got degrees in the U.S., came to Russia, and started to spread really weird stuff. Like, ‘I have a Ph.D.; why do you believe in a six-day creation?’ And when I try to speak to them, they say, ‘You don’t have a degree. You can’t speak.’”
“When I started to come to the U.S., I was really surprised to hear things like that. How can you be a Christian and not believe in a six-day creation? It doesn’t make sense at all. If God is great, He could create for one day! He chose six days, so why do they try to limit Him?”
(excerpted from Dao, C. 2011. Russian Pastor Visits ICR. Acts & Facts. 40 (2): 22.)
(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)
(On Twitter: FOLLOW uMarko or http://www.twitter.com/uMarko)
Showing posts with label Biblical Inerrancy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Biblical Inerrancy. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Tuesday, March 08, 2011
Genesis -> the Inerrant Foundation of the Gospel
The literal Genesis record of supernatural creation is the foundation of the true gospel of Christ and all crucial aspects of biblical Christianity. True education, true science, and even the institution of marriage and family, are also based on the truths found in Genesis. In fact, all truth in every area of life finds its beginning in the Genesis record—the very word means “beginning,” after all. God placed it first in the Bible for a very good reason, for it is the foundation of all foundations.
But while Genesis is the foundation, it is not the complete structure. Jesus Christ is our Creator, but He has also become our Redeemer and will one day be acknowledged by all as King and Lord. Thus, winning the world and all its systems back to God must be our ultimate goal. Of course, no organization could achieve such a task alone, and it will never be fully accomplished until Christ returns to “make all things new” (Revelation 21:5). But we should at least be earnestly working toward that end, doing what we can to meet this great challenge.
(excerpted from Morris IV, H. 2011. Commitment to a Timeless Message. Acts & Facts. 40 (2): 21.)
(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)
(On Twitter: FOLLOW uMarko or http://www.twitter.com/uMarko)
But while Genesis is the foundation, it is not the complete structure. Jesus Christ is our Creator, but He has also become our Redeemer and will one day be acknowledged by all as King and Lord. Thus, winning the world and all its systems back to God must be our ultimate goal. Of course, no organization could achieve such a task alone, and it will never be fully accomplished until Christ returns to “make all things new” (Revelation 21:5). But we should at least be earnestly working toward that end, doing what we can to meet this great challenge.
(excerpted from Morris IV, H. 2011. Commitment to a Timeless Message. Acts & Facts. 40 (2): 21.)
(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)
(On Twitter: FOLLOW uMarko or http://www.twitter.com/uMarko)
Labels:
Biblical Inerrancy,
Creation Science,
ICR,
Theology
Saturday, January 22, 2011
Adam's descendents were too numerous for a local flood
"If Adam's listed descendents each produced only 10 offspring during his lifetime, Adam would have had more than 10 million descendents when he died at age 930." (Downing 2011)
Adam died 492 years before the flood, according to Bishop Usher's Biblical chronology, and even earlier in other interpretations of the biblical dating. Extremely long lifetimes are definitely reported in the pre-Flood account of Genesis, tailing off to present-day expected lifetimes only long after the time of Abraham.
This is another strong evidence that the Genesis account upholds a global flood! A local flood could not have wiped out 10 million people. Only a global flood could have done this. The book of Genesis teaches us that God saved only Noah and his family from destruction, by His grace. All others perished, because of their sin and rebellion.
References
Downing, Jim. 2011. 75 Years as a Disciple-Maker, an Interview with Jim Downing, Mission Frontiers 33(1):30.
Adam died 492 years before the flood, according to Bishop Usher's Biblical chronology, and even earlier in other interpretations of the biblical dating. Extremely long lifetimes are definitely reported in the pre-Flood account of Genesis, tailing off to present-day expected lifetimes only long after the time of Abraham.
This is another strong evidence that the Genesis account upholds a global flood! A local flood could not have wiped out 10 million people. Only a global flood could have done this. The book of Genesis teaches us that God saved only Noah and his family from destruction, by His grace. All others perished, because of their sin and rebellion.
References
Downing, Jim. 2011. 75 Years as a Disciple-Maker, an Interview with Jim Downing, Mission Frontiers 33(1):30.
Labels:
Apologetics,
Biblical Inerrancy,
Creation Science,
Flood,
Geology,
Theology
Friday, December 31, 2010
Beware New Science Curricula for Christian Schools!
The BioLogos Forum, founded by Dr. Francis Collins (President Obama's pick to head the National Institutes of Health), is aggressively leading the charge into biblical compromise. BioLogos teaches that the Bible is not completely without error, that Adam was symbolic and not real, and that Genesis does not teach the creation of the material world. On their website they announce that if Christians today do not accept the theory of evolution, the Church will die off in the form of an insignificant cult!
BioLogos is conducting workshops for Christian school science teachers in order to train them how to teach evolution to their students - to supposedly harmonize the Bible and Darwinian evolution in the classroom. They are also developing an evolution-based science curriculum for use in homeschools and Christian schools. One of the BioLogos teachers, Dr. Peter Enns [recently terminated by Westminster Theological Seminary for his views that are contrary to Biblical Inerrancy - MM], is even developing a Bible story curriculum for children! Anticipated to release in February 2011, this material is being published by homeschool guru Susan Wise Bauer. Parents, beware! BioLogos is also leading and participating in Christian conferences to influence pastors and other Christian leaders with the message that the Bible and evolution are compatible.
There is a Biblical alternative for Christian schools. In Fall 2010, the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) launched Science Education Essentials, a new line of science curriculum supplements that cover topics with a crucial bearing on creation and evolution. Five modules are now available:
(Lawrence E. Ford, Executive Editor, "Confronting Evolutionary Ideas", Acts & Facts, January 2011, Institute of Creation Research)
BioLogos is conducting workshops for Christian school science teachers in order to train them how to teach evolution to their students - to supposedly harmonize the Bible and Darwinian evolution in the classroom. They are also developing an evolution-based science curriculum for use in homeschools and Christian schools. One of the BioLogos teachers, Dr. Peter Enns [recently terminated by Westminster Theological Seminary for his views that are contrary to Biblical Inerrancy - MM], is even developing a Bible story curriculum for children! Anticipated to release in February 2011, this material is being published by homeschool guru Susan Wise Bauer. Parents, beware! BioLogos is also leading and participating in Christian conferences to influence pastors and other Christian leaders with the message that the Bible and evolution are compatible.
There is a Biblical alternative for Christian schools. In Fall 2010, the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) launched Science Education Essentials, a new line of science curriculum supplements that cover topics with a crucial bearing on creation and evolution. Five modules are now available:
- The Origin of Life
- The Structure of Matter
- Human Heredity
- Genetic Diversity
- Geologic Processes
![]() |
| Science Education Essentials for Christian Schools |
(Lawrence E. Ford, Executive Editor, "Confronting Evolutionary Ideas", Acts & Facts, January 2011, Institute of Creation Research)
Thursday, December 09, 2010
Reformed Blacks of America...
RBA is an organization helping to unite the growing movement of African Americans embracing the Reformed faith. It seeks to build and maintain an infrastructure and network among African-Americans in a Reformed theological context for indigenous leadership, church growth and theological research for today's world.
RBA was led to its existence due to the lack of an intentional multifaceted structure through which the Reformed Black community in all its diversity can reach its fullest potential in America. The cultivation of this infrastructure will be fulfilled through these three aspects of the mission of RBA: (1) the advancement of indigenous Black Reformed leadership, (2) growth of Reformed Black churches and (3) theological research that addresses the pathologies of Black America and the challenges of this complex world.
One of RBA's distinctives is that it embodies the next generation of Black Reformed thinkers and thought.
RBA on the Doctrines of Grace: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistable Grace, Perseverence of the Saints.
The Cambridge Declaration: Sola Scriptura, Solus Christus, Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Soli Deo Gloria.
For more info, see http://reformedblacksofamerica.org/.
![]() |
| Black Tulip. |
One of RBA's distinctives is that it embodies the next generation of Black Reformed thinkers and thought.
RBA on the Doctrines of Grace: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistable Grace, Perseverence of the Saints.
The Cambridge Declaration: Sola Scriptura, Solus Christus, Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Soli Deo Gloria.
For more info, see http://reformedblacksofamerica.org/.
Tuesday, December 07, 2010
Let us not Waver on the Savior and the Creator
Why do so many “Christians” and “churches” waver on the fundamental doctrines of the Bible? How can they deny God the power and might to create the world in six days? Why do they deny the detailed account of a flood that covered the entire world? When will they realize that they are treading on dangerous ground by turning God’s inerrant and inspired Word into a supposedly flawed book of myths mixed with history?
As we think of the birth of Jesus this month, we must remember that the Son of God not only created the world with great purpose, but that He also came to us to fulfill one grand purpose—the salvation of our souls. It’s so clear in Scripture—from Genesis to Revelation.
When “the reason for the season” is torn away from the pages of the Bible, why should we be surprised that Christian teachers—some calling themselves evangelicals—describe God as an evolutionist? May God have mercy on them!
And may God grant us all a renewed determination to take and maintain our stand for the Creator and His holy Word.
(Lawrence E. Ford, Executive Editor, Acts & Facts, December 2010, Institute of Creation Research)
As we think of the birth of Jesus this month, we must remember that the Son of God not only created the world with great purpose, but that He also came to us to fulfill one grand purpose—the salvation of our souls. It’s so clear in Scripture—from Genesis to Revelation.
When “the reason for the season” is torn away from the pages of the Bible, why should we be surprised that Christian teachers—some calling themselves evangelicals—describe God as an evolutionist? May God have mercy on them!
And may God grant us all a renewed determination to take and maintain our stand for the Creator and His holy Word.
(Lawrence E. Ford, Executive Editor, Acts & Facts, December 2010, Institute of Creation Research)
Labels:
Apologetics,
Biblical Inerrancy,
Christian Life,
Creation Science,
ICR
Monday, December 06, 2010
Nebraska Fetal Pain Law Hailed as Successful
Research clearly substantiates the concept of fetal pain in the 2nd trimester. This is the motivation behind Nebraska's new Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which prevents abortions after 20 weeks from fertilization, when substantial medical evidence indicates unborn children feel pain.
The genius behind the legislation was the thinking that it would be challenged in court and the pro-life movement could win a favorable decision from the high court on the heels of the ruling upholding the national partial-birth abortion ban.
This quote is from Mary Balch, Nebraska's legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee.But, with the news that the late-term abortion practitioner LeRoy Carhart is possibly relocating to another state and him saying the fetal pain bill is responsible, Balch says the further genius of the bill is seen.
“This announcement illustrates the importance of having states pass protective laws such as the one passed in Nebraska,” Balch told LifeNews.com. “Now is the time for Right to Lifers to capitalize on the dramatic pro-life gains in state legislative and gubernatorial elections last week and to make it illegal to kill unborn children who are capable of feeling pain.”
For more, see Steven Ertelt's article at LifeNews.
The genius behind the legislation was the thinking that it would be challenged in court and the pro-life movement could win a favorable decision from the high court on the heels of the ruling upholding the national partial-birth abortion ban.
This quote is from Mary Balch, Nebraska's legislative director for the National Right to Life Committee.But, with the news that the late-term abortion practitioner LeRoy Carhart is possibly relocating to another state and him saying the fetal pain bill is responsible, Balch says the further genius of the bill is seen.
“This announcement illustrates the importance of having states pass protective laws such as the one passed in Nebraska,” Balch told LifeNews.com. “Now is the time for Right to Lifers to capitalize on the dramatic pro-life gains in state legislative and gubernatorial elections last week and to make it illegal to kill unborn children who are capable of feeling pain.”
For more, see Steven Ertelt's article at LifeNews.
“At twenty weeks into pregnancy, unborn children have pain receptors throughout their bodies connected by nerves to the brain’s thalamus, they recoil from painful stimuli, their stress hormones shoot up, and they are routinely anesthetized when undergoing fetal surgery. While we expect substantial resistance from abortion advocates, we believe most Americans agree in rejecting abortions that cause excruciating pain, and look forward to protective laws being given serious consideration in a significant number of states.”
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Are you a 12-point Calvinist? TULIP, FABRIC & More
In 1619, in order to answer Arminianism, the Five Points of Calvinism were codified by the Synod of Dort. They are summarized by the acronym TULIP:
Total Depravity (also known as Total Inability and Original Sin)
Unconditional Election
Limited Atonement (also known as Particular Atonement)
Irresistible Grace
Perseverance of the Saints (also known as Once Saved Always Saved)
In 1910, in order to answer "Modernism", the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the USA, passed the Doctrinal Deliverance, which declared that Five Fundamentals were "necessary and essential" to the Christian faith.
In 1961, in order to answer Theistic Evolution, the modern Creation Science movement was revived with the publication of The Genesis Flood: The Biblical Record and its Scientific Implications, by John C. Whitcomb and Henry M. Morris, which reminded Bible believers how vital Creation and the Flood are to the faith.
These tenets of the faith after TULIP - the Five Fundamentals, Creation, and the Flood - may be summarized by the acronym FABRIC & M:
Flood of Noah was global
Atonement for sin by Christ's death
Birth from a virgin of the Lord Jesus Christ
Resurrection of Christ in his body
Inerrancy of Scripture
Creation in the six literal days of Genesis chapter one
Miracles of Christ were a historical reality
Today, in the early 21st century, Biblical Christianity is coming under increasing pressure. The Five Points of Calvinism, the Five Fundamentals, and now Creation and the Flood are just 12 battle grounds of the faith, with More to come. TULIP, FABRIC & More.
Total Depravity (also known as Total Inability and Original Sin)
Unconditional Election
Limited Atonement (also known as Particular Atonement)
Irresistible Grace
Perseverance of the Saints (also known as Once Saved Always Saved)
In 1910, in order to answer "Modernism", the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in the USA, passed the Doctrinal Deliverance, which declared that Five Fundamentals were "necessary and essential" to the Christian faith.
In 1961, in order to answer Theistic Evolution, the modern Creation Science movement was revived with the publication of The Genesis Flood: The Biblical Record and its Scientific Implications, by John C. Whitcomb and Henry M. Morris, which reminded Bible believers how vital Creation and the Flood are to the faith.
These tenets of the faith after TULIP - the Five Fundamentals, Creation, and the Flood - may be summarized by the acronym FABRIC & M:
Flood of Noah was global
Atonement for sin by Christ's death
Birth from a virgin of the Lord Jesus Christ
Resurrection of Christ in his body
Inerrancy of Scripture
Creation in the six literal days of Genesis chapter one
Miracles of Christ were a historical reality
Today, in the early 21st century, Biblical Christianity is coming under increasing pressure. The Five Points of Calvinism, the Five Fundamentals, and now Creation and the Flood are just 12 battle grounds of the faith, with More to come. TULIP, FABRIC & More.
Labels:
Apologetics,
Biblical Inerrancy,
Creation Science,
Flood,
Theology
Sunday, November 14, 2010
Adam and Eve were Neolithic Farmers that God Chose?
Denis Alexander says that God called these two folks "into fellowship with himself so that they might know him as a personal God." This is what he writes in his book Creation or Evolution: Do We Have to Choose?, published in 2008.
Dr. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, brings up Alexander's teaching, as well as similar viewpoints from the BioLogos Forum, in his speech “Why Does the Universe Look So Old?” given on June 19 at the Ligonier Ministries 2010 National Conference. Mohler shows that "theological disaster ensues when the book of nature (general revelation) is used to trump God’s special revelation, when science is placed over Scripture as authoritative and compelling. That is the very heart of this discussion."
Below are more of Dr. Mohler's comments.
Selections from Why Does the Universe Look So Old? by R. Albert Mohler, Jr., Ph.D
(These excerpts by Marko are from the article published by Institute of Creation Science Acts & Facts October 2010, also available at http://www.icr.org/article/why-does-universe-look-so-old/).
A couple of Neolithic farmers? Is that in any way a possible, legitimate exegetical reading of Genesis? More disturbing is not the contents of the book, but the endorsement from J. I. Packer on the front cover, who says, “Surely the best informed, clearest, and most judicious treatment of the question and title that you can find anywhere today.”
Peter Enns, a fellow at the BioLogos Forum, wrote a series of articles on “Paul’s Adam,” in which he states, “For Paul, Adam and Eve were the parents of the human race. This is possible but not satisfying for those familiar with either the scientific or archeological data.” He suggests that we must abandon Paul’s Adam; Paul, as far as he refers to Adam, was limited by his dependence on primitive understandings.
Karl Giberson, a professor at Eastern Nazarene University and Vice President of BioLogos, says, “Clearly the historicity of Adam and Eve and their fall from grace are hard to reconcile with natural history.” He continues:
Was it true that, as Paul argues, when sin came, death also came?
Paul makes clear that, even though God has revealed Himself in nature—so that no one is with excuse—given the cloudiness of our vision and the corruption of our sight, we can no longer see what is clearly there. The heavens are telling the glory of God, but human sinfulness refuses to see what is plainly evident.
Theological disaster ensues when the book of nature (general revelation) is used to trump God’s special revelation, when science is placed over Scripture as authoritative and compelling. And that is the very heart of this discussion. While some would argue that the Scriptures are not in danger, the current conversation on this subject is leading down a path that will do irrevocable harm to our evangelical affirmation of the accuracy and authority of God’s Word.
Dr. Giberson is not someone attempting to defend the book of Genesis; his goal is to defend the theory of evolution.
Kenton Sparks, for example, writing for BioLogos, suggests that any rendering of the Bible as inerrant makes the acceptance of theistic evolution impossible.
Peter Enns, [recently terminated by Westminster Theological Seminary, Marko] one of the most frequent contributors to BioLogos, suggests that we have to come to the understanding that, when it comes to many of the scientific and historical claims, the writers of Scriptures were plainly wrong.
Are we going to take our cosmology or the redemptive historical understanding of Scripture and submit these to interrogation by what we are told are the assured results of modern science? Doing so will certainly lead to disaster, to a head-on collision that should compel Christians to understand just what is at stake theologically and to be prepared to give biblically-sound answers.
(For more on the very low view of God's Word found in Alexander's book, also see Paul Taylor's review at Answers in Genesis)
Dr. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, brings up Alexander's teaching, as well as similar viewpoints from the BioLogos Forum, in his speech “Why Does the Universe Look So Old?” given on June 19 at the Ligonier Ministries 2010 National Conference. Mohler shows that "theological disaster ensues when the book of nature (general revelation) is used to trump God’s special revelation, when science is placed over Scripture as authoritative and compelling. That is the very heart of this discussion."
Below are more of Dr. Mohler's comments.
Selections from Why Does the Universe Look So Old? by R. Albert Mohler, Jr., Ph.D
(These excerpts by Marko are from the article published by Institute of Creation Science Acts & Facts October 2010, also available at http://www.icr.org/article/why-does-universe-look-so-old/).
![]() |
| "Reconstruction" of Neolithic farmers at work |
Peter Enns, a fellow at the BioLogos Forum, wrote a series of articles on “Paul’s Adam,” in which he states, “For Paul, Adam and Eve were the parents of the human race. This is possible but not satisfying for those familiar with either the scientific or archeological data.” He suggests that we must abandon Paul’s Adam; Paul, as far as he refers to Adam, was limited by his dependence on primitive understandings.
Karl Giberson, a professor at Eastern Nazarene University and Vice President of BioLogos, says, “Clearly the historicity of Adam and Eve and their fall from grace are hard to reconcile with natural history.” He continues:
One could believe, for example, that at some point in evolutionary history God “chose” two people from a group of evolving humans, gave them his image, and put them in Eden, which they promptly corrupted by sinning. But this solution is unsatisfactory, artificial, and certainly not what the writer of Genesis intended.
Was it true that, as Paul argues, when sin came, death also came?
Paul makes clear that, even though God has revealed Himself in nature—so that no one is with excuse—given the cloudiness of our vision and the corruption of our sight, we can no longer see what is clearly there. The heavens are telling the glory of God, but human sinfulness refuses to see what is plainly evident.
Theological disaster ensues when the book of nature (general revelation) is used to trump God’s special revelation, when science is placed over Scripture as authoritative and compelling. And that is the very heart of this discussion. While some would argue that the Scriptures are not in danger, the current conversation on this subject is leading down a path that will do irrevocable harm to our evangelical affirmation of the accuracy and authority of God’s Word.
Dr. Giberson is not someone attempting to defend the book of Genesis; his goal is to defend the theory of evolution.
Kenton Sparks, for example, writing for BioLogos, suggests that any rendering of the Bible as inerrant makes the acceptance of theistic evolution impossible.
Peter Enns, [recently terminated by Westminster Theological Seminary, Marko] one of the most frequent contributors to BioLogos, suggests that we have to come to the understanding that, when it comes to many of the scientific and historical claims, the writers of Scriptures were plainly wrong.
Are we going to take our cosmology or the redemptive historical understanding of Scripture and submit these to interrogation by what we are told are the assured results of modern science? Doing so will certainly lead to disaster, to a head-on collision that should compel Christians to understand just what is at stake theologically and to be prepared to give biblically-sound answers.
(For more on the very low view of God's Word found in Alexander's book, also see Paul Taylor's review at Answers in Genesis)
Thursday, October 28, 2010
The Crucifixion Earthquake left its Mark
A distinctive mixed layer less than one inch thick of laminated Dead Sea sediment proves that there was a Jesus who was crucified - by the mark of the earthquake that God sent. As recorded in Scripture!
The New Testament testifies to an earthquake at the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Matthew 27:50-51 recounts that "when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit. At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook and the rocks split."
Dr Steven A. Austin, Senior Research Geologist of Logos Research Associates, travelled to Israel's Wadi Ze'elim to study sediment deposits of the Dead Sea. As he describes in his article Great Earthquakes of the Bible:
The Bible is confirmed yet again, by Science! Jesus was crucified - and God sealed his death with an earthquake that leaves its mark even to the present day.
Christ rose from the dead, and He leaves his mark in our lives and all over eternity. That is good news!
The New Testament testifies to an earthquake at the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Matthew 27:50-51 recounts that "when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit. At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook and the rocks split."
![]() |
| Judean Desert Near Wadi Ze'elim |
An outcrop of laminated Dead Sea sediment can be seen at Wadi Ze’elim above the southwestern shore of the modern Dead Sea near the fortress of Masada. In this sediment outcrop is a distinctive one-foot thick “mixed layer” of sediment that is tied strongly to the Qumran earthquake’s onshore ground ruptures of 31 B.C. (see Figure 2 below).
Thirteen inches above the 31 B.C. event bed is another distinctive “mixed layer” less than one inch thick. The sedimentation rate puts this second earthquake about 65 years after the 31 B.C. earthquake. It seems that the crucifixion earthquake of 33 A.D. was magnitude 5.5, leaving direct physical evidence in a thin layer of disturbed sediment from the Dead Sea.
The Bible is confirmed yet again, by Science! Jesus was crucified - and God sealed his death with an earthquake that leaves its mark even to the present day.
Christ rose from the dead, and He leaves his mark in our lives and all over eternity. That is good news!
Labels:
Biblical Inerrancy,
Creation Science,
Geology,
ICR
Saturday, October 23, 2010
The walls of Jericho really did fall in 1400BC, just like the Bible says.
Once again, the early date for the Exodus is proven, this time by earthquake records! From analysis of the uppermost 19 feet of laminated sediments of the Dead Sea. Pay attention, seminary professors...
One of the many battle lines for the truth of the Bible is the date for the Exodus of the Israelites out of Egypt.
In 1 Kings 6:1 the Bible states "In the four hundred and eightieth year after the people of Israel came out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv, which is the second month, he began to build the house of the LORD." If this construction is to be dated about 966 B.C., the Exodus would thus have taken place about 1446 B.C. The destruction of Jericho would then have occurred forty years later after the wanderings of the Israelites in the wilderness were completed, when Joshua led them into the Promised Land.
During the 20th century, this literal Biblical date for the Exodus was heavily disputed by Biblical critics, who instead argued that the Exodus happened some two hundreds years later. Wood (2008) explores this late date theory for the Exodus, which has now been largely discredited, but which is still taught at many evangelical seminaries:
Now, additional evidence for the early dating of the Exodus comes directly from scientists! Austin (2010), a geologist and creation scientist, evaluated the findings by Migowski et al. (2004), Agnon et al. (2006), and Ken-Tor et al. (2008). They are mainstream geologists who investigated the chronology of earthquake disturbances in the Dead Sea area. Austin took Migowski's data on the uppermost 19 feet of laminated sediment of the Dead Sea and plotted it to make a 4,000-year sediment chronology. The sediment core was drilled at the shore of the present lake near En Gedi.
Austin notes that:
Marko Malyj
M.S. Physics, Drexel University
M.Div. Pastoral Ministry, Westminster Theological Seminary
References
Agnon, A., C. Migowski and S. Marco. 2006. Intraclast Breccias in Laminated Sequences Reviewed: Recorders of Paleo-earthquakes. In New Frontiers in Dead Sea Paleoenvironmental Research. Enzel, Y., A. Agnon, and M. Stein, eds. Geological Society of America Special Paper 401, 195-214.
Austin, S. 2010. Greatest Earthquakes of the Bible. Acts & Facts 39(10): 12-15.
Ken-Tor, R. et al. 2001. High-resolution Geological Record of Historic Earthquakes in the Dead Sea Basin. Journal of Geophysical Research. 106 (B2): 2221-2234.
Kitchen, K.A. 2008. On the Reliability of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI. Eerdmans.
Migowski, C. et al. 2004. Recurrence Pattern of Holocene Earthquakes Along the Dead Sea Transform Revealed by Varve-counting and Radiocarbon Dating of Lacustrine Sediments. Earth and Planetary Sciences Letters. 222 (1): 301-314.
Wood, B.G. 2008. The Rise and Fall of the 13th Century Exodus Conquest Theory. Associates for Biblical Research.
One of the many battle lines for the truth of the Bible is the date for the Exodus of the Israelites out of Egypt.
In 1 Kings 6:1 the Bible states "In the four hundred and eightieth year after the people of Israel came out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv, which is the second month, he began to build the house of the LORD." If this construction is to be dated about 966 B.C., the Exodus would thus have taken place about 1446 B.C. The destruction of Jericho would then have occurred forty years later after the wanderings of the Israelites in the wilderness were completed, when Joshua led them into the Promised Land.
During the 20th century, this literal Biblical date for the Exodus was heavily disputed by Biblical critics, who instead argued that the Exodus happened some two hundreds years later. Wood (2008) explores this late date theory for the Exodus, which has now been largely discredited, but which is still taught at many evangelical seminaries:
The 13th century exodus-conquest theory was formulated by William F. Albright in the 1930s, based largely on Palestinian archaeological evidence, and promoted by him throughout his career. In the years following Albright’s death in 1971, however, evidence for the proposal dissipated and most Palestinian archaeologists abandoned the idea. In spite of the fact that the theory runs counter to Scripture, a number of evangelicals continue to hold to this view, prompting Carl G. Rasmussen to comment, “the Late-Date Exodus/Conquest Model has been abandoned by many scholars…it seems that currently the major adherents to the Late-Date Exodus/Conquest Model are some evangelicals!” A strong advocate of the theory is Kenneth A. Kitchen, who recently gave a detailed exposition of it in his On the Reliability of the Old Testament.Old Testament seminary professors who continue to teach this late dating of the Exodus also go on to question the truthfulness of other Old Testament accounts, such as the accounts of Kings and Chronicles, Isaiah as the single author of the book of Isaiah, the prophecies of Daniel, the truth of the global flood, and the six-day creation. They also object to using the Old Testament as a source book for scientific truth...
Now, additional evidence for the early dating of the Exodus comes directly from scientists! Austin (2010), a geologist and creation scientist, evaluated the findings by Migowski et al. (2004), Agnon et al. (2006), and Ken-Tor et al. (2008). They are mainstream geologists who investigated the chronology of earthquake disturbances in the Dead Sea area. Austin took Migowski's data on the uppermost 19 feet of laminated sediment of the Dead Sea and plotted it to make a 4,000-year sediment chronology. The sediment core was drilled at the shore of the present lake near En Gedi.
Austin notes that:
The biblical account does not specifically mention an earthquake, but the earth would have been shaken by the wall's collapse. Archaeological excavations at Jericho confirm that the massive wall made of mud bricks did collapse at the time of the conquest, about 1400 B.C. The site of the ancient city of Jericho sits directly on top of a very large fault associated with the Jordan Rift valley. Surprisingly, the Dead Sea sediment core has a distinctive mixed sediment layer at a depth of 15.1 feet that is evidence of a big earthquake at about 1400 B.C.Actually, this is no surprise at all to those who are familiar with the early/late date controversy of the Exodus! 1 Kings 6:1 is correct, and so is the rest of the Bible.
Marko Malyj
M.S. Physics, Drexel University
M.Div. Pastoral Ministry, Westminster Theological Seminary
References
Agnon, A., C. Migowski and S. Marco. 2006. Intraclast Breccias in Laminated Sequences Reviewed: Recorders of Paleo-earthquakes. In New Frontiers in Dead Sea Paleoenvironmental Research. Enzel, Y., A. Agnon, and M. Stein, eds. Geological Society of America Special Paper 401, 195-214.
Austin, S. 2010. Greatest Earthquakes of the Bible. Acts & Facts 39(10): 12-15.
Ken-Tor, R. et al. 2001. High-resolution Geological Record of Historic Earthquakes in the Dead Sea Basin. Journal of Geophysical Research. 106 (B2): 2221-2234.
Kitchen, K.A. 2008. On the Reliability of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI. Eerdmans.
Migowski, C. et al. 2004. Recurrence Pattern of Holocene Earthquakes Along the Dead Sea Transform Revealed by Varve-counting and Radiocarbon Dating of Lacustrine Sediments. Earth and Planetary Sciences Letters. 222 (1): 301-314.
Wood, B.G. 2008. The Rise and Fall of the 13th Century Exodus Conquest Theory. Associates for Biblical Research.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)












