Saturday, August 17, 2013

Correcting four myths about the history of the Crusades


from here: http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2013/08/16/correcting-four-myths-about-the-history-of-the-crusades/
Here is an interesting article from First Principles Journal. (H/T The Poached Egg)
Intro:
The verdict seems unanimous. From presidential speeches to role-playing games, the crusades are depicted as a deplorably violent episode in which thuggish Westerners trundled off, unprovoked, to murder and pillage peace-loving, sophisticated Muslims, laying down patterns of outrageous oppression that would be repeated throughout subsequent history. In many corners of the Western world today, this view is too commonplace and apparently obvious even to be challenged.
But unanimity is not a guarantee of accuracy. What everyone “knows” about the crusades may not, in fact, be true. From the many popular notions about the crusades, let us pick four and see if they bear close examination.
The four myths:
  • Myth #1: The crusades represented an unprovoked attack by Western Christians on the Muslim world.
  • Myth #2: Western Christians went on crusade because their greed led them to plunder Muslims in order to get rich.
  • Myth #3: Crusaders were a cynical lot who did not really believe their own religious propaganda; rather, they had ulterior, materialistic motives.
  • Myth #4: The crusades taught Muslims to hate and attack Christians.
Here’s the most obvious thing you should know. The Crusades weredefensive actions:
In a.d. 632, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Asia Minor, North Africa, Spain, France, Italy, and the islands of Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica were all Christian territories. Inside the boundaries of the Roman Empire, which was still fully functional in the eastern Mediterranean, orthodox Christianity was the official, and overwhelmingly majority, religion. Outside those boundaries were other large Christian communities—not necessarily orthodox and Catholic, but still Christian. Most of the Christian population of Persia, for example, was Nestorian. Certainly there were many Christian communities in Arabia.
By a.d. 732, a century later, Christians had lost Egypt, Palestine, Syria, North Africa, Spain, most of Asia Minor, and southern France. Italy and her associated islands were under threat, and the islands would come under Muslim rule in the next century. The Christian communities of Arabia were entirely destroyed in or shortly after 633, when Jews and Christians alike were expelled from the peninsula.6 Those in Persia were under severe pressure. Two-thirds of the formerly Roman Christian world was now ruled by Muslims.
What had happened? Most people actually know the answer, if pressed—though for some reason they do not usually connect the answer with the crusades. The answer is the rise of Islam. Every one of the listed regions was taken, within the space of a hundred years, from Christian control by violence, in the course of military campaigns deliberately designed to expand Muslim territory at the expense of Islam’s neighbors. Nor did this conclude Islam’s program of conquest. The attacks continued, punctuated from time to time by Christian attempts to push back. Charlemagne blocked the Muslim advance in far western Europe in about a.d. 800, but Islamic forces simply shifted their focus and began to island-hop across from North Africa toward Italy and the French coast, attacking the Italian mainland by 837. A confused struggle for control of southern and central Italy continued for the rest of the ninth century and into the tenth. In the hundred years between 850 and 950, Benedictine monks were driven out of ancient monasteries, the Papal States were overrun, and Muslim pirate bases were established along the coast of northern Italy and southern France, from which attacks on the deep inland were launched. Desperate to protect victimized Christians, popes became involved in the tenth and early eleventh centuries in directing the defense of the territory around them.
This is always good to know when you are answering Muslims, because they do tend to bring it up.

Friday, August 9, 2013

So You’re a Christian—Really?

from here

by Bodie Hodge, AiG–U.S.
Many people today call themselves Christians. For example, an atheistic evolutionist named Anders Breivik hailed himself online as a Christian before he murdered 77 people in Norway. He viewed Europe as culturally Christian as opposed to culturally Islamic, but his view of Christianity had nothing to do with Christ or God.1 Leading atheist Richard Dawkins also identifies himself as a cultural Christian, and even more particularly as a cultural Anglican!2 President Obama repeatedly calls himself a Christian, but then he also supports homosexuality, the murder of the unborn, and other sinful behaviors forbidden by Christ in His Word.
Many people call themselves Christians, but their words and actions are grossly unchristian. Such contradictions stain the name Christian as people look and say, “That’s a Christian? Well then, I don’t want to be a Christian.” Obviously such behaviors reveal that these people—who claim to be Christians and yet promote open sin—deny the Bible as the authority in their lives (Titus 1:16).
Many want to associate themselves with Christians due to the good name Christianity has or due to the large Christian populous (especially during elections). It can be beneficial to be called a Christian, at least in the more Christianized nations. Sadly, people take advantage of that. They try to call themselves Christians for selfish, financial gain by getting votes, donations, or business from the Christian crowd! In other cases, they simply call themselves Christian to appease their family, but meanwhile their hearts are far from God.
At what point should a Christian say, “Enough is enough,” and start judging a tree by its fruit (Matthew 7:20)? Christians are to “judge with righteous judgment” (John 7:24) and are commanded to judge those who are within the church (1 Corinthians 5:12). We are commanded to put away the evil person who tries to infiltrate the church (1 Corinthians 5:13).

How to Recognize a Christian—According to the Bible

By definition a Christian is a repentant believer in Jesus Christ—the Son of God who came in the flesh, died, and was resurrected. The Bible speaks extensively about the subsequent lifestyle of believers—what it calls fruit. For example, we read about “the fruit of the Spirit”:
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law. And those who are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. (Galatians 5:22–24, emphasis mine)
This wholesome fruit stands in contrast to “the unfruitful works of darkness”:
Therefore be imitators of God as dear children. And walk in love, as Christ also has loved us and given Himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling aroma. But fornication and all uncleanness or covetousness, let it not even be named among you, as is fitting for saints; neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. For this you know, that no fornicator, unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not be partakers with them. For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light (for the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness, righteousness, and truth), finding out what is acceptable to the Lord. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret. (Ephesians 5:1–12, emphasis mine)
Walking in the fruit of the Spirit is often a telltale sign that people are living out their Christian lives as a tribute to the Lord who redeemed them from sin and death. But even so, identifying godly believers can be difficult. The book of 1 John speaks extensively about how to identify those unbelievers. Essentially, it is those who continue to live evil lives even though they claim to follow Christ. Some of the identifying marks of false believers are tabulated below:


Identifiers Of An Unbeliever
1 John Reference
1
Walks in darkness (sin), practices lawlessness
1 John 1:6–7; 3:3–4
2
Does not obey Christ’s commands (to love God and love other Christians)
1 John 2:4–6; 3:23–24; 5:1–3
3
Hates brothers (fellow Christians)
1 John 2:8–11; 3:14–17; 4:20–21
4
Loves the “world and the things of the world” (e.g., worldly pleasures and ideas as opposed to those of God)
1 John 2:15–16; 4:4–5; 5:4–5
5
Does not do the will of God
1 John 2:17; 5:14
6
Walks away from the faith, does not continue with Christ
1 John 2:18–19; 5:13
7
Does not confess Christ
1 John 2:21–24; 4:14–15
8
Does not abide in Christ
1 John 2:24–25; 4:13, 16
9
Does not practice righteousness
1 John 2:29; 3:7–10
10
Does not believe the testimony of God (i.e., His Word)
1 John 5:1, 10–12

Reasons People Might Not Display the Fruit of the Spirit

So why is it that many people today, who claim to be Christians, often still have some identifiers of false belief? I suggest three reasons:
  1. They are unregenerate: they have a misplaced faith. Without the Holy Spirit they cannot produce the fruit of the Spirit.
  2. They are ignorant: they simply don’t know enough on the subject. Some new or immature Christians may continue in a sin that they didn’t know was a sin. This is where being taught and studying the Word of God really helps (2 Timothy 3:16–17). Keep in mind that no one is perfect and Christians will still sin, but becoming aware of that sin, they need to repent and strive to live godly lives.
  3. They are deceivers: they are simply false teachers calling themselves Christians for their own selfish desires—in some instances to subtly attack and undermine God’s people from within. The Bible warns of false teachers who infiltrate the church and teach false doctrines that contradict the Bible (Acts 20:29–30; 2 Corinthians 11:13). Should it be a surprise?

Final Remarks

Though much more could be said on this subject, I do want to leave us with some final thoughts. Only God is the ultimate judge of someone’s heart. But when those who claim to be Christians do things that are not Christ-like and hence oppose the Bible, then we need to point out that error and correct the brother or sister. Or, after seeing their fruits and checking for identifying marks of unbelief, we might need to point out that they are no brother or sister at all.
As we carry out our responsibility of correcting or challenging anyone, it should be done with gentleness and respect (Galatians 6:1; Ephesians 4:2; 1 Corinthians 4:21; 1 Peter 3:15). Our desire should be to call people to repentance in Christ if at all possible (2 Corinthians 7:9–10).
There are times when false believers should be removed or avoided so they are no longer stumbling blocks to Christians (e.g., 2 Timothy 3:1–5; 1 Corinthians 5:1–13; 2 Thessalonians 3:6, 14; Matthew 18:15–20; Romans 16:17; 2 John 9–10; Titus 3:9–10).
These principles apply when, for example, the Bible is used to judge false teaching and warn Christians of false teachers who compromise God’s Word with humanistic philosophies like evolution and millions of years and do not repent. To do this is actually obeying the Word of God—and it is better to obey God (Acts 5:29) than those Christians who say we should not judge.3
The old phrases “actions speak louder than words” and “you can tell a tree by its fruit” are not without warrant. This biblical principle comes from Christ Himself:
For a good tree does not bear bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit. For every tree is known by its own fruit. For men do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they gather grapes from a bramble bush. (Luke 6:43–44)
Help keep these daily articles coming. Support AiG.

Footnotes

  1. “A Christian Terrorist,” Answers in Genesis, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v7/n1/terrorist. Back
  2. Stoyan Zaimov, “Richard Dawkins: I Guess I’m a Cultural Christian,” CP World, http://www.christianpost.com/news/richard-dawkins-i-guess-im-a-cultural-christian-91312/. Back
  3. Usually these Christians will quote Matthew 7:1 out of context. In Matthew 7, Jesus is saying to judge yourself first, “then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye” (Matthew 7:5). It is definitely an act of judgment to help your brother with a fault or error. The point is to judge yourself first before you judge your brother and not to judge your brother unfairly or by a different standard. Back

Monday, August 5, 2013

How Many Translations Did Your Bible Go Through? Answer: One.


 from here: http://4simpsons.wordpress.com/2013/07/25/how-many-translations-did-your-bible-go-through-3/

Posted on

bible5.gifOne (1). 
Really. Just one time from the original language to the language and version of your Bible.  The original writings were copied many times, but the Bible you hold was only translated once.   This is one of my favorite lessons in apologetics (defending the Christian faith) because it is such a simple and accurate explanation to a common and important objection.
Many people – including some Christians – are quick to say that the Bible has been translated and changed so many times over the centuries that we don’t know what the original writings said.  For example, I saw a video clip where Deepak Chopra (alleged religious expert) claims that the King James was the 13th iteration of the Bible.
But contrary to that myth, the books of the Bible have only been translated once and the copying process was very robust, dependable and verifiable.  This is an easy way to politely correct people on one of the most common errors they make, so please commit this response to memory.  I’ve used this to persuade agnostics and Mormons, among others, in literally a minute or so.  They didn’t concede that the writings were divinely inspired, but it was easy to correct them about the translation myth.
For example, Paul wrote in Greek, and we have Greek manuscripts to make translations from.  That is one translation.
Conventional wisdom: Tranlations from one language to another to another . . .
Greek original ==> Latin translation ==> other translations ==> King James version ==> English Standard Version, etc.
What actually happened
Greek original ==> copies of Greek original ==> Latin version
Greek original ==> copies of Greek original ==> King James version
Greek original ==> copies of Greek original ==> English Standard Version
Etc.
So the real issue is how accurate and reliable the copying process was.  The science of textual criticism shows that the copies of the New Testament are 99.5% accurate and that the differences are minor and have no impact on Christian theology.  Even atheist textual critics like Bart Ehrman, an “ex-Christian” who makes a living attacking Christianity, will concede that.
Regarding the Old Testament, here are some notes from the Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry.  The existence of the Dead Sea Scrolls provided spectacular evidence to refute the myth that the Old Testament had been changed significantly.
The OT does not have as many supporting manuscripts as the NT but it is, nevertheless, remarkably reliable.
  1. The Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew OT done around 250 B.C., attests to the reliability and consistency of the OT when it is compared to existing Hebrew manuscripts.
  2. The Dead Sea Scrolls discovered in 1947 also verify the reliability of the OT manuscripts.
  3. The Dead Sea Scrolls were ancient documents that were hidden in a cave in Israel about 2000 years ago. The scrolls contained many OT books, one of them being Isaiah.
    1. Before the Dead Sea scrolls, the earliest existing manuscript of the OT was dated around 900 A.D. called the Masoretic Text. The Scrolls contained OT documents 1000 years earlier. A comparison between the manuscripts revealed an incredible accuracy of transmission through copying, so much so that critics were silenced.
In summary, the Bible you hold has only been translated once, and the copying process was very robust, dependable and verifiable. 
Also see Is the New Testament Text Reliable? and Hasn’t the Bible been rewritten so many times that we can’t trust it anymore?
This was a favorite updated for your reading pleasure.

Friday, August 2, 2013

What is your authority? Is the age of the earth an important issue, really?

from here: http://creation.com/what-authority

What is your authority?

Christians who invoke millions of years cannot make their arguments from the biblical texts.

by CEO, CMI–US
Published: 1 August 2013 (GMT+10)
First appeared in a CMI newsletter.

Is the age of the earth an important issue, really?

123rf.com/Krasimira Nevenova
8656-authority
Pastors often love CMI speakers to take questions as part of our ministry program at their churches. These often flush out the discordant views of some members, surprising the pastors.
Q & A sessions are not always easy for our speakers. We don’t know what’s coming, or whether rabid anticreationists, some with scientific qualifications, are attending, intent on demonstrating the ‘ignorance’ of the visiting creationist. In the hot seat, we now have to be instant ‘experts’ in paleontology, biology, geology, cosmology and even theology. Of course, no one is an expert in all fields, but we do our best to show there are answers!
Sadly, the most hostile audience members are usually Christians agitated by our ‘young-earth’ (biblical) presentation. I’ve come to realize this is because they believe they’ve sorted out the apparent conflict between ‘science’ and the Bible years ago by adding the millions of years somewhere in Genesis. So, who are we to ‘rock their boat?’
Not long ago after the main presentation in a church, we opened the floor for questions. A middle-aged man bolted up (his look of disdain immediately told me I was about to be in the firing line), and sure enough, openly expressed disappointment at my “narrow” view of Scripture. It went something like this.
Questioner: “N. G. [name omitted] is a great apologist. His books are required reading in many seminaries. He has no problem with a billions-of-years-old earth. Who are you to say he is wrong?” [Now please note here that despite his public put-down of my own seeming lack of credentials, he was ‘inviting’ me to criticize another Christian. If I did, it could cause others to lose focus on the question.]
Me: “I agree that he is a good apologist. But I think you could actually answer the question for me. For instance, could you show me anywhere in Scripture, if I read it at face value, where I can read the term millions or billions of years? Or, even get the impression—just from Scripture—that the universe or the earth is that old?’
Qu: “No.”
Me: “So, the idea of some ancient Earth is not derived from Scripture then? Is that correct?”
Qu: “I suppose.”
Me: “So, even though Mr N. G. can be very good in other areas of apologetics, and can even claim that the Bible is his sole authority; when it comes to deciding the age of the earth, he did not derive his ideas from the Bible, but from outside it. And most importantly, those old age ideas came from people who are not Christians to start with, and are trying to explain the universe without God. Respectfully then, on this issue the Bible was not his authority, and if any Christian says that the universe is billions of years old, then the same applies to them.” [The man sat down as he realized what he had just done].

The age of the earth is not the issue!

The point I am trying to make here is that most people don’t realize what authority they accept when they do this. Many Christians wrongly believe there is overwhelming evidence to prove the earth is old. One of our main goals during presentations is to show that operational science cannot give us ages of things such as fossils or rocks. The ages are derived from interpretations of facts based on beliefs about such things. The lights go on when people realize how they’ve misunderstood this all along.

The real issue for Christians is about the authority of God’s Word. In other words, “Did God really say?” (Sound familiar?) Doubting the Bible’s history in Genesis causes many to reject the Christian faith entirely. One of the most famous apostates was a preaching contemporary of Billy Graham, the famed evangelist Charles Templeton. He died a few years ago, publicly rejecting his former belief in a Savior. And the reason? He’d been taught (like most people) that the fossil record was proof of millions of years of evolutionary history on Earth. He knew that Genesis was foundational to the entrance of sin and death into the world, and saw it as being undermined if there were eons of death before Adam. If only he had been exposed to solid creation teaching that showed the fossil record could be explained as an order of burial from Noah’s Flood. What a tragedy!

“My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge” (Hosea 4:6)

We’ve belabored the awful statistics of our Christian youth going down the same road as Templeton, and for the very same reasons. CMI exists to provide information to ‘stop the rot’. So, please think of someone you know who needs to hear this information, ask to have a creation presentation at your church, or support CMI through prayer or financial means to enable us to keep producing information. It only takes a little effort to be involved.

Related Articles

Further Reading