McKenzie is right in noting the detail of two pillars holding up a roof would be odd. In fact, Philistine temples that had been known to archaeologists didn’t have such a design at all—until the 1970s…
…It doesn’t prove the Sampson story as true, but it definitely removes the claim that the two pillars are a fictitious invention of the author of Judges.
Further, it lends credibility to the author’s reliability in getting certain details right, since Jewish architecture, definitely did not feature two central pillars. The author seems to have some real familiarity with Philistine temple construction, bolstering his reliability in the process…
Read more: http://apologetics-notes.comereason.org/2017/05/archaeology-topples-objection-to.html
“One of the favored tactics of the Atheistic Naturalist and other assorted Leftists is to attack the trustworthiness of the canonical Gospel accounts. Sadly, many Christians are left without adequate answers to the many misinformed objections to the veracity of Sacred Scripture. In answer to their truly empty challenges we must approach scripture like an historian.
It is a common misconception that we have to apply the Scientific Method. I have even witnessed critics of the Christian faith demand we apply it. This is fallacious, since we are dealing with an issue of history, not science, so we should apply the Historical Method.
The Scientific Method requires any proposition be proven in a controlled environment, by experimentation, and be repeatable and observable. One can hardly go back in time and prove anything historical using such criteria. The Historical Method, by contrast, relies on the following criteria:
- Written Records
- Oral Tradition
- Physical Evidence…”
Read more: http://barbwire.com/2017/06/03/considering-historical-evidence-new-testament-trustworthy/
I enjoyed reading how the Lord brought Nabeel Qureshi unto Himself:
I thank God Almighty for your devotion to the truth and your desire to lay aside personal comfort for His sake, for He is Truth. Your struggle to get closer to the truth—and thereby closer to God—will be rewarded due to your sincerity and purity of heart. It is for you that I write my testimony.
I myself have always been dedicated to finding the truth, and many extraordinary events have transpired which led me there. I am certain that the miraculous occurrences in my life have all been due to that pure dedication which is readily available to all of us, and not in any way due to skill or accomplishment of my own. Praise be to God, for I asked, and He gave. I sought, and He helped me find. I knocked on the door of truth, and He opened it for me.
My name is Nabeel. Born as a U.S. Citizen in California, I was raised by devout Muslim parents. My mother and father are immigrants from Pakistan and among the most dedicated Muslims I have ever known. My father was an officer in the U.S. Navy, and because of his career I have lived up and down the Atlantic Coast in the United States, as well as in the U.K…
Read more: https://christianheritagenews.blogspot.ca/2017/02/crossing-over-intellectual-and.html
The history of Christ’s church is inseparable from the history of Satan’s attempts to destroy her. While difficult challenges have arisen from outside the church, the most dangerous have always been from within. For from within arise the false teachers, the peddlers of error who masquerade as teachers of truth. False teachers take on many forms, custom-crafted to times, cultures, and contexts. Here are seven of them you will find carrying out their deceptive, destructive work in the church today. Please note that while I have followed the biblical texts in describing them in masculine terms, each of these false teachers can as easily be female..
Read more: https://www.challies.com/articles/7-false-teachers-in-the-church-today
–Posted by David Gadbois
In 2014 a filmmaker named Timothy Mahoney released the documentary Patterns of Evidence, seeking to demonstrate the historical veracity of the Exodus account, largely through its sympathetic treatment (if not outright endorsement) of a revisionist timeline known as the New Chronology, an idea that has its genesis in English Egyptologist David Rohl. Mahoney is not a scholar but claims to have spent over a decade of research on the film, and while he seems very well-meaning it must be said that this thesis does more harm than good to those believers and unbelievers who are making an honest inquiry into the matter.
Read more: https://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2017/01/30/dating-the-israelite-exodus-from-egypt/
A Puritan’s Mind:
Did the Early Church Believe the Doctrines of Grace?
There are a number of websites (some quite terrible, others a bit scholarly, yet equally terrible) that attempt to dissuade investigative readers to believe that, except for Augustine, or at least until the “time of Augustine”, that the early church did not believe in the depravity of man, in unconditional election and/or a sovereign predestination, a limited atonement in extent of Jesus Christ, grace that is irresistible, and the final perseverance of the saints. This is a tragedy. Why? With a hearty consulting of primary sources, readers can certainly find the “infant stages” of all these Gospel doctrines throughout the writings of the early church. And not only these can be found in “infant stages” but they can be found quite specifically in many of the early writers…
Read more: http://www.apuritansmind.com/arminianism/calvinism-in-the-early-church-the-doctrines-of-grace-taught-by-the-early-church-fathers/
Ianto Watt on Atheism and morals:
“Anyway, let’s get back to the point, eh? And that is the question of whether or not there is any rational meaning to Jimmy’s lyrics in Stairway to Heaven. Yes, I know, in your mind I’ve already prejudiced the entire case by prefacing it with the word ‘rational’. Well, that’s tough. You atheists can’t have it both ways. Either you believe in some kind of universal law (which requires universal assent), or you don’t. Make up your mind. If there’s no God, there’s no reason to object when Jeffrey starts nibbling on your toes. Or when I use the word ‘rational’. Or when anybody does anything you don’t like. In other words, what cosmic difference does it make that you don’t like something some other atheist did, if there is no cosmic order?
Yes, it’s up to you to prove it, not me. Prove why Joe Stalin was a bad atheist. How can you? Because if there’s no God, there’s no universal definition of what is good, nor bad. Without a God, universally recognized as such, what do those terms really mean? So here we are, back to semantics. The word you hate. But unless you can cite some universal congress of atheists who convened and unanimously voted on what atheism really means (and allows), then you’re really just arguing on behalf of yourself. In which case, you are simply setting yourself up as the real God. Hail Caesar. Hail you. Hail no.”
Read more: http://wmbriggs.com/post/21437/