LOVE that you provide the Table of Contents and the Chapter links! It helps a person be intentional about getting specific facts. Thanks for the excellent, organized presentation by Dr. Kennedy.
Great video, well presented and very encouraging. Dr Kennedy has the ability to bring the Bible to life and present facts in such an interesting way that it's easier to remember. Thank you both so much ❤ I just subscribed.
@Ahh it’s Katie There was a flood and a man got two of every animal on a boat sorry but what the fuck I just can’t comprehend that. yes elephants hop on snakes come on ok ok rhinos get on the boat no rhinos don’t attack the edge of the boat that can def hold up two of every animal and still ride the boat for tons of months without us sinking and no animals dying or killing each other also we can’t eat anything so we’re gonna be fine. I’m sorry but I can’t comprehend that also why couldn’t someone have made that as a story in life long before the first testament was written couldn’t they have been part of life for some people before the Bible like I just don’t understand any bit of how you could survive that
@@kyekruchoski1457 the Bible don't say the ark hold a pair of every animal! it says , it says of every kind!! The dog kind , the cat kind we don't need the lion the tiger the leopard as long as we have the kind you have to think a with a open mind my friend.
Loved seeing the Sennacherib Prism at University of Chicago's Oriental Institute, a treasure trove of John D. Rockefeller's sponsorship of archaeology, with whole floors exhibiting things from Babylon, Assyria, Egypt, etc. I saw Queen Esther's Throne there. Then deep dish pizza. Did NOT love memorizing all of the Kings of Judah and Israel and their years of reign in 10th Grade Old Testament History Class, which turned out to be harder than anything I had taken at the graduate level. Also loved visiting the University of Michigan Library to see 3rd or 4th century copies of the Greek New Testament, then going to used book stores in Ann Arbor back in the day. Looking back on my education, it was pretty solid. 1. Atra Hasis 2:08 2. Code of Hammurabi 5:12 3. Papyrus Brooklyn 7:40 4. Negative Confession 9:43 5. Nomads of YWHW 11:50 6. Scarab of Amenhotep III 14:04 7. Merneptah Stele 17:02 8. Piym Weight 19:36 9. Tel Dan Stele 21:23 10. Qeiyafa Ostracon 23:23 11. Shoshenq I Stele 25:07 12. Mesha Stele 27:48 13. The Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III 29:30 14. Bulla of Isaiah the Prophet 31:10 15. Sennacherib Prism at 33:00 16. Nebo Sarsekim 36:05 17. Jerusalem Chronicle 38:04 18. Babylon Ration Tablets 39:34 19. Cylinder of Nabonidus 41:31 20. Bowl of Gesham of Qedar 43:58
There was a flood and a man got two of every animal on a boat sorry but what the fuck I just can’t comprehend that yes elephants hop on snakes come on ok ok rhinos get on the boat no rhinos don’t attack the edge of the boat that can def hold up two of every animal and still ride the boat for tons of months without us sinking and no animals dying or killing each other also we can’t eat anything so we’re gonna be fine. I’m sorry but I can’t comprehend that also why couldn’t someone have made those stroys into life long before the first testament was written couldn’t they have been part of life for some people before the Bible like I just don’t understand any bit of that
Where the ark story is concerned, the story is told and retold in countless ancient cultures, so it seems almost impossible for there not to have been some catastrophic events that shook the world at that time. As to the animals in the ark...why didn't they kill each other or smash the ark up? Noah, took the very youngest of the species, cubs, chicks, foals; they would eat less, live together reasonably amicably as has been demonstrated countless times in RU-vid videos ☺️, take up less space, and be generally healthier and live longer. It would be illogical to take full grown creatures. Did it happen exactly as it states in the Bible? That's for individuals to decide for themselves.
Are you a blood Jew or a religious Jew? Intyeresting that you idolaters suppose your idol cum image cum god to use words, indication rgat you make yourour idol cum image cum god in your own image; would you say worshipping an image of yourself was ideal, or is self-imagining, self-abuse? There is no curing you idolaters of your anthropomorphic idolatry is there?
Dear Sean: If you tried to explore if there were archeological findings contradicting any of the stories written on the Bible... YES, there are, plenty! Find out what falsifies your assumption, not only what agrees with it.
Your message prompted me to look into this. Doing a google search for "archeology that disproves/contradicts the bible" turns up with article after article questioning this. Over and over I'm finding articles that conclude the archeological record backs up the bible. These are articles from Smithsonian magazine, Newsweek, PBS and The New York times. Can you point me to a specific claim of something that contradicts the bible? I'd like to check it out. Thanks.
Interesting, anytime some one tries speak the truth about God or the Bible or has evidence to verify anything having to do with the Bible, the enemy( the devil) is right there to speak against it and mock them.
@@danielfortonforton223 Interesting. There are no gods or devil's talking, but humans talking in their names... Lame supernatural fauna we made in our image!
I really don't know where to start here, and am pretty sorely disappointed in this interview. Literally every "interpretation" offered that I've seen here is spin that diverges from the vast majority of scholarship in the field. The Atrahasis segment is farcical. Scholarship has long known that it, the Sumerian flood myth, and the later story of Utnapishtim in Tablet XI of the Epic of Gilgamesh come from somewhere in the late 3rd or early 2nd millennium, some 1000 years prior to the Biblical account being written. To say that it corroborates the historicity of the Noah story is ridiculous. Not only is the Biblical account much later, but, like other parts of the Bible, adapts from the stories of their neighbors -- just as it does in the use of the Egyptian Instruction of Amenemope in the book of Proverbs, or the numerous pieces of borrowed Baal imagery in the OT (i.e. the cloud rider whose holy mountain is Zaphon and who smotes Leviathan). Furthermore, we KNOW that the story was known by Israel's neighbors, as fragments of Atrahasis have been found at Ugarit, one of Israel's Phoenician neighbors, which was destroyed a few hundred years before the earliest Biblical texts were likely penned. It also doesn't help that 1) in Atrahasis, unlike what is claimed, it's not just "1 man who builds the ark", there are plenty of people involved, 2) the whole story is innately polytheistic, and 3) the flood is blamed on the gods becoming angered by the noise of humanity. Really, the beauty in the Biblical account comes when you recognize not the historicity of the flood account, but the comparative theologies of the accounts. For the Babylonians the flood was caused by the fickleness of their gods who ultimately depend on man for their own livelihood and regret what they did once man can no longer offer their offerings for them to eat, hence the relief at the end of the story when they swarm like flies over the burnt offering. For the Biblical account it says something much more profound about God, that evil grieves him, that he sends the flood because of man's sinfulness, and that ultimately our very continued existence is out of God's mercy -- it's very much a case of competing polemic and rewriting of a well-known account to proclaim the supremacy of God over and against the Babylonian pantheon. To get caught up in the question of historicity is to lose complete sight of the radical theology of the text, and to claim that a mythological Babylonian or Sumerian tale corroborates the book of Genesis is nonsense.
Once again, truly fascinating and so encouraging! Thank you for the ways in which this was structured to show the breadth of evidence that spans the OT, even the minute details. So amazing! Very thankful for your Ministries and sharing these discoveries with us.
One thing I've noticed about the old and new testaments is people sharing the same name, like Joseph, Mary, and Judas. If someone was fabricating a story, I don't think they would use the same name for several different people, they wouldn't want people to get confused.
Awesome as always, you have great content Btw I will be walking Biola tomorrow with my son 🤞 he’s the current jserra water polo goalie and wants to check out the school and pool
I will be interested to read in more depth. I am not sure about the logic given for '6' but realise you just had a minute or so to tell us about each one!
i thought that the exodus happened during the bronze age collapse in the 13th cent as egypt's decline facilitated the escape. evidence for israel in the 15th cent suggests that israelite identity started to form in canaan before the exodus. the entry of escaped semitic slaivs from egypt was how yahwism was brought into the land but did not completely replace canaanite religion. that set the stage for the conflict between worshippers of God and those of baal that continued right until the exile.
Kennedy teaches at Biola University which requires that its faculty agree with its "Doctrinal Statement". See the "Theological Positions" part of their website. This is from the HR section of their website. "Prospective and existing employees must affirm that their personal theological beliefs are in agreement with the Biola Doctrinal Statement. A prospective or an existing employee's church affiliation will be considered in determining his or her understanding of and compliance with Biola's theological position." Kennedy has no choice or academic freedom. The conclusions he makes are the only conclusions he can make without jeopardizing his job and income. Under these conditions he CANNOT engage in legitimate academic research. He can only find ways to try to justify the pre-existing conclusions of the Doctrinal Statement. If he were to analyze the latest and best archeological evidence, only to find that it indeed contradicted the Doctrinal Statement, he would either have to hide this conclusion from his peers and superiors, or he would have to have the courage to state his contradictory conclusions and most likely lose his job and his income.
That's a silly thing to say, he's answering the question about archeological finds that support scripture. That's a biased question but it's still a legitimate one. Second everyone has a bias. There's no neutral ground. You're saying his biased pretty much because he's christian but if he weren't a Christian, that's objective research and unbiased. That's BS.
This is not archeological evidence at all. Here is why. Let's say I lived in Wichita, Kansas on 11 Smith Street, in 2021 and I worked in a grocery store and attended Midtown Baptist Church. All of those facts are easy to research and confirm. 500 years from now, you will still be able to confirm those facts. Now, let's say that I wrote in my diary that I buried $1,000,000 in my backyard. If someone reads my diary 500 years from now, everything I said would be easy to confirm, except for the $1,000,000. Just because 90% of my diary is true and can be confirmed, DOES NOT MEAN that I had $1,000,000 in my backyard. That fact must be individually confirmed for it to be true. So, we CANNOT say that anything about the Old Testament is true just because the towns were there, buildings were there, and there are stories from that time. The only way to prove that I have money buried in my backyard is to dig up the money. The speaker has not said anything that proves anything about the Old Testament. Flood stories are told all over the world where it floods. Find me an ancient flood story that originated in the middle of the desert. That would be some proof, because it doesn't normally flood there.
Jesus is God's Son. Jesus was conceived by God's Spirit and the virgin Mary. Jesus never sinned. Jesus was crucified and died for the sins of the world. Jesus blood was shed for the forgiveness of sins. Life is in the Blood. Jesus was raised from the dead bodily by God. Jesus left an empty tomb. Jesus was seen alive by witnesses. Jesus is returning to the earth. Jesus is Lord. If you confess with your mouth Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart God raised Jesus from the dead you shall be saved. Any one who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that any one you believes in Him shall not perish but Have eternal life. To know more about Jesus read the New Testament in the Bible. Jesus said this. "No greater love has one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends." If we confess our sins God is faithful and just to forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. Jesus was whipped before His death on the cross. By Jesus's stripes we are healed. Say the Lord Jesus Christ to drive away demons.
Papyrus Brooklyn: The critique of the Exodus narrative is NOT that there were no Israelites living in Egypt at the time. It’s that there is no archeological evidence that Israelites lived in Egypt in the high numbers necessary for the Exodus narrative to be true. The evidence works against the Exodus narrative.
Its funny how every Christian historian, archaeologist, or theologian seems to use different standards and practices than everyone else in those fields and different than what even they use when looking at any topic other than Christianity and the bible.
Interesting contemplation. I'm just beginning to explore some of these ideas and would appreciate some more information on the topic. Could you elaborate just a bit, maybe give a couple examples? Just to get me going in the right direction so I know what I'm looking for?
@@tamaraoconnor5483 Basically, when an apologist presents a historical or archeological "standard" google it. More often than not you will find nothing but articles by apologists, nothing from the other experts in the field or relating to any other topic. One of the easy ones is their "criterion of embarrassment", its when a historical account is deemed likely to be true under the inference that that the author would have no reason to invent a historical account which might embarrass them. Its not an idea that is brought up outside of biblical scholarship, along with being astonishingly fallacious. Another common error they love to wave around is claiming that historians use the number of matching manuscripts as a way to determine if what those manuscripts say is true or accurate in relation to reality... In reality, all the number of matching manuscripts do is tell us how well the stories were copied over time. Then there is what the video is doing... using archeological finds regarding locations and dates that are accurate in the bible as evidence for other claims in the bible that do not have support. Not only do experts in the field who are not Christian apologists not use these sorts of "standards" but the apologists themselves don't apply them to any other texts or religions, going so far as to actively argue against their use when you try to apply them to writings about the gods of Olympus or the Æsir and Vanir or Hinduism ect.
@@timeshark8727 I don't think these are fair criticisms. To your first point about the criterion of embarrassment. There's more to it than what you say. The argument is always followed up with other reasons like would this particular lie further the liars cause. For instance the female followers of Jesus being the first to find his tomb empty. Females were looked at as lesser in that time we all know that. Females couldn't even testify in court. So in that culture telling someone the females found this and we are taking their word for it would likely not further the cause. If someone was lying about this and wanted people to listen it would make more sense to say it was a man that found the empty tomb. Let's say a white supremacist is going to make up a lie to get people to follow them. Would it make sense for that person to say a black or Jewish person gave them the info? Not likely. And as I said this is one piece of an argument that uses abductive reasoning and not meant to prove anything alone. To your second point you would have to give me an example of someone doing this and if you do I will stand beside to in calling them wrong. I know of no apologist that says multiple copies of something make it true. If that argument were used you could call middle earth real. What scholars do with multiple manuscripts is compare them for accuracy. Say you have five different copies of one text and in these text there are 10 variations. You then compare the places where the variations occur to get a larger picture of what the text originally said. Old copies like this are likely not going to be copied from the same place and not all of the variations are going to be in the same place. So you can compare to get an idea of what the original might say. This is a commonly used historical tool and not at all just used by Christians. I'm not sure I understand your third point. You seem to be saying that this video is using evidence that doesn't support their claim. Can you give an example of this? In your conclusion you go on to repeat the part about nobody else using these "standards". As I already pointed out this is not the case. And you would have to show me an apologist arguing against using these "standards" for other religions. I would personally be willing to put any argument I use to the test and in my experience apologist usually feel the same way. Thanks if you've read this far and I look forward to your response
@@patrickturner7764 _"or instance the female followers of Jesus being the first to find his tomb empty. Females were looked at as lesser in that time we all know that."_ - *We also know that females were the ones who had the job of taking care of the body and the only ones who should have any reason to have been at the tomb... anyone who knew the culture would have women as the first ones there. Having men there would have been very strange, culturally speaking.* _" If someone was lying about this and wanted people to listen it would make more sense to say it was a man that found the empty tomb."_ - *Not at all, because men would have had no reason to be at the tomb at that time, as stated above.* You have also missed the point. The point wasn't to talk about how it is applied, though I did that. The point was that it is _ONLY_ applied by apologists and only when talking about religious texts. Its a fabricated standard. _"To your second point you would have to give me an example of someone doing this and if you do I will stand beside to in calling them wrong."_ - *You've never heard apologists brag about the number of manuscripts and act as if it somehow supports the idea that they are accurate? I envy you.* _"I know of no apologist that says multiple copies of something make it true."_ - *Correct, they don't say that exact line. However, many talk about the number of manuscripts, generally claiming that we know it is accurate because we have multiple copies that say the same thing and touting the number of copies (saying things like "we have 10 times more early manuscripts for the bible than for the Odyssey). Groups like the Institute for Creation Research, Patheos, and AiG, use it or talk about it on their websites, there is even a Wikipedia page devoted to it.* The 3rd point is referring to when we find an archaeological site, usually a town, that was mentioned in the bible and apologists try to use that find to say that what the bible says happened there must be true. Its the sort of thing that generally gets skeptics to bring up New York and the Avengers. _"As I already pointed out this is not the case."_ - *Actually, you didn't. You first said that its ok to use the first **_if_** you do it x way... you didn't show that anyone outside of apologists used that standard.* *The second you didn't address at all, you talked about a proper way to use manuscripts... not the use I was criticizing.* *and the 3rd you were confused about.* ... I'm not sure how you think any of that demonstrates that the standards I talked about are used outside of apologetics... but it doesn't.* _"And you would have to show me an apologist arguing against using these "standards" for other religions."_ - *No I don't. Where is this even coming from? Although, I'm sure it could be done, though it wouldn't be in those specific terms. I have found no examples of the things I have presented being used in academic circles outside of religious apologetics, which is what I have argued.* *You have an example of it being applied outside of religious circles and in academia, by all means enlighten me.* Try using the criteria of embarrassment to support the belief in Thor when talking to a Christian apologist. Many of the stories about Thor are extremely embarrassing to Thor and make him look a fool. Or do it for Zeus, or any other god in any pantheon. Many have far more embarrassing stories about them than Jesus'. See how they respond. (hint: they won't even take it seriously, and will dismiss it outright) _"I would personally be willing to put any argument I use to the test and in my experience apologist usually feel the same way."_ - *That's good, and since I already explained why the criteria of embarrassment example you used has massive issues I'm sure you will never use it again, right?* I have rarely seen any professional apologist admit an error or stop using an argument when it's defeated, even when its dismantled top to bottom over and over. Though I have seen them relent in the short term... only to repeat the same failed argument to the next group that hasn't heard the defeater.
@@timeshark8727 Interesting response. I have a lot to unpack. I’m going to try to answer each point but I’m going to do so by topic instead of jumping around. Bare with me, I apologize in advance for the length. First I’d like to start off with what you said about the women and the tomb. You said that women are responsible for taking care of the body like that’s as well known as how women were treated at that time. I’ve never heard that criticism so I spent a couple of hours this morning reading about second temple Jewish burial practices. I can’t find anything about women being the ones that took care of the body. If you could point me to the evidence for why you believe that I’d be happy to look it over and revise my argument if that is in fact the case. According to my current understanding the only one who couldn’t touch a dead body was the high priest. When a person died the body would be placed in a tomb by the family and sealed for about a year. Then the family would come back and gather the bones and place them in an ossuary. So technically nobody would have a reason to return to the tomb after three days. However if you read the text it gives reason why these women would be returning at that time and I don’t think it’s because women were responsible for taking care of bodies. Last point about this, take a look at the early creeds like 1 Corinthians 15:3-8. Paul is essentially doing apologetics here. He is mentioning these people that Jesus appeared to like Peter, James, John and himself. Notice he doesn’t mention any of the women, some of who became prominent figures in the early Church like Mary mother of Jesus. I think this is because he knew writing a letter telling people to go ask women what they saw wouldn’t carry as much weight in that culture as the men. For the sake of the argument I’d be willing to concede this point and say forget about the women and the tomb. Lets go to what the authors say about themselves. The Gospel of Mark is generally agreed to be from Peter’s perspective and Mark is Peter’s scribe. I’ll keep it narrow and just point out three examples. Check out Mark 8:31-33. This is where Jesus essentially called Peter Satan. Mark 14:27-31, 66-72. Where Jesus tells Peter that Peter will deny him three times and then Peter subsequently doing so. Mark 14:32-42. The story of the Garden at Gethsemane where Peter repeatedly fell asleep after Jesus asking him to stay up and pray with him. Peter spent the last few hours of Jesus’s free life sleeping instead of doing what Jesus asked. All three of those would have been great places to lie about yourself or just leave out. That is just three examples. There are tons if you take the time to look for them. To stay on the same topic of the criterion of embarrassment (will be CoE henceforth), I’ll agree that I didn’t point out where this is used outside of apologetics. To be fair you did more than say it’s not used outside of apologetics, you called it astonishingly fallacious. I was pointing out why I don’t think that is the case. To your point about it not being used outside of apologetics, that is just false. Why do we take for granted that a falling apple sparked Issac Newton’s thoughts on gravity? There is no evidence for it. Because it’s a believable story. An apple falling on your head is not the most embarrassing thing that could happen to you but it’s a great place to lie and say I’m just a genius who came up with this idea with no prompting. CoE is essentially just textual criticism. Just because a Christian coined the phrase and apologist use it doesn’t mean that the same thing isn’t done in the secular world. The Newton apple thing is just the first one that comes to mind. I’m sure I could come up with more examples if I spent time on it. But I’m willing to go further and say the CoE is used in everyday life. A police officer might use it to determine if a witness is credible. You might use it to determine if your friend is telling the truth about their night out at the bar or a childhood story. This is just something we do and people don’t have a problem with it unless we are talking about the bible. Last thing on the CoE, you talk about trying to use if for Zeus and Thor or other religions. I would absolutely take it serious if we are comparing apples to apples. However I don’t think you are doing that here. If you can show me a text that most critics agree was written by Zeus or Thor that has Zeus or Thor doing embarrassing things I’d gladly look that over. When we are talking about the New Testament writers we know who they were. Them saying embarrassing things about themselves is quite different that a person writing an embarrassing story about a God they worship. To conclude this section on CoE, you have a long way to go to prove this argument isn’t valid. I don’t think you have provided sufficient reasoning to say it defeated by any means. Next I’m going to talk about the multiple manuscript topic. I again just think you are wrong. I’ve only been seriously studying apologetics for less than 5 years so I obviously haven’t heard everyone speak. However in my research I have never heard any apologist use this argument the way you are portraying it. They talk about multiple copies being evidence of the accuracy of the document but not the event. Just because a Christian claims we have 10 times more copies of biblical text than we do the Odyssey doesn’t imply they are claiming any more than that. I would again say if you are listening to someone who says that stop. There are plenty out there that don’t. Take either of the McDowells as an example. Can you find anywhere they do this? To conclude this topic it seems you are going for low hanging fruit by arguing against the people who use the arguments the wrong way. I’m much more interested in the evidence and I think it’s a much more interesting topic. Next I’m going to quickly touch on where you quoted me saying you would have to show me some evidence of your claim and you responded you didn’t have to and you didn’t know where this was coming from. It’s a response to your previous message where you said apologist actively argue against using their own standards on anything other than the bible. That doesn’t sound logical to me so I’m calling it out as not true. And similar to my response to the last point, if you are watching someone who does that just don’t. There are much better arguments out there to contend with. But as Hitchens said, something that can be asserted with out evidence can be dismissed without evidence. So if your not providing evidence I’m dismissing this claim. To your original third point about how archaeologist use finds to support the bible, I don’t think that is the case in this video. If you can point me to a place where this happens I’ll reconsider. I’m very familiar with Dr Kennedy’s work and he strikes me as the type that is very careful not to overstate things. And again if there are people out there doing this stop listening to them. Using archaeology to determine if someone was in the right place and time to have details about a story is perfectly fine. That is what happens when the argument is used correctly. About the Avengers and New York thing, I’ve heard this put forward as this; if in 2000 years someone finds an Avengers comic that takes place in New York they would think that Ironman and the Hulk Et al were real because they also found a place called New York maybe they even a Captain America doll preserved in a vault. This is not a valid argument. If the same someone who made those finds were to keep digging they would never find a spike in Thor or Loki worship that would be expected if a God appeared in New York. In fact if they did find additional context they would find that nobody at the time the avengers was written believed it to be true. Context would show the opposite of what your claiming this argument shows. Compare that to Christianity. The context around that says that the people at the time it was written believed it to be true. Big difference. In conclusion I think your argument are aimed at the lowest level of apologetics that could exist. When your arguments are placed against the better apologist they don’t hold up and some not even valid criticisms. As I said before I’d put the arguments I use up against anything. And if a defeater is provided for one of them I will stop using the argument. At the end of the day I want the best arguments and the best evidence. If I’m wrong about something I hope someone would point it out to me so I can be smarter. In terms of ceasing to use arguments I hope I have shown why your Zeus, Thor and Avengers arguments don’t hold weight and I’m sure you will follow your own standard and not use them anymore right? It’s been great. I had to crack the bible for this response. You definitely made me think. Sorry again for the long response. You read the last long one so I figured I’d push this one a bit longer lol. Thanks for your time. I look forward to your response.
Can I suggest a project. A book that lists verses and connects them to archeological evidence so that any reader or preacher can reference the evidence for a passage easily. I would suggest a web site that you could type in the passage you are looking at and it can be continually updated with links to evidences related to that passage. I would be happy to help with such a project. If you would be willing to offer some skills or work, please add a reply. If such a thing exists already, please let me know and publicise it in a reply.
The logic of the cumulative case from archeology, for both the Gospels and the Exodus is inescapable. How interesting that when you go further back in the non-Biblical record the closer the flood story gets to the Genesis account. Yet people still pretend that the Pentateuch was written during the Babylonian captivity.
I love how the history of this young science of archeology is full of statements such as "since WE have no proof of XYZ, the Bible must be wrong" ... until proof of XYZ surfaces.
"You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." When a well packaged web of lies has been sold gradually through time to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic. It’s easier to fool people than it is to convince them that they have been fooled. No one is more hated than he who speaks the truth. This truth will free you to seek for the Living God in the Spirit and to truly KNOW GOD instead of just knowing ABOUT HIM. The GOSPEL is NOT written with ink, nor on tablets of stone, but on our hearts by the Spirit of the Living God. The gentiles who have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, then they are a law unto themselves. Under the New Covenant we are to be led by the Holy Spirit, not the bible. I was searching for truth when Jesus told me, "The bible is an idol" which completely changed my direction. After that I only sought for Him in the Spirit and He has taught me many things on life's journey. The most important of which is that He died so we could be regenerated by the Holy Spirit into sons and daughters of God. The gospel is simple, repent from living after the flesh, ask Jesus to fill you with the Holy Spirit and then be led and controlled by Him through the Spirit. The bible is only history and has absolutely no authority from God to control us, the outward law was under the old covenant. Jesus died to redeem us from the curse of the written law because we were unable to keep it. Have a great journey through life with the Living Christ guiding you. When Jesus words are written down and Satan is using them, then the bible becomes the word of Satan. Constantine (1st) beast compiled 50 bibles, legalized Christianity and set up the false prophet (pope). King James (2nd) beast, born 6/1566, 6th of Scotland, authorized a bible in 1611 that now has 66 books to control people with, an image of God's word they make to speak (the bible says). By having faith in the bible which has been made into an idol, they break the new covenant of having faith in the Living Christ through the Holy Spirit, who is the true word of God. THE BIBLE IS THE MARK OF THE BEAST Ask Jesus -Yeshua for the Holy Spirit. Link To Blog Site Book: Book 1 THE BIBLE IS THE MARK OF THE BEAST bibleismarkofbeast.blogspot.co... BOOK 2 THE BIBLE IS AN IDOL bibleismarkofbeast.blogspot.co... RU-vid Channel: ru-vid.comvideos 🕊💖•••••
@@cmain3931Christians who use the scripture that says all scriptures are inspired by God don't know the New Testament isn't scriptures they supposed to be Epistles letters, there's no prophets, the creator don't speak in the book, not even to his so called son, they definitely 2 different books for a reason.
Have you managed to find the volcano they were walking towards? Exodus 13:21 And the LORD went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them the way; and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them light; to go by day and night:
Everything that came after Yehoshua the teacher of what is called the Matthew gospel is of the false christ created after the gospel, after the good news preached in the gospel, that christ is false, a deception its name jesus and its cross never happened except in the man of sins lying epistles, the writings of Paul of tarsus and the rest of the ones who come in the name if jesus and not in the name of God alone as all true lost sheep will. We serve God alone not any christ! I know God, I walk in covenant with God and I Love God. I fear God as well and that is the beginning of Love because until you fear disobeying God and causing God to look upon you in shame so you feel horrible then you can not love Him. I started this walk when I was 32, to look for God. I started to actually begin to find God when I was 39 and sealed myself to God as the gospel tells us to, those of us who listen to the gospel teacher and not the ones who came after him, know to take up the commandments of God and to seek out our roots back to Abraham and to Moses and Yehoshua and the prophets so we become firm in knowledge of what GOD ALONE asked of us. It took me several years of fighting sin and the devil by obeying God. I fought the sin out of me with God's help, by his instructions in the written word. It is a very narrow road and as the mattan/Matthew gospel says very few will find it. We have to fight Satan and the whole world that serves him in sin in order to get out and the one who will help is God alone because we can't trust anyone else. I am with God, God provides for myself and my family and yes there is absolutely evidence BUT not until you absolutely come clean, in thought, word and deed, the absolute opposite of all the lying religions. The gospel was sent down to free us from sin by sending us to our teacher and if you reject it then you are freed from God into sin perpetually and to death spiritually from God which as I can now see is absolutely hell on earth, your light you pretend to have is absolutely darkness caused by your unwillingness to even try to obey God. I speak to 99% of the population. If you can't put everyone first after God and stop yourself from all sin THEN YOUR NOT WORTHY AND YOU ARE ALREADY FINISHED BEFORE YOU EVEN STARTED. So come out of all sun, take up the commandments and begin your battle, call to GOD ALONE, LEARN YOUR ROOTS, BE GOD'S PEOPLE. FIGHT SATAN WHO IS THE SINNERS INNER VOICE, THE CONSCIENCE THAT LEADS YOU TO HURT YOU, that's not you, it's Satan the deceiver. If you come to God and pass the trials cleansing yourself by obedience then GOD WILL BECOME YOUR CONSCIENCE AND YOU WILL LOVE GOD AND HATE SIN, SATAN WILL FLEE FROM YOU. SO there it is. Peace, the ball in in your court Be wary of this world, it is the valley of death, you need God's light and God doesn't dwell with sin or sinners. Not until they begin the journey to stop sin.
Both Israel and Ugarit had a highest god called El. They shared seventy "sons of El." called by similar divine titles. Both religions talk about the multi-headed chaos dragon and use the same cognate titles for him. In both religions, their divine beings met on a mountain called by the same name, in tents called by the same name, in a well-watered mountain at the source of several rivers watering the earth- upon which the temples of both religions were connected to mimic a heavenly archetype. Ugarit 6000-1200BC Israel 1300BC -. How would this archaeological finding support the Bible as being authentic?
"But you, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book until the time of the end; many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase." -Daniel 12:4
Nice information. I disagree with your dating of Shoshenq I... he was much later than 925... And, if you map out his route from his inscription in Egypt, he didn't attack Judah... he avoided them.
Thanks, I just requested a copy of Dr. Kennedy’s book from the library. This story reminds me of Velikosvsky’s interpretation of Exodus. Please I am not suggesting an equivalence between Dr. Kennedy’ solid science and Velikovsky’s story telling. It’s been sixty years since I read Velikovsky, his books are still on my shelf, and I shall revisit them. Thanks again.
One can find most anything to fit into a preconceived theory or story that is part of the persons Religious, Political and cultural history. The Creation, Garden of Eden/Adam and the Flood are stark examples. I am not in anyway denying the reality or existence of those facts, just the understanding, interpretation and dogmatic variation the whole Biblical truth.
Stop insulting all Jews calling it the old testament. There is no such thing as an old testament. The tanach is eternal. Not one word can be changed or added or subtracted. There is no new one.
2 Kings Chapter 3 and Moabite Stone: It appears to have been a stalemate. Israel won a tactical victory, but failed to conquer Moab. The Moabite stone probably convers Moab's reconquest of territories lost to israel. So the Moabite Stone is covering events that take place shortly after 2 Kings 3
