Does Colossians 2:8 Condemn Philosophy?

        "See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ." (Colossians 2:8)

        A number of well-meaning Christians understand Paul to be expressing disapproval of us engaging in philosophy. However, this interpretation of his words fails to take into consideration the original context in which this passage was written.

        Earlier, Paul said that we are to teach and proclaim the gospel in a state of wisdom (Colossians 1:27-28). He emphasizes properly knowing the mystery of God, which is the Person of Jesus Christ (Colossians 2:2-3). Philosophy necessarily involves the acquisition of wisdom.

        There exists good philosophy and bad philosophy. The former is rooted in sound theology. The later is rooted in human speculation. Philosophy is not to be developed apart from or against the content of divine revelation. It is bad kinds of philosophy that we must condemn.

        Paul exhorted the church at Colossae not to be deceived by various customs and practices rooted in Jewish and pagan mysticism (Colossians 2:16-23). In so doing, he was very much setting forth a philosophical proposition. Everybody engages in philosophy at some level.

Zechariah 3:1-5 And Imputed Righteousness

       "Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord, and Satan standing at his right hand to accuse him. And the Lord said to Satan, “The Lord rebuke you, O Satan! The Lord who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is not this a brand plucked from the fire?” Now Joshua was standing before the angel, clothed with filthy garments. And the angel said to those who were standing before him, “Remove the filthy garments from him.” And to him he said, “Behold, I have taken your iniquity away from you, and I will clothe you with pure vestments.” And I said, “Let them put a clean turban on his head.” So they put a clean turban on his head and clothed him with garments. And the angel of the Lord was standing by." (Zechariah 3:1-5)

       In this text, we see Satan laying the charge of Joshua the high priest being unfit for his position. The filthy garments that he wore were representative of sin. Joshua was not qualified to be in a priestly office for that reason. It follows that he could not offer up sacrifices for the people. Thus, no forgiveness of sins could be obtained for the Jews.

       The filthy garments had to be removed from Joshua. God gave to him a set of pure garments so that he could fulfill his position as high priest. This turban had an inscription which read as: "Holy to the Lord" (Exodus 28:36-38). God Himself carried out the work of bestowing new garments on Joshua. He saved the Israelites from complete destruction. God clothed them in His own righteousness.

      The act of God providing a new garment for His people gives us a picture of Him putting away our sin and giving to us a foreign righteousness which is His. This incident shows us how God justifies sinners. Instead of giving to us the eternal punishment that we deserve because of our sins committed against Him, God out of His love for us has chosen to exercise mercy. Jesus Christ cloths us in His righteousness in order that we be reconciled to a holy God and render service that is acceptable to Him.

More Than Half Of The Arabian World’s Young Adults Want To Leave

Lack of trust in Islamist governments, spike in non-religious identity are among chief reasons, report finds.

The results of a recent survey in the Arab world show that more than half of the region’s young adults are considering emigrating, and an increasing number of people are identifying as “non-religious.”

The Big BBC News Arabic Survey, a joint assessment by BBC News Arabic and Arab Barometer, a Princeton University-based non-partisan research network, is the largest in-depth survey ever carried out in the region….Fifty-two percent of the respondents aged 18-29 said they were considering emigrating to another country.

The survey indicates that 70% of young Moroccans are thinking about leaving their country and almost half of all the population in Sudan, Jordan and Morocco, and a third of Iraqis, are considering emigrating. “The number itself is alarming and has several components,” Dr. Mohammed Masbah, director of the Moroccan Institute for Policy Analysis in Rabat, told The Media Line.

“Politically, there is a lack of confidence in the government as youth believe the government cannot solve their problems,” Masbah said. “Socioeconomically, youth unemployment is high; the belief is it will get worse.”

However, the desire to emigrate has not increased universally across the region. Since 2013, it has decreased in the Palestinian Territories, Algeria, Sudan, Yemen and, most substantially, in Lebanon.

Abdul-Wahab Kayyali, a research associate at Arab Barometer, explained to The Media Line in an email that the yearning to emigrate in Lebanon might have decreased for several reasons. Some estimates put the number of people in the Lebanese diaspora at 15 million to 20 million people compared to the 5 million Lebanese in Lebanon, he noted.

“Many Lebanese are already immigrants, and many of those who want to immigrate have already done so,” he explained.

Economic factors were cited in the survey as the predominant reason for emigration. Conflict and instability that have recently plagued Yemen, Sudan, Algeria, Libya and the Palestinian Territories have increased the rate of economic deterioration."

https://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/More-than-half-of-Arab-worlds-young-adults-want-to-leave-survey-593746

The Grand Design: Is God Unnecessary?

"To explain our existence on the planet Earth, Hawking and Mlodinow simply claim that there are many planets so one must have the conditions necessary to support higher life forms. This statement is both naive and unscientific for we have enough information about the requirements necessary for a planet to support higher life forms that we are able to do a rough estimate of the probability of finding even a single planet like the earth. Many of the required parameters can be found in the book Rare Earth by Peter Ward and Donald Brownlee....The astrophysicist Hugh Ross has done a rough estimation of the probability of finding a single earth-like planet by chance based on 322 parameters known to be necessary if a planet is to support higher life forms. He has taken correlations and longevity factors into account as well as the fact that there are at least 1022 planets in the visible universe. His order-of-magnitude calculation comes up with a probability of 10-282 for finding one planet capable of supporting higher life forms in the entire visible universe. Hawking and Mlodinow are wrong. Even with a lot of planets we should not expect to find one suitable for our existence purely by chance.

Finally, in regard to the laws of physics that seem to be finely-tuned to allow life to exist, Hawking and Mlodinow appeal to M-theory, the most recent and encompassing string theory. String theory proposes that the fundamental entities that make up our universe are "vibrating strings of energy." M-theory holds a lot of promise as a scientific theory, including the development of a consistent quantum theory of gravity, which has been an elusive goal for about 100 years. M-theory requires that there are 11 dimensions of space-time. M-theory has about 10500 possible configurations, and allows for the possibility that there are many universes. If ours is just one of many universes (a multiverse), with different laws and parameters of physics in every different universe, then just by chance one of the universes would have the laws and parameter falling in the necessary range to be able to support life. We are here because we happen to be in the right universe. There are many problems with proposing M-theory as the solution to the anthropic principle problem. Of course, the first problem is that, as with the no-boundary condition, there is no scientific evidence that M-theory is true, so a belief in M-theory is not based on science at all. Second, there are few, if any, definitive predictions of M-theory. For instance, we don't know if any of the "other" universes would actually be created or just have the potential of being created. When The Grand Design was published there was overwhelming criticism that M-theory would be invoked as the answer to the anthropic principle problem. For instance, in Scientific American, John Horgan wrote, "M-theory, theorists now realize, comes in an almost infinite number of versions, which "predict" an almost infinite number of possible universes. ... Of course, a theory that predicts everything really doesn't predict anything... Hawking is telling us that unconfirmable M-theory plus the anthropic tautology represents the end of that quest. If we believe him, the joke’s on us."1

Perhaps the most disappointing aspect of The Grand Design is that the attempts made to support Hawking's and Mlodinow's case are, in many cases, simply unsophisticated, unsupportable, naive, and even fallacious. I believe that in a college class on logic, philosophy, or religion, this book would receive a failing grade. For example, the question is posed, "Are there any exceptions to the laws of physics?" or "Are miracles possible." The answer given is, "…the modern scientists answer to question two [exceptions to the laws of physics]…is…a scientific law is not a scientific law if it holds only when some supernatural being decides not to intervene." This is a clear example of the logical fallacy of "begging the question." Hawking is dismissing miracles outright because they don't fit his preconceived definition of what science is. If this were your answer to the question of miracles in a logic class I guarantee you would get an F.

Consider also the quote from the book mentioned in the first paragraph of this blog, "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing." It doesn't take a rocket scientist, or someone as smart as Stephen Hawking, to realize how ridiculous this statement is. Gravity works within the space-time dimensions of our universe so it is impossible to invoke gravity as the cause of our universe. The physicist Gerald Schroeder wrote, "Therefore if the laws of nature created the universe, these laws must have existed prior to time; that is the laws of nature would be outside of time. What we have then is totally non-physical laws, outside of time, creating a universe. Now that description might sound somewhat familiar. Very much like the biblical concept of God: not physical, outside of time, able to create a universe."2

Many scientists and scholars who read the book The Grand Design were extremely disappointed that the arguments presented were poor and simplistic. In The New York Times, Dwight Garner wrote, "The real news about The Grand Design is how disappointingly tinny and inelegant it is."3 I'm tempted to quote dozens more of the negative reviews to emphasize my point, but I'll let you look them up if you need more persuasion.

Once again, we see that the conclusions most consistent with the known facts from scientific observations and theoretical calculation are that the universe seems to have a transcendent beginning and seems to be designed with humans in mind, two ideas consistent with the teachings about the God of the Bible. This attempt by Hawking and Mlodinow in The Grand Design to circumvent such straightforward conclusions is entirely inadequate, illogical, and invalid. If you are looking for reasons to make God "unnecessary" you will have to look elsewhere."

https://www.michaelgstrauss.com/2017/08/the-grand-design-is-god-unnecessary.html

On The Significance Of The Lord's Supper In Contemporary Contexts

• The Practice Of Open Worship Gatherings: 

          -Open worship gatherings within the church context are fundamentally significant, as they create inclusive spaces where all believers are both invited and encouraged to participate actively. Such gatherings foster a profound sense of belonging and community, effectively dismantling barriers that may otherwise inhibit engagement. This collaborative approach highlights the biblical vision of the church as the Body of Christ, as articulated in 1 Corinthians 12:12-27, where each member contributes uniquely to the whole. By providing a platform for open worship, churches become dynamic environments conducive to communal encounters with the divine. This engagement not only enriches the worship experience but also cultivates a deeper understanding of the diverse gifts within the congregation, thereby reflecting the multifaceted nature of God's kingdom.

• The Necessity Of Organization And Harmony: 

          -While spontaneity can invigorate worship practices, it is essential to balance this dynamism with organizational structure and harmony. Such balance fosters an atmosphere conducive to reverence and contemplation, ensuring that each component of the service—from musical selections to Scripture readings—serves a well-defined purpose in glorifying God. For example, selecting hymns that resonate with the service's overarching theme, timing prayers strategically to guide the congregation’s focus, and choosing Scripture readings to illuminate central theological tenets contribute to a well-ordered worship experience. This structured approach facilitates thoughtful engagement with God, enabling worshippers to concentrate deeply on their spiritual journey and the communal experience of faith.

• Integral Elements Of The Worship Service: 

          -A fully realized worship service typically encompasses singing hymns, offering prayers, and reading Scripture, with each element fulfilling distinct roles in fostering a connection to God and encouraging spiritual reflection. Hymns, imbued with doctrinal richness and emotional depth, uplift congregational spirits and unify voices in praise. Prayers and words of praise evoke gratitude and collective intercession, rendering the congregation more attuned to divine presence. Furthermore, the reading of Scripture anchors the service in biblical truth, reminding believers of the narratives and promises foundational to their faith, reminder that worship is, at its core, rooted in a reverent acknowledgment of God’s Word.

• Edification And Instruction: 

          -At its essence, the worship service is designed as a vehicle for edification and instruction, nurturing spiritual growth and equipping believers for their daily lives. Through expository sermons, scriptural readings, and communal discussions, congregations are grounded in the teachings of the Bible. This process cultivates an environment fostering intellectual engagement with Scripture, facilitating a deeper understanding of sound doctrine and the implications it holds for believers’ lives.

• Fellowship With God And With Brethren: 

          -A key component of worship is the aspect of fellowship, both with God and amongst fellow believers. The worship service serves as a sacred space wherein participants can collectively commune with their Creator, seeking His guidance and presence. Concurrently, this communal aspect strengthens the bonds of community, allowing church members to offer support, encouragement, and love to one another, enhancing the interconnectedness that characterizes Christian fellowship.

• What Worship Is To Be Centered On: 

          -Worship must be directed with a deliberate focus on God as its central object, a theme that resonates throughout the book of Psalms. The Psalmists fervently express their praise and thanksgiving, reminding worshippers that authentic worship transcends personal experience, redirecting attention toward the majesty and holiness of the Creator. This focus cultivates an environment where believers can elevate their praise, aligning their hearts and minds with divine purpose.

• Centered On Christ: 

          -The New Testament sharpens this focus further, directing worship toward the person and work of Jesus Christ. In 1 Corinthians 11:24-26, the vital connection between communion and the remembrance of Christ's redemptive sacrifice is articulated, emphasizing that true worship must acknowledge the significance of His crucifixion and its implications for humanity.

• Glorification Of God: 

          -Authentic worship ultimately culminates in the glorification of God, fulfilling Scripture’s promise that He abides among those who praise Him (Psalm 22:3). This prioritization of divine presence fosters an atmosphere where individual lives can be transformed, as genuine encounters with God lead to profound spiritual renewal.

• Building Love And Unity: 

          -The act of participating in communion reinforces the love of Christ and fosters unity among believers. This sacred ritual not only commemorates Christ’s sacrifice but also encapsulates essential biblical and theological truths about the depth of divine love and the nature of the community that God desires His followers to embody.

• The Bread And Wine: 

          -The elements of bread and wine utilized in the Lord's Supper are laden with potent symbolism, representing Christ’s body and blood. The wine serves as a stark reminder of His brutal execution, encapsulating the seriousness of sin and the costliness of redemption. Conversely, the bread symbolizes His body, broken for humanity, emphasizing both the physicality of His sacrifice and the tangible grace bestowed upon believers.

• Fellowship Through The Elements: 

          -1 Corinthians 10:16-17 elucidates the significance of believers partaking of the bread and wine as a means of fellowship with one another. This communal meal serves as a profound symbol of unity, reinforcing connections among those who constitute the body of Christ.

• Reflecting On Salvific Truths: 

          -The language surrounding the Lord's Supper resonates with the teachings found in John 6, revealing salvific truths that invite believers into a deeper understanding of their spiritual sustenance. Christ’s declaration that He is the Bread of Life underscores the transformative nature of communion, encouraging congregants to draw spiritual nourishment from Him.

• Repetition As Renewal: 

          -The ritualistic repetition of the communion meal signifies the ongoing reliance on Christ, highlighting believers’ continuous need for His grace. This act of remembrance transcends mere formality; it represents a vital reaffirmation of commitment to live in light of His sacrifice, inviting ongoing transformation through faith.

• The New Covenant: 

          -The New Covenant signifies an elevation in the worship offered by believers, establishing their role as a royal priesthood under the eternal kingship of Christ. This theological understanding adds depth to worship practices, fostering an approach marked by reverence and humility in encounters with God.

• The Meaning Of Fellowship: 

          -The Greek term "koinonia," which translates to fellowship, underscores the active, friendly associations among church members. This concept signifies the critical importance of community in the believer’s life, as Christians are called to devote themselves to prayer and the breaking of bread together, as seen in Acts 2:42. A biblically vibrant church exemplifies koinonia through collective acts of service, worship, and love, nurturing authentic relationships and accountability among members. This active expression of fellowship enables congregants to experience the empowering presence of the Holy Spirit collectively. Koinonia extends into believers' relationship with the Holy Spirit (2 Corinthians 13:14), establishing a profound connection that influences worship practices and guides decisions. This integral aspect of communal worship reflects the dynamic interplay between divine presence and human experience, reconciling the sacred and the communal in the life of the church.

Is Penal Substitutionary Atonement Cosmic Child Abuse?

        Liberal theologians object to penal substitution on the grounds that no just legal system would ever try an innocent victim in the place of criminals. It is claimed that this doctrine portrays God as some vengeful and bloodthirsty tyrant who wants to punish His Son for crimes that He never even committed. In other words, one philosophical objection to the penal substitutionary theory of atonement is that it undermines God's love and righteousness. 

        First and foremost, it needs to be understood that Jesus Christ, being God in the flesh, took the punishment of sin upon Himself. The Godhead paid off an infinite debt of sin on our behalf so that we did not have to suffer eternal condemnation. Our problem is that we have sinned against God, who is holy. He enabled a means of redemption through the shed blood of His Son Jesus Christ. It is precisely because of His love and mercy that Jesus came to die for our sins.

        Jesus, knowingly and willingly, took on human flesh to make atonement for our sins (John 10:17-18). He died to make reparation for our sins and to bring glory to God. The members of the Trinity worked together as one to bring about our redemption. So, the claim that penal substitution is cosmic child abuse is a false analogy by its very nature. Our forgiveness came at a great expense: the death of Christ in human flesh. He was raised bodily from the grave, which assures us that we can have a righteous standing in the sight of God (Romans 5:18-19).

        If God does not punish the ungodly, then He cannot simply be regarded as morally right and fair. He would be compromising His holiness if He left evil to its own device. Sin results in judgment, and there is no reason for God not to do so (Ezekiel 18). If God has love for the ungodly, then it follows that there must also be a way for Him to satisfy His justice. There has to be legitimate grounds on which God can forgive us. The penal substitutionary theory of atonement enables God to be just and make sinners just at the same time.

        If people want to be treated fairly by God, then that would mean He show us no graciousness and mercy at all for our sins. That would entail us spending an eternity in hell. Penal substitutionary atonement cannot reasonably be deemed morally repugnant when properly understood. If we are to be saved from the sentence of eternal condemnation in hell, then it is a logical necessity. The fact that an innocent man had to be killed for our sakes should stir our consciences. If penal substitutionary theory is morally objectionable, then so is the gospel itself.

        Love is not a weakness in God's character. He has the power either to judge or forgive our sin. He has the power to use a tragedy for a greater purpose. Jesus Christ, being sinless, was qualified in every way to bear the punishment and guilt of sin that we deserve. He did that on our behalf. Substitutes for rapists and murderers in our justice system are not authorized because we already know that such convicts will most likely continue in their folly. This concept goes beyond how human legal systems work. When we are in heaven, sin will be completely and permanently erased.

Does 1 Corinthians 4:6 Support Sola Scriptura?

• Introduction:

          -Patrick Madrid wrote an article for Catholic Answers titled Going Beyond in which he raised a number of objections to the citation of 1 Corinthians 4:6 as being a supportive text for the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. His arguments touch on exegetical issues as well as the extent of the canon. All of these points will be answered in this piece. The passage from 1 Corinthians most certainly does weaken the Roman Catholic concept of "Sacred Tradition."

• Exegetical Analysis Of Corinthians 4:6:

          -In context, the Apostle Paul figuratively spoke of the apostles as being fellow custodians of the gospel. He did so with the intention of explaining to the Corinthian Christians their designated purpose, preaching the gospel. 

          -While Paul had described himself and his fellow Christian laborers as planting the seeds of spiritual conversion in the minds of the unbelieving, he gave all the credit and glory to God for success in ministry (1 Corinthians 3:5-15). While the apostles planted, God had caused the growth. 

          -It is only by the power of God that the apostles were able to carry out their mission in the efficacious manner as they did. So the Corinthians need not become puffed-up in their minds (1 Corinthians 3:3-4). Paul was addressing issues such as pride, selfishness, worldly wisdom, and even sexual immorality.

          -The Corinthian Christians needed to depend on the wisdom of God, not man. Dependence of God leads to humility. They needed to learn how to keep their thinking in alignment with God's revealed will. 

          -The church as a whole needs to use only the written Word of God as the standard of evaluating leaders in the church. Many professing Christians evaluate ministers on the basis of humor, how they persuade, how they look, and by their intelligence. 

          -These points of consideration, however, are completely unbiblical standards by which to judge the validity of ministry. Thus, they violate the principle set forth by the Apostle Paul in this text. We should not elevate ministers to a status that is not scripturally warranted. That is precisely the rationale of Paul's phrase: "not to think beyond what is written." 

          -The King James Version adds the phrase "of men" after the word "think" in an effort to clarify the meaning of this passage. The New International Version translates it as, "Do not go beyond what is written," reflecting the views of certain commentators who believe this to be an axiomatic expression. The New Jerusalem Bible and New Revised Standard Version say, "Nothing beyond what is written." 

          -1 Corinthians 4:6 prescriptively assumes the principle of Sola Scriptura as being necessary for the establishment of sound doctrine. It contains a general principle by which we are to observe. Any development that is not contained in Scripture did not originate from the Spirit of God.

• Is The Phrase "What Is Written" Mentioned In 1 Corinthians 4:6 An Allusion To The Book Of Life?:

          -Roman Catholic apologist Patrick Madrid mentions the fact that some biblical commentators have interpreted the phrase "what is written" as being a reference to the book of life (Revelation 20:12). This interpretation is rooted in the point that the four previous verses allude to the concept of divine judgment. However, connecting the phrase "what is written" with the "book of life" is problematic, since it would involve the Apostle Paul telling the Corinthian Christians to not go beyond a book that they never even had access to in the first place. The book of life is located in heaven. Moreover, the only place where Paul had made reference to it was very briefly in Philippians 4:3.

          -The Roman Catholic New American Bible Revised Edition has this footnote on 1 Corinthians 4:6: "That you may learn from us not to go beyond what is written...It probably means that the Corinthians should avoid the false wisdom of vain speculation, contending themselves with Paul's proclamation of the cross, which is the fulfillment of God's promises in the Old Testament (what is written). Inflated with pride: literally, 'puffed-up,' i.e., arrogant, filled with a sense of self-importance. The term is particularly Pauline, found in the New Testament only in 1 Cor 4, 6. 18-19; 5, 2; 8, 1; 13, 4; Col 2, 18 (ch the related noun at 2 Cor 12, 20). It sometimes occurs in conjunction with the theme of 'boasting,' as in vv 6-7 here."

          -The text of 1 Corinthians 4:6 is fairly straightforward in that it is referring to Scripture. It is abundantly clear that Paul was assuming the principle of Sola Scriptura. Rome flatly contradicts the scriptural pattern set forth by the apostle in this verse because it elevates the authority of men to unbiblical levels. It has throughout history defined the meaning of several dogmas that far transcend the boundaries of written revelation.

• Patrick Madrid Claims That Citing 1 Corinthians 4:6 As Biblical Support For Sola Scriptura Would Also Require (Logically Speaking) Rejecting The Inspiration Of Subsequent Canonical Writings Which Comprise The New Testament:

          -The Old Testament was sufficient in making known the purposes of God in His own timing and wisdom, but not the exhaustive content of divine revelation. Jesus Christ Himself always appealed to it as the final court of authority in spiritual matters. That is, in fact, the repeated pattern recorded in Scripture. A logical parallel can be formulated to demonstrate the absurd nature of this objection: "the present pope does not have the authority to infallibly define dogma because there are future successors yet to be elected." Scripture's effectiveness at any given time is not negated by the later addition of further revelation. It has always been, in a sense, a sufficient rule of faith. The phrase "what is written" refers to Scripture. If the canon of Scripture is still open, then it follows that more divine revelation will be communicated in writing. The text of 1 Corinthians 4:6 affirms in a straightforward manner the ultimate authority of Scripture: "do not to exceed what is written."

• Evaluating The Roman Catholic Case For Sacred Tradition:

          -Roman Catholic apologist Patrick Madrid challenges the support for Sola Scriptura in 1 Corinthians 4:6 by pointing to the Apostle Paul's emphasis on oral teaching to first-century Christian churches (1 Corinthians 11:2). However, this objection misses the core issue: Sola Scriptura does not reject the idea of authoritative church traditions outright. Instead, it acknowledges the need for an objective standard to evaluate the validity of such traditions. Moreover, there is no conclusive evidence that Paul's references to tradition differ substantively from the teachings found in written Scripture. He does not provide a definitive list of these traditions or describe how they should be preserved and transmitted. Without this clarity, relying on oral tradition opens the door to misinterpretation and innovation, issues that Sola Scriptura seeks to prevent. Paul's aim was likely to set apart apostolic teachings, derived directly from God, from the claims of apostates who misrepresented the gospel. This stands in contrast to certain Roman Catholic traditions, such as the immaculate conception (declared in 1854) and the assumption of Mary (defined in 1950), which lack a solid foundation in early apostolic teaching and are of questionable origin. Throughout the New Testament, the apostles show a consistent pattern of writing down their teachings to ensure unity and guard against false doctrine (e.g., 2 Peter 1:15; Jude 3).

Archaeological Discovery Helps Prove Babylonian Conquest Of Israel

The current find is one of the oldest and perhaps the most prominent in its historical significance, as the Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem is a major moment in Jewish history.

Archaeologists have unearthed evidence pointing to the validity of the Babylonian Conquest of the Holy City of Jerusalem in 587/586 BCE, as described by the Bible, according to a release published earlier this week.

A team of researchers from the University of North Carolina, Charlotte, who have been excavating the hill known as Mount Zion in Jerusalem, say they have discovered arrowheads dating from the period, layers of ash, Iron Age potsherds, as well as a "significant" piece of jewelry - a gold silver tassel or earring - archetypal of the period in question.

"The team believes that the newly-found deposit can be dated to the specific event of the conquest because of the unique mix of artifacts and materials found -- pottery and lamps, side-by-side with evidence of the Babylonian siege represented by burnt wood and ashes, and a number of Scythian-type bronze and iron arrowheads which are typical of that period," the UNC archaeological team wrote in a statement.

The Mount Zion Archaeological Project is co-directed by UNC Charlotte professor of history Shimon Gibson, Rafi Lewis, a senior lecturer at Ashkelon Academic College and a fellow of Haifa University, and James Tabor, UNC Charlotte professor of religious studies. The group has been working in the area for more than a decade and has made numerous significant finds relating to the ancient city's many historical periods.

In July 2019, the archaeologists found evidence concerning the sack of the city during the First Crusade.

The current find is one of the oldest and perhaps the most prominent in its historical significance, as the Babylonian conquest of Jerusalem is a major moment in Jewish history. The researchers say that the unique mix of artifacts and materials found, together with the way they were found - covered in layers of ash - solidify both the time period and that there was some type of destructive event that took place at that time.

"Alternative explanations for the artifacts can be eliminated," the researchers claim in their release. "Nobody abandons golden jewelry and nobody has arrowheads in their domestic refuse. Frankly, jewelry is a rare find at conflict sites, because this is exactly the sort of thing that attackers will loot and later melt down.

Gibson explained that the arrowheads are known as "Scythian arrowheads," and have been found at other archaeological conflict sites from the 7th and 6th centuries BCE.

"They were fairly commonplace in this period and are known to be used by the Babylonian warriors," he explained. "Together, this evidence points to the historical conquest of the city by Babylon because the only major destruction we have in Jerusalem for this period is the conquest of 587/586 BCE."

The potsherds help date the discovery further, considering the lamp shards found are typical to the period.

https://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Archaeological-discovery-helps-prove-Babylonian-conquest-of-Israel-598543

What Is The Relationship Between Belief And Confessing Christ As Lord?

       "If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved." (Romans 10:9-10)

       What is the relationship between faith in Christ and publicly confessing His name? Both go hand in hand with each other. We confess His name by faith. Confession is not a meritorious deed. Confession is not something that we attach to faith as a requirement or prerequisite for salvation. It is simply an expression of faith. The main reason for public confession was so that fellow Christians could help keep each other accountable and for the sake of honor.

        Audible confession of Christ's Lordship is evidence of a changed heart, as such will certainly bring about persecution. In context, the Apostle Paul is giving particular emphasis to the simplicity of receiving the righteousness of God. Receiving His forgiveness comes by faith, not keeping the Law. We are saved because God is gracious. The object of our faith is Jesus Christ. The Apostle Paul is not hereby placing faith and confession in a sequential or chronological fashion, but resorting to a literary device called parallelism.

         A faith which results in justification before God comes "from the heart." That inward faith will manifest itself with an outward declaration of "Jesus is Lord." That is brought about through the repentance of sin. A faith that reflects trust in God cannot exist apart from repentance. It is for this reason salvation cannot exist apart from the confession of Christ's Lordship. It is an inherent characteristic of a saving faith. It is the outworking of a regenerate heart.

Celibacy Advances The Priesthood's Culture Of Compromised Truths

In the 2015 movie "Spotlight," the voice of Richard Sipe (played by Richard Jenkins) says over the speaker phone, “If you really want to understand the crisis, you need to start with the celibacy requirement.” He continues, “That was my first major finding. Only 50% of the [Catholic] clergy are celibate. Now, most of them are having sex with other adults. But the fact remains that this creates a culture of secrecy that tolerates and even protects pedophiles."

Sipe, the former priest and psychologist, who died in August 2018, devoted much of his life to the psychological treatment of priests. He wrote extensively on priestly celibacy. In 1990, he published A Secret World: Sexuality and the Search for Celibacy. He estimated then that at any given time only 50% of priests, monks and bishops are actually celibate. This contributes to a culture of mendacity (lying).

In a 2016 letter to San Diego Bishop Robert McElroy, Sipe wrote:

Sooner or later it will become broadly obvious that there is a systemic connection between the sexual activity by, among and between clerics in positions of authority and control, and the abuse of children. … When men in authority — cardinals, bishops, rectors, abbots, confessors, professors — are having or have had an unacknowledged-secret-active-sex life under the guise of celibacy, an atmosphere of tolerance of behaviors within the system is made operative.

In other words, priests and bishops are not going to expose others because they may be guilty themselves. The recent cases of former cardinal Theodore McCarrick and Bishop Michael Bransfield of West Virginia prove this point. How could they rise so high and allegedly endure so long in their double lives? Perhaps because people who knew were also compromised by sexual activity.

In our 2016 novel Strange Gods: A Novel About Faith, Murder, Sin and Redemption, which I wrote with Msgr. Jack Myslinski, the character of Msgr. Matthew Ackerman says:

The problem is being celibate. Celibacy turns us all into liars. … The whole thing is built on mendacity. …

Celibacy leaves a wound. Some people kid themselves into thinking it doesn't, but it does. You try to compensate, but you are never really whole. Some priests drown their sorrows in alcohol or pills. A lot of them overeat and get obese. … Some guys travel all the time to escape. Others take secret lovers. Some redecorate the rectory over and over again. That's a classic clerical tradition, decorating. Just look at all the frescoes in the Vatican. It's a kind of retail therapy that has been going on for centuries.

Again, the cases of McCarrick and Bransfield illustrate this "celibacy wound" compensation. Both men decorated lavishly and traveled luxuriously. Both allegedly carried on secret sexual liaisons, evidently trying to heal their "celibacy" wound.

In 1994, I wrote an article about celibacy for The Washington Post following several priest sexual scandals in Washington. I said then:

In light of recent sexual scandals involving priests, I find some skepticism about priestly celibacy. Among skeptics, I get one of two reactions. Some people think priest are liars. Others think we are fools. Some of the time, of course, they are right.

Don't think that this is just an American problem. It is a universal problem as scandals in Poland, Ireland, France, India, Philippines, Kenya, Congo, and Costa Rica, etc. have shown. In Africa, where some of the fiercest defenders of celibacy are to be found, it is widely reported that priests routinely live double lives, keeping "secret" families in homes far from their parishes.

On June 1, The Washington Post reported that Fr. Peter Njogu is publicly leading a breakaway Renewed Universal Catholic Church in Kenya over the issue of celibacy. He is married and has established himself as a bishop of a schismatic church. Twenty priests have followed him along with more than 2,000 Catholics in several congregations. He said in The Post, "They (his followers) are tired of the hypocrisy. Some of our people call us the 'Church of the Future.' " Njogu says that other priests tell him, "The problem with you is that you went public. And I say, 'I am not the problem: I am the solution. Join me.' "

In Latin America I have encountered the same phenomenon. People openly express skepticism about celibacy because they know or suspect that Padre has a secret family. Look at Legionaries of Christ founder Marcial Maciel Degollado, who had not one but two secret families in Mexico.

Celibacy is not essential to holiness. Many saints were married and had children. The Second Vatican Council said there is a universal call to holiness. If celibacy were essential to holiness, then most of the church could not be holy. Sex is an essential part of holiness in the sacrament of matrimony. We say that marriages are "consummated" by a sexual relationship.

Celibacy is not essential to Catholic priesthood. It is only mandated in two of the 24 "autonomous churches" in communion with Rome; the Latin Rite and the Ethiopian Rite. All of the others — the Ukrainian Rite, Syrian Rite, Maronite Rite, Coptic Rite, etc. — allow their priests to marry prior to ordination. Are 22 churches of the East not also holy?

St. Peter was not celibate. Much of the clergy for the first 1,000 years of Christianity were not celibate.

Celibacy was not mandated for diocesan clergy until the first Lateran Council (1123) and reaffirmed by the second Lateran Council (1139). Both of those decrees were brought on by the fact that many clergy, especially in rural areas, had wives or concubines. Often they gave church property to their families. Celibacy then was honored more in the breach than the observance.

At least seven popes were married. Several others had children either before or during their papacies. Pope Julius II, the pope who commissioned Michelangelo to paint the Sistine Chapel, fathered three daughters. There was even a father and son pope combination, Pope Hormisdas (514-523) who was father to Pope Silverius, (536-537) who himself fathered an illegitimate daughter.

Paul presumed that bishops would be married, but he said they should be self-controlled (Titus 1:8). Still good advice. Paul himself favored celibacy for practical reasons because it allowed the unmarried man to be single minded in his work for the church (1 Corinthians 7:32-33).

Today we have many married priests in the Roman Rite who have come to us from the Anglican or Lutheran traditions. The Washington Archdiocese, like many American dioceses, has several married priests who were first ordained in the Episcopal church and then received into the Roman church. If they can be married, why not others?

https://www.ncronline.org/news/accountability/priestly-diary/celibacy-advances-priesthoods-culture-compromised-truths

One Of The Greatest Questions Ever Asked

        "For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?" (Mark 8:36-37)

        We live in a culture that is obsessed with personal glory and material gain. Many people waste hordes of time on fleeting things such as the latest fashion trends or vehicle models. Commercials that we hear on the radio and on television oftentimes announce various ways to improve the quality of virtually every facet of our lives. Businesses concentrate on accumulating large masses of wealth for themselves. Gullible customers concentrate on getting the best items possible. This all points to the fact that an inherent part of human nature is a desire to find a source of ultimate fulfillment.

        There is, however, one thing of utmost importance that society has totally forgotten. That is the person of Jesus Christ as proclaimed in the gospel. The vast majority of people in today's world seem to be utterly oblivious to or unconcerned regarding their sinful condition and the need of a redeemer. This should motivate us even more so to preach the gospel to the lost world. Moreover, Jesus powerfully and with great simplicity struck down the mindset of striving to achieve the highest place of praise and honor according to worldly standards.

        Even if a person became so popular that he could instantaneously claim possession of the whole world, that position of earthly supremacy would be absolutely worthless in the sight of God. It would not even begin to amount to a claim against God. Further, nothing is more precious than the human soul itself. There is more to life than material goods. Nothing should be considered more important than our eternal destiny, for the things of this world are passing away before our very eyes. If people do not repent at the preaching of the gospel, then they will perish for all eternity. Material possessions can always be stolen, damaged, or destroyed. We are staring eternity in its face. We came into this world with nothing. We shall leave this world with nothing. Life is but for a moment.

       All things created by man rightfully belong to God, since He at the beginning of time formed all the particulates which constitute the composition of everything that we observe. He also gave us the ability to grow in intellect. If a person thinks that we cannot find enjoyment in the things we do have, then he has missed the heart of Christ's teaching. We are not to allow ourselves to become preoccupied with our belongings or activities to the point at which they control our lives. If that happens, they become idols and demons. Our chief focus in this life should be on God who is above. He has the power and authority to take everything away just as quickly as He imparted those gifts to us.

Aquinas: There Is No Hope Of Justification, But Only By Faith...We Conclude That A Man Is Justified By Faith Without The Works Of The Law

Here's an interesting Aquinas tidbit from an old discussion list:

Et sie exponit Glossa. Sed Apostolus videtur loqui de moralibus, quia subdit quod lex posita est propter peccata, et haec sunt praecepta moralia. Horum legitimus usus est ut homo non attribuat eis plus quam quod in eis continetur. Data est lex ut cognoscatur peccatum. Roman., vii, 7: Quia nisi lex diceret,non concupisces (quod dicitur in Decalogo) concupiscentiam nesciebam. Non est ergo in eis spec justificationis, sed insola fide. Roman., iii, 28: Arbitramur justificari hominem per fidem sine operibus legis.

"But the Apostle seems to be speaking about morals, because he adds that the law was set forth because of sin, and the law consists of moral precepts. The proper use of these precepts is that man not attribute to them more than what is contained in them. The law was given so that sin might be recognized. As Romans 7:7 says, "Unless the law were saying, 'Do not covet,' (which the Decalogue says), I would not have known about covetousness. In the precepts, therefore, there is no hope (spec=spes?) of justification, but only by faith. As Romans 3:28 says, "We conclude that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law."

Thomas Aquinas, "Epistola I Ad Timotheum", "Lectio III" in *Opera Omnia*, Volume 21: *Commentarii in Epistolam Ad Corinthios 1 In Caeteras Omnes Epistolas S. Pauli.* Paris: Apud Ludovicum Vives, Bibliopolam Editorem, 1876, page 456.

https://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2013/01/aquinas-there-is-no-hope-of.html

A Double-Standard Raised In Arguing That Morals Are A Product Of Evolution

"In a promotional piece for his book, Wright says, "My hope is that people will use the knowledge [in this book] not only to improve their lives-as a source of 'self-help'-but as cause to treat other people more decently" (emphasis ours).

This statement captures a major flaw in Wright's analysis. His entire thesis is that chance evolution explains morality, that the environment selects those whose morals are beneficial or survival. Morality is a product of nature.

Yet Wright frequently lapses, unconsciously making reference to a morality that seems to transcend nature. Take this comment: "Human beings are a species splendid in their array of moral equipment, tragic in their propensity to misuse it, and pathetic in their constitutional ignorance of the misuse" (emphasis ours). Wright reflects on the moral equipment randomly given to us by nature and then bemoans our immoral use of it with such words as tragic, pathetic, and misuse.

He writes, "Go above and beyond the call of a smoothly functioning conscience; help those who aren't likely to help you in return, and do so when nobody's watching. This is one way to be a truly moral animal."

It's almost as if he has two categories of morality-nature's morality and a transcendent standard used to judge nature's morality. But where did this transcendent standard come from? If transcendent morality judges the "morality" that evolution is responsible for, the it can't itself be accounted for by evolution."

Francis J. Beckwith and Gregory Koukl, Relativism: Feet Firmly Planted in Mid-Air, p. 159

The Type Of People Consistent Moral Relativism Produces

"In our society, we have a name for these people; they are a homicide detective's worst nightmare. The quintessential relativist is a sociopath, one who has no conscience. This is what relativism produces.

Something is terribly wrong with an alleged moral point of view that produces a psychopath as its brightest star. This is another reason relativism does not qualify as an ethical viewpoint.

Relativism does not stand in any great moral tradition. Rather, it has been universally rejected by all. The supreme moral teachers of all time-Moses, Jesus, the apostle Paul, Buddha, Aristotle, Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr.-have all condemned this view.

Relativism simply is not a moral point of view. Its "morality" is no different than having no morality at all, its moral hero is a sociopath, and has been opposed by every moral tradition. Those who are relativists have no morality."

Francis J. Beckwith and Gregory Koukl, Relativism: Feet Firmly Planted in Mid-Air, p. 31

Moral Principles Correspond With Objective Truths

       "...If anyone will take the trouble to compare the moral teaching of, say, the ancient Egyptians, Babylonians, Hindus, Greeks, and Romans, what will really him will be how very like they are to each other and to our own." (C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity, p. 6)

       This factor certainly is a powerful support of the moral argument for the existence of God. It shows that He has inscribed His moral laws into our hearts. If moral relativism is true, then it would be difficult to imagine how something like the golden rule (i.e. love your neighbor as yourself) can be found in ancient human civilizations outside the Judeo-Christian framework.

       "...Men have differed as regards what people you ought to be unselfish to-whether it was only your own family, or your fellow country men, or everyone. But they have always agreed that you ought not to put yourself first. Selfishness has never been admired. Men have differed as to whether you should have one wife or four. But they always have agreed that you must not simply have any woman you liked." (ibid. p. 6)

       This seems to point to a moral Law Giver, with the problem being our sin nature that we inherited due to the fall of Adam and Eve. Lewis provides examples such as the condemnation of selfishness and the regulation of sexual behavior. These examples further support the idea that certain moral principles are universally recognized.

       "...surely the reason we do not execute witches is that we do not believe there are such things. If we did-if we really thought that there were people going about who had sold themselves to the devil and received supernatural powers from him in return and were using these powers to kill their neighbors or drive them mad or bring bad weather-surely we would all agree that if anyone deserved the death penalty, then these filthy quislings did? There is a difference of moral principle here: the difference is simply about a matter of fact. It may be a great advance in knowledge not to believe in witches: there is no moral advance in not executing them when you do not think they are there. You would not call a man humane for ceasing to set mousetraps if he did so because he believed there were no mice in the house" (ibid. p. 14-15)

        The discussion about executing witches illustrates how changes in belief about facts (e.g. the existence of witches) do not change moral principles. This suggests that our moral expectations and actions are grounded in objective truths.

Does 1 Corinthians 13:2 Refute Justification By Faith Alone?

• Discussion:

          -The purpose of this article is to answer claims made by Joe Heschmeyer on the doctrine of justification by faith and the nature of love. He tries to pit love in action against the teaching that justification before God is not on the basis of meritorious works. This piece begins with an excerpt from the author and is followed with critical commentary:

          "Now, the first two, even by themselves are meritorious. Romans 4:3 reminds us that by Genesis 15:6, Abraham “believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.” But from this must come the third part of faith — the obedience of faith. After all, James 2:19 notes that even the demons have these first two forms of faith."

          A faith that motivates a person to do the things of God involves trust. Demons believe that God exists, but refuse to place their trust in Him. 

          "So Abraham is faithful not because he has just the first two forms of faith, but because he has all three. Protestants often claim that you can’t have the first two forms of faith without the third, but this is wrong — as noted, the demons do."

           Obedience done in faith does not constitute what faith is itself. Such is a consequence of faith. It is the "instrument" of our justification before God. Faith is not inherently meritorious. By itself, it bestows no benefits to a man. Faith conveys the presence of merit because of what it rests on: the person and work of Jesus Christ. He Himself has standing before God.

          "First, Paul says that faith without love is nothing. And second, Paul speaks of the various spiritual gifts a bit later in the chapter, and says that love is greater than faith. Now, from Luther’s perspective, if you truly believed Jesus was Lord, that faith would necessarily result in love and good works. But here, Paul’s talking about people for who that just isn’t so. They believe that Jesus is Lord, they perhaps even believe He’s calling them to love, but they just don’t."

          The Apostle Paul does not set forth moral commandments without grounding them in our identity with Jesus Christ. Calls for believers to love each other are based on being united in the family of God. We receive a new identity in Christ prior to becoming one of His followers. Love is the greatest of all spiritual gifts because it endures forever. We long to encounter God in eternity. Our faith and hope will reach their designated goal as we enjoy fellowship with God.

          "In the context of 1 Corinthians 13, Paul is explaining why out of faith, hope and love, “the greatest of these is love” (1 Corinthians 13:13). He’s comparing real faith with real hope and real love, and saying that love still greater, because real faith, by itself, isn’t enough.

           The Apostle Paul says that the Christians at Corinth have been washed, sanctified, and justified (1 Corinthians 6:11). This description has been given in the past tense. Paul's exhortations flow from this statement. The context of this passage is not about us meriting our justification before God.

          "The KJV version of Galatians 5:6 nails it: “For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.” Paul’s phrase, also translated “faith working through love” sums everything I’ve said up succinctly: for faith to be worth anything, it must not be mere belief, or even belief combined with trust, but belief, trust and loving obedience.

          Interestingly enough, the Roman Catholic New American Bible has this footnote on this passage from Galatians 5:

          "The Greek for faith working through love or “faith expressing itself through love” can also be rendered as “faith energized by (God’s) love.”

          Faith is the root. Love is the product of that faith. It is evidenced or made manifest by our love. Galatians 5:6 is not inconsistent with the doctrine of justification by faith alone because it affirms that the performance of good works follows a change of heart.

          "So where Luther was wrong was that he believed that all true seeds of faith eventually bore the fruit of good works, so that as long as you had a seed, you knew you’d eventually have fruit. That’s not true. The parable of the sower appears in Matthew 13, Mark 4, and Luke 8 — in all three versions, the exact same seed is thrown, and yet depending of the soil (the disposition of the hearer of the word of God), it either dies out at once, grows and then dies out, or grows and bears fruit.

          The Parable of the Sower relates to the preaching of the gospel and what people do with that message. The seed is to be identified as the gospel. Good works will always spring forth from genuine faith because it is God who works in us to accomplish His will.