Archive for category The Bible
Visit to Rome: The Mamertine Prison
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Biblical archaeology on December 1, 2014
Simon Peter Sutherland at the Mamertine Prison, Rome © 2014
Visiting ancient Biblical sites in the Mediterranean is always an experience for me and is something I find second to none. Although I like some of the wonders of modernity, I regard our present world as unappealing, noisy and somewhat shallow. Because of that, I prefer history rather than the present
Last month, I travelled to Rome, the ancient and modern city known for being somewhat of an open air museum. Being a history fanatic myself and absolutely intrigued by the Bible, as always I was in inner rapture.
Forum, Rome © 2014 Simon Peter Sutherland
During the afternoon of the first day I visited the ancient area of the Forum leading to a place known as “Mamertinum”or the Mamertine Prison. This ancient prison is within a stones throw of the ancient forum, a Comitium which once felt the feet of the Apostles Peter and Paul and also of Luke and of Aquila and Priscilla.
The Gospel of Luke and Acts of the Apostles were probably written while Luke was in Rome. We also know that Luke was with Paul during his time in prison. This is understood from 2 Timothy 4: 11.
The Mamertine prison, known historically as the “Tullianum”, was probably constructed between 640-616 BC and was likely a cistern. The amazing thing for me was that scripture was written from this damp dark cell.
In 2 Timothy 1: 16 Paul referred to his “chain” this chain now resides at ‘St Paul outside the walls’ which was build on his ancient tomb. Writing from the Mamertine, in 2 Timothy 2: 7-9 Paul wrote: “Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things. Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel: Wherein I suffer trouble, as an evil doer, even unto bonds; but the word of God is not bound.”
On entry down the stairs to the upper level of the complex, I saw ancient Frescos. These can be found on the walls and show Christians depicted with the arms and hands held out. Over recent years Archaeologists have uncovered evidence that have connections to St Peter as early as 7th century. The evidence also suggesting the Mamertine was used as a Church by the 8th century.
The claim that St Peter was in Rome goes all the way back to the 1st century from his probable coded use of the word “Babylon” for Rome in 1 Peter 5: 13, 2 Peter 5: 13, and his crucifixion linked to John 21: 18 where Jesus foretold him of his future suffering. The claim of his crucifixion in Rome comes from the 1st or 2nd century “Acts of Peter” which we know was in circulation in the 2nd century. The “Acts of Peter” claims that Peter was crucified upside down in Rome at his own request. This claim is also affirmed by Clement between AD 80-98 in his letter to the Corinthians (chapter 5). An event which probably took place near where St Peter’s Basilica now stands around AD 64 during the reign of Emperor Nero.
Mamertine Prison © 2014 Simon Peter Sutherland
There was a time when condemned prisoners were held in this cell before execution. We know for certain that 2 Timothy was written from the Mamertine and it is possible that Philippians was also written here too. If Peter was in fact executed in Rome then he most certainly was held in the Mamertine, as a strong tradition affirms. If that be true which I think it is, 2 Peter may also have been written in this dungeon.
Other Biblical texts possibly written from the Mamertine or nearby, include Philemon, Ephesians, Colossians and possibly Galatians. It is one of the most outstanding thoughts and realities of life that the Truth of the Gospel is that suffering produces great things. Persecution never destroys the Church, on the contrary it enhances it. It is truly amazing to think that such a light as Scripture itself could come from such a dark damp cell. That such a light could truly shine from such a dark place.
I love this little prison.
Aristobulus: Britain’s Apostolic connection to the Bible.
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Christianity on September 12, 2014
A lot of people in Britain today when they think of Christianity, either think of it in the present or alongside the likes of Archbishops and Popish type figures. Pompous priests and high Anglican services and so forth.
So often, the events of the present, dictate and define our understanding of words and people’s beliefs. Such, I think, could not be further from the Truth.
Britain as it stands today, may well be a Christian Country in the context of some official ethics and as in a form of Christianised culture, but in reality and belief, it is far from real Christianity.
But the question which looms in my mind is this: was Christianity ever intended to be a denominational establishment, where members of a so-called Christian state, were members of the Church. This type of political institution I think, reduces the Gospel of Christ and the foundations of the Apostolic doctrine to comply with geopolitical power of ‘Christendom’ rather than members of the worldwide community of Christians. Most of all, it denies the Truth of Scripture.
In Britain today however, the media and so forth likes to over state Henry V111 and his so-called tyrannical reign: yet Britain’s foundation of the Gospel pre-dates the commonly overstated emphasis of the so-called Church of England as founded by him and likewise continues throughout history through Christians who separated from the Church of England and founded various denominations. Many of these people are labelled extreme or ‘fundamentalists’ and thus are programmed in peoples minds even before they attempt to understand them. The fact remains that Christianity has her measuring line; the Bible, by which the Church is to be judged not visa versa.
In fact, even though the Church of England is given official credit today in Britain, it is not merely Henry V111’s establishment that is the foundation. For the Church of England pre-dates Henry V111 and can be quite easily connected to the early primitive Church, the Anglo-Saxon and Celtic eras leading to the influence of Rome and Henry V111’s separation.
In fact, a long and well established tradition connects Britain directly to the Apostles themselves.
In Romans 16: 10, St Paul wrote of a certain Aristobulus. He was believed the brother of Barnabus and of Cypriot decent and one of the seventy Disciples who witnessed the Resurrection of Jesus. He may even have travelled with St Paul? Aristobulus is believed to have taken the command of Christ in ‘the Great Commission’ to “Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature” (Mark 16: 15) to Spain and concluding his missionary journey in Roman Britain.
We have plenty of evidence of Christianity being practised and believed in Roman Britain in the 1st century, so it is logical to say that someone from Israel must have brought it here.
Considering this view is not the mere claim of some ancient myth or folklore type legend, it is supported by reliable sources, I think God has a special place for Britain and He will not let her go. Even if He has to bring the country down to its knees that the Church and the people might return to Him, He will do so.
The atheist who printed a splended Bible
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Issues with Christianity in England today, new atheism, The Bible on July 7, 2014
Title page of Baskerville’s 1763 Bible.
Public domain
In 1763, Cambridge University printer and atheist John Baskerville produced a fine Bible. This Bible is known as ‘The Baskerville Bible’. Tis a fine piece of work and not merely because of its contents, but due to the fine clarity of the fonts.
The story goes that Baskerville wanted to produce a Bible which people could read with absolute clarity and not those old Gothic type prints that can be found throughout many early English Bibles.
The Baskerville Bible was first printed in Folio (Cambridge edition) in 1763. He also printed at Birmingham. His work, although criticized by some, became an inspiration to many, including Benjamin Franklin.
John Baskerville died in 1775 and according to his wishes, his body was buried in unconsecrated grounds but his memory lived on. It is believed by many that his name was borrowed by Arthur Conan Doyle for the title of the Sherlock Holmes mystery, The Hound of the Baskervilles.
Today, many prints of these original Bibles still exist. Having looked at a good number of these prints in research and devotion, I am thankful to Baskerville for this work and these prints, they are indeed a sight for sore eyes. And inspiring too! Since these days, at least on the surface, atheists appear to be against the Bible and Christianity, but such is not the case with established history. For this version furthered the printing of Bibles for centuries, even to this day.
Just goes to show, that God can even use atheists to accomplish His will on earth.
An Israeli archaeologist discovers King David’s Citadel
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Biblical archaeology on May 6, 2014
“The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.” Psalm 2: 2-4
For quite a while now, some modern archaeologists and scholars have been mocking the historical claims of the Bible and propagating their theories that it is an unreliable source. But their Political agenda stricken claims are repeatedly proven wrong, as recent discoveries consistently prove. There is no doubt to the historical authority of the Scriptures.
Israel belongs to the Jews!
DSS: 7Q5, Marks Gospel and the Resurrected Christ
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Biblical Scholarship, Christianity, The Bible on April 20, 2014
Ancient handwriting
© 2014 Simon Peter Sutherland
Those who are familiar with me know how I repeatedly disagree with the many popular claims made by so-called modern ‘Bible Scholars’. All too often I find the opinions of these people and their dating methods concerning Biblical history, the New Testament Gospels and epistles, inconsistent with the information that is available. Since the existing data contradicts them, I often regard their claims as either misinformation or out right lies.
However, what some people fail to acknowledge concerning me, I, is that I never make such claims without rigorous research and proofs.
In this post, I am writing yet again concerning another often overlooked and deliberately disregarded proof text which contradicts the claims of modern critical scholars. This further information I am presenting relates to DSS fragment 7Q5 and its connection to the Gospel of Mark, which if true, is undeniable proof that the Synoptic Gospel of Mark was written well before AD 66 or 68.
The facts are the following.
Between 1946-47 shepherds in Qumran, Israel, discovered a number of ancient manuscripts in a series of Caves about a mile inland from the Dead Sea. These scrolls (known as DSS) are of highly significant in Biblical research and were written in the languages of Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek and provide valuable information relating to some Religious practices and beliefs during the 2nd Temple Biblical era.
This discovery is arguably one of the greatest finds of the last century.
In cave 7 among some of the Qumran scrolls was discovered a fragment known as 7Q5. This Papyrus fragment clearly appears to be a New Testament papyri containing a section of Marks Gospel chapter 6 and verses 52-53.
This section in Greek reads like so;
ου γαρ
συνηκαν επι τοις αρτοις,
αλλ ην αυτων η καρδια πεπωρω-
μενη. και διαπερασαντες [επι την γην]
ηλθον εις γεννησαρετ και
προσωρμισθησαν. και εξελ-
θοντων αυτων εκ του πλοιου ευθυς
επιγνοντες αυτον.
In the King James Version, the passage reads as following;
“For they considered not the miracle of the loaves: for their heart was hardened.
And when they had passed over, they came into the land of Gen-nes-aret, and drew
to the shore”
It is quite clear that this Greek passage is part of Marks Gospel. Which, presents a huge problem for modern scholars since this cave was closed in AD 68 and never reopened again until 1946-48.
The problem is that those leading scholars whom society make their leading thinker, are the very ones who deny them. Yet the Markan narrative in its original context shows that some people back in the time of Christ could not see the Truth, their hearts were hardened by God Himself.
In his book ‘The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English’ Geza Vermes ignores the claim that 7Q5 contains Mark 6: 52-53 and dismisses it as a “clearly unprovable hypothesis” (Appendix. P 441) yet he appears to offer no satisfactory explanation why? Neither does he include the actual text in his book. This begs the question; ‘just how complete is his version?’
The significance concerning this fragment and Marks Gospel is very high and should not be played down by scholars. Since the caves in which the DSS scrolls were discovered were large quantities of scrolls which are of the highest importance. Today the DSS sit in the Shrine of the Book, in Jerusalem of which the Israel Museum has over one million visitors per year.
It is a very real claim to say there are a lot of disinformation agents in the West today who are trying to bring down Christianity and her mother Religion, Judaism. And any evidences that rise up, either by archaeology, vault discovery or textual analysis, each day they are ready to pounce upon them and discredit the information in relation to the Bible.
The Truth is that the some of these modern scholars continuously play down the authority of the Synoptic Gospels and the Gospel of John because they know the implications and the power of eye witness testimony of this grand scale. The Gospel of Christ “turned the world upside down” (Acts 17: 6) and these scholars and authorities and political spin doctors know that. So in order to control the masses of people and play down Christianity, they must attack it from within. What better place to start than attack the Bible itself.
The problem is that they know all too well that the Bible is not just another religious text. If Jesus had been presented as some kind of guru, philosopher or crucified man, He would be just another martyr, but no, He rose from the dead and proved He was the Christ. But if He was just a great teacher or one of many ways to God, then people would not revolt against Him. But knowing the implications of the things He said, He Himself makes the path of Truth a very singular journey. Thus, in order for the enemies of Truth to bring down this road to pave the way for another they look for contradictions like a lawyers in a court of law in an attempt to make the testimonies themselves appear unreliable. But clear research and Theological insights and exegesis of the Biblical narratives clearly demonstrate that the Gospels do not contract each other and people like myself are willing to appear unlearned and silly sometimes in making claims that are contrary to what is often seen as the majority opinion.
But just because something is believed by a majority, does not make it true. The fact remains the Theological community regularly reviews these apparent contradictions and by careful analysis of the text, know the claims are in error. The problem is, that we know the Word of God and its Theological meaning, they don’t. They are attacking things they do not understand. They win over the unsaved majority and even some believers who sit on the fence and then claim their victories. But even a majority vote does not make something true, sometimes people are just plain wrong.
What we need to do, each and every one of us, is rise up and defend the Truth. It is the promise of eternal life which those scholars are robbing people of. It is they who are destroying peoples faith in the Bible as the Word of God. And it is the Word of God which is Gods chosen way for Him to reveal who He is. But if people close their minds to the Truth, how will they find it?
The time is upon us and we are seeing more than enough proofs of this each day, that a very large organization is set out to utterly abolish Christianity from face of the earth. And if it cannot do that, it seeks to destroy peoples faith in Christianity’s measuring line by reducing it to mere literature. But they will not succeed so long as the Truth is presented and that fellow Christians, is our job.
Do it now while it is still day, for the night comes when no man can work.
“Noah” movie, a hotchpotch of hidden messages?
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Science and evolution, The Bible, The influence of film on April 11, 2014
Walking into the theatre to watch the new ‘Noah’ film was one of those moments where one does not know what to expect.
Film makers always have an agenda. Even if the agenda is art, fame, money, or personal inner release concerning some issue or topic that is bursting them open at the seams, there is always a reason for making a film.
But the director and maker of this film is a new atheist. Which begs the question; why would a new atheist desire to make a movie about Noah?
I have seen a lot of ‘Biblical Epics’ over the years, some good some not good. But most of them, if not all have been set in the ‘Biblical eras’. Such did not appear to be the case with the ‘Noah’ movie. It was filmed in Southern Iceland with no attempt to make it look Babylonian or Turkish.
What struck me on the opening scenes was the films ‘Apocalyptic’ appearance. The cloths appeared more futuristic and the landscape not at all like the Biblical Sacred Geography of the Bible lands.
It soon became quite clear to me that this film was not about the Bible at all. It was not even about the Biblical story of the flood. Something else was going on.
Some scenes were not too bad, but then I noticed when Tony Hopkins appeared on screen he repeatedly mentioned the drinking of “tea”. Anthony Hopkins was of course playing a representation of ‘Methuselah’ but he was not at all like a Biblical Prophet but rather resembled some kind of witch doctor or spiritualist.
Why, I asked, would ‘Methuselah’ mention Noah as ‘drinking tea with an old man’ when there is no evidence that people drank tea in the areas inhabited by Noah. Tea drinking likely began in China yet the script made a clear point of repeating the habit. Why? A conclusion I made was that the reference to drinking tea was a covert method of disconnecting the story to the Biblical eras and giving it a more recent or futuristic setting.
What struck me about the film was that it appeared apocalyptic rather than historical and really, the topic itself was about ‘depopulation’. The popular notion which many of those who presently embrace the theory of ‘Global warming’ that ‘Man has corrupted this world and must be destroyed’. The focus was not upon the Biblical claim that God was correcting the corrupted seed which the serpent had sown. No, the focus was upon ‘saving the animals’ and getting back to ‘Eden’ without man. The animals were the innocent. Man must be destroyed even to the point of a savage and unBiblical representation of Noah as one who became like a madman, wholly intent upon killing the new born child of ‘Shem’s wife’.
The covert yet apparent topic of ‘depopulation’ became quite apparent within the film, the seeds of which the theory of overpopulation can be traced to a Darwinian origin. Darwins acceptance of Thomas Robert Malthus’ principle of population of which his proof was concerning population expansion in America. The film quite clearly represented ‘Darwinian Theory’ in a scene where ‘Noah’ was in the ark after the floods came and he told the story of Creation which in this case was little more than a basic representation of the big bang. The scenes quite swiftly progressed to show a mass of water and sea creatures, one of which crawls out of the water and onto dry land, soon to be transformed into a reptile, then a beast, then a monkey and then ‘Adam and Eve’. The scene was little more than a representation of the often misinformed view of ‘Theistic evolution’.
What could have been rather good was the resurrected inclusion of Tubul Cain, an obscure Biblical character as mentioned in Genesis 4: 22. The Mosaic narrative says that Tubal-Cain was “an instructor of every artificer in brass and iron”.
The Jewish historian Josephus in Antiquities of the Jews 1. 2. 2 affirms this and wrote “Tubal…exceeded all men in strength, and was very expert and famous in martial performances”. He also states that he “first of all invented the art of making brass”.
Concerning the historical references to the ancient use of Iron, written history itself disagrees with modern scientific claims concerning the dating of the iron age and even though the character of Noah was not represented Biblically in the film, outside of the English accent and appearance, Tubel-Cain appears quite accurate?
It cannot be merely argued that the film made Biblical mistakes, but more choices of either interpretation or the so-called ‘artistic license’. Such licences were extreme. Such was the case concerning the violence of Noah and his family when the flood waters came and the great springs of the deep burst forth (Genesis 7: 11) and people tried to get on the ark. Noah and his sons were depicted as killing them. This is a distinct misrepresentation. But the claim that people attempted to get on the ark can be traced historically to the Talmud, where the Babylonian version claims “the people came to the ark and clung to it, and cried to Noah for help, but he answered them: “For a hundred and twenty years I entreated ye to follow my words; alas, tis now too late” (The Talmud. Translated by Polano. Part first. Page 25. London)
Thus, it seems that in some ways the writers did some research into the ark, the written texts and so forth, yet they seemed to mingle these things with other ideas. Such things as the representation of the ‘fallen angels’ I thought was pathetic. The Deist representation of God, always named “The creator” is inconsistent with the Noahic story.
Towards the end of the film when the ark had landed, it seems that the film-maker depicted the vessel as broken in two. This, is likely to be based upon the eyewitness claim of George Hagopian who claimed that when he was a boy he was taken to view Noah’s ark on Ararat around the years between 1900-1905. He stated that he saw the ark and went onto it and it was split in two. This, among a good number of reliable historical eye witness accounts that range from Josephus to Marco Polo, give us many indications and evidences concerning the historical whereabouts of the ark. Evidences it seems, the film-maker is aware of?
Thus, in our modern age where some people consider the Bible unreliable, those who believe that Noah’s ark and Biblical Creation are historical facts are sometimes labelled as ‘fanatics’ or ‘uneducated’ or ‘morons’. These claims are untrue. The word ‘uneducated’ should be replaced in many cases with ‘unpersuaded’. For, such claims are often based upon disinformation and misinformation.
Major facts which divide those two groups are matters of faith and facts on both sides. The Darwinian’s and uniformitarians, who must deny the historical reality of Noah’s flood in order for their ‘uniformitarian assumption’ to work, must, if they are sold out to their atheistic world-view play the event down. The event of the flood would disprove their ‘unformitarian assumption’ that the present is the key to the past. For, the implications of a worldwide flood, would be that it had affects concerning the mutations of the earth and the earth’s crust. If there was a worldwide flood, then the fact that 71% of the earth’s surface is water, must be played down by new atheist scientists as being unrelated to a worldwide flood, but the product of highly speculative theories. Thus, when their body of scientists are set up and declare their finds as ‘fact’ then those sheep who follow them are in fact, little more than scientific faith-heads who put their trust in interpretations of science and ignore the historical texts. Or merely label them as unscientific myths for deluded religious morons.
The facts remain that the story of a worldwide flood is highly documented throughout history, geology and archaeology and whether or not a person believes those claims I have made there, is really a matter of faith in objective argument.
The question is; who are you going to put your trust in? Science or scientists? Arguments or Truth? Written proofs or the claims made about them? Darwin or God? Because, as Bob Dylan rightly put it, “You’ve gotta serves somebody. It may be the devil or it may be the Lord but you’ve got to serve somebody”.
The God of the Bible will not take second place. For the Truth, as the great hymn writer put it “demands my soul, my life, my all”
In conclusion; the Noah film was not at all Biblical but a mere hotchpotch of deism and fantasy. Shame because it could have been good. What was good though is the way the film was depicted, which dissolves somewhat the children’s story like representation in other films, cartoons and books and atheist fiction and mockery. However, I thought they spoiled the film and muddled it up. But I don’t think it was intended to be Biblically based, but merely a film which used popular and central characters and events to further something else. A subliminal message of which I think relates to a predicted and futuristic mass genocide of depopulation? Where men seek justification to “annihilate” man and save the earth because according to them, man is destroying it. A wretched notion on their part, which I think should be consistently opposed.
The god of the Noah film is not the God of the Bible. He is the ideal god that the new atheists would prefer, if indeed, in their minds there were such a being, he is a deist god, and one whom, the new atheists in their wishful thinking, would rather exist, than the Biblical Creator. Science views itself as a type of god, the creator of life and this universe and it is science that will seek to give or take away life. The institution of modern science is not a friend of the earth or of people, it is merely gaining peoples confidence as a friend in the present, only to turn and rise up against them in the future. A new army is rising and a new era; science has been hijacked and will be used against us by militants and the one institution which they have presented as the peoples enemy, will be the one institution that will save us and concerning those wretch notions that some people have concerning depopulation, from the likes of Jacques Cousteau, John P. Holdren, Ted Turner, Bill Maher and many more, I think they are disgusting, for there is enough room in this world for all of us.
An appeal to 5 point Calvinists in America
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Limited Atonement on April 7, 2014
The Gospel of John in Greek
© 2014 Simon Peter Sutherland
“For the time is come, that judgement must begin at the house of God; and if it first start with us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?. ” 1 Peter 4: 17
Dear brothers and sisters in Christ. The time has come for you to re-examine the Scriptures, and cease to deny those which do not reaffirm your message.
Too long have your teachers embraced a loyalty within their hearts to the Separatist theories and histories which landed on your shores so long ago.
Dear brothers and sisters in Christ, I know you love the Scriptures and are loyal to them, but the reason why some of you wrestle with the Scriptures, is because they speak contrary to some of the doctrines of which you hold dear. It is time for change.
Too long have your teachers upheld Scripture in one place, while denying them in another. I know that they are loyal to the Truth and I know they try and be loyal to Scripture, but they have another love in their hearts. The loyalty to their much loved friends and historical people, has taken the pure milk of the word out of their hearts.
Friends; you need not be loyal to the doctrines upheld by your close friends, pastors, beloved teachers, historical people and their books. Our loyalty is to God alone and the Scriptures which He has set in their place. And if a doctrine has no place in Scripture, it should have no place within our hearts.
On the basis of Scripture and in the quest for Truth, I appeal to you to re-think your position with Scripture and plain reason.
If you open your hearts to what Scripture says, the Scripture will come into you and breathe. But if you shut up your hearts and close your minds, you alone will close them up.
Remember that you who uphold and teach doctrines, will be judged more highly than those who do not . This is why James wrote, “My brethren be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation” (James 3: 1.)
With that Truth in mind, I urge you for the good of yourselves and all people; be not be like those of old who affirmed Salvation for themselves, while denying it for others. All the while, looking at the decline of your own while denying their Salvation at the same time. For, if this be an untruth, you will receive judgement for teaching it.
I appeal to you who know the Scriptures, to spend some time in the close examination of them once again. For it is the Church which is to be judged by the Scriptures, not the Scriptures by the Church. It is the Body of Christ to whom the message of Salvation has been entrusted. And she cannot be alarmed by her country’s denial of Scripture, while she herself denies them too.
I appeal to you this day, to re-examine the Scriptures and seek the Lord who gave them. To seek the Word of the Prophets and Apostles who wrote them down and sent the Words to you by the Power of the Holy Spirit sent from Heaven.
The Scripture says “Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father” 1 Peter 1: 2. Through which is revealed the original purpose of God, to indiscriminately bring Salvation both to Jews and Gentiles, who are elect according to the foreknowledge of God, in which, if it follows that if no man is excluded from calling upon God, Salvation must be ready available for him.
I urge and plead with you to re-examine your hearts and minds and be not like those of old, who were chosen, but in the time of Our Lord did deny salvation for everyone, but themselves alone. They too used Scripture to affirm it.
Brothers and sisters, I plead with you, on behalf of Truth and the souls of those who are perishing and the pure testimony of divine Scripture, ‘gird up the loins of your minds, be sober and repent’. And if you have tasted that the Lord be gracious to you, remember His grace towards others, who were like yourselves, not the people of God, even so should you be merciful, as you yourselves have obtained mercy.
If the doctrine of ‘Limited Atonement’ be true, then it is not a ‘doctrine of Grace’. It is a doctrine of damnation for all those who either cannot, or will not believe in it.
Dearly beloved, judgement is coming, but it will not come until the house of God is set in order first. Time is short, I beseech you, as strangers yet as brothers and sisters, to submit yourselves to every Word of God. And pray, pray, pray.’
CNN: Noah’s Ark discovery in the British Museum 2014
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Biblical archaeology, The Bible on January 31, 2014
In an article on CCN, it is reported that Irving Finkel, a British Scholar has discovered a 4,000-year old tablet from Iraq which contains an account similar to the Mosaic account of Noah’s Ark.
Link to CNN article; http://newday.blogs.cnn.com/2014/01/28/noahs-ark-discovery-raises-flood-of-questions/
Were the four Gospels eye witness testimony?
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Biblical archaeology, Biblical Scholarship, The Bible on January 13, 2014
Ancient handwriting
© 2014 Simon Peter Sutherland
One common notion people are presented with today is the claim that scholars now know the four Gospels of the New Testament were not written by eye witnesses or people who actually knew Jesus of Nazareth.
This type of claim is quite a common place today. We read it in books, hear it on the BBC radio, see and hear it on television and in countless documentaries. Likewise within the world of scholarship I continuously run into a head on collision with this argument by people who, when it is all said and done, know more about this argument than the narratives themselves.
One problem I see is that many of the people who make these claims do not make them off their own back, neither did they originate them. The claims themselves go back quite a while to the dawn of modern scholarship and one can easily find the early church disputing who wrote the Gospels.
In the 19th century, a fine Biblical commentator and Anglican Bishop of Liverpool J. C. Ryle wrote concerning this issue in his exposition of John 5: 2 and said the following;
“These words, it is thought, show that Jerusalem was yet standing, and not taken and destroyed by the Romans, when John wrote his Gospel. Otherwise, it is argued, he would have said, “There was at Jerusalem.”. J. C. Ryle. (Expository Thoughts on the Gospels. Volume 3. P 269)
At the time when Ryle wrote this there was no evidence for the exact location of this pool, but it was discovered in the 19th century and now sits within the Muslim Quarter of Jerusalem. Thus, demonstrating that although evidence for this pool had not been found until around nineteen hundred years or so after the text was written, the Bible was correct all along. And today it is widely recognised and visitors to Jerusalem can visit the site.
The text of John 5: 2 reads like so; “Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep market (or pool) a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Beth-es-da, having five porches”.
In this text John is clearly communicating that, not only was John writing for Gentiles and not Jews, which confirms the position of Eusebius in his ecclesiastical history that John wrote this Gospel from Ephesus to expand on things not previously written by Matthew and Mark, but that he wrote in the way that is communicating that Jerusalem was still standing at the time.
There is ample evidence that John had already read Matthew, Mark and Luke by the time he was to write his Gospel and noticed that there was other points concerning Jesus’ life that the Synoptic writers did not mention. For this reason, John wrote concerning the final year of Jesus’ ministry. This is just one of many reasons to claim historically and textually that the Gospels were written by eye witnesses and based upon eye witness testimonies.
Eusebius claimed Irenaeus wrote in Against Heresies, 111.1.2 that Matthew published his Gospel first in the Hebrew tongue and Mark recorded the words of Peter from his preaching. He connects Luke’s Gospel to Paul, which could be confirmed by Luke’s opening passage in his Gospel. (Eusubius. The History of the Church. 8)
Thus, if Eusebius was correct, then this places the date of authorship for Matthew and Mark to well before AD 50’s and not anywhere the proposed dates that modern academic communities claim.
Simon Peter Sutherland at Ephesus
© 2013 Simon Peter Sutherland
From my own research into the Gospels, I have found them to date no later than this era, even as early as AD 30’s for Matthew and as late as AD 60 for Luke. The problem is that modern scholars claim that Matthew could not have been written prior to the events of AD 70 and the destruction of Jerusalem, since they think it not plausible that Jesus could have prophesied the destruction of Jerusalem as He did. Thus, the Gospel of Matthew must have been written after these events. The problem then grows because people would rather believe the negative suggestion rather than think and research for themselves. People are often fooled into thinking that they are researching something when in reality all they are doing is reading other peoples opinions.
Thus, John 5: 2 is just one of many Biblical texts which leave me wondering what on earth so many of these modern scholars are thinking when they date the gospels? What are they up to? I suspect it is a legal game like those in a court of law who look for contradictions in eye witness accounts, thus if they find them, they argue the texts as void.
But I have not found contradictions in the Gospels, the only contradictions I find are the interpretations of those passages by Western thinkers. The Gospels and the entire Bible was written by Jewish people, and when it is all said and done, the critics for the most part, know very little of ancient Judaism.
But concerning John 5: 2, the problem with the academic communities dating methods for the Gospels is that they are not consistent when one understands that John was here stating the sheep gate or market was still standing at the time of his composition. But the problem is, if this text was written when these scholars claim it was then to anyone who knows what the text claims, it is impossible to believe them. The reason being that the sheep gate or market in Jerusalem was destroyed in AD 70 by prince Titus. Thus, internal evidence from John’s Gospel gives us a composition date of AD 50’s at the very latest. And examples like this can be found throughout the Gospels and the New Testament.
Thus, concerning John’s Gospel, J. C. Ryle was certainly correct and he was not afraid or fooled into believing that because scholars say so, it must be true. He had the character and strength enough to disagree with what scholars and critics of his day claimed. Ryle let the text speak for itself and then explored it, that is what makes his expository thoughts on the Gospels so good. But the problem which happens today is that scholars such as Francesca Stravrakopoulou often make wild assumptions concerning the Bible and then publishes what she thinks the text is saying and then judges it according to that thinking. But Francesca Stravrakopoulou is not original in her thinking and neither is she convincing, in fact she in a long line of scholars who often leave both myself and others baffled at their claims.
People are swift to believe the documentary hypothesis of modern scholars, yet they are not so swift to research the actual text for themselves. If they were, the world would be full of people who do not agree with the speculative claims of the academic communities.
In this, I never fail to tire at hearing them, especially when the single minded media barons give those people all the air time. not singularly as an issue of truth or the quest for truth, but something far more earthly and possessive. We are living in a time where all but the sinful depraved nature of man is uncertain. Our age lacks identity and absolutes. Scientists are single minded in presenting their ideas alongside Theology and history, as though everything should be judged scientifically. Regardless of the fact that science merely means ‘knowledge’ people think of science as some kind of test tube analysis, which when it is all said and done is not a method used to judge history.
A person cannot put a historical document in a test tube and measure it according the that method, you have to find some other way of testing things. Each method is an interpretation only and not factual.
The Gospel of John in Greek
© 2014 Simon Peter Sutherland
For example, if I were to measure the Gospels, I would look at them internally and measure their claims. I would never go along with what state education claims, but would measure the claims according to what I know. For this reason, I absolutely disagree with many claims made by modern scholars who take a text, a verse, a claim, a science, a majority vote and so one and measure the texts through those eyes. Thus, whatever one makes of that, it is certainly not the method used by the early church through to the reformation and beyond, where devotion and Theological insight must first be established in order to see the text clearly. In other words, a person cannot measure a text and judge it if they have failed to understand what the text is saying.
Let us take Biblical archaeology for example; if I go to Jerusalem, I can find plenty of evidence for the Bible there, the reason being, because that is the central location for the majority of Biblical events. So if I go and search for evidence of King Solomon’s temple in Babylon, I’m not going to find very much, but if I first look at what the text says, interpret it correctly, then see where the Biblical narrative is leading me, I will find it. I suppose what I am saying is that people should first find out what the Bible is saying before they critique it.
Be aware of the Dolwyddelan Dragon
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Christianity, Science and evolution on October 7, 2013
Dolwyddelan Church © 2013 Simon Peter Sutherland
In Wales recently, at the tiny and beautiful village of Dolwyddelan, Gwynedd, I, my wife and sons had been travelling through the Welsh mountains and stopped at the ancient village. This village is stunningly located in those glorious Welsh mountains and even has its own Welsh Calvinistic-Methodist Chapel and also a delightful 500 or so year old Church.While visiting this ancient building known as St Gwyddelan’s Church, I picked up an old legend about a Dragon. I love those old legends.The story goes that a Dragon came up out of the sea and made its way up the river arriving at the village of Dolwyddelan. Apparently the Dragon was so powerful that as it swooped through the valley, diving into the waters it caused a number of floods in the village.The locals knew they needed to do something about the creature but did not want to harm it and decided to lure the beast into the mountains so it could live its days out there. It did so and no harm came to the village again.
Obviously not all legends are true, but we have similar examples of stories like this where people lured Dragons into caves, even amongst the ancient writings of Marco Polo.
Strange isnt it how so many ancient stories can be found throughout the world about people coming up against Dragons and large flying creatures. Yet today, particularly amongst modern evolutionary scientists, many people appear to be under the impression that the discoveries of Dinosaurs are a modern thing, yet the writings of the ancients clearly suggest otherwise.
Calvinistic Methodist Chapel at Dolwyddelan © 2013 Simon Peter Sutherland
The obvious and clear problem when reviewing these ancient legends is that they never use the word ‘Dinosaur’. The answer to this is of course that the word ‘Dinosaur’ had not been invented at the time of the event and the compositions. The word ‘Dinosaur’ or “Dinosauria” was not used to describe the creatures until 1842 when the Lancaster born Sir Richard Owen formally named them. People prior to this time referred to ‘Dinosaurs’ as Dragons, Winged Serpents, Reptiles and so forth. Which is all the word Dinosauria means, terrible reptile or lizzard.We find clear examples of Dinosaurs (Dragons) in ancient writings ranging from the likes of Josephus, the Romans, the Apostle John, Marco Polo and even the likes of ancient myths such as ‘George and the Dragon’.
There is even an ancient tomb in Carlisle Cathedral with the image of a Dinosaur (Dragon) on there.
Strange is it not that so many people today think that the discoveries of Dinosaurs is a modern thing, as though modern evolutionary scientists own ‘Dinosaurs’.
Clearly the ancients would not agree, but would ask them, ‘what took you so long, we knew about these creatures thousands of years ago’.
-
You are currently browsing the archives for the The Bible category.
Simon Peter Sutherland
-
Simon Peter Sutherland 