Evidence that Charles Darwin was not an atheist!
Posted by simon peter sutherland in new atheism, Science and evolution on October 6, 2012
In his own words, Charles Darwin did not reject belief in a god!
“It seems to me absurd to doubt that a man may be an ardent Theist & an evolutionist. … In my most extreme fluctuations I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God. I think that generally (& more and more so as I grow older) but not always, that an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind.”
Charles Darwin
Letter to John Fordyce, 7 May 1879
The Tombs of the Kings and early Christians
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Biblical archaeology, Christianity on October 5, 2012
At Paphos, Cyprus there stands what is known as ‘The Tombs of the Kings’.
These tombs have a wide variety of historical facts connected to them, and although all of them are of interest, one point of this history stands out to me, that point being the fact that early Christians met in these tombs in ancient times.
At the Tombs of the Kings, early Christians from around the 1st – 4th centuries AD met for worship in singlar tombs around this location and also for protection from the persecution lashed out upon them by the Romans.
It is likely that the early Christians met in one tomb at a time.
Acts 11:19-20 tells us that after Stephen was martyred some Christians travelled to Cyprus and preached to Jews only. In Greco-Roman times Paphos was the island’s capital and it is likely that these Christians travelled there. However, it was not until Paul, Barnabus and Mark visited Paphos, Cyprus as written in Acts 13: 4-13 that the gospel was given to the Gentiles of which Paul, then Saul converted the Roman official.
Some believe that the Roman authorities were angry at Pauls conversion of the Proconsul Sergius Paulus and thus persecuted Christians at Paphos. Thus, it is for this reason that they went just outside the city walls and met in the ancient caves and tombs.
Evidence for this is found in the discoveries of crosses and Frescoes found in the burial chambers, which is regarded as proof that early Christians used these tombs during tribulations prior to the 4th century AD. Persecution of Christians was abolished by Roman Emperor Constantine who made Christianity the religion of Rome in 313 AD.
This short documentary which I made on the matter offers a more visual presentation of this subject of ‘The Tombs of the Kings and early Christians’.
‘Gospel of Jesus’ wife’ papyrus a fake. Vatican claims…
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Biblical archaeology, Christianity, The Bible on September 28, 2012
The academic debate concerning a ancient papyrus that is said may imply that Jesus had a wife has been furthered somewhat by a statement made by Vatican that the Jesus’ wife papyrus is a ‘clumsy fake’.
Although I am a Protestant theologian and rarely take the claims of Rome seriously, I think they got this one right. After all, the Vatican library does boast 75,000 ancient codices, so I think on this, they are more than qualified to make such a statement. And even if many would ignore their claim or redicule the Vatican as the home of a messy religion, such would only be a distraction from the issue at hand.
This matter is concerning the authenticity of a manuscript, not religious debate or morals for that matter, however, back to the topic, here is a link to an article;
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/28/vatican-denounces-jesus-married-papyrus
The “Wicked Bible” is the one without all the words
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Christianity, Reform, The Bible on September 27, 2012
A while ago I viewed an ancient Bible known as “The Wicked Bible”.
It was published and printed by Robert Barker, the official printer of the King James Bible in 1631. However, a massive error was made in the print and one word was missed out from the 7th commandment, “Thou shalt not commit adultery” (Exodus 20: 14)
The word in question which was missed out was the word “Not“. Thus the text read, “Thou shalt commit adultery” for which the printer was fined £300 and the run of prints were destroyed and the printers license was taken from him.
Only a few of these Bibles exist today, since they were destroyed. But as I stood looking at this surviving witness to such a massive error, it came to me of how valuable every word of scripture truly is. That if “one dot or tittle” be removed, then it will have devastating eternal effects.
I prayed for the church in England and America while thinking of how far she has fallen today, when the Bibles that so many Christians hold and regard as worthy of being called a Bible, actually have edits and large numbers of texts and words missing from them. And thus so much of today’s church has gotten into bed with a harlot and has committed adultery with her, by embracing many ‘wicked Bibles’.
Seems to me that we not only have individual leaders within the Christian church who are likewise guilty of this sin by accepting edited Bibles, but she is also guilty of adultery too. It is she who so often accepts sins and re-interprets the Bible to comply with modern blasts of wind and thus so often makes herself look like a people pleasing coward in the eyes the world and an adulterous bride through the eyes of her Husband.
Did Jesus have a wife? The Papyrus may well be a fake!
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Christianity, The Bible on September 27, 2012
Over the years the debate has raged somewhat concerning the question of whether or not Jesus was married. I personally, after reviewing the evidence from the New Testament, historical texts and reliable history see nothing to suggest that Jesus was married.
Recently we have heard of an ancient manuscript which has come to light which may claim that Jesus was married?
The manuscript itself appeared to be 4th century AD? Which if so, could date the composition of the document anywhere up to 300 years after the life of Jesus. Hardly reliable history?
However, after looking at photography of this manuscript, I noticed that something did not appear consistent when compared with other authentic manuscripts. Having viewed authentic manuscripts such as P52. Rylands library papyrus (50-125 AD) also known as “St Johns Fragment” and other ancient Biblical and apocryphal manuscripts at Rylands, I could not help but find the current manuscript which claims that Jesus was married, suspect.
More on that later.
However, Professor Mark Goodacre of Duke University has published an article by Professor Watson on this matter. Here are two links to that article.
http://ntweblog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/the-gospel-of-jesus-wife-how-fake.html
Ancient Reservoir from the 1st Temple period found in Jerusalem
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Biblical archaeology on September 7, 2012
Here is a recent article I found from http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org
According to the article “The Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) and Jerusalem archaeologist Eli Shukron announced the discovery of a large First Temple period reservoir” on 09/06/2012.
This discovery will improve our understanding of the 1st Temple period in Jerusalem.
Christopher Hitchens errors concerning the deaths of John Wycliffe and Myles Coverdale
Posted by simon peter sutherland in England issues, new atheism on July 28, 2012
The late and somewhat outspoken atheist Christopher Hitchens in his popular book “God is not great” made many claims from both history and the present and from historical texts, religious texts and books regarded as sacred by many, out of which he attempted to dismatle the walls of religion brick by brick by applying the written content towards his criticism based upon his logic and interpretation of which his claims towards history. It is clear that his understanding of religious narratives have impacted the lives of many modern atheists and religious folk today.
Hitchens certainly wrote a book in which he attempted to grind his axe against all things religious and Christian. Yet the problem is that many folks regard this book as somewhat dynamic and excellent, yet many of them are ignorant of the clear cut errors of Hitchens work.
One such error is in his claim that devout Christian men such as John Wycliffe, Myles Coverdale and Tyndale were all burned alive at the stake.
In his book, “God is not great” Hitchens writes the following, quote; “Devout men like Wycliffe, Coverdale, and Tyndale were burned alive…”
This is simply not accurate at all. Although he was correct that Tyndale was burned, he was not burned alive, on the contrary, Tyndale was strangled first, then his body was burned and the facts remain that early English Bible translator John Wycliffe was not burned alive at all, but suffered a stroke on 28 December 1384 during a service at Lutterworth Church and died the last day of that month. Wycliife was not burned alive at the stake.
Likewise, early Bible translator Myles Coverdale was not burned alive as Hitchens claimed but died on 20th January 1569 at London of natural causes.
What is clear to me is that Hitchens was so intent on lashing out in a war of words against all thing religious, that his own bitterness towards Christianity is demonstrated by his total lack of ability to even present accurate research into the historical facts behind one of the religions which he was so vehemently attacking.
The gospel of Mary, Papyrus 463 at John Rylands Library
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Christianity, The Bible on July 27, 2012
One of only two Greek fragments of the hugely controversial and so-called ‘Gospel of Mary’ is now on display at Rylands Library, Manchester.
The manuscript itself dates back to the 3rd century AD and is Gnostic in its content and the content is believed by some to have been written by Mary of Magdela. But this is highly improbable since the book itself was most likely composed during the late 2nd century AD, however the manuscript is on display with ancient Mummy portraits and Papyri which is part of an exhibition that is said to be both rare and “ground-breaking”.
The Faces and Voices exhibition is at John Rylands Library, Deansgate, Manchester and is on now until 25 November 2012, so I will no doubt be posting thoughts about the exhibition and the contents during that period.
Richard Dawkins on “infanticide”
Posted by simon peter sutherland in England issues, new atheism on April 26, 2012
Atheist Richard Dawkins is widely known or said to support moral living. Moral living is a consistent claim made by modern atheists, who arguable do live somewhat moral lives. However, the question I would like to ask is what is the standard of morality offered by modern atheists?
What is the measuring line of their morals?
In a recorded interview, atheist Richard Dawkins stated that he supports infanticide and can see no moral objection to that at all. Quote
“What about infanticide? Morally, Strickly morally I can see no objection to that at all. I would be in favour of infanticide.” Richard Dawkins
Obviously we have to take the context of the infantide he is speaking about into consideration, but in reality, this is totally depraved of him to make such a claim.
The problem with this type of so-called morality and logic which discerns this so-called morality is that it is based upon the opinions of men, who, by themselves are depraved, according to the natural depravity of man. Thus, when morality is discerned by men, then it moves downhill and has in fact, moved downhil and it is only a matter of time before it hits rockbottom.
Thus, I post the video of Dawkins in my comment box and leave his words for you to judge for yourself.
Remember the past!
Two ancient documents and the Shroud of Turin?
Posted by simon peter sutherland in Christianity, The Shroud of Turin on April 25, 2012
Amongst the vast amount of ancient and early Christian writings from the 1st – 4th centuries, we find large amounts of forgotten books and somewhat un-researched material, all of which give us glues and further insights into the ancient mind and the times in which Jesus and the apostles lived.
Our understanding of the era in which the New Testament was written is growing by the day and our knowledge of the historical reality of the New Testament is unearthed continually.
Some of this knowledge and insight is hugely controversial and what is discovered is so often contrary to what is commonly called knowledge.
The historical theologian likes to see things, to touch the historical artefact, the ancient coin, the fragment of pottery, the ancient nail, the writing upon the ancient temple wall. We want every bit of information we can find. We seek to discover every last word written on every ancient fragment of papyrus and every ancient tablet of stone and document.
One document which has interested me recently is my observation within two ancient texts dating around the 2nd century AD and their referrences to the burial cloth of Christ.
One of these documents is from a text known as “The gospel according to the Hebrews“. The passage which contains a Shroud referrence reads concerning a Gospel which Origen used and records an event concerning Jesus who after His resurrection took His burial cloth to the servant of the [High] Priest, who is named in John 18: 10-11 as Malchus and referred to in Matthew 26: 51, Mark 14: 47, Luke 22: 51 as the man to whom Jesus healed his ear, after it had been cut off by Peter in Gethsemane.
According to the Gospel of the Hebrews, Jesus gave Malchus the Shroud after Jesus’ resurrection.
The text reads follows;
“But when the Lord had given the linen cloth to the servant of the priest, He went and appeared to James”
The Gospel according to the Hebrews. (Found in Jerome, Illustrious men, 2 & Lost Scriptures, Ehrman, Page 16)
Could this text be a referrence to the Shroud of Turin?
The second historical text is from what is called “The Hymn of the pearl”. This text is said to have been written by the apostle Thomas himself and is somewhat mysterious and less direct, maybe even poetical, but nevertheless, a referrence. This work is referred to in the third century Acts of Thomas and the work itself is generally agreed to date to the 2nd century AD.
The text reads as follows;
“But, when suddenly I saw my garment reflected as in a mirror, I preceived in it my whole self as well and through it I knew and saw myself. For though we originated from the one and the same we were partially divided, then again we were one, with a single form. The treasurers too who had brought the garment I saw as two beings, but there existed a single form in both, One royal symbol consisting of two halves…And the image of the King of Kings was all over it”
(The Hymn of the Pearl. 76-80, 86. 2nd century AD)
The question is, are these texts historical and very early referrences to the Shroud of Turin?
Simon Peter Sutherland
-
Simon Peter Sutherland 