The Fighting Fundamental Forums http://www.fundamentalforums.com/ This is a discussion forum for fundamental Christians and others. It is a perfect place to debate, fellowship, and discuss issues. en Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:54:10 GMT vBulletin 60 http://www.fundamentalforums.com/images/styles/Skylight/misc/rss.png The Fighting Fundamental Forums http://www.fundamentalforums.com/ Much More http://www.fundamentalforums.com/ambassador-baptist-college/113549-much-more.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:48:13 GMT . *_Much More_* By: Henry Morris, Ph.D. “Much more then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him” ... .

Much More

By: Henry Morris, Ph.D.

“Much more then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him” (Romans 5:9).

The fifth chapter of Romans is sometimes called the “much more” chapter, because of five wonderful “much more” verses. The first is our text for the day, consisting itself of a commentary on the tremendous truth in the preceding verse. That is, because of the tremendous love expressed by God “in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (v.8), we shall also be delivered completely from the just wrath of a holy God.

Romans 5:8 - But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Then, there is the truth of verse 10: “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.” Formerly His adversaries, we are not only delivered from God’s wrath on sin, but also delivered from sin’s power, because Christ’s life becomes our life, once we are restored to complete fellowship with Him.

Romans 5:10 - For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

Thirdly, we have more abundant grace. “But not as the offense, so also is the free gift. For if through the offense of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many” (v.15). His grace is far greater than all our sin.

Romans 5:15 - But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

Next, there is verse 17. “For if by one man’s offense death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.” Note the progression in these “much mores”: saved from wrath; saved unto righteousness; a life abounding in grace; and, now, a life of victory.

Romans 5:17 - For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.

Finally, and in summary: “Moreover the law entered, that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord” (vs.20-21).

Romans 5:20-21 - Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: 21. That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

HMM



What We Believe


Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles


Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles
]]> Ambassador Baptist College I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/ambassador-baptist-college/113549-much-more.html Physics, Not God, Explains The Universe? http://www.fundamentalforums.com/ambassador-baptist-college/113548-physics-not-god-explains-universe.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:46:53 GMT . Image: http://static-www.icr.org/i/wide/physics_explains_universe_wide.jpg *_Physics, Not God, Explains The Universe?_* By: Brian... .




Physics, Not God, Explains The Universe?

By: Brian Thomas, M.S.

"With the laws of physics, you can get universes," said Alex Filippenko of the University of California, Berkeley, during a panel discussion at the June 23 SETICon 2 science and science fiction conference in Santa Clara, California.[1] He argued that the universe could have begun as a result of a random "quantum mechanical fluctuation."[1]

Filippenko implies that we should not trust in God. "Instead, scientists say, we should trust the laws of physics."[1] But many scientists suggest that the laws of physics lead to trust in God, not from it. Which is right?

Physicist Jake Hebert recently showed fatal flaws in this increasingly common "universe from nothing" argument, as described by theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss in his 2012 book, A Universe from Nothing. In Hebert's Acts & Facts article, he first explained that the "argument hinges on the claim that the total energy of the universe is exactly zero," an extraordinarily unlikely sum.[2] And since nobody but God knows the exact energy content of the entire universe, the claim is entirely unscientific.

Second, and more critically, quantum fluctuations are only known to occur within space that already exists. How would the first universe-generating fluctuation occur without space, and how could that space be there without a universe already in place? It appears that in order to make a universe this way, another universe must already exist. In that case, how did the first universe begin—or the one before that?

Hebert also noted logical problems. For example, the assertion that the universe came from nothing assumes pre-existence of the very laws of physics that can supposedly generate universes. Filippenko began to address this by saying, "The question, then, is, 'Why are there laws of physics?' And you could say, 'Well, that required a divine creator, who created these laws of physics and the spark that led from the laws of physics to these universes, maybe more than one.'"[1]

But instead of accepting his own argument for a "divine creator," Filippenko objected that one would still need to explain where that creator came from, and where the creator of that creator came from, and so on. This is a thin smokescreen, since the ultimate Creator of the laws of physics and/or the finite universe would of necessity not be finite. Only finite entities like universes or people require causes, because only they have beginnings. A "beginningless" or infinite Creator did not come from anything else since He always was and is.[3]

Filippenko and like-minded scientists ignore the necessity of pre-existing space for quantum fluctuations to occur, ignore logical problems in obtaining laws of physics from nothing, and ignore the nature of God, all in the name of justifying their faith that the universe could come from nothing. In reality, without an infinite Creator, not only would there be no laws of physics that point sinful people to his existence, but there would be no universe at all.[4]


References

1. Wall, M. The Big Bang Didn't Need God to Start Universe, Researchers Say. Space.com. Posted June 24, 2012, accessed June 29, 2012.

2. Hebert, J. 2012. A Universe from Nothing? Acts & Facts. 41 (7): 11-13.

3. Such a Creator would be identified as Jesus in Colossians 1; see esp. verses 15-17.

4. Thomas, B. New Book Says Universe Came from Nothing. ICR News. Posted on icr.org January 20, 2012, accessed July 2, 2012.



What We Believe


Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles


Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles
]]> Ambassador Baptist College I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/ambassador-baptist-college/113548-physics-not-god-explains-universe.html The Blood Of Consecration http://www.fundamentalforums.com/ambassador-baptist-college/113547-blood-consecration.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:45:33 GMT . *_The Blood Of Consecration_* By: Henry Morris, Ph.D. “And he slew it; and Moses took of the blood of it, and put it upon the tip of... .

The Blood Of Consecration

By: Henry Morris, Ph.D.

“And he slew it; and Moses took of the blood of it, and put it upon the tip of Aaron’s right ear, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot” (Leviticus 8:23).

This unique ceremony, conducted when Aaron was being consecrated as Israel’s high priest, is rich in symbolism. The blood was taken from the “ram of consecration” (Leviticus 8:22), which had been slain by Moses, its death signifying the death to self which priests should experience in order to be fully dedicated to the will and service of God. Then the blood was applied to the head, hands, and feet of the priest, thus, in effect, to his whole body, symbolizing cleansing and forgiveness of personal sins, in order that he might be an acceptable intermediary between God and the people. Further, it of course signified that the priest must have ears willing to hear God’s Word, hands willing to do God’s work and feet willing to carry God’s message wherever He led.

Leviticus 8:22 - And he brought the other ram, the ram of consecration: and Aaron and his sons laid their hands upon the head of the ram.

In fulfillment, the high priest is Christ, the sacrificial offering is Christ, and the consecrating blood is His own blood, shed at Calvary (Hebrews 9:11–14). As the perfect high priest, His ear was perfectly attuned to God’s Word, His hands worked the perfect work of God, and His feet walked all the way from Bethlehem to Calvary, to accomplish the saving will of God.

Hebrews 9:11-14 - But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; 12. Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. 13. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: 14. How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

But then each believer must remember that he, also, is a member of “an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices” (I Peter 2:5). As believer-priests, we must hear God’s Word, for “faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God” (Romans 10:17). Our hands and feet must also be ready to do the work of God and walk in His ways, if we would be faithful to our high calling. This is our “reasonable service” as “living sacrifice(s)” presented unto Him (Romans 12:1).

I Peter 2:5 - Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

Romans 10:17 - So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Romans 12:1 - I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.

HMM



What We Believe


Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles


Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles
]]> Ambassador Baptist College I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/ambassador-baptist-college/113547-blood-consecration.html <![CDATA['James...Brother Of Jesus' Ossuary Is Rock Solid]]> http://www.fundamentalforums.com/west-coast-baptist-college/113546-james-brother-jesus-ossuary-rock-solid.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:43:20 GMT .




'James…Brother Of Jesus' Ossuary Is Rock Solid

By: Brian Thomas, M.S.

In 2002, the Biblical Archaeological Society and the Discovery Channel announced in Washington, D.C. that an ancient inscription on a 2,000-year-old ossuary with the inscribed Aramaic words "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus" was genuine. However, controversy and a lawsuit over the veracity of the inscription followed. That's all over now, and the verdicts are in.

The November/December 2002 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review magazine published the translation, dated at between 6 and 70 A.D. according to paleographer Andre Lemaire.[1] A paleographer is an expert in ancient inscriptions.

The ossuary was designed to hold previously-entombed human bones that were later interred. When it was discovered, the ossuary served as a lowly planter box.

Immediately after the Washington announcement, the bone box achieved worldwide attention. Some called it the most important New Testament archaeological discovery, since it verifies exact biblical relationships between Jesus, his brother James, and their earthly father Joseph.[2] How amazing to think that this ossuary once contained the bones of Jesus' brother![3]

However, the Israel Antiquities Authority, which was not aware of the ossuary's discovery prior to the Washington press release, accused the owner of forging the inscription. Years later, "experts" still said that the inscription was a modern-day forgery.[4] The five-year trial ended in March 2012, when Jerusalem Judge Aharon Farkash acquitted the accused of all forgery charges, ruling that the prosecution could not show beyond reasonable doubt that the inscription was forged.[5]

Now, according to a triumphantly titled article in the July/August 2012 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, "There is no reason to doubt the authenticity of the inscription on the James Ossuary."[1]

That article also summarized the results of a detailed statistical analysis of the likelihood that the James ossuary refers to Jesus of Nazareth. Considering the possible numbers of those who were named Jesus, Joseph, and James at that time, and then adding other statistical estimates such as the total adult male population, "the number of individuals in that population who bear the three names with this relation is 1.71[one or two]."[1]

Of course, the Bible is clear that there certainly was one named James whose father was named Joseph, and whose brother Jesus was worthy of the honor shown by inscribing His name on an ossuary. With as much surety as modern analysis can muster, this artifact and its inscription are genuine. And like so much of archaeology, it verifies exact details in the Bible, which is altogether trustworthy.[6]


References

1. Shanks, H. "Brother of Jesus" Inscription Is Authentic! Biblical Archaeology Review. Posted on bib-arch.org July/August, 2012.

2. Rose, M. 2003. Ossuary Tales. Archaeology. 56 (1).

3. More accurately, James was Jesus' step-brother.

4. Kalman, M. The Burial Box of Jesus' Brother: Fraud? Time. Posted online September 5, 2009, accessed June 25, 2012.

5. Breaking News: Golan and Deutsch Acquitted of All Forgery Charges. Bible History Daily. Posted on biblicalarchaeology.org March 14, 2012, accessed June 25, 2012.

6. For example, the account written in the earliest Flood tablet 13539, written in cuneiform about 150 years after the Flood occurred and found in the ancient ruined Babylonian city of Nippur during the 19th century, does not differ in a single detail from the Flood narrative recorded in Genesis. See: Cooper, B. 2011. The Authenticity of the Book of Genesis. Portsmouth, UK: Creation Science Movement.



What We Believe


Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles


Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles
]]> West Coast Baptist College I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/west-coast-baptist-college/113546-james-brother-jesus-ossuary-rock-solid.html Much More http://www.fundamentalforums.com/west-coast-baptist-college/113545-much-more.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:42:07 GMT . *_Much More_* By: Henry Morris, Ph.D. “Much more then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him” ... .

Much More

By: Henry Morris, Ph.D.

“Much more then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him” (Romans 5:9).

The fifth chapter of Romans is sometimes called the “much more” chapter, because of five wonderful “much more” verses. The first is our text for the day, consisting itself of a commentary on the tremendous truth in the preceding verse. That is, because of the tremendous love expressed by God “in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (v.8), we shall also be delivered completely from the just wrath of a holy God.

Romans 5:8 - But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Then, there is the truth of verse 10: “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.” Formerly His adversaries, we are not only delivered from God’s wrath on sin, but also delivered from sin’s power, because Christ’s life becomes our life, once we are restored to complete fellowship with Him.

Romans 5:10 - For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

Thirdly, we have more abundant grace. “But not as the offense, so also is the free gift. For if through the offense of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many” (v.15). His grace is far greater than all our sin.

Romans 5:15 - But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

Next, there is verse 17. “For if by one man’s offense death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.” Note the progression in these “much mores”: saved from wrath; saved unto righteousness; a life abounding in grace; and, now, a life of victory.

Romans 5:17 - For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.

Finally, and in summary: “Moreover the law entered, that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord” (vs.20-21).

Romans 5:20-21 - Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: 21. That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

HMM



What We Believe


Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles


Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles
]]> West Coast Baptist College I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/west-coast-baptist-college/113545-much-more.html Physics, Not God, Explains The Universe? http://www.fundamentalforums.com/west-coast-baptist-college/113544-physics-not-god-explains-universe.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:40:55 GMT . Image: http://static-www.icr.org/i/wide/physics_explains_universe_wide.jpg *_Physics, Not God, Explains The Universe?_* By: Brian... .




Physics, Not God, Explains The Universe?

By: Brian Thomas, M.S.

"With the laws of physics, you can get universes," said Alex Filippenko of the University of California, Berkeley, during a panel discussion at the June 23 SETICon 2 science and science fiction conference in Santa Clara, California.[1] He argued that the universe could have begun as a result of a random "quantum mechanical fluctuation."[1]

Filippenko implies that we should not trust in God. "Instead, scientists say, we should trust the laws of physics."[1] But many scientists suggest that the laws of physics lead to trust in God, not from it. Which is right?

Physicist Jake Hebert recently showed fatal flaws in this increasingly common "universe from nothing" argument, as described by theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss in his 2012 book, A Universe from Nothing. In Hebert's Acts & Facts article, he first explained that the "argument hinges on the claim that the total energy of the universe is exactly zero," an extraordinarily unlikely sum.[2] And since nobody but God knows the exact energy content of the entire universe, the claim is entirely unscientific.

Second, and more critically, quantum fluctuations are only known to occur within space that already exists. How would the first universe-generating fluctuation occur without space, and how could that space be there without a universe already in place? It appears that in order to make a universe this way, another universe must already exist. In that case, how did the first universe begin—or the one before that?

Hebert also noted logical problems. For example, the assertion that the universe came from nothing assumes pre-existence of the very laws of physics that can supposedly generate universes. Filippenko began to address this by saying, "The question, then, is, 'Why are there laws of physics?' And you could say, 'Well, that required a divine creator, who created these laws of physics and the spark that led from the laws of physics to these universes, maybe more than one.'"[1]

But instead of accepting his own argument for a "divine creator," Filippenko objected that one would still need to explain where that creator came from, and where the creator of that creator came from, and so on. This is a thin smokescreen, since the ultimate Creator of the laws of physics and/or the finite universe would of necessity not be finite. Only finite entities like universes or people require causes, because only they have beginnings. A "beginningless" or infinite Creator did not come from anything else since He always was and is.[3]

Filippenko and like-minded scientists ignore the necessity of pre-existing space for quantum fluctuations to occur, ignore logical problems in obtaining laws of physics from nothing, and ignore the nature of God, all in the name of justifying their faith that the universe could come from nothing. In reality, without an infinite Creator, not only would there be no laws of physics that point sinful people to his existence, but there would be no universe at all.[4]


References

1. Wall, M. The Big Bang Didn't Need God to Start Universe, Researchers Say. Space.com. Posted June 24, 2012, accessed June 29, 2012.

2. Hebert, J. 2012. A Universe from Nothing? Acts & Facts. 41 (7): 11-13.

3. Such a Creator would be identified as Jesus in Colossians 1; see esp. verses 15-17.

4. Thomas, B. New Book Says Universe Came from Nothing. ICR News. Posted on icr.org January 20, 2012, accessed July 2, 2012.



What We Believe


Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles


Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles
]]> West Coast Baptist College I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/west-coast-baptist-college/113544-physics-not-god-explains-universe.html The Sinning Brother http://www.fundamentalforums.com/texas-baptist-college-longview-baptist-temple/113543-sinning-brother.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:39:20 GMT . *_The Sinning Brother_* By: Henry Morris, Ph.D. “But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother... .

The Sinning Brother

By: Henry Morris, Ph.D.

“But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat” (I Corinthians 5:11).

Here is a sober reminder that a Christian brother—one who has accepted Christ as Savior and repented of his sins can again fall into gross sin. This seems so anomalous that we might question whether such a one was ever saved in the first place. Some modern translations even let this question distort the real thrust of the verse. The NASV, for example, calls such a person a “so-called brother,” and the NIV translates the phrase as “anyone who calls himself a brother,” both thus implying that he was not really a brother in Christ.

The Greek word, however, is onomazo which means, simply, “named” or “called,” as the King James version correctly renders it. The thrust of the whole phrase is, “any man who bears the name of brother.” Paul is stressing the anomaly itself. Any brother in the Lord should live in a manner befitting this high calling.

If he does not, however, and if he is not responsive to the pleadings of his brethren who seek to restore him, in the manner of Galatians 6:1 (“ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness”), then he should be subject to church discipline, and be removed from the fellowship of the church. “If he neglect to hear the church,” said Jesus, “let him be unto thee as an heathen man” (Matthew 18:17). If such a person later repents, of course, Paul says we “ought rather to forgive him, and . . . confirm your love toward him” (II Corinthians 2:7-8).

Galatians 6:1 - Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

Matthew 18:17 - And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

II Corinthians 2:7-8 - So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. 8. Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him.

In the meantime, knowing that it is possible for a true believer to fall into gross sin, through carelessness, or doubt, or whatever, “let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall” (I Corinthians 10:12).

I Corinthians 10:12 - Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

HMM



What We Believe


Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles


Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles
]]> Texas Baptist College - Longview Baptist Temple I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/texas-baptist-college-longview-baptist-temple/113543-sinning-brother.html <![CDATA['James...Brother Of Jesus' Ossuary Is Rock Solid]]> http://www.fundamentalforums.com/texas-baptist-college-longview-baptist-temple/113542-james-brother-jesus-ossuary-rock-solid.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:38:08 GMT .




'James…Brother Of Jesus' Ossuary Is Rock Solid

By: Brian Thomas, M.S.

In 2002, the Biblical Archaeological Society and the Discovery Channel announced in Washington, D.C. that an ancient inscription on a 2,000-year-old ossuary with the inscribed Aramaic words "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus" was genuine. However, controversy and a lawsuit over the veracity of the inscription followed. That's all over now, and the verdicts are in.

The November/December 2002 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review magazine published the translation, dated at between 6 and 70 A.D. according to paleographer Andre Lemaire.[1] A paleographer is an expert in ancient inscriptions.

The ossuary was designed to hold previously-entombed human bones that were later interred. When it was discovered, the ossuary served as a lowly planter box.

Immediately after the Washington announcement, the bone box achieved worldwide attention. Some called it the most important New Testament archaeological discovery, since it verifies exact biblical relationships between Jesus, his brother James, and their earthly father Joseph.[2] How amazing to think that this ossuary once contained the bones of Jesus' brother![3]

However, the Israel Antiquities Authority, which was not aware of the ossuary's discovery prior to the Washington press release, accused the owner of forging the inscription. Years later, "experts" still said that the inscription was a modern-day forgery.[4] The five-year trial ended in March 2012, when Jerusalem Judge Aharon Farkash acquitted the accused of all forgery charges, ruling that the prosecution could not show beyond reasonable doubt that the inscription was forged.[5]

Now, according to a triumphantly titled article in the July/August 2012 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, "There is no reason to doubt the authenticity of the inscription on the James Ossuary."[1]

That article also summarized the results of a detailed statistical analysis of the likelihood that the James ossuary refers to Jesus of Nazareth. Considering the possible numbers of those who were named Jesus, Joseph, and James at that time, and then adding other statistical estimates such as the total adult male population, "the number of individuals in that population who bear the three names with this relation is 1.71[one or two]."[1]

Of course, the Bible is clear that there certainly was one named James whose father was named Joseph, and whose brother Jesus was worthy of the honor shown by inscribing His name on an ossuary. With as much surety as modern analysis can muster, this artifact and its inscription are genuine. And like so much of archaeology, it verifies exact details in the Bible, which is altogether trustworthy.[6]


References

1. Shanks, H. "Brother of Jesus" Inscription Is Authentic! Biblical Archaeology Review. Posted on bib-arch.org July/August, 2012.

2. Rose, M. 2003. Ossuary Tales. Archaeology. 56 (1).

3. More accurately, James was Jesus' step-brother.

4. Kalman, M. The Burial Box of Jesus' Brother: Fraud? Time. Posted online September 5, 2009, accessed June 25, 2012.

5. Breaking News: Golan and Deutsch Acquitted of All Forgery Charges. Bible History Daily. Posted on biblicalarchaeology.org March 14, 2012, accessed June 25, 2012.

6. For example, the account written in the earliest Flood tablet 13539, written in cuneiform about 150 years after the Flood occurred and found in the ancient ruined Babylonian city of Nippur during the 19th century, does not differ in a single detail from the Flood narrative recorded in Genesis. See: Cooper, B. 2011. The Authenticity of the Book of Genesis. Portsmouth, UK: Creation Science Movement.



What We Believe


Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles


Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles
]]> Texas Baptist College - Longview Baptist Temple I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/texas-baptist-college-longview-baptist-temple/113542-james-brother-jesus-ossuary-rock-solid.html Much More http://www.fundamentalforums.com/texas-baptist-college-longview-baptist-temple/113541-much-more.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:36:34 GMT . *_Much More_* By: Henry Morris, Ph.D. “Much more then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him” ... .

Much More

By: Henry Morris, Ph.D.

“Much more then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him” (Romans 5:9).

The fifth chapter of Romans is sometimes called the “much more” chapter, because of five wonderful “much more” verses. The first is our text for the day, consisting itself of a commentary on the tremendous truth in the preceding verse. That is, because of the tremendous love expressed by God “in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (v.8), we shall also be delivered completely from the just wrath of a holy God.

Romans 5:8 - But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Then, there is the truth of verse 10: “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.” Formerly His adversaries, we are not only delivered from God’s wrath on sin, but also delivered from sin’s power, because Christ’s life becomes our life, once we are restored to complete fellowship with Him.

Romans 5:10 - For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

Thirdly, we have more abundant grace. “But not as the offense, so also is the free gift. For if through the offense of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many” (v.15). His grace is far greater than all our sin.

Romans 5:15 - But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

Next, there is verse 17. “For if by one man’s offense death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.” Note the progression in these “much mores”: saved from wrath; saved unto righteousness; a life abounding in grace; and, now, a life of victory.

Romans 5:17 - For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.

Finally, and in summary: “Moreover the law entered, that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord” (vs.20-21).

Romans 5:20-21 - Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: 21. That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

HMM



What We Believe


Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles


Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles
]]> Texas Baptist College - Longview Baptist Temple I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/texas-baptist-college-longview-baptist-temple/113541-much-more.html Did Noah Bring A One-Ton Crocodile Onto The Ark? http://www.fundamentalforums.com/trinity-baptist-college/113540-did-noah-bring-one-ton-crocodile-onto-ark.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:04:05 GMT . Image: http://www.icr.org/i/wide/one_ton_croc_wide.jpg *_Did Noah Bring A One-Ton Crocodile Onto The Ark?_* By: Brian Thomas, M.S. ... .




Did Noah Bring A One-Ton Crocodile Onto The Ark?

By: Brian Thomas, M.S.

After a three-week hunt, Philippine locals used cables to capture a huge crocodile from a remote location in the southern Agusan del Sur province.[1] Guinness World Records deemed it the largest captive croc in the world.[2] Since last September, caretakers have held the one-ton saltwater crocodile at Bunawan Eco-Park. Were giant crocodiles on board Noah's Ark?





Some question the veracity of the historical Noah's Ark on the grounds that certain dinosaurs would have been too large to enter it or even to fit on board. But dinosaurs would certainly have fit for the same reasons that crocodiles would have, leaving intact the feasibility of the Ark account.

The most straightforward solution assumes that the Lord brought juvenile animals to Noah.[3] Like dinosaurs, crocodiles all begin small. At about four inches long, crocodile eggs fit in the palm of an adult's hand, and even the largest dinosaur hatched from an egg not much larger than a football.

Certain animals continue to grow their whole lives, crocodiles included. Would Noah have bothered taking old, giant representatives of each large-growing kind, rather than youthful ones?

Many Bible defenders assert that reptiles continue to grow, unlike mammals, but this is not accurate. Some reptiles are "indeterminate growers," but others, such as skinks, are not. Some mammals, the kangaroo for example, are indeterminate growers, but most are not.

Both growth modes also appear to have been true with dinosaur reptiles. Many stopped growing after they reached a maximum size, but some of the largest were probably indeterminate growers. No matter how fast or slow they grew, Noah and his family would certainly have husbanded young, large-growing dinosaurs and young, large-growing crocodiles on the Ark.[4]


References

1. Guinness: Philippine croc is largest in captivity. Associated Press, July 1, 2012.

2. Largest Crocodile in Captivity. Guinness World Records. Posted on guinessworldrecords.com July 1, 2012, accessed July 2, 2012.

3. Genesis 6:20 says that the Lord brought animals to Noah, Genesis 7:2 says that the Lord told Noah to take them on board, and Genesis 7:9 says that they went on board. Apparently, all three occurred. The animals "went" on board, stewarded by Noah and company, who took them after the Lord brought them close.

4. Sarfati, J. 2005. How did dinosaurs grow so big? Creation. 28(1): 44-47.



What We Believe


Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles


Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles
]]> Trinity Baptist College I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/trinity-baptist-college/113540-did-noah-bring-one-ton-crocodile-onto-ark.html The Sinning Brother http://www.fundamentalforums.com/trinity-baptist-college/113539-sinning-brother.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:02:45 GMT . *_The Sinning Brother_* By: Henry Morris, Ph.D. “But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother... .

The Sinning Brother

By: Henry Morris, Ph.D.

“But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat” (I Corinthians 5:11).

Here is a sober reminder that a Christian brother—one who has accepted Christ as Savior and repented of his sins can again fall into gross sin. This seems so anomalous that we might question whether such a one was ever saved in the first place. Some modern translations even let this question distort the real thrust of the verse. The NASV, for example, calls such a person a “so-called brother,” and the NIV translates the phrase as “anyone who calls himself a brother,” both thus implying that he was not really a brother in Christ.

The Greek word, however, is onomazo which means, simply, “named” or “called,” as the King James version correctly renders it. The thrust of the whole phrase is, “any man who bears the name of brother.” Paul is stressing the anomaly itself. Any brother in the Lord should live in a manner befitting this high calling.

If he does not, however, and if he is not responsive to the pleadings of his brethren who seek to restore him, in the manner of Galatians 6:1 (“ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness”), then he should be subject to church discipline, and be removed from the fellowship of the church. “If he neglect to hear the church,” said Jesus, “let him be unto thee as an heathen man” (Matthew 18:17). If such a person later repents, of course, Paul says we “ought rather to forgive him, and . . . confirm your love toward him” (II Corinthians 2:7-8).

Galatians 6:1 - Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

Matthew 18:17 - And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

II Corinthians 2:7-8 - So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. 8. Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him.

In the meantime, knowing that it is possible for a true believer to fall into gross sin, through carelessness, or doubt, or whatever, “let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall” (I Corinthians 10:12).

I Corinthians 10:12 - Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

HMM



What We Believe


Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles


Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles
]]> Trinity Baptist College I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/trinity-baptist-college/113539-sinning-brother.html <![CDATA['James...Brother Of Jesus' Ossuary Is Rock Solid]]> http://www.fundamentalforums.com/trinity-baptist-college/113538-james-brother-jesus-ossuary-rock-solid.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:01:30 GMT .




'James…Brother Of Jesus' Ossuary Is Rock Solid

By: Brian Thomas, M.S.

In 2002, the Biblical Archaeological Society and the Discovery Channel announced in Washington, D.C. that an ancient inscription on a 2,000-year-old ossuary with the inscribed Aramaic words "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus" was genuine. However, controversy and a lawsuit over the veracity of the inscription followed. That's all over now, and the verdicts are in.

The November/December 2002 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review magazine published the translation, dated at between 6 and 70 A.D. according to paleographer Andre Lemaire.[1] A paleographer is an expert in ancient inscriptions.

The ossuary was designed to hold previously-entombed human bones that were later interred. When it was discovered, the ossuary served as a lowly planter box.

Immediately after the Washington announcement, the bone box achieved worldwide attention. Some called it the most important New Testament archaeological discovery, since it verifies exact biblical relationships between Jesus, his brother James, and their earthly father Joseph.[2] How amazing to think that this ossuary once contained the bones of Jesus' brother![3]

However, the Israel Antiquities Authority, which was not aware of the ossuary's discovery prior to the Washington press release, accused the owner of forging the inscription. Years later, "experts" still said that the inscription was a modern-day forgery.[4] The five-year trial ended in March 2012, when Jerusalem Judge Aharon Farkash acquitted the accused of all forgery charges, ruling that the prosecution could not show beyond reasonable doubt that the inscription was forged.[5]

Now, according to a triumphantly titled article in the July/August 2012 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, "There is no reason to doubt the authenticity of the inscription on the James Ossuary."[1]

That article also summarized the results of a detailed statistical analysis of the likelihood that the James ossuary refers to Jesus of Nazareth. Considering the possible numbers of those who were named Jesus, Joseph, and James at that time, and then adding other statistical estimates such as the total adult male population, "the number of individuals in that population who bear the three names with this relation is 1.71[one or two]."[1]

Of course, the Bible is clear that there certainly was one named James whose father was named Joseph, and whose brother Jesus was worthy of the honor shown by inscribing His name on an ossuary. With as much surety as modern analysis can muster, this artifact and its inscription are genuine. And like so much of archaeology, it verifies exact details in the Bible, which is altogether trustworthy.[6]


References

1. Shanks, H. "Brother of Jesus" Inscription Is Authentic! Biblical Archaeology Review. Posted on bib-arch.org July/August, 2012.

2. Rose, M. 2003. Ossuary Tales. Archaeology. 56 (1).

3. More accurately, James was Jesus' step-brother.

4. Kalman, M. The Burial Box of Jesus' Brother: Fraud? Time. Posted online September 5, 2009, accessed June 25, 2012.

5. Breaking News: Golan and Deutsch Acquitted of All Forgery Charges. Bible History Daily. Posted on biblicalarchaeology.org March 14, 2012, accessed June 25, 2012.

6. For example, the account written in the earliest Flood tablet 13539, written in cuneiform about 150 years after the Flood occurred and found in the ancient ruined Babylonian city of Nippur during the 19th century, does not differ in a single detail from the Flood narrative recorded in Genesis. See: Cooper, B. 2011. The Authenticity of the Book of Genesis. Portsmouth, UK: Creation Science Movement.



What We Believe


Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles


Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles
]]> Trinity Baptist College I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/trinity-baptist-college/113538-james-brother-jesus-ossuary-rock-solid.html In The Image Of God http://www.fundamentalforums.com/tennessee-temple-university/113537-image-god.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:59:05 GMT . *_In The Image Of God_* By: Paul G. Humber, M.S. “So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and... .

In The Image Of God

By: Paul G. Humber, M.S.

“So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them” (Genesis 1:27).

The Lord Jesus Christ “is the image of God” (II Corinthians 4:4), “the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person” (Hebrews 1:3), “the image of the invisible God” (Colossians 1:15). Human beings were created “in” God’s image. From the beginning we were made to be like Jesus, God the Son, but we miserably failed.

II Corinthians 4:4 - In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

Hebrews 1:3 - Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:

Colossians 1:15 - Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

God the Father did not forsake His purposes, however. In the fullness of time He sent His Son to take on our flesh so that the believer might “be conformed to the image of His Son” (Romans 8:29), “renewed in knowledge after the image of Him that created Him” (Colossians 3:10).

Romans 8:29 - For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Colossians 3:10 - And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:

Animals do not share this privilege. They were not made to resemble Jesus. Animals have instinct; humans, creativity—like the Creator! He reasons with His human creatures and wants us to reason back (cf. Isaiah 1:18). Like Jesus, we also have authority. He calmed the storm; we tame killer whales and whole herds of cattle. Yet, our rebellion against God shows up in many and varied abuses, but the ingredients are stamped on our beings nevertheless.

Isaiah 1:18 - Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

The fact that we can worship God and commune with Him in prayer is a tremendous truth. God is tripersonal; each Person of the Trinity communes with the Other. But God also invites us into His fellowship. Let us be what we were meant to be. Let us imitate the Lord Jesus Christ—trusting solely in the merits of His cross, commune with the Father through the Son, and experience the joy of fellowship with the Spirit for all eternity so that “we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord” (II Corinthians 3:18).

II Corinthians 3:18 - But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

PGH



What We Believe


Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles


Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles
]]> Tennessee Temple University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/tennessee-temple-university/113537-image-god.html Did Noah Bring A One-Ton Crocodile Onto The Ark? http://www.fundamentalforums.com/tennessee-temple-university/113536-did-noah-bring-one-ton-crocodile-onto-ark.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:57:02 GMT . Image: http://www.icr.org/i/wide/one_ton_croc_wide.jpg *_Did Noah Bring A One-Ton Crocodile Onto The Ark?_* By: Brian Thomas, M.S. ... .




Did Noah Bring A One-Ton Crocodile Onto The Ark?

By: Brian Thomas, M.S.

After a three-week hunt, Philippine locals used cables to capture a huge crocodile from a remote location in the southern Agusan del Sur province.[1] Guinness World Records deemed it the largest captive croc in the world.[2] Since last September, caretakers have held the one-ton saltwater crocodile at Bunawan Eco-Park. Were giant crocodiles on board Noah's Ark?





Some question the veracity of the historical Noah's Ark on the grounds that certain dinosaurs would have been too large to enter it or even to fit on board. But dinosaurs would certainly have fit for the same reasons that crocodiles would have, leaving intact the feasibility of the Ark account.

The most straightforward solution assumes that the Lord brought juvenile animals to Noah.[3] Like dinosaurs, crocodiles all begin small. At about four inches long, crocodile eggs fit in the palm of an adult's hand, and even the largest dinosaur hatched from an egg not much larger than a football.

Certain animals continue to grow their whole lives, crocodiles included. Would Noah have bothered taking old, giant representatives of each large-growing kind, rather than youthful ones?

Many Bible defenders assert that reptiles continue to grow, unlike mammals, but this is not accurate. Some reptiles are "indeterminate growers," but others, such as skinks, are not. Some mammals, the kangaroo for example, are indeterminate growers, but most are not.

Both growth modes also appear to have been true with dinosaur reptiles. Many stopped growing after they reached a maximum size, but some of the largest were probably indeterminate growers. No matter how fast or slow they grew, Noah and his family would certainly have husbanded young, large-growing dinosaurs and young, large-growing crocodiles on the Ark.[4]


References

1. Guinness: Philippine croc is largest in captivity. Associated Press, July 1, 2012.

2. Largest Crocodile in Captivity. Guinness World Records. Posted on guinessworldrecords.com July 1, 2012, accessed July 2, 2012.

3. Genesis 6:20 says that the Lord brought animals to Noah, Genesis 7:2 says that the Lord told Noah to take them on board, and Genesis 7:9 says that they went on board. Apparently, all three occurred. The animals "went" on board, stewarded by Noah and company, who took them after the Lord brought them close.

4. Sarfati, J. 2005. How did dinosaurs grow so big? Creation. 28(1): 44-47.



What We Believe


Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles


Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles
]]> Tennessee Temple University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/tennessee-temple-university/113536-did-noah-bring-one-ton-crocodile-onto-ark.html The Sinning Brother http://www.fundamentalforums.com/tennessee-temple-university/113535-sinning-brother.html Wed, 19 Jun 2013 17:55:51 GMT . *_The Sinning Brother_* By: Henry Morris, Ph.D. “But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother... .

The Sinning Brother

By: Henry Morris, Ph.D.

“But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat” (I Corinthians 5:11).

Here is a sober reminder that a Christian brother—one who has accepted Christ as Savior and repented of his sins can again fall into gross sin. This seems so anomalous that we might question whether such a one was ever saved in the first place. Some modern translations even let this question distort the real thrust of the verse. The NASV, for example, calls such a person a “so-called brother,” and the NIV translates the phrase as “anyone who calls himself a brother,” both thus implying that he was not really a brother in Christ.

The Greek word, however, is onomazo which means, simply, “named” or “called,” as the King James version correctly renders it. The thrust of the whole phrase is, “any man who bears the name of brother.” Paul is stressing the anomaly itself. Any brother in the Lord should live in a manner befitting this high calling.

If he does not, however, and if he is not responsive to the pleadings of his brethren who seek to restore him, in the manner of Galatians 6:1 (“ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness”), then he should be subject to church discipline, and be removed from the fellowship of the church. “If he neglect to hear the church,” said Jesus, “let him be unto thee as an heathen man” (Matthew 18:17). If such a person later repents, of course, Paul says we “ought rather to forgive him, and . . . confirm your love toward him” (II Corinthians 2:7-8).

Galatians 6:1 - Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

Matthew 18:17 - And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

II Corinthians 2:7-8 - So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. 8. Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him.

In the meantime, knowing that it is possible for a true believer to fall into gross sin, through carelessness, or doubt, or whatever, “let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall” (I Corinthians 10:12).

I Corinthians 10:12 - Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

HMM



What We Believe


Principles of Scientific Creationism

Foundational Principles


Principles of Biblical Creationism

Foundational Principles
]]> Tennessee Temple University I Am Am Angel http://www.fundamentalforums.com/tennessee-temple-university/113535-sinning-brother.html