Other Historical Teachings - People need to know the truth. How can they, if the teachers don't?

Proverbs 30:5 proclaims, "Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him" and warns us, "Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." To guess about what happened in the past and tell people it is so or highly suggest we know what was done is to speak presumptuously or to lie about history. If we do not know we should not say. If the Bible does tell us something we should handle the truth accurately. Teachers, scholars, pastors and preachers need to stick with the facts and leave out guess work.

The Creation of Man is Taught Out of Order

Bible teachers tell us that on the sixth day of creation God made the animals and then he made Adam and Eve. This is not true. Genesis 1 tells us:

Genesis 1 is a list of things God did the sixth day but it does not give an order of how he did it. Genesis chapter 2 gives the details:

Adam was made first. There was not a help meet, a helper or an ideal companion for man so God made the land animals in verse 19. These were wonderful but God knew that man was still alone, so God created women who was perfect for man. God man Adam, the land animals and woman in that order.

Eve was not taken from Adam's side for equality

Genesis 2:21 says, "And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; " God took one of Adam's ribs to make woman. Now I often hear something at weddings along these lines. "God did not take a bone out of Adam's head, because woman was not to rule over him. God did not take a bone from Adam's foot because man was not to rule over woman. God took a bone from Adam's side because God created man and woman as equals." This is not true. The exact reason is not given as to why God took a rib. A reason is given for why God made woman. The Bible says God created women as a help meet for man. Preachers are reading their own precepts into the passage and teaching it as the doctrine of God. Anyone who preaches a reason for which there is no evidence is putting words in God's mouth. They are speaking presumptuously.

Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden only a short time

How Long Were Adam and Eve in the Garden? The Bible does not specifically tell us how long Adam and Eve were in the garden of Eden but we should know the approximate time. Some claim they could have been there hundreds of years or even a thousand. Genesis 3:23-24 accounts for the time when Adam and Eve were driven out of the garden. Eve gave birth to Cain and Abel afterwards in Genesis 4:1-2. Cain murdered Abel in Genesis 4:8. Later in Genesis 5:3 we see Seth born when Adam was 130 years old. Clearly Adam had sinned before he was 130 and before Cain and Abel grew up. What limits the time substantially more is God's commandment to Adam and Eve in Genesis 1:28, "And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." God told Adam and Eve to had children. There was not a valid reason in those in those days for waiting to bear children. Sin and death had not entered the world. Adam did not need to worry about getting a better job first to pay for the bills. Adam did not have concerns about insurance. They didn't need to save for a college education for the kids or get a bigger house. Eve was perfect and not barren. Eve did not need to go see a fertility doctor. They could have had a baby the very first year they were in the garden and been more prepared to care for them than anyone alive in the world today. Delayed obedience is disobedience. If they waited to build a family it would have been wrong. It would have been a sin. Genesis 3:6 records the first sin of man in history; eating from the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil which they were commanded by God not to eat. If they had sinned by delaying to have kids, they would have been sent out for that sin and not the sin of eating the forbidden fruit. The time it took for them to eat the fruit was less than the reasonably allowable time to have kids. A pregnancy lasts about nine months. It takes some time to get pregnant. We cannot judge how much time was reasonable for Eve to conceive but if Adam and Eve were obeying God it would not have taken long. It would be reasonable to expect conception in days, weeks or months but to say it was years does not take into consideration the commandment of the Lord. They could have very easily had child within the first year and certainly within two years. It is not reasonable to say they were in the garden for any period longer than that.

The behemoth was not a hippopotamus

What was the Behemoth mentioned in Job 40:15? Was it an elephant or hippopotamus as some think? Such a theory is not consistent with the Bible. Check out the Answers in Genesis web site Could Behemoth have been a dinosaur?. They handle the subject well. When preachers provide pathetic explanations for scriptures it's no wonder the world laughs at Christians. Answers in Genesis, however, has some of the answers you need.

The leviathan was not a crocodile

What was the Leviathan mentioned in Job 41:1? Was it an crocodile? Again, such a theory is not consistent with the Bible. Crocodiles do not have breath which kindles coals per Job 41:21. Unlike leviathan, men are able to fight crocodiles. Read the whole passage of Job 41 below and you will find the crocodile explanation is ridiculous.

Job Chapter 41

For more information see the Answers in Genesis web site More on Dinosaurs.

The unicorn was not a wild ox

The unicorn is mentioned in Numbers 23:22, Numbers 24:8, Job 39:9-10, Psalm 29:6 and Psalm 92:10. God told Job, "Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee?" Modern versions such as the New International Version translate this as a wild ox. The world thinks of the unicorn as a myth and these versions reinforce that treating the Bible as being in error. If it meant wild ox then God could have simply said that. An ox can be bound. A unicorn has to be something different. The old stories of unicorns were not based on the fairy tale versions of today with a horse having a completely straight conical horn sharp as a tack in the middle of its forehead, sparkling dust, a princess riding on its back and rainbows in the sky. The old stories spoke of a large horse with a horn in its forehead that would charge at someone and then forget. How is that different that a rhinoceros? The word hippopotamus means river horse. The rhinoceros is a large animal with four legs and a torso similar to the hippopotamus. So why not consider that as a horse as well? The International Rhino Foundation shows the classification of the Great One Horned Rhino as rhinoceros unicornis. I am used to the name Indian Rhinoceros. There are other variations; the White Rhino, Black Rhino, Javan Rhino and Sumatran Rhino. It fits the description yet people are still shying away from the Biblical truth. Unicornis is a Latin name which best translates to unicorn in English. If the scientists, in all essence, call it a rhino, why can't you and I? On a side note, it is appropriate to say we need to save the unicorns.

Joseph was not a type of Christ

I have heard pastors say Joseph was a type of Christ. What does the Bible say? Genesis 46:28-34 tells us:

In Genesis 47:3 his brothers refused to do what Joseph asked and told Pharaoh they were shepherds. Exodus 20:16 tells us not to lie. Jesus would not have feared Pharaoh and encouraged people to lie.

Genesis 41:34 tells us Joseph proposed a that a fifth of the crops be gathered during the seven years of plenty in Egypt. What happened when the drought came during the seven years of famine? In Genesis 41:56 Joseph sold the corn he had previously taken from Egyptians back to them. Was that right? What happened when they ran out of money?

There was not any love there. He used the corn he took from them to take everything they had including their freedom. He practiced discrimination favoring the priests. That is not Christ like. The Bible never uses the phrase "type of Christ". Why should you?

The Jews were not slaves 400 years in Egypt

In Genesis 15:13 God promised Abraham, "Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;" What does this really mean? God told Abraham that his descendants would be strangers in a land that is not theirs for 400 years (Genesis 15:13). In this land they would also be enslaved and oppressed. They were strangers in the land for 400 years but they were not oppressed for 400 years. In Acts 7:6 Stephen said, "And God spake on this wise, That his seed should sojourn in a strange land; and that they should bring them into bondage, and entreat them evil four hundred years." They were treated evilly 400 years but they were not enslaved 400 years.

Jacob served Laban seven years for Leah and seven years for Rachel (Genesis 29:15-30). All of his sons up to Joseph were born while Jacob served Laban for the second set of seven years. Levi, the third born, was less than seven years older than Joseph. Joseph was 30 years when he stood before Pharaoh (Genesis 41:46). In the second year of the famine, the Jews went to stay in Egypt (Genesis 47:18). Joseph was now about 39. Levi, the third born son during the second set of seven years, would then be no more than four and a half years older than Joseph and therefore a maximum of 44 years old when the 430 year period started. Exodus 6:16 tells us Levi lived to 137 of age or 93 years after the Jews went to Egypt. Exodus 1:6-8 tells us, "And Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation. And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was filled with them. Now there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph. And he said unto his people, Behold, the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we: Come on, let us deal wisely with them; lest they multiply, and it come to pass, that, when there falleth out any war, they join also unto our enemies, and fight against us, and so get them up out of the land." The start of the oppression did not come until after Joseph and all of his brothers, including Levi, died. Since Levi lived very close to 93 years after they went into Egypt then the oppression did not start before then. 430-93 = 337. If the Jews were slaves 400 years then they would have only lived in Egypt 30 years when this happened.

Genesis chapter 50:26 says, "So Joseph died, being an hundred and ten years old: and they embalmed him, and he was put in a coffin in Egypt." If the Jews were slaves at that time the Egyptians would not bother to embalm him. Would his relatives as slaves have the time and money to bury him this way? It does not make sense.

Verse 5 says, " And all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy souls: for Joseph was in Egypt already. If the population could double every ten years there would be 140 people after 10 years, 280 after 20 years and 560 after 30 years. Verse 7 says the land was filled with them. It is ridiculous to say the land was filled with 500 or 600 people. In verse 8 the king said the Jews were more and mightier than Egyptians. How could anyone believe that 600 or so Hebrews were more and mightier than Egypt at this time? It does not makes sense. Reviewing more scripture we find is that the Jews were not strangers for the first thirty years, they were strangers for another 63 years or so and then the oppression started some time after that. Following this time, Jews were enslaved for a period less than 400 years.

Moses was not a murderer

Moses has been called a murderer because he killed an Egyptian. Exodus 2:10-12 says, "And the child grew, and she brought him unto Pharaoh's daughter, and he became her son. And she called his name Moses: and she said, Because I drew him out of the water. And it came to pass in those days, when Moses was grown, that he went out unto his brethren, and looked on their burdens: and he spied an Egyptian smiting an Hebrew, one of his brethren. And he looked this way and that way, and when he saw that there was no man, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him in the sand. In Acts 7:22-24 Stephen said, "And Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, and was mighty in words and in deeds. And when he was full forty years old, it came into his heart to visit his brethren the children of Israel. And seeing one of them suffer wrong, he defended him, and avenged him that was oppressed, and smote the Egyptian:" In Acts Stephen used the word avenged not murdered. What does the Bible say? Exodus 21:16 says, "And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death." The Hebrews were slaves to the Egyptians. Slavery was, and is, a capital offence. There was nothing wrong with killing a slave owner.

Moses was not necessarily a stutterer

Exodus 4:10 says, "And Moses said unto the LORD, O my Lord, I am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant: but I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue." The word in this passage translated as slow is keved. The primary meaning is heavy but it can also mean massive, abundant, numerous, heavy, dull, hard, difficult, burdensome, very oppressive, numerous or rich. This could mean he stuttered but it also mean he had a speech impediment, couldn't pronounce some words, could only talk slowly or maybe could speak well but after a long pause. We don't the exact details. The problems is that when some preachers don't know the details they make them up and that's wrong. We should be content that we know only Moses had difficulty speaking without knowing what his problem was.

The pharaoh of the Exodus drowned. He did not survive

Movies such as the "The Ten Commandments" show the Pharaoh of Egypt at the time of the Exodus surviving while the armies of Egypt drowned in the Red Sea. This is incorrect. Bible study teachers try to point out that the Bible does say he drowned in Exodus. They are taking only select portions of the Bible and not studying the whole thing. Pharaoh did drown. Psalm 136 starts, "O give thanks unto the LORD; for he is good: for his mercy endureth for ever." Verses 14-15 say, "And made Israel to pass through the midst of it: for his mercy endureth for ever: But overthrew Pharaoh and his host in the Red sea: for his mercy endureth for ever." Psalms 106:7-11 says, "Our fathers understood not thy wonders in Egypt; they remembered not the multitude of thy mercies; but provoked him at the sea, even at the Red sea. Nevertheless he saved them for his name's sake, that he might make his mighty power to be known. He rebuked the Red sea also, and it was dried up: so he led them through the depths, as through the wilderness. And he saved them from the hand of him that hated them, and redeemed them from the hand of the enemy. And the waters covered their enemies: there was not one of them left." If Pharaoh was overthrown and not one of the enemies of Israel was left there can be no doubt that Pharaoh drowned.

God's people were not required to wear phylacteries

Deuteronomy 6:4-9 says, "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates." This commandment has been twisted to say that people were required to wear phylacteries or a boxes containing scripture strapped to their forehead. This is promoted by those who do not know God, by those who wish to mock it and those who have simply been taught wrong. They were merely required to wear the word of God on their foreheads. If you a hat, bandana, motorcycle helmet or hard hat you can write scripture on it and do the same. It does not require a box. Ignore tradition and focus on the Bible.

Bible maps are not authorities

Do scholars really know where all of the tribal boundaries of the nation of Israel were? Look at the tribe of Zebulun. Jacob said of Zebulun in Genesis 49:13, "Zebulun shall dwell at the haven of the sea; and he shall be for an haven of ships; and his border shall be unto Zidon." If this were not a valid blessing or prophecy, why would God have it written in the Bible? None of the maps I find of the tribes of Israel show Zebulun with a haven or port on the Mediterranean Sea. Moses, inspired by God, said in Deuteronomy 33:18-19 says, "And of Zebulun he said, Rejoice, Zebulun, in thy going out; and, Issachar, in thy tents. They shall call the people unto the mountain; there they shall offer sacrifices of righteousness: for they shall suck of the abundance of the seas, and of treasures hid in the sand." I would guess, and let me emphasize, guess, that as far as the abundance of the seas or the treasure hid in the sand, the people looking for oil would do better to find where Zebulun would have a port on the Mediterranean and look there. The treasures hid in the sand have not been found so far so this must refer to a time in the future. Are there any ports in northern Israel today other than Haifa? Matthew 4:12-13 says, "Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee; And leaving Nazareth, he came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is upon the sea coast, in the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim:" Zabulon is the same as Zebulun. Here we see Zebulun, along with Naphtali, having a border on the Sea of Galilee. Modern maps show neither Zebulun nor Issachar with border by the Mediterranean Sea. Modern maps do not show Zebulun with a border by the Sea of Galilee. These maps must be wrong.

David did not write all the Psalms

Sure, most pastors know better but it keeps slipping out and a lot people do not know better. David wrote some of the Psalms but he did not write all of them. Do not forget that ultimately God was the author. Some of the Psalms, such as chapters 1 and 2 do not tell who wrote them. Asaph wrote chapters 50 and 73 through 83. Moses wrote Psalm 90. Ethan the Ezrahite is given as the psalmist for chapters 88 and 89. The name is not given for 62 of the Psalms. As it turns out, King David wrote about half of the Psalms.

Solomon did not have seven hundred wives

1 Kings 11:3 says, "And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart." Notice that the number is that of wives and princesses not just wives. Song of Solomon 6:8 helps with, "There are threescore queens, and fourscore concubines, and virgins without number." The exact ratio and relationships of these women is not known but there appears to be far more princesses than queens.

Jehoiachin was eighteen when he became king

How old was Jehoiachin when he began to reign over Judah? 2 Kings 24:8 is translated, "Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem." 2 Chronicles 36:9 is rendered, "Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD." There is a clear conflict here. Teachers avoid explaining this because they can't. The New American Standard Bible, Revised Standard Version, Young's Literal Translation and the New KJV are some of the versions which have this conflict. The problem is that the text in Chronicles does not actually say eight. The Hebrew word for eight is shemoneh spelled shin, mem, nun, heh. The word found in the actual Hebrew of 2 Chronicles 36 is spelled shin, mem, vav, nun, heh. It is similar but not the same. It is a different word and should not be translated as eight. Confusion is caused by the translation.

Tisha B'Av

Scholars teach that the ninth day of the fifth month in the Jewish calendar is the day when the first and second temples were destroyed. They also mention that many other tragedies have occurred on this day to the Jewish people. It is called Tisha B'Av. 2 Kings 25:8-10 says, "And in the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month, which is the nineteenth year of king Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard, a servant of the king of Babylon, unto Jerusalem: And he burnt the house of the LORD, and the king's house, and all the houses of Jerusalem, and every great man's house burnt he with fire. And all the army of the Chaldees, that were with the captain of the guard, brake down the walls of Jerusalem round about." Jeremiah 52:12-14 reads, "Now in the fifth month, in the tenth day of the month, which was the nineteenth year of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard, which served the king of Babylon, into Jerusalem, And burned the house of the LORD, and the king's house; and all the houses of Jerusalem, and all the houses of the great men, burned he with fire: And all the army of the Chaldeans, that were with the captain of the guard, brake down all the walls of Jerusalem round about." At first it may appear there is a conflict but notice the difference in the text. On the seventh day Nebuzaradan came to Jerusalem but he did not go in to it. On the tenth day he went into it. That is the day the destruction of the temple started. Jewish scholars teach that on the seventh the heathens entered the Temple and ate therein and desecrated it throughout the seventh and eighth and towards dusk of the ninth they set fire to it and it continued to burn the whole of that day. What the Bible says is different. It says the Babylonians did not enter until the tenth day. The temple was looted. That had to be done before it was burnt. Psalm 74:6-7 says, "But now they break down the carved work thereof at once with axes and hammers. They have cast fire into thy sanctuary, they have defiled by casting down the dwelling place of thy name to the ground." Men would not take an axe to carved work that had been burnt. The temple was in the midst of the city. Casting fire into the sanctuary was something that was done after looting and defacing it. Jeremiah 52:17-23 lists things taken from the temple on the tenth day before it was burned. Jeremiah 20:5 lists more, "Moreover I will deliver all the strength of this city, and all the labours thereof, and all the precious things thereof, and all the treasures of the kings of Judah will I give into the hand of their enemies, which shall spoil them, and take them, and carry them to Babylon." Jeremiah 37:8 warned, "And the Chaldeans shall come again, and fight against this city, and take it, and burn it with fire." Notice the order. Flames would consume many of the precious treasures of the kings of Judah. Nebuchadrezzar's army would have to invade and take the city first. Lamentations 5:11 provides more insight, "They ravished the women in Zion, and the maids in the cities of Judah." Again, this had to be done before the city is burnt. Conquerors follow the rule, "Loot, then burn." Nebuzaradan did not enter the city until the tenth day. The temple was not burnt, looted or destroyed until the tenth day.

Cyrus is the one who ordered the restoration and rebuilding of Jerusalem not Artaxerxes

Almost all scholars say King Cyrus of Persia did not order the restoration and rebuilding of Jerusalem prophesied in Daniel 9:25. Instead they look to Artaxerxes to fulfill God's word. They rework history based on a faulty view of scripture. Actually, Cyrus did give an order to rebuild Jerusalem. Isaiah 44:28-45:1 says, "That saith of Cyrus, He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure: even saying to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be built; and to the temple, Thy foundation shall be laid. Thus saith the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut;" If God prophesied it, we can trust that it was done. As the temple was being rebuilt the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin wrote a letter to King Artaxerxes to try and stop the construction.  Ezra 4:12-13 reads, "Be it known unto the king, that the Jews which came up from thee to us are come unto Jerusalem, building the rebellious and the bad city, and have set up the walls thereof, and joined the foundations. Be it known now unto the king, that, if this city be builded, and the walls set up again, then will they not pay toll, tribute, and custom, and so thou shalt endamage the revenue of the kings." In verse 12 it is noted that Jerusalem was already being built. In verse 13 they used logic to try to convince the king not to let the Jews continue. Had there not been an order previously given to rebuild Jerusalem they would have only had to mention that the Jews were performing unauthorized work, that they exceeding their direction or going against the king's orders. Scholars need to understand Cyrus gave an order to rebuild Jerusalem and restore the temple. Those who do not believe it either don't know scripture or are not trusting God.

Historical fiction is false prophecy

Giving fiction an upgraded title does not justify presenting it in a believable context and mixing it with the truth. If people will associate it with the Bible, believe it and then get confused it should not be done. Movies about Bible stories do this very well and as a result pollute God's word. What did God say? Deuteronomy 4:2 commands us, "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you." Revelation 22:18-19 has a similar warning,"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." This particular passage may apply to the book of Revelation itself but it reinforces the need to treat the Bible as holy. A fictional story recognized as such in one thing. Presenting fact and fiction yoked together is a lie. The best way to avoid having your mind polluted about the Bible is to avoid movies about it.

We should not claim the innkeeper was a cruel or greedy man

When Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem they found no room in the inn. Luke 2:7 says, "And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn." Some preachers assume the innkeeper was a man without mercy, an evil man or a greedy man. This is ridiculous. They weren't there and the Bible does not say why this happened. So why slander the innkeeper? How do they know the inn wasn't full of other women giving birth or elderly people or sick people? We do not even know the innkeeper was a man. Why were Joseph and Mary there? They were traveling for the same reason that others may have been traveling for; to go and pay taxes per the order of Caesar Augustus as mentioned in Luke 2:1. If they innkeeper had already taken people in, why should he break his agreement and ask them to leave? Would that be right? Why was the inn in Bethlehem full? It could have been from the Feast of Tabernacles which occurs around October. Once a year, the Jews were to live in temporary shelters, tents or sukkas. Leviticus 23:42-43 says, "Ye shall dwell in booths seven days; all that are Israelites born shall dwell in booths: That your generations may know that I made the children of Israel to dwell in booths, when I brought them out of the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God." It may have been that Jesus was born in a stable so he would celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles even from the beginning. John 1:14 says that he dwelt among us. The Greek word σκηνοω (skenoo - pronounced skay-no'-o) means to fix, have, abide or live in a tabernacle. The Bible really says he tabernacled among us. Jesus Christ may have born in a stable based on God's choosing and not the innkeeper's. Don't judge the innkeeper.

Jesus walked in Israel not Palestine

Many maps for Bible studies today show the the land of Israel as Palestine instead of calling it by its true name Israel. A typical map would be titled "Palestine at the time of Christ" There are 73 references to Israel in the New Testament but not to Palestine. Jesus referred to it as Israel in Matthew 8:10, 10:6, 10:23, 15:24, 19:28, Mark 12:29, Luke 4:25, 4:27, 7:9, 22:30, John 3:10 and Revelation 2:14. The word Palestine comes from the word for Philistines. In Numbers 34:1-12 God gave Israel the land shown on maps today as Palestine. We should call it by the name God uses and the name Jesus uses instead of the false name the world uses.

We do not know the Apostles were big burly fishermen

I have heard Bible teachers mention that the Apostles were big burly fisherman. Does big mean tall, fat or muscular in this case? Burly means what? Check the dictionary. I use the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. How do they know they were big and burly? Did God only call the strong? Were they there? Did they find reliable historical accounts about the Apostles? What did the digital photos show? Oh, that's right we don't have pictures from back then do we? The historians of the day, such as Josephus, are not reliable. Actually, they don't know.

We do not know Mary Magdalene's occupation

Preachers have referred to Mary Magdalene as being impure on a professional level. Mark 16:9 tells us, "Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week he appeared first to Mary Magdalene out of whom he had cast seven devils." Having demons does not mean the person was committing any particular act of sin. To teach it as such is a sin. Please note commas were omitted above. Commas in the Bible were placed by man and not by God. For more see The Resurrection. People judge Mary based on gossip and tradition but not by knowledge.

The use of a cat and nine tails was made up

Teachers often talk about Jesus Christ being whipped thirty nine times with a cat and nine tails or cat-o-nine tails; a whip with nine leather straps having pieces of broken bone or rock at the end. Deuteronomy 25:3 limited the number of lashes a person could be given for punishment to forty. The Apostle Paul mentioned in 2 Corinthians 11:24, "Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one." Not everything done to Jesus, however, followed the law nor was typical of how prisoners were treated. To finish the crucifixion of Jesus and the two criminals with him, the Romans sought to break their legs. John 19:32-33 tells us, "Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:" Jesus was different than rest. We cannot assume that everything we think happened to those crucified also happened to Jesus or that it happened the exact same way. In Matthew 20:19, Mark 10:34, Luke 18:33 Jesus foretold that he would be scourged. Matthew 27:26 records, "Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified." Mark 15:15 writes, "And so Pilate, willing to content the people, released Barabbas unto them, and delivered Jesus, when he had scourged him, to be crucified." In John 19:1 we find, "Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him." We know Jesus Christ was scourged and just that. We do not know how many lashes he was given nor what type of whip was used. Pretending the whip was a cat and nine tails is better for movie ratings, repeated in gossip and favored by tradition. The Bible, however, tells us not to bear false witness.

The Apostle Paul got his testimony wrong

The verses in the Book of Acts are historical accounts of what was done and what was said. Keep in mind, that just because somebody said something that is repeated in the Bible, it does not mean what they said was correct. Comments made by the Pharisees are in the Bible but the Pharisees' comments are not correct. 2 Peter 3:3 tells what the scoffers will say in the last days but what the scoffers will say, and are saying today, is not right. Paul made a mistake. I do not believe it was for the same reasons as the Pharisees or scoffers, but he did make a mistake. Here are the passages about Paul's conversion:

Chapter 9 says the men heard a voice but saw no man. Chapter 22 says they saw a light but heard nothing. When Paul gave his testimony to king Agrippa in Acts 26 he did not address the details of what the other people saw or heard. Acts chapter 9 is the account of what actually happened. Acts 22 and 26 were what Paul gave as his testimony. We should get the details of Paul's conversion right and teach people ahead of time to know the difference between the accounts. If Paul could make a mistake then anyone else could as well.

The Apostles were not always right

When Paul got his testimony wrong it was not the only time the apostles made mistakes after the resurrection of Jesus. Not everything they said was correct. Now the Bible is true, and the holy scriptures are inspired by God, but that does not make these people infallible. For example, Peter's discourse on Pentecost was not completely accurate.

No wonders were noted in heaven that day. Nothing was changed into blood that day. No fires were reported. Vapour of smokes did not make the list, either. The sun was not turned into darkness. The moon was not turned into blood nor is there a record of it appearing as blood. Why did he say these things? It does not matter. The fact is, he was wrong. Referring to a later incident, God, through Paul writes,

Paul told Peter he was wrong. If Peter could make mistakes, if he was wrong, if he was fallible then why should anyone believe that his successors were perfect? There is not a Biblical basis to claim that preachers, scholars or the rest of the lot are perfect either. Rely on the authority of the Bible and not man.

Israel was not reestablished in 1948

Some good scholars think Israel was reestablished as a nation in 1948. It got started, however, in 1917, declared its independence in 1948 and gained control over capitol in 1967.

Jews lived in Israel before 1917 but that did not mean that Israel was restored. There were several waves of immigration or Aliyah prior to 1948. The Balfour Declaration was issued in November 2, 1917 establishing a Jewish homeland and contained far more land than today. The League of Nations unanimously recognized the British Mandate on July 24, 1922. The size was reduced. The land was divided creating a two state solution with Trans-Jordan as a homeland for those known today as Palestinians. The Jewish people were not in complete control then. They were not in control either, however, when they were under the hands of the Medes and Persians, Greeks, Seleucids or Romans. The United Nations recognized Israel in a 1948. They did not, however give all the land to the Jewish people that had been theirs, either.

God also described the coasts or borders of Israel in Genesis 15 and Joshua 15. The land of Israel includes Gaza, the West Bank and the Golan Heights. Israel really did not have complete control until June 7 or 10, 1967. During the Six Day War Israel recaptured all of the land. It was then they were fully recovered. Look at the verses in Isaiah 11 where it mentions God's people being recovered. In verse 14 they fly upon the shoulders of the Philistines toward the west. This happened in 1967. They spoiled them of the east together: they laid their hand upon Edom and Moab; and the children of Ammon obeyed them. The West Bank was recaptured in 1967. Were they recovered when they had control or when the war stopped? I do not know the day or hour but it did happen in 1967. Unfortunately, Israel didn't put their faith in God but for fear of its enemies gave control of the temple mount to Jordan. Israel was restored in 1917, made official in 1922, divided in 1922, recognized as independent in 1948 and able to recover its capital and some land in 1967. The year 1948 was neither the beginning nor the end. What part is really conclusive.

Home

The Past

Online Bible Source: Blue Letter Bible

Copyright ©2007-2024 Lay it to Heart