Is There a God? –Ask John Clayton!

Who is John Clayton?

---

  A devout atheist until his early twenties, Clayton was part of the same organized atheist group that made Madeline Murray O’Hair famous.  He decided to write a book called All the Stupidity of the Bible, but instead found himself slowly becoming convinced about Christianity.  Today, he travels the U.S. giving some 40 lectures per year on the subject “Does God Exist?”  He is a teacher and geologist by profession.  He holds a B.S. degree from Indiana University in education with a concentration in physics and mathematics.  He holds a M.S. degree from Indiana University in education with a concentration in chemistry and psychometry.  He also holds a M.S. degree from the University of Notre Dame in geology and earth science.  His most recent honors include:  Distinguished Physics Teacher for the State of Indiana–1985 by the American Association of Physics Teachers; S.T.A.R Instructor for Indiana Department of Public Instruction–1990; South Bend Community School Corporation High School Teacher of the Year and School Corporation Teacher of the Year–1991.

How to contact Mr. Clayton.

---

Please visit our Web site Does God Exist?

---

IS RELIGION HOPELESS? …by John N. Clayton

IS RELIGION HOPELESS? … by John N. Clayton

 

 

    It is easy to get discouraged when you are a Christian living in the pluralistic, materialistic, secular, post-modern world in the early twenty-first century. Society has decided that belief in God, absolute standards of morality and behavior, and family values are archaic and destructive. The Church as a whole has decided that the only method of growth is to provide competitive entertainment, and that the Christian system of living is of historical interest but has no practical application to daily life. While these statements are generalizations, and obviously do not apply to every person, we all run into these beliefs on a daily basis. The world we live in can literally grind us down to wanting to withdraw. How do we avoid this pessimistic mind-set? What can individuals do in the face of declining involvement in meeting the challenges of our age by church leaders and fellow Christians in general?

DON’T GIVE UP ON THE BIBLE.

    We sometimes get the idea that we face a situation that is new to Christians. The fact is that everything mentioned in the first paragraph has happened before. Throughout history famous leaders have predicted the end of Christianity and the demise of the Bible. Voltaire, Marx, Lenin, and Bertrand Russell are just a few of a host of famous people who were convinced that man had outgrown the Bible. When other standards of living and ethics were incorporated, they brought disaster and people turned back to the Bible and to the system God has given man — the system that has been proven to work. It may well be that our civilization will end, but the lesson of history is that Christianity will emerge out of the rubble. It will be given new life as it provides a proven rule of conduct for men and women

.
    Our culture is full of people poking fun at the Bible and making wild claims about contradictions and conflicts within the Bible’s pages. For a marginally trained Christian these challenges are easy to answer, and this journal is dedicated to answering them. We need to be aware of the challenges — and the answers to them. We should be encouraged by the fact that the challenges themselves are desperate claims by people who want to live uninhibited by the wisdom of the teachings of Jesus Christ. (We urge the reader to look at the article titled “Why Biblical Christianity?” in the March/April 2010 issue of this journal for more on this subject.) The evidence is that the biblical system works, and even the rankest skeptic has trouble criticizing the teachings of Jesus in Matthew chapters 5 through 7. Do not let the flood of hostility cause you to reject the only teaching that can bring peace, love, and security that means something.

DEMAND EVIDENCE, NOT JUST WILD CLAIMS.

    I had an e-mail not long ago from a guy who claimed he could prove that Bugs Bunny hit Elmer Fudd on the head with a shovel, and that the pieces that flew off became the creation. I replied by saying, “Very funny,” thinking this was a man just playing games. I found that he was deadly serious. At a fair booth in 2009 we had a guy who claimed he could prove that his cat was his reincarnated father. The man became incensed when I suggested that the cat had no relationship to him or his father and offered genetic proof of that statement. The man became enraged with that suggestion and said I did not understand how reincarnation works. The point here is that people can propose anything! For the most part, we live in a society where there is freedom of speech, and if someone wants to propose a completely fictitious and bizarre explanation of something, he can do so.
    Whatever someone believes about how the creation happened needs to be substantiated by evidence. Scientific theories that have no evidential support cannot be seriously entertained. Scientists use the word “falsify” to describe this process. If there is not a way to test a hypothesis, the suggestion cannot be considered to be science. Much of what appears in the media as science is in fact wild speculation that cannot be tested (falsified) in any way. Like the Bugs Bunny nonsense mentioned above, it is just a wild suggestion thrown out as science, but which is really just human opinion. Many scientists have pointed out in recent months that “string theory” and “virtual universe” theories fall into this category.
    Religious theories which conflict with known fact need to be discarded also. In both science and religion there is a point where faith enters into what we believe. The process by which time, energy, and space were created cannot be answered scientifically and probably never will be. Atheism or wild religious ideas should not decide what we will believe about how the world came to be. What we must do is to accumulate evidence and see what understanding fits that evidence. Cyclic and reverse models of time do not fit scientific evidence. Atheistic or religious proposals that assume cyclic time or reverse time need to be discarded. This is just one example of how modern people can evaluate the evidence for the existence of God and the credibility of the Christian system. We have more evidence than at any time in the history of mankind, and that evidence strongly supports the concept of an Intelligence outside of space/time as the Creator.

REALIZE THAT NEW UNDERSTANDINGS WILL COME ABOUT AS BETTER INFORMATION BECOMES AVAILABLE.

    In both science and religion we may have to give up some previously held beliefs or traditions as new factual material becomes available. Our belief system becomes more balanced and less vulnerable when we have looked at all the supporting evidence. There was a time when both people in religion and people who were studying nature believed that the earth was flat. There was scientific evidence to support that belief, and religious arguments to support it. The instruments of the day were crude, and measurements did not show any curvature in the surface of the earth. People quoted passages like Revelation 7:1 which talks about the four corners of the earth to back up the idea that we live on a flat earth. As instruments became more accurate it became obvious that the earth was curved — just larger than had been previously thought. A closer examination of Revelation 7 showed it was not talking about the shape of the earth and people eventually became convinced the earth was round — but not for a very long period of time. In Columbus’ day there were still people who thought that if you sailed out far enough in the ocean you would fall off the earth.
    We frequently get mail from atheists suggesting that new evidence will invalidate our position of faith in God. I am sure that as new discoveries are made I will find things I believed that were wrong either scientifically or biblically — or both. However, the lesson of history is that as new discoveries are made they validate the Bible and show how remarkable the Bible is in stating things that have only become known in recent years. One remarkable new example is the classification system of living things. The biblical word “kind” in the Old Testament is the Hebrew word miyn. People assumed for many years that “kind” and “species” were the same thing. A species has been defined as a group of plants or animals that can interbreed and produce fertile offspring. Much debate has gone on in the scientific community about whether that definition needs to be revised, especially with recent understandings of the genomes of living things. How different must the genomes be in order to be considered different species? That debate will be going on for a long time.
    Since God created kinds, some believers assumed that species could not change, and that belief has continued into the twenty-first century. The fact is that “kind” is a very general term. In 1 Corinthians 15:39 the Bible says there are four different kinds of flesh — birds, fish, beasts, and man. In Genesis 1 the same groupings are used — flesh of fish, flesh of birds, flesh of beasts, flesh of man (Genesis 1:20  – 27). It is also seen in the flood account in Genesis 6, that use of “kind” is not the same as species. There are many species of birds but birds are a kind. Now biologists are talking about cladistic classification which is based on structure, not evolutionary theory as the Linnaeus system was. The biblical system and the scientific evidence are getting closer and closer as better evidence becomes available. There are many examples that can be given, but this one should make the point that we need to be open to new data and new ideas. As we learn more, we find that the scientific evidence and the biblical concept get closer and closer together.

LET ORGANIZED RELIGION DIE
.

    Religion can be defined as “man’s attempts to find God or meaning in life.” On an individual level religion is a good thing. We each need to search out what we believe and know why we believe it. There is a terrible tendency for mankind to take the easy way out. The easy way is to let someone else tell us what to believe. Most atheists have not thought out why they are atheists. Most religious people are religious because they inherited that belief. I was an atheist because my parents were atheists and I knew nothing else as a child. I have friends who are atheists because they want to justify their lifestyle. I have other friends who are atheists because they have had bad experiences with people who believe in God. All of these predispositions are understandable, but ultimately none of them make sense.
    Recently in a period of one week I received over 20 e-mails from atheists containing the same set of “bible contradictions.” That material was posted on the Web by a well-known atheist, and these folks cut and pasted it into an e-mail and sent it to me. I asked each of them if they would discuss the claimed contradictions one at a time with me. All of them either declined or never answered my offer. This is a religious response at its worst. It is like religious people who take something posted by a preacher or religious spokesman and blindly parrot it to other people.
    We need to know why we believe what we believe — whether we are atheists or believers. If the only evidence we have is what someone else says, we are blindly following a religion — be it Atheism, Catholicism, Buddhism, or whatever. The purpose of this journal is not to tell people what to believe or coerce them to become a member of some denomination. Our purpose is to say you can intelligently believe in God, and that science and faith are complementary disciplines supporting each other in building successful lives. Let religion die — be it Atheism, Spiritualism, or some denominational creed. Follow the biblical injunction to “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling” (Philippians 2:12) and know there is a God through the things He has made (Romans 1:19 – 22). “Choose you this day whom [you] will serve; … but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD” (Joshua 24:15). In the twenty-first century that choice is still there — make it personally and intelligently.

–John N. Clayton

---

Back to Contents Does God Exist?, SepOct10.

Unanswered Prayers, –by John N. Clayton

I enjoy reading the mail that comes to us about articles in this journal. It is interesting to see how people react to what we write. In the November/December 2009 issue we had an article titled “God’s Role in Relationships” in which we talked about how God works in the lives of His children to bring people together. We have had more mail on that article than any article in recent history. What is interesting to me is how many people reacted to the discussion on page six about the history of my prayer life. I have always tried to be transparent in the articles I have written in this journal, and here is what I said:

 

The notion that praying for a new person to love would solve my problem rang pretty hollow with me. Call it lack of faith, call it lack of trust, call it hypocrisy — whatever accusation you might want to throw at me — I did not believe that God would bring me someone else or in any way impact my relationships. In the past when we had been faced with major problems in life praying never seemed to help. When our baby Tim was born with congenital problems we prayed and our friends prayed that he would not be blind, but he is blind. We accepted that and prayed that he would not be mentally challenged, but he is severely mentally challenged. We then prayed to help us accept the blindness and the retardation but that there be no other problems. We then found he had a form of muscular dystrophy, cerebral palsy, and schizophrenia. I battled my way through all of that, maintaining my faith in God, but becoming rather cynical about God answering specific prayers for specific needs. In my wife’s many struggles with the complications of juvenile diabetes we prayed fervently that the problems would go away, but they never did. In all of these cases what I prayed for never happened directly, but in all of these cases I found an answer that allowed me to cope with the problem and move on. The meaning of 1 Corinthians 10:13 became a part of my thinking — that God gives a way of escape that can prevent breaking if we choose to accept it, but that He does not always take away or provide direct solutions to the problem we are facing (2 Corinthians 12:8 – 9; 2 Corinthians 1:3 – 6, 9).

The mail that came in on that paragraph was massive. Many believers expressed their own experiences which were similar. A number of atheists and skeptics stated the view that this was a clear proof that there is no God and I was too biased to see it. The bottom line here is that there is a need to understand why God does not answer prayers. Why should there ever be a “no” from God on a sincere request? After all did not Jesus say, “And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it” (John 14:13 – 14, NIV). He also said, “Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks, the door will be opened” (Matthew 7:7 – 8, NIV). Why would God not say “yes” and allow me to have a child who was not blind, who was not mentally challenged, and who was not impaired by muscular dystrophy and cerebral palsy?

Before we try to answer this, let me say from experience that no matter how good an answer is given, if you are in the depths of pain and frustration, no answer is going to remove all that you are feeling. When I was in agony, people gave me logical and biblical answers, but those answers did not solve anything for me. Those answers, combined with study, prayer, and thought, have brought me to some understandings that have enabled me to survive as a Christian and a human being. Here are some of the conclusions I have reached.

In James 4:3 we are told that sometimes when we pray we do not receive because we “ask amiss, that ye may spend it in your pleasures” (ASV). I do not think any of us struggle with this one. We know that praying for a solid gold BMW is not a prayer that is likely or logically to be answered in a positive way. Sometimes what we construe as an essential is a luxury, and that also falls into this category. Rational human beings can accept that God would not and should not pass out positive responses to every human whim.

This is another obvious point. Galatians 6:7 makes a promise “Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows” (NIV). People cannot abuse their bodies with drugs and alcohol year after year and then expect to be able to pray to God and not suffer the long term consequences of that abuse. Hebrews 9:27 tells us that we are each promised that we will die. To expect God to void that promise is inconsistent, and yet death can be incredibly difficult for those left behind. If we understand that death is a transition and not an end, the whole picture of death changes because God makes positive promises about death to those who serve Him. God is not voiding His promise to answer prayer when He denies a request that would void another promise He has made.

In 2 Corinthians 12:7 Paul talks about a “thorn in the flesh” which he had prayed three times that God would remove , but the answer was “No.” Paul says that the reason was “lest I should be exalted above measure” (KJV). The TCNT translation says “to prevent me from thinking too highly of myself.” The message is that sometimes we ask for things that are not good for us, or ask to be free of things that will help us be better and more useful to God.

I have to confess that I am a different person today than I would have been if my son Tim had not been born with multiple birth defects. The book I have written about Tim is titled Timothy, my Son and Teacher. Because of the long struggle to help Tim find happiness and stability in life, I have had to change. I have been molded by all the battles with doctors, state agencies, religious leaders, and even friends. I see nothing in logic or scripture that says that God caused Tim’s problems. In fact, I know his difficulties came from the actions of irresponsible adults. (Tim is an adopted child whose biological mother had measles and did not seek medical care.) The fact is that I prayed fervently and with other Christians that Tim would not be victimized by all of this, but he was born blind, mentally challenged, with muscular dystrophy, cerebral palsy, and schizophrenia. I have been molded by all of this. I am a different person. I did not ask to be a different person, and I would rather not have been changed. However, the few strengths I have came mainly from the molding that Tim brought to me.

Like Paul we have to realize that God may see that there is a reason why He should not give us what we ask because He sees a higher purpose. If you see no purpose or value in your life, that may not seem to be a reasonable answer and one that is not easy to accept. However, to fair-minded people who believe that God has a purpose for their lives, this is an important understanding about prayers that are not answered.

In Matthew 26:39 we see an obvious case of God not answering prayer. Jesus Christ is facing crucifixion, and He knows what is about to happen. In anguish He cries out to God, “O my Father, … let this cup pass from me”(KJV). Jesus clearly states He wants to avoid dying on the cross, and the surrounding verses tell us He prayed this over and over (see verses 42 and 44). We are also told in each of these petitions Jesus adds “Yet I pray, not what I want but you want” (Williams). Jesus knew God had a higher purpose for what He was about to endure.

In Ephesians 3:11 we are told that everything that happened to Christ and that happens to us is “the eternal purpose which he realized in Christ Jesus our Lord” (RSV). In verse 10 further explanation tells us that “in order that the powers and authorities in heavenly realms should not see the complex wisdom of God’s plan being worked out through the Church” (Phillips). Ephesians 6:12 again states the ultimate purpose of God in creating man and the Church.

Christians cannot accomplish God’s purpose by opting out of every difficult situation that comes along. Christianity is not an escape mechanism to avoid problems and sickness in life. When we ask God to back off from the reason He created us, we are making an unreasonable request and God will not answer such a request in a positive way. I am reminded of a line from Fiddler on the Roof in which the question is, “Would it void some vast eternal plan, if I were a wealthy man?” In reality the answer to that question is “yes”!

You go to the dentist and you get a novocaine shot. Why? Because thirty seconds of the needle is better than what seems like three hours of the drill. How much will anything that happens in this life mean in the context of eternity? You have a purpose for existing — a reason to be. God does not create junk, and He has a purpose for every life. God has also promised to take even the evil, bad things that come from Satan and make good things come from them (Romans 8:28). He has given us the option of rejecting that purpose and living selfishly, but He will not assist us in doing so. Life is not always easy, and prayers can be made for anything. When we become angry with God because He does not grant our requests, we are forgetting why we are here. When we accuse God of ignoring our prayers, we are turning to selfish desires that revolve around ourselves. We look instead at the eternal purpose we have in Christ Jesus as described in Ephesians 3:11.

–John N. Clayton

---

Back to Contents Does God Exist?, JulAug10.

Why Biblical Christianity?

This is an article written by John N. Clayton.  www.doesgodexist.org  submitted here by Donald D. Cole

We live in an age of relativism. It is popular in our culture to suggest that no one religious system is the answer to man’s problems and that all religious teachings have something good to say. Attacks on Christianity and the Bible are increasingly acrimonious, especially on those of us who attempt to follow what the Bible says and who maintain that it is the one and only true path to God.

Jesus Christ is an easy target for those who follow relativism. John 1:1–14 makes it abundantly clear that Jesus is God and that He came to earth and dwelt among mankind. Verse 14 says very clearly, “The Word [Jesus] was made flesh, and dwelt among us.” In John 14:6 Jesus tells us clearly that He is the only path to God, ”I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes to the Father but by me.”  In 2 Timothy 3:16 –17 the Bible is portrayed as all a person needs for instruction in living: “All scripture is given by inspiration of God … that the man [or woman] of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.”

Atheists, agnostics, skeptics, and anti-Christian activists view such statements as arrogant, empty claims of superiority. They would have us believe that all religious systems are equal and all contain some elements of truth and wisdom. They claim that all religious systems, including the Bible, also contain massive amounts of error.

It is not difficult to see why relativism has been accepted by so many people. All of the major religions such as Islam, Hinduism, and many forms of Buddhism claim to be the only true path to God, or at least to perfection. Only the Bahá’í and some modern cult systems view all religious systems as equally valid. It is also a fact that many religious teachings made in the name of Christianity both now and in the  past have been false. (Who can forget the Branch Davidians, Jim Jones, and Marshall Applewhite?) It is also of interest that all religious systems have some positive things that they teach that are beneficial. The Hindu Vedas certainly have some wonderful concepts of man’s responsibility to take care of the environment in which he lives. The Koran has a marvelous sense of controlling the environment in which one lives so that immorality does not occur.  Buddha understood how to reduce conflict between one another and live at peace. Seeing elements of truth and wisdom in the writings of a religious system may lead someone to feel that everything taught by that religion must have similar credibility. That is simply not true. 

Another misunderstanding prevalent among those who promote relativism is that the actions of members of a religion demonstrate the truth or error of that religious system. I have frequently seen Americans in other countries conducting themselves in rude, abusive, and even illegal ways. It has always disturbed me to see the local people in a situation like that, condemning the United States and all Americans on the basis of what they saw some Americans do. There have been people who claim to be Christians who have had attitudes and have practiced things that are opposed to everything Jesus Christ taught. This includes those supposed Christians involved in the Crusades, the Ku Klux Klan, various cults, and even dishonest politics. I am sure there are people in every religious system who are honest, kind, peaceful, and giving. It is wrong to condemn all Muslims because of the heinous acts of Al-Qaeda or to condemn all Germans because of what Adolph Hitler did. Humans are full of arrogance, ignorance, and selfishness. The only way to fairly evaluate a system is by looking into its written credo — the beliefs and commanded practices that the founders of the religious system taught. How the religious system has affected the standard of living in the cultures where it has been dominant can be of some use, but even that process is prone to error because of the number of variables involved.

In view of all of this, what evidence do we have that validates the Christian system and the claim that it is the one true path to God? How can we know that the Bible is the inspired message from God telling us how we should live? There are some areas we would like to offer that support the view that Christianity is the one true path that all men should follow that will bring them to God.

We have already pointed out that trying to tie a religion to the acts of individuals who might claim to be a part of that religion is inconsistent. Looking at what the sacred writings of the religious system teaches however, is a way of avoiding the inconsistencies of humans and allows us to make equitable comparisons. One can begin by looking at internal characteristics involved in the manuscripts themselves. We can look for such things as clarity, brevity, whitewashing, and sanitizing as indicators of the credibility of the message, without even looking at what the document teaches. This is something the reader can easily do, especially in this day of computers and evaluation tools.

This is a term used to tell how clearly the ideas have been expressed by an author. When you read something, you should stop and ask yourself “How clear is what was just said?” (Not “do I believe that?”) To assist us in making unprejudiced judgments in this area, there are a number of educational software programs that school teachers use to get a picture of what a student has written before they read the student’s paper. Over 5,000 students took my physics, chemistry, earth science, and math classes during the 41 years I taught in the public schools in South Bend, Indiana. If you ask virtually any of them, they would tell you that spelling, grammar, and punctuation were not my long suits. Still, I would frequently give students a list of misspelled words when I returned a paper I had graded. The words were carefully printed out by the computer I used which scanned the student’s paper and compiled the list. The same computer program would tell me how many words the student had used, the reading level of the paper, and something called a “fog index” which told me how clearly the students had expressed their ideas. The fog index scale ran from 1 for something perfectly clear, to 14 for something absolutely obscure. On that scale the comic strips would run 1 or 2, the front page of the newspaper 2 to 4, Shakespeare 3 to 6 and the 1040 Income Tax Instructions for the long form 13 to 14. (I actually ran that one year and most of it was over 12 and some of it was over 13.)

Many years ago I had a wonderful group of physics students who were in the habit of not doing their homework. When they bombed one of my tests as a group I gave them my “You’re not trying etc., etc.,” lecture. The next morning I found a letter from the class in my box signed by all 36 kids. They had run a fog index on my test and it was 11.6. “You can’t count a test with a fog index of 11.6,” they said, “We want another test that is at least under 8!!” After that I ran a fog index on my tests before I gave them to the students.

I would encourage the reader to scan the New Testament and compare it to the Koran, the Vedas, The Urantia Book, and the writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Buddha, and Zoroaster. Look at the reading level and the fog index, and try to compare writings that are similar — history with history,  poetry with poetry, commands with commands, etc. All of these works have similar problems. They are all ancient in their authorship, and they have all been translated into English. Muslims are fond of suggesting that the Koran can only be understood if one has fluency in Arabic, but all of these books came from an ancient tongue foreign to English, and thus face similar problems. In many cases such as Arabic, computer software is available in that language, so even that problem is not difficult to handle if one is well informed and able to read all languages fluently.

The contrast in the data on fog index is striking. The book of Acts, the Gospels and the letters of the New Testament have very low scores on the fog index — most well under 4. (Remember the lower the number, the clearer the writing is.) The apocalyptic works of the Bible such as Revelation are high — over 7 — typical of that literature style. The Vedas, by comparison, are consistently over 10 and large sections are over 12. Just reading the Vedas will leave you with very little doubt that they are radically different than the biblical manuscripts. The Koran, The Urantia Book, and the writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Buddha, and Zoroaster consistently run higher than the Bible in every kind of literature where the style and intent of the writing is comparable. It is an interesting comparison and useful in making evaluations.

All one has to do is to think about the most recent political campaign in the United States to realize that humans do not tend to be brief. Again, the comparisons between the Bible and other manuscripts are most interesting. Of the 12,000 days that Jesus Christ lived upon the earth, and of the 1200 days which made up His ministry, if you added up every day of His life accounted for in the New Testament  you would get a total of something around 34 days. One can see the frustration of the gospel writers as they are restrained from doing what their normal human impulse would have them do. John concluded his gospel account by writing “… there are also many other things which Jesus did, …” and John was not allowed to record them all because “… even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written” (John 21:25).

Just look at the volume of pages in the Vedas and The Urantia Book and you will see there is no brevity. Any reading of the Koran will amaze careful readers at how much repetition and irrelevant material it contains compared to the primary message being presented. The Bible’s brevity is incredible.

Atheists and skeptics are fond of making references to the “dirty stories” of the Bible. There is no question that the Bible has the dirty laundry of its heroes as well as the stories of their successes. David’s sordid affair with Bathsheba (2 Samuel 11), Abraham’s willingness to let his wife be another man’s wife (Genesis 12:10 – 20), Paul’s murderous background (Philippians 3:4b –6), and the affair of a member of the Corinthian church with his stepmother (1 Corinthians 5) are all there for us to see. American politics has taught us all that cover-up is a way of life for many people in power. It is pretty easy to control the press and slant history if you have the power of total control. One of the amazing things about the Bible is that the bad is shown along with the good — something humans who are in power do not do.

Most religious books have been whitewashed and sanitized. If you go to your local bookstore you can buy a copy of the Koran which is translated by N. J. Dawood and published by Penguin Classics (ISBN-10: 0140449205). This is the translation of the same words as the Koran that Bin Laden and his followers are reading. You can also get a copy of The Essential Koran: The Heart of Islam published by HarperSanFrancisco and translated by Thomas Cleary (ISBN-10: 0062501984). This version of the Koran has had some of the material objectionable to Westerners softened or removed altogether. If one reads external accounts of contemporaries of Muhammad, one will find something about Muhammad’s history, lifestyle, and methods. There is total consistency in Muhammad’s life with the un-whitewashed version of the Penguin Classics material.

One can easily check the accuracy and understandings of the authors of various religious manuscripts. This can be done from just about every discipline that is available — mathematics, geography, science, history, psychology, literature, and medicine. In this journal we have had numerous articles over the years talking about the scientific integrity of the Bible. It is difficult to read Leviticus 17 and not be impressed with the biblical understanding of the importance of blood. Genesis 1, when taken literally, has amazing concordance with what science now knows to be true of the sequence with which life appeared on earth. There are vast numbers of scientific statements in the Bible which predate the discovery of these truths by modern science. When apparent errors are seen in biblical writings, a careful examination of the original language removes the error in virtually all cases.

In contrast to the great accuracy of the Bible in a variety of disciplines, other religious writings show considerable error. The Koran contains a number of scientific errors and the Book of Mormon has many scientific and historical inaccuracies. (Go to this link to see a list of these errors.)

It is important to note in this discussion that the subject of miracles is not a part of examining the Bible for accuracy. If the Bible presents something as a miracle, then it is recognized that this is not a natural scientific event. Explaining the resurrection is not a valid enterprise, because it is not presented as a natural event. If it were explained by a natural process that would invalidate the biblical claim that it was a miracle. The same would be true of claims of any other book — and in some cases things that are claimed to be miraculous have been shown to be natural events. It would take a large book to explore this subject adequately, but our purpose here is simply to identify some methods of validating the religious systems being considered. (For a list of scientific statements in the Bible, the Koran, and the Book of Mormon, go to this link [a PDF file of these lists] or send an addressed envelope with a 44-cent stamp and we will mail it to you.)

Many years ago on a flight from Dallas to Chicago I had a seat-mate who was a very successful businessman. As he was telling me how he made all of his money he explained that when something worked he always applied that system 100 percent to everything else he had. The fact that it worked showed that the system must have intelligence and good design behind it. I responded that his logic was exactly the reason why I have used the Bible as a guide for my life. When I decided I could no longer be an atheist because of the scientific evidence I saw for the existence of God, I started reading every religious document I could find. I was looking especially for the reasonableness of what the system taught and what the logical result would be of following that system. This is perhaps the most compelling evidence for the validity of Christianity. A few simple examples might be the best way to demonstrate this.

The relationship between man and woman is one area where the contrast in systems is striking. Many religious systems like the Koran and the Book of Mormon teach polygamy — the notion that a man can have many wives. It should be obvious to any thinking person that polygamy is an unworkable system. Males and females are born in roughly equal numbers. If one man like Bin Laden has 15 wives, then there are 14 other men out there who do not have a wife at all. The best they can hope for is a harem of their own when this life is over, making them prime candidates for suicide bombings. In addition to the obvious imbalance in wives, polygamy has a denigrating effect on women. I remember one Mormon wife who was interviewed on TV when the modern issue of polygamy came up in Mormon groups saying “When my husband decided to marry another woman I found myself asking, ‘Why am I not enough?’ I finally realized it was to produce more children.” It is difficult to comprehend how a woman can have security and a positive self-image free of competition in a polygamous system.

Polygamy totally misses what God intended for marriage to be. When Jesus was asked about the whole question in Matthew 19:3 – 6 He referred His questioners to Genesis 2:24. “‘Haven’t you read,’ he replied, ‘that at the beginning the Creator “made them male and female,” and said, “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh”?’”

The issue of system design is very broad and applies in many ways. Read Matthew 5 – 7, and ask yourself what the world would be like if every person on the planet followed just the words of the Sermon on the Mount. What would happen if everyone returned good for evil, if everyone strove to love those called their enemies, if everyone went the second mile in all relationships, if everyone really did strive to be at peace with all men? (Matthew 5:38 – 46). The contrast to this teaching are the sharp military commands of Muhammad: “Anyone who attacketh you, attack him in like manner as he attacked you.” (Qur’an 2:194).

It is important to understand that not all Muslims interpret Muhammad’s commands as being physical, but he practiced war, was a military leader, and certainly established his Islamic empire by military methods — a huge contrast to Jesus hanging on the cross saying “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do” (Luke 23:34).

The final point about system design is the fruit test. Jesus said, “Ye shall know them by their fruits” (Matthew 7:16a). When Christianity is practiced as Jesus taught it (not as some humans have practiced distorted versions of it), what has been the result? Take your local phone book and look at the names of the hospitals in the city where you live or a large nearby city. How many hospitals contain a name that lets you know that the hospital is connected in some way to a group that is expressing their faith in Jesus Christ by ministering to the sick? How many Muslim, Buddhist, Bahá’í, or atheist hospitals are there — even in places where those religious systems dominate?

In this journal we have reviewed several books in the last few years that have explored the results of Christianity. Under the Influence by Alvin Schmidt, reviewed March/April 2003, gives a clear picture of how women, medicine, care facilities, treatment centers, and schools have been positively impacted by Christianity. The God that Did Not Fail by Robert Royal, reviewed in July/August 2007, showed the effect of Christianity on Western culture and the positive impact it has had.

Take a look at the 12-step programs sponsored in your community. Look at the nursing homes and child care facilities in your area. Check out the HIV treatment centers. Look at the homeless shelters and women’s shelters in your area. Go on the Web and do the same thing in areas where Christianity is not dominant and see what is happening there. Even in Europe where the press touts the advantages of the “post-Christian era” Christianity changes lives, provides for the needy, and promotes the care of women and children. I might not agree with the theology of Mother Teresa or Danny Thomas or the local homeless shelter director, but I admire their lifestyles and the selfless dedication that they made to doing what Jesus said to do for those who were in need. “For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me. … I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.” (Matthew 25:35, 36, 40b).

My life has been changed for the better by my association with biblical Christianity. I can truly say that it has been a good life and I have been blessed by serving Jesus Christ. Know why you believe what you believe, and do not buy into relativism and the apathy and indifference that it breeds. Let your light shine for Jesus.

–John N. Clayton

ARDI and REALITY

In the 42 years that this journal has been in existence, there has been a long series of “spectacular finds” of the remains of ancient men or apes. Media hype has always been extensive about the latest find, and magazines like National Geographic have capitalized on public interest in the claims. Neanderthal man has been a major focus of interest over the years, and in 2009 there were several detailed articles on Neanderthal man in several popular publications.

In October of 2009 a major publicity campaign was conducted on a 1994 find named Ardipithecus ramidus which has been nicknamed “Ardi.” Grandiose claims have been made in the press and on TV about this find and its significance. The fossil skeleton found in Ethiopia consists of 125 pieces and is said to be 4.4 million years old based on radiometric dating of the volcanic ash layers where it was found.

The interest in Ardi may have been tweaked by the tour of “Lucy” that was going on throughout the country. Lucy was the most complete specimen ever found of an early primate and she is significant for that reason. In spite of the hype, Lucy is pretty much 100 percent monkey. Her brain size was 421 cc (a chimp is 525). Her mandible (jawbone) was V shaped instead of C shaped like a human or box shaped like a gorilla. Her humerus (upper arm bone) and femur (upper leg bone) were the same size—typical of a monkey. Lucy’s finder (Donald Johanson) has a theory that apes became erect and that later the brain developed, becoming human. That view is supported by some indications that Lucy may have been able to walk in an erect position.

Ardipithecus is older than Lucy. Again there is some evidence that this animal may have traveled in an erect position. Instead of having a thumb that was down on the wrist which is helpful for living in the trees, this animal’s thumb is like ours—near the fingers. The pelvis and hip of Ardi show that the gluteal muscles were positioned so that the animal could walk upright. Everything else about the specimen is pure monkey, like Lucy—small brain (smaller than a modern chimpanzee), V-shaped mandible, limb ratios identical, etc.

The excitement among evolutionists in the scientific community is that it may add some more information to the debate about the theory of how man became man. The message for all of us is that there may have been monkeys in the past which could live on the ground and travel on two legs. Some evolutionists like Dr. Owen Lovejoy of Kent State University believe that is all that is needed to qualify the specimen as an ancestor of man. Lovejoy said “When you get to the very bottom, it is simply bipedality that becomes the defining character of being human.” The idea is that after apes became erect and started living on the ground, the brain size increased, ultimately leading to man.

The name Ardipithecus ramidus means “root of the ground ape,” indicating that the animal may help detail the changes that have occurred in the ape family. It does not mean that this is an ancestor to man. The idea that there is a single link that connects man to the apes is a massive exaggeration. There is a whole series of major differences between man and other primates. On the earth today there is but one species of man. A pygmy can interbreed with a Swede and produce fertile offspring. As Acts 17 says, “We are all of one blood,” and we all have common ancestors which the Bible names Eve and Adam. There are many species of monkeys. That is because monkeys do not have a recent common ancestor. There has been a great deal of genetic drift and specialization among the various primates on this planet. This new find will complicate the picture more, but all of this is really not a major issue for those who believe the Bible is the Word of God.

The Bible defines human beings in completely different terms than does the physical anthropologist. The scriptures do not tell us what Adam looked like (in spite of massive numbers of art works that show a Caucasian, blue-eyed, blonde-haired, modern human without body hair). The biblical definition is that man is that being created in the image of God. All animals have life, but only humans were created in the image of God. We see that uniqueness displayed in man’s capacity to worship, to create art and music, to feel guilt, to be sympathetic, and to have a concept of self. Even though chimpanzees have over 90 percent of the same genes that we have, we do not see these capacities displayed even in part in any monkey or ape. This is in spite of many attempts that have been made to relate these functions to the brain.

The body in which man is housed is not an issue in the biblical definition. How long ago our ancestors lived is not given in the Bible, and all methods of trying to determine when God created man are based on so many assumptions as to be of no use. It is also an assumption to believe that all that makes up man’s spiritual nature is produced by natural processes.

Ardi is an interesting specimen, and gives us more information about how diverse the various primates have been throughout time. It will be interesting to watch those who wish to deny man’s unique nature as a spiritual being try to integrate Ardi and Lucy into a model that will satisfy them. The Bible gives no information about how God “formed man of the dust of the Earth” (Genesis 2:7). Those who believe it was an instantaneous, manual creation should not feel threatened by investigations of ancient primates or by the theories of evolutionists as to how the changes might have led to modern man. Those theories will always be just imaginative proposals, and will never really explain what makes us spiritual human beings and not just mechanically driven robotic animals.

–John N. Clayton
 Does God Exist?, JanFeb10

www.doesgodexist.org

 

Re: CNN, Dawkins: ‘Evangelist an ‘idiot’ on evolution’ ?

Dawkins: Evangelist an ‘idiot’ on evolution
By Peter Wilkinson, CNN
November 25, 2009 7:34 a.m. EST

Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Dawkins: Evangelist an ‘idiot’ on evolution – CNN.com: “Guest ‘If a refutation ever were to come about, it would come from a scientist, and not an idiot. –Richard Dawkins.’ Well, that scientist is ex-atheist, John N. Clayton. ‘It’s scientists vs. preachers, not science vs. the Bible.’– John N. Clayton. –Donald Cole, Dover, NJ”
Posted by Don Cole at 7:13 PM

If interested, there is a continuing dialogue going on here at this CNN website, where I have been participating. –dc

Yes; Richard, –There IS a God!

Jon, (and Richard Dawkins),
Absolutely: –there is a book you can read!
There really IS a God!

“Creation–Eternal Design or Infinite Accident? ‘The SOURCE,’ by JOHN CLAYTON, and Nils Jansma,
HOWARD Publishing Co., ISBN 1-878990-89-6. Science and Faith/Faith
 

I am presenting here, following, the copy from the paper leaf cover of this hard-cover book:

Is it really possible to reconcile the facts of science and the biblical teachings of creation?

Not only is it possible, but the book you hold in your hands shows that good science is not an enemy of faith in God. In fact, the God of the Bible invites us to learn about him through his creation. The evidence in this book shows that the intellectual position of the believer is more rational and better supported scientifically than that of the atheist.

In addition to special-subject appendixes and illustrations to simplify important concepts, you’ll read chapters like:

     * The Cosmos and the Creation
     * Let the Earth Speak
     * Ask the Animals
     * What is Man?
     * The Nature of God
     * God’s Permission of Evil

After reading this book, you will see that only one conclusion can be reached: God is real, and He is the God of the Bible.

JOHN CLAYTON, is a scientist and former second-generation atheist, came to believe in God while attempting to prove that the Bible contradicts known scientific facts. Instead of disproving the Bible, he found it to be absolutely reliable. An award-winning science teacher, popularly recognized by the American Association of Physics Teachers and the National Association of Geology Teachers, Clayton has earned national prominence for his knowledge and skill in dealing with matters of faith and science. Today, Clayton travels the United States, speaking to university and church audiences some forty times a year, answering the question “Does God Exist?”

NILS JANSMA, is a practicing engineer working in San Diego, California. He has a master’s degree in both science and geotechnical engineering. At present he is enrolled in a Christian apologetics Ph.D. program.

What is the orgin of the world and of life itself?

* Did a series of ACCIDENTS and evolution bring about the world as we know it?
Or is there a design and PURPOSE behind it all?

*And if there is a design, is there an ultimate DESIGNER?

A number of years ago, John Clayton, a second-generation atheist and respected acientist and teacher, set out to disprove the Bible from a scientific point of view. Instead, his six-year study brought him to a profound faith in the God of the Bible.

Now, in this highly informative and easy to understand book, John Clayton and Nils Jansma–a geotechnical engineer and geologist–present convincing evidence that the Bible and the facts of science agree. As the public moves away from a belief in God as Creator of our heaven and earth, it becomes imperative that all believers be well informed on the vital subject. This book will become a resource you will use again and again.

“With unfailing intellectual honesty, John Clayton pierces the clouds of tradition that obscure what the Bible actually says, showing that what it says agrees with rigorous scientific facts. In The Source he shows that good Bible study and good science do not conflict. Based on his own studies, he changed from a militant atheist to a believer in the God who reveals Himself in the Bible.”
—Robert H. Towell Sr.
Consultant to Department of Energy on Transportation of Radioactive Materials.

“Clayton has the ability to describe complex scientific data and principles in ways that both educate and stimulate an open mind to rethink conventional wisdom. He then postulates an explanation that genuinely makes sense of the many unique and mysterious attributes of our world.”
—Danny C. Rich, Manager of Research: Datacolor International

“John Clayton is the best scientist I know at presenting the case for science and faith. Every Christian needs this information, in specific scientific form, as a ready resource. This book provides this much-needed help.”
—Dr. Carl Brecheen, Professor of Bible; Abilene Christian University, Abilene, Tesas.

“John Clayton is a man who pursues truth in both science and religious faith in an unusually insightful and gifted way. In my view, his ability to educate and challenge in fair, understandable, and honest ways is unmatched.”
—Richard Lee Brown, Management Consultant, Registered Professional Engineer.

In conclusion here; I will admit that I have not yet read all of Richard Dawkins’, renouned atheist, entire new book. I am familiar with his earlier books. However; I do highly respect what renouned scientist and ex-atheist John Clayton has to say about Richard Dawkins writings, along with other scientists and experts in their fields. I claim to be no expert myself, but I do have the God given ability to THINK. I am not a scientist, but I listen to scientists. I look at and consider all the evidences. Bring on your evidences, that support your faith, and let us have a look.  –dc

(John Clayton’s web-site: www.doesgodexist.org)

Richard Dawkins, ‘The Angry Evolutionist,’ Newsweek, Oct. 5, 2009

Re: Richard Dawkins, Newsweek, “The Angry Evolutionist”

Ref: Newswek, October 5, 2009 Issue:

After reading intently the excerpts from Richard Dawkin’s latest book, found in the current issue of Newsweek magazine, I get the feeling that Richard Dawkins is getting closer and closer to the actual truth, –but that he just hasn’t quite found the whole of it yet. It wouldn’t surprise me to see his next book, down the road, titled something like, –‘I Found It!’

Case in point, the life journey of renowned scientist John N. Clayton, ex-Atheist who had set out to write just such books as these, about fifty years ago, the likes as Richard Dawkins is famous for today. The difference between Richard Dawkins and John Clayton is that the more John Clayton researched for his book, the more he realized that he had been wrong.

John Clayton’s material supporting the existence of God does not depend on the Bible. Cosmological, teleological, ontological, moral, and philosophical proofs of God’s existence can be made with no appeal to scripture. By the same token, those of us who have studied the Bible in depth and with an attempt to be honest with the evidence have seen that there is good support for the Bible not being the work of ignorant men living in an ignorant age. About the ‘young earth’ teachings and such, we find that it is really about scientists vs. preachers, not science vs. the Bible. People would do well to check out the ‘Does God Exist?’ web-site: http://www.doesgodexist.orgThe purpose of the program is to provide thinking, seeking people with scientific evidence that God does exist and that the Bible is His Word. John Clayton has already been where Richard Dawkins is now, –been there, done that, (except for all the money and best-selling books).

Back to the Articles in Newsweek; there are two Articles, one following the other: “The Angry Evolutionist, ” an excerpt from Richard Dawkin’s latest book, “The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution,” and then following, is a questions and answers interview with Richard Dawkins, “Darwin’s Rottweiler,” by Lisa Miller.

Dawkins is good to point out objections to his theories by creationists, and even goes on to state the silliness of imagined creatures that might have been, such as Fronkeys (half frog and half monkey), a Doggypotamos, Crocoduck, or an Elephanzee.

J.B.S. Haldane is quoted here as having famously retorted “People came from monkeys via frogs and fish, but that doesn’t mean we should expect to find a ‘fronkey.’ Evolutionary change doesn’t happen overnight.”

The excerpt goes on to discuss the objections about ‘missing links,’ the ‘Piltdown man hoax, and then talking about the Cambrian Explosion, illustrated by flatworms, Platyhelminthes.

So, what has Richard Dawkins really have to offer here? That Evolution exists? Does anyone alive today deny that evolution exists? Is that what all the fuss is about?

Of course, evolution has nothing to do with creation, or the orgin of life. Evolution is about changes in things that have already been created.

Where is there any scientific evidence shown that humans evolved from lower life forms, and not from other humans?

How does Richard Dawkins back up his conclusion saying: “Every one of the millions of species of animals shares an ancestor with every other one.” What does he mean by that? So, given enough time, a frog really can (and did) evolve into a monkey? The fact is, recent DNA studies show that any person alive today can actually be traced back to a common ancestor; that is to a ‘scientific Adam and Eve.’ Today’s science shows us that all humans are related. Humans are related to humans, not to frogs, swamp scum, rabbits, birds, crocodiles, monkeys, or anywhere inbetween, from goo to you, by way of the zoo. Where are the scientific facts in this regard? Consider the Bible book of Genesis. First God created, and then God formed entities from what was already created. (Most people misread this Genesis account). Each kind reproduces, and evolves, after it’s own kind. (There were no cockatoos on Noah’s ark.)

Now, about this statement that “God of the Old Testament is a monster. It’s very, very hard for anybody to deny that. He’s like a hyped-up Ayatollah Khomeini.”

Following is an article by John N. Clayton, about this subject, as seen in the May/June, 2009 issue of ‘Does God Exist?’  This is a nonprofit effort to convince mankind that God is real and the Bible is His Word.  www.doesgodexist.org

 The Logic of the Testaments

As atheists have become more aggressive in their attacks on the Bible and on Christianity, they make public statements which are designed to denigrate God and the Bible. However, many of those statements show a lack of understanding of the difference between the New Testament and the Old Testament. An increasing number of atheist Web sites have taken to portraying God as a control freak, as violent, as an egomaniac, and as sexist. We have discussed Richard Dawkins’ diatribe against God in the May/June 2007 and July/August 2007 issues of this periodical. Dawkins statements are the source of most of the atheist periodicals and Web sites that portray God this way to the public and especially to young people. When attempts are made to get these authors to have a better understanding of what was written in the Bible and why, the response is usually that God must then be a vacillating, insecure being who keeps changing the rules of the game.

The fact of the matter is that there are good reasons for us to have a New Testament and an Old Testament. Failure to understand these reasons leads to misunderstandings and misapplications of what God wants us to know and do. In this article we will attempt to explain why we have a New Testament and an Old Testament and how that information should be applied.

MAN’S SOCIAL AND CULTURAL EVOLUTION

One fact which atheists and Christians alike sometimes overlook is that man has evolved socially and culturally since his creation. Adam and Eve were not twenty-first century Americans driving fancy cars, shopping in massive food stores, and spending large amounts of money, time, and energy on entertainment. There might be differences of opinion about how man has changed physically over time, but man’s social and cultural evolution is a fact. In Genesis 1 Adam and Eve ate by gathering. Their responsibilities included taking care of the garden, “to dress and keep it” (Genesis 2:15). When man no longer lived in this state because of sin, he was faced with a hostile world. The statement from God was “. all thy life you shalt win food from it with toil” (3:17, Knox translation). No scientist who has studied the evidence questions this. Atheists may challenge the cause or method, but life was hard early in man’s history. The Bible tells us that various social and cultural advances came about. Genesis 4:21 (NIV) says that one of Adam’s descendants “was the father of all who play the harp and the flute” indicating the development of musical instruments and obviously the culture that goes with that skill. Genesis 4:22 (Jerusalem Bible) says, another descendant “was the ancestor of all metal workers in copper and iron” indicating that metallurgy eventually came into use.

As man progressed, a need for a justice system came about. It was early in man’s history when the first murder occurred, and the punishment for that horrendous act was a restrained but final punishment (see Genesis 4:11-12). As we read through the Old Testament we see mankind moving from family units with leadership coming from a family patriarch to a community made up of several families, and a judicial system evolving from that community. The book of Judges has a variety of stories showing the struggles to establish a workable community framework. Leaders in these communities were religious leaders who were not well informed themselves, but who struggled to do the best they could. Judges 18 shows people competing for these leaders and paying them for their services.

What kind of system of law and order was needed in such a primitive society? As mankind battled to survive in a hostile world, what rules needed to be accepted by all who lived in close proximity to each other? Dietary laws were needed for hygienic reasons. Laws involving burying waste were needed (see Deuteronomy 23:12-14). Marriage laws were needed to protect women because they were especially vulnerable in such primitive and harsh conditions. God’s method was to provide direct commandments which met these needs. Originally there was no human calling the shots and no political hierarchy making arbitrary decisions. When mankind insisted on corrupting this system, God warned them they were making a mistake (see 1 Samuel 8:5-19) but gave in to their demands.

“An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” is an unattractive philosophy for those of us who have lived in a system that emphasizes tolerance and forgiveness. In primitive conditions and in a society where the daily battle for survival was extreme, it was an absolute necessity. Not eating certain animals, quarantines of certain diseases, and isolation of body fluids is medically sound. Complete isolation from peoples practicing sexual activities that spread sexually transmitted diseases is not an arbitrary edict from an egomaniac who wants to persecute. It is a necessary action to prevent diseases like the AIDS epidemic we see sweeping primitive societies in the world today. We may find some of the methods that were employed distasteful and cruel, but that judgment is coming from our civilization that is not faced with the limitations of people in Old Testament times.

THE RADICAL TEACHINGS OF JESUS

By the time Jesus Christ appeared on the earth, man had changed in a multitude of ways. No longer were people living entirely in agrarian settings, but many of them were living in large cities. This required a new judicial system and a different political structure. Methods of farming and cooking had evolved so that dietary laws could be relaxed. Medical knowledge had advanced and survival was less of a hand-to-mouth situation. The securing of goods through trade and currency had changed mankind forever, and leisure time was available for thought and study. Above all, there was writing by which information could be transmitted from person to person and city to city. Mankind had evolved from a primitive, survival-oriented, legalistic system to a personalized moral system.

As you read the teachings of Jesus in Matthew 5-7, you see Him making the contrast we have just been describing. He says things like “You have heard it said .” and then He quotes something from the Old Testament. Then Jesus, God in the flesh, says, “But I say unto you .” and He gives a contrasting way of living that involves attitudes and values steeped not in legalism, but in love and kindness. He addresses murder, not just by warning about the punishment, but by telling mankind to stop hating (Matthew 5:21-24). He attacks sexual misconduct not by a legalistic physical reprisal for an offense, but by telling us to stop making sex and our sexual motives the primary way that we look at others. This is a new command of God, appropriate for the level of development that man has achieved. It is radical. It is difficult. It is destined to fail at times because of our selfishness, but it is the ultimate positive way of life for all of mankind. It has the potential to work.

ADDRESSING MAN’S REAL NEEDS

The Old Testament addressed man’s most fundamental need, which was survival. The laws given and the punishment for breaking the law generally matched the potential destructive nature of the offense. Murder, sexual misconduct, and interrelationships with those who did those things had the potential to bring disaster to the entire population, so the punishment was severe. Involuntary manslaughter and stealing had lesser destructive potential but still needed to be punished, so places like the cities of refuge were provided to make the punishment as fair as possible. God even tolerated things He did not approve of (such as polygamy) and ill-advised worship practices such as in Judges 18 because it was not as destructive.

In God’s new will for man the personal needs of mankind were emphasized. No longer were people commanded to worship in a specific location or through a priest or other religious leader. Man’s need to look to a higher power was provided in worship through the Church, but individual prayer and obedience was the emphasis. The need to address giving and the serving of others was the primary emphasis of the first century Church, replacing the ritual and pageantry of the Old Testament. So striking is this contrast that Jesus is described as “blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross” (Colossians 2:14, KJV). We are also told in Matthew 5:17-20 that this was the completion of God’s plan for man. Instead of tolerating polygamy and its denigration of women and destruction of a real relationship for a man and a woman, we are given a plan for marriage that brings maximum fulfillment and satisfaction. Instead of a giving system that is essentially taxation, giving is presented as a gift that comes from the heart and brings joy (see 2 Corinthians 9:7). Interpersonal conflict is addressed by direct discussion and then assisted discussion (see Matthew 18:15-17 and Colossians 3:13), and by an attitude of forgiving, giving, and going the second mile.

Sometimes our immaturity and selfishness prevents us from seeing the beauty in this new will of God for man, but as we get older and see the failures of human systems the beauty of the New Testament of God becomes more and more clear.

WATCHING FOR THE MISUNDERSTANDINGS

When we hear people talk about the violent nature of God, quoting Old Testament examples and commands to justify the claim, we need to understand the context. That was a primitive culture, survival oriented, and controlled by a set of rigidly enforced rules. When God speaks of His jealousy He is talking about His broken heart from man’s acceptance of every other kind of standard to live by except His laws. When extreme punishment is prescribed for what might be a less significant problem in our day, we need to understand that in the day the punishment was given there was very little room for other options. When nationalistic rules and commands are given, we need to understand that this was a tool to help a primitive people survive, and that today God calls us to a system of all peoples of earth being equal in opportunity and access to God (see Colossians 3:11 and Galatians 3:28). In 2 Timothy 2:15 we are told to “rightly [divide] the word of truth” and at least a part of that means looking at the time in which the teaching is given and getting the right lesson from the teaching. Forcing an Old Testament law onto the love and grace teachings of God’s New Testament is a major error.

–John N. Clayton

 

 

 

 

 

Creation or Evolution?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CNN Developing Story, the ‘Bible Debunker’

Friday, May 15, 2009
CNN Developing Story, the ‘Bible Debunker’
Posted 5/15/2009 5:53 PM EDT on dailyrecord.com
http://www.cnn.com/LIVING/About the ‘Bible Debunker’ —
CNN Developing Story: In all fairness, CNN should let it be shown that renowned scientist and author –former atheist– John Clayton can ‘debunk’ the debunker, Bart Ehrman, –former fundamentalist. Clayton’s Web-site: http://www.doesgodexist.org/ Clayton has been there, done that! –setting out to debunk the Bible. But, who will get all the media attention?
I would be happy to debate and ‘debunk’ Bart Ehrman, issue by issue, over the internet, over sufficient time. How about it CNN? –Donald Cole, Dover NJ