The Forerunner Forum

These are my comments relating to some of the articles found at www.forerunner.com. Check back for my random thoughts on eschatology, world missions, God's Law and Society, theonomy, Christian Reconstruction, pro-life activism, evangelism testimonies, Neo-Puritan theology and social theory, revival and spiritual awakening, church history, and so on.

Friday, June 22, 2007

When pro-abortionists finally accept the humanity of the unborn child ...

You may know that I have some controversial pro-life videos at YouTube. One shows the dangers of abortion using several 911 ambulance calls to the Aware Woman abortion clinic against a montage of emergency vehicle footage. I made this video when I owned the property across the street in Melbourne, Florida.

Young people are no longer using the line, "My body, my choice." They now fully accept the humanity of their unborn child. In the 1970s and '80s, we thought that the victory would come once people came to that realization -- "But this is a human being!" Then America would become pro-life. "Who would kill their own baby if they really knew the truth?" In our eyes these women were deceived and the abortion doctors were the monsters.

But everything has changed. Read the folowing response carefully. Emphasis added in red is mine.

DebKOrah writes:
no one has the right to decide for what a woman does with her child.

you do not own her, and therefore, you cannot dictate what she does with her baby.

it doesn't matter if the girl was raped, she'll be killed if she has the baby the baby is retarded phsyically or mentally, it's the woman's choice.

no religion, husband/boyfriend, mother, father, can dictate a choice.

if it's coming out of OUR womb, it's our choice.


So it's all about control. If you have control over your unborn baby girl, then it is your right and choice to kill her? Unfortunately, this is not an isolated case. It's an attitude we are seeing more and more.

DebKOrah admits that she is killing a "child" and a "baby." When Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973, the preferred term was a "fetus" or a "blob of tissue." Now we can see a fully developed human being. Does this dissuade us? The depths of human selfishness and depravity know no limits. I fear for our culture when postmodern teens claim the right to kill their "child" and "baby" with such a cavalier attitude.

Labels:

Tuesday, June 19, 2007

Did Moses write Genesis? (part 2)

My last post on the authorship on Genesis was originally a response to a question posed by another blogger I read often, Uri Brito of Ad Majorum Dei Glorium. He was originally concerned with James Jordan’s argument against the Mosaic authorship of Genesis. I am going in an entirely different direction with this. I am not so much concerned with Jordan as I am with the idea of a book in the Biblical canon lacking a pedigree. Moses had to be the author of the five books of Moses.

Uri then comments:

Concerning point 3, remember that the death of Moses is recorded in Deuteronomy. Jordan does not believe Joseph had anything to do with the authorship of Deuteronomy. As for your question, who wrote about Moses’ death-your guess is as good as mine. To me, however, it is obvious that it was not Moses and I think church history bears that skepticism as well.


I respond:

I use that passage about Joseph’s bones as an example of the skepticism that Moses was the author of the “five books of Moses.” It is possible that Moses composed the five books as we know them today. However, it would not do violence to inerrancy to say that a later prophet, such as Joshua, redacted the Pentateuch.

It is also okay to say that Ezra or one of the prophets after Moses edited some of the books of the Old Testament — as long as a known prophet did this and as long as he had the authority to do so.

If Jesus and the Apostles taught the five books were the books of Moses, then they were the books of Moses. It is useless to conjecture what that meant. We can speculate as to whether Moses received it from an earlier source. For instance, I can hypothesize that Moses compared the story of Joseph in the Egyptian libraries with the story of Jethro in the wilderness. But this is a thesis that can never be proven — however likely it may sound. The problem is that this is the type of wild fancy that Higher Critics engage in. Conservative evangelicals follow their lead and reject almost every established tradition about authorship.

For instance, virtually every Christian has been taught that Mark was the first Gospel written and the ancient tradition that Matthew was very early (37 to 40 A.D.) is now thought to be a mistake. All the church fathers who wrote on the topic of priority believed that the order is exactly as we have in now in the canon.

The idea that the other Gospels followed Mark is based on the attempt of liberals to date the writing of the synoptic Gospels in the late first or even the second century. They posit the “Q” source or a “two sources” theory and reason that pseudonymous writers — not the Apostles — wrote the Gospels later on. Evangelicals swallow their conclusions hook, line and sinker when they reject the Markan priority, which has no basis in evidence unless we accept the late writing of the four Gospels and an earlier fifth Gospel that has been lost to us.

The bottom line is that the New Testament authors quoted from Genesis thinking that Moses was the author. We should too.

Labels:

Saturday, June 16, 2007

Did Moses write the book of Genesis?

Did Moses write Genesis? That's an easy one. Of course, it was Moses. Sometime I should write a longer article on this, but here are just a few reasons why.

1. The liberal viewpoint is that the “Five Books of Moses” sprang from the Hammarabi Code and Chaldean mythology. Yet Moses himself wrote, “What nation is there ... that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law” (Deut. 4:8). If you break down the semantics of that verse, it is incredible in its implications. Other nations had their laws, but these words imply that these laws were entirely different because they were received from God and not man. In criticism of the liberal theory, Sayce writes, “… on the spiritual and religious side, there is a gulf between them that cannot be spanned.” The Code is so full of legendary nonsense that it is impossible that such a highly detailed account as Genesis evolved from this.

2. Some say there is no internal evidence for a Mosaic authorship. Au contraire! Every book of the Bible necessitates a pedigree of known authorship in order for it to have been included in the Hebrew Canon. Throughout the New Testament, Jesus and the New Testament writers refer to the “book of Moses” (Mark 12:26) and “Then He said to them, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me” (Luke 24:43-45). The messianic prophecies of Genesis were considered to be from Moses by the Jews at the time of Jesus. If Jesus and the Apostles accepted without equivocation that the Genesis prophecies about the Messiah were from the “Law of Moses,” then they had the divine authority to pronounce it so. The internal evidence is found in the New Testament and everywhere in scripture that the “books of Moses” are referred to.

3. Some say it is “obvious” that Moses did not write the account of his own death and burial. Who did write it then? Only God and Moses were present at his burial. It is just as likely that Moses predicted that “no one knows his grave to this day” (Deut. 34:6) as it was for Joseph to prophesy what would happen to his bones hundreds of years after his death (Gen. 50:25). Even if Joshua or a later scribe wrote this passage, he was still prophesying things that only the Spirit could reveal.

4. A larger question becomes how much of the books of Moses were garnered directly from spoken divine inspiration -- “The Lord spoke unto Moses … all the words of the Lord” -- without the aid of human sources and later redaction. The two are not mutually exclusive and certainly the Semitic people knew the story of Genesis. Moses recognized “the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob,” without need of greater explanation. The problem for Moses is that he was an orphan raised by a pagan king’s daughter. While in slavery for several generations many of the Hebrews had forgotten the name of God (Ex. 3:13). So it is likely that until Moses encountered the household of Jethro, he knew little of the specific history contained in Genesis. Jethro was a descendant of Abraham through his second wife Keturah. At the time of Moses, the Midianites were worshipping the one true God and even knew the dwelling place of the shekinah glory of God on Mount Horeb. According to rabbinic tradition, the book of Job is a Midianite story that was told to Moses through Jethro. So it is not unlikely that Genesis was told to Moses through Jethro. Since the Isaelites and the Midianites were related, it’s also likely that the tradition from which Genesis was scribed was carried on through Jethro, the priest of Midian. He is Moses’ counselor, “So Moses hearkened to the voice of his father-in-law, and did all that he had said” (Ex. 18:24).

5. Another fascinating and often neglected study is the question of how 2500 years of history could have been remembered without error. This simple answer to this question is that Genesis was divinely inspired, given to Moses through the audible voice of God in the presence of the shekinah glory. However, without discounting divine inspiration in the process, it is also possible that the story of Genesis could have easily been transmitted through only six intervening lifetimes! Biblical chronology shows us the following:

  • Adam lived 687 years to the birth of Methusalah;
  • Methusalah lived 628 years to the birth of Shem;
  • Shem lived 452 years to the birth of Isaac;
  • Isaac lived 77 years to the birth of Levi;
  • Levi lived 70 years to the birth of Amram;
  • Amram lived 61 years to the birth of Moses.

There is a total of 553 years of contemporaneous history during which these men could have spoken to one another. Thus Amram’s children, Moses, Aaron and Miriam, brought the history of mankind through a priestly order into the Sinai desert whether in the form of a memorized oral tradition or in actual writing. Another theory is that Joseph wrote Genesis while ruling Egypt and then all the writing of the Egyptian libraries were later made available to Moses prior to the Exodus. If one were to lean toward this argument of a transmitted written tradition, it is more likely that it passed through Levi, the father of the priestly caste, or Judah, the direct ancestor of the Word made flesh.

Labels: