|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Introduction:
I downloaded the booklet The Bible: Fact or Fiction? (here) by Douglas S. Winnail, from the Living Church of God (LCG) web site in July 2011. As the reader can see, I have added my comments to refute the many false claims made in this booklet. My analysis might seem rather blunt, but I do not mean to be offensive. I feel it is important to give the reader "straight talk" so people can be saved from following myths and legends. Therefore I don't pull punches; I give it to the reader straight.
Remember that the onus of proof is on those who claim they can prove the Bible is infallible. They must prove that the Bible is true in every respect. But all it takes is a few mistakes in the Bible to prove the Bible is not true. And we can certainly prove that.
Sadly, many sincere people with little knowledge of the Bible (though they might be well educated in other areas) read booklets like the LCG booklet and are misled by arguments which can be easily refuted with a little help.
Since I'm refuting a Living Church of God booklet, sometimes I refer to the LCG, but since many of the Churches of God share the same views I sometimes refer to the COGs in general. Though I have never been in the LCG, and this is the first LCG booklet I've ever read, I recognize the same arguments from other COGs I'm more familiar with.
We critique version 1.0 of the 42 page LCG booklet which came out in June 2006.
So here we go, with a point-by-point refutation of the LCG booklet.
LCG: Is the Bible just a collection of myths and legends, or is it the inspired word of God?
Comment: Actually, it is worse than a collection of myths and legends. It is possible to construct myths and legends which are consistent. But the Bible contains so many inconsistencies and errors that it cannot possibly be the inspired word of God. The COGs will not tell you about those errors. They gloss over them, ignore them, and try to paper them over. That's why we must not neglect to examine the other side of the story. We need to do additional research. Once we see the many errors in the Bible, they become impossible to refute. Thankfully, there is some good information available to help. Some of the books by former fundamentalist Christian Bart Ehrman are very helpful in this regard.
LCG: Many assume that modern scholarship has discredited the Bible, but the facts of history — and the discoveries of archaeology — confirm its contents to be true!
Comment: This is not true. Modern scholarship, and not so modern scholarship, have discredited the Bible. Don't let some Church of God tell you otherwise. It is not an assumption, it is based on a lot of careful research.
The COGs teach that the Bible is the infallible word of God but most Bible scholars today do not accept that. Sometimes COGs seem to be trying to create the impression that the Bible is under attack from a radical element of "liberal scholars" outside of the mainstream. The fact is that the mainstream scholars today reject the position that the Bible is without errors and it is only the conservatives who try to promulgate the inerrancy of the Bible.
The COGs only use isolated facts of history and archaeology to "prove" the Bible while they ignore many facts that conflict with their beliefs.
LCG: The Bible recounts the past with amazing accuracy — and it predicts the future like no other book! Most of the world has been misled and misinformed about the Bible. You need to understand the truth — and how it can affect your life!
Comment: As the reader will see, the LCG cannot prove those statements. The Bible is not always accurate on the past, and it cannot predict the future accurately.
LCG: Is the Bible really the inspired word of God? Was it accurately preserved for thousands of years as a unique revelation from the Creator of the universe?
Comment: The Bible cannot be inspired (way too many errors) and it was not accurately preserved, as we shall see.
Keep in mind that, according to Matt 5:18, Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." So for the Bible to be true, it has to be 100% accurate. The COGs like to quote this verse to prove every single word of the Bible is true. So as we go through this booklet, we will hold them to that standard.
LCG: Or is it just a collection of humanly devised myths and fables? Do we even have the right books in the Bible, or are important sources missing that would change our view of God, Jesus Christ and Christianity? Can we trust Scripture? Is the Bible vital and relevant today?
Comment: There are no "right books of the Bible." The Churches of God got the Bible that they use from the Protestants whom they call Satan's churches, apostates, liars, false teachers, and spiritual harlots. There is no way to determine which books are the "right books" because none of them were handed down to us by faithful men of God. (See our article Should We Get The Word of God from Harlots or Faithful Men?)
LCG: Discovering the truth about the Bible could prove to be one of the most important and exciting adventures you have ever embarked upon.
Comment: It can be exciting if you really think you have found the truth, but, in my experience (and for many others) it got me trapped into the COGs and that turned out, in the end, to be a very bitter, destructive, and expensive experience. Don't let them trick you into their clutches with the lure of excitement.
LCG: Although critics attack the Bible, and preachers ignore or gloss over many of its teachings, the Bible contains a dimension of knowledge that is almost totally missing from our modern world.
Comment: The critics often attack the Bible for good reason. The COGs often attack the critics for bad reasons. Further, COG preachers are guilty of glossing over much truth themselves.
The Bible was concocted by men. I challenge the Living Church of God to show any significant provable truth from the Bible that cannot be found in other books.
LCG: The Bible reveals the true purpose of life.
Comment: No it does not. It is subject to many interpretations about the purpose of life. Each interpretation is merely a theological theory concocted by men. There is no way to prove that any of these theories are actually true.
Like many other churches, the COGs think they have the correct interpretaion, but they cannot prove that.
LCG: Bible prophecies not only foretold the rise and fall of ancient nations; they also explain the real significance of world events making headlines today and where those events are heading.
Comment: This can and has been refuted, and when time perimts, we plan to prove it in more detail on this site.
LCG: In spite of what millions have been led to believe, the Bible is much more than a pious devotional book or an incense-shrouded source of comfort for the troubled and bereaved!
Comment: This is just their opinion.
LCG: Today, many educated people assume that science and modern scholarship have thoroughly discredited the Bible. This assumption thrives because so many know so little about the Bible.
Comment: The COGs try to make us think that Bible critics base their views on mere assumptions. Perhaps many do. But one can prove the Bible is false using sound analysis. Don't let the COGs imply there is no proof to back up the critics because there is plenty of proof. Of course not all agruments used against the Bible are valid, but many are.
LCG: Many people today are simply unaware of discoveries that continue to confirm the historical accuracy of Scripture.
Comment: Many believers are simply unaware of discoveries that disprove the accuracy of scripture.
Even if the Bible contains many historical accuracies, that does not prove it is a special book or true in all respects. There are many ancient books that contain historical accuracies. Even if some of them are 100% accurate, it does not mean that God inspired them.
LCG: Instead, people are encouraged to believe that all religions are equally credible—or equally fanciful—without ever comparing the sourcebooks of those religions.
Comment: Do most people really think all religions are equally credible for false?
Actually, most people are encouraged to believe their religion is special, unlike any others. Most people believe in some religion, it is only atheists and agnostics who believe all religions are false. However, I see no reason to assume they believe all religions are equally false. Some religions contain many more rituals, myths, and superstitions than others, so presumably athesits and agnostics regard these as more false.
The LCG seems to suggest that we should compare the "sourcebooks" of other religions, but how many of their ministers have carefully studied (or even read) the Koran, the teachings of Buddha, the works of Confucious, and other "holy" writings? Why are they (sort-of) encouraging us to read books they have not even read themselves? I think this is pure hypocrisy, thrown in to suggest that they know more than they actually do about these other religions, and to imply that they have studied them all and found the Bible to be superior.
LCG: As a result, millions are unaware of how the Bible is unique, and what amazing features distinguish it from all other religious books.
Comment: All religious traditions are unique in some way. The Bible is not special in this regard.
Further, the Bible is not as unique as many Christians think it is. For example Jesus was not the only religious leader who was believed by his followers to work miracles (Wikipedia, Miracle, July 2011), be born from a virgin (Wikipedia, Miraculous births, July 2011), or rise from the dead (Wikipedia, Ressurection, July 2011). There are actually many similarities between the Bible and some other religious traditions. Most people are just not well aware of them.
LCG: Before you accept the idea that the Bible is "just like any other book," you need to examine the evidence for yourself.
Comment: Yes, we need to examine the evidence for ourselves, and to do that we must read some of the better critics own works for ourselves, not just listen to what the COGs say about those critics.
COG members who read "dissident literature" are excommunicated! So it is pretty hypocritical for the LCG to make it sound like they want you to "examine the evidence for yourself." Typicaly what happens is prospective members read some Church of God literature and prematurely go to a COG, before being fully aware of what they are getting into and what the arguments are on both sides. Once they start attending services in a COG they are subtly encouraged (through literature and preaching) to get off the fence and "make a commitment to God" because "the time is short". Once in (especially once baptized), they are no longer permitted to read dissenting literature. It is a trap.
If the new (or old) member begins to seriously question or reexamine some of the basic assumptions and beliefs, this is called "faithlessness", "disloyalty to God," "going into apostacy", "attempting to reprove what we already proved", etc. In other words, it is considered shameful and sinful, and strongly discouraged with a variety of subtle and not so subtle methods.
LCG: That evidence is eye-opening and extremely informative, and it could change your life!
Comment: It changed my life all right--for the worse! I thought my eyes were being opened, but I was just being tricked.
LCG: You need to understand why so many today doubt the Bible's credibility, and what the truth about the Bible can mean to your future.
Comment: The COGs are a very poor source of information about why people doubt the credibility of the Bible. They show people a few arguments that they can refute (or think they can refute) and try to use that to suggest that all the arguments of the critics can be refuted.
They try to lure people in with promises of a great future, but it is all a delusion.
LCG: For thousands of years, Jews and Christians believed, and died for believing, that the Bible was the inspired word of an Almighty God.
Comment: So what? Today Muslims die and kill for Islam. Does that mean Islam is right? Religious fanaticism is not proof of the validity of a belief system.
LCG: Down through the ages, antagonists and skeptics have challenged, attacked and ridiculed the Bible.
Comment: Repeatedly through this booklet the LCG disparages their opponents by calling them "antagonists", "skeptics", "critics", etc. They imply that these people are hostile and biased against the Bible. Probably some are, but many are not. Even if a scholar is biased, we must separate their bias from the facts. But the COGs prejudice people against scholars to the point where their ministers and church members simply scoff at and ridicule scholars without realizing that some of these scholars are just ordinary people with a lot of valid points. This prejudice is a trap that keeps people from seeing how the COGs mislead them. Gradually, church members (and prospective members) are trained to distrust all Bible teachers but their own Church of God ministers. Church members come to think that scholars are tools of Satan, evil and deceived people who fight against God's precious truth, while church ministers are the tools of God to save them from eternal death. Once people buy into this thinking their mind becomes closed to much good scholarship.
There are a number of scriptures which encourage this closed-minded thinking. The fault is not just with the COGs but with the Bible itself.
LCG: Popes and pagan Roman emperors attempted to destroy Scripture, and even altered its words.
Comment: They admit that popes and pagan emperors attempted to destroy scripture, but they still get their Bible from these same people! (I.e. a Roman emperor played a role in bringing together some of the people who laid out the canon of the Bible. These same people helped lay the foundations for the Roman Catholic Church).
Yes, the words were altered, but the COGs do not discuss just how much! I'm sure most of them don't even know. That would undermine faith, so they would probably just gloss over that even if they did know. They only tell people about the alterations they don't like (i.e. 1 John 5:7 which is used to support the Trinity), and they reject those alterations, while keeping others.
LCG: Yet, during these same turbulent centuries, the Bible was carefully preserved and its message spread in remarkable ways!
Comment: False. The Bible has not always been carefully preserved. Nobody knows what the earliest manuscripts actually said because they no longer exist and all copies contain errors. Some copiests were sloppy and some of them made additions to the text. For hundreds of years scholars have known this, but churches have tried hard to ignore and minimize these problems. For more information read the books Jesus Interrupted and Misquoting Jesus by Bart Ehrman. These books should be available from any local library.
LCG: The Bible is surely the most influential book ever written.
Comment: Surely? This might only be true in the Western world. Further, we should not follow a bandwagon. There are many influential books that are just wrong.
LCG: It has been translated into more languages than any other piece of literature. More than two billion people alive today embrace, at least nominally, its teachings. Even so, many do not realize how profoundly the Bible has influenced the course of all Western civilization. Millions do not understand that biblical laws and teachings provided the basis for social values and legal systems throughout the Western world for centuries.
Comment: None of this does anything to prove the Bible is true.
LCG: Sir Isaac Newton, one of the most brilliant minds of his century, remarked, "There are more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane history."
Comment: Many other brilliant scientists would disagree with him. This is typical of how the COGs only quote those scientists that agree with them. This is their approach to science when they compare it to the Bible.
Newton lived from 1642 to 1727, long before we had computers to make information readily available and to help us analyze the Bible. Even a great mind will make mistakes without enough information. He would probably not say the same thing if he were alive today.
LCG: Britain's Queen Victoria said of the Bible, "That book accounts for the supremacy of England." U.S. president Andrew Jackson stated, "That book, sir, is the rock on which our republic stands." U.S. president George Washington commented, "It is impossible to govern the world without God and the Bible." France's Napoleon observed, "The Bible is no mere book, but a Living Creature, with a power that conquers all who oppose it" (Halley's Bible Handbook, pp. 18–19).
Comment: Queens, presidents, and emperors are politicians. Quoting them to back up a religious book is worthless because we all know politicians are often liars and say many things for political reasons (e.g. to be popular). Anyway, just because a person is famous does not mean they know anything about the Bible. No doubt one could quote famous people who did not agree with the Bible also. Further, all those people the LCG just mentioned lived before the Internet age when information became readily available.
LCG: Yet much has changed since these statements were made. Today, Bibles can be found in far-flung corners of the globe. But in Western nations founded on biblical principles, there has been a steep decline in respect for the Bible. There is a pervading notion that the Bible is just another book, and that its teachings are archaic, outdated and irrelevant to our modern lives.
Comment: One of the reasons for the steep decline of the Bible in the West is declining control over information by religious leaders. The internet will likely accelerate this trend. It is not surprising that the number of Christians in places like China is rising, because the number was so low it had nowhere to go but up.
LCG: Many seriously doubt that God inspired Scripture. Millions who live in nations that once learned to read from the Bible, and sent Bible-toting missionaries around the world, cannot even name books in the Bible or explain basic biblical doctrines. Surveys done in recent decades show that even many professing Christians have little real knowledge about the Bible. Coinage in the U.S. proclaims, "In God We Trust." Yet recent legislation and judicial decisions have made it illegal in the U.S. to display the Ten Commandments in public buildings, or for students to pray in school!
Comment: The LCG should get to the point and actually try to prove the Bible. The demise of the Bible should not be a problem if it is not true (though, sadly, many people seem to need some religion to make them do good), so let's get to proving it.
LCG: What has produced such a profound shift in attitudes toward the Bible in the very nations that once professed strong belief in Scripture? Why do millions now doubt that God inspired the Bible? Why are billions searching everywhere else for answers found clearly in the Bible?
Comment: The answers are not found clearly in the Bible.
LCG: Why do people fail to recognize that the Bible contains prophecies clearly revealing the course of world history, and even the future of specific nations?
Comment: Many prophecies of the Bible have failed, and the supposed fullfillments believed by the COGs have been disproved and discredited. We urge readers to thoroughly research both sides before they accept any claims of fulfilled prophecy. Many people are still stuck in the COGs because they are not aware that the prophecies their churches teach have been refuted. They are told "these things cannot be refuted by skeptics" but they don't actually do much, if anything, to examine what the skepics say before or after they start attending a COG. The truth is out there and it is getting harder for the COGs to hide from it, which goes a long way to explain why the COG movement shows strong signs of stagnation and even decline.
LCG: Why have modern generations chosen to ignore a book that reveals essential details about the future and explains the way to peace and the ultimate purpose for human existence? Why has such vital information remained hidden from so many today?
Comment: People "ignore" the book because they rightly believe it is full of errors. The LCG keeps talking up the Bible but so far they have provided no proof the Bible lives up to any of the claims they make for it.
LCG: The answers to these important questions read like a novel laced with danger, intrigue and adventure. You will be surprised by information about the Bible that is readily available, yet has largely gone unappreciated or been ignored.
Comment: The booklet keeps talking up the Bible, trying to create a receptive attitude in the mind of the reader, but they have not proven any of their claims. So far they have just been making assertions about how great the Bible is without proving any of them.
LCG: You will be shocked to learn how power-seeking religious leaders have twisted Scripture to support misguided and anti-biblical doctrines.
Comment: This is hypocrisy. I certainly was shocked to learn how power-seeking religious leaders in the COGs twisted scripture. I wish I had checked it out far more carefully before I ever got involved. I thought I had done my research thoroughly, but I made the mistake of letting one of the COGs guide me in my research. I am a lot more careful now.
LCG: The more you learn about Scripture, the more you will realize that you can believe the Bible, because it has been inspired and preserved by a real God who is alive today!
Comment: This is the opinion of those who "learn" about the Bible from sources that will not tell you the whole story. Churches would lose their source of income if they told people the truth about the Bible.
LCG: The Bible is firmly based on the facts of history, not on myth and fiction. The evidence presented in this booklet will make this clear.
Comment: That is not true.
LCG: Many today assume that to believe the Bible, you must ignore the facts of science and history and just proceed on "blind faith."
Comment: That is basically the way it works; but recognizing that is not an assumption.
Of course, it's more complicated than that. In practice Bible enthusiasts don't totally ingore science and history. What happens is that the churches feed them selected information about science, history, and the Bible to make it all look like it fits, when in fact many things don't actually add up.
LCG: Some believers relish the old saying, "God said it. I believe it. That settles it"—but this does not fit well with the skepticism that dominates our age.
Comment: It does not fit well with "prove all things" either (I Thess 5:21), which is my favorite scripture, because when diligently followed, this scripture destroys the Bible (and many other false views).
The COGs insinuate that skepticism is a bad thing. Actually, in this deceitful world one needs a great deal of skepticism to protect oneself because we must always be on guard. The alternative to skepticism is to be naive and easily deceived.
Sadly, many scriptures encourage people to be easily deceived. Here are some examples.
"O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe ALL that the prophets have spoken!" (Luke 24:25). Being slow to believe everything one is told is said to be foolish. I have to disagree. I think it is wise to be slow to believe. Then we will check things out more carefully.
Acts 17:11 NIV: "Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true."
We are told to be EAGER. Sadly, the Bereans were too eager and were deceived. Here it is in the King James.
Act 17:11 KJV. "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."
In other words, this eagerness was a readiness of mind to believe. This is the opposite of skepticism, and it is a great danger. The Bible calls those who are quick to believe noble and faithful. I call it foolish and dangerous.
Unfortunately, churches disparage skeptics and call them "doubting Thomases", as if doubt is a bad thing.
John 20:27 KJV: "Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing."
The New International Version translate this as, "Then he said to Thomas, 'Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe.'".
LCG: Others want to ignore what Scripture plainly states, and invent ways to "harmonize" the Bible with modern preferences.
Comment: The COGs also ignore scripture to harmonize with their own preferences, as we prove on this site.
LCG: Many theologians teach that the Bible is only authoritative when it speaks of broad spiritual principles, and suggest that details of science or history in Scripture are merely the untrustworthy additions of human writers.
Comment: The Bible is so full of error (as we show and as the patient researcher can find out for himself) it is not authoratative on anything.
LCG: This desire to accommodate the Bible to the modern world is reflected in an October 2005 document issued by Roman Catholic bishops from England, Scotland and Wales. In "The Gift of Scripture," the bishops warned that while they consider the Bible true in passages regarding salvation, "we should not expect total accuracy from the Bible in other matters ... We should not expect to find in Scripture full scientific accuracy or complete historical accuracy."
Comment: These churches have been forced to admit the Bible contains error, yet they continue to promulgate it with regards to salvation. Why would anyone base their salvation on such an unreliable book? If we can't even base our science on it, why should we base our salvation on it? Which is more important, science or salvation?
Furthermore, the Bible does not contain mere "errors". Some of these errors are lies (See Bart Ehrman's book Forged). This disqualifies the Bible as a divine religious text. The churches like to call these lies "errors" to hide the truth about how bad the Bible reallly is.
In one sense the Catholic church is more honest (or informed) than the COGs. At least the Catholics admit the Bible contains errors.
LCG: Even so, the bishops profess respect for Scripture, telling their flock: "We have rediscovered the Bible as a precious treasure, both ancient and ever new." These double-minded statements reflect the mindset of many theologians today, who say they respect the Bible but deny its authority.
Comment: I will not defend the traditional churches because they too are deceitful. But the COGs are hypocritical when they pretend to protect their readers from deception while promulgating deceptions of their own. A wolf will always protect the sheep from another wolf.
LCG: When religious leaders urge people to believe in a book that cannot be trusted on many topics, it is not surprising that church attendance in many countries has fallen off dramatically in recent decades.
Comment: Those leaders at least admit some of the Bible's errors. The COGs should also.
LCG: The plain teachings of the Bible, however, stand in striking contrast to what many religious leaders preach today. The Apostle Paul did not encourage first century Christians to "just believe" in Jesus and merely accept the teachings of the Bible and Christianity "on faith." Instead, he told his audiences, "Test all things; hold fast what is good" (1 Thessalonians 5:21).
Comment: They speak as if the Bible teachings are plain. This is often not true.
The truth is that the Bible contains contradictions on this point and many other points. We showed above a few verses that do encourge blind faith, being quick to believe, or believing on little evidence. We could have shown many more. The Bible even seems to say that doubting is a sin (whatsoever is not of faith is sin, Rom 14:23). But doubting can be nothing more than asking questions or being slow to believe! What is wrong with that?
LCG: Paul urged people to check into the facts and believe what they could prove to be true!
Comment: This is only partly true. Once again, they quote scriptures selectively.
As we just mentioned, in Rom 14:23 Paul wrote, "But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because he does not eat from faith; for whatever is not from faith is sin." (NKJV).
So doubt can be a serious sin. If you do something in doubt, you can be condemned. If you lack faith, and do it anyway, it is sin. And this is talking about lesser matters of the law such as what a person eats.
LCG: His admonition reflects Old Testament passages where God challenged the ancient Israelites to "prove Me now ... if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it" (Malachi 3:8–10, KJV).
Comment: Once again, they are ignoring the scriptures which encourage faith based on little evidence.
I paid my tithes for 30 years and did not get these blessings. I ended up poor. I guess that proves Malachi was wrong.
LCG: God urged Israel to put His promises to the test, and promised that He would bless them, to prove that He was real and that His promises were true! Paul knew that true religious belief involves evidence, assurance and certainty, not "blind faith." He wrote that "faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" (Hebrews 11:1). According to the Bible, faith should rest on solid evidence, not just warm, fuzzy, emotional feelings in your heart. You should never believe something in spite of the facts, and that includes believing in the authenticity and authority of the Bible!
Comment: Sounds good, but they do not have solid evidence.
Furthermore, this scrpiture in Heb 11:1 is often interpreted to mean that we should have faith instead of other evidence. For the believer, faith is the substitute for actual proof. The LCG seems to be forcing the exact opposite interpretation on this verse.
LCG: The Apostle Peter emphasized the credibility of Scripture and of the Christian message when he wrote: "For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty" (2 Peter 1:16).
Comment: I disagree. The Bible is a collection of cunningly devised fables. Historian and Bible scholar Bart Ehrman, in his book Forged, has shown that many books of the New Testament were forged. Simply claiming you are not following fables does not prove you are not following fables.
LCG: Peter also warned his readers to "be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets" because "scoffers will come in the last days" questioning and ridiculing Scripture, "saying, 'where is the promise of His coming?'" (2 Peter 3:1–9). Peter challenged prevailing misconceptions about Scripture; he did not try to water down fundamental scriptural teaching.
Comment: Anybody could have predicted that "scoffers will come in the last days." There are always scoffers. Always have been.
LCG: The Bible clearly reveals that the apostolic writers were advocates of Scripture, and of the teachings of the Christian faith!
Comment: So what? What else would we expect them to say? Where is the proof that the Bible is actually true?
LCG: They knew that they were preaching the truth!
Comment: That statement cannot be proven. The LCG cannot prove that what they taught was truth or that they actually believed what they were telling people.
Some will object that "the apostles died for what they believed in." But how do we know they died for what they believed in? The "information" we have about the apostles comes to us from "traditions" which were passed on, and probably fabricated, by the apostates. Those apostate theologians are the people the COGs call Satan's ministers, the very people that the Bible and the COGs tell us not to listen to. Surely, if God expected us to believe in "his" book, he would give us better sources of information than that.
LCG: Their approach followed the example of their teacher, Jesus Christ. The New Testament shows that Christ's manner of preaching surprised His audiences. "And so it was, when Jesus had ended these sayings, that the people were astonished at His teaching, for He taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes" (Matthew 7:28–29).
Comment: Where is the proof that it actually happened the way Matthew said? We were just told that Paul wanted us to demand proof, not to accept things on faith. So where is the proof that the book of Matthew is inspired by God? Why ask us to believe what is written there before proving the book is from God?
LCG: The contents of Scripture can be verified by the facts of history and the discoveries of modern science and archaeology.
Comment: This is not true. The contents of scripture are disproved by science.
Even if the Bible were totally consistent with history and archaeology, that would not prove the Bible was inspired by God. Are we expected to believe that every book free of historical or archaeological errors is from God?
LCG: What is more, the Bible provides answers to life's big questions.
Comment: It provides unprovable answers. Mere opinions and theological theories.
LCG: Not only do the hundreds of detailed Bible prophecies accurately reveal the future course of world events; they set the Bible apart from all other religious books!
Comment: Nobody can say predicitions about the future are accurate since the future has not arrived yet. If the LCG wants to claim prophecies are reliable they have to show us ones that have already been fulfulled, not talk about ones they think will be fulfilled in the future.
LCG: The Bible provides a dimension of knowledge that is simply not available from any other source.
Comment: Like many other books, it provides theological and doctrinal theories, nothing more.
LCG: With so much evidence available, the real question that we face today is simply whether or not we can believe the Bible. As you read this booklet, you will see that the answer is, "Yes, we can!"
Comment: No we can't.
LCG: Many assume that all religions are equally credible, that religious people all worship the same God and that the holy books of various religions are of equal value.
Comment: Who actually assumes this? Most people seem to assume their books are right and the others are wrong.
Anybody who assumes all worship the same God knows little about various religions.
LCG: Yet nothing could be further from the truth! Scholars confidently claim that no one can predict the future with assurance—and that only fools try! However, these assertions overlook or ignore the incredible phenomenon of Bible prophecy, which distinguishes the Bible from any other book that has ever been written.
Comment: The COGs misinterpret many prophecies and historical events to make it look like prophecies were fulfilled. Even though these have been refuted, many COGs continue to teach them! They are always looking for someone new they can fool who has not seen these refutations.
LCG: The God of the Bible claims that He can predict the future and bring it to pass! The Bible contains hundreds of prophecies that have come true, and are confirmed by history.
Comment: What "hundreds" of prophecies have come true? Most COGs seem to have only a few booklets on prophecy, and I have not seen any that are reliable. They make it sound like they know about "hundreds" of fulfilled prophecies. If so, they should list them all and show us the proof. The way to settle this question is to look at both sides, which we encourage the reader to do instead of blindly accepting the "historical facts" as interpreted (and sometimes falsified) by the Churches of God.
LCG: The Bible also contains dozens of prophecies that are coming alive today! Bible prophecies explain the real significance of global events making headlines today. Bible prophecies also reveal what is ahead for major nations of our modern world—and for the human race! No other book, religious or secular, does this with such accuracy and detail! Prophecy is clearly the Bible's most striking feature!
Comment: Most COGs today trace their history to Herbert Armstrong who made hundreds of false prophecies. These errors are documented on the Web for all to see. Does the Living Church of God and other COGs admit that? It is extremely deceitful to gloss over the many mistakes and still talk as if the Bible is accurate and as if they understand prophecy.
LCG: Notice this amazing statement by Dr. Gleason Archer, a renowned Old Testament scholar: "The Holy Bible is like no other book in all the world. It is the only book which represents itself as the written revelation of the one true God, intended for the salvation of man, and demonstrating its divine authority by many infallible proofs. Other religious documents, such as the Muhammadan Koran, may claim to be the very word of God, but they contain no such self-authenticating proofs as does the Bible (for example, the phenomena of fulfilled prophecy)" (A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, Archer, p. 9).
Comment: Just because some Bible scholars believe in the Bible does not make it true. We have yet to see the proof. Quoting people who say the Bible is great does not prove the Bible is great.
LCG: Another authoritative source notes: "One of the strongest evidences that the Bible is inspired by God is its predictive prophecy. Unlike any other book, the Bible offers a multitude of specific predictions—some hundreds of years in advance—that have been literally fulfilled or else point to a definite future time when they will come true" (Geisler, p. 609).
Comment: Claiming that prophecy has been fullfilled is easy to do. Proving it is an entirely different matter. This booklet has yet to show the proof.
LCG: Old Testament professor Milton C. Fisher recognizes a "sharp distinction between prophetism in Israel and the outwardly similar phenomenon in surrounding cultures...both the type of message and the writings of Israel's prophets is without parallel" (The Origin of the Bible, Bruce, pp. 105–106).
Comment: So what? This proves nothing. Claiming that the Bible is without parallel does not prove that the Bible is true or even that it is without parallel.
LCG: Another scholar has noted that "the Bible ... is the most remarkable volume that has ever been produced in some five thousand years ... it is the only volume that has ever been produced by men, or a group of men, in which is to be found a large body of prophecies relating to individual nations, to Israel, to all the peoples of the earth, to certain cities, and to the coming One who was to be the Messiah.
Comment: So what? Many books are unique in some way or another. And proving a book is unique (even if it is) does not prove the book is true.
LCG: The ancient world had many different devices for determining the future, known as divination, but not in the entire gamut of Greek and Latin literature ... can we find any real specific prophecy of a great historic event to come in the distant future, nor any prophecy of a Savior to arise in the human race" (Evidence That Demands a Verdict, McDowell, p. 22). These are absolutely remarkable statements that clearly recognize the unique nature of Bible prophecy!
Comment: To suggest that the Bible is the only book that makes prophecies is nonsense. Everyone has heard of Nostradamus and his writings. We are also told that the ancient Mayans made prophecies. Since these prophecies have reputedly been preserved until now, I assume that they were written down in books.
Even if the Bible goes about some things differently, prophecies are nothing new. The Old Testament itself is full of warnings about false prophets (Deut 13, 18). I would have to assume that some of these prophets wrote their prophecies down in books.
The writings of most ancient prophets have largely been ingored and probably even destroyed in the last 2000 years by Christians, Jews, and Muslims on their crusades or jihads to wipe out the infidels and their books.
LCG: Being able to predict the future accurately and consistently is simply not a human trait. Even the best strategic planners acknowledge that detailed prediction of future events—especially geopolitical events—is difficult in the short term, and practically impossible in the long term, at least at any level of detail. Yet the Bible repeatedly predicts the rise and fall of prominent individuals, nations and empires with amazing accuracy and in remarkable detail!
Comment: These claims are simply not true. Churches have simply read all sorts of things into vague prophecies.
LCG: Bible scholars have determined that more than one quarter of the Bible—about 27 percent—is devoted to prophecy, and that the Bible contains more than 1,800 predictions, many of which are very specific. Hundreds of specific prophecies, given centuries before their exact fulfillment, are undeniable evidence that an all-powerful God is alive and in control of future events!
Comment: These claims that prophecies have been fulfilled are simply not supportable. These claims sound impressive, but when we actually examine them we see that they are frauds or errors. For example, read Old Testament "Prophesies" of Jesus Proven False by Thomas Paine, an excellent piece of work that we highly recommend. Paine examines the Old Testament verses used in the New Testament gospels to "prove" from prophecy that Jesus was the Messiah. Paine showed how the gospel writers Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, misapplied these prophecies to Jesus.
LCG: Scripture makes this plain when the God of the Bible challenges skeptics to predict the future and bring it to pass! Through the pen of the prophet Isaiah, God thunders: "Show the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that you are gods ... indeed you are nothing, and your work is nothing; he who chooses you is an abomination" (Isaiah 41:23–24).
Comment: By this standard the Bible is also nothing because Bible prophecies turn out to be nothing.
LCG: And again: "Remember the former things of old, for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done, saying, 'My counsel shall stand, and I will do my pleasure'" (Isaiah 46:9–10). These verses boldly state that no human being can predict the future and bring it to pass on the scale that the God of the Bible claims He can—and has, and will!
Comment: Sounds impressive, but it is simply not true.
LCG: This unique capacity to predict the future accurately sets the Bible apart from any other piece of literature. Bible scholars recognize: "Other books claim divine inspiration, such as the Koran, the Book of Mormon, and parts of the [Hindu] Veda. But none of these books contains predictive prophecy. As a result, fulfilled prophecy is a strong indication of the unique, divine authority of the Bible" (The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict, McDowell, p. 13).
Comment: This is silly. We are still waiting for the actual proof. Shouting "we can prove it, we can prove it" is not proof.
LCG: Bible prophecy stands in marked contrast to human attempts to predict the future. A study of 25 top-rated psychics discovered that 92 percent of their predictions were totally wrong, and that chance or general knowledge of circumstances could explain the remaining 8 percent that were accurate (Geisler, p. 615). Anyone familiar with the so-called prophecies of Nostradamus (Michael de Nostredame), the 16th century French psychic who dabbled in astrology, alchemy and other occult practices, is aware that his vague and nebulous verses simply do not compare to biblical prophecies. Specific prophecies, given centuries before they were accurately and consistently fulfilled, are some of the most stunning proofs that the Bible is the inspired word of God!
Comment: If the reader examines the evidence on this site and other sites we link to, he will find that many of the prophecies the COGs believe in are also vague and subject to interpretations. Many others have been totally discredited. Some are based on blatant mistranslations. Others on distortions of historical facts. Some of their interpretations blatantly contradict the plain meaning of the scriptures that they interpret. Others are blatant plagiarisms (virtually word for word in a number of places) by Herbert Armstrong, which just goes to show how dishonest their founder was. And if the churches of God were honest they would admit their founder was a fraud! Armstrong not only plagiarized but he lied to cover it up! (See www.allen-armstrong.org).
LCG: Some of the Bible's most striking examples of fulfilled prophecies are those that accurately foretold specific details about the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, centuries before He was born!
Comment: Is this what the LCG means when they talk about the "hundreds" of fulfilled prophecies? Those "fulfilled prophecies" recorded in the Bible itself?
There is no proof that the New Testament writers did not simply make up events in the life of Jesus to fit Old Testament prophecies of Jesus. These "fulfillments" were debunked a long time ago, but churches keep ignoring the facts. Thomas Paine wrote about it hundreds of years ago.
Once again, concerning OT prophecies supposedly fulfilled by Jesus, we highly recommend Old Testament "Prophesies" of Jesus Proven False by Thomas Paine. He did such a good job we simply refer the reader to it, rather than attempt to repeat some of his points here.
LCG: More than 200 prophecies, written centuries before His birth, foretold specific events in His life that were fulfilled to the letter. He would be born of a virgin and named Immanuel (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23), in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2; Matthew 2:3–8).
Comment: Finally we get into some actual prophecies.
Actually, the Hebrew word translated "virgin" does not mean virgin. Also, the prophecy in Isaiah 7 was for events happening at that time, and has nothing to do with the Messiah to come. This is how the COGs "prove" the Bible. They use arguments that have been disproven long ago. People fall for it because they are not careful enough. Frankly, some are afraid to lose faith and so they are overly receptive to what they want to hear to prop up their faith.
We have no hard evidence that any of the prophecies of the Messiah were fulfilled in Jesus. We have only the words of the New Testament. For example, we cannot prove Mary was a virgin when she conceived Jesus. We have only her word for it (through the gospel writers) and that would never stand up anyplace that real evidence is required such as in a court of law. It is hearsay. Further, were there any witnesses to prove she was a virgin when Christ was born? Did someone do a physical examination of her to prove it? There is no record of a medical examination or anything of the kind. People simply believe the virgin birth story because they already believe the Bible, not because there is any actual proof.
There is no way to prove Mary became pregnant while a virgin. She could have made that story up, and no doubt she (or Jesus's followers) did.
There is much more we could say on this, but again, we refer the read to Paine's writings for more details.
LCG: He would be a descendant of David (Matthew 1:1; 22:42–45). He would sojourn in Egypt (Hosea 11:1; Matthew 2:13–15). His birth would prompt a massacre of children (Jeremiah 31:15; Matthew 2:16–18). He would live in Galilee (Isaiah 9:1–2; Matthew 2:19–23). He would enter Jerusalem on a donkey (Zechariah 9:9; Matthew 21:1–5). He would die with transgressors and be buried in the tomb of a rich man (Isaiah 53:9, 12). He would be resurrected after three days (Matthew 12:40; Jonah 1:17).
Comment: Again, we have no proof that any of the prophecies of the Messiah were fulfilled in Jesus. We have only the words of the New Testament which could have been made up. We can prove that the gospels are not accurate because the gospel writers misquoted Old Testament scriptures. Please read the material by Thomas Paine.
LCG: The remarkable fulfillment of hundreds of specific predictions, recorded centuries earlier in the Hebrew Scriptures, demonstrates beyond any reasonable doubt that Jesus was the prophesied Messiah of the Bible and the Son of God.
Comment: There is nothing remarkable about it, because there is no way to prove the claims made in the New Testament are true. The LCG has not proven these stories are true, they simply believe them on blind faith in the New Testament (NT). They told us to demand proof but they are not giving us proof. They are using the NT as proof without having proven the NT is true. They expect us to accept the stories in the New Testament on faith.
LCG: It should be noted that "Mohammedanism cannot point to any prophecies of the coming of Mohammed uttered hundreds of years before his birth." [McDowell, p. 22].
Comment: To be blunt, this just proves that Christ's early followers were better liars than those of Muhammad. That's probably one reason Islam has to use death threats to keep people in line. Christian leaders have more subtle methods.
LCG: "Neither can the founders of any cult ... rightly identify any ancient text specifically foretelling their appearance" (McDowell, p. 22).
Comment: It is strange that the LCG would quote this given that Herbert Armstong claimed to be the Elijah that was prophecied to come! If the LCG really believes that quote, they are refuting their own founder, exposing him as a false prophet!
LCG: Some Muslim scholars cite Old Testament verses that they say prophesied Muhammad (Deuteronomy 18:15–18), but it was Jesus Christ who actually fulfilled those prophecies (see Matthew 21:11; Luke 1:76; 24:19; Acts 3:18–22) more than 600 years before Muhammad was born! The Bible's prophecies about Jesus Christ are unique among religious writings.
Comment: Though I don't believe Muhammad fulfilled Deut 18, the LCG has not proven that Christ did either. They merely quote the NT. This is not proof unless one can first prove the NT is true, and they have not done that.
Thomas Paine showed long ago that the New Testament was written by deceivers who made up stories about Jesus and misquoted OT scriptures and applied them to him.
One COG leader actually claims that he is the fulfillment of Deuteronomy 18:15–18! (See Who is "That Prophet"? by Gerald Flurry). He does not openly claim to be Christ, but he could be making that claim in an indirect way because "That Prophet" refers to Christ. This path to this silliness was paved by Armstrong who claimed to be the Elijah and an end-time "John the Baptist" prophesied to come. Will the LCG admit many of their ministers used to preach this false prophecy? Does that make those ministers false prophets? It certainly made Herbert Armstrong a false prophet. Many COGs no longer teach Armstrong was Elijah but they won't admit the Elijah doctrine made him a false prophet because it would undermine their own authority.
When we see thousands of people of "the true church" following a false "That Prophet" or a false "Elijah" we really have to question whether these people have a special understanding from God and whether they have the Holy Spirit of God. Most people, even without the Holy Spirit, are not that foolish. So why do these "sons of God" fall for it? It should be clear that something is very wrong.
Despite such terrible mistakes, the COGs think they alone have the spirit of God which gives them a superior understanding of prophecy. This is just not true.
LCG: The Bible contains more than 1,500 prophecies that foretell in remarkable detail the future of prominent cities, kings and kingdoms.
Comment: Remarkable detail? No. The prophecies are vague and subject to a lot of interpretation. Also, most are still "for the future" which means they offer no proof of the Bible.
LCG: Fulfilled prophecies about the ancient Phoenician city of Tyre stand as a sobering testimony to the power and accuracy of Bible prophecy.
Comment: Before we discuss the prophecy itself, note that the LCG got essentially all of its teachings from Herbert W. Armstrong. In 1953 Herbert Armstrong wrote The Proof of The Bible in which he tried to prove the Bible is true using the prophecy of Tyre. This booklet was blatantly plagiarized from Prophecy Speaks by Earle Albert Rowell. The proof of this plagiarism can be found at www.allen-armstrong.org.
Herbert Armstrong was not always honest. He plagiarized, sometimes blatantly, information from other churches and then claimed God revealed truths to him directly from the Bible. He did this to claim he was an apostle, on the same level as Peter and Paul. Since his claim to be an apostle was based on false premises, he was a false apostle!
It would be very foolish to trust Herbert Armstrong, yet he is the source of the LCG's information on Tyre! Why doesn't the LCG admit they got this information about Tyre from Armstrong? They have many other quotes in this booklet, so why not quote their founder, Herbert Armstrong? Do they know that Armstrong was a plagiarist and false apostle? Is that why they don't want readers to know where they got this information on Tyre? Are they trying to hide the fact that the information about Tyre came from a false teacher? Is that why the LCG takes Armstrong's (actually Rowell's) material on Tyre without quoting him?
Herbert Armstrong was the man who ordained Rod Meredith an evangelist. If not for Armstrong, Meredith would not have the rank that he holds. Of course, since Armstrong was a false apostle, his ordination of Meredith was not valid. This makes Meredith a false evangelist. All of the ministers in the LCG and almost all other COGs (an exception would be the Church of God Seventh Day which is not a WCG split-off) got their ordinations from Armstrong or men who were ordained by Armstrong (or men who were ordained by those men, etc, on down the line). Clearly, since Armstrong was a false apostle right from the start of his ministry, none of these ordinations are valid. All of these men became ministers by ordination; the COGs recognize no other method of becoming a minister. All of these ordinations are invalid -- all these men are false ministers! These men are among the false ministers that the Bible warns us about!
So the LCG has to acknowledge Armstrong even though their top leaders should know by now that he was a fake. How do they know he was a fake (false apostle)? The proof is on the internet and has been sent to a great many COGs. The LCG and many other churches have been told. If they reject that information, they are responsible for doing so.
Now let's see if the LCG information about Tyre is accurate.
LCG: When Ezekiel recorded his prophecies (around 585bc), Tyre was one of the great cities of the ancient world. It was situated on an island at the center of a maritime trading network that controlled Mediterranean commerce.
Comment: Note where the LCG says Tyre was situated--on an island (actually, part of the city was on the mainland as well). This is important because the prophecy they are about to use says Tyre would never be rebuilt, but it has been, on the same island. To make the prophecy that says it would not be rebuilt seem true, the LCG will try to claim there is nothing there now, except a small village at a nearby but different location.
Wikipedia says "Tyre originally consisted of two distinct urban centers, Tyre itself, which was on an island just off shore, and the associated settlement of Ushu on the adjacent mainland." (Wikipedia, Tyre, Lebanon, December, 2011).
That was the original city. What about the new city? "The present-day city of Tyre covers a large part of the original island ... " Yes the city has been rebuilt on the same spot. Today it is a major port. (Wikipedia, Tyre, Lebanon, December, 2011).
LCG: Tyre was a wealthy emporium of goods, surrounded by 150-foot-high walls that were considered impregnable. The Bible reports that Tyre's citizens rejoiced when Nebuchadnezzar and his Babylonian army conquered Jerusalem; they anticipated gaining access to valuable inland trade routes passing through Jerusalem. In response, God delivered a series of specific prophecies of Tyre's future devastation. Ezekiel wrote that, "because Tyre has said against Jerusalem, 'Aha! She is broken who was the gateway of the peoples' ... Therefore thus says the Lord God: 'Behold, I am against you, O Tyre, and will cause many nations to come up against you, as the sea causes its waves to come up. And they shall destroy the walls of Tyre and break down her towers; I will also scrape her dust from her, and make her like the top of a rock. It shall be a place for spreading nets in the midst of the sea... they will lay your stones, your timber, and your soil in the midst of the water... you shall never be rebuilt, for I the Lord have spoken, says the Lord God'" (Ezekiel 26:2–14).
Comment: Note that they just quoted the Bible as saying Tyre "shall never be rebuilt" (Ezekiel 26:14). Is this what happened? No. Tyre was rebuilt and exists today on the same site as in ancient times. The prophecy of Ezekiel is therefore proven false. The infallibity of the Bible is disproven!
Perhaps one reason the COGs have almost no converts in the Middle East is because people over there would easily know that COG prophecies about Tyre are complete nonsense.
Some of the things in this prophecy came to pass, but it would not take divine insight to predict them. A great many cities in the old days were invaded and destroyed at one time or another, so to predict that Tyre would be invaded was not exactly going out on a limb, especially given that it was a major port with natural harbors that made it a predictable target for the great powers in the area.
LCG: To appreciate the power and scope of Ezekiel's prophecies, picture someone trying to predict what will happen to New York or London over the next 2,500 years! Yet history records how Ezekiel's predictions have come to pass.
Comment: If we make a lot of relatively safe or general prophecies and wait long enough there is a good chance that some of them will come to pass, or at least parts of them.
LCG: In 585bc, Nebuchadnezzar began a 13-year siege against Tyre. His was the first of many nations that would come like waves against Tyre. Around 530bc, the Persians gained control of Tyre. In 332bc, Alexander destroyed the mainland portion of Tyre and threw the debris into the sea to build a causeway for assaulting the island city. When Alexander conquered the island fortress of Tyre, he battered down the walls and reduced the city to ruins. As Phoenician specialist Glenn Markoe wrote, "The conquest of Alexander ... marked the beginning of the end for Tyre and Phoenicia ... Tyre would soon recover commercially ... yet it would never fully reclaim the pride of place it had enjoyed" (Phoenicians, Markoe, p. 61). Greeks and Romans later dominated what remained of the city. In 638ad, Muslim armies captured Tyre. Crusaders recaptured the city in 1124, and used it as a staging area for military operations. In 1291, the Muslims retook Tyre and laid it in ruins, "after which she never again regained any importance" (Geisler, p. 870).
Comment: Sorry, but that is misleadling. The prophecy did not simply predict that Tyre would lose importance, it said Tyre would never be rebuilt after it was destroyed, but it was rebuilt.
LCG: Today, there is a small fishing village near the ruins of the once proud city of Tyre, but the city's ancient power and splendor, and its extensive trade network, are gone. The site of one of the wealthiest cities in the ancient world has become "a place for spreading nets," just as the Bible predicted.
Comment: Actually, there is a lot more than a small fishing village there and it is a lot more than a place for spreading nets. There is a modern city of about 120,000 people, the fourth largest city in Lebanon. It is a major port. Tourism is a major industry (Wikipedia, Tyre, Lebanon, July 2011). I don't think the tourists go there just to spread nets.
Even if it was just a fishing village, it would refute the Bible claim that Tyre would never be rebuilt.
The LCG says the fishing village is "near" the ruins of Tyre, but they do not name this village. What village are they talking about? Isn't saying "near" just an attempt to side-step the claim that the city has been rebuilt on the same spot? But the prophecy said nets would be spread where Tyre was. So if they are going to say nets are spread in this fishing village, then they have to admit that a settlement, even though small, was rebuilt on the spot of the original city. This is enough to disprove the prophecy.
Some of the LCG information on Tyre is just wrong. People believe it because they don't actually research Tyre, they just believe what they read in church booklets!
The LCG mentions some unnamed fishing village, but they omit mentioning the city of 120,000 called Tyre on the same little island as ancient Tyre!
LCG: The Bible contains prophecies about other cities near Tyre that would have a bloody history but a different future. Sidon, an idol-worshiping Phoenician city about 20 miles north of Tyre, was noted for artistic metalwork and fine cloth. Bible prophecies reveal that Sidon would have a bloody history and suffer from pestilence, but would come to "know that I am the Lord" (Ezekiel 28:21–23).
Comment: Lots of places suffer destruction and pestilence. These things were very common and the prophecy is very general.
Notice it says "they shall know that I am the Lord when I shall have executed judgments in her." (Ezek 28:22). But, when the destruction came, did they admit the Jewish God was the Lord? The prophecy said they would, but I'm sure they have not. If they did, why didn't they convert to Judaism? The LCG just glosses over the part of the prophecy that apparently did not pan out.
LCG: Nowhere did God prophesy total destruction or oblivion for Sidon. History records that the Assyrians destroyed Sidon in 678bc, but the city was rebuilt, and it submitted to Nebuchadnezzar after suffering from a devastating pestilence. Persians burned the city in about 351bc. Syria and Egypt fought over Sidon, and it became a free city under Roman rule. The Bible indicates that Jesus may have visited Sidon (Matthew 15:21) and that Sidonians heard Jesus preach the gospel (Mark 3:7–8). The Apostle Paul also visited Sidon (Acts 27:3). Today, modern Sidon is known for its gardens and orange groves.
Comment: The LCG uses historical details (as if to imply that prophecy mentions them somewhere?) but I think this is misleading (trickery?) because these details do not seem relevant. Where did the Bible prophesy them? Where did the Bible tell us in advance just who would destroy Sidon, when, and how? Where are the details in the Bible?
LCG: Bible prophecy outlined a very different future for Tyre's sister city Sidon—and it came to pass, just as Scripture predicted!
Comment: This is simply not true. Both cities were rebuilt.
LCG: Around 700bc, the prophet Isaiah recorded several specific prophecies about the downfall of the Babylonian Empire and the destruction of the city of Babylon (see Isaiah 13; 14). At the time of Isaiah's prophecy, Babylon was subject to the Assyrians and would not become a major power for another hundred years.
Comment: The LCG has not proven that the book of Isaiah was written when they think it was and they have not proven that it was not edited at some later time. Until they do that, they cannot really prove any of these prophecies were written before the events took place.
LCG: Yet Isaiah foresaw the future glory that Babylon would achieve under Nebuchadnezzar with its Hanging Gardens, magnificent palaces, luxurious living, massive walls and military conquests.
Comment: The LCG just said that Isaiah foresaw the "hanging gardens" and these other details. Where is that in the Bible? I read both Isaiah 13 and 14 and I don't see anything about Babylon's hanging gardens, magnificent palaces, or massive walls. So why quote Isaiah 13 and 14 and say Isaiah foresaw these details if those details are not in those chapters? Are they pretending these things were prophesied and then hoping people don't bother to look it up and check up on them?
LCG: Isaiah also foresaw the Medes' destruction of Babylon, and the city's ultimate desolation, several hundred years in advance!
Comment: Isaiah 13:19 says that when the Babylon is attacked it will be "as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah." That was total devastation--everyone died. Where is the proof that everyone in Babylon died when the Medes invaded? Didn't Babylon contine to exist for a while?
Incidentally, while we are on these chapters, note that Isa 14:21 says the children will be slaughtered "for the iniquity of their fathers." Is this fair? Not only is this unfair, but it contradicts Ezek 18:20 which says "...the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father..."
The Bible contains many such contraditions. For more on Bible contradictions, see Jesus, Interrupted by Bart Ehrman, or one of many other sources. COG members simply do not know about these things because they get all their information spoon-fed to them by their chruches, and these churches don't tell them about contraditions except for the ones they can explain. When I show them one they cannot explain they ignore me or tell me I'm being picky or contentious, and change the subject or refuse to discuss it.
LCG: Isaiah's prophecies foretold: "The burden against Babylon ... I will stir up the Medes against them ... And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldeans' pride, will be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah. It will never be inhabited, nor will it be settled from generation to generation; nor will the Arabian pitch tents there ... but wild beasts of the desert will lie there ... her days will not be prolonged" (Isaiah 13:1–22).
Comment: Is this really a prophecy of what happened in the past? Verses 9, 10 and 13 are prophecy for the future Day of the Lord, not something that already happened.
Also, note that the LCG use of ellipsis (...) is misleading here! Though verse 1 refers to Babylon, verse 11 says "I will punish the world [not Babylon] for its evil." The Medes are mentioned in verse 17 and Bablyon in verse 19. Actually, it is not totally clear whether the Medes are supposed to come aganst Babylon (v. 19) or the whole "world" (v.11).
Next, if Isaiah said Babylon will never be inhabited or settled (Isa 13:20) after being destroyed, this also suggests that the prophecy failed because the LCG admits (see below) that Babylon was still inhabited for years before it was finally abandoned. It certainly was not totally destroyed in a single day like Sodom and Gomorrah were (Isa 13:19).
LCG: History records that these prophecies were fulfilled: "In 539 [bc] Babylon fell to the Medes and Persians... Xerxes destroyed the city in 478, and it was finally abandoned in the 4th century bc" (Eerdmans' Handbook of the Bible, p. 382).
Comment: Even if the city of Babylon was never again inhabited, much of the rest of the empire was. Verse 5 says the "whole land" would be destroyed, not just one city. Verse 20 refers to flocks of sheep, and one does not typically raise flocks of sheep in the city, so again, it seems to be referring to the entire land of Babylon, not just the city. So things did not happen the way the prophecy said.
Furthermore, "In 1983, Saddam Hussein started rebuilding the city on top of the old ruins ... investing in both restoration and new construction." (Wikipedia, Babylon, July 2011). His plans to rebuild were halted by the American invasion of Iraq, but there is now talk of resuming construction and making the city into a cultural center.
In any case, these two chapters are really prophecies for the future "Day of the Lord" (Isa 13:6, 9-10, 13) so I don't see how they prove what the LCG says they prove.
LCG: Some of the Bible's most amazing and surprising prophecies deal with the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob—the twelve tribes of Israel, whom God chose to use for a special purpose (Exodus 19:1–6). God promised Abram (Abraham) that in return for obedience, his descendants would become great and be a blessing to the world (Genesis 12:1–3). Later prophecies stated that Jacob's descendants through Manasseh and Ephraim would ultimately become a "great" nation, and a great "multitude [company, commonwealth] of nations," who, along with the other descendants of Jacob, would in Bible prophecy be called Israelites (Genesis 48:14–22). In the Bible, the terms Israel and Israelite generally apply to the descendants of all twelve of Jacob's sons. The Jews are the descendants of Judah, who was just one of Jacob's sons. In a more specific sense, Israel applies to the descendants of the ten tribes that made up the nation of Israel (with its capital in Samaria), which broke away from the nation of Judah (with its capital in Jerusalem) when the kingdom of Solomon was divided (see 1 Kings 12). This biblical distinction between the Jews and the other Israelite nations is an important key to understanding Bible prophecy.
Comment: This theory, called British-Israelism or Anglo-Israelism, is refuted on the Internet and we recommend the reader look into it. The LCG got British-Israelism from a book by Herbert Armstrong who plagiarized an earlier book by J.H. Allen. There is an entire web site devoted to Armstrong's plagiarisms (www.allen-armstrong.org). That site also illustrates some critical errors in the theory.
Other sources for refuting Anglo-Israelism are here and here. Though I don't agree with evey point made by these sources, they should at least get the reader to seriously question the doctrine.
It is foolish to accept Anglo-Israelism without checking into the other side of the story. Often, well intended people are too trusting of others. The British-Israel threory seems impressive at first, and has fooled many people. However, many of the "facts" that people are told to support the theory are just not true.
LCG: Genesis 49 contains a remarkable series of prophecies foretelling how the Israelites—descendants of Jacob's twelve sons—will be recognized "in the last days."
Comment: The truth is that the COGs don't have any proof of where any of these tribes are. And except for Ephraim, Manasseh, Judah, Dan, and Reuben they don't offer more than a few lines of attempted proof. Regarding tribes like Zebulun, Issachar, Asher, Gad, and Naphtali these prophecies are so general they could apply to many differenent peoples. If this scripture is supposed to tell us how to recognize these nations, then the prophecy has failed because there is not enough information in these prophesies to go by. The COG's aren't even sure where some of these tribes are today.
The COGs talk about "specific" and "detailed" prophecies but most of these prophecies are anything but specific and detailed. Don't be mislead by such misleading talk.
For example, notice Gen 49:19 which says, "Gad, a troop shall press upon him; But he shall press upon their heel." This is supposed to tell us who Gad is today. This could probably be interpreted different ways, but to me all it seems to say is that Gad will be pressed upon by an army, and he will repel them and chase them away (press upon their heels) as they flee. This could apply to any nation that was invaded and repelled the attackers. Many nations have been invaded. This is very general. It is so general, that it is a useless prophecy because it could apply to almost any nation. What good is that? Would God "prove" his word by giving us such useless prophecies? Surely God could do better than that.
LCG: Reuben will become powerful and have notions of grandeur, but will lack national stability; consider how this description could describe France.
Comment: It could describe a lot of countries. Actually, France survived two World Wars fought on its soil. It has been one of the most politically stable countries in the world throughout these (supposed) "last days". Many other countries have split apart in the last 100 years or so. It is also more economically stable (I am writing this section in July 2011) than Greece, the USA, Italy, Spain, Ireland, Iceland, and a lot of other places. It also has one language which helps make it more stable than many other countries which do not.
LCG: Judah (the Jews) will provide the Messiah and retain knowledge of the Law of God. Zebulun will dwell by the sea and become a mercantile people; a description evocative of modern Holland.
Comment: Many Jews are atheists. Did they really retain the law of God?
Regarding Holland, most nations dwell by a sea and could be considered mercantile. This probably applies to over 100 different countries.
LCG: Dan will leave its mark, having traveled from its base in the Middle East; a description evocative of Denmark and Ireland.
Comment: Anglo-Israelism's claims that Dan went to Denmark and Ireland are very controversial at best. For example, just because "Denmark" sounds, in English, like "Dan" and "mark" does not mean much. This is probably just a fluke of the English language, which is not even a Bible language. This kind of evidence is not compelling at all. And I don't see why they think that "Dan will leave its mark" is a "discription evocative of ... Ireland".
LCG: Joseph (Ephraim and Manasseh) will become a colonizing people dwelling in the choice places of the earth—and dwelling "separate from his brothers"—a description perfectly apt to describe the former British Commonwealth nations and the U.S. (see Genesis 49:22–26).
Comment: Do the commonwealth nations really live in the best places on earth? In England it rains a lot, Canada is very cold, parts of the USA are desert, and so is much of Australia. Sure there are some nice places in these countries, but there are a lot of nice places in the "gentile" countries and other "Israelite" countries also. I am not convinced.
Spain and Portugal were also colonizing nations, and many other nations have migrated or expanded. This is not unique to the British. Though some of these prophecies could fit the USA and British, they could fit other nations as well. The expression "separate from his brothers" does not help at all unless we know where those bothers are, and the COGs cannot identify with any certainty where tribes like Zebulun, Gad, Asher, etc, supposedly went to. Further, any ethnic group that has its own territory is separate from its brothers.
LCG: These remarkable prophecies were not to be fulfilled only by the Jews—to whom the world gives the name "Israel"—but also by eleven other nations that are part of the "whole house" of Israel. These prophecies reveal keys to the identity and location of the modern descendants of Jacob's twelve sons—the children of Israel. For a more detailed discussion of this topic, please request our free booklet, The United States and Great Britain in Prophecy.
Comment: Before believing any of this, the reader is strongly advised to read some of the better sources on the Internet which refute Anglo-Israelism. (If time permits we might do our own article on it).
LCG: Understanding the true identity of the Israelite nations is not only a key for understanding Bible prophecy; this knowledge is also essential for God's Church, which must fulfill the commission that Jesus gave. Jesus commissioned His disciples to "go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel"—to preach about the coming kingdom of God, and warn the Israelites about terrible trials they would face in the last days because of their disobedience to God's laws (see Jeremiah 30:7–24).
Comment: The COGs claim they do not interpret the Bible, that the Bible interprets itself. But they are not using Jesus' interpretation; they are using their own interpretation.
First, who did Jesus mean by the house of Israel? The ten "lost" tribes? No. In Matt 15:24 we read, "But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Jesus himself did not preach the gospel in Northern Europe, so according to the Bible interpretation, "the lost sheep of the house of Israel" referred to the Israelites living in Judea at that time.
Contrary to British-Israelism, in the NT, the terms Jew, Judea, Israel, house of Israel, Israelites, etc, were all used interchangably, as several scriptures show. (See this off-site article for more details.)
Also, Jesus did not say "go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel in the end time". He told those men he was speaking with to go to the "lost sheep of Israel" at that time.
Notice this carefully: "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matt 10:5-6). Notice that he specifically sent "these twelve" to do this, not the whole church in the end time. Further, if this refers to the end time, why did Jesus say do NOT go to the gentiles? (v. 5). The COGs teach that in the end time they are comissioned to preach the gospel to all nations, including gentiles, before the end comes (Matt 24:14). So this cannot refer to the end time like the LCG says. Making it refer to the end time misleads the reader into thinking the "house of Israel" here refers to the USA and Britian rather than Judea.
I find it curious that the LCG booklet quoted part of Matt 10:5-6 but did not tell us where to find it in the Bible and did not quote it in full. Were they afraid that if we took the trouble to read it, it would actually contradict what they were trying to make it say?
LCG: Jesus' disciples took this commission seriously. In their day, the tribes of Israel were not "lost."
Comment: If the people Jesus were referring to were not lost at that time, why did Jesus call them "lost"? He did not say the sheep that "will be lost," he said "lost." The LCG rejects the words of Christ, and again puts their own interpretation on things.
Jesus was not talking about the "lost tribes" at all, either now or then. He said the "sheep" of Israel were lost, not that the tribes were lost. No doubt he meant that the people of those tribes were lost spiritually, not that the tribes were lost geographically.
The term "lost sheep" is really an oxymoron. A sheep is a follower of Christ, and a person who is lost is not following Christ. There is no such thing as a "lost sheep."
But if we interpret "lost sheep" as God's followers who are somewhat off track (partly lost), then it applies better to those in Palestine at that time than to the "lost ten tribes" who had supposedly gone to Europe. Anglo-Israelism teaches that those ten tribes stopped following God hundreds of years before Jesus, so why would Jesus refer to them as sheep? Anglo-Israelism says only the Jews were still following God, so "lost sheep" makes more sense if applied to the Jews, not the supposed "lost" tribes. At least the Jews were still keeping the Sabbath.
LCG: The Apostle James addressed his epistle "to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad" (James 1:1). Josephus revealed that in the days of the apostles, "ten tribes are beyond the Euphrates... and are an immense multitude" (Antiquities of the Jews, Book XI, 5, 2).
Comment: Another contradiction. James says they were scattered, which implies they went in different directions, but Josephus says they were "beyond the Euphraties". So which was it?
Further, James said that all twelve tribes were scattered, not just ten of them, so how does James support Anglo-Israelism? He seems to contradict it.
LCG: This explains why several of the apostles, including Peter and Andrew, traveled in that direction.
Comment: Where is the proof they traveled in that direction? They are asking us to accept that without proof. They quote no source of information.
LCG: Historical sources also indicate that Peter, Paul and others traveled to Western Europe and Britain preaching the gospel.
Comment: What historical sources said the apostles traveled there? There are so many conflicting legends and lies about the early church, a person can believe all sorts of things. Again, they offer no proof.
Further, Paul and Peter had different areas of responsibility. Paul was the apostle to the gentiles and Peter was the apostle to the Jews (Gal 2:8, NIV. Notice that Israel was not mentioned, so they must have been lumped in with the Jews). I don't see why both would travel to the same far-flung place, because one of them would be working on the other's turf.
LCG: The clear implication of these leading apostles' journeys to the West is that Israelite peoples were there!
Comment: They just quoted Josephus as saying the ten tribes were "beyond the Euphraties" which is EAST, not West, and now they say they were in Western Europe. James, on the other hand, said they were scattered, so we have three conflicting views. A fourth view, is that they were in Judea, as we mentioned that Jesus said. The Bible writers can't seem to agree, and Josephus and British-Israelism have yet other views. What a mess.
LCG: Examine the history of ancient Ireland, and notice which Israelite tribal name appears in the records.
Comment: Writings of Anglo-Israelism often refer to "the history of Ireland" without quoting or even naming an Irish historian or giving page numbers in history books. Where is the proof they said they would give us? They expect people to take it on faith that the history books back up their theories.
To say, "examine the history of ancient Ireland" is way too general. If they can't give us a page number, at least give us the name of a book. They are not proving anything, and the book they offer probably does not prove it either (because it is probably a lot like Armstrong's book which is full of errors).
The COGs got a lot of their historical "facts" about British-Israelism from Armstrong who plagiarised J.H. Allen, one of "Satan's ministers" who played the role of a "historian" and wrote a biased history about British-Israelism. Armstrong's book never tells the reader the information came from a minister rather than a real historian.
LCG: When you study the Genesis 49 prophecies about the characteristics and future history of Jacob's descendants, you will notice the connection with peoples that currently reside in, or emigrated from, northwest Europe! When you understand the identities of modern Israelite nations, you can begin to understand from Bible prophecy what lies ahead for these nations—and for other nations mentioned in Bible prophecy!
Comment: The LCG is simply making an assertion here. They are not proving anything.
LCG: Bible prophecies are not just about ancient history. The book of Daniel contains detailed yet sweeping prophecies that provide an outline of history from the time of Nebuchadnezzar's Babylon through the return of Jesus Christ at the end of the age.
Comment: We shall see if they actually prove that.
LCG: Modern critics, seeking to discredit the prophetic and supernatural elements in the book of Daniel, have revived ideas put forward by Porphyrius, a third-century pagan philosopher from Tyre.
Comment: They try to suggest we should not listen to this man because he was pagan. But neither can we trust the Jews (those Pharisees, teachers of the law, etc, that Jesus disputed with), or traditional Christians because they were apostates. But that rules out just about everyone. When COG's don't like someone's ideas they remind us he was a "pagan", or a "Jewish teacher" or a "traditional Christian" or "intellectual scholar" (by which they often mean arrogant and closed minded). But if they agree with the person, then they call him a "respected expert" or something to that effect. The LCG repeatedly talks like this to discredit any sources they don't like and bolster those they do like. For example, they don't mention that the church leaders who gave us the Bible itself were also "spiritual harlots" or "apostates", etc.
LCG: Porphyrius (also called Porphyry) claimed that the book of Daniel was a fraudulent work produced in the second century bc, after the events it recounts had already taken place! However, this theory does not square with the facts.
Comment: We shall soon see if the LCG's "facts" are any better.
LCG: The book of Daniel gives precise dates, locations and names that can be verified.
Comment: What precise dates, locations and names? They don't say; we are expected to take their word for it. But even if the dates, locations and names in the book are accurate, that does not prove the book was written before the events took place. One could certainly write a history hundreds of years later which contains dates, locations, and names which are accurate. Uninspired historians do this all the time by drawing on earlier sources. One can also fabricate "precise" dates, locations, and names and pass them off as the real thing. Can the LCG rule out all these other possibilities?
LCG: The prophet Ezekiel was a contemporary of Daniel, and mentioned him very respectfully (Ezekiel 14:20).
Comment: How do we know this was the same Daniel? How do we know this was not added to the book of Ezekiel by a later editor? Many scriptures were tampered with by later editors. How do we know the book of Ezekiel was written when we are told it was? What the LCG gives us is a theory, not proof.
The verse the LCG uses mentions someone called Daniel but it only says he was righteous. It tells us nothing else. What Daniel is it? We don't know, we can only guess. Let's suppose Ezekiel was referring to the Daniel referred to in the book of Daniel. All this would prove, at best, is that Daniel existed. It does not prove that Daniel wrote a book of prophecy, that the book of Daniel we have today was the same one written by Daniel, and when the book of Daniel was written. See how silly some of the COG's "proofs" are?
Now, I cannot prove Daniel did not write a book of prophecy, but the onus of proof is on the LCG, not on skeptics like myself.
LCG: The book of Daniel was widely accepted as inspired, and was included in the Hebrew Bible in the second century bc.
Comment: So what? Wide acceptance is not proof. The Koran is also widely accepted.
Why did it take hundreds of years before the book of Daniel showed up in the Bible if it had existed all along? How do we know the Jews made the right choice when they accepted it? Where is the proof they made the right choice? Why should we trust the Jews or anybody else?
LCG: Jesus acknowledged Daniel as the author of the book (Matthew 24:15).
Comment: Maybe Jesus was deceived. Maybe Jesus didn't actually say that. The New Testament has so many contradictions, edits, forgeries, spurious verses and misapplied OT verses that it cannot be relied on.
Once again, the LCG is using the Bible to prove the Bible. When the Bible canon was decided they had many books to choose from so they threw out those that contained obvious contradictions. What we were left with was a collection of books whose contradictions and errors were not as obvious. However, many mistakes still slipped through, and with modern computers and modern disemination of knowledge, more of them have been recognized.
LCG: One respected source notes ...
Comment: Respected by who? Only by others who accept the Bible on faith?
LCG: "In NT prophecy Daniel is referred to more than any other book in the OT. Moreover, it contains more fulfilled prophecies than any other book in the Bible" (see The Expositor's Bible Commentary, vol. 7, p. 3).
Comment: What fulfilled prophecies? Where are the "specifics" and "details" they keep promising us?
LCG: Daniel recorded a dream about a huge image (Daniel 2). The four parts of the image—head, chest, belly and thighs, legs and feet—pictured four empires that would arise in the future to dominate the Mediterranean world. Bible scholars now recognize these empires as the Babylonian Empire, the Medo-Persian Empire, the Greco-Macedonian Empire under Alexander the Great and the Roman Empire. Daniel also revealed that Jesus Christ will strike the last remnant of the Roman Empire on its feet and toes (made of iron and clay) when He returns to set up His kingdom on this earth at the end of this age (Daniel 2:41–45). Daniel described the same four empires as four beasts, and gave additional details about each. The third empire (Greco-Macedonian under Alexander) was pictured with four heads (Daniel 7:6).
Comment: This could have been written by someone claiming to be Daniel after most of the events took place.
LCG: History records that after Alexander's death, his empire split into four parts, about 300 years after Daniel recorded the prophecy.
Comment: The LCG has not proven that Daniel was the author or that the book was actually written before these events took place.
LCG: Daniel described the fourth beast (the Roman Empire) as having ten horns representing "ten kings who shall arise from this kingdom" (Daniel 7:7, 24). History records the many attempts to continue or revive the Roman Empire down through the centuries. They have all occurred in Europe, including revivals under Charlemagne, Charles V of the Hapsburgs, Napoleon and Mussolini.
Comment: The COGs say there will be ten revivals or "horns" of the empire, and that nine have already passed, but if we look at the history of that empire, it is impossible to unambiguously determine which phase or "revival" of the Roman empire might corresponded to a single "horn" of Daniel 7. There are not nine clear revivals in history, so they really seem to have no basis for making that claim. The revivals could be counted in various ways, and the Bible does not tell us how to count them.
Further, Dan 7:24 interprets the prophecy to mean the ten horns are "ten kings" not ten revivals! The COGs insist that they do not interpret the Bible, that the Bible interprets itself, but where does the Bible say that there will be ten revivals? It says ten kings.
Even if it said there were ten revivals, that would imply one king per revival, not several kings per revival, because there are only ten kings.
The fact is that there have been far more then ten kings (emperors) in the Roman empire! Since there were far more than ten emperors it seems safe to say the prophecy of Daniel has failed utterly.
The LCG says the Bible is CLEAR (they pretend to understand it) but when we have a clear verse like Dan 7:24 they distort the meaning.
"And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings [not revivals] that shall arise: and another shall rise after them [i.e. after the other ten]; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings." (Dan 7:24).
Now what about the "extra" horn, the eleventh king? It says this king (one king) "shall rise after" the other ten. The COGs do not believe that this king arose after the other ten because they say this king represents the popes. But this "little horn" is interpreted in Daniel to be ONE king, not a succession of kings (popes). Also note that the popes did not arise after the ten "revivals" since the tenth revival (as counted by the COGs) has not happened yet.
Furthermore, this little horn exists at the same time as the other ten, and puts down three of them while the other seven kings still rule. This is radically different than the COG interpretation of these prophecies as ten successive revivals. They changed ten concurrent kings to ten successive revivals. They changed one "little horn" to a whole succession of popes. They completely changed the meaning.
There is no time in the history of the Roman Empire when a king arose and put down three kings in a group of ten concurrent kings.
We conclude that the COGs are all mixed up about Daniel 7:24, and that they have not proven the Bible is true using this scripture, as much as they like to pretend otherwise.
LCG: According to Bible prophecy, the final revival will be lead by a person labeled "the beast," backed by a religious leader called the "false prophet" (see Revelation 13 and 17). For more information about these end-time prophetic developments, please request our free booklet, The Beast of Revelation.
Comment: If I ever have time I will write a booklet which debunks these prophecies. In the mean time, I suggest that the reader study into the many good sources which disprove the Bible. I have to fight these dishonest churches that have millions of dollars and hundreds of ministers, and I have been doing it with no financial help, no research help, and no editorial help, so please be patient.
LCG: Daniel also mentions a "little horn" that will disown the first three attempts to continue the Roman Empire, but will be intimately involved with subsequent revivals of the Roman Empire in its various forms. This figure is prophesied as speaking "pompous words against the Most High… persecute the saints… [and] change times and law" (Daniel 7:8, 20, 24–25). This "little horn" foreshadows those religious leaders who have claimed to be the "vicar of Christ" (meaning "in place of Christ"), who murdered Bible-believing Christians through an Inquisition and who replaced commanded biblical Holy Days with pagan holidays. Other prophecies identify this "little horn" as a prominent religious figure whose latter-day counterpart will play a key role in events leading to Jesus Christ's return (2 Thessalonians 2; Revelation 13; 17).
Comment: These prophecies can be intepreted many ways. The COGs cannot prove their interpretation is correct.
Where did Daniel say that the little horn would "disown" (rather than "subdue," KJV) the "first three" horns (rather than just "three of" the horns? That is their interpretation. Where did Daniel say the little horn would be "intimately involved" with the other horns? Where did Daniel say that the little horn would be involved with "subsequent" (rather than concurrent) "revivals" (rather than with individual kings)?
That is just their interpretation. Even worse, their interpretation conflicts with the clear meaning of Dan 7:24.
LCG: The ten toes of Daniel's image (Daniel 2:40–43) correspond to ten kings who will give their power and authority to "the beast," a powerful and deceptive political leader who will emerge on the scene in Europe just before Jesus Christ returns at the end of the age (Revelation 17:1–13).
Comment: This has not happened yet, so it is not a proof of the Bible. What we are trying to focus on here is the proof of the Bible. Prophecies yet to be fulfilled do not prove anything at this point in time.
This booklet we are examining, called The Bible: Fact or Fiction? is supposed to prove the Bible is true, but instead they are writing about what they think will happen. All this does is make people think they need to go to a COG to be safe from future events. This is scaring people, not proving the Bible. To prove the Bible with prophecy one must look at past events, not things that can't be proven because they have not happened yet.
LCG: This political leader will receive support from, and be influenced by, a powerful religious leader—the final manifestation of the "little horn." Like his predecessors, this "little horn" will play a key role in world politics (Revelation 13; 17). History records that Roman Catholic popes have crowned the emperors of the Holy Roman Empire, and that popes and bishops have long influenced European politics. The iron and clay of the ten toes of Daniel's image foretells the attempts by squabbling European nations to form a union by surrendering their sovereignty to a central government (akin to what the E.U. has done in Brussels). Current attempts to create a united Europe modeled on the old Roman Empire have been backed by several popes and the Roman Church. Daniel and other books of the Bible indicate that the final fulfillment of these remarkable prophecies will occur in the years just ahead!
Comment: None of this concerns us here, because this has not happened yet. However, the Catholic church is declining in power, due to many sex scandals and growing secularism, and this trend seems likely to continue. Furthermore, at the time I'm writing this section (July 2011), the "gentile" nations (Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain) in Southern Europe are having financial problems which seem to be greater than many of the "Israelite" nations in Northern Europe. This is another trend which is to running counter to the prophecies of the COGs who have been predicting for decades the rise of the gentiles and the decline of Israel. My personal prediction is more economic trouble for both.
The COGs say events are moving toward fullfilling these prophecies (as they understand them) but to draw this conclusion they often ignore contrary trends. Unfortunately, this is the way people are. They accept whatever supports their beliefs and reject whatever does not fit in with their beliefs.
This is why I am a skeptic. I am skeptical of all religions, and of much of what is passed off as science (including evolution). I do not claim to have the answers. What I see is a lot of bad arguments on all sides.
LCG: It is ironic that while these ancient and detailed prophecies are coming alive today, leaders of the Roman Church insist that the symbolic language used in Daniel and Revelation "is not to be interpreted literally. We should not expect to discover in this book [Revelation] details about the end of the world" (The Times, October 5, 2005)—yet that is exactly what these prophetic books claim to reveal!
Comment: I totally disagree with the statement that these prophecies are "detailed" or are "coming alive today".
Anyway, this booklet is supposed to prove the Bible and talking about what is supposed to happen next proves nothing.
LCG: Today, for people who really want to understand where world events are leading, the challenge is: Whom do you believe, theologians or the Bible?
Comment: Neither. Why restrict me to two bad options?
If we are not to believe theologians, why has this booklet quoted so many theologians as experts that we should rely on? This is double-talk.
Aren't COG ministers and the people who gave us the Bible theologians?
LCG: This is why it is important to determine whether or not the Bible is truly the word of God—whether it is fact or fiction!
Comment: This LCG booklet has not presented convincing facts.
LCG: Sadly, modern skeptics—and even many who claim to believe in Jesus Christ—dismiss ideas about the end of the age as pure fantasy and wild-eyed doomsday talk.
Comment: Sadly, many COG members have ruined their lives because they did not check out the skeptics.
Notice how they try to portray the skeptics as shallow and superficial. There are good and bad skeptics. The good ones are good; listen to them.
LCG: Yet the Bible takes a linear view of history, and pictures all events moving toward a climax. The prophecies in Daniel take this view, with the climax being Jesus Christ's return to establish the kingdom of God on this earth. Jesus spoke freely and in detail about specific events that would signal the end of the age.
Comment: Most of his prophecies were very general, not "specific events".
LCG: When Jesus' disciples asked Him, "what will be the sign of your coming, and of the end of the age" He did not beat around the bush or try to avoid answering the question, as many theologians do today (Matthew 24:3).
Comment: I have asked many questions of COGs and they OFTEN avoid answering them, so it is very hypocritical that they would have the audacity to fault other theologians for avoiding questions.
LCG: He told His disciples to watch for a time when they would see widespread religious confusion and deception, and increasingly frequent reports of violence, wars, ethnic strife, famines, disease epidemics and natural disasters on a global scale (Matthew 24:4–7).
Comment: There has always been widespread religious confusion and deception. There has always been violence, wars, ethnic strife, famines, disease epidemics and natural disasters.
The LCG booklet said we should have proof. Can the LCG prove that any or all of these things are actually increasing in frequency? Show us the proof. There is probably far less disease now than at any time in history. If we are really living in the end times, why isn't disease increasing as prophesied?
The news media and end-time preachers sensationalize natural disasters, but accurate records have only been kept in the last 100 years or so, and these records show that, despite the hype, the frequency of natural disasters is not increasing. The actual data also show that, contrary to COG prophecy, the nations of "modern Israel" are not getting hit worse than the "gentile" nations. We have an article on this web site which proves the truth about natural disasters.
Sometimes the media will report the "most expensive ever hurricane" or some such thing. The reason is because as populations grow, more houses get smashed when hurricanes come through. And sometimes, perhaps, more people die. But it does not mean that hurricanes are acutally getting worse in severity. It is just the predicitable result of higher populations.
What natural disasters "occur on a global scale"? Has there ever been a global earthquake, a global drought, or a global whale beaching?
LCG: These are the very headlines dominating our news today!
Comment: Nothing new about that. Has been going on for thousands of years (except that they did not have headlines in those days).
LCG: Yet Jesus said that this would be just the "beginning of sorrows" (Matthew 24:8). Christ went on to reveal that there will be a global persecution of Christians, but that the true gospel of the coming kingdom of God will nevertheless "be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come" (Matthew 24:14).
Comment: None of this has happened yet, so it proves nothing. I don't believe the COGs have really reached all the world with "the true gospel". Armstrong claimed he had done this but in many nations his massive broadcasting empire had almost no penetration. If his claim were true, wouldn't the end have come already? The impact of the COGs is even smaller since his death--another counter-trend that does not look good for their predictions.
LCG: Jesus said that all these events leading up to the climax of this age will occur at a time in history when the very existence of life on this planet will be threatened. Notice Jesus' description that "unless those days were shortened [by Jesus' return], no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened" (Matthew 24:22). Jesus admonished His disciples to watch—to remain alert—so that they will recognize when the civilizations of this world are entering their final hour (Matthew 24:36–44; 25:1–13; Mark 13:32–37; Luke 21:34–38).
In the 1950s, world leaders first realized that, with the development of nuclear weapons, mankind has created the capacity to destroy all life from the face of the earth. This was never possible until the last half of the 20th century!
Comment: The COGs think that the existence of nuclear weapons proves we are living in the end times, and that those weapons prove God inspired the prophecy that "all flesh" could someday be destroyed. These are easy assumptions to make. Who but God could have forseen a time when weapons would exist that could destroy all flesh? However, a little logic shows that both ideas are false.
Note carefully that Jesus did not say that weapons of man would be able to destroy "all flesh". And he did not say that a future time would come when all flesh could be destroyed. He simply said all flesh could be destroyed. That could have happened then. Paul believed the end was near in his time, way back then, long before modern weapons. Paul understood that modern weapons are not needed for God to destroy the earth.
If we believe the prophecies of Jesus, the world could be destroyed by earthquakes and disease. No modern weapons are needed. The idea that the destruction of "all flesh" was not possible until modern weapons were developed is simply a false notion that misleads people. If we believe God is going to destroy us, modern weapons have nothing to do with it because God does not need modern weapons to destroy us. Even without natural disasters, entire cities can be laid waste with conventional weapons. So modern weapons do not prove we are living in the end time. Jesus did not say we would be destroyed by modern weapons. He refrerred to natural disasters, like earthquakes, disease, etc. He did mention war, but he did not say war would be the big killer. During the black death, about half of Europe's population was wiped out. A combination of disease, earthquakes, droughts, etc, would be plenty to destroy "all flesh". A single asteroid impact would also be more than enough.
LCG: Is it just a coincidence that between 1950 and today we have seen the global spread of HIV-AIDS, the return of drug-resistant tuberculosis and the threat of international pandemics of bird flu and other infectious diseases?
Comment: Before we had modern drugs we had even less defense against disease. To suggest that the threat has increased is nonsense. Even if ALL disease carriers became totally resistant to ALL drugs, we would not be worse off than before we had drugs, we would simply be back where we started because drugs would be ineffective. Even then, modern knowledge of cleanliness and sanitation would do a lot to make us safer from these kinds of threats than at any time in the past.
The congestion of our modern cities does pose a threat because it promotes the spread of disease, but with sanitation we are probably still better off than in the past, and it will likely be a long time, if ever, before all germs are resistant to all drugs.
International pandemics are not new. To suggest that they are a sign of the end times is simply nonsense. The COGs have been telling us that disasters are getting worse now (according to prophecy as they see it) and the evidence just does not support that. We are not currently experiencing a growing death rate from disease or most other natural disasters. In fact, death rates from some types of disasters are going down.
Because of population increases and currency inflation, the number of people killed and the dollar cost in some diasters (e.g. hurricanes) sometimes increases, but overall, the death rate from disasters is not going up.
LCG: Is it just a coincidence that today we are concerned with the emerging threat of global warming and the sobering consequences of global climate change?
Comment: I have spent weeks, night and day, researching "climate change" and there is a lot of evidence that it is greatly exaggerated, and much of it seems to be a pack of lies. It is often hard to tell which side of this argument is lying the least, so I won't try to untangle it all for the readers. However, based on my weeks of research, this is one of the things that worries me the least. For the LCG to treat global warming as if it is a proven danger is irresponsible. The media shares the blame since many of them have been hyping up the "problem".
Anyway, where did Jesus prophecy "climate change" (the climate is always changing anyway) or "global warming"? He didn't.
LCG: Is it just a coincidence that all this is happening amid rising fears about international terrorism and escalating conflict in the Middle East—all of which Scripture predicted long ago?
Comment: I am calling B.S. on that. Where did scripture predict terrorism? Where did scripture predict escalating conflict in the Middle East?
LCG: Is this all coincidence, or are we seeing the approaching fulfillment of ancient Bible prophecies that describe in detail the end of the age?
Comment: It is neither coincidence or Bible prophecy. Churches are simply reading their interpretations of prophecy into current events and ignoring counter trends.
LCG: These astoundingly accurate prophecies distinguish the Bible from any other book on this planet, and they offer proof that the Bible was written by "the finger of God."
Comment: The Bible is not the only book to predict the end of the world. The Wikipedia article End Time says "The end time ... is a time period described in the eschatological writings in the three Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) and in doomsday scenarios in various other non-Abrahamic religions." (July, 2011).
This LCG booklet does not mention that other religions also predict doomsday. Also, Bible prophecies are often wrong and never "astoundingly accurate."
LCG: One of the Bible's most striking features is that it plainly claims to be the inspired word of an Almighty God.
Comment: Many books of the Bible make no such claim. Talking about "the Bible" as a whole is actually very misleading because it is a book of confliciting views written by different people at different times. There is no one "Bible viewpoint".
LCG: We see this in the words of the Apostle Paul, a highly educated Hebrew who wrote, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Timothy 3:16).
Comment: So what if Paul was highly educated? A lot of educated people disagree with Paul.
Even if all scripture were from God, it does not tell us what is scripture. It does not tell us which books are scripture. And the LCG still has not proven that Paul wrote the books attributed to him, that he was truly an apostle, that the New Testament is reliable, etc. Actually, some of the books attributed to Paul are known to be forgeries (See Forged by Bart Ehrman).
And just what is "all scripture" anyway? Perhaps this verse could be used to say the Koran is from God, or the Hindu scriptures are from God.
LCG: The Apostle Peter wrote that the content of Scripture "never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit" (2 Peter 1:21). To early Church leaders, "inspiration was not an ecstatic overpowering of the writer's consciousness, but rather a high degree of illumination and calm awareness of God's revelation ... extending to every word of Scripture" (The Origin of the Bible, Bruce, et al., p. 38). Scripture indicates, and the early Church recognized, that God inspired the biblical writers to use their own minds and their own styles to write what God wanted them to write.
Comment: Where is the proof? This is merely the opinions of Paul, "early Church leaders", Bruce et al, and "the early church". It gives one the false impression that "the early church" (how early?) was united. Actually, nothing could be futher from the truth. As anyone who reads the NT knows, the early church was plagued by disunity, false teachers and controversies even while the apostles were still alive.
LCG: The Bible describes the process of divine inspiration in the way God worked with Moses, "And God spoke all these words ... And Moses wrote all the words of the Lord ... when Moses had completed writing the words of this law in a book ... Moses commanded the Levites ... Take this Book of the Law, and put it beside the ark of the covenant" (Exodus 20:1; 24:4; Deuteronomy 31:24–26). Centuries later, Ezra and Nehemiah read to the people of Israel from the "Book of the Law of Moses," which was also called "the Book of the Law of God" (Nehemiah 8:1, 18).
Comment: Once again, using the Bible to prove the Bible is a circular argument.
LCG: Jesus acknowledged its divine inspiration when He said, "have you not read in the book of Moses ... how God spoke to him" (Mark 12:26).
Comment: Using the Bible to prove the Bible is a circular argument. At best it can prove internal consistency, but internal consistency is not proof of divine inspiration. And the Bible is not even internally consistent. There are a number of web sites that point out many Bible inconsistencies that the COGs cannot properly answer.
LCG: The prophet Jeremiah recorded a similar experience: "The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying, 'Thus speaks the Lord God of Israel, saying: Write in a book for yourself all the words that I have spoken to you" (Jeremiah 30:1–2). The phrase, "Thus says the Lord" is used more than 350 times in the Old Testament, clearly implying that the words of Scripture came from God.
Comment: Using the Bible to prove the Bible is a circular argument.
LCG: As we will see, other religious books may claim divine inspiration like the Bible, yet they lack the specific characteristics that confirm the Bible's authenticity.
Comment: The LCG has not shown that Bible has any specific characteristics that confirm its authenticity.
LCG: Not only does the Bible claim to be divinely inspired, it claims to be the ultimate source of truth, revealed by the one true God. The Apostle John wrote, "Thy word is truth" (John 17:17, KJV). David wrote, "Your law is truth ... all Your commandments are truth... The entirety of Your word is truth" (Psalm 119:142, 151, 160). The prophet Isaiah asserted, "To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them" (Isaiah 8:20). Isaiah meant that if statements and ideas do not agree with Scripture, we can recognize them as false. The Apostle Paul also calls Scripture "the word of truth" (2 Timothy 2:15).
Comment: It is worthless to use the Bible to prove the Bible is true. In John 5:31 Jesus is quoted as saying, "If I testify about myself, my testimony is not valid." (NIV). So why should we believe it when the Bible testifies of itself?
The LCG is appealing to emotion here. We all have a need for a sense of security in an unpredictable world. But they are giving their readers a false sense of security.
LCG: These statements stand in marked contrast to the uncertain words spoken by Pontius Pilate, "What is truth?" (John 18:38). Today, many skeptics and cynics share Pilate's question.
Comment: First, we don't even know if Pilate said that. We have only the unreliable NT to go by.
Second, it makes no sense to discredit "many skeptics and cynics" today based on what one man supposedly said 2000 years ago.
LCG: Yet the Bible's bold claims show that its writers clearly believed that the words they recorded were absolutely true and inspired by a wise and all-powerful God (see Genesis 17:1; Psalm 86:10; Jude 1:25).
Comment: The LCG is saying that making bold claims proves that a person is sincere. This is total nonsense.
Since we are not mind readers, we really don't know if the writers believed it themselves (except in those cases where we can prove they were lying). They could have been bold liars. Many people are.
Should we be impressed by bold claims? Didn't Muhammad make bold claims? Doesn't the Koran contain bold claims? Making bold claims is not unique to the Bible and it does not prove the persons making the claims believed them. This argument is ridiculous and yet some people probably fall for it because many people are not skeptical enough.
LCG: What is truth? You need to prove that for yourself!
Comment: What is truth? Certainly not what we get from the LCG.
LCG: The Bible repeatedly emphasizes, "the Lord is the true God" (Jeremiah 10:10; see also John 17:3; 1 Thessalonians 1:9; 1 John 5:20). Scripture records that when the ancient Egyptian priests saw the miracles announced by Moses, and saw their own gods powerless, they concluded: "This is the finger of God" (Exodus 8:16–19).
Comment: We have no way of knowing any of that is truth or fiction. Much of the "proof" of the Bible is based on quoting the Bible! It comes down to "the Bible is true because the Bible says it is true."
LCG: Daniel records that Nebuchadnezzar, pagan king of Babylon, came to the same conclusion after encountering the God of the Bible: "Truly, your God is the God of gods, the Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets" (Daniel 2:47). The Bible records that the Apostle Paul, distressed at seeing Athens "given over to idols," taught superstitious Greek philosophers about the true God (Acts 17:16–34). For more information about the true God of the Bible, request our free booklet, The Real God: Proofs and Promises.
Comment: Once again, they are quoting the Bible to prove the Bible! This is a circular argument.
LCG: The Bible's clear and unambiguous message is that Scripture is the inspired word of a real God, and is the ultimate source of truth!
Comment: Actually, the Bible does not have a clear and unambiguous message. It contains contradictions on some very fundamental points.
LCG: This is difficult for many today to believe, because we live in a skeptical age where even so-called biblical scholars doubt that the Bible really is God's word.
Comment: The LCG should not blame the skeptics if they can't do a proper job of proving their points. Even the so-called "ministers of God" are using bad arguments. If the Bible were as great as the LCG says it is, many more people would follow it.
LCG: However, the Bible's bold claim that it is the inspired word of an all-powerful God, and is true in its entirety, can be verified in the records of history and the discoveries of archaeology. The evidence is there for anyone willing to look!
Comment: The claim that history and archaeology prove the Bible "is true in its entirety" is so obviously absurd I have to call this a blatant lie. Yet that is exactly what they just said! Does anyone really believe that history and archaeology prove every verse in the Bible is true? Of course not. At best they can only confirm certain isolated points, not every verse in the Bible. Refuting some of the stupid statements in this booklet is no challenge at all.
So we get more assurances that the evidence is there, while they still do not provide real evidence. What we get from the LCG is ridiculous and bombastic claims to prop up the Bible. Sometimes I think this LCG booklet was written for children. But even the Bible tells us to think like adults. "Brothers, stop being childish in your thinking. Be like infants with respect to evil, but think like adults." (I Corinthians 14:20, International Standard Version).
LCG: Scripture boldly asserts that "the word of our God stands forever" and "the word of the Lord endures forever" (Isaiah 40:8; 1 Peter 1:25).
Comment: Once again, they want to impress us with how bold the scriptures are. This does nothing to prove they are true since many bold and opinionated people are liars and many others don't know what they are talking about.
LCG: King David wrote, "His truth endures to all generations" (Psalm 100:5). Yet, down through the centuries, antagonists and critics have tried to undermine, disparage, defy and destroy Scripture, and even mock the God of the Bible.
Comment: Here the LCG seems to be against mocking, but there is a lot of mocking going both ways. The prophet Elijah mocked the prophets of Baal (I Kings 18:27) and Jesus hurled insults at the Pharisees (Matt 23:27). Even the LCG personal correspondence department mocked me when I wrote to ask them questions. So if Bible supporters don't like being mocked, perhaps they should not do it to others. Is this treating others the way we want to be treated? (Matthew 7:12).
Psalm 59:8 "But you, O LORD, laugh at them; you scoff at all those nations."
Prov 1:26 "I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear comes."
Notice how Jesus (God) mocked the Jews. "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean." (Matt 23:27).
LCG: The Bible warns, "Do not be deceived; God is not mocked" (Galatians 6:7).
Comment: Why does God mock others, then say "God is not mocked" if he wants us to treat others the way we want to be treated? Is he setting a bad example?
There are a lot of people who mock the Bible and seem to get away with it. Does that make this verse false?
LCG: The Old Testament records that during the Assyrian invasion of Judah (ca. 700bc), Sennacherib, a pagan Assyrian king, mocked the God of Israel before king Hezekiah and the people of Jerusalem (2 Chronicles 32:9–19). Shortly thereafter, "the Lord sent an angel who cut down every mighty man of valor... in the camp of the king of Assyria. So he [Sennacherib] returned shamefaced to his own land. And when he had gone into the temple of his god, some of his own offspring struck him down with the sword there" (2 Chronicles 32:21–22).
Comment: They are trying to scare people into believing the Bible. This is an old trick of many religions who use the threat of death, suffering, or hellfire to intimidate people.
LCG: Historical records confirm that Sennacherib did not conquer Jerusalem, and that his own sons killed him. Secular history does not explain why this occurred.
Comment: This does not prove the Bible is true. Just because some historical records agree with the Bible does not make the Bible true.
LCG: However, the Bible reveals that dire consequences can arise when doubters and critics mock the real God! Next to the exodus from Egypt, this is one of God's most dramatic interventions in Israel's history, and the facts of secular history support the biblical record.
Comment: Which "facts of seculary history" support the biblical record? The LCG does not provide any facts of history which support the biblical record. After making this statement they talk about a story by Herodotus, but this is a legend, not a fact of history, and the story of Herodotus actually conflicts with the Bible record.
LCG: Incidentally, the Greek historian Herodotus relates that Sennacherib also suffered an embarrassing setback, with supernatural overtones, when his army invaded Egypt and a swarm of field mice chewed up their weapons, causing him to flee from the field near Pelusium with heavy losses (The Histories, 2:141).
Comment: Here is how the story by Herodotus conflicts with the Bible.
In 2 Chron 32:21 the biblical record states that Sennacherib was miraculously driven out of Judah, returned to his own land, went into the temple, and was killed. So, according to the Bible, there is no way he could have invaded Egypt after invading Judah because he was killed right after God (supposedly) drove him back. And there is no way the story of Herodotus could have occured before Sennacherib invaded Judah because during his invasion of Judah he bragged that none of the gods of the other nations that he invaded were able to deliver their peoples from him (v. 15). It does not seem logical that he would have made this boast if his army had already been destroyed by mice when he invaded Egypt.
So if we examine things at a deeper level than that presented by the LCG, we see that the story by Herodotus conflicts with the Bible. Yet they use the story to try to confirm the Bible!
Furthermore, if Sennacherib was defeated "with supernatural overtones" by "a swarm of field mice" when he invaded EGYPT, doesn't this prove that the gods of Egypt were responsible for defeating him (perhaps the Egyptians had a mice god)? Why would the God of the Hebrews defend Egypt? It seems more logical to conclude, if we believe the story of Herodotus, that the intervention was caused by the gods of Egypt!
So the story of Herodotus does not confirm the Bible, and it does not confirm the scripture that says the Hebrew God is not mocked.
LCG: This truth of Scripture—that God will not be mocked—stands confirmed.
Comment: The story of Sennacherib does not "confirm" that the Hebrew God is not mocked because many people today mock the Bible and do not suffer because of it.
Of course the Bible account of this claims God miraculously saved the Jews, but that is only the Bible account.
LCG: In the century after the apostles, historical sources confirm that Celsus, an articulate pagan philosopher, created a major stir when he wrote a blistering attack against the Bible and Christianity. Celsus wrote that biblical teachings were "absurd," that the gospel accounts were "a deception" and that anyone who believed in one God was "deluded" (Is the Bible True?, Sheler, p. 9). The Bible survived, and Christianity spread around the world, but few people today have even heard of Celsus!
Comment: So what? I'm sure many Christians have lived and died, never to be heard of again. And I predict that in another 2000 years, few people will have heard of the LCG.
Islam has many critics also. Yet Islam has survived. Does that mean I should convert to Islam? Of course not. It is a very foolish argument to suggest that survival despite critics is proof that God is behind you.
LCG: Modern biblical critics who have resurrected Celsus' ideas should remember that his attack on Scripture was answered by an early religious scholar named Origen, whose eight-volume Against Celsus gave a point-by-point rebuttal in defense of the Bible.
Comment: This is perhaps the stupidest argument in this booklet so far. It appears that we are expected to believe that Origen correctly refuted Celsus without being told a single thing Origen actually said. I.e. The LCG says Origen won the argument so Origen won the argument! Sorry, that is not good enough for me.
LCG: At the beginning of the 4th century, the Roman emperor Diocletian sought to wipe out the Christian religion. He unleashed a terrible persecution of Christians, and commanded that all Bibles be burned. However, within a few short years a new emperor (Constantine) actually ordered the production of 50 Bibles!
Comment: This proves nothing. The Bible is not the only book to survive persecutions. Christianity is not the only religion to survive persecution, and the "Christians" Diocletian were persecuting were probably not real Christians as the COGs define them.
LCG: During the Middle Ages (ca. 500–1500ad), scholars influenced by pagan philosophy taught that scriptural accounts were merely allegories and should not be taken literally. Their allegorical approach assumed that Bible passages hid a deeper meaning, making the literal meaning unimportant. The Bible survived, but this way of thinking also survives today in many theological schools. The allegorical approach is a very subtle way of undermining the Bible's clear message, because it ignores what the Bible actually says.
Comment: This proves nothing, except that some people take the Bible literally and some don't. We all know that already.
Again, the LCG talks about "the Bible's clear message" because they like to pretend their interpretation is "clear". In fact, it is often far from clear.
LCG: Secular scholars in the 18th century became enthralled by the apparent power of human reason and the new discoveries of science. Regarding human reason as the ultimate authority, and armed with a bias against the supernatural, these critics began to offer speculative theories about the Bible's supposed origins, apparent contradictions and assumed errors.
Comment: The LCG tries to imply that those who demand proof are vain, regard human reason as the ultimate authority, and are biased against the supernatural. They told us not to believe without proof, and now they try to make us seem vain and biased if we are skeptical and demand hard evidence.
Many of the alleged contradictions and errors in the Bible are indeeded merely "apparent" but many are not. The COGs cannot explain them all, they just pretend that they can. When they are shown one they cannot explain they generally refuse to answer. They often use cop-outs like "it's a sin to argue" (once they start losing the "argument" they start to consider it an "argument") or "only those with the spirit of God can understand", etc.
LCG: However, the assumptions and speculations of these critics have not stood the test of time.
Comment: The LCG wants us to think that critics have nothing to offer but assumptions and speculation. This is rubbish. They keep on denegrating the skeptics to undermine their opponents without presenting hard evidence for the Bible.
LCG: In fact, some of their bold pronouncements now appear extremely presumptuous and naive.
Comment: So do many of Herbert Armstrong's Bible-based prohecies that did not pan out. Has the LCG renounced his ministry? Wasn't he extremely presumptuous? Weren't LCG members naive to follow him? Are not the COGs presumptuous for claiming all the other religions of the world and other churches of traditional Christianity are evil and that the COGs are the true sons of God?
LCG: Toward the end of the 18th century, the French philosopher Voltaire predicted that Christianity would be swept from existence within a century. Yet, 50 years after he died, the Geneva Bible Society produced stacks of Bibles in Voltaire's house on his own press (The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict, McDowell, p. 10).
Comment: Just because Volatire was off in his timing does not prove the Bible is true.
If the LCG wants to discredit Voltaire because his prediction did not happen on time, shouldn't they also discredit their founder Herbert Armstrong who made many predictions, setting definite time limits, only to see his predictions did not happen on time? Let's be fair, they can't have it both ways. At least Voltaire did not claim to be an apostle of God.
Here is one (of many) of Armstrong's predictions that was proven wrong when it did not happen when he said it would. In 1967 he wrote the following: "The Day of the Eternal--a time foretold in more than 30 prophecies--is going to strike between 5 and 10 years from now! You will know, then, how real it is. You will wish, then, you had heeded. I am not writing foolishly, but very soberly, on authority of the living CHRIST! (Military Service and War, 1967, p. 54).
Writing on the "authority of Christ" is making prophecy in the name of the Lord. When the Day of the Eternal did not come on schedule, Armstrong was proven to be a false prophet. In Deut 18:22 it says that when someone prophesies in the name of the Lord and his prophecy does not come to pass, the prophet is a false prophet. The penalty was death (v.20).
Herbert Armstrong and some (perhaps all?) of his top ministers were preaching and writing this way in the 1960s. When their prophecies failed people should NOT have given them another chance, but they did. Deut 18:20 does not say "give the false prophet another chance, maybe they will do better next time." It simply says, the penalty is death. End of story. People should have left the WCG after the "5 to 10 years" was up and never looked back. Instead they continued to funnel money into the false prophet's organization, commiting a grave sin by helping him continue his deceptions.
LCG: The facts of history and the discoveries of archaeology make it plain: secular critics' ill-founded pronouncements and theories are intellectual castles built on hot air.
Comment: Because Volatire was off in his timing, this is supposed to prove critics are full of hot air. Well, the COGs teach that Paul was "off in his timing" about the return of Christ (1 Thess 4:17). Does this prove Paul was full of hot air?
They say that Paul was "off in his timing" because it supposedly exonerates HWA for being off in his timing. If Paul could be wrong, under inspiration (which really makes no sense) then it's not a big problem if HWA was wrong. But it is a problem.
I'm sure Voltaire never said his prediction was inspired by God. Armstrong did. Paul did. So who was more full of hot air? Paul was also a false prophet. See our article The Delayed Prophecy Excuse Refuted for more information.
LCG: Over the last 200 years, the rise of biblical criticism spawned many confident assertions by scholars who doubted the inspiration of Scripture. Skeptics at first claimed that since there was no evidence outside the Bible of various people and places mentioned in the Bible, the writers of Scripture must have invented them.
Comment: It is certainly possible that some critics made exaggerated claims. But the Bible and Bible supporters also make exaggerated claims. Just because some critics went too far, does not means all criticisms were wrong or that the Bible is proven true.
LCG: This approach found fertile ground in "progressive" schools of theology, and in secular academic circles. The press and media fed these ideas to society, furthering doubts about the Bible's credibility.
Comment: The LCG is saying that doubts about the Bible are due to invalid claims of critics. What they don't tell you about are the valid claims of critics, only the ones they think they can discredit.
LCG: This doubt and skepticism persists today, even though ongoing archaeological discoveries continue to validate the Bible's historical accuracy, and discredit the skeptics' assumptions!
Comment: So far we have seen that the LCG quotes scholars and scriptures selectively, and I have no doubt that they will treat archaeology the same way.
LCG: As recently as 1992, some scholars were confidently asserting, "There are no literary criteria for believing David to be more historical than Joshua, Joshua more historical than Abraham, and Abraham more historical than Adam" (see "House of David Built on Sand," Biblical Archaeology Review, July/August 1994, pp. 54–55). Yet, just one year later, archaeologists digging in upper Galilee discovered a 9th century bc inscription about the "house of David." Jeffrey Sheler, an award-winning journalist and a religion writer for U.S. News & World Report, wrote: "The fragmentary reference to David was a historical bombshell. Never before had the familiar name of Judah's ancient warrior king ... been found in the records of antiquity outside the pages of the Bible" (Is the Bible True?, p. 60).
Comment: This might help prove David existed but it would not prove the Bible stories about him are true. Nobody ever said everything in the Bible is false, they just said they had not yet found other literary evidence for David outside of the Bible. When they did it was a "bombshell" (supposedly) but this "bombshell" did not prove anything other than that David existed. So what? Many myths are not total fabrications, they are distortions of real events and real people. The "bombshell" sounds impressive but it did nothing to prove the events in the life of David as recorded in the Bible are not myths.
The LCG is trying to impress us with talk of "bombshells" and other bombastic language, but it really proves nothing.
LCG: For decades, critics viewed the biblical story of David and Goliath as a fanciful tale of religious fiction. Yet, recently, "archaeologists digging at the purported biblical home of Goliath [Gath, see 1 Samuel 17:4] have unearthed a shard of pottery bearing an inscription of the Philistine's name, a find they claimed lends historical credence to the Bible's tale of David's battle with the giant" (The London Times, November 13, 2005). This is the oldest Philistine inscription ever discovered, dated to 950bc—within 70 years of the biblical narrative.
Comment: Just because someone had the name Goliath does not prove he was a giant, it does not prove it was the Goliath of the Bible, and it does not prove that David defeated him. There are many people named "John." If I find pottery with the name "John" does it prove everything written about "John" (who might be some other John) is true? Of course not.
LCG: Doubting scholars for years assumed that "there were no Hittites at the time of Abraham, as there were no records of their existence apart from the Old Testament. They must be a myth" (McDowell, p. 11). However, later "archaeological research ... uncovered more than 1,200 years of Hittite civilization" (ibid.).
Comment: Just because Hitties existed does not prove everything written about them in the Bible is true.
LCG: In similar fashion, critics assumed that the biblical patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, were fictional figures from Hebrew folklore. Yet cuneiform tablets discovered in the royal archives of the palace of Mari in northern Syria, dating from the start of the second millennium bc (the approximate time of the patriarchs) mention "such names as Abam-ram (Abraham), Jacob-el and Benjamites" (When Skeptics Ask, Geisler & Brooks, pp. 186–187). All these discoveries support the biblical record and refute the charges of critics.
Comment: These discoveries support the biblical record only insofar as persons with such names existed. How do we know these people were the same Abraham, Jacob and Benjamin mentioned in the Bible? Even if they were, it does not prove that anything written about them in the Bible is true, and the LCG should know that such discoveries certainly do not refute all the charges of critics.
LCG: Scholars skeptical of the Bible have noted the similarity between the Genesis creation account and Babylonian clay tablets describing the creation of the world. These scholars have glossed over major differences in the accounts, and suggested that biblical writers simply borrowed their material from other sources. However, the discovery of more that 17,000 clay tablets at Ebla (in modern Syria), dating from 2500bc, has overturned the critics' theories. The Ebla tablets (which predate the Babylonian creation epic by some 600 years) contain "the oldest known creation accounts outside the Bible ... The creation tablet is strikingly close to that of Genesis, speaking of one being who created the heavens, moon, stars and earth. Parallels show that the Bible contains the older, less embellished version...
Comment: I really don't care if Hebrews got it from Bablyon, if Babylonians got it from the Hebrews, or if they both got it from some earlier source. This is just a distraction. It does not prove the Bible account is true. All it might prove is that the Bible account is older than the Babylonian tradition.
To prove the Bible we must determine if the account of Creation in the Bible is accurate. That is what is important. The fact is that the account of creation in the Bible is not scientific. (We hope to post material on this when we get the time).
LCG: They [the Ebla tablets] destroy the critical belief in the evolution of monotheism from supposed earlier polytheism" (Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, Geisler, p. 208).
Comment: I really don't care if monotheism evolved from polytheism, if polytheism evolved from monotheism, or if neither evolved from the other. All we are interested in is finding proof of the Bible. Rather than giving us proofs of the Bible, the LCG is giving us distractions which discredit some theories held by some scholars. Just beause some scholars were wrong about some detail or another does not prove the Bible is true.
In any case, do the COGs even believe in monotheism? They believe that God consists of two separate beings, God the Father and the Word (Jesus). They do not believe God is one being, and they do not believe in the Trinity (three in one).
LCG: There have been dozens of other remarkable discoveries. The Merneptah Stela describes an Egyptian pharaoh conquering Israel (ca. 1200bc). The Black Obelisk from Nimrud pictures Israelite king Jehu bowing before Assyrian king Shalmaneser III. An inscription near Jerusalem refers to "Joseph, son of Caiaphas" (Caiaphas was the high priest in Jerusalem at the time of Christ's crucifixion; see Matthew 26:57). An inscribed stone from first century Caesarea reads, "Pontius Pilate, the Prefect of Judea" (Pilate was the Roman governor at the time of Jesus' crucifixion; see Matthew 27:2). Such evidence, carved in stone, supports the conclusion that the Bible writers were recording facts and not fiction (see The Signature of God, Jeffrey, pp. 72–74; Is the Bible True?, Sheler, pp. 110–112).
Comment: Nobody ever said everything in the Bible was fiction. All religions have some truth. Even tall tales can be based, in part, on history. This does nothing to prove all of the Bible is true.
There are many movies made today which refer to real events, real people, and real places. Many of these movies are Holywood embellishments of real events and contain a great deal of fabrications and nonsense. They are great for entertainment, but not getting the true story.
To say the Bible is accurate because archaeology shows some of the people in the Bible really existed, is like saying some movie about Jesus is an accurate portrayal of his life because Pilate and Judas appear in the movie. But we all know that movies can be wildly inaccurate, even if they are "based on" a real life story. Even history can be faked.
Is this how the LCG tries to "prove" the Bible?
The scriptures of other religions also refer to real people, places, and events. Does this prove all those scriptures are from God? Does it prove all the stories in them are true? Of course not. So what in the world makes the LCG think that just because the Bible refers to some real persons, places, and events, somehow that proves the Bible is accurate?
Sadly, there are people who fall for this kind of argument. This is why we must be skeptical. To be skeptical is to ask challenging questions and to think.
LCG: The manner in which archaeology has verified the historical accuracy of the Bible has been nothing short of remarkable!
Comment: It is not the slighest bit remarkable if some details of the Bible are true. But the LCG likes to use inflated language to describe quite unimpressive discoveries.
LCG: As noted archaeologist Nelson Glueck has written, "it may be clearly stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a single biblical reference. Scores of archaeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or exact detail historical statements in the Bible" (Rivers in the Desert, Glueck, p. 136).
Comment: The LCG only quotes the scholars they want to quote. Why should our salvation depend on listening to archaeologists, and "knowing" which ones to believe? I.e. which ones to put our faith in.
I would like to know what "exact details" they are referring to in these "scores" of findings. Even if you could prove (say for example) 100 "exact details" (100 is 5 times 20, or five scores) such as 100 people in the Bible really existed, there are a lot more than 100 people referred to in the Bible. Proving that a modest fraction (like 100) of them were real persons would not prove that anything about the Bible is true other than that some fraction of the characters were real. So, while people like Glueck seem to use inflated language (which is probably why the LCG quotes from them) it is really not that impressive, and falls far short of proving the Bible is the word of God, which is what we really need to know, and what the LCG is pretending to prove by calling their booklet The Bible: Fact or Fiction then pretending to answer that question with "exact details".
I also have to seriously question Glueck's claim that "it may be clearly stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a single biblical reference." The LCG interprets the Bible literally (or they try to), so they say man has only been here for 6000 years, and many, probably most, archaeologists disagree. Archaeologists have dated many things they dug up to be older than 6000 years. I don't know if their dates are correct or not, but if the LCG wants to use archaeology to prove the Bible they have to explain, using archaeology, why the dates they don't agree with are wrong and why those they do agree with are correct. Instead they just say "no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a single biblical reference" which is obviously not true.
LCG: Glueck's comments echo the words of another prominent archaeologist, William F. Albright, who stated, "There can be no doubt that archaeology has confirmed the substantial historicity of Old Testament tradition ... The excessive skepticism shown toward the Bible by important historical schools of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries ... has been progressively discredited" (Evidence That Demands a Verdict, McDowell, vol. 1, p. 65). The evidence of history and archaeology defies the critics, and supports Scripture!
Comment: Perhaps some skeptics went too far, and that excessiveness might well have been discredited, but the Bible has also been discredited, and the LCG does not tell us that. The LCG only quotes the scholars they want to quote.
LCG: How can we know whether the text of the Bible has been preserved accurately down through the centuries? Is it logical to believe that a book written by more than 40 authors in different locations over 1,500 years can be trustworthy? Can we prove that the text we have today is reliable?
Comment: No. The text has been proven unreliable. See Bart Ehrman's books and many similar books.
LCG: If the Bible is the inspired word of an Almighty God who encourages people to "check the facts," we should expect to find convincing evidence that Scripture has been preserved carefully and accurately over time. Such evidence is available—in Scripture itself!
Comment: Once again, the proof of the Bible is supposedly in the Bible. A circular argument.
LCG: Evidence can also be found in Jewish historical literature, in the writings of early Church scholars and in a multitude of modern sources. The evidence for the accurate transmission of the Bible is remarkable, overwhelming and, indeed, irrefutable!
Comment: Once again, instead of presenting the proof, they just claim the proof is out there. In other words, believe it because they say to believe it.
LCG: The Apostle Paul revealed where to find evidence of Scripture's preservation when he wrote, "What advantage then has the Jew ...? to them were committed the oracles of God" (Romans 3:1–2).
Comment: Once again, the proof of the Bible is supposedly in the Bible. A circular argument.
Can we really trust the Jews? Jesus called them "children of the devil" (John 8:44).
Well, we can't trust the early church scholars who gave us the NT either, because they were members and ministers of the church that the COGs refer to as Satan's churches. Why trust Satan's men? They were also children of the devil.
LCG: Biblical scholar Bernard Ramm comments, "The Jews preserved it [the Old Testament] as no other manuscript has ever been preserved" (McDowell, p. 9). When God revealed His laws to their ancestors, they were given a mandate: "You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it ... be careful to observe them [the statutes of God] ... teach them to your children and your grandchildren" (Deuteronomy 4:1–10). History clearly shows how this has occurred.
Comment: The LCG quotes only the scholars they want to quote.
LCG: The Bible records that God gave His laws directly to Moses (ca. 1400bc), and that "when Moses had completed writing the words of this law in a book... Moses commanded the Levites... Take this Book of the Law, and put it beside the ark of the covenant" (Deuteronomy 31:24–26). This ark was a box containing stone tablets of the law carved by God and the writings of Moses (see Deuteronomy 10:5). It was kept in the Tabernacle, and later in the Temple at Jerusalem. The Bible shows Ezra the priest reading and explaining the "Book of the Law of Moses" to Jews who had returned to Jerusalem from Babylon in the fifth century bc (Nehemiah 8:1–12).
Comment: Once again, the LCG quotes the Bible to prove the Bible.
LCG: By 150bc, there is even evidence from extra-biblical sources that the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament) was attributed to Moses (The Origin of the Bible, Bruce, et al., p. 56).
Comment: 150 B.C. is a LONG time after Moses. This is not reliable!
The LCG omits mentioning that these sources were probably just the "children of the devil", and that the "books of Moses" were edited along the way by unknown (?) persons (i.e. we have no way of knowing if these persons were reliable).
LCG: In the first century ad, Jesus and the apostles also quoted from and referred to the books of Moses as inspired Scripture (see Mark 12:19–27; John 1:17; Romans 10:5). Thus, the Bible provides its own account of how Scripture was preserved and used over generations.
Comment: Once again, the LCG quotes the Bible to prove the Bible.
LCG: Evidence also exists from the Bible, as well as from historical sources, that the Old Testament consisted of specific books that were widely recognized as divinely inspired. The list of books recognized as inspired became the canon of the Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible. In the first century ad, both Jesus (Luke 24:44) and the Jewish teacher Philo referred to three major divisions of the Old Testament canon: the Law, the Prophets and the Writings (see Bruce, p. 60).
Comment: At best it tells us what the major divisions were. It does not tell us which books were in the OT and it does not prove these books were from God. I'm sure lots of other religious books had divisions. Is that supposed to prove they were from God?
LCG: Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian, acknowledged that the Hebrew Bible consisted of 22 books—essentially the same text which, divided differently, forms the 39 books of our modern Old Testament—and that these books "have all been accepted as canonical from time immemorial" (ibid., p. 61).
Comment: So what? This was not until after Christ. This was more than 1000 years after men like Moses, Abraham, and David. That is a big gap in time. Further, not all experts agree with Josephus that the canon was settled from "time immemorial" (whatever that means) or that it was ever settled. The LCG makes the issue seem much simpler than it really is. They just want people to listen to the experts that they agree with and ingore the others.
LCG: The fact that 22 books of the Old Testament and 27 books of the New Testament comprise the 49 books of the complete Bible (49 is considered a number of completion) indicates that a divine mind was guiding this process. The Bible is not just a haphazard collection of books!
Comment: So what? The Protestants who decided on the books of the Bible were not dumb. They knew about the number seven. They could have selected 49 books for that reason. Furthermore, the Protestants and Catholics do not agree on which books belong in the Bible. So should we believe the Great Harlot or her Harlot Daughters? One is not much better or worse than the other.
Now, if I write a book with 49 chapters, does it imply God guided me? This is not very stong evidence, it is extremely weak. Any fraud could take the trouble to use 49 books or chapters.
LCG: Modern scholars generally agree that the Hebrew Scriptures were recognized as inspired from an early date.
Comment: Once again, when scholars agree with them, the LCG uses their words as proof. When scholars disagree with them, they ridicule the scholars as faithless "cynics". From what I've seen, this is very typical of other COGs as well.
LCG: According to one source: "The evidence supports the theory that the Hebrew canon was established well before the late first century ad, more than likely as early as the fourth century bc and certainly no later than 150bc" (McDowell, p. 26).
Comment: In other words, even the scholars the LCG prefers to quote are not even sure if the cannon was settled before 150 B.C.. This was over 1000 years after some of the books were written, and about three hundred years after the last OT book was written! In my view, to call this an "early date" is a lie. This is very late in the game! I don't see how anyone can consider that an early date--hundreds of years later.
There are several NT verses that quote scriptures that are nowhere found in the Bible! This shows that some NT writers used a different canon than the OT.
Of course, the COGs never mention that.
LCG: Another source states: "No one doubts that the Pentateuch was both complete and canonical by the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, in the fifth century bc... such evidence implies that by the beginning of the Christian era the identity of all the [Old Testament] canonical books was well known and generally accepted" (The Origin of the Bible, Bruce, et al., p. 56).
Comment: From the time of Moses till Ezra was still a huge gap of hundreds of years. A lot can go wrong in that time.
Generally accepted by who? The "children of the devil"?
LCG: It is worth noting that none of the biblical writers or early Church scholars accepted as inspired the apocryphal books written in the inter-testamental period.
Comment: They seem to be saying that if a book of the Bible is quoted by another book in the Bible, the first book is inspired. But if that really does prove a book is inspired, then the canon is missing many books because there are books referred to in the Bible that are not part of the accepted Bible canon.
Joshua 10:13 "And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher?" The accepted canon does not contain the book of Jasher.
See here for a list of other "lost books" referred to in the Bible. There are quite a few.
LCG: But how reliable are the Old Testament books that we have today? Has the text of the Old Testament been transmitted to us accurately? Consider the evidence. "In Judaism, a succession of scholars was charged with standardizing and preserving the biblical text" during a period extending from about 500bc to about 1000ad (McDowell, pp. 73–77).
Comment: 500 BC to 1000 AD was only 1500 years. Bible events go back 6000 years. There were periods of history when the coping was very slopply. But they don't mention that! They quote history selectively.
Also, this was only the Old Testament, preserved by the Jews, and they did not start this accurate copying until hundreds of years after many of the events discussed in the books (supposedly) took place. A lot can go wrong in hundreds of years.
LCG: The earliest scribes, the Sopherim (400bc to 200ad), worked with Ezra and "were regarded as the Bible custodians until the time of Christ" (ibid.). They were followed by the Talmudists (100ad to 500ad) and finally by the Masoretes (500ad to 1000ad). Numerous accounts confirm that these scribes copied the biblical texts with extreme care, counting the number of words in a book, counting the number of times a letter appeared in a book, and even pointing out the middle letter in the Pentateuch and the middle letter in the Bible!
Comment: Actually, this is misleading. Many errors still crept in. There are many differences in the manuscripts that we have today. Not all copiests used "extreme care" and many errors were made as a result.
LCG: Because of such careful attention to detail in the preparation and transmission of Old Testament manuscripts, modern scholars acknowledge that "the Hebrew Bible has been transmitted with the most minute accuracy ... it may safely be said that no other work of antiquity has been so accurately transmitted ... [it is] little short of miraculous" (Evidence That Demands a Verdict, McDowell, pp. 55–56).
Comment: Not really. There are many scriptures that have not been transmitted accurately. At best it shows the Jews were at times diligent, but it does not prove a miracle took place.
Besides, getting it close is not good enough. The Bible says EVERY letter must be perfect (Matthew 5:18) and that is certainly not the case.
LCG: The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947 proved just how accurately the Jews have preserved and transmitted the Old Testament text. Before the discovery of the scrolls in a cave near the Dead Sea, the oldest copy of the Hebrew text dated from around 1000ad. The newly discovered scrolls dated to the first century bc—about 1,000 years earlier!
Comment: This is long before many of the books of the Bible were written, so it does not prove all the books were accurately copied, just a few at best. Even the books discovered in the dead sea could have been corrupted before then.
LCG: The scrolls contained two nearly complete copies of the book of Isaiah, which proved "to be word for word identical with our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95 percent of the text. The 5 percent of the variations consisted of obvious slips of the pen and variations in spelling" (When Skeptics Ask, Geisler & Brooks, pp. 158–159).
Comment: Frankly, 95% accuracy stinks. It is terrible. They portray this as a victory but it is a sickening defeat for Bible literalists.
According to Matt 5:18, Jesus said, "I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." That is the Bible standard. He did not say 95% was good enough. It has to be 100% or the Bible is not true.
Further, it was only the books of Isaiah that were "accurate". What about the rest of the books? No doubt, they were even worse. If they were better, why didn't the LCG tell us about them?
Is a 5% failure rate acceptable? If one rejects 5% of the doctrines of the LCG they will probably throw that person out of their church.
LCG: The Dead Sea Scrolls provide solid evidence that the text of the Old Testament has not changed in more than 2,000 years!
Comment: This is not true. They just said that 5% did change. That is a lot of changes! Jesus (supposedly) said that not ONE word would change. Not one. If the dead sea scrolls are the standard to go by, Jesus was wrong.
Even if the Bible was transmitted with 100% accuracy it does not prove that the Bible is from God in the first place.
LCG: The reliability of the New Testament rests on a wealth of material that is available.
Comment: There is a wealth of material, but it does not prove what the LCG says it proves.
LCG: Scholars readily acknowledge, "There are earlier and more manuscripts of the New Testament than of any other book in the ancient world" (Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, Geisler, p. 93). These manuscripts clearly reveal that the New Testament "has been transmitted to us with no, or next to no, variation" (Evidence That Demands a Verdict, McDowell, p. 44).
Comment: This is misleading. Jesus said the transmission would be perfect (Matthew 5:18). That is the standard we must judge by. Close is not good enough. By saying it was close, they are proving the Bible is not true, and that God failed to preserve "his word"!
LCG: More than 24,000 manuscript copies of the New Testament in Greek, Latin and other languages provide evidence about the text. The earliest New Testament manuscripts date within a few decades or a few centuries of the apostolic writers. By comparison, there are only 643 manuscripts of Homer's Iliad (written in the 8th century bc), and the earliest copy in existence today dates from about 400bc—some 500 years after it was composed. Only 10–20 copies of writings of Julius Caesar, the Roman historian Tacitus, and the Greek historian Herodotus exist today, with the oldest manuscripts copied 1,000 years after the originals were composed (McDowell, pp. 39–43). Compared against the New Testament, no other document from the ancient world has left such a wealth of material documenting the reliable transmission of its text.
Comment: Comparing to Homer or Caesar makes no sense. Homer and Caesar did not claim to offer salavation, did not claim to have the words of God, and did not claim their words would be transmitted PERFECTLY. If the Bible is true we must go by divine standards of perfection, not the standards of Homer or Caesar. Nobody is betting their eternal life on Homer or Caesar. If my eternal life depends on it, I need and expect perfection, and I think I have a right to expect that, just as the Bible promised.
Note that "The earliest New Testament manuscripts date within a few decades or a few centuries of the apostolic writers." That is a lot of time during which these manuscripts could have been altered. For all we know, the first copy ever made from the original could have been altered, the original copy could have been burned, and all existing copies made from the altered copy. The truth is we really have no way of knowing what the original said.
LCG: In addition to the many available manuscripts, early Christian writers quoted the New Testament so extensively that almost the entire New Testament could be reconstructed from other sources.
Comment: Which version of the NT can be construted from other sources? Even the manuscripts do not agree with each other, so there is no way that the various quotes from these manuscripts will agree. Therefore it is misleading to suggest that the NT can be accurately constructed from other sources.
Even if the NT could be constructed perfectly, we have no reason to think that we have the right books in the first place.
LCG: Critics have theorized that unknown authors composed the gospels centuries after the apostles.
Comment: The fact is that we really do not know who wrote many of these books. This is not a mere theory, it is essentially a fact. Don't let the LCG tell you otherwise. Read Forged by Bart Ehrman.
LCG: Yet the earliest fragment of John's gospel is dated 130ad, about 30 years after the apostle's death.
Comment: They only mention one book of the Bible, and it was 30 years after John died (probably 40 years after he wrote, supposedly in 90 AD). That is a long time, and it is only a fragment. The apostacy was already in full swing by 50 AD. False teachers were everywhere. And the truth is, we don't even know if John actually wrote that book. It was merely written by a man claiming to have the name of John; we really don't even know if it was the apostle John.
LCG: This supports the traditional view that John wrote his gospel towards the end of the first century (see McDowell, pp. 39–47).
Comment: This merely a traditional view. I don't want traditions, most or all of which were passed on by apostates, not true men of God. Many of these traditions are legends that even the COGs don't believe (like the legend that Peter went to Rome and founded what became the Catholic church or that Jesus had long hair). The Bible says the traditions of men are vain (Jer 10:3). Jesus condemned the Jews for holding to their traditions while laying aside the commandments of God (Mar 7:8). The COGs are always criticizing "traditional Christianity". So why should we trust their traditions?
LCG: Also, "there is no evidence from the first two Christian centuries that the gospels ever circulated without the names of the authors attached" (Sheler, p. 33).
Comment: The absence of proof that the gospels were circulated without the names attached, does not mean it didn't happen. The onus of proof is on the Bible supporters. Further, a forger would have put the wrong name on a book as soon as he wrote it, so again, this proves nothing.
Also, having a name attached to a book does not prove the book was inspired or that faithful men actually wrote the book. According to Ehrman, many books of the NT were forged.
LCG: One scholar has observed: "If we compare the present state of the New Testament text with that of any other ancient writing, we must... declare it marvelously correct" (McDowell, p. 45).
Comment: Untrue. At best they can say it was transmitted accurately. That does not mean it is correct. There is a big difference, and the LCG ought to know that. Shame on them for saying otherwise.
Further, the Bible standard is absolute perfection. Comparing to other ancient writings is an irrelevant distraction.
LCG: Another prominent scholar stated: "It cannot be too strongly asserted that in substance the text of the Bible is certain: Especially is this the case with the New Testament ... This can be said of no other ancient book in the world" (ibid.).
Comment: Once again, they only quote the scholars they want to quote. This is not proof. There are always conflicting views held by scholars and they offer no proof for the claim that "in substance the text of the Bible is certain". Our salvation must depend on something more sure than unproven claims and the assurances of men. But we don't seem to have anything better than that. Sorry, but that is the truth.
LCG: For decades, critics have charged that the books of the New Testament were not written until a century or more after Jesus and the apostles lived, and were probably pieced together by anonymous authors. Such a late composition would allow time for myths and legends to creep into the text.
Comment: The LCG admits that a 100 year delay would allow myths and legends to creep in, but what about the 500 and more years between the days of Moses, Abraham, and David and the time of Ezra when the OT canon was just starting to take shape (see above)!? When the LCG discussed the OT they just glossed over the fact that myths and legends could have crept in during that time. As far as the NT goes, myths, legends, and false teachings were already circulating when the book of Galations was written, said to be in 50 AD, just 20 years after Christ! Galations chapter one says false teachers were already preaching another gospel and perverting the truth. This was before many of the books of the NT were written! Just 20 years after Christ, it was already too late to comprise a reliable canon of the NT--false teachers were already poisoning the well.
The unfortunate truth is that there were so many false teachers, myths, and legends so early on that there is no way to determine with certainty the truth of many events in the life of Christ, or what his teachings really were. The same goes for much of the OT where the gap was not just 20 to 100 years but about 500 years!
LCG: Some progressive theologians and modern authors, as in The DaVinci Code, also assert that the books of the New Testament were selected by politically motivated committees, and that valuable books were deliberately omitted, thereby compromising the Bible's accuracy and value.
Comment: The The DaVinci Code is a novel. It was probably never intended to be a scholarly work. Is the LCG trying to discredit scholars because of a work of fiction that everyone recognizes as a work of fiction? If so, this "guilt by false association" is not a fair argument to discredit their opponents.
The determination of the canon was a complex process, it was not as simple as a vote from a committee, but the LCG cannot honestly say that politics and committees never came into it. They gloss over some very damning historical events when they do.
A significant step in the determination of the canon took place when a pagan emperor called church leaders together to vote on which books to accept and which to rule out.
Clearly the true God was not behind this process. Clearly, God would not use a pagan emperor to decide who to invite to a conference to determine the canon. God would not use the method of voting (which is nowhere approved in the Bible), and God would not use apostate ministers to determine any matter of relevance to his true church, and certainly not something as important as the canon of the Bible.
The Bible says it is a shame if church members cannot settle even lesser matters like personal disputes among themselves and go to outsiders to make those judgments.
In I Cor 6:1-6 we read: "[1] Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints? [2] Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? [3] Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life? [4] So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church? [5] I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren, [6] but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers?" (NASB).
LCG: However, the internal evidence of the New Testament books, the facts of history and the weight of modern scholarship all refute these ideas!
Comment: There is no such thing as "internal evidence" for the truth of the Bible. The best that Bible proponents can hope for by examining internal "evidence" is that the Bible will be free of contradictions. But the Bible is not free of contradictions. Even if it were, this would not prove it was inspired or true. Secular works and works of fiction can also be free of contradictions. This is not real "evidence"; just internal consistency.
Many Bible contradictions are exposed on the web. Many of the alleged contradictions can be refuted, but many cannot.
The internal "evidence", history and scholarship all prove the opposite of what the LCG says they do. The COGs do such a through job of convincing their members that the critics have nothing to offer, that their members never read for themselves what the critics say. So the members remain trapped in the COGs.
LCG: Today, most credible scholars concur that "the New Testament canon with the Gospels and most of Paul's Epistles was formed by the end of the first century ... The attested date for the canonical Gospels is no later than 60–100" ad (Geisler, p. 520).
Comment: This is merely speaking of some books, not all the NT. And note that these scholars say that only "most" of Paul's letters were part of the canon by the end of the first century. This means that some of Paul's letters were not part of the canon until long after he was dead!
If God gave inspired writings to Paul, then Paul would have known it as soon as he wrote them and would have told the church they were part of the canon right away. The church would have recognized it as the word of God right away (I Thess 2:13). But if it was not until decades later that the church finally "recognized" what belonged in the canon, they could not have gotten that information from Paul, who would have been the only correct source. And after Paul was dead they could not go back and ask him!
As soon as God inspired a new book, it would have been added to the canon right away, not decades later. The Thessalonians recognized that Paul's words were really "the word of God" immediately, "when you [Thessalonians] received" them (I Thess 2:13, NASB).
The only "early church" that was adding books to their canon decades later would have been the early apostate church, not the early true church. We have to be careful when people talk about "the early church." The true church would not have received books from God, forgot them, then added them back a few decades later.
It gets even worse. According to Ehrman's book Forged, many books of the NT were indeed forgeries. We can never trust men.
LCG: Neither Luke's gospel nor the book of Acts (also written by Luke) mention the 70ad destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, which was for Jews the most significant event of the century. Indeed, no New Testament author mentions the destruction of the Temple, which strongly suggests early authorship of the New Testament canon.
Comment: Even the COGs say the book of Revelation was written after the temple was destroyed and yet it does not mention the destruction of the temple. So what makes them think other books of the Bible written after 70 AD would mention it?
Besides, if a forger wanted people to think his book was written before the temple was destroyed, he would just omit mentioning the destruction of the temple. So it proves nothing. The book could still have been forged. Forgers were not stupid so why would they have made it obvious their works were forgeries?
The books of the NT were mostly epistles on Christian living. It makes no sense to suggest that books on Christian living and doctrine should be expected to mention historical events like the destruction of the temple.
The destruction of the temple might have been the most significant event for Jews, but Jesus's disciples were religiously Christians, not Jews. The most significant events for them were his life, death, and (alleged) ressurection, as well as his many alleged miracles. So there is no reason to think they would write about the destruction of the temple. Further, most of the NT books were written for gentiles, not for Jewish converts.
Even if the books were written before 70 AD it does not prove they were inspired by God.
LCG: The New Testament books themselves reveal that the authors recognized which writings God had inspired, and belonged in the canon. The Apostle Paul wrote that "the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord" (1 Corinthians 14:37). Paul wrote that the teachings of the apostles were divinely inspired and were to be read in the churches, "because when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you welcomed it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God" (1 Thessalonians 2:13; 5:27). Peter warned that those who were twisting Paul's writings were twisting "the Scriptures" (2 Peter 3:15–16).
Comment: Using the Bible to prove the Bible is circular reasoning.
LCG: Scholars in the early centuries of the Church accepted the apostles' writings as Scripture, but they "all draw a clear distinction between their own [writings] and the inspired, authoritative apostolic writings" (Bruce, p. 71). This argues strongly that the New Testament canon was recognized very early in Church history.
Comment: These scholars "in the early ... church" were in the early apostate church, not the early true church.
Also, "centuries" is not "very early" but very late, and the "church history" they are talking about is the history of the apostate church.
LCG: Tertullian, a religious historian who wrote in the early 200s, appears to be the first writer to call Christian Scripture the "New Testament." This is significant, because it "placed the New Testament Scripture on a level of inspiration and authority with the Old Testament" (Bruce, p. 66). From the 300s we have records showing that the New Testament canon consisted of 27 books—the same books we have today.
Comment: Notice how the LCG, part of the "true church" regards the history of the early apostate church as their own history and the canon of the early apostate church as their own canon. In other words, they are in effect admitting they are part of the system of the world's apostate churches! They do not distinguish the early true church from the early apostate church.
I would also like to know by what authority Tertullian (who was famous for being one of the earliest promoters of the Trinity) placed the NT on the same level of authority as the OT. To have that authority he would need to be an apostle rank in the true church. If the LCG follows his "authority" they are following the authority of a heretic. Tertullian's ideas were "at first rejected as heresy by the church in the eastern Roman Empire." (Wikipedia, July 2011).
LCG: A letter written in 367ad by Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, provides the earliest documentation of the exact 27 books of the New Testament canon. His letter, which was "designed to eliminate once and for all the use of certain apocryphal books," warns: "Let no one add to these; let nothing be taken away" (Bruce, p. 74). Later, in 397ad, a church council in Carthage decreed that "aside from the canonical Scriptures [which the council listed as 27 books] nothing is to be read in church under the Name of Divine Scriptures" (Bruce, p. 74). The clear purpose was to identify which books were part of the inspired New Testament canon, and to eliminate the use of apocryphal literature.
Comment: The truth is that none of these people were true Christians as true Christians are understood by the COGs. They were all apostates, so their opinions are worthless. Furthermore, this was extrememly late in the game. A lot of corruption of scripture could have happened in the 300 plus years since Christ died.
Basically, the LCG is showing that they have no divine authority for the books they use. They must rely on the "authority" of apostates, the same deceivers the NT itself repeatedly warns us about.
The COGs flatly reject the authority of all other churches, but when it comes to the Bible itself, they accept that authority, not because it makes any sense to do so, but because they have no other choice if they want to follow the Bible at all.
LCG: Just what are the apocryphal books? Why were they an issue of controversy in the early Church? Are they relevant today? The "Apocrypha" (which means hidden or concealed) refers to books that neither the Jews nor the early Church ever accepted as inspired or as part of the canon (see Bruce, pp. 79–94; Geisler, pp. 28–34).
Comment: Again, the "early church" they refer to is the early apostate church. Why don't they quote the early true church? Because there are no such records. We simply do not know which books were used by the true church (assuming there was a true church).
LCG: Most apocryphal books date to the inter-testamental period, and were written by anonymous authors or under the name of a person or a place named in Scripture. These books do not claim to be inspired.
Comment: Many books in the NT were also written by anonomous authors, were forged, or do not claim to be inspired.
LCG: They contain no predictive prophecies, but instead contain historical and geographical errors and promote fanciful ideas and false doctrines that contradict canonical Scripture.
Comment: The same can be said about many books in the NT itself!
Just what are fanciful ideas? Many miracles could be called fanciful ideas.
The LCG calls "false doctrines" those which contradict the canon--as it was determined by apostates!
LCG: Jesus and the New Testament writers never acknowledged the Apocrypha as Scripture. "No canonic list or church council accepted the Apocrypha for nearly the first four centuries" (Geisler, p. 33).
Comment: We do not know what Jesus said because we do not have an independent reliable source for his words.
LCG: Although some apocryphal books were published along with canonical books in the Septuagint (a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures produced by 70 scholars in Alexandria ca. 250bc), this translation was not supervised by scribes of the Judaic tradition, who had their centers in Tiberias and Babylon.
Comment: So what? Once again, they pick and chose which scholars or traditions of men to follow. Jesus condemned the Jews for their traditions.
LCG: Josephus, writing in the first century ad, specifically excluded apocryphal books from the Hebrew canon when he wrote, "we have... but only twenty-two books, which are justly believed to be divine" (Against Apion, 1:8).
Comment: What makes Josephus the ultimate source? Nothing. He is just another scholar.
LCG: Philo, a first century Jewish teacher in Alexandria, "quoted the Old Testament prolifically from virtually every canonical book. However, he never once quoted from the Apocrypha as inspired" (Geisler, p. 32). Prominent early writers such as Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius of Alexandria and Jerome all rejected the apocryphal books as inauthentic. In fact, it was Jerome (who prepared the Latin Vulgate Bible ca. 400ad) who first used the term Apocrypha when referring to books that were not considered part of the inspired biblical canon and should not be used to establish doctrine. Jerome disputed with the theologian Augustine, who felt that the apocryphal books were inspired and should be included in the canon, apparently because they had been included in the Septuagint.
Comment: Once again, they pick and chose which scholars or traditions of men to follow. This is an argument between one set of apostate teachers and another. This is not where "the true church" should be getting its doctrines!
Frankly, the LCG is selectively quoting scholars because they want to prove the Bible is true. The onus of proof is on them, but they are biased. I'm sure the people they quote from are also, in general, biased men who want to prove the Bible is true. Why should I trust Geisler, or Bruce, or Josephus, or any of the other people the LCG quotes?
LCG: The Apocryphal books became a major issue during the Reformation, when Protestants (following Jerome's thinking) rejected the Apocrypha as uninspired. However, at the Council of Trent in 1546, Roman Catholic leaders (following Augustine's ideas) declared those books part of the New Testament canon. This was an attempt by the Roman church to counter the influence of Martin Luther and other reformers who were teaching against celibacy, prayers for the dead, and purgatory—ideas that do not come from canonical Scripture but are found in some apocryphal books. Yet this was not the end of the controversy over apocryphal writings.
Comment: Once again, this is an argument between one set of apostate teachers and another. Neither group is to be trusted.
LCG: In 1945, a group of books commonly called "Gnostic gospels" were found near Nag Hammadi, an Egyptian town north of Luxor, on the Nile. Gnosticism encompassed a collection of heretical ideas that early Church leaders attributed to Simon the Sorcerer (see Acts 8:9–25; Geisler, p. 274). Gnostic writings contain purported "secret sayings" of Christ that differ dramatically from His New Testament teachings. In the Gospel of Thomas, Jesus flies into a fit of rage and causes a child who has offended Him to wither (3:1–3). In another work, Jesus makes clay birds on the Sabbath; when His parents correct Him, He claps His hands and the birds fly away. The Gospel of Philip suggests that Christ had a romantic relationship with Mary Magdalene. The Gospel of Mary asserts that Mary was the real leader of Christ's disciples.
Comment: This just goes to show how many lies and false gospels were circulating, and to think that apostates were able to sort out the truth about 300 or 400 AD is simply not realistic.
LCG: Early Church leaders denounced the Gnostic writings as spurious and heretical.
Comment: Early church leaders also denounced Tertullian but the LCG still defers to the "authority" of Tertullian.
LCG: Yet modern biblical critics, along with revisionist theologians, creative writers and mystical New Agers, have resurrected these "alternative" gospels and present them as equally credible as canonical Scripture.
Comment: Perhaps we can say they are equally unreliable rather than "equally credible."
LCG: Dan Brown, author of the widely read fictional novel The DaVinci Code, draws heavily on the heretical ideas of Gnostic writings, as well as on occult, pagan goddess worship and mysticism. In his novel, he "makes the case that Mary Magdalene was ... a strong independent figure, patron of Jesus, cofounder of his movement, his only believer in his greatest hour of need, author of her own Gospel, his romantic partner, and the mother of his child. To the millions of women who feel slighted, discriminated against, or unwelcome in churches of all faiths today, the novel is a chance to see early religious history in an entirely different light ... The DaVinci Code opens everyone's eyes to a startlingly different view of the powerful role of women in the birth of Christianity. These themes have become mainstream at Harvard's divinity school and other intellectual centers" (Secrets of the Code, Bernstein, p. xxvii).
Comment: This is a strawman argument. Everyone knows the The DaVinci Code is a novel, so why bother trying to refute it? This is not relevant to whether the books in the Protestant/COG Bible are from God. What it does show is how much politics (e.g. feminism in this case) enters into religion. It has always been this way.
LCG: When Dan Brown makes his leading characters say, "almost everything our fathers taught us about Christ is false" and, "The Bible is a product of man, my dear, not God," he is promoting an agenda and world view that seeks to undermine and discredit the Bible, and the Jesus Christ of the Bible. Though the plot of The DaVinci Code appears to "advocate a courageous search for truth at any price, its real goal is to undermine one of the fundamental characteristics of the Christian faith—the belief that the original message of the Gospel, enshrined in the Bible, is the unique, inspired word of God" (Cracking the Code, Garlow & Jones, p. 72). The real danger of books like The DaVinci Code comes from doubts planted in the minds of people who lack historical and biblical knowledge. For such people, the fiction of apocryphal writings can appear to be fact, which leads to deception about the true nature of inspired Scripture. One of the primary reasons for public declarations about what books comprised the canons of the Old and New Testaments was to clearly distinguish between inspired books and the false and misleading writings of the Gnostics.
Comment: The LCG is not proving the Bible is true. They are merely stating (without proper proof) that those who don't share their perspective of the Bible "lack historical and Bible knowledge" etc. They act like they know more than they really do. Claiming the gnostics are wrong (which I would agree with) does not prove the Protestant/COG Bible is the correct one.
LCG: Today, many people live in a materialistic world of affluence and abundance. More people enjoy a higher standard of living today than at any other time in human history. Yet with more money in our pockets and more time on our hands, millions of people still find life empty and meaningless. More and more people today are finding that money, material things and searching for the ultimate experience simply do not provide lasting happiness, remove the emptiness or provide meaningful answers to the big questions of life: Why was I born? Why am I here? Why do I exist? What is the real purpose of life? What happens when I die?
Comment: Searching for the truth in the COGs was the most meaningless and depressing experience in my life. They promised me answers to the big questions of life, but in the end I had to admit it was all nonsense and lies. It ruined my life, and left me none the wiser on the big questions. I did however, learn just how deceived and deceitful churches and their members can be. I learned to be much more careful about drawing conclusions about anything. That is why I am a skeptic today.
LCG: Those who take time to look beyond themselves soon notice the tremendous inequities in our modern world, and wonder: Why do millions of human beings suffer from a lack of food, lack of fresh water, lack of sanitation and inadequate shelter? Why are so many people exploited and abused by corrupt leaders in failing countries? Why are wars and deliberate acts of horrific violence and terrorism proliferating around the world? Why is there no peace? Millions want a better world, but know they cannot make it happen. Why, then, does God fail to intervene—if indeed there is a God?
Comment: The Bible does not have the true answers to these questions. Probably nobody does.
I could have had a good life, but following the COGs made me POOR. It is very hypocritical for COG leaders to exploit people and then pontificate on all the poverty in the world due to corrupt leaders.
LCG: Few people find satisfaction in the vague answers they hear from most religious leaders and secular philosophers. To hear that human beings are merely "trousered apes"—nothing more than bags of DNA struggling to survive in a purposeless universe, awaiting eternal nothingness at death—does not provide an inspiring reason to live.
Comment: I would rather believe the painful truth and make the best of it than live a life of delusion in a COG. False hope is not the answer.
LCG: On the other hand, it seems like purposeless fantasy to believe that the goal of life is to spend eternity sitting on a cloud, playing a harp. To hear that "God is love"—and then to witness all the evil and inequality in the world—simply does not add up. Tragically, many today have been led to believe that these answers are "as good as it gets."
But this is nonsense! Most people who assume that these are the best answers to life's big questions have never heard the real answers that God recorded in the Bible! Many theologians either do not know or do not believe what the Bible actually says about life's big questions. Because of our society's prejudice against the supernatural, fostered by biblical scholars who do not believe in the personal and all-powerful God of the Bible, millions have been conditioned to be skeptical of whatever Scripture might reveal about these subjects. However, the Bible provides real answers to life's big questions!
Comment: The COGs think they have the answers but they don't. They only have theories about God that they cannot really prove. All they can offer is false hope.
LCG: Contrary to popular modern notions that life emerged from hot slimy pools of pre-biotic soup (akin to an idea espoused by pagan Greek philosophers) and that human beings evolved from an ape-like ancestor (as postulated by the disciples of Charles Darwin), the Bible reveals that God created human beings in His own image (Genesis 1:26–28).
Comment: One does not have to choose between the Bible and evolution. Some reject both. To suggest that there are only two options is a logical error.
LCG: Whether or not you can believe this statement will depend on whether you can accept the plentiful evidence that the Bible is truly the word of God.
Comment: Plentiful evidence? Nonsense.
LCG: According to Scripture, human beings were not created to amuse the gods, as some ancient philosophers assumed. The Bible reveals that God created humans so that they could learn to manage the earth (Genesis 1:26–28; 2:15), and build character by learning to discern right from wrong (Genesis 2:16–17). According to Scripture, God established the institutions of marriage and family (Genesis 2:18–24). He also established roles in marriage and revealed important guidelines so that these divinely ordained institutions would function smoothly and successfully (Matthew 19:3–9; Ephesians 5:22–33; 6:1–4; 1 Timothy 2:8–15; 1 Peter 3:1–7).
Comment: Bible theology is a well developed collection of theories that gradually evolved in the minds of men.
LCG: The reason for the biblical emphasis on learning to manage our own lives, and on functioning smoothly in marriage and family, is that we have been created to become members of God's spiritual family (see Romans 8:15–17; Hebrews 2:5–11; 1 John 3:1–3).
Comment: The COGs have torn apart (through church splits, excommunications, abusive ministers, etc) many marriages and families, yet they talk like they have the answers to marriage and family issues. This is hypocrisy.
LCG: If we qualify to become members of that spiritual family, we will reign with Jesus Christ when He returns to establish the kingdom of God on earth (see Revelation 1:4–6; 5:10). The Bible, when properly understood, clearly reveals that we do not fly off to heaven when we die (see John 3:13; Acts 2:29, 34; 13:36). When you understand what Scripture actually reveals about the purpose of life, you can begin to understand why the teachings of today's "mainstream" Christianity are not very satisfying or convincing. To learn more about the real purpose of life as it is revealed in Scripture, request our free booklet, Your Ultimate Destiny.
Comment: Rather than properly proving the Bible is from God, the LCG lures people in with a rosy but false vision of the Kingdom of God.
Note: My purpose in analyzing this booklet is to examine any alleged proofs of the Bible. So, to save myself some time, I won't say much about the next couple of sections in the LCG booklet, which is veering away from that topic. Actually, I think the booklet is repetitious and poorly organized. A lot of the material does not seem to belong here, and probably just repeats some of their other booklets. And if they can't prove the Bible is true, there is little value in these sections.
LCG: But what is the cause of the human suffering that has occurred down through time? Why is there so much evil in the world? Why does God allow it? If there is a God, why does He fail to act? People ask these questions because they do not understand that God is working out a plan and a purpose on this earth. Scripture reveals His plan, and it is pictured in the Holy Days that He commanded His people to observe (Leviticus 23). God's plan reveals not only the cause of, but also the solution to, the problems we see in our world.
Many today do not believe in God's existence, but even fewer believe that Satan is real. However, Scripture reveals quite a bit about this spirit being. The Bible reveals that Satan was originally an "anointed cherub" covering the throne of God, who sinned, "became filled with violence" and led a rebellion against God involving one-third of the angels (see Ezekiel 28:1–19; Isaiah 14:12–17; Jude 6; Revelation 12:4). We see so much evil in the world today because Satan is the "god of this age… who deceives the whole world" by influencing people to reject the instructions and way of life that God has revealed in the Bible (2 Corinthians 4:3–4: Ephesians 2:1–2). You need to read these scriptures for yourself to verify what the Bible actually says about this individual who has deceived the whole world (Revelation 12:9).
The biblical Holy Days picture the major steps in God's plan of salvation. Those steps reveal that Jesus Christ came to die for the sins of mankind, to replace Satan as the god of this world. Jesus then raised up His Church (Acts 2)—called the "Church of God" (1 Corinthians 1:2; 10:32; 15:9; 2 Corinthians 1:1)—to preach the gospel of God's kingdom to the world (Mark 16:15) and to prepare a group of believers to become the "firstfruits" (James 1:18; Romans 8:23; Revelation 14:1–5) who will reign with Him in the coming kingdom of God for a thousand years—a period called the Millennium (Revelation 20:4–6).
The Bible also reveals that when Christ returns, Satan will be bound and put out of commission (Revelation 20:1–2). This is how God will eliminate evil, and will use the individuals whom He has prepared to solve the world's problems. This will all happen according to God's plan, which is revealed in Scripture. To learn more about God's great plan for humanity, request our free booklet The Holy Days: God's Master Plan. To learn more about the Church that began with Jesus Christ—and the remarkable and perilous course it has traveled through the centuries—request our booklet, God's Church Through the Ages.
LCG: But what is the real hope for the future? Why should we struggle against the trials and temptations of this world? What is the value of learning to live by God's laws and the Bible's instructions? The answers emerge when we understand what the Bible reveals about the kingdom of God, and why it is called the "gospel." The word "gospel" means "good news" and the biblical message about the kingdom of God is good news—it is exciting news! The gospel of the kingdom of God, as described in the Bible, is not about some warm fuzzy feeling in your heart. It is about a coming world government that Jesus Christ will establish on this earth.
The Bible clearly reveals that Jesus will return to Jerusalem (Zechariah 14:4). He will take charge of the kingdoms of this world (Revelation 11:15–18) and set up a world government that will bring true justice and lasting peace to this planet. Jesus will be aided by the saints, individuals who understand the laws of God and have learned to function within the family of God, who will serve as civil and religious leaders—"kings and priests" (Revelation 5:10). God's government will bring peace and justice to the earth (Isaiah 9:6–7). The saints will also function as teachers (Isaiah 30:20–21) who will explain the laws of God (Isaiah 2:2–4), show people the way to peace (Psalm 119:165) and help them understand the real causes of strife and war (James 4:1–4). Christians are urged to "grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord" (2 Peter 3:18) so that they will be prepared to rule with Christ in this coming kingdom.
The Bible reveals that in the coming kingdom of God, rebuilt cities will promote a sense of community and will be in harmony with the environment (Isaiah 61:4; 11:6–9; Amos 9:14–15). Our polluted planet will be restored and made productive (Isaiah 35:1–7; Amos 9:13). The global curse of disease will be eliminated as people learn to live by the Bible's personal and public health laws (see Leviticus 3:17; 7:23–27; 11:1–47). The peoples of the world will learn to speak one language (Zephaniah 3:9), and "the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea" (Isaiah 11:9). The Bible speaks of the coming kingdom of God as the "times of refreshing" in which there will be a "restoration of all things" (Acts 3:19–20). The Apostle Paul called this "the world to come" or "the age to come" (Hebrews 2:5). We also call it Tomorrow's World. The Bible holds out these scriptural teachings as our real hope for the future!
Modern critics scoff at taking Scripture literally, at face value. Many preachers do not even mention the exciting biblical information we have covered in this booklet. Instead, most willingly overlook or even ignore what history reveals about the teachings and beliefs of the early Church. Historian Edward Gibbon wrote: "The ancient and popular doctrine of the Millennium was intimately connected with the second coming of Christ... a joyful Sabbath of a thousand years; and that Christ, with the triumphant band of the saints and the elect... would reign upon earth... The assurance of such a Millennium was carefully inculcated by a succession of fathers from Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, who conversed with the immediate disciples... Though it might not be universally received, it appears to have been the reigning sentiment of the orthodox believers; and it seems so well adapted to the desires and apprehensions of mankind, that it must have contributed in a very considerable degree to the progress of the Christian faith" (The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Gibbon, vol. 1, pp. 187–188).
Gibbon wrote plainly that early Christians believed and taught about the Millennium—the coming kingdom of God. The Bible's exciting and inspiring gospel of God's kingdom motivated believers and spurred the growth of the early Church. However, Gibbon also recorded how early theologians, influenced by pagan philosophy—believing they knew better than God's inspired word—gradually watered down this important teaching of Scripture and then explained it away, first calling it allegory, then calling it heresy. Millions have lost sight of—or have never heard—the real biblical answers to life's big questions, because most scholars and religious leaders have rejected—or never heard—those answers! This is one reason why so many today find life empty and meaningless.
LCG: In our modern age, many seriously doubt or openly disbelieve that an all-powerful supernatural God inspired Scripture. Many assume that the Bible is no different than any other humanly authored book. Many also assume that modern scholarship has completely discredited the Bible, and that no evidence exists that proves otherwise. Yet, as we have seen in this booklet, the truth is just the opposite! These widely held beliefs and assumptions are, in reality, fictions that are totally contrary to the facts!
The big question that you face, and the challenge that confronts many others today, is: What exactly will you believe about the Bible? Will you believe the facts discussed in this booklet (which only scratches the surface of this vast subject), or will you accept skeptics' speculations that undermine and discredit the Bible—largely by ignoring the facts?
Comment: Who is ingoring facts? The Living Church of God.
LCG: The God of the Bible can challenge us to "examine all things" and "prove" whether He exists (and whether He inspired the Bible), because there is so much remarkable and irrefutable evidence available!
Comment: Untrue. They talk as if they have lots of proof but they don't.
LCG: True biblical scholars know that the Bible is unlike any other religious book in the world, and that the most distinctive feature of the Bible is prophecy. Students of prophecy know that the Bible contains hundreds of specific prophecies that have been consistently and accurately fulfilled. No other book on the face of the earth contains such remarkable prophetic material, and human efforts to predict the future simply do not compare to the scope and accuracy of Bible prophecy. All this provides powerful evidence pointing to the Bible's divine origin.
Comment: The booklet is repetitious and long-winded. In marketing, one tries to indoctrinate the target by repeating the same things over and over. This is what the LCG is doing. Their booklet is more of a marketing booklet than a serious attempt to answer the question of whether the Bible is fact or fiction.
They keep raising points that I have refuted above, or which are refuted in the sources I have referred to. E.g., what "hundreds" of "specific" prophecies? Nonsense.
LCG: The facts of history demonstrate that the Bible has been preserved and accurately transmitted for thousands of years, in spite of concerted efforts to outlaw, suppress, corrupt, burn and destroy it.
Comment: They cannot prove the true writings of the apostles were not suppressed or destroyed. And the Bible we have was corrupted, that is proven in the sources we have referred to and many other sources.
LCG: The continued existence of the Bible under such adverse and hostile conditions offers strong support that an all-powerful God inspired such biblical statements as "the word of the Lord endures forever" and "My counsel shall stand."
Comment: Once the book spread to many countries, it would have been impossible for any one goverment to exterminte it, even if they wanted to, so the continued existence of the book merely shows how popular it became. But popularity is not a sign of truth. False teachers found it was more effective to reinterpret the Bible than to destroy it. The Roman Church could not destroy it because they were using it to prop up their own authority (e.g. claiming Peter founded the Catholic Church). I see no proof that it was actually preserved by God.
LCG: The remarkable way that archaeological discoveries continue to confirm Scripture's historical accuracy, and undermine critics' speculative theories, clearly affirms that the Bible is the inspired word of God!
Comment: Archaeology at best can prove the Bible is historically accurate. It cannot prove the miracles of Jesus are true, when the books of the Bible were written, who wrote which books, etc.
Besides, even if certain parts of the Bible agree with archaeology, it does not prove the rest of the Bible is historically true. Archaeology can only verify certain isolated points, not the whole Bible. And it certainly cannot prove the Bible is inspired by God as the LCG claims it can.
And when archaeology disagrees with the Bible by digging up a 9000 year old skeleton, the COGs don't tell us that.
LCG: The Bible provides real answers to life's big questions, unlike academics, philosophers and theologians who offer mere platitudes. This strongly indicates that the Bible's answers were revealed from a supernatural source.
Comment: Untrue. The Bible's answers are just the result of thousands of years of theological theory. They often "make sense" to the believer because thousands of years of thought went into developing those ideas. There is no reason to think it was from a supernatural source. In fact, there are many moral problems in the Bible which show it could not have been from God (unless God's morals are lacking).
For example, in Judges 11:29-40 Jephthah burns his own innocent daughter as a burnt offering to God.
For a discussion of the moral problems in the Bible, see here. That site might be hard to take, and it might only be partly correct, but it makes some valid points that can't be refuted, and a few valid points are all we need to prove the Bible is fiction.
LCG: But why do critics and skeptics—who are often highly educated—ignore the facts and continue to claim that the Bible is only a collection of myths and legends, and is untrustworthy as a source of historical, theological or scientific information?
Comment: The COGs more frequently ignore facts than the skeptics do. Unlike the COGs, skeptics don't kick people out for reading unapproved literature.
LCG: Is it significant that secular-minded scholars have planted doubts about the Bible in the minds of millions of people today? What are the consequences of ignoring evidence that the Bible is the inspired word of God? Scripture provides informative answers and offers sobering warnings.
The Bible reveals the cause of this widespread deception: Satan "deceives the whole world" (Revelation 12:9). We can certainly see this when we consider the incredible misconceptions that so many have acquired about the Bible. Jesus prophesied that one sign of the "end of the age" would be the increasing number of false teachers who "will deceive many" by spreading false teachings (Matthew 24:3–5, 11).
Comment: Where is the proof we have more error, ignorance, and deception today than ever before? There has always been great deception.
Of course lots of scholars are deceitful, but so are lots of churches. Searching the Web shows irrefutable proof that certain COG leaders are also lying.
The COGs typically paint an inaccurately negative view of Bible scholars. In doing so, they are often more deceitful than the scholars. They must really be afraid of scholars because they've got COG members extremely suspicious of scholars. This unbalanced approach is deceitful, accusational, and therefore, sinful!
LCG: The Apostle Peter warned that false teachers would subtly bring in "destructive heresies" that would discredit the truth of God and deceive many people (2 Peter 2:1–3). He also warned that "scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts"—casting doubts on Scripture and ignoring the facts of history (see 2 Peter 3:3–9). This deception will be widespread at the end of the age.
Comment: Deception and scoffing have always been widespread. The COGs are part of the problem, not the solution.
LCG: However, the Apostle Paul reveals that scoffers and false teachers will reap serious consequences from the God they are mocking and defying.
Comment: They are trying to use fear to intimidate people into believing their version of the truth. This is primitive. Would a just God appeal to fear, or would he educate people with facts? The LCG has failed to provide convincing facts, so now they resort to fear. It sounds like the work of a devil, not God.
LCG: He wrote: "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all... who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them... so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God... but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools" (Romans 1:18–22).
Comment: The Churches of God are suppressing the truth by quoting history, scholars, and scriptures selectively. They are without excuse.
LCG: Paul's condemnation of the misguided pagan intellectuals of his day also applies to the misguided scholars and critics of today—who ignore the powerful evidence that points to God as the author and sustainer of the Bible. We need to remember that there is a judgment coming!
Comment: Again, they try to use fear. Fear is a trap. I refuse to be intimidated. The Bible says "perfect love casts out fear." I guess I have more love than the LCG which seems to be in fear. "There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love." (1 John 4:18, NASB)
LCG: The stinging reproofs that the prophet Jeremiah leveled at his contemporaries also apply in our present day. Jeremiah warned that "the prophets become wind, for the word [of God] is not in them...
Comment: That would include the LCG.
LCG: The prophets prophesy falsely ... and My people love to have it so... the false pen of the scribe certainly works falsehood... the prophets prophesy lies in My name. I have not sent them... they are prophets of the deceit of their own heart, who try to make My people forget My name by their dream...and cause My people to err by their lies and by their recklessness... they shall not profit this people at all" (Jeremiah 5:13, 31; 8:8; 14:14; 23:26, 30–32).
Comment: It sounds like Jeremiah told us not to listen to prophets because they are all a pack of liars. That would seem to go for the LCG and the Bible too. Let's be consistent here.
LCG: God said through Jeremiah that because His people "have forsaken My law... and have not obeyed My voice... but they have walked according to the dictates of their own hearts... I will scatter them also among the Gentiles... I will send a sword after them until I have consumed them" (Jeremiah 9:13–16). The Bible clearly reveals that serious consequences will befall those who forsake the laws of God and promote their own theories, or follow those who do.
Comment: More fear.
LCG: However, wonderful benefits come to those who prove and believe that the Bible is God's inspired word, and who follow God's biblical instructions. King David wrote: "Blessed are [they]... Who walk in the law of the Lord... Your commandments make me wiser than my enemies... Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path... Great peace have those who love Your law, and nothing causes them to stumble... All Your commandments are truth... The entirety of Your word is truth" (Psalm 119:98, 105, 151, 160, 165). The Bible reveals that God will look favorably on those who develop a deep respect for His word, and are willing to follow its instructions. The prophet Isaiah wrote, "But on this one will I look: On him who is poor and of a contrite spirit, and who trembles at My word" (Isaiah 66:2).
Comment: These verses are false prophecies. I DILIGENTLY followed the Bible for about 30 years. I was left poor, single, friendless, out of work, alienated from my family, ... I could go on.
LCG: The Bible reveals that God has not left human beings to flounder without fundamental guidelines, or without important answers to life's big questions. God has inspired and preserved the Bible in a way that no other book has ever been preserved.
Comment: Many people want a sense of security, but a false sense of security is a trap (see above).
LCG: He has filled Scripture with hundreds of prophecies that accurately predict the future—setting the Bible apart from all other religious books on earth.
Comment: They keep saying that. It is repetitive and false.
LCG: The discoveries of archaeology and the facts of history continue to confirm the validity of Scripture, even though it was written thousands of years ago.
Comment: False (see above).
LCG: These facts are simply astounding and cannot reasonably be denied!
Comment: False (see above). There is nothing astounding about it at all. Archaeology and history confirm certain aspects of old books all the time. The Bible is not unique in this regard.
LCG: When you weigh critics' claims about the Bible against the tremendous evidence of the Bible's divine inspiration, you are left with a clear choice.
Comment: What "tremendous evidence"? Please give us, not hype, but the supposed evidence.
LCG: You can choose to believe that critics' theories might have some foundation in fact, while waiting for the next theory to change and assumptions to be revised.
Comment: They imply that they can offer the reader stability while the critics can only offer theories that change. But most members in the COGs (this would probably include all of the hundreds of COGs out there) have been rocked by changes in doctines and prophecies, including most of the people in the LCG. Many have seen their families and church communities torn apart. And the COGs are rapidly making more changes as they are forced to admit more errors. The COGs are some of the most unstable churches in the world due to their many church splits and changes in doctrine and prophecy. You shall know them by their fruits. The LCG itself was formed after the GCG fell apart, and the GCG was formed after the WCG split apart.
The Bible simply has theories, not facts, and even those theories are subject to interpretation. In a chaotic world, people are searching for stability, but the Bible offers a false solution. Do not succumb to the temptation to grasp for the mirage of stability based on myth.
LCG: Or you can trust the evidence from archaeology, history and fulfilled prophecy, which clearly reveals that the Bible is the inspired word of God—fact, not fiction!
Comment: Is it really a simple choice between the theories of critics and the "proven" word of God? The truth is, no matter what we believe we have to depend on scholars. Few of us have seen actual manuscripts. Few of us have actually dug up artefacts. We depend on scholars whether we like it or not. I don't see how any just God can base our salvation on what we are told by scholars, theologians, or ministers of any church. God, if he even does offer salvation, must have a better way. Maybe he just goes by how honest and fair we are in our dealings with others. The idea that God would give us a holy book to base our salvation on is fraught with difficulties because there seems to be no way to be sure any holy book is 100% true or really from God. All holy books come through men who cannot be trusted.
People who rely on the Bible are actually trusting their teachers (mere men) and the experts those teachers have selectively chosen. People who believe this Living Church of God booklet are trusting the Living Church of God to be reliable in their use of information about archaeology, history, and the Bible. These people think they are putting their faith in God but it is really faith in the LCG and scholars they choose to quote from.
For me, the Bible has been a cruel hoax. The Churches of God which tricked me into believing it destroyed the best years of my life. Following its teachings (as understood by the COGs) resulted in much persecution and hardship. It was very bad for my career and relationships. I was persecuted inside and outside the COGs (some of which are run by harsh, self-seeking, corrupt ministers). It left me old, poor, virtually friendless, and with severely diminished opportunities in every aspect of my life. I might not be able to afford to retire when I am no longer healthy enough to work. My life probably would have been much better without the Bible. I was extremely diligent in following the Bible but did not reap the promised benefits.
Peter began to say to Him, "Behold, we have left everything and followed you." Jesus said, "Truly I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or farms, for my sake and for the gospel’s sake, but that he will receive a hundred times as much now in the present age, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and farms, along with persecutions; and in the age to come, eternal life." (Mark 10:28-30, NASB)
Did I get 100 houses, 100 farms, 100 children? No, I got zero of all of the above. I'd be happy with just a tiny fraction of that. I don't know anyone who has gotten that, or even close, and neither do the COG ministers. All "true Christians" know church members who died waiting. Is there any congregation where no long-term dedicated members died old and poor or old and alone after decades of following Jesus?
To use their own lingo, instead of using human reason to make excuses for why these scriptures fail, "God's true ministers" should read them for what they say, and face the clear meaning, instead of rejecting "the word of God" and then reinterpreting it. I wasn't expecting 100 houses, 100 children or 100 farms, but after 30 years I had a right to expect something!