Search

Monday, October 19, 2015

The Self-Harmony of the Bible - 2 (Part Three)

Did Moses Fear Pharaoh?
            When we think about Moses we do not imagine anyone who could even be moved to fear. The Scriptures say of him at Hebrews 11:27 (NWT): “By faith he left Egypt, but not fearing the anger of the king, for he continued steadfast as seeing the One who is invisible.” The skeptic, however, says, “Pray tell, why Moses fled fearfully from the king of Egypt?”
            He alludes to Exodus 2:14,15 (NWT) which says: “At this he said: “Who appointed you as a prince and a judge over us? Are you planning to kill me just as you killed the Egyptian?” Moses now was afraid and said: “Surely the matter has become known!” Then Pharaoh heard about it, and he attempted to kill Moses; but Moses ran away from Pharaoh and wen to dwell in the land of Midian.” Does this prove that there is a contradiction?
            No, for Paul seems to be alluding to Moses leaving Egypt with the sons of Israel. In those days he was not afraid of Pharaoh (on account of the appearance at the burning bush and the miracles he performed; see Exodus 10:28). Therefore it is perfectly possible that at first he was afraid, but then he was not. He was not even afraid when Pharaoh pursued them to the Red Sea. (Exodus 14:13,14) To this the skeptic might object, for Israel left Egypt after the Passover, and the observance “by faith” of the Passover by Moses, as mentioned in Hebrews, is found in verse 28. The point being that the time “he left Egypt, but no fearing the anger of the king” must be before the Passover since it was mentioned in verse 27.
            This argument is found wanting, for just because something is mentioned afterward does not mean that it occurred afterward. While Paul went chronologically as far as the faith people he used as examples, he didn’t list everything chronologically. For in mentioning Jacob worshipping Joseph he says that he “blessed the sons of Joseph and worshipped,” which to some might imply that he blessed Joseph’s sons first, or that he did both at the same time. (Hebrews 11:21 NWT) However such a conclusion would lean to heavily on the use of “and” and the unprovable assumption that the an event being mentioned first makes it first chronologically; keep in mind that this what Paul wrote is a summary.
            In conclusion, I can see no contradiction, neither now after I have examined it, nor before. What the skeptic saw, I cannot, so I must imagine it was due to a poor reading of the text.b

Does Paul Deny the Authenticity of the Psalms of the Sons of Korah?
            To the informed and malicious Paul’s words at Romans 8:37 (WEB): “No, in all these things, we are more than conquerors through him who loved us,” show that he regarded Psalm 44:22 as false scripture, and possibly felt that way toward all of the psalms of the sons of Korah. How? (I still haven’t figured that out.)
            It is necessary to examine what Paul says, namely: “Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? Just as it is written [at Psalm 44:22], “For You sake we are being put to death all day long; We were considered as sheep to be slaughtered.” But in all these things we overwhelming conquer through Him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” – Romans 8:35-39 NASB95
            Here we see that Paul proposes an idea – these things can separate us from God’s love. Then he cites a scripture that describes the situation they face, and whose own context might describe the helpless feeling his brothers have. Then he answers that, contrary to external appearances of being conquered, we are in fact conquerors whom can never be separated from God’s love.
            Why is it necessary to resolve this? How did the skeptic so mangle the meaning of the scripture? Even by narrowing the material quoted, the fool never explains the validity of his assertion, for it hardly would make sense for Paul to deny this scripture since the scripture truthfully describes the external circumstances (that he himself faced) which gave birth to the heart of the matter, the question that Paul was actually addressing. Yes if Paul denied the verse it would leave him with no reason to bring it up to begin with.

Who Destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah?
            In the Bible God claims credit for the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. (Amos 4:11) So, the skeptic is confused, by the mention of two angels at Genesis 19:1. Did Jehovah destroy the city, or did they? The skeptic fails to note two things, namely, that the angels are there to get Lot, but never are said to be the ones destroying the city, and that even if they were the ones destroying it, they’d simply be agents of Jehovah, which would still afford Jehovah the credit for destroying the four cities (four is not a typo). (Deuteronomy 29:23) There is no contradiction.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for your feedback. Your comment will be posted after approval.