Profound Disciples Ministries
|Posted on January 12, 2016 at 6:50 PM||comments (2865)|
New Scientific Study Explaining Where Water Came from Confirms Biblical Account
Veronica Neffinger | Editor, ChristianHeadlines.com | Thursday, January 07, 2016
NEW SCIENTIFIC STUDY EXPLAINING WHERE WATER CAME FROM CONFIRMS BIBLICAL ACCOUNT
A new scientific report has confirmed the Bible’s account of where water on the Earth came from.
The Bible describes how, after God created the Earth, “springs came up from the ground and watered all the land (Genesis 2:6). In the account of the Flood, the Bible also mentions how “the fountains of the great deep burst forth” (Genesis 7:11).
According to Christian Today, the new nine-page scientific study confirms the Bible’s account that water came from within the Earth.
"The ultimate origin of water in the Earth's hydrosphere is in the deep Earth—the mantle," the scientists wrote in their report, as quoted by Christian News.
The researchers came to this conclusion by studying diamonds discovered in Brazil which are believed to have come from deep within the Earth--in the mantle--the layer between the Earth’s surface and its innermost core.
"The presence of hydrous ringwoodite in a diamond from transition-zone depths supports the view that high fluid activity, notably that of water, has a key role in the genesis of ultradeep diamonds," the report explained.
The study also discovered that there is a “major repository for water” located within the mantle, about 250 to 410 miles below the Earth’s surface.
“It's actually the confirmation that there is a very, very large amount of water that's trapped in a really distinct layer in the deep Earth," said Graham Pearson, the research team’s leader. "It translates into a very, very large mass of water, approaching the sort of mass of water that's present in all the world's ocean," he added.
Photo courtesy: Wikipedia
|Posted on January 12, 2016 at 6:25 PM||comments (1619)|
Have you ever wondered about the actual Hebrew names for Jesus and the disciples? I know this subject has nagged me from time to time as I've noticed that the names in the Old and New Testaments don't seem to match up with the times in which they lived. I've known for a while that the Hebrew name for Jesus is Yehosuoa, but but the names of the other disciples didn't seem consistent as they sounded European and my hunch was correct as the names have been translated into different versions. Now, there indeed was a Greek influence in the New Testament as Luke was a Greek, but my curiosity and quest for the original names led me to dig deeper which brought me to this Jewish Professor's blog site. This is a very interesting read which I am happy to share. Shalom!
Minister E. Lionel Perry
|Posted on January 12, 2016 at 6:00 PM||comments (1729)|
Having "coming up" in the black church from childhood, I've always wondered about the history of the black church and started asking numerous questions of ministers and pastors about how and why "we" came to be, only to realize that some of them, as well as the congrgations were woefully ignorant of our history although they'd gone to these churches for years and decades, which led to very few answers and in some cases, scorn. I ended up researching this on my own and I have a great understanding now of how the black church in America came to be and I found that this Wikipedia article gives a very good summation of our history. I always encourage research and reading so I am totally happy to share this information. Shalom!
Minister E. Lionel Perry
|Posted on January 12, 2016 at 5:50 PM||comments (3361)|
Very interesting video as it pertains to how the image of Jesus was changed to enforce white supremecy. It is a shame that I tend to get a lot of flak when I try to talk about this subject; quite a bit of it from people of color who have been brainwashed to just accept what the oppressors have forced upon them (us), and never question, research, or think on their own. I am totally with Yeshua (Jesus), but I don't accept manyof the European translations and changes to the Holy Scriptures. It is my hope that true disciples of The Most High (Yahweh) will open their minds and research history. Shalom!
Minister E. Lionel Perry
|Posted on January 4, 2016 at 7:40 PM||comments (500)|
As one who loves to read, Here is a great quote from Mark Twain that I felt needed sharing.
Minister E. Lionel Perry
The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them." - Mark Twain (1835-1910)
|Posted on January 4, 2016 at 7:35 PM||comments (444)|
Here is an interesting article concerning New Year's resolutions.
Minister E. Lionel Perry
|Posted on December 28, 2015 at 8:10 PM||comments (1181)|
5 Things to Know about Luke from the Bible
• Liz Kanoy-Editor, Crosswalk.com
• 201510 Dec
Who is Luke?
Luke is only mentioned by name three times in Scripture, and all three references are in Paul’s letters: Colossians 4, 2 Timothy 4, and Philemon 1. Most biblical scholars support Luke as the author of the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts. We can come to this conclusion because of the similarity of writing styles and vocabulary in both books; another reason is that Luke used the term “we” several times to refer to his missionary travels in the book of Acts. Though Luke was not present with Jesus during His ministry, and likely was not a believer until after Jesus’ resurrection, Luke’s attention to detail and abundant eyewitness accounts serve him as a credible historian for the life, death, and resurrection of Christ.
Luke’s gospel contains several parables and eyewitness accounts that are only in his gospel, such as a pre-birth account for John the Baptist, the story of the two men who met the resurrected Jesus on the road to Emmaus, as well as stories of miraculous healing. His gospel is the longest of the 4 gospels and includes the most healing stories, showing his interest in and compassion for the sick. His gospel also has the most detailed birth account and a more descriptive death and resurrection account for Jesus. The Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts total 52 chapters, making Luke the author of 1/3 of the New Testament, just like Paul.
It is most likely that Luke wrote his gospel in 63AD before the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, since he does not mention it. As a detailed and observant writer, it would be odd for him to leave out such a historic event, but there are still some scholars who argue for a later date.
Why did he write a gospel account?
In Luke 1, he writes:
“Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.”
Here are 5 things to know about Luke:
1. Luke was a Gentile
Lucas (or Loukas) is a Greek name; the author of Luke writes with a Greek style, and is highly educated with his chosen vocabulary, similar to other Greek writers in his day. He used Greek expressions rather than Hebrew versions, showing that he was more comfortable with the Greek language. We also know that Luke was a Gentile because of the way Paul addresses him in Colossians 4; Paul named his Jewish co-workers first and says, “These are the only Jews among my co-workers for the kingdom of God…” Then 2 verses later Paul addresses Luke by saying, “Our dear friend Luke, the doctor, and Demas send greetings.” Col. 4:11 & 14
Luke was the only Gentile to write a book of the Bible, and he clearly wrote his gospel with a Gentile audience in mind. He is sure to point out references to creation and Jesus’ circumcision that a Gentile audience would not have known. A Jewish audience would have assumed Jesus was circumcised on the 8th day, even if it wasn’t written, since he came from a Jewish family. Luke made sure to give a detailed account of everything he wrote, so that those who were not as familiar with Jewish traditions, customs, places, and Old Testament references would be able to understand the history of Jesus and plan of salvation.
2. Luke was a Physician
Though, we can’t be certain about every aspect of Luke’s background, we know he was referred to by Paul as “the beloved physician” in Colossians 4:14. He likely had a comfortable life in Antioch practicing medicine, but he chose to sacrifice that life of comfort to follow the Lord. Henry Morris, of the Institute for Creation Research, shares this of Luke’s physician background,
“Some commentators have noted the ironical relation between Mark 5:26 and Luke 8:43. Mark had said that a certain woman needing healing ‘had suffered many things of many physicians, and had spent all that she had, and was nothing bettered, but rather grew worse." Luke, perhaps trying to defend his professional colleagues, merely said that this same woman "had spent all her living upon physicians, neither could be healed of any.’ That is, they had done their best, but it was an incurable disease.”
3. Luke was Humble
Luke never addresses himself as the author of either of his books, he never addresses himself by name as one of Paul’s travel companions though he does use the term “we,” he never mentions his profession as a doctor (only Paul does), and he never mentions his brother Titus (2 Cor. 8 & 12). He does not mention the sacrifice he made in giving up his medical practice to travel with Paul and care for Paul. Instead, he gives much focus to Jesus’ healing miracles and Jesus as the great Healer. The most important thing he wants his readers to understand is salvation in Christ.
Gordon Franz, of the Associates for Biblical Research, states,
“When he wrote his gospel and the book of Acts, he did not mention his name at all (Acts 1:1), nor did he mention his brother Titus. Dr. Luke was a humble person and he did not want to call attention to himself or his family, but rather, he wanted to point people to the Person of the Lord Jesus Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit in His Church.”
4. Luke Met Some of the Apostles
By the time Luke was writing his gospel, the Holy Spirit had already inspired two others: Matthew and Mark. It is reasonable to think that Luke would have interviewed them and investigated their writings. Luke would have likely traveled with Mark, since Mark also traveled with Paul. And it is logical to think that since Mark and Luke knew each other, and Mark and Matthew knew each other that Matthew and Luke would have also met. Luke would have been exposed to many sources, and, therefore, would have based his writings on existing narratives with eyewitness accounts added in that he gathered with the help of the Holy Spirit. Luke was not trying to write a new gospel, he wanted to record the life of Jesus as accurately as possible for a wider Gentile audience, including a high Roman official named Theophilus.
5. Only Luke Remained with Paul to His Death
In 2 Timothy 4, Paul tells us that Luke alone remains with him. Why would the majority of Paul’s companions desert him? John MacArthur explains,
“Nero had cranked up the persecution to a high level and Christians were paying with their lives. And frankly, many believers had fled from Rome. And, you know, they might have had a reasonable motive to do that, to carry on the preaching of the gospel. It's not that they were all just cowards. But Luke didn't go. Everybody left. And there was a lot of desertion. Demas left him because he loved the present world, verse 10 says. And you do get the idea that some of the rest left in desertion from verse 16, but he says, "May it not be counted against them." But not Luke, loyal, faithful, brave, long-term friend, fellow worker, companion to Paul, been with Paul over years and years and years, been with Paul over hundreds and probably thousands of miles of walking. “
John MacArthur also writes,
“So I say, next to Paul, Luke is the most powerful writing force in the New Testament, and yet he is basically unknown. I don't think in my life I've ever heard a sermon about Luke. His historical narrative spans over sixty years. It starts with the birth of John the Baptist, the forerunner to Jesus, and it ends at the end of the book of Acts, which is volume two of his writings, it ends with the gospel being preached at Rome, which means the gospel has extended to the world. No other writer wrote so comprehensive a history of Jesus and His impact. No other writer goes all the way from the John the Baptist to the gospel having reached the capital of the Roman Empire. He is the most complete story teller of the saga of salvation in the New Testament, and he is mostly unknown to us.”
Luke knew he wasn’t the first to write about Jesus nor did he claim to be; he wanted to write a gospel that shared the truth that had already been written but for a wider audience. He investigated every written and oral source that he could, with the help and inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Luke was an evangelist, a historian, a physician, a pastor, a missionary, a companion, a brother, and a theologian. His goal and purpose in writing a gospel was to write exact truth concerning Jesus Christ and the plan of salvation, an infallible history and theology inspired by the Spirit. And with God’s guidance that’s exactly what he did.
No, we don’t know everything there is to know about Luke, but I think that’s the way he would want it. He didn’t write a gospel for fame or recognition, which is why he does not mention his own name in either of the books he wrote. Luke wanted to teach people about the Savior and the glorious salvation Jesus offers to all mankind.
Luke’s life was changed and transformed by God the same way that every sinner becomes new, washed clean by the blood of the Lamb!
Information received via Crosswalk
|Posted on December 28, 2015 at 5:15 PM||comments (9913)|
Archaeologists find the gate to Goliath's hometown
Elizabeth Armstrong Moore, Newser staff 9:39 a.m. EDT August 4, 2015
In this photo taken Wednesday, July 6, 2011, volunteers and archeologists work at the excavation site in Tel el-Safi, southern Israel. Archaeologists are piecing together the history of a people remembered chiefly as the bad guys of the Hebrew Bible. The city of Gath, where this year's digging season began this week, is helping scholars paint a more nuanced portrait of the Philistines, who appear in the biblical story as the perennial enemies of the Israelites.(Photo: Ariel Schalit, AP)
(NEWSER) – An archaeological dig now in its 20th year has uncovered the entrance gate to Gath, the ancient Biblical city of the Philistines and onetime home of the giant Goliath. Before the king of Damascus destroyed it in 830 BCE, Gath was the largest city in the land for hundreds of years, reports the Jerusalem Post. The Bible refers to the massive city gate itself, in the story of David's escape from King Saul to the king of Gath. In addition to the city gate, scientists have also unearthed an "impressive fortification wall," several buildings that include a temple and iron production facility, and what the Post calls the earliest "decipherable" Philistine inscription ever found—which contains two names similar to "Goliath."
"After finding a huge fortification, it’s clearly the most important city of the 10th and ninth centuries," says the archaeologist in charge of the dig, per i24. The long-term dig is part of the Ackerman Family Bar-Ilan University Expedition to Gath, a look at the archaeology and history of one of the largest "tells" (aka ancient ruin mounds) in Israel. The area in central Israel, in the Tel Zafit National Park in the Judean Foothills, has been inhabited almost continuously since the 5th millennium BCE, the researchers note in a press release. (Also recently discovered in Israel? A mask unlike any other.)
This article originally appeared on Newser:
Information received via source
|Posted on December 27, 2015 at 6:15 AM||comments (3463)|
Biblical King's seal discovered in dump site
By Will Heilpern, for CNN
Updated 1645 GMT (0045 HKT) December 4, 2015
The oval bulla -- which is 0.5 inches wide -- is estimated to be 2,700 years old.
• A piece of clay inscribed with the 2,700-year-old seal of King Hezekiah found in Jerusalem
• The seal was probably used by the King himself, according to experts
(CNN)A dump site is the last place you would expect to find an 8th century B.C. seal for a papyrus document signed by one of the kings of Judah.
Perhaps that's why it has taken 2,700 years for the piece of clay inscribed with King Hezekiah's seal to be discovered in Jerusalem.
It is believed to be the first-ever seal -- also referred to as a "bulla" -- from an Israeli or Judean King to be discovered by archaeologists.
"The seal of the king was so important. It could have been a matter of life or death, so it's hard to believe that anyone else had the permission to use the seal," Eilat Mazar, who directs excavations at the City of David's summit, told CNN.
"Therefore, it's very reasonable to assume we are talking about an impression made by the King himself, using his own ring.
"This the greatest single item I have ever found," added Mazar -- a third generation archaeologist.
The Ophel excavations were conducted at the foot of the southern wall of the Temple Mount.
The oval bulla -- which is 0.5 inches wide -- was discovered by a team from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Led by Mazar, the team were excavating an ancient dump near the Silwan neighborhood beside the wall that surrounds Jerusalem's Old City.
The site itself, along with the nearby City of David, is contentious, because it is an Israeli archaeological dig in East Jerusalem next to a Palestinian neighborhood. Critics say the dig is politically motivated to extend Jewish claims over East Jerusalem and the Old City: archaeological finds become historical justifications
Watch a video about the Ophel excavations here.
The seal is believed to have been discarded from a royal building, with the rubbish.
The impression on the clay bears an inscription in ancient Hebrew script that translates as: "Belonging to Hezekiah [son of] Ahaz king of Judah."
It features a two-winged sun, with wings turned downward, flanked by two ankh symbols symbolizing life.
Other bullas bearing the name of King Hezekiah have been seen on the antiquities market. However, the others are not as important because they were not found by archaeologists and therefore may not be genuine, according to Mazar.
What we know about King Hezekiah
"The bible describes King Hezekiah as one of the most important kings after King David," said Mazar.
"He was rich, daring, stood up against Assyrians. A very impressive king," she added.
King Hezekiah -- who reigned from about 727 to 698 B.C. -- is certainly portrayed favorably in the Bible. The Book of Kings II 18:5 says of Hezekiah: "... after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor among them that were before him."
It has been claimed that Hezekiah dedicated his reign to the reversal of the "idolatry" of his father. However, Hezekiah's newly discovered private seal, which bears the name of his father, suggests that Hezekiah valued this link.
|Posted on December 27, 2015 at 5:55 AM||comments (1610)|
Forensic depiction of 'manly Jesus' rises again
San Francisco Chronicle
A scientific representation of Jesus' appearance that appeared in Popular Mechanics over a decade ago resurfaced today in social media as a political statement.
Many are saying the depiction of a dark-haired, tan-skinned man is fitting at time when Americans are debating whether to allow Syrian refugees into the country.
"Would Donald Trump let this man into the US? Would you?" asks one Facebook commenter.When this image was first released in 2002, it challenged historical depictions of Jesus Christ as a tall, lean, pasty guy with effeminate facial features and long, flowing light-brown hair. Famous paintings of him — mainly done by Italian artists — show someone of European decent who probably could have rocked a pair of skinny jeans and a man bun.
A team of scientists led by medical artist Richard Neave created what they think is a realistic image of Jesus.
But scientists working in the field of forensic anthropology determined that the son of God probably had a manly face with a tan complexion, bushy eyebrows and short, dark hair, according to Popular Mechanics. He didn't look anything like the person many of us remember from Sunday School lessons.
The team of British scientists and Israeli archeologists used the same techniques employed by detectives solving crimes to create the computer-generated image. They delved "into cultural and archeological data" and the world of "physical and biological sciences" to identify the appearance of a typical Middle Eastern Jewish man living in the Galilee area of northern Israel at the time of Jesus.
The effort was led by medical artist Richard Neave, who has created depictions of dozens of famous historical faces.
"If anyone could create an accurate portrait of Jesus, it would be Neave," Popular Mechanics reported.
Information source source via...