I was raised a witness to believe the Bible as well. Blind faith. But I really didn't feel a true spiritual connection with God until I volunteered to "Go where the need was greater." I grew up in Compton, California, a middle-class black area where the "truth" took over like a wildfire. So many witnesses were coming in that it was the fastest-growing area for witnesses in the country. The congregations were dividing and dividing and dividing and the congregation territories got smaller and smaller and smaller. As a result the territory was likely overworked. The zeal of the young brothers was there though, so lots wanted to pioneer and so we had to get out early and stand on the corners of the do-nut shops or stores that were open. It seems soooo silly now because instead of a tasteful say one or two brothers standing around, sometimes they were lined up all along the wall. It seems so silly now, but that's how we had to put in our time; the territory didn't last but an hour or so at the most. So the thing was for the young ones to "go where the need was greater" which was in the South. Some brothers actually moved to where the preaching work was greater. That was my goal. So I got a job in a high-school tutorial program where I tutored Spanish to Jr. High School students to save enough to pay for my going to Arkansas during the summer. A brother who had gone there would provide me shelter. It wasn't enough money so my parents had to supplement; my parents, though on a strict budget were wonderful that way and still are.
Finally, off I went to "where the need was greater" and in that process of being in the full-time service, I just came a heightened sense of my love for God and the Bible. I was just 16. I loved it all. I was really into it. I even played the piano for the congregation who had a piano but no piano player. It was a bit different though since this was The South in the 60's so we only contacted blacks and there were two separate congregations. Even so, the black and white brothers knew each other and got along just like at the assemblies. Then one day when I had been out a long day and was coming in, it was thundering and about to rain. I was running trying to get in before it started and just as I reached the porch it just POURED! I hadn't gotten wet. It was as if God had not let it rain until just as I got cover. And at that moment I just sensed Jehovah was watching over me. I had this sense of "holy spirt" I guess. Especially from then on did it seem there was harmony and compatbility between the Bible and reality and being a witness. There was just no doubt. Every challenge the world or Christendom presented seemed to be easily vanquished by what the Bible said or the Watchtower explained.
But it was still blind faith. Hope, with no direct confirmation that any of this was really true. I just believed it. Then, many, many years later during the summer of 1992, after all my struggles with my personal issues and the truth, something amazing happened. I became one of the "anointed." Most have only heard about this from others. When some are asked about how a person feels if they are anointed, they all say the same thing, that it's just an assured feeling. But also, they say something strange happens with respect to the Bible and that is, it seems as though suddenly that the Bible is talking to them directly, as if certain verses light up and jump out at you. I had that precise feeling! I started seeing things in the scriptures that I hadn't noticed before. At that point, I rejoiced though, because for me, all that I had only believed before was now FULFILLED. I actually had something more direct upon which to believe the Bible is ture and that God alive. Many things happened since then of course, but at that point I knew the Bible was true and that God is real.
So even though many don't have that experience, there is no doubt for me that the Bible is true and God's word. So that's one level. It's different for the "anointed" who are more directly involved with scripture than say for most.
But then, after the fact, I did look into the major issues contradicting the Bible as a book of truth, which is the scientific attacks from archaeology and in relation to evolution, as well as conflicting ancient history. Evolution proved to essentially be an "inconclusive" argument that went no where. Evolutionists don't want to have to explain where it all begin and just want to explain how it evolved after it all began quite mysteriously. That's usually where I get off. But if you pursue this further, it no longer becomes about the process of "evolution" but about the contradiction of the Bible's timeline as to when things started and what the scientists are saying, a few thousand years versus millions, and that argument continues, so nothing is resolved there. Of course, the Global Flood is an attempt to discredit the Bible but lack of evidence is not real proof against the Bible for a fundamentalist. So that's another dead topic. But what you have left, a little more hands-on was the archaeology and ancient history. That's where I focussed a lot of my research. As a result of that, my faith in God's word not only intensified but it became even more accurate!
What do I mean? I mean ancient texts, like the SK400 astronomical text actually forced me to correct some false beliefs I had from what the Bible says or what I was taught by the Watchtower without really paying attention! This demonstrates how something like this actually increases your faith. Basically, the WTS had quoted from the "Strm. Kambyses 400" astronomical text about two lunar eclipses, the same year that supported or confirmed that Kambyses' 7th year occurred in 523BCE. I knew by this time from the Bible that 455 BCE had to be the 1st of Cyrus. But going by what I had been taught all those years by the WTS, that the 70 years began with the fall of Jerusalem, a cornerstone belief related to 607BCE and 1914, I assumed that the corrected date for the fall of Jerusalem must have been 525BCE and that is what I started preaching. I was convinced that somehow the astronomical text must somehow point to the correct date. I didn't know anything about astronomy back then. But I cross-checked and cross-checked for two eclipses that would align with 525BCE and it just wasn't happening. Of course, one of the eclipses was 2-hours askew for 523BCE as well so there was no problem dismissing the SK400 as a fake text. Also a "year 9" reference was in the text and Kambyses at the most only ruled for 8 years, so something was wrong. Still, I didn't want to think that astronomy from this ancient text didn't support the Bible. I figured if the Bible was true then some way, this text should reflect this. I couldn't make heads or tails out of this situation and basically sort of gave up. Out of curiousity though, I finally decided to look for dual-eclipses during these months for the entire period of 500-600 BCE, just to see if these eclipses made any sense with respect to the times in the eclipses. And then it happened!! In 541 BCE, there were two lunar eclipses in the prescribed months that matched the eclipse interval between these two eclipses of 2 hours and 46 minutes! WOW! That must be it. Those must be the eclipses! I wantd this so badly to be "year 7" of Nebuchadnezzar which I was dating 4 years later in 537 BCE. But it wasn't working. I was desperate too, willing to try and compensate for a year give or take. But no go. The text clearly matches 541 BCE for "year 7" and that was that. There was a 4-year discrepancy that I couldn't resolve. Having faith in the Bible, I just assumed that the text must be wrong and fraudulent. I let it go, not giving up my faith that the Bible had to be true and no matter what, Jerusalem had to fall in 525BCE as the Bible said.
But then, generally doing more research into the NB Period and finding out all this history from a different point of view, maybe a few weeks later I stumbled upon Jeremiah 52:30. Basically I was looking for perhaps a double-rulership for Nebuchadnezzar or something, something that would explain why his year 7 was falling in 541BCE instead of 537BCE. But there it was! Jeremiah 52:30 says that the last deportation from Jerusalem was in the 23rd year of Nebuchadnezzar! Therefore, the land was not completely desolated until the 23rd year! If that's the case, the 525BCE was actually when the 70 years began and 529BCE is the actual date for year 19 of Nebuchadnezzar. Thus my dating was 4 years off! At the same time, of course, the eclipse reference was also four years off! That is, once you correct the Bible's chronology so that the fall of Jerusalem falls in 529BCE, year 19 of Nebuchadnezzar, his 7th year falls in 541 BCE!!!! AMAZING!!!!
Now what is so grand about this is, that this is the direct result of an ancient astronomical text!!! A text that actually corrected my inaccurate chronology of the Bible! So then I had the best of both worlds. I had an ancient astronomical text confirming the accurate Bible chronology! It was a RUSH!!! I couldn't believe it! This was early on, long because the VAT4956 even more specifically does the same thing, pointing to 511BCE for year 37 of Nebuchadnezzar, the exact same chronology.
So when you talk about faith in the Bible, especially now that we have two astronomical texts that can be used not only to support the Bible's specific chronology but independently correct the secular chronology, then your faith in God's word as a true book of history simply soars!! This has nothing to do with "holy spirit" or seeing or talking to God or any of that. This is simple, pure, direct RESEARCH.
So absolutely the Bible is true if you actually get really close to the actual research and discover these things.
Then on top of all this, just recently, after digging into the archaeology challenges now being thrusted against the Bible by archaeologists like Israel Finkelstein who want us to think King David and Solomon are myths, because they don't match the archaeological timeline, another huge surprise! Turns out the Bible's corrected chronology which would date Shishak's invasion specifically to 871BCE is directly confirmed by RC14 dating from Rehov. That is, the archaeologists have actually gotten so good, they have painted themselves into a corner! They figured out that if they carefully discover grains or cereals that are burned at the time of a destructive event and test those grains, then they can get a more accurate idea of precisely when this event occurs. Seems reasonable that grains found could be presumed to have been perhaps harvested that same year. But a new method was introduced where they divide the sample up and test it multiple times. What they discovered is, even though the range of dating might be about 90 years, there was a consistent random higher ratio of dating in the very middle of the range! As a result, radiometrologists provide dating, if the samples are good for some events to within less than ten years! That is profound! That's because even Finkelstein considers Solomon and David impossible during their current times and they are just displaced about 54-60 years! Dating to within 10 years is a profound contradiction or confirmation of any timeline.
Well, guess what? I'M CONCERNED HERE! That's because knowing the precise dating to be 571 BCE, and the reasonable theory behind radiometric dating using RC14 for short-lived grains, it should confirmed the Bible's dating, right? I mean, that's what I'm thinking. If this is scientific and all, it should point more toward 571BCE than the erroneous dating of 925BCE. Well, IT DOES!!!
Further, it proves the 925BCE dating is wrong!
So when it comes to faith, even though now those who actually use this RC14 dating to bash the Bible are now trying to qualify the results, subjectively if you dated Shishak's invasion as I do to 871 BCE, this new research just confirms your faith in the Bible even more!!! At the same time, it dismisses, like the VAT4956 and the SK400 do, the false chronology that is used to contradict the Bible. Again, this is not "holy spirit"or just blind faith, this is direct historical and scientific evidence that supports the Bible and that can be used to build up faith in the Bible.
Therefore, many who dismiss the Bible as inaccurate, are those who take the word of biased archaeologists like Finkelstein and others, and who don't look at all the evidence or more of the direct evidence. Thus they make their dismissal because they are not well informed or have been influenced by what the "experts" have decided, even though if you directly consider ALL the evidence, so much supports the Bible's timeline but it is ignored. Final case in point of FAITH IN THE BIBLE, is the digging up of Jericho by Kathleen Kenyon. She clearly dismisses the popular chronology for the fall of Jericho based upon the current popular timeline that would date the Exodus in 1446 BCE and thus the fall of Jericho around 1406 BCE. Her archaeological findings dates the fall of Jericho where they found cartouches of Pharaoh Shishak at the last destructive level to between 1350-1325BCE. Now this is already on the books! If you use this archaeological dating alone to project to the Exodus, you'll get a 5-year early range of dates for the Exodus between 1390-1985BCE. But this alone would force you to date or consider dating Solomon's 4th year falling no earlier than 910 BCE to 905BCE (Solomon's 4th year is 380 years after the Exodus)! But this is ignored by archaeologists who don't use the Egyptian-based dating for Jericho for determining Solomon's rule. Instead they use the erroneous secular dating and then claim the Bible writers revised their documents. So you see there are two sides to this story. More than one way to look at the evidence!
In the meantime, this dating by Kenyon totally agrees and aligns with the RC14 dating, since that dating would overlap the narrow range of dating for Shishak's invasion between 874-867 BCE. That is, say if you dated the Exodus in 1386BCE, as I do, then that falls within that 1390-1385 BCE range. Shishak's invasion occurs in year 39 of Solomon so that matches the dating to 871BCE and that's confirmed by the RC14 dating. But it is also compatible with the fall of Jericho in 1346 BCE as dated by Kenyon.
So is the Bible a true book of history? YES, it is! If you first get the right chronology from the Bible straightened out from those want to distort the Bible's chronology like secular historians and the WTS, AND you actually do your own research to find out the true facts instead of what is biasedly represented by those who have their own anti-Biblical angendas.
So do I believe the Bible is true history? Absolutely! But far moreso based upon actual supportive historical, astronomical, archaeological and scientific evidence than before, evidence that allows me to dismiss the lies totally and have complete faith in the Bible.
So now it's an absolutely wonderful time for Biblicalists, especially in regard to understanding the contradictions and challenges presented against the Bible as far as chronology and the Bible's history. At this point, beause it is possible to reconstruct the original secular timleine, which is now identifical to the Bible's, there is no reason to doubt the Bible as a true historical record. And at that point, that recommends that the Bible is true in other areas.
It's AWESOME now. It's wonderful and it's ABSOLUTE. The Bible is a true book of history. I have the goods to prove it!
So the advice to those who want to maintain their faith in the Bible, you have two choices:
1) Simply accept the Bible is true and try to understand it more accurately and do as Paul told Timothy and ignore all the secular "genealogies" that deal with history and the "false stories" out there that contradict the Bible's history and chronology. Just have blind, absolute faith.
2) If that's not good enough, then you have to do the hard work like I did of taking these people who are challening the Bible to task. A degree behind their name is an automatic red flag they don't know what they are talking about or are lying. That's the attitude. Take them to task on every little detail and if possible get to the source materials and don't deal with their interpretation of the source materials. Get fully involved. When you do that, you'll find many times there are many issues that archaeologists and/or scholars vary on or have different opinions on. You'll find there is more than one timeline for different periods that are supported by different scholarly groups, as in the case of the Egyptian timeline. Arm yourself with KNOWLEDGE. Listen to all sides of the story. Listen and read what Olof Jonsson has to say, for instance, about the 70 years, but check into Josephus as well to see what traditional Jewish history says about when the "70 years" of desolation or servitude says. Don't just read his book and think, "Oh yeah, I'm impressed. He explained that well." It doesn't work that way. You may still agree with him at the end of the day, but you have to hear all the counter arguments. A lot of people want to influence you to doubt the Bible is true history. But in fact, it ACTUALLY and truly is the most accurate history and there is an abundance of evidence now that reconstructs the original timeline, supported as noted above by both science and astronomical texts. At this point, there is no excuse not to consider the Bible reliable history. Research is going on all the time. More sites are being dug up and more information is coming in. If the Bible is truly accurate history, then this is a good thing. The more they dig up, the more you will be able to fill in the missing pieces. But BE HONEST. You have to actually accept the Bible's own timeline! You can't change the history of Persian Period and then think Solomon and David's timline is going to work out. You have to accept the Bible's dating of the 1st of Cyrus in 455BCE and go from there. IF the Bible says there were 70 years from the last deportation, then compare THAT with the evidence, not some convoluted explanation that requires you to doubt a certain part of the Bible to make something else fit. The moment you don't follow the Bible precisely, you will be comparing the wrong dating and will get the wrong results. When you have the correct dating, then everything from the astronomy to the RC14 dating falls right into place.
But if you don't use the Bible's true timeline, then there is plenty of reason to doubt the Bible isn't true. For instance, JWs date Solomon's rule some 127 years earlier than the Bible does, which is 67 years earlier than the secular archaeologists do who are already saying Solomon is dated to early. So how is that as far as building faith that the Bible is true? What is you're a witness faced with the RC14 evidence now pointing to 871BCE and your WTS is telling you per the Bible this happened 127 years earlier? How can you justify that? Now, true, I'm a hardcore fundamentalist like the rest and I have my suitcase of excuses why everything doesn't seem to work if it doesn't agree with the Bible, just to reassure myself, But still, one has to wonder. In the meantime, if you actually keep digging, then the Bible will always turn out accurate and true, as it has for me.
So I'm a very happy and very confident person as far as the Bible is concerned. Not just because I'm into prophecy and see some accurate dating being fulfilled but also because of some hardline research that has turned out very supportive of the Bible. It's just WONDERFUL, WONDERFUL!!
JCanon
JCanon
