King should stop 'borrowing' and repent
Published:Friday | March 14, 2014 | 12:00 AM
THE EDITOR, Sir:
If Mr Keiran King is interested in truth, and I am assuming he is, I would encourage him to not just read and regurgitate articles (and watch YouTube videos) that seek to debunk the Bible - but read and watch the rebuttals - and simply take time to think and reflect on facts.
For example, one blatant error that Mr King has unthinkingly repeated in his online column of March 12, 2014 titled 'The Bible isn't a divine text - it's a messy history book' is: "Resurrection during the winter solstice, and so on - were borrowed without apology. " Really? The resurrection took place in winter? The crucifixion took place at Passover (or if you prefer to be unbiblical - Good Friday). Neither Passover nor Good Friday is ever during the winter solstice (which is in December). This is just one example of putting one's faith in the critics of the Bible and not taking the time to think for oneself.
Just do a Google search for Mr King's statement and you will have to ask: Is it the Bible, or Mr King, who has "borrowed without apology"?
Greek Septuagint
Just to give another example of the faith Mr King has placed in myths he has read: He states, "The Bible ... is in reality ... originating from the 2nd century AD." Is Mr King aware that the Old Testament was translated from Hebrew into Greek at least two centuries BEFORE the birth of Jesus? Just look up 'Greek Septuagint', Mr King.
Regarding the New Testament, is he aware that Clement of Alexandria and Ignatius, who lived from circa AD 30-100 AD 30-107, respectively, quote from all four Gospels and from every book in the New Testament, except 2 John and 3 John? If these men died circa AD 100/107 and they quote from almost every New Testament book, the books they quote from must have been written prior to their death, suggesting first-century completion.
The reality is that all Mr King has done is naively and unthinkingly adopted as his own 'bible' the misinformation that others have spewed forth. These are old wives' tales and criticisms, and if Mr King had bothered to listen to the other side of the argument, he would not have darkened counsel without knowledge.
For those of us who know the Jesus of the Bible, who find that there is fullness of joy in His presence, that Jesus is a treasure for whom we gladly forsake all else, Mr King's article will remind us of when we, too, were lost and without Christ.
I, for one, have tasted and seen that the Lord is good, and I pray that one day Mr King will do the same. Take note, Mr King: The Bible has so far outlived its critics.
HOWARD VERMONT