Mormon President Disavows the Mormon Name

Mormon President Disavows the Mormon Name
In August of 2018, the president of the Mormon church, Russell M. Nelson, claimed that God personally revealed to him that names such as “LDS” and “Mormon” were offensive to Him. The Mormon president disavows the Mormon name because he says that these nicknames are offensive to God and are a “major victory for Satan.”

One of the problems with human-made churches is that they have a hard time naming themselves. Martin Luther did not want those who followed his teachings to call themselves “Lutherans” but his followers did not heed his plea. Many denominational names of religious groups identify their belief system such as “Methodist” or “Pentecostal.”

The name “Mormon” comes from a fictional character in the Book of “Mormon.” Many of us have heard of the “Mormon Tabernacle Choir” and programs like the “I am a Mormon” campaign. The “Meet the Mormons” movie began playing in Temple Square in 2014. The website for the denomination has been “Mormon.org.” That title has not been questioned until now. We have to wonder about why now and what the collateral consequences will be.

As the Mormon president disavows the Mormon name, he says the correct name for the Church is “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.” However, he says that “The Church” or the “Church of Jesus Christ” or “The Restored Church of Jesus Christ” are acceptable to God.

Nowhere in the Bible is there a command to the early Christians to call themselves by any title. Acts 11:26 tells us that the disciples were called “Christians” first at Antioch and that title is referenced only three times in the New Testament. Its use may have been a derogatory reference by the enemies of the early church. (See Acts 26:28.) It was a name given to them, not something they selected although Peter used it in 1 Peter 4:16.

The DOES GOD EXIST? ministry is not a product of any denomination and is not funded by any denomination. We are simply individuals trying to serve God by presenting evidence and encouraging people to do what the Bible says. The “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints” teaches and practices many things not consistent with the teachings of Christ and the apostles. For that reason, we do not associate with that sect or encourage people to follow their teachings. We urge people to simply follow Jesus and practice what is revealed in the New Testament.
–John N. Clayton © 2018
Reference: Salt Lake City Messenger November 218 from the Utah Lighthouse Ministry www.utlm.org.

Stromatolite – Oldest Fossil or Not

Stromatolite
For many years the textbooks in paleontology classes have said the stromatolite was the first life form to appear on Earth and that its formation was the product of chance biochemical reactions. Now there are some challenges to this model.

There were several reasons for promoting the stromatolite as the oldest life-form. One reason was that it fit evolutionary models and made sense as far as the production of atmospheric oxygen is concerned. The other reason was that a primitive plant which is a form of algae leaves a conical formation of calcium carbonate in the ocean today. Those formations are similar to the stromatolite formations found in ancient rocks. Scientists found those formations in such diverse locations as the Gunflint Chert in Canada, the Isua Belt in Greenland, and the Ediacaran formation in Australia. I have seen the formations in Australia and Canada, and they are very similar and easy to recognize.

It turns out that the formations appear to be volcanic and not biologic in origin. If the conical formations organically originated they should all have the point of the cone pointing up. In at least one recent find, the top of the cone was pointing down. Dissection of the cones shows they are an elongated ridge and not really a symmetrical cone. Biological cones are almost always very symmetrical. Rocks around the structures have been metamorphosed by heat and pressure. The recent conclusion of scientists studying stromatolites is that they are the product of metamorphic activity on volcanic material and are not biologic.

Not all of the experts in paleontology are willing to buy into the idea that a stromatolite results from tectonics and not biology. One of the reasons is that this would require an overhaul of the theoretical model for the development of life on planet Earth. The Bible simply says that the first life-forms God created were plants. The biblical sequence of plant formation in Genesis 1:12-13 was:

“deshe” meaning grass
Translated “grass” in KJV and “vegetation” in some newer translations.

“eseb” meaning naked seed or gymnosperm
Translated “herb” in the KJV and “plants bearing seed” in some newer translations.

“ets” meaning flowering tree or angiosperm
Translated “fruit tree” in KJV and “trees bearing fruit” in newer translations.

It will be interesting to see where the newest scientific controversy leads. But the lesson of history is that when science makes new discoveries and verifies them, they always support the biblical record if we take it literally. This appears to be one more example of that.
–John N. Clayton © 2018
Sources: Science News November 10, 2018, page 12 or online HERE
Nature for October 17, 2018 online HERE

Women’s Roles Controversy in Europe

Women's Roles Controversy
One of the most interesting characteristics of the women’s rights movement is their intolerance of any view that doesn’t fit their idea of what women’s roles should be. A classic example of this is the turmoil produced by a popular Swedish journalist named Greta Thurfjell. She wrote an article in which she suggested that being a housewife was a worthy goal for a woman who chose that vocation. “Feminists are not cool and have gone too far,” Thurfjell complained.

Feminist Jonna Sima responded that Thurfjell and her supporters “have no idea how hard women had to struggle to achieve the freedoms she takes for granted.” Numerous articles on both sides of the issue have filled newspapers in Europe, with abortion rights being the primary focus.

The problem here is that both sides looking at women’s roles are ignoring fundamental human rights in pushing their agenda. Sima characterizes Thurfjell’s view as “longing to be a submissive housewife devoted to making her man happy.” On the opposite side, the need for women to have the same political and economic rights certainly should not be contested by anyone.

No woman who wants to be a wife and a mother should be criticized for choosing that role. The Bible makes it clear that this is a worthy role for women. (See 1 Timothy 5:14.) Those who chose to be career women even in the day of Paul were accepted and honored. (See Acts 16:14-15.) Such women were vital to the financial support of Jesus and of the first-century church. (See Luke 8:3.)

As a public high school teacher, I have seen the disastrous effect of women who felt unfulfilled and abandoned the role of being a mother and a wife. The impact on children is frequently catastrophic. If a woman doesn’t want that role, she needs to think of the effect her choices have on others. God’s way works, but God does not require anyone to marry or to have children. If you don’t want to be a mother, don’t!

Women’s roles are just as important as men’s roles. Sometimes a role is forced upon us, and we have to do the best we can with what we have. In 1 Timothy 5:14 Paul stated the ideal that younger women marry and guide the house, committed to that role. Feminists need to focus on equal pay for equal work and not demean those women who choose to make a career of being a wife and a mother.
–John N. Clayton © 2018
Reference: The Week, November 16, 2018, page 14.

Jewish Feasts and Thanksgiving

Jewish Feasts and Thanksgiving
There are seven feasts that God told the ancient Israelite nation to observe. What is interesting is that the purpose of each one of these is similar to what Christians engage in and for the same reasons. You can see the connection between the Jewish feasts and Thanksgiving.

Take a look at these seven feasts and how we have the same needs:

1-The Feast of Unleavened Bread (Or Passover). Leviticus 23:5, Exodus 23:15, and Numbers 28:16-25. This feast celebrated the historical deliverance from Egypt. Our 4th of July originally had a similar purpose. The Lord’s Supper also remembers deliverance from sin – 1 Corinthians 11:23-26.

2-The Feast of Weeks or Harvest. Exodus 23:16 and 34:22 and Numbers 28:26. It was later known as Pentecost because it was celebrated on the 50th day from the Sabbath beginning the Passover. It was a time to remember the blessing of having grain crops. By the way, our first Thanksgiving occurred on the same date as Thanksgiving 2018 – November 22. The Plymouth Colonists and Wampanoag Indians celebrated it on that date in 1621. First Corinthians 16:1-2 and 2 Corinthians 8:1-5 express a similar joy at the blessings of God.

3-The Feast of Tabernacles (or Feast of Booths or Ingathering). Leviticus 23:34-43, Deuteronomy 16:13-15, and Numbers 29:12-38. This feast celebrated the harvesting of fruit from trees. Our Thanksgiving had a similar origin. (See number 2.)

4-Feast of the Sabbath – or Sabbath of Rest. Leviticus. 23:2-3 and Isaiah 58:13. It was a solemn assembly of thanking God for the nation of Israel. Our Independence day is similar.

5-Day of Blowing Trumpets. Numbers 29:1 and Leviticus 23:24. It was a sabbath and a memorial to celebrate the nation. Our Veterans Day and our Memorial Day are similar.

6-Day of Atonement. Leviticus 23:26-31 and Exodus 30:10. On the 10th day of the 7th month observed once a year a day Israel focused on individual personal sin and making atonement for that sin. Our Lord’s Supper has a connection to that concept every week, and 1 John 1:5-10 tells us that as Christians our atonement is continuous.

7-Feast of Purim. Esther 9:18-32 – This was a celebration established by Mordecai to celebrate the deliverance from Haman similar to our Memorial Day.

Israel had specific feasts to lift and remind their thinking to have an attitude of gratitude for all the blessing they had received. Shouldn’t we have that same spirit as we celebrate Thanksgiving? Romans 1:18-22 describes the enemies of God, and one of the indicators of their antagonism to God was that they were not thankful.

The connection between the Jewish feasts and Thanksgiving are evident. Make Thanksgiving special this year by expressing your sincere thanks for all the blessings God has given.
–John N. Clayton © 2018

Abraham Had Camels

Abraham Had Camels
It’s the case of the missing camels. One argument that biblical skeptics keep resurrecting is the claim that there were no camels in ancient Israel. In Genesis 24 Abraham’s servant took ten camels and went to find a wife for his son Isaac. The charge is that there were no camels in the Promised Land at that time so this account is in error. We want to know if it is true that Abraham had camels.

Camels are mentioned 22 times in Genesis and are mentioned again in Exodus 9:3, Leviticus 11:4, 1 Samuel 15:3, 1 Kings 10:2 and 2 Kings 8:9 as well as other passages. In modern times famed archaeologist William F. Albright claimed that there were no camels in the Holy Land until the 10th century B.C. National Geographic repeated that claim claim in 2014.

Dr. Mark Chavalas in the November/December 2018 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review makes it likely that Abraham had camels and the biblical account is not in error. He gives archaeological evidence that there were camels all around the Holy Land as early as the 4th millennium B.C. Here are five of the pieces of evidence Chavalas gives:

1) In the 4th millennium B.C., a bactrian camel (one with two humps) is portrayed in artwork in Eastern Iran.
2) In the 3rd millennium B.C., a dromedary (with one hump) appears on a plaque from modern day Iraq.
3) Camel skeletal remains from the 3rd millennium have been found in Iran.
4) Camel remains from 2400 B.C. were found in the Sumerian city of Shuruppak.
5) A Babylonian document from the 18th century B.C. contains the line “the milk of the camel is sweet.”

Abraham and his family came from Mesopotamia (Genesis 12) and moved to the land God promised to him. Migrating to this new land, Abraham, who was rich in livestock, would have brought his animals with him. (See Genesis 13:2.) So it seems evident that Abraham had camels. The attempts of skeptics to declare the Bible anachronistic is simply a case of letting prejudice override a reasonable search for evidence.
–John N. Clayton © 2018

Modern Misconceptions About the Flood

Modern Misconceptions about the Flood
Perhaps the most argued event in the Old Testament is the flood of Noah described in Genesis. For the past several days we have been examining some of the questions people have. Today we will look at two modern misconceptions about the flood.

Did the Ark come to rest on Mount Ararat? The answer to that question is “no!” Genesis 8:4 says that the Ark came to rest “upon the mountains of Ararat” which is not modern day Mount Ararat. This is of little interest except that the claims of some people that they found the Ark on modern-day Mount Ararat are clearly erroneous.

Was the Grand Canyon caused by the flood laying down strata and then carving the canyon by erosion? The answer to that question is also “no.” The rocks in the canyon are not of one deposition and are not flood strata. Floods leave a tangled mess of debris. The majority of rocks in the Grand Canyon are limestone which is a chemically precipitated rock. The limestone is interspersed with conglomerate, shale, desert deposits of sandstone, and some volcanic deposits. A flood would produce none of those except shale.

Do fossils in the Grand Canyon verify the flood? No, a flood produces a tangled mess of all kinds of remains of plants and animals. The rock layers in the Canyon have different animals at different layers. Each animal or plant grouping is a function of the environment in which they lived. That is not what a flood would do.

The question is not whether the flood happened, but rather what a flood would do and what remains from the flood. There are dozens of flood layers in the stratigraphy all over the American southwest, but which one might be related to Noah’s flood cannot be determined.

There are many modern misconceptions about the flood of Noah. The flood did not create the Grand Canyon. The rocks and fossils prove that. No one has found Noah’s Ark. The claims of someone finding the Ark have always turned out to be erroneous. We need to test every Spirit and not be sold a bill of goods by religious groups trying to back up their beliefs by claiming to have found the fossils of giants, an ark, or some other claimed artifact of the flood of Noah.
–John N. Clayton © 2018
We have a discussion of the flood in our video series program # 27 available on our doesgodexist.TV website. You can also look up information on the flood by doing a word search on our doesgodexist.org website search engine.

How Extensive Was the Flood of Noah?

How Extensive Was the Flood of Noah?
Perhaps the most argued event in the Old Testament is the flood of Noah described in Genesis. This week we have been examining some of the questions people ask. Today we will look at the question, “How extensive was the flood of Noah?

Taking the Bible literally does not mean a superficial reading of the King James translation of the Bible. You have to look at who wrote it, to whom it was written, why it was written, and how the people to whom it was written would have understood it. The language of Genesis 6-8 certainly seems to indicate that the waters of the flood covered the whole globe.

Many times biblical passages sound like the event was global when it clearly was not. Luke 2:1-3 says “There went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed…” Was that the whole globe or the Roman world? Did Rome collect taxes from the Incas, the Hopi, or the Denali? The people of the time would have understood that to mean the entire Roman world. In Colossians 1:23 Paul says that the gospel of Christ “was preached to every creature which is under heaven.” I have visited with the native people at the bottom of the Grand Canyon, and they have no record of the gospel ever having been preached to their ancestors there. Clearly, Paul was talking about the world that he knew.

The message of Genesis 6-8 is that humans discarded God and became corrupt to the point that God destroyed them by a flood. The one person who stayed faithful to God was a man named Noah who was warned that the event was coming. God gave him time to construct a way to save his family and the animals of his area. There is evidence to verify this that we have considered in this series of posts and which is available on our website.

How extensive was the flood of Noah? It ended the lives of all but the few people on the boat. The Bible tells us that a flood like that will not happen again. However, it also says that the Earth will be destroyed by a fire that melts the very elements of which we are all made ( 2 Peter 3:8-13).

We must listen to the lesson of Noah and not try to deny the historical event on which it is based. I would suggest the flood covered the whole inhabited Earth of Noah’s day. It probably did not cover uninhabited lands thousands of miles away from where Noah lived. If you have a different opinion, that is fine, but don’t miss the message of the story.
–John N. Clayton © 2018
We have a discussion of the flood in our video series program # 27 available on our doesgodexist.TV website. You can also look up information on the flood by doing a word search on our doesgodexist.org website search engine.

Where Did the Water Go After Noah’s Flood?

Where Did the Water Go After Noah's Flood?
Perhaps the most argued event in the Old Testament is the flood of Noah described in Genesis. This week we have been examining some of the questions people ask. Today we will look at the question, “Where did the water go after Noah’s flood?

If the flood covered the whole Earth so that the highest mountain was under water by 15 cubits (Genesis 7:19-20), what happened to all that water? Genesis 8:1-3 says that “God made a wind to pass over the Earth” and stopped the fountains of the deep and the windows of heaven. That indicates three methods of removing the water. If the fountains of the deep involved underground springs that gushed massive amounts of water, that water could be removed by flowing back into the caverns from which it came. If “the windows of heaven” indicates an extraterrestrial source, it is difficult to suggest any significant return. High winds which the Bible mentions would maximize evaporation, but there are some other factors to consider.

It is important to point out that nowhere in the Bible is there an indication that the waters were level. We will discuss the extent of the flood in our next post, but the known earth at the time of this event was a limited area. At the Straits of Gibraltar, there is a normal fault with the downthrown side to the west. At the base of that fault is a large waterfall gouge. The Glomar Challenger Oceanographic Research Vessel has documented what appears to be an opening of the Straits with the whole Atlantic Ocean having access to the Mediterranean Sea at a time in the past, which was a desert before the flood. It is reasonable to propose a model where hydrostatic pressure could drive water up the western shore of the Mediterranean which is of course where the biblical story takes place.

While this is speculative, it does show that a limited flood to the known world at the time is possible. The water could merely return to normal static levels after the event. There are several other models based on recent evidence that assist in explaining the question of where the water came from and answering the question of where did the water go after Noah’s flood. Very important to this question is, “What was the extent of the flood?” We will examine that question tomorrow.
–John N. Clayton © 2018
We have a discussion of the flood in our video series program # 27 available on our doesgodexist.TV website. You can also look up information on the flood by doing a word search on our doesgodexist.org website search engine.

How Could All Those Animals Fit in Noah’s Ark?

How Could All those Animals Fit in Noah's Ark?
Perhaps the most argued event in the Old Testament is the flood of Noah described in Genesis. For the past two days, we have been examining some of the questions people ask. Today we will look at the question, “How could all those animals fit in Noah’s ark?

The Bible gives the dimensions of the ark, and it indeed was huge, especially for that time. How do you get the 25 million or so species of animals on Earth today into that ship? The answer is that you couldn’t.

Genesis 6:20 lists the same groups that are described in Genesis 1. Those are (1) fowl, (2) cattle, (3) “creeping things,” and (4) fish. We pointed out in our lessons on evolution that the word “kind” in Hebrew is not the same as “species” in modern scientific terms. The word “kind” is the Hebrew word “min,” and the Bible tells us in both the Old and New Testaments that there are four kinds: the flesh of fish, the flesh of birds, the flesh of beasts, and the flesh of man. First Corinthians 15:39 identifies these four and Genesis 1 identifies them as well. The same groupings are used in Genesis 6 to describe what Noah took on the ark.

The Hebrew word “remes” is rendered as “creeping thing” in some translations of the Bible. “Sherets” is also translated creeping thing (see Leviticus 11). “Remes” was an animal the Jews could eat, but “sherets” was not. “Remes” clearly refers to goats and sheep – animals that could be eaten by the Jews. But “sherets” refers to things like snakes and lizards which they could not eat.

So how could all those animals fit in Noah’s ark? The point of all this is that Noah didn’t take two poodles, two cockapoos, two German shepherds, etc. He took two dog-like animals. Similarly, he took two bovines, not the dozens of varieties that exist today. There are over 100 varieties of chickens, but he took two of that group. In short, Noah’s ark would have had enough room, and the evolutionary change that has taken place since has given us the variety we have today.
–John N. Clayton © 2018
We have a discussion of the flood in our video series program # 27 available on our doesgodexist.TV website. You can also look up information on the flood by doing a word search on our doesgodexist.org website search engine.

When Did Noah’s Flood Happen?

When Did Noah's Flood Happen?
Perhaps the most argued event in the Old Testament is the flood of Noah described in Genesis. Yesterday we looked at the question of whether it really happened. Now let’s consider when did Noah’s flood happen?

People have suggested many dates for the flood. The instructions given to Noah indicate that fabricated metals had not yet been invented. Genesis 6:14 indicates that the ark was made of “gopher wood” and covered with pitch. We don’t know what gopher wood was, but some wood expands when it is wet, and pitch can be used as a waterproofing sealant. The planing of wood to make planks had not been invented yet, so the construction of the ark is doubly amazing and modern portrayals are wildly misleading.

The Bible doesn’t answer the question of “When did Noah’s flood happen.” All calculations must be based on many assumptions that may or may not be correct. Therefore, there is no way to date the flood accurately. The one thing we can say is that it was very early in human history.

The instructions God gave to Noah suggest that the flood event happened before the smelting of metals and machining of wood. The stone age is the label we have given this time period, and scientists call it the Neolithic period. Our modern calendars would put that age at around 10,000 years ago. Noah would have used the primitive tools available at that time.

Another often-asked question is, “How could all those animals fit in the ark?” We will look at that tomorrow.
–John N. Clayton © 2018
We have a discussion of the flood in our video series program # 27 available on our doesgodexist.TV website. You can also look up information on the flood by doing a word search on our doesgodexist.org website search engine.