I came to this startling realization based on personal conversations with professing atheists. The first I recall is a written exchange with someone I contacted via a forum for Air Force Academy alumni. The discussion made its way around to evolution, creation, and the existence of God. I engaged in that heated argument for a time but later decided to do something more personal with the main participant. I wrote him a letter and included a copy of Jason Lisle’s Ultimate Proof of Creation. It must have made an impression because exactly one year later, he wrote his first and only reply. Here is part of that letter:

I would never honor such a creature, even if it meant eternal suffering for me. Knowing that I’ve kowtowed tot he kind of evil that would condemn someone to untold horrors just because that person didn’t pledge to that evil…that would ruin me worse than any threat of torture or pain. I could never give my loyalty to such a being, knowing that it harms others in that kind of fashion, for that kind of reason. No, thank you. Even assuming you’re correct, I’ll take the lake of fire and whatever’s behind Door Number 3. [emphasis mine]

This perspective stuns me. It’s beyond comprehension that someone would choose Hell over Heaven not simply because they don’t believe in God but because they don’t like who he is. I have wondered in the past if it’s even worth it to try to prove God’s existence, which led to me to ask this on Twitter:

If I could prove God is real to your satisfaction, would you repent & worship him? #atheist #atheism

— Robert Rouse (@soullibertyweb) August 24, 2012

Here’s one very telling reply:

@soullibertyweb The Christian God?Probably not.Any being willing to send his creations to eternal suffering is not worthy of respect.

— askegg (@askegg) August 24, 2012

This says God is the evil one, not mankind. It turns the nature of good and evil on its head, aptly described in Isaiah 5:20. This is not a limited view among atheists. I met with another man whose “de-conversion” testimony revolved around the teaching of Dan Barker. Barker is a writer and frequent debater who strongly argues that God is evil and unworthy of worship.

Speaking for myself, if the Bible heaven and hell exist, I would choose hell. Having to spend eternity pretending to worship a petty tyrant who tortures those who insult his authority would be more hellish than baking in eternal flames. There is no way such a bully can earn my admiration. (Godless, page 170) [emphasis mine]

God does not send people to Hell without giving them a choice or a chance. As shown so clearly in the open, honest statements by the atheists above, they willingly choose Hell over Heaven because they hate God. And, no, I don’t believe hate is too strong a word here.  Have you talked with people who have this attitude?  How would you respond to them?

Click the image to download a high-quality PDF. Image Credit: Rodrigo Quezada Reed in collaboration with Robert Rouse. Statue by PixArtAnimation.

-Daniel 2 (604 B.C.)

Editor’s Note: The following is a guest post by a student in Spain.  His contribution is a true blessing.  If you have an interest in graphic design or data visualization and would like to contribute to this blog, please contact me.

The Book of Daniel, which many call the Old Testament’s Revelation, develops the story of certain captive Jews in Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon’s court. The six first chapters narrate Daniel’s historical experience there.[i] The others are visions and prophecies. Nevertheless, the vision we illustrate here is situated on the second chapter, because it was originally revealed to Nebuchadnezzar one night, in one of his dreams.

It’s not strange that night Nebuchadnezzar woke up extremely frightened and nervous, hungry to know the meaning of his nightmare, because what he saw was a heavy and highly codified message from God Almighty to all humanity. It was a lesson that he personally learned only after another nightmare, in which he became like an animal (Daniel 4).

God rules not only in heaven, but also on earth.

It is generally known from history and other visions of Daniel (ch. 7, 8, 10) that Babylon, Medo-Persia and Greece are identified respectively with the head, the breast and arms, and the belly and thighs of the statue of Nebuchadnezzar’s first nightmare. That means that Nebuchadnezzar received in life, via Daniel, a prophecy of the future of his power (of gold) through the times. His kingdom (God never recognized huge kingdoms as empires) was going to be crushed by an inferior one, Medo-Persia (of silver). That inferior kingdom was also going to be destroyed by another one, Greece (of brass), commanded by Alexander the Great, disciple of Aristotle. These transitions happened, approximately, in 539 B.C. and 330 B.C.

It is harder to discern the political identity of the legs (of iron), the feet and the fingers (both part of iron, part of clay). Traditionally in the West it has been interpreted that the legs of iron represent Rome. We agree, since Rome was strong enough to rule over the entire Mediterranean Sea, kill the Prince of the princes (Lord Jesus), persecute his primitive followers and take away the daily sacrifice by means of cast down the Second Temple of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. This was explicitly prophesied in Daniel 8, a chapter which also contemplates a spiritual resurrection of Rome in the end of the times.

But there are more reasons to believe that Rome was implicitly indicated in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. As in the case of Medo-Persia (two arms, related to the bear of Daniel 7:5), anatomical details provide us with some help. Rome was divided into Western Rome (that fell in 476 A.D.) and Eastern Rome, Byzantium (that survived until 1453 A.D.). That gives us a picture of an operation more complex than the simple division of an empire. The Rome of iron, and its partition, was the instrument to preserve for the world to come the basic ingredients to build today’s democracies – political systems where common people (clay) mixed with old powers (iron) have the pleasure to call themselves kings and lords, sovereigns, something that Nebuchadnezzar learned not to do long time ago.

From Personalist Sovereignty to Popular Sovereignty

Rome preserved Greek philosophy, Roman law and Christian values from the violence of the rest of the world. Greek philosophy contains the elemental rebellion against God: we humans are the center. Roman law articulates the legal consequences of that self-centered mentality. Christian values with their distrust towards the human heart in matters of power and their defense of equality among human beings helps ensure that power is enjoyed by every one, at least symbolically. This is true even if the origin of democracy and the concept of popular sovereignty is radically against God, who is Sovereign not only on heaven, but also on earth. Still, it is better to establish popular sovereignty rather than personalist sovereignties of the ancient world. But we must always have in mind that all this is only temporary. When Jesus returns, there will be no democracy.

Roman law was preserved through Byzantium, thanks to the efforts of Justinian I. Biblical knowledge was hidden in Latin by the power-hungry Popes of the Roman Catholic Church until the Reformation. As in ancient Babylon, God used evil rulers as a means of judgment. It will happen with current democracies too, which prove that emperors and common people alike are evil – capable of saving the trees while at the same time killing children without hesitation. We are capable of giving up our freedom, or using it, for the benefit of a fanatic while forgetting the consequences of that decision for others (remember: Hitler and Hamas were legally elected).

In 1992 Francis Fukuyama became famous for a book entitled “The end of history and the last man”. Although the author refers specifically to liberal democracies, the text suggests that democracy in general seems to be the end of the history. It is the political system longed for by global citizenship. It’s an idea that’s impossible to remove from people’s minds. Even in clear dictatorships like Russia, China, Iran or North Korea, states are forced to legitimize themselves with mandatory references to their people, in many cases using a communist discourse to do so. There are very few governments not self-identified as democratic.[ii] Nobody, except God with his Egyptian plagues of the Apocalypse, can convince the world that we are not truly sovereign, but only clay under the feet of a King who is God and fights sonorously against our wickedness.

That was Nebuchadnezzar’s nightmare, and is the nightmare of the world: the idea of a God who rules upon the entire globe from Zion, as it happened prophetically on a small scale during King David’s times in Israel. Let’s learn from Nebuchadnezzar’s experience, paying attention to his public testimony of repentance in Daniel 4. He was the head of gold.

The Struggle

There is a battle between humanity and new humanity, between Greece and Zion, between democracy and God’s future monarchy. In the past, Hebrews didn’t want to live under the control of their King, God.  They asked for a human king to be more like the surrounding nations (1 Samuel 12). Now that kingdoms are unpopular among the nations, Israel has embraced democracy, partly due to the modernization work of figures like Theodor Herzl. But there is no escape, their genuine King will return.

It is one thing that the people leave the south, Egypt, and another that Egypt leaves the people. It is one thing that the people leave the north, Rome and Greece, and another that Rome and Greece leave the people. Jeremiah 16:14-15: “Therefore behold, the days come,” saith the Lord, “that it shall no more be said, ‘The Lord liveth who brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt,’ but, ‘the Lord liveth who brought up the children of Israel from the land of the north, and from all the lands whither He had driven them.’ And I will bring them back into their land that I gave unto their fathers”.

It is in this context that some scriptures can be understood more deeply:

I have bent Judah for Me,
filled the bow with Ephraim,
and raised up thy sons, O Zion,
against thy sons, O Greece,
–Zechariah 9:13

As I live, saith the Lord God,
surely with a mighty hand
and with a stretched out arm
and with fury poured out,
will I rule over you.
–Ezekiel 20:33

Why do the heathen rage,
and the people devise a vain thing?
The kings of the earth set themselves,
and the rulers take counsel together,
against the Lord
and against His Anointed, saying,

“Let us break Their bonds asunder,
and cast away Their cords from us.”

He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh;
the Lord shall hold them in derision.
Then shall He speak unto them in His wrath,
and vex them in His sore displeasure:

“Yet have I set My King
upon My holy hill of Zion.”

“I will declare the decree:
The Lord hath said unto Me,

‘Thou art My Son;
this day have I begotten Thee.
Ask of Me, and I shall give Thee
the heathen for Thine inheritance,
and the uttermost parts
of the earth for Thy possession.
Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron;
Thou shalt dash them to pieces
like a potter’s vessel.’”

Be wise now therefore, O ye kings;
be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
Serve the Lord with fear
and rejoice with trembling.
Kiss the Son, lest He be angry
and ye perish from the way,
when His wrath is kindled but a little.

Blessed are all they
that put their trust in Him.
–Psalm 2

Yes, my dear child, there is a man something like you have heard about in stories and seen in movies. I can assure you he is real. In fact, the real man is much better than you might imagine. Let me tell you about this person we all like to talk about at Christmas time.

People around the world ask him for the things they want. We eagerly anticipate his coming, expecting him to bring everything we’re waiting for. But, he doesn’t grant every wish. He knows that some gifts are not good for us (James 4:3). We would have wished for something different if we knew everything (even the future) like he does. Besides, the gifts he brings are usually far greater than anything we can imagine.

Many people – especially your parents, family, and friends – will wrap presents in boxes in hopes that those things will bring each other joy. They might, but this feeling goes away after a short while. This man I know makes gifts that cannot be put in a box under a tree, decorated with pretty paper and bows. They are gifts of love, joy, peace, and life. These are the ones that last forever.

We wait all year for our gifts, but we don’t have to! He can answer our requests any time he chooses. He doesn’t have to ride a reindeer-driven sleigh around the world in one night because he is always everywhere, all at once. He does not need a magic bag or little elves to work year-round, either; he can create anything in an instant just by speaking. You do not have to go to the mall and sit on his lap to talk to him. You only need to get on your knees and pray.

He does know if you have been naughty or nice because he knows everything about us, even how many hairs we have on our head! He keeps a list (Rev 3:5), but he doesn’t use it to keep track of who should or shouldn’t get presents this year. He is gracious enough to give precious things even to those who have done something wrong in the past.

You may have seen pictures showing Santa as a very large white-haired man in red with a round belly like a “bowl full of jelly.” Well, the man I’m telling you about is very large, indeed. He is so huge that even the whole universe is not big enough to hold him! I can also tell you with some certainty that he does have white hair (Rev 1:14) and a beard (Isaiah 50:6).

Yes, dear little one, there is a man like this and so much more … but I must tell you his name is not Santa Claus. Others may think I am silly or strange for describing something different than what they believe. Do not worry about that. The person I know is far more real, more powerful, more loving, and more generous than Santa could ever hope to be. He is more than just a man. He is God in the flesh. His name is Jesus Christ.

The growth of technology evangelism has given rise to comparisons between that and certain aspects of religion. The very use of the term “evangelist” strikes up scenes of street preaching like the one above. More often, it takes the form of a “crusade” (a.k.a. developer’s conference) with bloggers and other media types frantically covering minute-by-minute revelations of new product features and specs.

H/T Ben Lang via Google+

I use the term “fanatic” advisedly. The brand loyalty among some Apple users has inspired more than its fair share of parodies and ridicule for their over-the-top defense of all products beginning with “i.” One anthropologist, perhaps tongue-in-cheek, compares Apple fandom with revival meetings.

Google has built enough of a similar following among Android users to spark conflict with the iFanboys. I have seen more than one heated exchange arguing the merits of Google’s mobile operating system versus iOS to recognize this extends beyond product preference. In those conflicts, it’s less about technology choice and more about one’s communal identity.

This connection between brand identity and personal identity solidifies the self-defensive “I’m right and you’re wrong” attitude. Wars of words get fought over whose truth is the truth and people come away with hurt feelings – all over issues like screen resolution and battery life! These reactions aren’t surprising; it’s human nature to connect strongly with a like-minded community and react negatively to competing tribes. Some just choose the Android Community instead of something less geeky.

Onlookers of this spectacle understand that it’s only a matter of opinion. “Hey, you have your device and that works for you. Just don’t go around pushing your preferences like they’re absolute.” If that sounds familiar, this is also the attitude many people take toward religious discussion. “You have your religion, I have mine. You do what works for you and leave me alone.”

In contrast to the mobile device wars, the latter goes beyond individual taste. We cannot build a worldview on such fickle things. It must be built on unchanging truth – the kind found in God’s Word. When we evangelize this “user’s manual for life,” recognize it isn’t about selling something that will help a person reach their goals or better carry out a task. It is about their everlasting soul.

We must do our best to share the Gospel with a world steeped in covetousness for material things that do not satisfy. Let us do so with the realization it isn’t about showing another person whose right. It is about sharing the truth of God’s love and salvation.

The best approach to studying the Bible is to put everything in its proper context.  We get to know the people in a story by understanding their relationships.  We learn to appreciate cultural references by knowing what else was going on the world at the time and in what geopolitical arena it occurred.  The new features in Logos are designed to help ministry leaders gather this kind of context.

Sean Boisen, Director of Content Innovation, gives a good overview:

The Most Comprehensive Search Available

The most significant thing about Bible Facts, Clause Search, and the various guides is the database behind it all. Their team has digitally linked countless words with the person, place, or thing they describe. To understand this from a user perspective, compare results when searching for Jesus.  In popular online search tools and competing software platforms  I found 942 verses.  Using Clause Search I found 6,773 references to him.

The difference is that Logos knows which verses talk about Jesus but don’t use one of his names. A prime example is John 3:16: Logos finds it in a search for “Jesus” while others come up empty.  The same applies to physical locations or objects that are the subject of a phrase but may not be named directly.  To appreciate this more fully, there are at least 70,000 personal pronouns (by my rough count) to digitally tag to make this work. Logos went beyond that into aliases, other nouns and even the implied subjects of verbs. In case you missed it in the video above, that is why it took a team of people three years to complete.  I applaud them for that kind of dedication and concern for fine details.

Bible Facts: People, Places, and Things

Certain features are common to everything in Bible Facts.  You get a short description, verse list, links to the books and media in your library, and original language information. Searching for a person returns their relationships (visually and in list form), roles (king, priest, etc), known aliases, and key life events.  Search for a place to get an array of maps and that location’s lat/long linking to a Google view.

Auto-completion suggestions help you find the right information when a search term could describe multiple things.  For example, typing in “Israel” will suggest either the person named Israel (a.k.a. Jacob), the geographic area or the people group known by that name.  It also gives some results from events containing that keyword.

These features work well and are easy to navigate.  They go a long way in helping to connect facts together in ways that give you a fuller understanding of each story.  The people, places and things you can learn about in the Bible Facts tool are all easily accessible with the Explorer pane.  I highly recommend keeping that open all the time.

My only disappointment is that the media provided give small windows of information, not a big picture. One graphic has Jesus’ genealogy from Luke (the line through Joseph). A separate image has the one from Matthew (the line through Mary).  There is no graphic showing his complete lineage in one view.  Maps have the same challenge.  Each shows select places of interest but none show every place mentioned in the Bible in the zoom-able type of interface I love about online maps (known as a “slippy” map). These aren’t easy problems to solve but if anyone can pull it off, Logos would be the company to do it.

Timeline

By contrast, the new timeline offers all biblical events and world history in a single dynamic view.  Choose to see as few or as many years as you’d like.  Filter out events not mentioned in scripture and filter further by keyword.  Then, click on an event to get all the details your digital library has to offer.  Clicking the “more” button brings you to an outline view of major periods.  That’s the kind of stuff I was expecting to see in maps and family trees.  It’s a great user experience in those respects, but it lacks smooth linkage between events and the associated text.

It takes several clicks to get from a selected time period back to the passage of the Bible which deals with it.  Going the opposite direction, when reading the Bible I can find no easy way to discover where a passage falls on the timeline without some creative searching involved.  If the goal is to gain historical context of a biblical story, why is the timeline so far removed from the source text?  I can get there in one click from other resources which mention a year, so why not make it equally well-connected with chapter and verse? This is an obvious shortfall that needs to be addressed in the next update.

Note: the Timeline feature is not offered in the Starter package but is there in all others.

Passage Analysis

Given my propensity for data visualization, I wanted to specifically deal with a feature which is not new in this version but is focused on graphical analysis. I give it 2 out of 5 stars. The pericope comparison is easy to follow and clearly shows how different Bible versions split up and name sections. That’s the first star. Word trees are a concise, easy way to show repetitions and discover literary structures. Another star performer.

The remaining three visualizations get zero stars because they break a cardinal rule: label your axes. The Cluster Graph appears to be an x,y scatter plot but has no text telling what either axis represents. What is it comparing? Why is one translation on the top-right while the others are scattered to the left, right, bottom, and every place in between?

The Morph River and Version River do slightly better by including verse numbers on the horizontal axis labels, but still nothing on the vertical axis. I assume it has something to do with how many words are different between the base text and the one(s) it compares.  It may be a raw number or it could be a percentage – I just don’t know.  Both use a chart type which is ill-advised by data visualization experts because the eye has a hard time comparing values with fluid reference points.

Readers may find my criticism a little too picky.  Average users may not have much need for any of these graphs and won’t think it’s any big deal.  Take these comments with the understanding that data visualization is my main area of interest these days.  It’s what I focus on the most because it’s something I love.  This company has a reputation for exceptional quality which makes me believe they can do better information design than what I described.

Who It’s For and What It Costs

Logos products have a higher price tag than anything else you’ll find on the shelf at the local Christian bookstore.  The biggest reason is it has almost as many resources as a small bookstore would. Prices range from $294 for a Starter package all the way up to $4,979 for the top-level Portfolio package.  You can get anywhere from 207 to 2,563 high-quality resources.  Most people not involved in full-time ministry or seminary would consider both the price and volume of content a bit too much to handle.

Is it worth the cost to those who can afford it and would have a use for everything from original language lexicons to sermon helps?  Yes, it is.  Publisher’s Weekly reports the average price of non-fiction e-books is $6.47.  I reviewed Logos 5 Silver which is listed at $999.95 including 699 resources.  That’s $1.43 each (read: huge bargain).  On top of that, the books and media are smart-tagged, linked to features not found on any e-reader, and they’re synchronized across platforms and devices.  Pile on a 15% introductory discount and things begin to look even more attractive.  For the “smart shoppers,” Logos sometimes offers deeper discounts at large conferences or training events.  Be sure to ask about that the next time you attend one of those.

Note: existing Logos users should see this post from CEO Bob Pritchett to better understand upgrade options and costs.

What to Expect in the Future

I don’t have inside knowledge of Logos.  For that, I point you to Sean Boisen’s blog which promises to offer that in the current series of posts.  From the changes I’ve seen in the past two versions of their flagship product, the trend is toward linking the content you’re studying to the context you need at all levels of detail - right down to the jot and tittle.  Their challenge for the future is finding better ways for us to explore the richest data on the market.  I can’t wait to see what they come up with next.

Screenshots

Textual Analysis

One of the more difficult areas of big data is text mining.  It is “unstructured” in the sense that it isn’t arranged in a way a computer can easily understand.  Machines have a very difficult time with natural language, though major search engines and other startups are making great strides in that area.  For the most part, language is analyzed according to word frequency or proximity to other words of a known type. I know of at least two practical examples in biblical studies.

First is Steven Boyd’s work in the RATE project.  He presented a statistical approach to determining whether a passage is prose or poetry.  Specifically, he looked at the distribution of four types of finite verbs in sections that are indisputably poetic and those which are prose.  We can then take a text in which the genre is controversial (Genesis 1:1-2:3 in this case) and compare the distribution of verb forms to appropriately categorize them.  Boyd’s study was limited enough that it wouldn’t be put in the big data category but the techniques would be similar with a much larger set of passages.

Another project published at openbible.info explores the “sentiment” of every biblical event. In basic terms, a program calculates the frequency of words generally considered to convey a positive sentiment vs. those that are more negative.  This approach is more useful to marketers studying customer reaction to their brand than serious biblical analysis but I do think it’s a good starting point and will prove more useful as language processing algorithms become more advanced and widespread.

Bible Codes

A far more well-known and controversial field is that of Bible codes.  To even approach a debate on the significance or meaning of messages some claim God encrypted in the Bible, we must have good data to back it up – and lots of it.  Consider a well-known example: by taking every 50 letters of either Genesis or Exodus, it spells out the word “Torah.”  To argue for or against the notion that this is evidence of divine cryptography, we must know how likely it is we’ll find the same phenomenon elsewhere.  That means gathering writings in the same language from the same time period as well as books from other languages and periods.  In other words, big data.

Books, software, and videos abound with claims of similar discoveries from simple to more complex and unlikely phrases.  I have not gone through the statistical rigor of verifying or refuting the claims myself, but some seem quite compelling.  In any case, newer technologies and mathematical discoveries are sure to shed new light on this subject as time passes.

Other Big Data Applications

Fresh possibilities abound, from authorship analysis to readability, n-grams and much more. It is an exciting time to be involved in big data programming and visualization.  It won’t answer questions about where we come from, why we’re here, or where we’re going any better than God’s words have already spoken, but it does have some potential to expand our understanding of those words.  In what ways do you think big data could aid Bible studies?

One of their ideas is to re-imagine the way people navigate online discussions.  I’ll spare the details for now; just know that my experience has shown this encourages conversations to go on and on with multiple participants.  However, it shares a limitation common to almost all such tools: you can only directly reply to one person at a time.  The best workaround I’ve seen for this is to “mention” other people so they’ll get a notification of your message even if they aren’t in a “To:” box.

These limitations don’t exist in real-life group conversations.  Since I mentioned my goal of defining the conversational structure of biblical people, consider an example in that context.  Jesus is speaking with his disciples.  One of them raises a question or makes a statement that requires a response from their teacher.  Does he respond only to one person? He might, but often he will address the group.  Now, complicate it further.  A council is arguing theology among themselves. Jesus steps into their conversation, addressing the group to answer multiple questions with one statement. It’s not in direct reply to a single person or point.

Do you see that this could not take place using today’s online discussion tools?  True, replies can be seen by the world, but you must address your reply to a specific statement made by a particular person.  Incredibly, the oldest communication technology on the internet is the one that allows you the most freedom in choosing intended recipients: e-mail!  I routinely get a message that requires a reply and I choose to send it to more people than were originally included.  Conversely, I may get a mass e-mail but only respond to the sender.  Or, I may send it on to a completely new person.  I can’t do that as easily or effectively on Facebook, Twitter, Disqus, etc. Perhaps that’s one reason that e-mail just won’t die.

I can envision scenarios where tools that overcome those boundaries may improve upon real-life exchanges.  Maybe someone said something I really want to respond to but can’t because of an interruption.  By the time I find a break in the conversation, we’re on a different subject.  To speak what has been in my head that whole time would invite awkward stares.  To go back in time to an earlier point in a written dialogue might not be so awkward and I don’t have to worry about interruptions.  Everyone gets a turn to speak.  On second thought, maybe that’s not an improvement after all…

If we can develop computer technologies which allow for the complexities of real-life conversations (startup buddy, I’m talking to YOU!) then I may find a better way to capture biblical exchanges in an electronic database. Doing so may help us better understand the whole arc of the Bible which can help us better understand ourselves. Let’s have a conversation about that some time.  Find me on Google+ or in the comment section below.

This and all other files included in MetaV can be downloaded here.

I can recall two experiences, both of which occurred in a single afternoon, which taught me more about handling tough situations than anything else I remember.  It was during an Air Force training exercise in Japan.  The scenario was to repair a damaged runway so (make-believe) fighter jets could land.  My job was to keep track of what was happening and give updates to our commander while being interrupted by threats of chemical attacks, insurgent strikes, and whatever else the training group could invent to make things more difficult.

For one of my half-hourly updates, I changed the completion time estimate by a large margin.  Our commander immediately called to chew me out for being inconsistent, wishy-washy.  How could he trust my promise if I didn’t even trust myself?  A lot of pretend dollars and missions were at stake. If we were off by even 30 seconds, the fictitious planes couldn’t land and we would fail the training exercise.  It was the only time other than at the Air Force Academy I was severely scolded by a superior officer.  Lesson learned: consistency builds trust.

Later in the afternoon, things got more intense.  We had planes that needed to land within the hour – damaged, low on fuel – either they were going to land safely or crash when they hit an incomplete or sub-par repair.  The commander called me again: “Can we land these planes in time?”  In this scenario, the fighters were expected to arrive within a minute or two of my estimate.  We had no room for error.  None. I told him yes, we’ll get it done.  After I hung up the phone, the highest-ranking sergeant muttered: “That’s balls.”

The well-seasoned folks within earshot had done this many times before.  I was barely 22 years old.  They knew the consequences we’d face if I was wrong.  Our ability to get this right in training reflected our ability to get it right for real on our upcoming deployment to Iraq.  They also knew how much work was left.  If we hadn’t compacted the soil enough, gotten it smooth enough, secured the matting well enough…bad things could happen.  If my “yes” turned out to be wrong, that earlier rebuke from the commander wouldn’t be the one I remembered.  The next one would be far worse.

I didn’t say we could do it because I was a cocky Academy grad (which I was back then).  I didn’t say it because I was scared of telling my boss “no.”  I did it because I knew the guys out there could hustle and do it right the first time, on time.  I trusted their experience, ability, and motivation.  I was right.  They got it done.  The planes landed (on paper) as scheduled and the practice repair met all standards.  The guys I was with that day treated me a little differently from then on.  Lesson two: confidence earns respect.

These are very basic things you learn in Leadership 101. I am reminded of those lessons often as I see more and more failures of leadership in our country.  It may be a President voicing inconsistent foreign policy, a corporate executive who won’t make a decision for fear of personal ruin, or a father sitting on the couch while his family is in spiritual decline.  Yet, hope remains for a better day.

I have confidence that our trials are temporary because I believe in a God who is eternally consistent.  He keeps his promises.  He is worthy not just of respect but of worship.  He has more than earned trust; his character demands complete faith.

This is the perspective I hope to keep in focus as our sin-cursed world “groans and travails” in ever-increasing frequency (Rom 8:22) until God fulfills his promise to restore creation to its original perfection (Rev 21-22).  Remember that when you see wars breaking out in the Middle east, corrupt executives shoved into federal prison, or endure the daily struggles of a dysfunctional family.  Man’s leadership often fails.  God’s lordship never will.

I tend to be a “power user” or even a creator of technology meant to help spread the knowledge of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  I share ideas on a very wide range of topics of concern to Christians.  I have covered abortion, science, design, prophecy, data visualizations galore, and created a handful of simple apps.  My communication style is  mainly oriented toward demonstrating new concepts instead of discussing them.  For instance, I could have written a post on how useful I thought Wolfram|Alpha could be and linked to a  couple of things there.  But, I didn’t.  I wrote on the size of the New Jerusalem and embedded a Wolfram|Alpha widget that lets you type the size of one person’s “house” and let it tell you how many of those “houses” could fit in that city.

Most of the time the “tech” part of this site is subtle like that.  The main exception is MetaV, my ever-expanding project to collect, visualize, and communicate data on biblical people, places, and periods of time.  Some of the visualizations using the data in MetaV are featured on the home page.  Others can be found under “Tools.”

Years ago when I started this site, I wrote this about the internet:

As we marvel at the technological achievements of our time, God finds a new way every day to remind me that the inventors of this virtual universe are worthy only to worship at the feet of the Creator of the actual universe.

I still feel that way all the time (you can read more on the “About” page). My hope is that readers would come to see things that way, too, but also recognize the rich opportunities before us. I want to make the most of the achievements in the Information Age to evangelize a lost world and train up disciples that grow in grace and the knowledge of the truth.  If you’re a new reader or just someone I haven’t heard from before who feels the same way, I’d love to hear from you in the comments below or on Google+.

Multiple news outlets have broken the story of a project which puts to rest a major argument supporting Darwinist ideology.  It’s called the ENCODE (Encyclopedia of DNA Elements) project , described as a “Google Maps for the Human Genome.”  NPR reports some initial conclusions and their implications:

For decades, scientists thought that most of our genetic code was essentially useless — basically filler between our genes. Only a tiny fraction — the part that has genes in it — really mattered, according to this thinking. [...] What has been called junk DNA is actually teeming with an intricate web of molecular switches that play crucial roles in regulating genes. The ENCODE project scientists found at least 4 million of these regulatory regions so far.

This is fantastic research. I do wish scientists had never called any of it “Junk DNA.” That idea was born out of the evolutionary paradigm that dismissed it as “useless filler,” like the failed “vestigial organ” arguments of yesteryear. Ideas like that hold back scientific progress.

Looking at it from the perspective that this code is here for a reason, placed there by an intelligent designer, curiosity is sparked: “What’s it here for?” “What does it do?” “Let’s find out!” No, the most important concept in biology is not evolution. It is the notion that biological structures have a function and their purpose can be discovered through scientific research. Evolution News has a breakdown of this story which confirmations intelligent design predictions.

This takes away nearly all the genetic breathing room anyone had left to insert mythologies about the development of life on Earth.  The new findings are a major upheaval and I expect there will be more information going “mainstream” in the coming weeks.  Are you as excited as I am?

For more information on this project, see the video below and Nature‘s website.

First, let me briefly address the common argument that using the Bible to prove the Bible is circular reasoning.  The Bible is not just one book.  It is a collection of 66 books by 40 different authors.  If it were one work by one author (like many other “holy” books), it would be circular reasoning.  This article shows the predictions of prophets whose fulfillment is witnessed by someone else in another time period.  In many cases, this witness is recorded in scripture; in a few cases it is mentioned elsewhere in history.  This represents multiple, independent lines of corroborating evidence – not circular reasoning.

Divine Origin

Only a being which exists outside the constraints of time can give a detailed description of what will happen in the future with one-hundred percent accuracy.  (In general, I have found those who claim a biblical prophecy has failed to be fulfilled are referring to end-times predictions they have mis-categorized.) This is a characteristic which sets it apart from the Qur’an and many other “holy” books which have no prophecies whatsoever or the Book of Mormon which is filled with false predictions.

Here I’ll describe just a few prophecies which I believe prove the Bible’s supernatural origin.  See 100prophecies.org, CARM, or our Google Custom Search to find many, many more mind-blowing examples of God’s prophetic words given to his people who compiled them in what we know as the Bible.

Daniel’s 69 Weeks

 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

- Daniel 9:25

This prophecy is part of larger discourse in Daniel 9:24-27 detailing the “seventy weeks” revealed to the prophet Daniel by the angel Gabriel.  In verse 25, he indicates that the Messiah will come 7 weeks plus 62 weeks (69 weeks total) from the time a decree to restore Jerusalem was issued to the time the Messiah would arrive.  Each “week” would have generally been understood by Jewish readers as representing a period of 7 years, each year being 360 days according to the Jewish calendar.  This would make the time period 483 years (173,880 days) from the decree to the Messiah’s coming.

The decree came when Nehemiah met with Artaxerxes in 445 B.C. (Neh 2:4-8). That would place Messiah’s coming in 32 A.D. for the prophecy to be exact.  The day of his coming was the Triumphal Entry recorded in Luke 19:28-48 (and parallel accounts in other gospels).  Prior to that, he kept telling his disciples “mine hour has not yet come.” Chuck Missler argues that Luke 19:44 is in fact a rebuke for not knowing the “hour of they visitation” because the prophecy was so precise they should have been waiting for him that day.  For a fuller explanation of this prophecy, other remarkable aspects of the “seventy weeks”, and discussion of the authenticity of this text, see Dr. Missler’s article.

Daniel’s Vision of the Four Great Beasts

Statue from Daniel Chapter 2.

The vision given by the Angel Gabriel in Daniel 7-8 is parallel to the vision of the statue in Daniel 2 (the photo on the right).  I have chosen the former because of its specificity.  Daniel records not only the symbolism but the interpretation of it which lines up perfectly with the history of the nations listed.

Daniel 8:20 names the kings of “Media and Persia” symbolized by a ram with great power. This matches the Medo-Persian empire as recorded by many historians.  Daniel 8:21 names the king of “Grecia” symbolized by a goat which overtakes the ram from the west.  Here again, the names and geography match the record of the Greek Empire and the conquest of Alexander the Great.  Finally, he says four kingdoms will arise when the Greek Empire falls.  Though he did not name these kings, they were: Ptolemy, Lysimachus, Cassander, and Seleucus.

Far more could be said about the sequence of events, specific symbolism, and other details which Daniel would not be able to manipulate to show he was a true prophet.  See this article by Kyle Butt for a more thorough analysis and defense of this prophecy.

The Reign of Cyrus

Thus saith the Lord to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him; and I will loose the loins of kings, to open before him the two leaved gates; and the gates shall not be shut; (emphasis mine)

-Isaiah 45:1

Here Isaiah names a king who did indeed gain great power without much resistance.  It was written at least 100 years before Cyrus was even born, let alone had risen to power.  This is yet another prophecy which could not have been fulfilled by a group of people wishing to validate what they foretold.  Chuck Missler has a good article on the authenticity of Isaiah and the reign of Cyrus.

Destruction of the Temple

Jesus explained that the temple in Jerusalem would be torn down all the way to its foundations in Matthew 24:1-2 (Also see the prophecy in Daniel 9:26 and parallel accounts in Mark 13:1-2 and Luke 21:5-6.):

And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple. And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

Josephus, a historian who was also a Jewish Priest (i.e. did not view Jesus as the promised Messiah), recorded the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D.  The lack of any mention of this in the Gospels is further evidence of their authenticity and early writing.  If Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were tossing in mentions of fulfilled prophecies to support their stories, why would they all leave out such an important event?  Surely this would have lent more weight to Jesus’ words and given them reason to make up this evidence as well.  The more likely explanation is that in fact the Gospels were written beforehand and the truth of Jesus’ words were recorded by others at a later date.  Read more about this event here.

Jesus Christ

In addition to Daniel’s vision listed above, over 300 prophecies about the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus were made in the Old Testament and fulfilled in the New Testament (see a complete list here).  Some are more open to interpretation than others, but the sheer volume of messianic predictions is undeniable.  Like the things mentioned above, there are details about place names and sequences of events which shut out vague interpretations and would also be out of Jesus’ control if he were just a man.  These include his ancestry, birthplace, the national reaction to him, the amount of silver exchanged for his life…it is simply overwhelming.  Rather than deal with specific prophecies in this category and the possible objections one-by-one, I will address them more generally and again point to our search tool for further research.

Common Objections to Prophecy

Many who are skeptical of prophecy in general would argue that the wording or symbolism is loose enough that it can simply be re-interpreted to fit history.  Consider this prophecy from Nostradamus which supposedly predicted the 9/11 attacks in New York City:

Earthshaking fire from the center of the Earth
Will cause tremors around the New City.
Two great rocks will war for a long time,
Then Arethusa will redden a new river.

I could see how this might fit the World Trade Center attacks, but it could match any number of other events as well.  What sets apart prophecies like this from the biblical ones is that the latter includes very specific details which cannot be interpreted multiple ways.  The sheer volume of messianic prophecies further narrow the range of possibilities so that not just any old “Messiah” would be able to claim he fulfilled biblical requirements.

Others would say the text was manipulated over time to support a religious agenda.  This accusation fails for a number of reasons.  First, we have copies of the Old Testament, prophecies and all, that date back hundreds of years before Jesus was born (see the Septuagint and Dead Sea Scrolls).  This means if anyone altered the passages about him, it happened in the New Testament.

But, does that work?  The people who were still around in the years following Jesus’ ministry would certainly have refuted not accepted utter fabrications of events they would have known something about.  Paul, before he was an evangelist, was a Pharisee of Pharisees.  He had deep knowledge of said prophecies and a hatred for all who followed Jesus.  He would not only have reason but also the influence to expose such a fraud.  Instead, he repented and accepted the “Gospel Truth.”  The video below is a good discussion with Lee Strobel talking about how he viewed these issues when he was an atheist and after he became a Christian.

Further objections and theories about how the Gospel writers must have invented this intricate story quickly become self-contradictory and sound more like an ancient Jewish conspiracy theory than a reasonable, objective look at the evidence.

How Will You Respond?

This is more than an academic exercise.  God didn’t just make (and keep) the promises he gave about people and nations that died long ago.  He also makes promises about things yet to come which matter to you and I.  There will be a day when Jesus returns to fulfill the “end-times” prophecies, and when that day comes we better know where we stand.  Those who repent of their sins, seek forgiveness through Jesus’ blood shed on the cross, and receive the Holy Spirit will be with him in Heaven.  Those who run from his truth will choose a worse fate – an eternity in Hell.

Do not make that choice before honestly examining your heart to know whether you reject the sure word of prophecy because it “doesn’t hold water” or if it is because you are looking for any reason at all to deny the God who sees all things from beginning to end.  Do not be deceived by yourself or by false teachers, for you know not the day nor the hour when it will be too late to turn back.

A recent article on PhysOrg, “God as a drug: The rise of American megachurches“, presents a study on the rise of American Megachurches.  Unlike many such studies on religious subjects, it is not an attack piece.  It does, of course, ignore God’s role in conversion and largely attributes the growth to sensory and emotional experiences – no surprise there.  From the article:

As part of their study, Wellman, Corcoran, and Stockly-Meyerdirk analyzed 470 interviews and about 16,000 surveys on megachurch members’ emotional experiences with their churches. Four themes emerged: salvation/spirituality, acceptance/belonging, admiration for and guidance from the leader, and morality and purpose through service.

 

Our modern perception of science is that it is an objective search for truth, but we often forget that science is conducted by people.  Those people are subject to the same influences and biases as everyone else.  While the application of certain methods can reduce the error caused by human imperfections, we cannot deny that paradigms, axioms, and presuppositions heavily influence the world of scientists.

To illustrate this, Creation-Evolution Headlines rewrote the PhysOrg article as though a theologian had conducted a study on the growth of Darwinism.  The result of this fictional study is a strikingly accurate description of how many Darwinian “evangelists” view their role.  Consider the same paragraph, above, re-imagined from the opposite perspective:

As part of their study, Weller, Corky, and Stocky analyzed 470 interviews and about 16,000 surveys on society members’ emotional experiences with the conferences. Four themes emerged: materialism/scientism, conformity/unity, admiration for and desire for acceptance from peers, and a sense of duty to fight creationism in public outreach.

Both articles are a good read, so check them out.  Do you agree that scientists can be influenced by each other in ways that affect their conclusions? How do you think this shapes the narrative of “religion vs. science?” Leave a comment below.

Data visualization, broadly defined, is an attempt to make complex sets of facts more understandable though the use of visual design elements. As the amount of data we create each year continues to rise, so does the popularity of its illustrations. The likely places to find such graphics are in scientific studies, journalism, political propaganda, and special interest blogs. However, it is unlikely to find much in religious pursuits. For this reason, few of the websites which curate the best visualizations have a “Religion” category (my work always ends up in the “Lifestyle” section).

I’m attempting to change that.

The Bible is more than just a story book or a manual for morality. It is a record of history that spans thousands of years, mentioning over 3,000 people and 1,200 places using 790,685 words to document the details. Scholars have catalogued 400,000 cross-references and grouped passages into 125,000 topics. How are all these things connected? Which ones are mentioned most often (or least often)? What can this tell me about God’s design of history? Data visualization offers another way to answer these questions by piecing together the massive volume of information and condensing it to visually comprehensible designs.

These awards offer an opportunity to display a different approach that uses modern techniques to portray timeless truths. It is another chance to bring Christianity to the worldwide marketplace of ideas. While I’m confident that God’s truth will ultimately prevail, I know I am an imperfect ambassador of the knowledge he has given us. That, and we live in a sinful world where truth is not clearly seen. So, I need God’s help and I need your help. Please pray for my ongoing efforts and particularly for this award. Share this post with others and ask them to take a moment to vote for “A Visual Harmony of the Gospels.”

Finally, in the interest of full disclosure, there is a monetary component to the award. The Community Award winner will get $1,000. Other award categories range from $250 to $5,000. If I do win in one or more categories, the proceeds will likely go toward furthering my efforts in this area.

Existing tools

The tools page on SoulLiberty.com includes several interactive visualizations dealing with readability, Paul’s life and journeys, and cross references.  Most importantly, there is an interactive explorer which allows the user to filter by any combination of location, time, or canonical reference.  These were all made by plugging the data from MetaV into existing applications, namely Tableau Public and Google Maps.

Current efforts

I am working to improve upon the widely popular graphic, “Mapping God’s Bloodline” by making it more interactive.  Users would be able to zoom/center the graph by searching for that person’s name or click on a name in the graph to see details about him.  The platform for this application is Flash and will be built such that it can be integrated into third-party software or migrated to a mobile (tablet) app.

Others have contacted me about using MetaV in a more full-featured piece of software (still at the very early stages of development).  I also plan to experiment with the feasibility of loading data into Silk – a new platform for dynamically linking and visualizing data and pages.  You can follow progress of this at bible.silkapp.com

Long-term efforts

MetaV will eventually become a suite of applications, all designed for different functions.  On the web, it will be about next-generation search which is geared toward displaying knowledge about a subject rather than a list of resources you must dig through to discover that same knowledge.  For mobile devices, search will be combined with limited visualization capabilities.  On more powerful desktops, fully interactive, integrated visualizations (maps, family trees, timelines, word usage, etc.) will take Bible software to the next level.

We never got past the first script, but I am happy to report that several ministries with superior skills and funding have had the same idea in recent years.  Answers in Genesis now has Check This Out, The Institute for Creation Research produces That’s a Fact, and Creation Today has my personal favorite: Creation Minute.  These video series focus on foundational issues surrounding science and the Bible, but what about the other important questions of life?

Now, Mark Spence of Living Waters teaches on these broader topics in a series of apologetics videos taken from the Way of the Master TV Show.  I was blown away by the quality of not only the teaching but also the production that goes with it.  Unlike those old lectures, these videos get right to the heart of some of the most-asked questions about Christianity or religious beliefs in general.  Everyone has time to watch three minutes (or less) of non-stop, hard-hitting apologetics on the questions that matter most.

You can watch all 10 videos below or click a link to jump to a specific clip.

1. Why Do Bad Things Happen to Good People?
2. Does Christianity Cause Wars?
3. Is It Wrong to Judge?
4. Can We Trust the Bible?
5. Is Reincarnation True?
6. Why Would a God of LOVE Send Someone to Hell?
7. Is Sin God’s Fault?
8. Which Jesus do you Follow?
9. What is Truth?
10. Why is There Evil in the World?

Timeline

The Bible is not just one book, it is a collection of 66 books.  The 40 different authors of those books often tell the same stories, though emphasizing different aspects.  A key way to piece together all the details of a story across two or more books is to arrange the passages chronologically.  MetaV currently tags verses with a year (from the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge), but more detail would be needed to accurately sort chronologically.

Specific Dates, Different Calendars

We are far enough removed from these events that it is hard to trust specific dates offered by historians (such as James Ussher).  That said, adding this level of detail gives us a reference point to correctly sequence events programmatically.  It’s hard to reconcile exact dates because calendar systems have changed a great deal over time.  We can get close by adding up lifespans or correlating events with archaeological records.  Perhaps the clearest difference is that the Jewish prophetic calendar is based on a 30 day month for a year of 360 days.  This is an important thing to know when studying Daniel’s 70 weeks or even Revelation.  MetaV will eventually include not just our Gregorian Calendar but Jewish calendar dates as well.

Named Events

Specifically identifying not only dates but particular events (or pericopes, if you will) allows more possibilities for dynamic timeline creation.  At higher-level views, the event name (i.e. “resurrection”) may suffice.  These headings appear in most bibles but naming systems vary widely.  Once a naming system is chosen, this data will be included in MetaV.

Date of event or date written?

The Bible includes not only historical books but also poetic and prophetic works.  For those passages that are poems or prophecies, the dates listed indicate when that section was written.  This distinction isn’t necessarily clear, and in the case of prophecy the event spoken of may be a known date other than the date of writing, it could be a date in the future, or a combination of both.  This disambiguation will be added to MetaV in the future.

Placemarks sized by number of mentions

This is the third in a series of posts outlining the roadmap for MetaV, a database of people, places, passages, and periods of time found in the Bible.

In addition to a concordance, the back of your Bible will likely include a set of maps.  Commonly you will find a map of Israel, Jerusalem, the Exodus, or Paul’s Missionary journeys.  The data in MetaV is intended to help programmers dynamically create maps based on any set of passages selected.  It comes from OpenBbile.info, which gives a latitude and longitude for every place mentioned in the Bible with a known location (or a well-educated guess).

Historical borders

The problem inherent in assigning every place a latitude and longitude is that it represents a country or region with a single place mark at that country’s capital or geographical center rather than drawing a border.  While it has become an increasingly simple matter to overlay modern borders on a map, it is a monumental challenge to do so with historical borders.

One obvious reason for that is that we may not have a detailed map of those places from each time period.  Another challenge is that instead of creating an overlay representing a single point in time, we must define borders for every period of that country’s history.  Just look at how much Israel’s borders change from one century to the next!  Fortunately, MetaV already includes a timeline which can be used to grab the right border overlay for that time period whenever someone manages to draw them.

Place Hierarchies

Cities are places unto themselves, but as borders shift they may be part of one empire in 400 B.C. and part of another empire in the first century A.D. What is needed, especially as an aid in (loosely) defining historical borders, is an explicit assignment of each landmark to a city, each city to a country, and each country to a region.  Scholars know a lot of this already, it just needs to be systematized and gathered together so we can more easily answer questions like: “Was this city I’m reading about part of Rome or Babylon at the time this story took place?”

Ambiguous references

Just as people can be discussed with pronouns (he, she, they, etc), places can be referred to as “here”, “there”, etc.  While it may be simple to understand where “here” is when reading the text, searches looking for “Jerusalem” may only find passages with that exact name.  A more robust search to find all references to that specific city must have these ambiguous references defined.

The Modern World

MetaV is not only about linking people, places, and periods of time to the passages that tell their story; it is also about helping people see how the Bible relates to our world today.  There are many resources which can give a wealth of data about places, including:religions, population, income, literacy rates, and government type.  Consider a study on prophecy where you’re exploring the places that various prophets mentioned in relation to the end times.  Wouldn’t it be helpful to know some things about how that country looks now when discerning where we may be on the prophetic timeline?  These data can be integrated programmatically through tools like the Wolfram|Alpha API since the latitude and longitude are already defined.

Other Improvements

Like the names of people, names of places usually have a meaning behind them.  J.B. Jackson’s Dictionary of Proper names will be a good place to start working up name meanings for places.

Schumacher raises a number of points that resonate with me (and I suspect most who engage in any debates with atheists), such as:

…atheists keep Christians honest where our apologetics are concerned, and they are helpful in showcasing what the philosophy of naturalism espouses and where it logically leads.  Although we disagree on theological matters, I’ve found atheists to be respectful, intelligent, and understanding in many of our discussions. They have thought through their positions, present them in a well-organized manner, and are happy to consider contrary positions and opposing arguments to their stance.

In contrast, he says, “discussing theology with hatetheists is an exercise in futility.”  He lays out 8 points describing what sets the hatetheist apart from other atheists.  Below is my attempt to boil down his comparisons for simplicity.

These distinctions are important because they can help discern how best to respond or approach an unbeliever.  While it may be a good idea to continually engage with an atheist for evangelism or other discussion, Schumacher warns against such continued interaction with hatetheists.  He gives a number of scriptural examples for this conclusion, which is summed up with a quote from Richard Weaver’s book, Ideas Have Consequences:

“Nothing good can come if the will is wrong. And to give evidence to him who loves not the truth is to give him more plentiful material for misinterpretation.”

If you often engage with atheists online, I would strongly recommend reading his entire post.  Do you agree that we should sometimes disengage with an unbeliever, or is it always advisable to keep the dialogue going?

Concordance

Few things are more commonplace in the back of study Bibles than a concordance.  MetaV contains Strong’s concordance, which is the most widely used, compiled by David Troidl as a contribution to the Open Scriptures project.  It can be hard to imagine improvements on such a “staple”, but allow me to offer a few ideas.

Definitions and word origins

First, the definitions in MetaV include some details about word origins and both the long and short definitions given by Dr. James Strong.  By splitting these three elements into their own fields, some advanced tools can be made.  Take, for instance, “adynatos” (G102).  It comes from G102 which comes from G1 which is of Hebrew origin.  I can think of many visualizations or programmatic comparisons to find similar words throughout the Bible or simply understand the meaning of that word more fully.

Proper Names

Strong’s Concordance includes many proper names of places and people.  In order to more deeply integrate the distinct parts of MetaV, these proper names could be linked to the place ID or person ID in those tables.  I have found these activities helpful in finding gaps, inconsistencies, and other potential errors in corresponding data sets.

Other Improvements

A minor improvement can be made in the near future to remove accent marks from transliterations for better readability.

That’s all for now.  Keep an eye out here to learn how we can improve upon data describing places and periods of time, or find out about the applications being developed to explore this data.

People

When we study the Bible and come across a person, we’d like to know a few basic things about that individual which provide some background for understanding his life and how his experiences relate to the story we’re reading.  MetaV provides that context with family relationships, some basic biographical information, and explicit identification of the person named.  As an example of the latter, consider that there are 26 unique individuals in the Bible named Zechariah.  MetaV makes it clear whether that passage is talking about the well-known prophet or one of the other 25.  Or, the opposite problem may occur in which one person goes by more than one name such as Paul (originally Saul) or God himself who goes by many names.

Unambiguous, Thorough Searching

To that end, some work remains in identifying names which are not always easy to process programmatically.  These may include possessive forms (like “Aaron’s”) or in many cases where the name of a person is also used to describe a place (like Israel).  Even more ambiguous are personal pronouns (him, hers, we, they, ours).  We know they describe a person and can usually identify that person through normal exegesis.  It is time we recorded that knowledge in order to build upon it.

By including that level of detail in MetaV, we will be able to find verses which refer to a group of people but never mention them by name.  A good example would be Jesus’ disciples.  Any place which references the “disciples”, “apostles”, “the twelve”, etc. would be a reference to Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, etc. even though they are not discussed by name.  Unless and until this is defined at word-level detail many of these verses would not appear in search results for “Matthew” (or another disciple for this example) meaning the search would not return some pertinent references.

Biographical Details

Other things we’d like to know about people in a “quick reference” context window which are not yet defined in MetaV are: official title, occupation, name meanings, or even a brief summary of the person’s life.  We would also like to know what books of the Bible that person may have written.  Again in the case of Zechariah: are you reading about the person who wrote the book of Zechariah, or a different person with the same name?  We also know the birth and death places for some people.  Future revisions to MetaV will link these places to the “Places” table for more context.

Relationships

The relationships defined in MetaV today are limited to family relationships.  But, we interact with others outside our family in the context of work, school, and play.  People of the Bible are no different.  A set of data defining these relationships for people in the New Testament already exists as part of the Semantic Bible project.  This data can be integrated into MetaV and then expanded upon to include Old Testament figures.

People also form groups.  The disciples are a group.  The Israelites are a group.  Much like today’s social networks which readily find a person’s group membership, MetaV currently has identified members of the 12 tribes of Israel and the people listed in Jesus’ genealogy.  Clearly many more groups must be defined, but this is a good start.

Communication

The Bible is God’s communication to man.  Within that, we see God talking to prophets, people talking to each other, and writers speaking to readers.  Wouldn’t it be nice to clearly identify who is the sender of a message and who is the intended recipient?  Well, the folks at Crossway have tackled the first part of that using Mechanical Turk.  They produced a dataset identifying all the speakers of the Bible and, thankfully, released it publicly.  Once it is “translated” to work with MetaV, I can begin the process to show recipients of what is being spoken  (or written).

That’s all for now.  Keep an eye out here to learn how we can improve upon data describing places and periods of time, or find out about the applications being developed to explore this data.

• Added siblings where only one parent is known (over 4,000 new records)
• Split Daughters of Lot into “older” and “younger” to clarify parent-child relationships.
• Corrected errors showing a person’s in-laws as their spouse.
• Added Jesus in “Genealogy of Jesus” group.

These files are now available on the downloads page and on GitHub.

Below is one way to illustrate the absurdity of those challenges.  If we relate the universe to the Twitterverse, this is how those arguments would sound.  The twitter account names have been replaced with “Christian” and “Atheist” in brackets.

[Christian] perhaps you should reconsider your belief in the existence of [Atheist]. What looks to you like an account from an intelligent being operating outside the Twitterverse is more likely the result of a process of continuous evolution giving the appearance of intelligence.

A better explanation is that Twitter has evolved an ability to respond to environmental stimulus more efficiently than its competitors such as the Blogosphere, Tumblr, WordPress, etc. This evolutionary advantage has helped it multiply its accounts at a far greater rate than others. These findings make it clear that no explanation other than the normal interaction of electrons manipulating common alphabetical codes is necessary.

Another possible explanation is that the followers of this being known as [Atheist] are skewing the data in their favor, perhaps motivated by money-grubbing or to exert control and influence over other tweeters.

The only proof anyone has yet offered that he actually exists are words which claim to be written (or at least inspired) by him. Obviously they were fabricated by his followers. Why should anyone believe their claim, especially when science can account for these phenomena by appealing only to the known operation of semiconductors instead of some mythical Tweeter? If his followers wish to claim that anything outside the Twitterverse actually exists, the burden of proof is on them, not us.

Finally, why would anyone actually WANT to believe in such a mean, vindictive Tweeter? Many who still believe the existence of such beings find it much more satisfying to follow a more friendly, less judgmental one.

General

• All files are now on GitHub in addition to the downloads page.
• Updated readme file.

Strong’s Concordance

• Renamed fields (see readme file)
• Cleaned up StrongsIndex table where some IDs had random preceding or trailing characters
• Fixed font formatting issue with Greek and Hebrew words
• Cleaned up definition/description field
• Added parts of speech (e.g. “noun”, “verb”, “adjective”, etc.) from Theological Dictionary of the New Testament
• Added language identifier

Special thanks to Nathan Smith for providing a script to convert the Strong’s XML files to an SQL-friendly structure.

People

• Added surnames in “People” table
• Added sibling, half-sibling, and child relationships (note:these could be determined before via a query but I found it’s easier to have them pre-defined in the table)
• Filled in some missing references in “PersonID” field of main MetaV table
• Indicated proper names versus man woman etc
• Added PeopleGroups table to define tribes of Israel and Jesus’ Genealogy.  More groups will be added later.
• Removed names not found in KJV from alias list for consistency with other tables.  (Some alternate spellings existed previously but do not correlate to the version chosen for MetaV.)

That’s all for now. Many more improvements are planned and updates will appear here as they are completed.

Social Networking

Something that’s brand new to our generation is the phenomenon of online social networking.  It is blossoming at a rate beyond comprehension.  Last year, I found a map made by an intern at Facebook that gives an idea of the magnitude and complexity of online connections. I found it fascinating, even mesmerizing, to see nearly every country in the world defined only by soft blue lines indicating a connection between two people.  Facebook is projected to have a billion users by the end of this year – that’s one in every seven people from every corner of the world.

What are people doing in that community? Are they mainly sharing baby photos, celebrity gossip (Beliebers, you know who you are), promoting some social or political cause? Well, as of February, the page with the most engagement in terms of shares, comments, and “likes” is a page called Jesus Daily, followed by Dios Es Bueno! (God is Good) and The Bible. While that’s not exactly as spiritually deep as circulating Paul’s letters or Luther’s 95 theses, it shows that at least in some ways the people in this community are using it to spread the message of Jesus Christ.

Pamphleteering

If the Reformers lived in this millennium, it’s likely they would have used these technologies to spread their message, too.   We always hear about Luther’s posting of the 95 theses on the door at Wittenberg but don’t always consider how that message got around after that.  Around the time I was asked to speak for communion at our church, I came across a story in The Economist talking about the parallels between how we use social networks compared to how the reformers shared their messages through pamphleteering.

As an illustration, think about how something today “goes viral.”  You share an idea and it resonates with a small group of people who saw your initial post.  Those people in turn share that post with people they know, then their friends re-share it, and so it multiplies.  The printing press was the 1500’s equivalent of social media.  What started as a “post” on one church door was copied, re-copied, commented on and translated until in just the first 10 years over 6 million pamphlets by Luther, Calvin,  and others were distributed.  This is the way they shared the truth of Christ’s words in that era.

House to House

Now go back even further, before the printing press, all the way back to the first century A.D. How did Jesus’ disciples who witnessed his life and teachings first-hand make their message go viral? How did they share this earth-shattering experience within their communities and beyond into the whole world?  In that time, they didn’t post messages on church doors or distribute pamphlets because any sort of writing was extremely hard to come by.

Instead, what they did probably looked a lot like what the Bible describes taking place at the Last Supper.  Acts 2:46 says “And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart.” Many met in the Temple, but more commonly they had fellowship in their home over a meal.  They participated in the first communion with Jesus in that same context.  He used that time for several purposes, one of which was to teach them a model of what it meant to partake of his saving blood and of his body.  The Gospel spread in a similar setting: in the homes of new followers of Christ who gathered together for fellowship, breaking bread, learning his doctrine, and praying with one another.

Communion within Families

All of these are ways we share life with the people in our own time. We do things with our peers, but we also do things with our family.  This, I think, is the most important way we build a Godly community.  Sure, it’s great to spend time with people our age but God’s truth perseveres through time by passing it from one generation to the next – from father to son and mother to daughter.  Want an easy way to do that?  Do what Jesus did!  Have dinner with them and make it a point to discuss how God is working in your life and the world around us.

The next time you share in communion, let me invite you to consider how you might use the connections you have to other people to express the love and joy that Jesus brings.  It may take a digital form. It may be written down on paper, spoken over a meal, or passed down from parent to child.  Whatever your community may look like, let it be a time of communion with the God who is everywhere in all things and all times.

The goal of biblical counseling is to teach that the believer’s purpose is to please God and glorify Him (2 Corinthians 5:9) in all areas of their life in the midst of all circumstances, whether hardship or blessing. (Job 2:10) Because sin is the greatest obstacle man faces, we have ordered our lives around the desire to please ourselves instead of God. It is important to note that “counsellor” is not an office one holds in the church; counseling is a function of the church. It is the responsibility of every believer to initiate loving confrontation directed towards bringing about change from conformity to sin to conformity to biblical standards, principles, and practices.

This is what the apostle Paul would define as “nouthesis” as in Romans 15:14 and Colossians 3:. Paul wrote, “And I myself also am persuaded of you, my brethren, that ye also are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge, able also to admonish one another.” (Romans 15:14) and “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs…” (Colossians 3:16) Paul is saying that all Christians are to confront and encourage one another with the Word of God as a regular activity. As believers we have the wisdom, knowledge, and goodness from the Holy Spirit that points us away from sin.

Paul explains that every Christian needs this to happen regularly in their lives in order to be mature in Christ. As a member of the Church, I do not see this consistently happening in one-on-one relationships or small settings. This is a big reason believers are struggling to be mature in their walk with God. Most regular attendees can tell you that they are saved and how Christ saved them, but when it comes to applying the Word through their daily broken and complicated lives, there is little lasting fruit.

There are a handful of biblical examples of men being confronted about their sin and admonished to repent. The first example we find is in Genesis 3:8-24. From the very beginning God gives us the model and standard through which we are to lovingly admonish one another. Jay Adams, a well-known author on the subject of nouthetic counseling, describes it this way:

“Adam tried to make a getaway into the woods. But God confronted him nouthetically, in order to change him by words. The relationship between God and Adam had been established on the basis of God’s Word, broken by Satan’s challenge to that Word, and had to be reestablished by God’s Word. God elicited a confession from him. He probed until he got satisfactory answers.”

The model is to use the Word as the tool through which sin is pointed out, which leads to repentance and brings them back into fellowship with God. To use any other resource to rescue them leads to greater destruction and is not love.

When Nathan confronted King David about his adultery and murder he used this same biblical model and the result was repentance. (2 Samuel 12:1-13) In John 21 after Jesus had died and been resurrected his disciple Peter was confused, discouraged, and felt purposeless so he returned to fishing when he should have been fishing men as Christ had directed him prior to his death. Because Peter had failed and denied Jesus three times, as was predicted, he had lost hope and felt he was unable to do what Jesus had commanded. Jesus loved Peter and one of the ways he demonstrated this intimate love was to confront him about his sin and restore him back into right fellowship with him. Jesus reminded Peter to feed Christ’s sheep. The intimate morning Peter spent with Jesus eating fish for breakfast led to Peter’s miraculous transformation into a powerful ministry, and then his ultimate martyrdom years later. Because Jesus confronted Peter nouthetically, God’s church was built and many souls saved. This is the lasting goal of biblical counseling: spiritual transformation and understanding so that sin can be avoided, leading to a fruitful life.

Why why have we strayed from this approach? Because it is hard and change happens in God’s way and time, not the way of the world that seeks quick, easy, temporary results. God’s model takes humility, authenticity, and a willingness to admit that I am no better than you. As I evaluate the church I do not see this nouthetic confrontation happening on a consistent basis, but I think believers are craving it. Believers want to grow, but sin blinds us from knowing how to apply God’s truth, which is why we need each other. Since I’m able to see your sin more clearly than you can, and you can see my sin more clearly than I can we must admonish one another in love using God’s truth as the guide. To use any other tool is not biblical and is not Godly love. This is exactly what God did in the garden. He called out Adam and Eve on what they could no longer see, and then restored them. If God does it and Jesus does it and the Holy Spirit does it, why not the church?

Right from the start, the 93% number is a little misleading. 72% disbelieve in God while 23% express doubt or agnosticism. Atheists routinely lump in agnostics in figures like this if it is to their advantage, but agnostics often describe themselves that way to separate their views from their understanding of atheism. But, this may be little more than semantics.

What if we looked at a different group of scientists? When surveyed in 2009, a slight majority (51%) expressed belief in God and 41% indicated disbelief. It turns out this survey matches rather closely with a survey done 100 years ago, even showing a slight increase in theism among the scientists polled.

Still a different group, university professors, end up somewhere in the middle of these figures. A 2010 survey found 34% were atheists, 30% agnostic, and 27% expressed some level of belief in God.

So far it’s clear that while scientists are far more likely than the general population to be atheist, the 93% figure is simply not an accurate representation of scientists as a whole. Now, let’s extend the data even further.

In academia, the consequences for your conclusion being wrong is a retraction from an academic journal, a scathing peer review, or wider public scrutiny. In other environments, the cost of being wrong are people’s very lives. Certainly few people think that doctors work with anything other than an evidence-based evaluation and decision-making process. If they were to do otherwise, they face severe civil or criminal penalties while their patient suffers physically to varying degrees. Physicians must rely on science when it really counts.

Are these rational-minded professionals also inclined to be atheists? Not quite. As of 2005, 76% expressed belief in God.  While this is still lower than the general population, it turns out that doctors are actually more likely to attend religious services – 90% of them vs. only 81% of Americans as a whole. If we were to accept that the majority opinion of an evidence-based profession proves that thinking people should accept their view, we may hold this up as a persuasive argument for converting to theism. I do not recommend that approach for the reasons explained throughout this article.

What might explain these differences in beliefs across a range of scientists? As an engineer who also relies heavily on facts to form conclusions, I prefer not to speculate too far without doing more extensive research. Allow me to offer two possible causes to consider: indoctrination and culture. American universities are now breeding grounds for anti-religious minds. Over time our culture has trended the same direction, and the sub-culture in academic circles is likely to influence the distribution of religious beliefs in that group.

In earlier times, higher institutes of learning we’re built by Christians and Western society was far more deeply committed to biblical truth. Indeed, the greatest scientific minds who pioneered most of the major branches of science were theists. This fact alone indicates that theistic belief is no detriment to the advancement of scientific inquiry, if not the very basis for science itself.

When we consider the full range of data and look at it objectively, we find every good reason to reject the “majority of scientists are atheists” argument so often presented. The wide disparity among different groups of scientists also shows that they are human like everyone else, subject to the same influences and pressures that shape our ideas about the world. This is why we must always look to a higher standard than ourselves. Let us trust instead in the words of an all-knowing being, not in the wisdom of men with limited knowledge or understanding (1 Cor 2:5).

Bible Contradiction Visualization

Several apologists’ responses have cropped up over time, but none are as complete and well-organized as Berend de Boer’s work.  In August 2011, Mr. De Boer completed a seven-year project to respond to every objection in the SAB.  Perhaps more importantly, he does so in a way that contrasts the scoffer’s flippancy with a kind, temperate, Christian attitude.  Consider the challenge and response to Genesis 2:2 about the seventh day of creation:

Skeptic:

 Even God gets tired sometimes.

de Boer:

Tired is not the right word, but God himself tells us he was refreshed by his rest, see Ex. 31:17. That is the purpose of the Sabbath for us as well, see Ex. 23:12.

His work draws a great deal from others who have come before.  The primary commentary he mentions is John Gill’s Exposition written in 1746, but also referenced an earlier work from 1621 by Johannes Polyander which goes deeper.  On the web, lookinguntojesus.net provided a similarly thorough (though poorly organized) reference as well.

Berend describes his motivation in part was to make these answers more accessible in our internet age:

Some skeptics appear to have grown up in new churches with no link to the past, no confessions, no well-known figures from the past, and they seem to invent the wheel every time. That might account for the fact that, according to them, no one was able to give them any answer to the questions they had. Even though these answers were available for 2,000 years… [to find answers] you have to know to search for “John Gill’s exposition”, so that’s still a barrier, but responses to skeptics like mine will make that less of an issue.

When I asked about his overall thought process, he had this to say:

My goal was to find the answers in readily available, very well-known commentaries, and preferably over centuries old. this way no one could accuse me of using “latest greatest research” or things no one could have known. All these skeptics think they come up with something new after 2,000 years, which on the face of it is already preposterous. But I wanted to demonstrate that as well.

The next time you see an angry skeptic on the internet and feel compelled to respond as commanded in 1 Peter 3:15 with meekness and fear.  And, if you’re having trouble finding that “ready answer,” a great place to start is with Berend de Boer’s excellent resource.

It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I’d rather not consider that).

And it’s not limited to biology.  World-renowned physicist Stephen Hawking is on record as saying:

I regard the brain as a computer which will stop working when its components fail. There is no heaven or afterlife for broken down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark

But, has it always been this way? Is it necessarily true that the Bible’s history of our origins is at odds with the practice of scientific inquiry?  To the contrary, many (if not most) of the scientists who either founded their field of study or at least are credited with its most important advancements routinely saw their work as seeking to better understand God through his Creation.  The quotes below are a sample of what these men who were profoundly influential in a wide array of fields said years ago.

 There are two books laid before us to study, to prevent our falling into error: first, the volume of the Scriptures, which reveal the will of God; then the volume of the Creatures, which express His power.

-Francis Bacon, Scientific Method

Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system, I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance.

 -Isaac Newton, Physics, Mathematics

 Atheism is so senseless & odious to mankind that it never had many professors.

-Isaac Newton

O God, I am thinking Thy thoughts after Thee.

-Johannes Kepler, Astronomy

 The more I study nature, the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator.

-Louis Pasteur, Medicine

Finite man cannot begin to comprehend an omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent, and infinite God … I find it best to accept God through faith, as an intelligent will, perfect in goodness and wisdom, revealing Himself through His creation.

-Werner Von Braun, Rocket Science

The conduct of God, who disposes all things kindly, is to put religion into the mind by reason, and into the heart by grace. But to will to put it into the mind and heart by force and threats is not to put religion there, but terror.

-Blaise Pascal, Hydraulics

When with bold telescopes I survey the old and newly discovered stars and planets when with excellent microscopes I discern the unimitable subtility of nature’s curious workmanship; and when, in a word, by the help of anatomical knives, and the light of chemical furnaces, I study the book of nature I find myself oftentimes reduced to exclaim with the Psalmist, How manifold are Thy works, O Lord! In wisdom hast Thou made them all!

-Robert Boyle, Chemistry

The flowers’ leaves… serve as bridal beds which the Creator has so gloriously arranged, adorned with such noble bed curtains, and perfumed with so many soft scents that the bridegroom with his bride might there celebrate their nuptials with so much the greater solemnity.

-Carl Linnaeus, Taxonomy

It is His work,” he reminded them; “and He alone carried me thus far through all my trials and enabled me to triumph over the obstacles, physical and moral, which opposed me.  ‘Not unto us, not unto us, by to Thy name, O Lord, be all the praise.’

-Samuel Morse, Inventor