God's Creation Beyond Man's Imagination
Translate
Saturday, September 13, 2025
The Bronze Serpent
‘As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man
be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life’.
John 3:14-15
Jake Allstaedt has written (2020):
https://www.1517.org/articles/jesus-is-our-bronze-serpent
Jesus Is Our Bronze Serpent
Looking at a bronze serpent on a pole cannot remove deadly venom coursing through your veins. But it can if God says it can.
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16) is a well-known verse. What isn’t so well-known is the sentence right before it: “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life” (John 3:14-15).
That short, seemingly obscure reference is a throwback to an event in the life of God’s people, the Israelites, as they journeyed in the wilderness after having been freed from slavery in Egypt. Understanding that story will enrich our understanding of who Jesus is and what He came to do for us.
So, what happened? Throughout the Israelites’ journey in the wilderness God took care of them. He gave them bread from heaven and water to drink. God graciously provided for their every need, yet they turned against Him in the desire for something more than what they had:
“And the people spoke against God and against Moses, ‘Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? For there is no food and no water, and we loathe this worthless food’” (Numbers 21:5).
Oh, there was food and water. God made sure of that. This complaint exposed their selfish discontentment with what they had been given. They were ungrateful, forgetting that they had been rescued from slavery. These gracious provisions weren’t enough; they wanted something more.
God gave them something more: fiery serpents. These serpents bit the people and many died. It was because of these serpents that the Israelites realized that they had sinned against God. They asked Moses to pray for them, that God might take away the snakes.
Moses did as the people asked and God had mercy on them. He commanded Moses to lift up a bronze serpent on a pole so that everyone who was bitten could look at it and live.
Scientifically speaking, that doesn’t even make sense.
Looking at a bronze serpent on a pole cannot remove deadly venom coursing through your veins. But it can if God says it can. God spoke. He attached His promise to that bronze serpent and the Israelites looked to it in faith—believing that God would save them through the way He provided.
Let’s go back to John 3:14-15:
“And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.”
Jesus came to this world because deadly venom courses through our veins too. It’s called sin. Adam and Eve, our first parents, were “snake-bitten.” Like the Israelites in the wilderness, God graciously provided for their every need, yet they turned against Him in the desire for something more than what they had. The ancient serpent, Satan, tempted them and they gave in, bringing sin into their lives and into creation itself. The venom of sin has passed from generation to generation. You and I have it. Our kids have it. It’s why you’ll never have to teach your children how to be bad. It’s why our hearts are filled with so much hatred, violence, abuse, racism, pride, selfishness, jealousy, adultery—it’s why we journey through the wilderness of this life often craving something more than what God has graciously provided. We have a sin problem. We’ve inherited it and we commit it. This venom is deadly and it is killing us.
But God has mercy on us. Immediately after Adam and Eve sinned, God promised a Savior who would crush the head of the serpent, undoing the deadly consequences of sin, while He himself would be bitten.
This Savior, Jesus, the Son of God, was lifted up to death on the pole of the cross. When Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, he lifted up that which was killing the people. God, in effect, was declaring, “Look! That which is killing you is now hanging on a pole! I have put away the snake and its venom. I have put away your sin. Look to this serpent in faith and live!”
Jesus is our bronze serpent—He became that which was killing us! St. Paul declares in 2 Corinthians 5:21:
“For our sake he made him (that is, Jesus) to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.”
Jesus was “snake-bitten” for us. He became our sin on the cross—the sin we’ve inherited, the sins we have committed, and the sins we will commit—all of it hung on the pole of the cross in the person of Jesus. Look! The sin that is killing you is hanging on the pole of the cross! God has put away your sin. Look to Jesus in faith and live!
Let’s read the words of John 3:16 one more time:
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”
God had mercy on Adam and Eve because He loved them. He had mercy on the Israelites because He loved them. Why does He have mercy on you? Because He loves you. One more time: Because He loves you. He loves us so much that, even though we’ve turned against Him, forgetting His goodness and craving more than He graciously provides, He sent His Son, Jesus, to become our sin and die our death to ensure that you will not perish, but have eternal life. That’s love right there. Anyone—anyone—who looks to Jesus in faith will not perish but have eternal life.
14th September, 2025
Feast of the Triumph of the Holy Cross
Monday, September 8, 2025
Pope Leo canonises “God’s influencer”, first millennial saint
Saint Carlo's online mission gained praise from Pope Francis, who had previously spoken about the need for technology to be in service of "human dignity".
The Italian teenager became a saint on September 7. (Wikimedia Commons: Fair Use)
The Catholic world has gained its first millennial saint.
Saint Carlo Acutis, an Italian teenager who tragically died in 2006, has been canonised by Pope Leo XIV in a ceremony at the Vatican, giving the next generation of Catholics a relatable role model who used technology to spread the faith and earn the nickname "God's influencer."
However, the Pope's death on Easter Monday and the subsequent mourning and conclave periods delayed the proceedings.
On June 13, Pope Leo announced that Saint Carlo, along with young Catholic author Pier Giorgio Frassati, would be the first saints named in his pontificate.
Saint Carlo, who is known as the "saint in sneakers", has been touted as the patron saint of the internet for his work cataloguing miracles and evangelising online.
And with Catholicism on the decline in many countries, including Australia, some are hoping a relatable saint will help galvanise the next generation of Catholic youth.
Who was Carlo Acutis?
Born in London in 1991 but raised in Milan, Saint Carlo loved gaming, computer programming, soccer, Pokémon, and his dog Billy.
While neither of his parents were religious before he was born, he identified as a devout Catholic from an early age and devoted his life to sharing his love of Jesus.
"There was an unexpected crowd of people from all over Milan; basically, the poor and the homeless," he says.
"It became apparent that Carlo had befriended so many of these people."
Saint Carlo's body was moved to Assisi's Sanctuary of the Renunciation a year after his death.
In 2013, the Archdiocese of Milan opened a formal request to consider him for canonisation.
Pope Francis declared him venerable in 2018 — a significant step towards sainthood — and two years later, the church officially recognised a miracle attributed to Acutis.
He is believed to have cured a young Brazilian boy with a serious birth defect in 2014.
This led to his beatification, the Catholic Church's proclamation that a deceased person has entered heaven and can be publicly venerated.
After the beatification ceremony, Saint Carlo's relics and tomb were opened to the public.
The young saint's body was encased in wax to preserve his likeness, and he was laid to rest in jeans, a jacket and Nike sneakers. A live stream of the tomb is available to view online.
Saint Carlo is believed to be responsible for another miracle: healing a Costa Rican woman after a life-threatening bicycle accident in 2022.
On September 7, he was officially canonised and declared a saint.
A relatable saint
Where most saints throughout history were theologians, missionaries or members of clergy, Saint Carlo broke the mould.
"His life shows that a true faith in God, a true faith in Jesus Christ doesn't mean that you don't get to have a normal life and be a normal teenager," Professor Pierce says.
Antonia Pizzey, a lecturer in theology at Australian Catholic University, says Saint Carlo speaks to "younger people today".
"People who have grown up with the climate crisis, who have grown up with the internet," she says.
"I think young people see him and they feel a sense of connection with him."
Saint Carlo's methods of outreach inspired other young Catholics, too.
In the past few years, several documentaries have been made about him, including one chronicling his influence on young American Catholics making a pilgrimage to the Vatican.
This year, three Irish teenage brothers even created a Lego short film about his life.
Father Ranson says the young saint demonstrated that "holiness is not something only reserved for the past".
"He's such a wonderful example to young people that even as children or adolescents, it's possible to draw close to God and to have a heart that's open to something transcendent."
'God's influencer'
Saint Carlo is not the first patron saint of the internet. Saint Isadore of Seville was also given that title by Pope John Paul II in 1997.
Born around 1,400 years before the invention of the computer, Saint Isadore was a scholar, theologian and archbishop who meticulously catalogued human knowledge in a 20-volume encyclopedia.
However, Saint Carlo, who gained the moniker "God's influencer", is the first saint to have grown up in the internet age.
"He had a message; he had work to do even though he was so young, and he felt that he needed to do that work in the [best] way he knew how," Dr Pizzey says.
"The internet became a medium for him where he thought, 'I can get this message out and I can engage with people'."
While digital evangelism is not new, Dr Pizzey says Saint Carlo's youth and devotion to his cause were "quite unusual".
"With his work through the internet, reaching out to people from all over the world, you could say he was actually one of the most extraordinary pilgrims in [how] far he travelled," she says.
"[That's] central to the idea of pilgrimage: to go out and to encounter people."
Saint Carlo's online mission gained praise from Pope Francis, who had previously spoken about the need for technology to be in service of "human dignity".
Professor Pierce says the late pope appreciated Saint Carlo's message: "that [technology and faith] don't need to be distinct, as long as your heart's in the right place".
Sunday, September 7, 2025
Thanks to the Plagues and Exodus cataclysms, Egypt will cease to be a force for centuries
by
Damien F. Mackey
“[Manfred] Bietak is convinced this is direct evidence of a plague or catastrophe. The large part of the remaining population abandoned their homes and left
en masse. Bietak says the site was then reoccupied after an unknown interval
of time by Asiatics who were not Egyptianised. Hence the break between
stratum G/1 and F”.
Berean Insights
Introduction
The Lord, through the agency of his servant, Moses - assisted by his brother Aaron - was about to bring the nation of Egypt so to its knees that it will hence disappear as a force in the Old Testament for about four centuries.
For several centuries prior to this, Egypt had been the stand-out power in the Bible, from the time of Abram (Abraham), through Isaac and Jacob, and then mighty Joseph, and for the first 80 years of the life of Moses. But the latter will deal Egypt such a shattering blow that the nation will not be able to rise up again as a power for centuries.
Some of it was pure miracle
Separating the miraculous from the natural in the Book of Exodus’ accounts of the Plagues and the Exodus may be difficult. Although, it was all miraculous in the sense that it was God’s perfect timing, using his ex nihilo creation (cf. John 1:3).
Obviously, the Lord had invested Moses with certain miraculous powers in order to encourage belief. That was the very same motive for which Heaven had worked the great Solar Miracle at Fatima, Portugal, on October 13th, 1917: ‘So that all may believe’.
“Do not forget the works of the Lord!” (Psalm 78:7)
Sadly, though, we do forget them, prompting Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn to lament in 1983 (a Holy Year): “Over half a century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of older people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: ‘Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened’.”
And it is the reason why “all this” is happening again in our tragic contemporary world.
‘… unless you repent, you will all likewise perish’ (Luke 13:5).
The Egyptian ruler, Neferhotep, presumably the Pharaoh of the Plagues and Exodus, will display a very short retentive memory. Firstly, yielding under pressure from the horrific Plagues and the testimonies of his own magicians: ‘This is the finger of God’ (Exodus 8:19), he will permit Israel to depart from Egypt. But soon afterwards, and so typically of human beings, he will forget all the mighty works of the Lord, and will plunge his magnificent army of chariots headlong into the watery abyss.
Moses (with Aaron) would soon come before Pharaoh with a set of magician-like tricks - but firstly for his own people.
Exodus 4:1-9
Moses answered, “What if they do not believe me or listen to me and say, ‘The Lord did not appear to you’?”
Then the Lord said to him, “What is that in your hand?”
“A staff,” he replied.
The Lord said, “Throw it on the ground.”
Moses threw it on the ground and it became a snake, and he ran from it. Then the Lord said to him, “Reach out your hand and take it by the tail.” So Moses reached out and took hold of the snake and it turned back into a staff in his hand. “This,” said the Lord, “is so that they may believe that the Lord, the God of their fathers—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob—has appeared to you.”
Then the Lord said, “Put your hand inside your cloak.” So Moses put his hand into his cloak, and when he took it out, the skin was leprous—it had become as white as snow.
“Now put it back into your cloak,” he said. So Moses put his hand back into his cloak, and when he took it out, it was restored, like the rest of his flesh.
Then the Lord said, “If they do not believe you or pay attention to the first sign, they may believe the second. But if they do not believe these two signs or listen to you, take some water from the Nile and pour it on the dry ground. The water you take from the river will become blood on the ground.”
Just as the Lord here had invested Moses with miraculous powers, ‘so that they may believe’, so, too, at Fatima, in 1917, did He empower Our Lady of the Rosary to work the great Solar miracle, ‘so that everyone may see and believe’. For, as She had predicted on the 13th of July, 1917: ‘In October I will tell you who I am and what I want. And I will perform a miracle so that everyone may see and believe’.
Assuredly, ‘there is something greater than’ Moses here (cf. Matthew 12:42).
Our Lady of the Rosary will be invested by God with the power to perform an unprecedented Miracle, heralded three months in advance, in which the Sun will be spun about like a ball and depart from its place in the sky, irradiating rainbow colours.
But this was pure miracle, not natural, because - although viewed by 70,000-100,000 eye-witnesses, including Freethinking scoffers who later described it in their papers, and even seen apparently beyond the confines of Fatima - it did not register at all in any observatories.
‘This is the finger of God’.
Obviously, too, some of the feats of Moses were purely miraculous, incapable of being exactly reproduced by any of Egypt’s skilled court magicians.
These magicians were highly reputed. One, Dedi, is described in the Westcar Papyrus.
Djedi was honoured with an invitation by pharaoh Khufu (one of the names of the Oppressor baby-killing “new king” of Exodus 1:8). Dedi with all his books and scholars arrives at the royal palace. King Khufu welcomes them and then began to question them about whether all the tales and legends about him were true. Khufu then challenges the wizard if he can mend a severed head like he is famed to be able to do, the king orders a prisoner to be executed so the magician can put his head back. Dedi refused as he did not want any man to suffer, so instead the magician chose three animals. The first was the goose that was decapitated, and the body was placed on the western side of the audience hall, and its head was placed on the eastern side. After Djedi cast a certain spell, the head of the goose stood up and began to waddle, and the body started doing the same. Both body parts met in the middle and merged together like before, then the goose leaves the royal court cackling like any bird.
The exact same performance was done on a bull and a water bird, and both were brought back to life in the same manner. King Khufu was impressed.
As you would be.
“Egyptian magicians historically used snake charming techniques to perform snake tricks, particularly making a snake appear rigid and rod-like by pressing its neck to induce a temporary, stiff state”.
AI Overview
So much for all of that!
The miracles wrought before Israel by Moses had the desired effect upon the people (Exodus 4:30-31): “[Moses] also performed the signs before the people, and they believed. And when they heard that the Lord was concerned about them and had seen their misery, they bowed down and worshiped”.
Well that was for the moment. Everybody loves a good miracle.
But this was “a stubborn and rebellious generation” (cf. Psalm 78:8), that included, amongst others, the rogue pair, Dathan and Abiram (St. Paul’s Jannes and Mambres).
These, like the hard-hearted Pharaoh whom Moses and Aaron were about to confront, would quickly forget the works of the Lord, and would perish in the wilderness, just as their Egyptian pursuers would perish catastrophically at the Sea of Reeds (Yam Suph).
In fact, Moses and Aaron will quickly bring upon themselves the ire of their people after Pharaoh had rejected their demand and had only increased Israel’s misery.
Very next chapter:
Exodus 5:1-23:
Afterward Moses and Aaron went to Pharaoh and said, ‘This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, says: ‘Let my people go, so that they may hold a festival to me in the wilderness’.”
Pharaoh said, ‘Who is the Lord, that I should obey him and let Israel go? I do not know the Lord and I will not let Israel go’.
Then they said, ‘The God of the Hebrews has met with us. Now let us take a three-day journey into the wilderness to offer sacrifices to the Lord our God, or he may strike us with plagues or with the sword’.
But the king of Egypt said, ‘Moses and Aaron, why are you taking the people away from their labor? Get back to your work!’ Then Pharaoh said, ‘Look, the people of the land are now numerous, and you are stopping them from working’.
That same day Pharaoh gave this order to the slave drivers and overseers in charge of the people: “You are no longer to supply the people with straw for making bricks; let them go and gather their own straw. But require them to make the same number of bricks as before; don’t reduce the quota. They are lazy; that is why they are crying out, ‘Let us go and sacrifice to our God.’ Make the work harder for the people so that they keep working and pay no attention to lies”.
Then the slave drivers and the overseers went out and said to the people, “This is what Pharaoh says: ‘I will not give you any more straw. Go and get your own straw wherever you can find it, but your work will not be reduced at all’.” So the people scattered all over Egypt to gather stubble to use for straw. The slave drivers kept pressing them, saying, ‘Complete the work required of you for each day, just as when you had straw’. And Pharaoh’s slave drivers beat the Israelite overseers they had appointed, demanding, ‘Why haven’t you met your quota of bricks yesterday or today, as before?’
Then the Israelite overseers went and appealed to Pharaoh: “Why have you treated your servants this way? Your servants are given no straw, yet we are told, ‘Make bricks!’ Your servants are being beaten, but the fault is with your own people”.
Pharaoh said, “Lazy, that’s what you are—lazy! That is why you keep saying, ‘Let us go and sacrifice to the Lord’. Now get to work. You will not be given any straw, yet you must produce your full quota of bricks”.
The Israelite overseers realized they were in trouble when they were told, ‘You are not to reduce the number of bricks required of you for each day’. When they left Pharaoh, they found Moses and Aaron waiting to meet them, and they said, ‘May the Lord look on you and judge you! You have made us obnoxious to Pharaoh and his officials and have put a sword in their hand to kill us’.
Once again we find Moses wishing that he had not been the one chosen by the Lord.
God Promises Deliverance
Moses returned to the Lord and said, ‘Why, Lord, why have you brought trouble on this people? Is this why you sent me? Ever since I went to Pharaoh to speak in your name, he has brought trouble on this people, and you have not rescued your people at all’.
Archaeological Evidence for Israelites and their Departure
https://pharaohoppressionmosesisraelegyptdynasty.wordpress.com/category/mud-bricks-containing-straw/
…. There is considerable evidence to suggest that the 12th dynasty was the period when the Israelites were oppressed. The 12th dynasty pyramids had a mud brick core and a limestone veneer. (The limestone veneer has fallen away over the centuries leaving the mud brick core exposed.) There were seven such pyramids constructed over about 200 years [sic]. The Labyrinth, another monolith of the 12th dynasty, was also made from mud bricks.
There was a massive Exodus of slaves from Egypt in the 13th dynasty, after which, no more pyramids were constructed.
The only other significant exodus from Egypt was at the end of the second intermediate period when The Hyksos were chased out of Egypt in a rebellion lead [sic] by the family of Ahmose who went on to found the 18th dynasty. The Hyksos were rulers of Egypt and are clearly not the Israelites.
The only reasonable conclusion is that the Exodus of slaves in the 13th dynasty was in fact the Israelite Exodus. ….
[End of quote]
The Egyptianised Exodus Israelites will emerge most importantly as the nomadic Middle Bronze I (MBI) people. This is rock-solid archaeological evidence in support of the Bible.
Then, not long after the catastrophic reign of Pharaoh Neferhotep, during the reign of Pharaoh Dedumes (Dudimose), Manetho’s ill-fated “Tutimaeus”, the Hyksos invaders poured into Egypt (Aegyptiaca):
https://www.loebclassics.com/view/manetho-history_egypt/1940/pb_LCL350.79.xml?readMode=recto
“Tutimaeus … In his reign, for what cause I know not, a blast of God smote us; and unexpectedly, from the regions of the East, invaders of obscure race marched in confidence of victory against our land. By main force they easily seized it without striking a blow … and having overpowered the rulers of the land, they then burned our cities ruthlessly, razed to the ground the temples of the gods, and treated all the natives with a cruel hostility, massacring some and leading into slavery the wives and children of others”.
The Hyksos had no trouble overwhelming an already devastated Egypt.
The ‘moment’ of the Hyksos can be pinpointed archaeologically, at Avaris (Tel ed-Daba), as we shall now read. Egyptianised Asiatics (the Hebrews) will depart (Exodus), making way eventually for non-Egyptianised Asiatics (the Hyksos), the latter sometimes being likened to an 11th Plague of Egypt.
https://www.bereaninsights.org/nugget/the-discoveries-at-avaris/
The Discoveries at Avaris
For more than two centuries archaeologists have sought evidence for the Israelites in Egypt. No Israelite settlement has ever been found in the 19th Dynasty where the Orthodox Chronology predicted it would be. I told you in the last Nugget about the Austrian team of archaeologists, led by Manfred Bietak, who have been excavating at Tel ed-Daba since 1960, more commonly called Avaris in ancient times. Bietak and his team have made many astounding discoveries.
Manfred Bietak and his team have found evidence of a long period of Asiatic settlement in Avaris. Between Stratum G/1 and F there is a definite break between two distinct phases of settlement. Both [David] Rohl and Bietak believe this line of demarcation between Stratum G/1 and F at Tel ed-Daba likely marks the break that resulted from the biblical Exodus of the Israelites from Tell ed-Daba. Around Goshen [Delta region] … there is incontrovertible evidence for a large Asiatic population. In just the time frame … where … the Israelite sojourn in Egypt would be.
The majority of the tombs in the earlier strata are of Asiatic people from Palestine and Syria. Bietak says the early Asiatics were heavily Egyptianized. These people have spent considerable time in Egypt and have taken on many of the cultural practices of the Egyptians themselves … these people have to be Israelites. The fit for the time period perfectly matches the other indications that this indeed is the correct time period for the Exodus. These earlier Asiatics are more likely to be Joseph’s relatives.
The later Asiatics were very different and were not Egyptianized at all and appear to be of Hyksos descent.
In the Brooklyn Papyrus there is a list of 95 names of slaves, over 50% of which are Semitic names. There are several Biblical names in the list, e.g. Menahem, Issachar, Asher and Shiphrah. The term Apiru (the equivalent of Hebrew) [sic?] appears first in the Brooklyn Papyrus. William Albright recognized the language belongs to the northwest Semitic language family which includes Biblical Hebrew. There is a high proportion of female slaves. More adult women are buried here than men. 65% of all burials are children under the age of 18 months with girls out numbering boys by a ratio of 3:1. This could be explained by the massacre of Israelite boys whose bodies were then disposed of in mass unmarked burial pits.
All over the city of Avaris are shallow burial pits with multiple victims. There were no careful interments as was required under Egyptian customs. The bodies were thrown one on top of another in mass graves. There is no evidence of grave goods being placed with the corpses as was the Egyptian custom. Bietak is convinced this is direct evidence of a plague or catastrophe. The large part of the remaining population abandoned their homes and left en masse. Bietak says the site was then reoccupied after an unknown interval of time by Asiatics who were not Egyptianised. Hence the break between stratum G/1 and F. There is a strange anomaly where the Asiatic folk who inhabited Stratum F lived in poor conditions yet their graves were richly endowed with precious metals and jewellery.
The sources are unconnected and yet intriguingly consistent. Putting all the pieces together one can build up a consistent story which supports the Biblical account. The break in archeological stratum between G/1 and F marks the intervening years following the exodus of the Hebrew slaves from Egypt.
The repopulation of Avaris sometime afterward by the Hyksos people who moved into Egypt matches the beginning of the Second Intermediate Period [Thirteenth Dynasty] of the Egyptian Pharaohs. They were Asiatic people from the same region as the Israelites but not Egyptianized as Joseph and his family had been.
The facts fit the period before the Exodus well. Given the disruption at the time of plagues and the magnitude of the deaths which occurred there would have been no time to bury the dead according to Egyptian customs. The predominance of females, especially among children would have been a result of the deliberate murder of the male children by the Pharoah. Where did such poor people (slaves no less) get such riches? Simple: read Ex 11:2 which says, “Tell all the Israelite men and women to ask their Egyptian neighbours for articles of silver and gold.”
[End of quote]
The mass departure of workers from Illahûn, or Lahun (Kahun), during the reign of Pharaoh Neferhotep archaeologically signals the Exodus.
Thus Dr. David Down: https://creation.com/searching-for-moses
Searching for Moses
….
Another striking feature of [Sir Flinders] Petrie’s discoveries was the fact that these slaves suddenly disappeared off the scene. Rosalie David wrote:
‘It is apparent that the completion of the king’s pyramid was not the reason why Kahun’s inhabitants eventually deserted the town, abandoning their tools and other possessions in the shops and houses.’ …. There are different opinions of how this first period of occupation at Kahun drew to a close … . The quantity, range and type of articles of everyday use which were left behind in the houses may indeed suggest that the departure was sudden and unpremeditated.’ ….
The departure was sudden and unpremeditated! Nothing could better fit the Biblical record. ‘And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years—on that very same day—it came to pass that all the armies of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt’ (Exodus 12:41).
Later we shall read (Exodus 11:3): “Furthermore, the man Moses himself was greatly esteemed in the land of Egypt, both in the sight of Pharaoh’s servants and in the sight of the people”.
His name may have been etched in stone, possibly signalling the beginning of the Hebrew alphabet – whether or not Moses himself had invented it:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/oldest-written-reference-moses-egypt-inscriptions-b2810114.html
Mr Bar-Ron argues the texts read “Zot M’Moshe” and “Ne’um Moshe”,
which may translate as “This is from Moses” and “Declaration of Moses”.
Oldest written reference to Moses may be etched into ancient Egyptian mine, claims researcher
Story by Steffie Banatvala
….
NEW STUDY CLAIMS EARLIEST REFERENCE TO MOSES FOUND IN ANCIENT EGYPTIAN MINE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhCRzpIA_EA
A researcher has claimed that two inscriptions dating back 3,800 years found in the Egyptian desert may be the oldest written references to Moses.
The etchings were first discovered in the early 1900s and are now being re-examined by American-Israeli epigraphist Michael S. Bar-Ron, a graduate student at Ariel University.
They were found at Serabit el-Khadim, a turquoise mining site in the Sinai Desert once worked by Semitic labourers during the Middle Bronze Age.
The Proto-Sinaitic etchings date back to between 1800 and 1600BC [sic], which are centuries before the earliest biblical texts were written between the 10th and 7th centuries BC.
Mr Bar-Ron argues the texts read “Zot M’Moshe” and “Ne’um Moshe”, which may translate as “This is from Moses” and “Declaration of Moses”.
If correct, they would represent the earliest known written reference to Moses outside of the Bible.
The inscriptions also refer to El, a deity linked to the Abrahamic God, according to Fox News.
Speaking to the broadcaster, Mr Bar-Ron said the inscriptions appear to resist worship of the ancient goddess Ba’alat by Semitic workers.
The Serabit el-Khadim site once housed a temple to Ba`alat, he added.
“Rather than lauding Ba`alat … [the] readings curse out the Ba`alat cult, with words of warning and rebuke to its followers,” Mr Bar-Ron said.
“They include the terms 'BŠ' – ‘for shame’ or ‘this is shameful' – and ‘nimosh,’ [which means] ‘let us leave’ [or] ‘remove ourselves.’”
Academic response to the interpretation has been mixed.
Thomas Schneider, an Egyptologist at the University of British Columbia told Daily Mail that the new interpretation is “completely unproven and misleading.”
Translating the ancient inscriptions took nearly a decade, the epigraphist said.
“I spent eight years actively involved in the painstaking, oft-frustrating reconstruction of some 23 wordy Proto-Sinaitic inscriptions.
“That is, based on the principles of the foremost greats in the field, and informed by the work of my distinguished colleagues in the field.”
Mr Bar-Ron also suggested to Fox News that the “Moses” inscriptions may have a single author, pointing to stylistic similarities in wording.
His wider thesis examines “a Mosaic-type leadership” in the region at the time. ….
Oldest written reference to Moses may be etched into ancient Egyptian mine, claims researcher
Dr. Davd Down continues:
The ten plagues on Egypt
Pharaoh had yielded to Moses’ demands to allow his slaves to leave because of the ten devastating plagues that fell on Egypt (Exodus 7–12). The waters of the sacred River Nile were turned to blood, herds and flocks were smitten with pestilence, lightning set combustible material on fire, hail flattened the crops and struck the fruit trees, and locusts blanketed the country and consumed what might have been left of plant life. The economy of Egypt would have been so shattered that there should be some record of such a national catastrophe–and there is.
In the Leiden Museum in Holland is a papyrus written in a later period, but most scholars recognize it as being a copy of a papyrus from an earlier dynasty. It could have been from the 13th dynasty describing the conditions that prevailed after the plagues had struck. It reads,
‘Nay, but the heart is violent. Plague stalks through the land and blood is everywhere … . Nay, but the river is blood. Does a man drink from it? As a human he rejects it. He thirsts for water … . Nay, but gates, columns and walls are consumed with fire … . Nay but men are few. He that lays his brother in the ground is everywhere … . Nay but the son of the high-born man is no longer to be recognized … . The stranger people from outside are come into Egypt … . Nay, but corn has perished everywhere. People are stripped of clothing, perfume and oil. Everyone says "there is no more". The storehouse is bare … . It has come to this. The king has been taken away by poor men’ ….
The Pharaoh of the Exodus
There are records of slavery during the reigns of the last rulers of the 12th Dynasty—Sesostris III, Amenemhet III and Sobekneferu (some include an obscure figure known as Amenemhet IV before Sobekneferu). With the death of Sobekneferu the 12th dynasty came to an end as she had no children born to her. Moses, the adopted heir, had fled to Midian.
A period of instability followed the demise of the 12th dynasty. …. (The idea of dynasties was not an Egyptian idea at the time. It was a later invention of Manetho, the Egyptian priest of the 3rd century BC who left a record of the history of Egypt and divided the kings into dynasties.) ….
The elevation to rulership over all Egypt by these kings resulted in fierce contention among themselves, resulting in a rapid succession of rulers and more or less anarchy in the country. This only settled down when Neferhotep I took the throne and restored some stability, ruling for 11 years.
I identify Khasekemre-Neferhotep I as the pharaoh from whom Moses demanded Israel’s release. I do so because Petrie found scarabs … of former kings at Kahun.
But the latest scarab he found there was of Neferhotep, who was apparently the pharaoh ruling when the Israelite slaves suddenly left Kahun and fled from Egypt in the Exodus. According to Manetho, he was the last king to rule before the Hyksos occupied Egypt ‘without a battle’. Without a battle? Where was the Egyptian army? It was at the bottom of the Red Sea [sic] Exodus 14:28). Khasekemre-Neferhotep I was probably the pharaoh of the Exodus. His mummy has never been found.
Egyptian magicians historically used snake charming techniques to perform snake tricks, particularly making a snake appear rigid and rod-like by pressing its neck to induce a temporary, stiff state. In the Book of Exodus, these "secret arts" were used to replicate Moses' miracle of turning his staff into a serpent by employing this technique, although Aaron's staff then swallowed the magicians' staffs, showing God's superior power.
Monday, September 1, 2025
Jonah may have actually died in the ‘fish’ and gone to Sheol
‘I went down to the bottoms of the mountains; the earth with her bars was about me forever: yet hast thou brought up my life from corruption, O Lord my God’.
Jonah 2:6
We read at: https://www.biblebro.net/jonah-died-in-the-whale/
Jonah Died In the Whale
First note that this is not a greatly supported teaching …
Like most bible believers, I once believed that Jonah miraculously lived in the belly of the whale for 3 days before he was spit up onto land to warn the people of Nineveh to turn to God. The more I studied the situation and the language, the more I realized that it’s a strong possibility that Jonah died in the whale and was resurrected.
Jesus & Jonah Died and Went to Sheol
Jonah is a type of Christ. Here’s what Jesus said:
Matthew 12:39-40 – “But he (Jesus) answered and said unto them (religious leaders), An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”
[Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly] – Yes, a whale’s belly, not just “a great fish” as some insist because of Jonah 1:17.
[the Son of man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth] – Was Jesus alive in the ground? No, and neither was Jonah alive in the whale. Jesus died and went to Sheol, as did everyone who died in those days.
….
Jonah 2:1-2 – “Then Jonah prayed unto the Lord his God out of the fish’s belly, And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the Lord, and he heard me; out of the belly of hell cried I, and thou heardest my voice.”
[the fish’s belly] – belly H4578 = the stomach, abdomen, inside or outside part of the belly. Note that this word is different than that used in “the belly of hell”.
[the belly of hell] – belly H0990 = the belly, the womb, or of depth of Sheol (fig.). Hell H7585 = š ‘ôl; Sheol, the world of the dead, abode of the dead. In other words, Jonah’s soul was in the pits of hell. [Comment: Sheol was not exclusively hell]. The “belly” here is not describing the whale’s stomach, but Sheol.
Jonah 2:6-7 – “I went down to the bottoms of the mountains; the earth with her bars was about me forever: yet hast thou brought up my life from corruption, O Lord my God. When my soul fainted within me I remembered the Lord: and my prayer came in unto thee, into thine holy temple.”
[the bottoms of the mountains] – The bottoms of the seas, which were recorded to be the lowest parts of the earth, hence the gates of Hell (Job 38:16-17). In the resurrection of the wicked dead, the seas give up their dead, and so does death and hell (Rev 20:13). Note the connection between the bottoms of the seas and Hell.
[the earth with her bars was about me forever] – He was in the eternal place of Sheol where the bars, or “gates of hell” (Matt 16:18) had him locked up. “I was going to stay in hell forever [sic], but you brought my dead body back to life, up from corruption.
[thou brought up my life from] – You brought me back from the dead. See Acts 2:27.
[my soul fainted] – “I prayed from the whale, passed out, died, prayed from Sheol, and was resurrected.”
Monday, August 25, 2025
Covenant between God and Abram wonderfully foreshadows the immolation of Jesus Christ
“When the sun had set and darkness had fallen, a smoking firepot
with a blazing torch appeared and passed between the pieces.
On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram”.
Genesis 15:17-18
Ryan Leasure has brilliantly written (2020):
https://ryanleasure.com/the-abrahamic-covenant-and-the-cross-of-christ/
The Abrahamic Covenant and the Cross of Christ
….
Take a quick survey of Christians and you’ll discover that most of them don’t read the Old Testament. And who can blame them? One quick glance at Leviticus or Ezekiel, and it’s easy to see how readers get bogged down in all the obscure details. Readers ask themselves, “do we want to read details about Jewish dietary laws or the Sermon on the Mount? Sermon on the Mount please!”
I understand the struggle.
Reading through endless genealogies, detailed plans of the tabernacle, or the numerous ways to offer a sacrifice can be challenging. But this shouldn’t deter us. After all, the Old Testament was Jesus’ Bible that he quoted dozens of times in the Gospels. It’s also the Scripture Paul referred to when he said “all Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable” (2 Tim. 3:16). You get that? The Old Testament is profitable.
Contrary to what some think, the Old Testament is a gold mine.
Not only does it tell us a great deal about the character of God, it anticipates his rescue plan. That is, the entire Old Testament points to the coming of the Messiah. Jesus rebukes the Pharisees for missing this very point. He declares, “You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me” (Jn. 5:39).
In the remaining space, I want to highlight an Old Testament text that anticipates the coming of Jesus, but, because of its unusual nature, we often gloss over it. My hope is that in looking at this passage, you will see one small example of the immense value of the Old Testament.
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT
The opening portion of the Bible describes God’s creation, human’s rejection of him, and the subsequent curse on the world. As a result, the human population, as a whole, rejected God and pursued their own way of living. Instead of leaving them to their own destruction, God mercifully reached out to a pagan worshipper named Abraham in Genesis 12 and promised to establish his rescue plan through his family line.
The only problem was that Abraham and his wife Sarah were childless and already beyond the conventional child-rearing years. If God was going to keep his promise, he would have to perform a miracle. As you read the story of Abraham, you find that his trust in God was a bit of a mixed bag — sometimes he trusted, and sometimes he wavered.
In Genesis 15, God reaffirms his commitment to Abraham despite the fact that Abraham and Sarah still remained childless.
We can imagine that after several years of infertility, Abraham and Sarah had their doubts and questions about God’s faithfulness surfaced in their minds. So Abraham asks God for another show of good faith. He asks, how is this going to happen since we’re only getting older and we still haven’t had a son?
God responds with a vision — an obscure one at that. In Genesis 15 we read:
So the LORD said to him, “Bring me a heifer, a goat and a ram, each three years old, along with a dove and a young pigeon.” Abram brought all these to him, cut them in two and arranged the halves opposite each other… When the sun had set and darkness had fallen, a smoking fire pot with a blazing torch appeared and passed between the pieces. On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram and said, “To your descendants I give this land.”
What is going on here? Cutting up animals? Smoking fire pots floating between the animals? This is bizarre stuff.
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT AND SMOKING FIRE POT EXPLAINED
I must confess, I missed the significance of this vision the first several times I read this text. In my mind, God had given a vision to Abraham, and that was enough to confirm God was going to keep his promises. But I discovered that much more was going on here.
What I failed to realize initially was that cutting animals in half and walking between the two parts was a common way ancients performed covenantal ceremonies. And the symbolism is hard to miss too. If either of the contractual partners didn’t hold up their end of the covenant, they would meet the same fate as the animals.
We see an example of this type of covenant in Jeremiah 34:18. It states, “Those who have violated my covenant and have not fulfilled the terms of the covenant they made before me, I will treat like the calf they cut in two and then walked between its pieces.” Did you get that? Those who violate the covenant will be treated like those torn-apart animals.
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT AND THE CROSS OF CHRIST
If you know the story, God fulfilled his covenant to Abraham. He gave him a son which ultimately led to the nation of Israel. But while God was faithful to keep up his end of the agreement, Abraham’s descendants weren’t faithful keep up their end. Instead, they rejected God and pursued idols repeatedly. Under normal circumstances, this would result in their death. But the Abrahamic Covenant wasn’t normal.
You see, it was customary for both parties to walk through the animals indicating that they both were going to hold up their end of the agreement. In Abraham’s vision, however, only God — in the form of a smoking pot — passed through the animals. It’s as if God was saying, “I will be responsible to make this covenant happen for the both of us. So even if you don’t hold up your end of the agreement, I will suffer the consequences.”
I hope you’re beginning to see the significance of the Abrahamic Covenant by now. Even though God remained faithful to Israel, they were unfaithful to him and, therefore, deserved to die. But, since God was the only one to pass through the animals, he would die in their place. In other words, by making this covenant with Abraham, God was pronouncing a death sentence on his Son. What an incredible act of love!
THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT FOR TODAY
At first glance, this text is a bit obscure. Apart from cultural understanding of ancient covenants, we might miss its point.
But once the point is clear, we see how significant the Abrahamic Covenant is for today.
God made a promise that he would rescue the world through the line of Abraham. And ultimately, this is precisely what he did. One of Abraham’s descendants — Jesus of Nazareth — rescued the world from their sin and death while at the same time suffering the consequences for Abraham’s descendants’ unfaithfulness.
What a beautiful story. But sadly, if you never read the Old Testament, you’ll miss it and so many more just like it that point to the promised Christ.
So the next time you’re tempted to skip over the Old Testament because you think it’s too difficult to read or irrelevant, I hope you’ll be reminded of the smoking fire pot. Because it was that fire pot that ensured that Jesus would die on the cross instead of you.
Tuesday, August 19, 2025
German archaeologist may have been misrepresenting anthropological data
Top German Archaeologist Accused of Faking Prehistoric Discoveries
Axel von Berg was among the world’s most respected archaeologists. Now, his historic findings are being called into question.
German Archaeologist Faked Skulls & Fragments As Prehistoric
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbsFMb1tB9k
We read at: Top German Archaeologist Accused of Faking Prehistoric Discoveries
By Tim Brinkhof December 6, 2024
Axel von Berg, long ranked among the world’s most respected archaeologists, is facing allegations of falsifying some of his most important prehistoric discoveries. Authorities in the German province of Rhineland-Palatinate have launched an investigation into claims that Von Berg misrepresented the age and origins of several artifacts, including a skull he famously identified as Neanderthal in 1997.
The controversy began earlier this year, when the Interior Ministry of Rhineland-Palatinate received evidence suggesting a senior employee at the General Directorate for Cultural Heritage had tampered with archaeological findings.
A report in the German newspaper Der Spiegel has identified Von Berg as the accused, claiming to have received inside information. According to the publication, an initial investigation by the ministry found that 21 skull fragments had been incorrectly dated, with 18 more potential cases of falsification—involving finds from spearheads to armor buckles—still under review.
Von Berg rose to prominence following a 1997 discovery at a volcanic site near the town of Ochtendung, where he claimed to have unearthed Neanderthal skull fragments while the construction workers clearing the site for redevelopment were away for Easter break. “I knew where to look,” he recalled, “but I was also lucky.”
After review by prominent archaeologists and paleontologists, the find was celebrated as a breakthrough and covered extensively in scientific journals. In the issue of the journal Berichte zur Archäologie an Mittelrhein und Mosel in which Von Berg detailed his discovery, he described the fragments as coming from a “typical Middle Paleolithic context,” with a French Neanderthal expert concurring with his assessment.
Recent investigations, however, have revealed that the skull fragments belong not to a Neanderthal but to a human from the early Middle Ages, making them much less significant.
Mackey’s comment: And this may be only the tip of the Axelberg.
See also e.g. my articles:
Messing with the Neanderthals
https://www.academia.edu/82426592/Messing_with_the_Neanderthals
Sawing off the jaws of Neanderthals to make them appear more ape-like
(6) Sawing off the jaws of Neanderthals to make them appear more ape-like
Thursday, July 31, 2025
St. Cardinal John Henry Newman to be made a Doctor of the Church
Lead, Kindly Light
by John Henry Newman (1834)
Lead, Kindly Light, amid the encircling gloom,
Lead Thou me on;
The night is dark, and I am far from home,
Lead Thou me on.
Keep Thou my feet;
I do not ask to see the distant scene;
one step enough for me.
I was not ever thus, nor prayed that
Thou shouldst lead me on;
I loved to choose and see my path; but now
Lead Thou me on.
I loved the garish day, and, spite of fears, pride ruled my will;
remember not past years.
So long Thy power hath blessed me, sure it still
Will lead me on.
O'er moor and fen, o'er crag and torrent, till
The night is gone;
And with the morn those angel faces smile,
Which I have loved long since, and lost awhile.
Fr. Juan Velez has written (2025):
https://www.cardinaljohnhenrynewman.com/st-john-henry-newman-to-be-declared-a-doctor-of-the-church/
St. John Henry Newman to be Declared
a Doctor of the Church
Today, July 31, 2025, the Vatican published the wonderful news that Pope Leo XIV has approved the future declaration of St. John Henry Newman as doctor of the Church. We are delighted with this news and wanted to share with you even if you learned about it earlier today.
We have already posted some blog posts on this topic and will soon publish others. Today we wanted to share the news with you and ask to invite friends to give thanks to God for this news and to follow our weekly podcasts.
Here is a link to the news from the Vatican webpage and some words by the journalist Alexandro Carolis:
“One of the great modern thinkers of Christianity, a key figure in a spiritual and human journey that left a profound mark on the Church and 19th-century ecumenism, and the author of writings that show how living the faith is a daily “heart-to-heart” dialogue with Christ. A life spent with energy and passion for the Gospel—culminating in his canonization in 2019—that will soon lead to the English cardinal John Henry Newman being proclaimed a Doctor of the Church.
The news was announced today, July 31, in a statement from the Holy See Press Office, which reported that during an audience granted to Cardinal Marcello Semeraro, Prefect of the Dicastery for the Causes of Saints, Pope Leo XIV has “confirmed the affirmative opinion of the Plenary Session of Cardinals and Bishops, Members of the Dicastery for the Causes of Saints, regarding the title of Doctor of the Universal Church, which will soon be conferred on Saint John Henry Newman”.
The saints give glory to God and teach us how to live as God’s children. We rejoice with the upcoming declaration of Newman as doctor of the Church. ….
We read this by Dr. Samuel Gregg, at:
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2025/07/31/john-henry-newmans-long-war-on-liberalism/
John Henry Newman’s long war on liberalism
Saint John Henry Newman’s devastating critique of liberal religion remains even more relevant in our own time.
Editor’s note: This article was originally posted on July 30, 2017, and is reposted today to mark the news that Newman has been named a Doctor of the Church by Pope Leo XIV.
There is truly nothing new under the sun. That’s the pedestrian conclusion at which I arrived after recently re-reading the address given by one of the nineteenth century’s greatest theologians, Saint John Henry Newman, when Pope Leo XIII made him a cardinal on May 12, 1879.
Known as the Biglietto Speech (after the formal letter given to cardinals on such occasions), its 1720 words constitute a systematic indictment of what Newman called that “one great mischief” against which he had set his face “from the first.” Today, I suspect, the sheer force of Newman’s critique of what he called “liberalism in religion” would make him persona non grata in most Northern European theology faculties.
When reflecting upon Newman’s remarks, it’s hard not to notice how much of the Christian world in the West has drifted in the directions against which he warned. Under the banner of “liberalism in religion,” Newman listed several propositions. These included (1) “the doctrine that there is no positive truth in religion,” (2) “that one creed is as good as another,” (3) that no religion can be recognized as true for “all are matter of opinion,” (4) that “revealed religion is not a truth, but a sentiment and a taste; not an objective faith, not miraculous,” and (5) “it is the right of each individual to make it say just what strikes his fancy.”
Can anyone doubt that such ideas are widespread today among some Christians? Exhibit A is the rapidly collapsing liberal Protestant confessions. Another instance is that a fair number of Catholic clergy and laity of a certain age who shy away from the word “truth” and who regard any doctrine that conflicts with the post-1960s Western world’s expectations as far from settled.
Yet Newman’s description of liberal religion also accurately summarizes the essentially secular I’m-spiritual-not-religious mindset.
At the time, the directness of Newman’s assault on liberal religion surprised people. It wasn’t for idle reasons that the speech was reprinted in full in The London Times on 13 May, and then translated into Italian so that it could appear in the Holy See’s newspaper L’Osservatore Romano on 14 May. Everyone recognized that Newman’s words were of immense significance.
The newly minted cardinal had hitherto been seen as someone ill at ease with the Church’s direction during Pius IX’s pontificate. Newman’s apprehensions about the opportuneness of the First Vatican Council formally defining papal infallibility was well known. Not well-understood was that concerns about Catholics being misled into thinking they must assent to a pope’s firm belief that, for example, the optimal upper-tax rate is 25.63 percent, didn’t mean that you regarded religious belief as a type of theological smorgasbord.
Those who had followed the trajectory of Newman’s thought over the previous fifty years would have recognized that the Biglietto Speech harkened back to a younger Newman and a consistent record of fierce opposition to liberal religion. In 1848, for instance, Newman had lampooned liberal religion in his novel Loss and Gain (1848). One character in the book, the Dean of Nottingham, is portrayed as someone who believes that “there was no truth or falsehood in received dogmas of theology; that they were modes, neither good nor bad in themselves, but personal, national, or periodic.”
Such opinions mirror the views of those today who primarily regard Scripture, the Church, and Christian faith as essentially human historical constructs: a notion that invariably goes hand-in-hand with a barely disguised insistence that the Church always requires wholesale adaptation to whatever happens to be the zeitgeist.
The end result is chronic doctrinal instability (and thus incoherence) and the degeneration of churches into mere NGO-ism: precisely the situation which characterizes contemporary Catholicism in the German-speaking world.
Another of the novel’s characters is Mr. Batts, the director of the Truth Society. This organization is founded on two principles. First, it is uncertain whether truth exists. Second, it is certain that it cannot be found. Welcome to the world of philosophical skepticism, which, Newman understood, is based on the contradiction of holding that we know the truth that humans really cannot know truth.
Newman’s antagonism towards liberal religion, however, also reflected another side of his thought that, I suspect, some today would also prefer to ignore. This concerns Newman’s critical view of liberalism as a social philosophy.
Newman was fully aware of the ambiguity surrounding terms like “conservatism” and “liberalism.” In his Apologia Pro Sua Vita (1864), Newman specified that his criticism of liberalism shouldn’t be interpreted as slighting French Catholics such as Charles de Montalembert and the Dominican priest Henri-Dominique Lacordaire—“two men whom I so highly admire”—who embraced the liberal label but in the context of post-Revolutionary France: a world which differed greatly from the Oxford and England of Newman’s time.
We get closer to the “liberalism” against which Newman protested when we consider a letter to his mother dated 13 March 1829. Here Newman condemns, among others, “the Utilitarians” and “useful knowledge men” whose ideas were propagated by philosophical Radical periodicals such as the Westminster Review. These beliefs and publications were clearly associated with utilitarian thinkers and political radicals such as Jeremy Bentham (the Westminster Review’s founder), James Mill, and, later, John Stuart Mill. In this sense, liberalism was Newman’s way of describing what we today call doctrinaire secularism.
This is borne out by the Biglietto Speech’s portrayal of a society’s fate as it gradually abandons its Christian character, invariably at the behest of those Newman calls “Philosophers and Politicians.”
Newman begins by referencing their imposition of “a universal and a thoroughly secular education, calculated to bring home to every individual that to be orderly, industrious, and sober, is his personal interest.”
Recognizing, however, that utility, pragmatism, and self-interest aren’t enough to glue society together, liberals promote, according to Newman, an alternative to revealed religion. This, he says, is made up of an amalgam of “broad fundamental ethical truths, of justice, benevolence, veracity, and the like; proved experience; and those natural laws which exist and act spontaneously in society, and in social matters, whether physical or psychological; for instance, in government, trade, finance, sanitary experiments, and the intercourse of nations.” But while liberals uphold this mixture of particular moral principles, matter-of-factness and science, Newman points out that they simultaneously insist that religion is “a private luxury, which a man may have if he will; but which of course he must pay for, and which he must not obtrude upon others, or indulge in to their annoyance.”
It’s not, Newman says, that things like “the precepts of justice, truthfulness, sobriety, self-command, benevolence,” etc. are bad in themselves. In fact, Newman adds, “there is much in the liberalistic theory which is good and true.” Nor did Newman adopt an “anti-science” view at a time when some Christians worried about how to reconcile the Scriptures with the tremendous expansion in knowledge of the natural world which marked the nineteenth century. Newman wasn’t, for example, especially troubled by Darwin’s Origin of the Species. As he wrote to the biologist and Catholic convert St George Jackson Mivart in 1871, “you must not suppose I have personally any great dislike or dread of his theory.”
What Newman opposed was a problem with which we are all too familiar today. This consists of (1) absolutizing the natural sciences as the only objective form of knowledge and (2) using the empirical method to answer theological and moral questions that the natural sciences cannot answer.
In such cases, Newman wrote in his Idea of a University (1852), “they exceed their proper bounds, and intrude where they have no right.” It also fosters a mentality which has seeped into the minds of those Christians who prioritize sociology, psychology, opinion polls, and what they imagine to be the “established scientific position” when discussing what the Catholic position on any subject should be.
More generally, Newman argued that it’s precisely because these principles are unobjectionable in themselves that they become dangerous when liberals include them in the “array of principles” they use “to supersede, to block out, religion.” In these circumstances, those who maintain that religion, in the sense of divinely revealed truths about God and man, cannot be relegated to the status of football teams competing in a private league are dismissed as unreasonable, intolerant, lacking benevolence, unscientific, and reflective of (to use the curious words employed in a L’Osservatore Romano opinion piece) a “modest cultural level.” In a word—illiberal.
Newman well understood the ultimate stakes involved in the advance of liberal religion and the nihilism it concealed under a veneer of progressive Western European bourgeois morality. It was nothing less, he said, than “the ruin of many souls.” For Newman, there was always the serious possibility that error at the level of belief can contribute to people making the type of free choices that lead to the eternal separation from God we call hell.
The good news is that Newman had “no fear at all that [liberal religion] can really do aught of serious harm to the Word of God, to Holy Church.” For Newman, the Church was essentially indestructible. That didn’t mean it would be free of disputation or disruption.
Newman himself spent his life immersed in theological controversies. But Newman’s deep knowledge of the Church Fathers made him conscious that orthodoxy had been under assault since Christianity’s earliest centuries.
Newman believed, however, in Christ’s promises to his Church. Moreover, Newman ended his Biglietto Speech by stating that “what is commonly a great surprise” is “the particular mode by which . . . Providence rescues and saves his elect inheritance.” Even in times where serious theological and moral error seems rampant, God raises up courageous bishops and priests, clear-thinking popes, new religious orders and movements, lay people who reject liberal Christianity’s mediocrity and soft nihilism, and, above all, great saints and martyrs.
Against such things, Newman knew—and we should have confidence—liberal religion doesn’t have a chance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)