Looking at All Things Biblically is a blog dedicated to looking at the world from a distinctly Christian point of view.
In addition to being a devoted husband and father, I am an assistant professor of Bible at Faulkner University, a staff blogger for The Daily Apologist, a staff writer for Apologetics Press, and an associate for the Associates for Biblical Research. I have taught undergraduate courses for Amridge University and the Southwest School of Bible Studies.
You can see my work elsewhere in Gospel Advocate, Reason and Revelation, Sufficient Evidence, Bible and Spade, and the Carolina Messenger. I have published three books: 12 Compelling Truths: Why Biblical Faith is Completely Reasonable; Rediscovering Jesus: Finding God’s Son Among Counterfeit Christs; and Who is Like the Lord? Exploring the Attributes of God.
Looking at All Things Biblically 
Could you please share the chapter titles from your book 12 Compelling Truths? Thank you!
LikeLike
Absolutely. Just click here for the table of contents and the first chapter. It will take you to a PDF on the publishers website. Thanks!
LikeLike
Would you please comment on “Patterns of Evidence, the Exodus”.
LikeLike
Hi Wes, I’m not a fan of “Patterns of Evidence.” It plays fast and loose with archaeology and history. It mostly derives from the work of one guy who waves his hands and makes three centuries of Egyptian history vanish. Basically, no scholar anywhere supports this theory, and it actually makes the job of Christians more difficult. The fellow who produced the documentary seems to have genuinely attempted to defend the Bible, but a bad defense does no good no matter how good the intentions. One of my professors was interviewed for the documentary and warned the producer about how flimsy the basic thesis is, and he went ahead with it anyway. I’m considering writing a review for Apologetics Press.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Please do. Thanks for the info.
LikeLike
Enjoyed reading ‘Canaanite DNA and the Biblical Canon’. Appreciate the timely response. Wouldn’t it be nice if the media splash followed-up with actual evidence and reasoned conclusion based upon your article.
The Bible is apparently “slapped” around because some genetic similarity was discovered. Is the “dna similarity” card perhaps overplayed or misused anyway, especially in the playbooks of evolutionary dogma? When us uninitiated folk read claims such as “chimps share 98% genetic similarity with the human species…”, how does that compare to a pair of human populations sharing only a 93% “striking similarity”. I’m confident I am not handling these genetic concepts correctly, but it would be interesting to read a clarified treatment of the subject.
In any case, the vindication of the Biblical record you presented stands; and some genetic similarities shared with Canaanites and Lebanese should not be a surprise, as even Haber’s paper demonstrates.
LikeLike
Isaiah, thanks so much. You’ve been thinking some of the same thoughts that I have. I’ve long wondered about the “98% similarity” statement from evolutionists. In my mind, with the massive amount of information in the human genome, 98% similarity should mean that two organisms look virtually identical. As far as the paper goes, I am very interested to see what researchers uncover in the future. It appears that, with the evidence properly interpreted, Haber’s paper really does support the biblical and historical records.
LikeLike
Brother Bryant,
Do you have any comments regarding Biblical archaeology of the artifacts contained in the soon to be opened Museum of the Bible (Washington, DC)? I understand there is some controversy of authenticity.
LikeLike
Hi Carol! Yes, there has been quite a bit of concern over the museum’s collection. The massive number of artifacts collected in such a short amount of time may mean that many of them came from the antiquities market. Black market items are frowned upon by the archaeological community in general, because of the way in which they are procured (usually illegally), and because much of their value is ruined if they are not properly excavated and the details of their discovery recorded. There could also be some fakes in the collection – which is nothing new (I’ve heard that most museums have them. Not by choice, of course). I also understand that the museum is taking steps to remedy the problem, which is good. I would visit the museum the next time I’m in DC.
LikeLike
Thank You
LikeLike