The story of the flood has been misinterpreted and misunderstood and sometimes considered fiction for centuries. Few have tried to understand it as the first reader or first hearer  might have. This essay explores how they may have understood the story. 

Understanding the complexity of the origin, oral transmission of the tradition, and the collection and application to the time and people of the time when it was written into Genesis, is important in understanding the story. 

The language and literary skills of the Gospel writers out them in a category with the best writers of the ancient world. How could simple fishermen have that skill? Read on and see. 

Is Jesus the servant of Isaiah 53? Many Jews and secular scholars think he is not. A closer look at the servant songs in sequence says otherwise. 

A recent Internet conversation led to this question: With all the truth claims by people and groups - Indian guru Sathya Sai Baba being one - how can we determine which is true? The answer is in the dirt and rocks reality of history. 

Increasingly the critics of Christianity are running out of arguments from science or philosophy and have turned to the idea that Jesus the Messiah was a myth created by the writers of the Gospels who in some cases mined the pagan myths for themes, motifs, and tropes. It is becoming increasingly sophisticated, but nevertheless fails when examined.  

The debate over whether Matthew copied or used Mark as his basic source has been going on a long time. My own take is that they both used a version of the oral gospel that preceded any written gospel. That accounts for both similarities and differences. 

Who wrote the different books and how did these books become accepted by the early church as inspired scripture?

Click on the preview then choose Google slides.

Looking at the evidence both within the book and beyond, a date for Matthew between 50 and 68 A.D. is the most likely.