Thursday, April 8, 2010

Things a Christian "Must Know"

(Visit my new blog at

This is a list of the basic Bible information and Christian doctrine that I think a believer must know. There is other important information that is not included on this list, but this contains the core. If a believer has a general knowledge of these things they will be in a very good position to gain understanding of Christian doctrine and Christian character as they mature as a believer in Jesus Christ.

I call this the BIBLE CORE. I wrote this down today and this is still the very first draft. This, of course, needs to undergo a second, third, fourth, . . . and final draft. I plan on developing a basic 15-25 minute lesson on each of the 79 points and typing up the information. This will then be made available at The lessons will be recorded on 79 ten minute videos and uploaded onto YouTube.

I have seen Christian adults and Christian youth (including entire youth groups) who do not know what I consider to be simple Sunday school flannel graph information. If anyone has been a Christian for more than 36-60 months (the length of time needed to pay off the loan for a new car) THEY SHOULD KNOW this information. If you do not know this information, fear not, because, here it is! In just a few weeks I will provide this teaching for you and anyone else who is tired of being an illiterate Christian. Communication of information as is found in the BIBLE CORE is both the foundation for the revival of the church and the means by which we will bring stability to our time. Obviously, that bit of insight is the first thing today's church leaders need to learn.

Bible Core Curriculum (BCC)

Old Testament

  1. Creation – universe, man
  2. Adam – creation, fall
  3. Noah
  4. Abraham
  5. Isaac
  6. Jacob and Twelve Sons
  7. Joseph
  8. Moses and Exodus
  9. Joshua
  10. Judges – Gideon
  11. Judges – Samson
  12. Samuel and Saul
  13. David and Goliath
  14. David as King
  15. Solomon
  16. Rehoboam and Jerobaom
  17. Kings of Israel – Abah, Jezebel, Elijah, Assyria
  18. Kings of Judah – Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Isaiah
  19. Last days of Judah – Manasseh, Josiah
  20. Babylonian Captivity – Jeremiah, 605, 597, 586
  21. Daniel
  22. Return from Babylon – Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther


  1. Old Testament Prophecy of Messiah – Gen. 3:15; Psalms 22; Isaiah 53; Malachi 3:1-2; 4:4-6
  2. Jesus’ Birth – Bethlehem, shepherds, wise men, Herod, virgin birth
  3. Baptism and Temptations
  4. First Passover – clears temple, Nicodemus, Samaritan woman
  5. Tour of Galilee #1 – Nazareth, Capernaum, Sermon on the Mount
  6. Second Passover – Pool of Bethesda
  7. Tour of Galilee #2 and #3
  8. Rejection – Matthew 12, Parables, feeding 5,000
  9. Withdrawal – Tyre, Decapolis, Caesarea Philippi
  10. Last 6 months
  11. Last Month
  12. Last Week
  13. Crucifixion
  14. Resurrection – physical resurrection
  15. Commission


  1. Ascension
  2. Pentecost
  3. Jerusalem Church
  4. Paul
  5. Antioch Church
  6. First Journey
  7. Second Journey
  8. Third Journey
  9. Visit to Jerusalem – Caesarea imprisonment
  10. Journey to Rome – shipwreck, Roman imprisonment

New Testament Letters

  1. Romans
  2. First Corinthians
  3. Galatians
  4. Philippians
  5. Ephesians
  6. First Thessalonians
  7. First Timothy
  8. Hebrews
  9. James
  10. First Peter
  11. First John
  12. Revelation


  1. Apologetics – ten points
  2. Hermeneutics – ten points
  3. Theology – Attributes of God
  4. Trinity
  5. Deity of Christ – eternal second member of Trinity
  6. Bibliology – inspiration, inerrancy
  7. Sin Nature – depravity
  8. Divine Judgment – in time, in hell
  9. Grace
  10. Imputation and Substitution
  11. Salvation by Faith
  12. Regeneration
  13. Justification
  14. Repentance and Confession
  15. Holly Spirit
  16. Church
  17. Israel
  18. Second Coming
  19. End Times and Eternal State
  20. Eternal Rewards

Galyn Wiemers

Thursday, March 4, 2010

Jeremiah 3:15

God promised to Israel through Jeremiah:
I will give you shepherds after my own heart, who will feed you with knowledge and understanding." (Jeremiah 3:15)
I would assume Jesus was referring to this line of thinking when he told Peter:
Feed my sheep. (John 21:17)
Galyn Wiemers

Monday, February 8, 2010

Philosophical Atheism

For the past 15 years I have rested comfortably in my faith holding to facts and convictions that supported the Scriptures. In January of 1996 I responded to an article that attacked Christianity on 16 points by writing a 100 page booklet. I then used this booklet to teach a couple of classes. Challenges of skeptics, atheists and evolution were resolved in my mind. Eventually, I lost interest in debating the topic.

Both atheism and humanism lost ground in the later 1900's. Even Antony Flew, the champion of atheism who debated C.S. Lewis, renounced atheism in favor of deism. Now, with the emergence of the new-atheist, who are emboldened by men like Richard Dawkins, atheism and humanism are attempting to make a comeback. I have been drawn back into the debate and have began reading some of their books. Yesterday I told my wife that I felt compelled to research and write a book in the next few months to address atheism's new strategies. This book would also speak to some of the other issues that can be addressed with apologetic evidence. I am now continuing to read and decide if I really want to extend the effort debating and researching something I could quickly loose interest in. There are already many very good sources available, yet it would be interesting to search out and address all the skeptic's questions and challenges. I know I would sleep better if I did.

One book I have been reading again is Dinesh D'Souza's What's So Great About Christianity. In chapter fourteen he discusses atheism's scientific methodology. There is a bias in science towards materialism and naturalism which is understandable on one level, but very dangerous on the other. This materialism manifests itself in two forms of atheistic science. One form is acceptable and necessary. The other is an ideology and a religion.

D'Souza calls the first type procedural or methodological atheism because it means that scientists go about their work presuming that we live in a natural, material world. Which, of course, is true. These scientist are not looking for God nor are they going to resolve difficult problems by saying, "Well, then this must have been a miracle or supernatural intervention." None of us want our scientists, doctors or, even, our car mechanics to give us an answer that sounds like that. We want facts. So, science uses the materialistic and natural scientific methodology. These scientists are not saying there is no God, there is no supernatural, or there is no soul. They are simply saying the scientific method does not measure these areas. So, we do not comment on those areas.

The second form of atheism is philosophical atheism. These scientist believe "that material and natural reality is all that exists. Everything else must be illusory." They hold to the conviction that because God cannot be measured or proven with an experiment then there is no way of discovering God. They tend to present their views as if one of their greatest discoveries was the discovery of not finding God. Thus, there is no God and anyone who says differently is unscientific and ignorant according to their doctrine.

D'Souza writes:
If you were to ask a scientist, "Why is that water boiling?" he or she would answer in terms of molecules and temperatures. But there is a second explanation: the water is boiling because I want to have a cup of tea. This second explanation is a perfectly valid description of reality, yet it is ignored or avoided by the scientific account. The reason for this is that science is incapable of answering questions about the nature or purpose of reality.

Philosophical atheism is narrowly dogmatic because it closes itself off from knowledge that does not conform to materialism and naturalism. . . By contrast, the theist is much more open-minded and reasonable. The theist does not deny the validity of scientific reasoning. On the contrary, the theist is constantly reasoning in this way in work and life. The theist is entirely willing to acknowledge material and natural causes for events, but he also admits the possibility of other types of knowledge.
Galyn Wiemers

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Oldest Hebrew Inscription Found (1000 BC)

Professor Gershon Galil (Department of Biblical Studies, University of Haifa) has deciphered an inscription on a pottery shard dated from the 10th century BC. This is now the earliest discovered Hebrew inscription. This broken piece of pottery was discovered provincial town in Judea in the Elah Valley which is in the hill country of Judah. This location is important not because it the location of David's battle with Goliath but because of its remote area away from Jerusalem. This means that if their writing was this developed in the Valley we can know they could be writing at the literary level used in the books of Judges or Samuel in Jerusalem at this time. The significance of this find is that we now have evidence supporting the earlier date for the writing of these scriptures.

Prof. Galil explains, “It can now be maintained that it was highly reasonable that during the 10th century BCE, during the reign of King David, there were scribes in Israel who were able to write literary texts and complex historiographies such as the books of Judges and Samuel.” He also noted that "the complexity of the text discovered in Khirbet Qeiyafa, (a fortress town) along with the impressive fortifications revealed at the site, refute the claims denying the existence of the Kingdom of Israel at that time." The existence of the nation of Israel and a kingdom of Jews at this time as proclaimed in the Bible is now confirmed. (The excavation of Khirbet Qeiyafa has recently revealed it had two gates, a unique feature compared to other towns. The two gates most like mean we should identify this site as the biblical Sha’arayim since this name means "two gates.")

Many liberal scholars have tried to rewrite the history of Israel without using the Bible and have only used archaeological evidence, i.e. based on archaeological evidence only. They are called minimalist since they claim very little of the Old Testament is historical. Minimalist often deny the existence of a Jewish state or kingdom and assign David and his kingdom to the realm of myth or legend. Finds like these force them to reconsider the Bible's historicity based on their own standard of validation. This archaeological find is evidence that the Bible is true and the theories that come against it are unfounded.

See the process of study of the potsherd HERE

A couple of articles: ONE . . . TWO

Photos of the Khirbet Qeiyafa Archaeological Dig

Deciphered on January 7, 2010 by Professor Galil. The text lines say:
1 you shall not do [it], but worship the [Lord].
2 Judge the sla[ve] and the wid[ow] / Judge the orph[an]
3 [and] the stranger. [Pl]ead for the infant / plead for the po[or and]
4 the widow. Rehabilitate [the poor] at the hands of the king.
5 Protect the po[or and] the slave / [supp]ort the stranger.
Galyn Wiemers

Friday, January 15, 2010

Are Atheists more Academic Than Theists?

I have spent some time this week responding to a self-proclaimed atheist who began making comments on one of my online sites. His accusations towards me centered around my incompetence, even calling me an intellectual vandal. Later in the discussion, an "intellectual vandal" was basically described as a person who takes from the facts the information they need to make a presentation that they want. I agreed that I was not an academic nor educated at a level I can boast about. (I very often experience inner shame at my lack of knowledge in many fields of study.)

I admitted I did not understand quantum physics, Einsteins' theory of Relativity or how science arrives at Planck time. The challenge atheists often throw towards me is that I should not comment or defend the existence of God until I have a full grasp of these concepts. At the same time these critics give the impression that atheists not only think on the level of Einstein and Hawking, but have also wrestled to the mat difficult concepts like evil, human self-awareness, and time.

After several exchanges our online conversation began to become civil and the atheist asked me if I agreed that it seems that atheists are more academically developed than theists. I thought that was a very good question and one that could serve my purposes very well. In response to how the atheist framed the question I would have to answer, "Yes, atheists are more academically developed than theists." I have to say this because of my experience and my own level of knowledge. Typically, if an atheist is an atheist they know and understand the basic term "atheist." But, over the last many years when I teach believing Christians I have to explain the term "theist" to them. Although most Christians know what an atheist is, they do not know what a "theist" is. And, they would not describe themselves as one. The one thing Christians do know is who God is. And, this leads me to my next point.

One of the reasons an atheist may be more academically developed than a theist is that an atheist is trying to disprove what a Christian has already accepted - the existence of God. A Christian engaging in a debate about the existence of God would be like gathering evidence and engaging in a debate about the existence of the earth or the physical universe. Who wants to prove the obvious?

Atheists need to use science to prove God does not exist. They spend hours, even careers, pouring through information to build their case against the existence of God. The problem with this effort is that it really can not be done. Why? If science and material evidence can not be used to prove God does exist, then it must also be true that science and material evidence can not be used to prove God does not exist. What are they looking for? No foot prints of a nonexistent being? Are they hoping to find no corpse of a nonexistent god who has not been murdered? Any material evidence they find only proves more and more the likelihood of a being who did leave his footprints in creation and the reality of a God who is not dead but living.

Atheists attempt to use science to prove that God does not exist. Because of this atheists seek knowledge and information about higher, abstract theories and merely speculate with the pieces of evidence that God has provided. This is contrary to Christians. Christians not only know God exists, they also know God. Christians know God and seek knowledge and information about him. The Christian has a relation with the living God and is focused on developing that relationship, not focused simply on proving the existence of a being known as God. Knowing God - this is the labor of a theist. An atheist labors to prove there is no God. A theist labors to know the God that exists. This labor of the theist must, of course, involve seeking information about all the works of God including all his creation - the physical universe, man, philosophy, etc. The difference then is the atheist studies to prove the non existence of God, while the Christian studies to seek the God they already know.

It is no wonder then the atheists mock my pursuit and the One I am pursuing. Trying to keep up with the latest theory can become a distraction. If you are undecided then maybe you need to continue. If you are trying to "answer a fool according to his folly" then maybe you need to delve into the abyss of science. Nothing wrong with that. I decided about 10 years ago that the issue of evolution is settled for me. How much more the question of Gods' existence? I am now pursing knowledge of God and experiencing a life changing relationship with God - the Eternal One. I am not questioning his existence.

Galyn Wiemers