Also from The Best, Worst & Most Unusual, by Bruce Felton & Mark Fowler:
“In 1663 a noted orientalist presented to the French Academy a paper in which he concluded that Adam was 140 feet tall, Noah, 50 feet tall, Abraham, 40 feet tall, and Moses, 25.”
There. Now at least when you read my Bible study notes here at Minor Thoughts over the next few months, you can’t say there haven’t been any worse.
I don’t know how other people study God’s Word, but I’ve settled into a sorta three-pronged approach; I simultaneously read through one commentary on the Old Testament and one on the New, while also just reading the Bible daily for fun, without looking up a single thing. The variety keeps me from studying pitfalls to which I’ve noticed I’m particularly prone, such as spending so much of my attention exploring the Hebrew legacy in the Torah that my spirit ends up horrifically starved for Jesus. So today I visited the Idaho Springs Public Library, a charmingly compact, creaky historical building in a charmingly compact, creek-y historical miner’s town in Colorado (”cute”, nay, “adorable”, that’s what the young lady would call it), and here’s what I chose:
The Torah: A Modern Commentary, by Gunther Plaut. Obviously, this is the Old Testament commentary I’ll be reading, my textbook whilst I work my way again through the Humash. It’s also the textbook for an entire denomination of Judaism, actually; since its publication the work has become the standard reader for Reform Jewdom. And boy howdy, am I so tickled to have it: I’ve already read Plaut’s commentary on Genesis (Bereshit, in Hebrew), and if his respective commentaries on the remaining parts of the Pentateuch are as fairly-balanced (Plaut often includes not only Conservative and Orthodox interpretations of Scripture, but Christian as well), well-researched (he cites all his sources), and eye-opening (at least for an ignorant cuss like me), I won’t be able to read this thing fast enough.
The Gospel of Matthew, Vol. 1 of the Daily Study Bible Series, by William Barclay. This is what I grabbed off the shelf for my New Testament pick, but two chapters into it and I’m already thinking about returning it in favor of something else. William Barclay’s a pretty famous theologian and his Daily Study Bible books are bestsellers, but there are plenty of good reasons to be uneasy about reading him. For one, he makes occasional references which he does not bother to cite, and makes leaps of logic (he fails to sell me on his ideas concerning authorship of the Gospels). For another, he is a heretic. Wikipedia claims him “a liberal theologian, denying both the inerrancy of scripture and the divinity of Christ. He described himself as a liberal evangelical. In his autobiography, he described himself as a universalist, believing all people will eventually be saved, an unorthodox position.” Even assuming this is true, it might not be a deal breaker (I’ve learned more about the Old Testament from Jews, all of whom deny the divinity of Jesus, than I’ve learned from my pastors), but coupled with his other apparent faults… I think a second trip to the library’s in order.
I was also finally going to read a book a friend of mine loaned to me eons ago, entitled The Search.. The hefty tome’s authored by a Dr. Ron Charles and subtitled “A Historian’s Search for Historical Jesus”. It is quite possibly, to quote one Amazon reviewer, the “most informative book on the life of Jesus that has been printed in decades”. But I’ll never know, because despite supposedly possessing a B.A. in Theology, two M.A.s, two Ph.Ds, and one Th.D (whatever that is), Dr. Ron Charles never learned he’s supposed to cite all his sources (though a Jamaican newspaper claims he used 160 of them). Either that, or he just didn’t care enough to catalog them, in which case I don’t care enough to read his book.
I assume the reason Dr. Charles had to self-publish his book is because every respectable book publisher agrees with me on this point. Or maybe the editors of those publishing houses just couldn’t get past the frequent typos; in the acknowledgements section of The Search Dr. Charles thanks Michelle Thomas, Kim Stuckey, and Laura Wairs for their proofreading services, but it’s thanks undeserved. The book’s errors are numerous.
So, to review: a book published in 2003 that is supposed to summarize 33 years of research by an archaeologist with six university degrees who claims he’s found Noah’s Ark, had to be self-published, is full of technical errors, and has no citations. Oh, and the author’s website, www.roncharles.com, is down, meaning the only mention of him Google can find is now an article in a Jamaican newspaper.
Anyone else reckon this Dr. Charles guy was a fraud who’s number just eventually came up?
Anyway, I guess I should look on the bright side of all this. Hopefully my friend won’t want me to send his book back now.
First Bible study entry starts tomorrow, most likely with a look at the first chapter of Exodus.
15 Comments
Ironically, I found this page while trying to find out about Ron Charles.
I have met Mr. Charles in two separate occasions, at two seminars where he was the featured speaker. Your concern is mine. In fact I have tried not to be skeptical, but it’s hard considering his modus operandi.
He seems like a well meaning person, and he does have a lot of good things to say about scripture, about missions, about the historical background of bible accounts, many other things. I’d say he’s a committed believer.
My problem is that when it comes to his more sensational claims he is very matter of fact (things like the identity and life story of the woman caught in adultery) without sufficient respect for the fact that when you say such things, you need to make a case for why you are to be believed.
I asked him for his sources, and he has talked about doing primary research in the Vatican II libraries (where apparently I am “free to go myself if I want”) and this is where his study comes from. Fine, except it is hard to find any corroborating evidence either for these stories of his or for the historians he has gleaned them from.
I’ve only been able to browse through his book for endnotes and as you have observed, it doesn’t help the cause much. So much for credible research.
Are there ANY leads you know of? Does the book provide ANY help at all? Names?
What a waste of time.
I just tried searching the internet myself again for information and found that this website, by virtue of the above post, is in the top three websites found. Heh. That’s how many leads there are about our Dr. Charles.
If there’s anything specific about the life of Jesus you’d like me to check out in the book, I can see if he lists any sources there.
As for me, I’ve already pretty much concluded there’s just no getting around it: steer clear of Dr. Charles and his lectures, because our man is very, very shady, and almost certainly not on the up-and-up. Christians live lives of transparency, but this man, who’s chosen vocation is to show us evidence of the past, tells us to go look it all up ourselves.
Yeeeeeeaaaah.
Go to http://downloads.finalfrontiers.org/files/marapr2004.pdf to see Ron Charles’s account of “How the Roman Church gave birth to Islam.”
More recently, he has taken to explaining (with equally dubious support) the strategy used by Saladin the Great to take Jerusalem in AD 1187: http://downloads.finalfrontiers.org/files/2ndquarter2007.pdf
Please, EVERYBODY, join me in warning Final Frontiers that Ron Charles could torpedo their credibility (which is their stock in trade!).
Thanks for the clue-in, John. I’ll certainly dash off an e-mail to them, and I know Joe’s not above that sort of thing, so maybe he will too.
On p. 13 of their September/October 2003 Progress Report, Final Frontiers wrote the following:
[quote] Ron Charles holds three Ph.D. degrees in Historical Theology, Ancient History and International Relations, the last being awarded by Cambridge University in England where he was recognized as one of the “1000 Greatest Americans†in our national history. He is also an author with seven published books and numerous articles. He was the first Westerner to be awarded the “Friend of Albania†medal by their Prime Minister. Ron, an archaeologist since 1985, has also served as a university professor, senior pastor in Georgia and Ohio, civil engineer and project manager, inventor, researcher and missionary to Albania. Most recently Ron was employed by Crown Financial Ministries, and serves as a member of the Board of Governors of Cambridge’s Biographical and Historical Division and serves on the board of directors of Pacific International University and the Final Frontiers Foundation. He is available for speaking engagements on missions, archaeology or his past trips (and future) to Noah’s Ark in Turkey. He can be contacted at (770) 531-0180. [unquote]
When I realized that Ron could not provide the source for an amazing historical claim, I asked him for the institutions, cities, and dates of his “degrees.†In an 5 Sep 2004 email to me, he wrote the following (which, to my knowledge, has not been communicated to Final Frontiers supporters):
[quote] Again, I repeat. I do not claim to be those things, nor will I ever. Just because Crown Financial Ministries produced a bio and placed it on their international site to further their ministry, does not mean that I gave them approval to do so. I have been a missionary for more than 40 years (4 with my parents and 35 on my own) so I am too old now to start acknowledging any credit, expertise or credentials. In fact, because I work almost exclusively in the Middle East, I NEVER say that I have ANY education. It would make it seem as if I am saying that I am better than them, since most have never finished the 3rd grade or equal. My education seems only to be relevant in the U.S, and I spend less than 10% of my annual ministry time in the U.S. So, to me and in my opinion, my education and the years that I spent getting it has not been an asset, rather it has been a burdensome yoke around my neck that does nothing to further the cause of Christ to the Muslim people…. [unquote]
BTW, Ron Charles is purported to have been an archaeologist since 1985, yet in the January/February 2004 Progress Report, he describes working with “Dr. James, an English archaeologist from the Albright Institute in Jerusalem” during the outbreak of the Yom Kippur War, the year of which (1973) he omits from his account. On this occasion, Ron told some threatening Syrian soldiers, “…[M]y companion and I were archaeologists” (p. 5).
Sounds like a pretty obvious side-step of the question to me. He never claims the references are true, but refuses to actually deny them either, breezily and self-righteously claiming it just doesn’t help his ministry.
But Crown Financial Ministries certainly didn’t get the idea that he was any of those things all by themselves; someone gave them that list of references, and who else could it have been but Dr. Charles?
Here (excerpted from a July 10 email) is the latest from Ron Charles: “. . . I have already named my sources to you, but you have refused to accept my answer. And if you want to use your own words, “Like ANY FRESHMAN WRITING STUDENT” knows who has taken any creative writing course at all, original manuscripts do not have to be footnoted nor cited. Since a great majority of my sources are original manuscripts, I am not obligated to footnote them at all. Yet, even though it was not necessary, I have given that information throughout my book, which it appears that you have not read, as well as to you individually. I have given you this information already. But you have rejected it. . . .”
Scholars don’t have to footnote or cite original manuscripts?
That seems… highly unlikely to me.
But hey, let’s find out; the following is the phone number and address of the Ancient Biblical Manuscript Center, an institution that should definitely know the answer.
909.447.6354 1325 North College Avenue Claremont, California 91711
Since I happen to be in California at the moment, I’ll try to remember to call them up myself tomorrow, and post back here later tomorrow night (it’s a little late in the day now) with what I find out. It’ll be educational.
Good of you to keep nippin’ at the man’s heels, though.
I got a phone call from a law firm purportedly representing Ron Charles and threatening to sue me for slander if I emailed him again.
I had sent him the following email 7/19/07:
Let’s briefly review from the beginning, Ron.
You have not named your source for the Edict of Separation. (”It’s a big secret” or “Fly to Damascus yourself” are not sources.)
The published summaries of your education contradict one another. (Which one are you willing to stand by?)
You have not named your source for information about Al-Ahmed Urin. (Unavailable notes from an anonymous lecturer do not count.)
Ron, I will feel terribly foolish–and will need to apologize to hundreds of people–if you will only provide a definitive and verifiable accounting of these three items.
You are Secretary/Treasurer of a respected missionary organization. If you are not able to convince readers of the truth of your reporting, then you do not deserve the confidence of your constituents.
It’s just that simple, Ron.
John Hayden
I deeply apologize for not calling the institute while I had the chance. I was re-packing for South Korea and things simply got forgotten (including my hair buzzer; looks like I’m just going to have to enter a barbershop where English isn’t even spoken and hope for the best).
John, you may want to lay off Dr. Charles himself at this point; you can’t be sued for slander, but harassment is actionable.
Having asked Dr. Charles numerous times to present his sources and having been rebuffed on each of them, you can be pretty sure he’s not going to confess a career built on smoke to an impudent e-mailer; calling, sending e-mails, and sending letters like the ones we sent to Final Frontiers is probably the way to go now, and well within your rights.
Just my two cents. I am more certain than ever that the man is a con now, tho’.
Adam,
Contrary to your observations, my attorney has shown me through past court cases that I do indeed have a slander case against John Hayden. He has gone well beyond harrassment. It is easy to take sides when you only hear one side of the story. I would like to tell you my side.
What in his e-mail has now given you certainty that I am “a con?” I have given John time and again the documentation that he has requested. I have told him where the documentation in Damascus is located, the room it is located in, and the location of the manuscripts. I have even offered to have someone meet him at the museum to show him the document. But he has refused my request and rejected my answer. The Middle East Museum will not take pictures of the manuscript. But he can go there to view the document and have someone translate it for him. John was not satisfied with that answer. He then began a smear campaign against me that was belittling, confrontational and degrading because the museum had not placed the manuscript on the Internet. Hence, he immediately accused me of being a liar and a fraud, rather than flying over to Damascus and seeing for himself. To such people I will give no further help. Had he asked professionally I would have been much more cooperative. Even the last issue in which he asked for documentation. I was out of the country when he requested it. Jon Nelms wrote him telling him when I would return and asked him to write me back when I returned. John refused to do that. Instead he began another smear campaign against me saying that I have refused to give him the documentation. When I arrived back in the USA some several days later, it was in full swing. He did not even give me a chance to answer before he began his slander. I would have gladly given him the information had he waited until I returned from overseas. He did not. So, I felt no obligation to supply him with the documentation that he requested. As I told him at the time that I discovered this, “Had you waited until I got back, I would have given you the professors name, the date, the university and even copies of my notes that I took. But because you took it upon yoursle fto slander me while I was sill overseas, I will not give you that information.”
What type of a con am I? I am a missionary. I spend 9-10 months each year in the Muslim Middle East. I have been there for over 3 decades. So, who am I coning? The Muslims? I don’t spend enough time in America to con anyone.
I wrote a book about Jesus. Within the body and text of the book I have identified each and every manuscript that I used. I name the museum, the university, or institution where the document can be found (in case someone wants to also research the documentation), the author, the date that it was written and exactly where it is located in the institution. I researched for over 30 years; traveling to over 50 countries in that research and it took me 3 years to write it. Have you read the book? If not, how can you make an evaluation? If you have, and you did not like it, that is fine too. But how does your opinion about the book translate into a personal evaluation of my character? What kind of con am I running? When I am in the USA I make people aware of the conditions of the persecuted Christians in the Muslim Middle East. Check with Final Frontiers, they are missing no money, I have not beat them out of anything. In fact, all funds that I make from my book and speaking goes to feed the persecuted Christians in the Middle East. Is that a con? I invite you to come with me at anytime and as many times as you want to see first hand the work we are doing in the Muslim Middle East. I return in October 2007 and will be there until August 2008. You are invited. Or if you prefer, you can just show up and see for yourself.
I do not know John. He has never heard me speak. I have never talked to him. Yet, he seems to know me so well and my character so well that he sends dozens of e-mails to my friends insulting me to them. If someone did that to you, would you be willing to just give him anything that he wanted? Concerning my education, you made the comment that I side stepped the issue. I did not, I spoke fact. How much time have you spent in the Muslim Middle East? If you have been there then you know that education claims from an American is a great negative in their culture. They do not like to be “shown up” by Americans. I merely told John that I do not make a big deal out of my education for that reason. He took that to mean that I lied and was side stepping. Again, he did it confrontationally. It was not a side step. It was a matter of fact to save face with the Muslims in the Middle East. Yet John took my answer as refusing to give him my education credentials. Again he did not request. He demanded confrontationally. So, I respopnded saying that if he knows me so well, then there should not be any problem for him to research and to find out my education. Maybe it was not right for me to say that to him, but I was very tired of being belittled and harrassed and slandered.
I have never spoken to you either that I know of, so how can such “absolute” statements about me and about my character be presented in a public blog?
The bottom line is that contrary to your statement, I have not rebuffed John numerous times. But he has rejected the answers that I have given to him numerous times and has in fact been absolutely guilty of slander.
Are you a supporter of Final Frontiers? If so, then you should know what we do and what I do. If you are not, then how is it that you know me so well that you can write in an open blog things about me that are certainly negative, bordering on defamation.
Ron purports to have an honorary PhD from Cambridge University in England. I am told he has worn a “Cambridge” ring and has a diploma to prove it.
Here’s what I received from Cambridge’s Alumini Relations Officer, Rachel Kirkley, in an email 8/21:
“I have now heard back from Student Administration and Records and there is no record of a Ronal D Charles studying for a PhD at the University of Cambridge. I have also followed up with Peter Carr, Graduate Examinations Manager at the Board of Graduate Studies and he has confirmed that this person did not attend the University (please see attached email for correspondence).
“This person says they have an ‘Honorary Ph.D’ from the University, from my enquiries such an Honorary PhD does not exist. An honorary degree is the highest accolade the University can give and these are awarded to members of the Royal Family, British subjects who are of conspicuous merit or have done good service to the State or to the University, and foreigners of distinction. Proposals for honorary degrees must be considered by the University’s Council. Any person may suggest a name and several dozen proposals are made each year. These are reviewed by a committee of the Council, chaired by the Vice-Chancellor, which makes final recommendations. Honorary Degrees conferred from 1977 till present can be found online http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/univ/degrees/honorary/list.xls and there is no record of a Ronal D Charles. Please see http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/univ/degrees/honorary/ for further information on honorary degrees.”
Brother Nelms,
I still have questions that I hope will be answered by you and/or Ron Charles (Secretary/Treasurer of Final Frontiers):
If Ron actually has his doctorate from Cambridge (as reported in Progress Report), then why does Cambridge have no knowledge of him?
If he actually lectured at Trinity Dublin last summer (as reported in Progress Report), then why is he unknown to either the executive officer or the department head of the department where he lectured?
(You have seen the correspondence from the responsible officers at Cambridge and Trinity, Jon.)
John Hayden, Pastor Columbia Road Baptist Church Mason, MI 48854
Read about “The Search for the Real Dr. Ron Charles,” by Richard Peck with G. Richard Fisher, at http://www.pfo.org/prevw_pg1.htm
One Trackback
[...] their website. Approximately half of the e-mail, which I share below, is reproduced from my earlier posting concerning the man’s practically useless book The [...]