9/2/15

From Gary... The answer

16,06,68,88,___, 98- what's the answer? Unless you look at this in a different way, you probably will not get the answer. Life is like that too; because, unless you change your thinking, you will be doomed to be exactly what the godless world teaches you to be - an unregenerated sinner. And no one really even wants to hear THAT!!! Case in point...

Acts, Chapter 17 (WEB)
  1 Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a Jewish synagogue.  2 Paul, as was his custom, went in to them, and for three Sabbath days reasoned with them from the Scriptures,  3 explaining and demonstrating that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus, whom I proclaim to you, is the Christ.” 

  4  Some of them were persuaded, and joined Paul and Silas, of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and not a few of the chief women.  5 But the unpersuaded Jews took along some wicked men from the marketplace, and gathering a crowd, set the city in an uproar. Assaulting the house of Jason, they sought to bring them out to the people.  6 When they didn’t find them, they dragged Jason and certain brothers before the rulers of the city, crying, “These who have turned the world upside down have come here also,  7 whom Jason has received. These all act contrary to the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, Jesus!”

Sinners do not like to be told their fate. They want to believe that they and they alone are the master of their fate, in this world and the next!! To hear that there is another king (besides one of their own choosing) is blasphemy to them. And they get angry (and perhaps violent). The truth hurts, and the Thessalonians were "hurt" to realize that many people were beginning to believe in Jesus as the one true king.  The basic nature of man has not changed in 2000 years. If anyone "dares" to declare Jesus as KING, the godless hoard reacts in an unpleasant way. In the U.S.A. most of the response by unbelievers has been legal, but that will eventually escalate into violent persecution- it is just a matter of time. For those of us who understand that Jesus really is KING, we must remain faithful, regardless of what the "Mob" does. Get it?

ps. If you turn the picture upside down, you will quickly see that the answer is 87.


From Mark Copeland... "GOD’S WILL FOR YOU" Pray Without Ceasing

                          "GOD’S WILL FOR YOU"

                          Pray Without Ceasing

INTRODUCTION

1. In our previous lesson, we saw that it is God’s will that you rejoice
   always...
   a. To rejoice in life
   b. To rejoice in salvation

2. In 1Th 5:17 we also read that it is God’s will for you to pray
   without ceasing...
   a. Really?  This is what God wants us to do?
   b. Why is prayer so important?
   c. How can we possible pray "without ceasing"?

[In answer to such questions, let’s begin by emphatically repeating that...]

I. GOD WANTS YOU TO PRAY WITHOUT CEASING

   A. ACCORDING TO JESUS CHRIST...
      1. In the parable of the persistent friend - Lk 11:5-10
      2. In the parable of the persistent widow - Lk 18:1-8

   B. ACCORDING TO APOSTLE PAUL...
      1. "pray without ceasing" - 1Th 5:17
      2. "continuing steadfastly in prayer" - Ro 12:12
      3. "praying always with all prayer" - Ep 6:18
      4. "continue earnestly in prayer, being vigilant in it" - Col 4:2
      5. "in everything by prayer...let your requests be made known to
         God" - Php 4:6

[It is clear that God wants you to pray without ceasing.  Why?  I can
think of at least 13 reasons why...]

II. YOU NEED TO PRAY WITHOUT CEASING

   A. TO PRAISE GOD...
      1. Jesus taught us to praise God in prayer ("Hallowed be Your
         name") - Mt 6:9
      2. Paul provides an example and good reason to praise God in
         prayer - Ep 3:20-21

   B. FOR GOD’S WILL...
      1. Jesus taught us to pray for God’s will on earth to be done - Mt 6:10
      2. Especially as it relates to His kingdom (rule, reign) - ibid.

   C. FOR DAILY NEEDS...
      1. Jesus taught to pray for our daily needs - Mt 6:11
      2. For God has promised to provide our necessities - cf. Mt6:25-34

   D. FOR FORGIVENESS...
      1. Jesus taught to pray for forgiveness as we forgive others - Mt6:12
      2. The Christian finds forgiveness through the blood of Christ
         - 1Jn 1:7-10; Ac 8:22

   E. FOR PROTECTION...
      1. Jesus taught us to pray for deliverance from the evil one - Mt6:13
      2. And God will provide such protection - cf. 1Co 10:13

   F. FOR PEACE OF MIND...
      1. The antidote to anxiety is to pray - Php 4:6
      2. The Christian will find his heart and mind guarded by the peace
         of God - Php 4:7

   G. FOR EMPOWERMENT...
      1. Paul prayed the Ephesians might be strengthened in the inner
         man - Ep 3:14-16,20
      2. When we need to be strong, Christians can likewise pray for themselves!

   H. FOR OPPORTUNITY...
      1. Paul knew that the Lord often opened doors for opportunities to
         serve - 2Co 2:12
      2. He therefore requested prayer that such opportunities would
         continue - Col 4:3

   I. FOR BOLDNESS...
      1. When the apostles needed boldness, they prayed and God
         delivered - Ac 4:23-31
      2. When Paul needed boldness, he asked for prayers in his behalf
         - Ep 6:19-20

   J. FOR WISDOM...
      1. Wisdom is insight that makes the best use of the knowledge one
         has
      2. The Christian is promised wisdom through prayer - Jm 1:5-8

   K. FOR HEALING...
      1. Those who are sick should ask elders to pray for them - Jm 5:14-15
      2. Those who have sinned should confess, and we should pray for
         one another - Jm 5:16

   L. FOR TRANQUILITY...
      1. The Scriptures proclaim God has ultimate control over the
         nations - Dan 4:17; Ro 13:1-7
      2. Thus we are pray that we may lead a quiet (tranquil, ASV) and
         peaceable life - 1Ti 2:1-2

   M. TO THANK GOD...
      1. Paul would have us be vigilant in prayer, with thanksgiving
         - Col 4:2
      2. Having an attitude of gratitude, which we intend to examine
         more closely in our next lesson

[For so many reasons, because there is power and privilege in prayer, we
should pray as often as we can!  Which leads to answering our final question...]

III. HOW YOU CAN PRAY WITHOUT CEASING

   A. WHAT IT MEANS TO PRAY WITHOUT CEASING...
      1. Does not mean praying constantly, but being persistent and
         consistent in prayer - NKJVSB
      2. It means not giving up; it does not mean praying at every
         moment - NLTSB
      3. It suggests a mental attitude of prayerfulness, continual
         personal fellowship with God, and consciousness of being in his
         presence throughout each day - ESVSB

   B. ESTABLISH SET TIMES TO PRAY...
      1. This can help create the habit of praying
      2. Consider the example of great men of prayer
         a. David, a man after God’s own heart - Ps 55:17
         b. Daniel, a man greatly beloved by God - Dan 6:10
      3. At the very least, find time each day to spend in prayer!

   C. ENGAGE IN SPONTANEOUS PRAYER...
      1. Praying on the spur of the moment as the occasion calls for it
      2. Some Biblical examples
         a. The Israelites in the heat of battle - 1Ch 5:20
         b. Nehemiah in response to the king - Neh 2:4-5
         c. Paul and Silas when imprisoned - Ac 16:25
      3. At any moment, we should be ready to call on God in prayer

CONCLUSION

1. How can we fulfill the command to pray without ceasing...?
   a. Praying at set times each day develops experience and persistence
      in praying
   b. Praying spontaneously as needs arise develops the disposition to
      pray in every circumstance
   c. Both help to develop that "mental attitude of prayerfulness,
      continual personal fellowship with God, and consciousness of being
      in his presence throughout each day" (ESVSB)

2. And why should we strive to pray without ceasing...?
   a. Because of the privilege of prayer made possible by Jesus - He 4:14-16
   b. Because of the power of prayer to "obtain mercy and find grace to
      help" - ibid.

And so it is the will of God for you to "pray without ceasing", that you
might enjoy both the privilege and power of prayer in your life...!

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011

Pitiful Paleolimnological Mumbo—Jumbo


https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=1814

Pitiful Paleolimnological Mumbo—Jumbo

by  Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Paleolimnology is “the study of past freshwater, saline, and brackish environments” (Sweets, 1997). According to a recent report in the Journal of Paleolimnology, a naturalistic explanation has been uncovered that may reveal why Jesus was able to walk on water. Researchers Doron Nof, Ian McKeague, and Nathan Paldor have proposed that “unique freezing processes probably happened in that region several times during the last 12,000 years” (2006, 35:418). Thus
the unusual local freezing process might have provided an origin to the story that Christ walked on water. Since the springs ice is relatively small, a person standing or walking on it may appear to an observer situated some distance away to be “walking on water” (35:417).
...With the idea that much of our cultural heritage is based on human observations of nature, we sought a natural process that could perhaps explain the origin of the account that Jesus Christ walked on water (35:436).
The same gentleman who proposed more than a decade ago that the parting of the Red Sea was the result of “a wind set-down which exposed a usually submerged ridge” (see Nof and Paldor, 1992), has now taken the lead in attempting to explain away another Bible miracle.
Countless man hours and untold thousands of dollars from various grants and universities have been spent by these three men in an attempt to explain that there may be a possible naturalistic explanation to the account of Jesus walking on water. Unbelievable! Why not just say that it is possible Jesus floated on some drift wood, hopped on rocks, walked on the backs of turtles, or wore inflatable wine skins around his feet? Anyone can concoct unusual, naturalistic explanations for various Bible miracles. But, that does not prove the miracle did not happen.
In truth, the only reason people even know that Jesus was at the Sea of Galilee 2,000 years ago is because the gospel writers said that He was. Why accept this detail as factual but not the miracle Jesus performed? And what about Peter? The Bible claims that he “walked on the water,” too (Matthew 14:29). Where is the researched “rationalization” for this miracle? For a trio of scientists living 2,000 years this side of Jesus to assert that they have a better understanding of this event than Jesus’ own disciples, who witnessed it (some of whom were experienced Galilean fisherman, including the apostle John who wrote about the miracle—John 6:14-21), is the height of “academic” arrogance (i.e., foolishness!—cf. 1 Corinthians 1:20-31). Moreover, the New Testament possesses attributes of supernatural inspiration, hence its reporting of the incident is factual.

REFERENCES

Nof Doron, Ian McKeague, Nathan Paldor (2006), “Is There a Paleolimnological Explanation for ‘Walking on Water’ in the Sea of Galilee?” Journal of Paleolimnology, 35:417-439, April.
Nof, Doron and N. Paldor (1992), “Are There Oceanographic Explanations for the Israelites’ Crossing of the Red-Sea?,” Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 73[3]:305–314.
Sweets, P. Roger (1997), “The Paleolimnology Home Page,” [On-line], URL: http://www.indiana.edu/~diatom/paleo.html.

Human Knowledge of Ice, Still Frozen by Kyle Butt, M.A.


https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=3751

Human Knowledge of Ice, Still Frozen

by  Kyle Butt, M.A.

Many modern scientists who have jettisoned belief in a divine Creator like to pretend that “science” has it all figured out. We are told that modern scientific methods are able to tell us how the Universe spontaneously popped out of nothing and what happened 10-43 seconds after the initial Big Bang. Furthermore, we are informed that modern science adequately and eloquently has documented the transition of a single-celled life form into the complex organism known as man. In addition, we are told that there is no need for a belief in God, because humans have figured out everything important or are on their way to solving the last of the Universe’s unsolved mysteries.

Anyone familiar with true science knows, however, that such grandiose claims ring as hollow as a drum. Not only have atheistic, evolutionary scientists failed to offer reasonable ideas concerning the origin of the Universe and biological life, but human knowledge of some of the most basic structures remains extremely limited, to say the least.

Take ice formation, for instance. Humans have been interacting with ice and snow for thousands of years. Yet, for all the time humans have been studying the stuff, we know precious little about its formation. Science writer Margaret Wertheim admitted: “In an age when we have discovered the origin of the universe and observed the warping of space and time, it is shocking to hear that scientists do not understand something as seemingly paltry as the format of ice crystals. But that is indeed the case” (2006, p. 177). While Weytheim is wrong about science discovering the origin of the Universe (people for millennia have known the true origin of the Cosmos to be God), she is right that human ignorance glares at us through the simple structure of an ice crystal.

How can humans claim to know so much, and claim to be at the pinnacle of all knowledge, intellect, and wisdom, and yet not be able to explain how something as seemingly simple as ice forms? As God told the prophet Jeremiah, “If you have run with the footmen, and they have wearied you, then how can you contend with horses?” (12:5).

When Job questioned God’s care, God condescended to speak with the suffering patriarch. Yet God’s answers were nothing Job expected to hear. God did not begin by offering a reasoned defense of why He was allowing Satan to torment Job. Instead, God asked Job questions that exhibited Job’s ignorance and pathetic frailty. He asked Job where Job was when God “laid the foundations of the earth” (38:4). God further queried if Job could bind the constellations together, or control rain and weather (38: 31-35). In the middle of God’s inquisition, He asked Job: “From whose womb comes the ice? And the frost of heaven, who gives it birth? The waters harden like stone, and the surface of the deep is frozen” (38:29-30). God was asking Job if he understood ice and its formation. Job’s answer to God’s interrogation shows his honest heart. He said to God: “Therefore I have uttered what I did not understand, things too wonderful for me, which I did not know” (42:3).

Would to God that our modern, “enlightened” generation of thinkers would recognize that, just as Job, we still cannot explain even some of the most “paltry” physical reactions as the formation of ice crystals. That being the case, the only correct inference from such is to conclude that the Intelligence that created ice and initiated the laws of its formation is vastly superior in every way to human intelligence. Margaret Wertheim is an evolutionist, but she was forced to concede: “Though they melt on your tongue, each tiny crystal of ice encapsulates a universe whose basic rules we have barely begun to discern.” All rules and laws demand the presence of a lawgiver, and the humble snowflake manifests the fact that our Universe’s Lawgiver has thoughts that are supremely higher than human thoughts, and ways that are higher than man’s ways (Isaiah 55:9).

REFERENCE


Wertheim, Margaret (2006), What We Believe But Cannot Prove: Today’s Leading Thinkers on Science in the Age of Certainty, ed. John Brockman (New York: Harper).

Creation Comment Leads to Another Casualty by Eric Lyons, M.Min.


https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=2603

Creation Comment Leads to Another Casualty

by  Eric Lyons, M.Min.

In his 2008 documentary, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, Ben Stein highlighted “an elitist scientific establishment” that allowed “absolutely no dissent from Charles Darwin’s theory of random mutation and natural selection” (“What Happened...?” 2007, emp. added). As proof of such close-mindedness on the part of “Big Science,” Stein interviewed several intelligent, credentialed scientists. These men and women had been fired from their positions or denied tenure simply because they questioned the factuality of the General Theory of Evolution and/or publicly supported intelligent design. Dr. Jerry Bergman has documented several cases of this same kind of discrimination in his book, Slaughter of the Dissidents: The Shocking Truth about Killing the Careers of Darwin Doubters (2008). Stein and Bergman methodically demonstrate that the scientific establishment really is free to think only inside the walls of the “goo-to-you” theory of evolution.
Recently, the scientific establishment claimed another “prominent casualty as the Royal Society’s director of education, Michael Reiss, stepped down” (“Creating Controversy,” 2008, 199[2674]:4). What happened, exactly? Reiss, an evolutionary biologist and ordained Anglican priest speaking at the British Association for the Advancement of Science Festival in September 2008, simply “called for creationism to be discussed in UK science classes” (“Creating Controversy,” p. 4, emp. added). “Creationism,” he said, “is best seen by science teachers not as a misconception but as a world view” (as quoted in Mitchell, 2008).
The greater scientific establishment was none too happy with Reiss for his comments about creationism. Reiss “provoked the anger” of many of the members of the Royal Society (Mitchell, 2008). The leading members wrote to the society’s president “demanding...Reiss step down, or be asked to step down, as soon as possible” (Mitchell, 2008, emp. added). According to the World Socialist, “Reiss was forced to resign” (Mitchell, 2008, emp. added).
Some may wonder why science societies, science departments, etc., are dominated by atheistic evolutionists. Could it be the result of years of dissidents being forced out? The fact is, scientists open to the idea of an intelligent Designer are some of the most discriminated-against people on Earth. Question the theory of evolution publicly, and a scientist must be prepared to lose his job and reputation in the scientific community.

REFERENCES

Bergman, Jerry (2008), Slaughter of the Dissidents: The Shocking Truth about Killing the Careers of Darwin Doubters (Southworth, WA: Leafcutter).
“Creating Controversy” (2008), New Scientist, 199[2674]:4, September 20.
Mitchell, Paul (2008), “Behind the Creationism Controversy at Britain’s Royal Society,” World Socialist, October 17, [On-line], URL: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/oct2008/crea-o17.shtml.
“What Happened to Freedom of Speech?” (2007), [On-line], URL: http://www.expelledthemovie.com.

God and the Pledge of Allegiance by Dave Miller, Ph.D.


https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=1570

God and the Pledge of Allegiance

by  Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Here we go again. A federal judge in Sacramento, California has ruled that reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools is unconstitutional. U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence Karlton ruled that the reference to “one nation under God” violates the constitutional right of students to be “free from a coercive requirement to affirm God” (“Federal Judge Rules...,” 2005). Fortunately, there are those who recognize the audacity and absurdity of such an action—which entails the usurpation of the Constitution. The Pledge Protection Act, introduced by Congressman Todd Akin of Missouri, would restrict the jurisdiction of the federal courts from ruling on the constitutionality of the Pledge (Akin, 2003).
During the last 40 years or so, America has moved farther and farther away from God and its original religious moorings. A small but growing number of liberal politicians, educators, entertainers, and activist judges have been working feverishly to expel Christianity from public life and to transform American civilization into a religionless (or religiously neutral) country. Their central strategy has been their claim that the Founding Fathers (and the Constitution they wrote) rejected references to the God of the Bible or the Christian religion in public life—whether in the government, public schools, or the community. They claim that references to the Christian religion in schools violate the principle of “separation of church and state,” and specifically, the “establishment clause” of the First Amendment.
It was Adolf Hitler who is purported to have said: “By means of shrewd lies, unremittingly repeated, it is possible to make people believe that heaven is hell—and hell heaven. The greater the lie, the more readily it will be believed.” In actuality, the Constitution makes no reference to any notion of an alleged separation of church and state—a phrase which the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist labeled “a misleading metaphor,” insisting that it ought to be “frankly and explicitly abandoned” (Wallace v. Jaffree). The Founding Fathers did not believe that the Christian religion should be banned from public life—since they, themselves, frequently referred to God in their official public actions, statements, and written documents. The Declaration of Independence, for example, refers to the “Creator,” “Nature’s God,” “Divine Providence,” and “the Supreme Judge of the world”—four unmistakable references to the God of the Bible.
While the Pledge was written in the late 1800s, the words “under God” were added in 1954 by Congress at the behest of President Dwight Eisenhower. At the time, he stated: “In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America’s heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country’s most powerful resource in peace and war” (“Pledge of Allegiance...,” 2002). Yet a liberal, activist federal judge in 2005 would have us to believe that the Congress of the United States—the legislative body who made a law in harmony with the consent of the governed, those millions of Americans whom they represented at the time—as well as the millions of American teachers and students who have repeated those words for over 50 years now, have all been in direct violation of the Constitution and the will of the Founders? Ridiculous! Such foolishness flies in the face of voluminous evidence to the contrary (see, for example, Barton, 2000).
But what about all the atheists, Buddhists, Hindus, Native Americans, et al. who do not share the Christian values and belief system that dominated the nation for the first 180+ years? Is not the use of the Pledge “insensitive” and “offensive” to them and their children? To put this question into perspective, consider another question: what about all the atheists, Buddhists, Hindus, Native Americans, et al. who attended public schools from 1954 to the present—before “under God” was challenged? History records that America has always had individuals within her borders who have not shared the Christian worldview of the Founders (though they have always been in a minority). What about them? Were they treated “insensitively” in violation of the Constitution? Answer: the Founders certainly did not think so—nor did their judicial and political successors for nearly two centuries. While they did not advocate the persecution of atheists or those who embrace false religious ideologies, neither did they indicate that provision or adjustments were to be made in public life to accommodate such erroneous belief systems! In fact, they insisted that it was only because the American Republic was grounded on the free exercise of Christian principles that enabled non-Christian citizens not to be persecuted (see State Supreme Court cases City Council of Charleston v. Benjamin, 1846 and Lindenmuller v. The People, 1860). Imagine what would happen to an atheist if he went to a Muslim nation and insisted that they adjust their social policies in order to avoid offending his unbelief!
Did the Founders intend to create a nation that adjusts itself to accommodate every ideology, religion, and hair-brained philosophy that comes to our shores? They did not. To do so now is to undermine the foundations of the Republic. Besides, it is impossible to please everybody. The world religions conflict with and contradict each another. The only sane course to follow, the only one that will perpetuate the Republic, is the one articulated by the psalmist some three millennia ago: “Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord” (Psalm 33:12). “For the nation and kingdom which will not serve [God] shall perish” (Isaiah 60:12).

REFERENCES

Akin Todd (2003), “We Must Keep ‘Under God’ in the Pledge,” [On-line], URL: http://www.house.gov/akin/updates/20030825ed.html.
Barton, David (2000), Original Intent (Aledo, TX: WallBuilder Press), third edition.
City Council of Charleston v. Benjamin (1848), 2 Strob. L. 508 (S. C. 1848).
“Federal Judge Rules Reciting Pledge in Schools Unconstitutional” (2005), Fox News, September 15, [On-line], URL: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,169379,00.html.
Lindenmuller v. The People (1861), 33 Barb (N.Y.) 548.
“Pledge of Allegiance Declared Unconstitutional” (2002), June 26, [On-line], URL: http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa062602a.htm.
Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38, 92 (1984).