12/25/15

From Mark Copeland... "LIFE AFTER DEATH" What Do We Know Concerning The Judgment?



                           "LIFE AFTER DEATH"

                What Do We Know Concerning The Judgment?

INTRODUCTION

1. In his sermon at the "Areopagus" (Mar's Hill) in Athens, Paul 
   concluded with a reference to the day of judgment - Ac 17:31

2. While in one sense people are judged in this present life by the 
   response they make to Jesus Christ (cf. Jn 3:18), the Bible clearly
   speaks of a day in which God will judge the world

[The focus of this study will be to ascertain from the Scriptures what 
we can know about the "Final Judgment".

Beginning with...]

I. THE "NECESSITY" OF THE JUDGMENT

   A. WHY HAVE A JUDGMENT?
      1. From the story of the rich man and Lazarus, it is apparent that
         one's "destiny" is determined by the time of one's death - cf. 
         Lk 16:22-23
      2. If the "destiny" of each person is determined by the time of 
         his or her death, why the need for a day of judgment at the end
         of time?
      
   B. THE PURPOSE OF THE FINAL JUDGMENT...
      1. Bear in mind that there is a difference between a "human trial"
         and the "Divine trial" of which we speak...
         a. A "human trial" is primarily a process of INVESTIGATION, in 
            which the judge and jury are trying to learn the truth
         b. The "Divine trial" is presided by an omniscient Judge with 
            perfect knowledge, so the purpose of this judgment is one of
            PUBLICATION and EXECUTION of the sentence - cf. 2Co 5:10
            ("that each one may receive...)
      2. Another purpose is to "glorify" God for His grace, and to 
         "vindicate" God for His justice!
         a. Why is it that some sinners are lost, and other sinners are 
            saved?
         b. How can God be just in condemning lost persons who never 
            heard the gospel of Christ?
         c. At the judgment, those currently ignorant of the answers to 
            such questions...
            1) Will be made aware and come to see that God has been both
               just and gracious in His efforts throughout the history 
               of mankind
            2) Those condemned will come to fully realize they can blame
               no one but themselves!

[So it will be a time in which all will be made known, and the sentences
executed.  Exactly when will this occur?]

II. THE "TIME" OF THE JUDGMENT

   A. SOME BELIEVE IN A SERIES OF SEPARATE JUDGMENTS...
      1. Dispensational premillennialists, for example, believe there
         will be...
         a. A judgment of the believer's works at the time of the
            "rapture"
         b. A judgment of individual Gentiles just before the millennium
         c. A judgment of Israel just before the millennium
         d. A judgment of the wicked dead after the millennium
      2. But just as we saw in the previous lesson concerning the 
         resurrection, the same may be said about the judgment
         a. There will be but one bodily resurrection, and that at the 
            "last day"
         b. So there will be just one "day of judgment".

   B. THE FINAL JUDGMENT WILL OCCUR...
      1. At the end of the present age, at which time the "heavens and 
         earth" will be no more - 2Pe 3:7, 10-14; cf. Re 20:11-12; 
         21:1
      2. At the end of "this age", as Jesus taught in His parable of the
         tares - Mt 13:36-43
      3. At the coming of Jesus "in that Day", who will give "rest" to 
         His disciples and "vengeance" to unbelievers - 2Th 1:7-10

[We turn next to consider...]

III. THE "CIRCUMSTANCES" OF THE JUDGMENT

   A. WHO WILL BE THE JUDGE?
      1. The New Testament clearly reveals that CHRIST will be the Judge
         a. As claimed by Jesus Himself - Jn 5:22,26-27
         b. As proclaimed by Paul in Athens - Ac 17:31
         c. And as written by Paul to the church at Corinth - 2Co 5:10
      2. In some way not fully revealed, even the "saints" (i.e., 
         Christians) will have a part in the judgment - 1Co 6:2-3

   B. WHO WILL BE JUDGED?
      1. The "angels" will be judged, as is clear from 
         1Co 6:2-3; 2 Pe 2:4; Jude 6
      2. All "human beings" will be judged, as evident from passages 
         like Ro 2:4-6; 3:6; Re 20:12-13
      3. Even Christians will be judged - 2Co 5:10; Ro 14:10; cf. 
         1Pe 4:17; 1Jn 4:17

   C. WHAT WILL BE JUDGED?
      1. All "deeds" done during this present life - 2Co 5:10
      2. All "words" spoken in this life - Mt 12:36-37
      3. Even our "thoughts"! - 1Co 4:5
      4. Indeed, there is nothing "hidden" that will not then be "known"
         - cf. 1Ti 5:24-25

   D. WHAT WILL BE THE STANDARD WHEREBY MEN WILL BE JUDGED?
      1. Jesus said, "the word that I have spoken will judge him in the
         last day" - Jn 12:48
         a. As He will be the Judge, so it will be by His "words" that 
            we will be judged!
         b. I.e., it will be the words of the New Testament
      2. And that "standard" is a strict one!
         a. One sin makes one guilty of all! - cf. Jm 2:10
         b. And it declares that all are sinners! - cf. Ro 3:23

   E. WHAT HOPE IS THERE TO SURVIVE THE JUDGMENT?
      1. The only hope one can have is made clear in the judgment scene
         of Re 20:11-15
      2. That hope pertains to having one's name "written in the Book of
         life"
         a. It is called the "Lamb's Book of Life" in Re 21:27
         b. Those Christians who persevere have their names in this Book
            of Life - Re 3:5
      3. Indeed, only those who have been redeemed by the blood of the 
         Lamb are in the "Book of Life", but only if they persevere to 
         the end!

CONCLUSION
   
1. Contemplating the reality and circumstances of the coming Day of 
   Judgment ought to cause every person to humbly consider their 
   relationship to God and His Son Jesus Christ

2. There is no way we can hope to "pass the test" based upon ignorance,
   or on good works...
   a. God now commands all men everywhere to repent - cf. Ac 17:30-31
   b. But only by the mercy of God can we be saved, and that "through 
      the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit" 
      - cf. Tit 3:4-7
   c. Only by being justified by His blood, shall we be saved from the
      wrath of God to come - cf. Ro 5:8-9

3. For those who will respond to the saving gospel of Jesus Christ, they
   can have their names in the Lamb's Book of Life, and not fear the day
   of judgment!
                        IS YOUR NAME WRITTEN THERE?

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2015

eXTReMe Tracker 

The Walls Came Tumbling Down by Garry K. Brantley, M.A., M.Div.


http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=592

The Walls Came Tumbling Down

by Garry K. Brantley, M.A., M.Div.

Jericho’s inhabitants watched the army of Israel circle their city each day for six days. On the seventh day, the Israelites marched around the city seven times. When the Israelites shouted and the priests blew their trumpets, those strong walls in which the Jerichoites placed such confidence crumbled like sand. Just as Egypt’s so-called gods were powerless against Yahweh, Jericho’s stately walls bowed before Him. Such is the biblical scenario of Jericho’s fate during the time of Joshua.
In the preliminary report of her extensive excavations at Jericho, archaeologist Kathleen Kenyon adduced a purely naturalistic explanation of the biblical story. She conjectured that, at the precise moment of Israel’s trumpet blasts and shouts, an earthquake fortuitously crumbled Jericho’s walls. In their religious naivete, the Israelites regarded this natural event as divine intervention on their behalf (Kenyon, 1957, p. 262).
Kenyon’s analyses demonstrate the status to which archaeology has been elevated in some circles. To many scholars, archaeology has become such a sophisticated scientific endeavor that they attach greater importance to archaeological interpretations than to biblical information. Accordingly, if archaeology cannot prove it, we are asked to suspend judgment on the integrity of a given biblical text.
Yet, archaeology can do only so much. Though it provides some valuable information regarding culture in biblical times, and has illuminated the biblical text in many unexpected ways, archaeology is woefully inadequate to address questions of theology. It is true that archaeological investigations often have confirmed biblical historicity. Bryant G. Wood, for example, has extensively analyzed the evidence from Jericho and concluded that the data are consistent with biblical information regarding Jericho’s destruction (see Wood, 1987; 1990). Such evidence does confirm the historical reliability of the Bible—something we would expect from a divinely inspired document. Archaeology, however, cannot determine Who caused Jericho’s walls to fall. It is by faith that we acknowledge divine causes in human history. And it is by such faith that we know that at God’s command, the walls of Jericho came tumbling down.

REFERENCES

Kenyon, Kathleen (1957), Digging Up Jericho: The Results of the Jericho Excavations 1952-1956(New York: Praeger).
Wood, Bryant G. (1987), “Uncovering the Truth at Jericho,” Archaeology and Biblical Research, Premiere Issue, pp. 6-16, Autumn.
Wood, Bryant G. (1990), “Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho?: A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence,” Biblical Archaeology Review, 16[2]:44-58, March/April.

The Creativity of the Creator Declares His Glory by Eric Lyons, M.Min.



http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=1609

The Creativity of the Creator Declares His Glory

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.



Much of mankind loves to classify and sort things. We like to sort socks by color and shirts by kind. We categorize books topically. We arrange files alphabetically. We organize tools by their function. We take pictures of people by their size (“tallest in the back, shortest up front”) and then arrange them chronologically in “properly” labeled albums. We like things certain ways; we want things “just so”; and when things do not fall in line with our ideas and expectations, we wonder what happened.
Sometimes we just need to “sit back, relax, and enjoy the view” of God’s handiwork. The Lord says, “Be still, and know that I am God” (Psalm 46:10). Sometimes we need to press the pause button and take a page out of God’s Creation revelation (Romans 1:20). Recognize that not everything fits neatly in a systematic filing system, and be thankful that God filled the Earth with His glorious, “manifold…works” (Psalm 104:24; Isaiah 6:3)—that He created all manner of creatures, some of which do not fit neatly in a sorting system, but certainly declare their Maker’s majesty.
Take the duck-billed platypus, for example. It is unlike any other animal on Earth. Scientists classify the platypus as a mammal, but it hardly fits neatly into this category. It is about the size of a house cat with fur thicker than a polar bear’s. It can store food in its mouth like a chipmunk. It has a beaver-like tail and webbed feet like an otter. It has spurs like a rooster, lays eggs like a turtle, and produces venom like a snake. Last, but not least, it has a clumsy-looking, duck-like bill with a complex electro-receptor system in it that allows the platypus to sense weak electric impulses in the muscles of its prey (Scheich, et al., 1986, 319:401-402). The platypus’ modern scientific name (Ornithorhynchus anatinus) means “duck-like, bird snout,” yet we call it a mammal. Truly, if there was ever an animal to call “unique,” it would be the platypus.
Consider also the seahorse. It is one of the most curious-looking animals on the planet. Though it has a head like a horse, eyes like a lizard, a tail like an opossum, and can swim like a submarine, the seahorse is considered a fish. Scientists refer to the seahorse as Hippocampus, a name derived from two Greek words: hippo, meaning “horse,” and campus, meaning “sea creature.”
Most fish swim horizontally by moving their bodies back and forth, from side to side. Seahorses, on the other hand, live in an upright position and swim vertically—like a submarine that can go up and down. The seahorse can properly maintain its balance as it goes up and down in the water because of the gas within its swim bladder (“Sea horse,” 1997, 10:579). Like a well-designed submarine that manipulates gas in order to submerge and resurface, the seahorse can alternate the amount of gas in its bladder to move up and down in the water (Juhasz, 1994). The life of the seahorse is dependent on a perfectly designed bladder. With a damaged bladder (or without a bladder altogether) a seahorse would sink to the ocean floor and die. How do evolutionists logically explain the evolution of this swim bladder if the seahorse has always needed it to survive? If it has always needed it, then it must have always had it, else there would be no seahorse.
Perhaps the most puzzling feature of the seahorse, which does not neatly file away in a normal animal fact folder, is that seahorses are the only known animals in which males actually become pregnant, carry young, and give birth. The male seahorse is designed with a special kangaroo-like pouch near its stomach. At just the right time during the courtship, the female seahorse deposits hundreds of eggs into the pouch of the male. The male fertilizes the eggs, and for the next few weeks carries the unborn seahorses, before squirting the fully formed babies out of the pouch (Danielson, 2002). If nothing like this process is known in the animal kingdom, why would anyone think that evolution can logically explain it? How do undirected time and chance stumble across a different and better way for a particular kind of fish to have babies? Did the first male seahorse to give birth simply have an irritable mate who refused to have babies unless he carried and birthed them? Suffice it to say, seahorses are as baffling to the theory of evolution as are duck-billed platypuses. These unusual animals cry out for a creative Creator, Who cannot be contained in the naturalistic box of evolution. As the patriarch Job asked, “Who…does not know that the hand of the Lord has done this, in whose hand is the life of every living thing?... Ask the beasts, and they will teach you…and the fish of the sea will explain to you” (Job 12:9-10,7-8).

CONCLUSION

God’s creation is full of variety and complexity. The natural world testifies to a masterful Maker, a creative Creator. He made an animal with the bill of a duck and the tail of a beaver. He gave a sea creature the head of a horse and the tail of an opossum. He made furry animals (i.e., bats) that fly on membranous wings, while making flightless birds (i.e., penguins) that live on land and “fly” through frigid waters. He made the prickly porcupine, the puffer fish, and a sloth so slow that it makes the tortoise look like a cheetah. As much as God’s creation testifies to His omniscient, omnipotent, sovereign nature (Job 38-41; Romans 1:20), I respectfully suggest that our great God seems to have had a lot of fun at the foundation of the world. At the very least, His amazing creativity has provided man a lot of laughs and entertainment since the beginning of time.
Oh come, let us sing to the Lord! Let us shout joyfully to the Rock of our salvation.
Let us come before His presence with thanksgiving; let us shout joyfully to Him with psalms.
For the Lord is the great God, and the great King above all gods.
In His hand are the deep places of the earth; the heights of the hills are His also.
The sea is His, for He made it; and His hands formed the dry land.
Oh come, let us worship and bow down; let us kneel before the Lord our Maker (Psalm 95:1-6).
O Lord, how manifold are Your works! In wisdom You have made them all.
The earth is full of Your possessions….
I will sing to the Lord as long as I live; I will sing praise to my God while I have my being.
May my meditation be sweet to Him; I will be glad in the Lord (Psalm 104:24,33-34).

REFERENCES

Danielson, Stentor (2002), “Seahorse Fathers Take Reins in Childbirth,” National Geographic News, June 14, http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/pf/90683716.html.
Juhasz, David (1994), “The Amazing Seahorse,” Answers in Genesis, June 1, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v16/n3/seahorse.
Scheich, Henning, et al. (1986), “Electroreception and Electrolocation in Platypus,” Nature, 319:401-402, January 30.
“Sea horse” (1997), The New Encyclopaedia Britannica (Chicago, IL: Encyclopaedia Britannica).

Expelled: One Movie You Ought to See by Eric Lyons, M.Min.


http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=2455

Expelled: One Movie You Ought to See

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Rarely does Apologetics Press encourage readers to see a movie on the big screen. It goes without saying that most movies playing in theaters are unfit for a Christian to watch (cf. Philippians 4:8; Psalm 101:3), and are unworthy of a Christian’s God-given time and money. However, one especially important film opened this past weekend in more than 1,000 theatres across America. Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is a documentary starring actor, economist, lawyer, and professor Ben Stein.
In the film, Stein, who also co-wrote the documentary, highlights “an elitist scientific establishment that has traded in its skepticism for dogma” (“What Happened...?” 2007). Refusing to follow the evidence to wherever it leads, “the scientific establishment” is exposed as phony freethinkers. “Freedom of inquiry has been greatly compromised” by evolutionists who will allow “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 interviews several bright, credentialed scientists. These men and women have 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. Their stories prove that the scientific establishment really is free only to think inside the walls of the “goo-to-you” theory of evolution. Question the theory of evolution publicly, and, as Stein uncovers, a scientist must be prepared to lose his or her job and reputation in the scientific community.
Stein also confronts the biggest proponents of evolutionary theory—from England’s world famous biologist Richard Dawkins, to one of America’s most vociferous critics of intelligent design, executive director of the National Center for Science Education, Eugenie Scott. Stein frustrated staunch evolutionist Michael Ruse when he questioned him about the origin of life on Earth. What’s more, he even gets Richard Dawkins to admit.... Well, just go see for yourself. Stein’s interview with Dawkins, author of The God Delusion, is the climax of the entire documentary.
Expelled is not a Christian film per se; its emphasis is not on the Bible, Jesus, or Christianity. However, we believe that Christians will enjoy the documentary (except for one interviewee’s use of the term “hell”), as it is very much pro-logic, pro-liberty, pro-life, and pro-intelligent design—which also means that it is very much anti-macroevolution.

REFERENCE

“What Happened to Freedom of Speech?” (2007), [On-line], URL: http://www.expelledthemovie.com.

Pluralism, Christianity, and America by Dave Miller, Ph.D.



http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=1989

Pluralism, Christianity, and America

by Dave Miller, Ph.D.


Since America has been methodically massaged for some 50 years by pluralistic, humanistic, multi-cultural, politically correct influences, Christians are being marginalized and are facing forthright discrimination and persecution. To see where America is logically headed, look carefully at what is happening to those nations that historically have been affiliated with Christianity, but are further along in their abandonment of the moral and spiritual principles of the Christian religion. For example, Fritz and Marianna Konrad live in Herbolzheim, Germany with their two children Rebekka and Josua. As professors of the Christian religion who avow strong attachment to the Bible, in 2000, the Konrads opted for homeschooling and sought exemption from public school attendance for their children for religious reasons on the grounds that “school education does not suit their beliefs because of sex education, the appearance of mythical creatures such as witches and dwarfs in fairytales during school lessons and the increasing physical and psychological violence between pupils at school” (Konrad v. Germany, 2006, p. 2, emp. added). The school authorities rejected their petition. So the Konrads took their case to German court.
In its 2001 ruling, a German court conceded that, indeed, “Basic Law granted the parents both freedom of religion and the right to educate their children with regard to religious and philosophical convictions, which also included the negative aspect to keep their children away from convictions which would be harmful in their opinion” (Konrad..., p. 2). Though the court did not question the ability of the parents to provide an academically suitable education for their children, nevertheless, the court ruled against the parents’ freedom to homeschool on these astounding grounds:
That freedom, however, was restricted by the State’s obligation for education and tuition. Hence compulsory school was not a matter for the parents’ discretion. The applicant parents’ wish to let their children grow up in a “protected” area at home without outside interference could not take priority over compulsory school attendance. Even if children could be sufficiently educated at home, the State’s obligation to educate under the Basic Law would not be met if the children had no contact with other children. Attending a primary school, with children from all backgrounds, would enable children both to gain first experiences with society and to acquire social competences. Neither would be possible if the parents were authorized to educate the children at home” (pp. 2-3, emp. added).
Unbelievable! The government’s right to educate children takes precedence over the parents’ right to do so (especially since the State must not be deprived of tuition money).
The Founders of America insisted that the parents had sole authority and discretion to educate their children. It was not only not the obligation of the State to do so, the State had no authority to do so. The American government was designed to receive its authority from the people—not vice versa. Indeed, the Founders of American government insisted that the people derived their rights and authority from God—not from the State—and that the State has no right to interfere with the people’s inalienable rights. Indeed, the Bible teaches that God invested the authority to educate, train, and raise children in parents and the home (Genesis 2:24; Ephesians 6:1ff.). Yet, the humanistic European judicial system maintains that the government has the right to override parents’ wishes in order to ensure that the children socialize with children “from all backgrounds,” i.e., Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and atheists.
When the case went to the Court of Appeal, the court reinforced the lower court ruling, further insisting that
even though the applicant parents’ right to educate their children included religious education, they were not entitled...to the exclusive education of their children. The State’s constitutional obligation to provide children with education was on an equal footing. The court stressed that the decisive point was not whether or not home education was equally effective as primary school education, but that compulsory school attendance require children from all backgrounds in society to gather together. Parents could not obtain an exemption...if they disagreed with the content of particular parts of the syllabus, even if their disagreement was religiously motivated. The applicant parents could not be permitted to keep their children away from school and the influences of other children (p. 3, emp. added).
Further, the court commented on the State’s right to indoctrinate children with evolution—the very circumstance that Americans have been enduring for half a century: “As far as the applicants complained that the school’s syllabus was too scientific and denied any divine influence on the creation and the history of the world, the court found that freedom of religion did not grant the freedom to deal with any possible conflicts between science and religion” (p. 3, emp. added).
Having lost their case in the German courts, the Konrads appealed to the European Court of Human Rights in hopes of achieving their aim. They made their petition on the basis of Article 2 of Protocol No. 1 which reads:
No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions (Konrad...,” p. 6, emp. added).
Seems clear enough. Regarding the views of the Konrads, the court noted that they
find that it is their obligation to educate their children in accordance with the Bible and Christian values. They infer from numerous quotations from the Bible that their children’s education is an obligation on them which cannot easily be transferred to third persons. They submit that, by teaching their children at home, they fulfil a divine order. Their children’s attendance of a primary school would inevitably lead to grave conflicts with their personal beliefs.... Compulsory school attendance would therefore severely endanger their children’s religious education, especially regarding sex education (p. 6, emp. added).
Yet, like the German courts, this international tribunal ruled against the parents on the misguided grounds of the alleged value to society of diversity and pluralism:
The provision...aims [at] safeguarding pluralism in education which is essential for the preservation of the “democratic society”.... In view of the power of the modern State, it is above all through State teaching that this aim must be realized.... Therefore respect is only due to convictions on the part of the parents which do not conflict with the right of the child to education.... This means that parents may not refuse the right to education of a child on the basis of their convictions (pp. 6-7, emp. added).
Observe that these declarations contain misrepresentations and erroneous hidden assumptions, i.e., that parents are unreliable determiners of their own children’s education and that the “right to education” means the right to be educated in public school by the State—not the right to be educated at home by the parents. The Konrads did not “refuse the right to education” of their children. They simply refused the right of the State—with its anti-Christian bias—to educate their children. They want their children to be educated; but they want them to be educated by themselves at home.
Americans would like to think that such things do not and cannot happen in this country. Yet, the indications are that America is moving swiftly in the same direction. American judges have commenced to cite foreign and international law in their decisions. For example, retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor repeatedly declared the necessity of relying on international law (“O’Connor: U.S. Must...,” 2003; “O’Connor Praises...,” 2004). Likewise, parents increasingly are being overruled by school and political officials in their efforts to shield their children from liberal ideology. Last year, the “Left Coast” 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that parents do not have a fundamental right to control when, where, and how their children are taught about sex (Parker, 2005). The Lexington, Massachusetts Superintendent of Schools recently insisted that the school system had no legal obligation to notify parents when children were being exposed to materials that advocated homosexuality and same-sex marriage (Jan, 2006). What a shame. And what a far cry from the convictions of the architects of American civilization who insisted that public education should have as its first concern the teaching of Christian principles. As Noah Webster so poignantly expressed:
In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government, ought to be instructed.... No truth is more evident to my mind than that the Christian religion must be the basis of any government intended to secure the rights and privileges of a free people (1843, p. 291, emp. added).

REFERENCES

Jan, Tracy (2006), “Parents Rip School Over Gay Storybook,” Boston Globe, April 20, [On-line], URL:http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/04/20/parents_rip_ school_over_gay_storybook/.
Konrad v. Germany (2006), European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), September 18, 35504/03, [On-line], URL: http://www.telladf.org/UserDocs/KonradDecision.pdf.
“O’Connor Praises International Law” (2004), WorldNetDaily, October 27, [On-line], URL:http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41143.
“O’Connor: U.S. Must Rely on Foreign Law” (2003), WorldNetDaily, October 31, [On-line], URL:http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35367.
Parker, Kathleen (2005), “Parents Take Another Hit in the Culture Wars,” Orlando Sentinel, G3, November 6, [On-line], URL: http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/orlandosentinel/access/922392231.html?dids =922392231:922392231&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Nov+6%2C+ 2005&author=Kathleen+Parker%2C+Sentinel+Columnist&pub=Orlando+ Sentinel&edition=&startpage=G.3&desc=Parents+take+another+ hit+in+the+culture+wars.
Webster, Noah (1843), A Collection of Papers on Political, Literary, and Moral Subjects (New York, NY: Webster and Clark).

“Righteous Lot”? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.



http://apologeticspress.org/AllegedDiscrepancies.aspx?article=2400&b=Genesis

“Righteous Lot”?

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

He chose to live in the wicked city of Sodom (Genesis 13:12-13). He offered his two virgin daughters to an angry mob of homosexuals (Genesis 19:5-8). He later became drunk and impregnated his daughters, albeit unknowingly (Genesis 19:30-36). Anyone vaguely familiar with Old Testament history likely knows of Lot and his troubles. For this reason, some find it troubling that Lot is called “righteous” in the New Testament. Peter, in fact, used the term “righteous” three times to describe the patriarch: “God...delivered righteous Lot, who was oppressed by the filthy conduct of the wicked (for that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented his righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds” (2 Peter 2:7-8, emp. added). Why did Peter repeatedly call Lot “righteous” when many see a different picture of Lot in Genesis? Was Lot really righteous? Does the Bible contradict itself?
First, one must keep in mind that though a Bible writer may have recorded specific sins and foolish acts of an individual does not mean that the person could not also have been righteous. Christ was the only perfect man ever to live (2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Peter 2:22). Though Noah, Abraham, Moses, etc. were counted faithful (Hebrews 11:7-29), they occasionally disobeyed God’s will (cf. Numbers 20:1-12), and acted foolishly or cowardly (cf. Genesis 9:21; 12:12-20; 20:1-18). God never blessed their disobedience, only their faithfulness. Consider also the harlot Rahab. Whereas God did not condone her harlotry, she was “justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way” (James 2:25). “By faith the harlot Rahab did not perish with those who did not believe, when she had received the spies with peace” (Hebrews 11:32). Simply because God graciously saved Rahab from the destruction of Jericho, does not mean that God condoned her past sexual sins. Similarly, just because Peter called Lot righteous does not mean that Lot was perfect. Even the apostle Peter, who also served as an elder in the Lord’s church (1 Peter 5:1), was guilty at one time or another of having a lack of faith (Matthew 14:31), denying that he knew the Lord (Matthew 26:69-75), and hypocritically withdrawing himself from Gentiles (Galatians 2:11-14).
Second, Peter’s statements about Lot’s righteousness must be considered in their proper context. Similar to how Noah was an island of righteousness surrounded by a sea of iniquity (2 Peter 2:5), Lot was surrounded by extremely “wicked,” “filthy,” “lawless” citizens of Sodom (2 Peter 2:7-8). Although Lot was far from perfect, he was not a wicked, lawless unrighteous citizen of Sodom; he was righteous. Lot separated himself from the unlawfulness of the inhabitants of Sodom and was even tormented “day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds” (2 Peter 2:8).
Though Lot’s offering of his daughters to the sodomites is inexcusable (as it seems were Abraham’s actions in Egypt and Gerar when he allowed his wife to be taken by kings in order to preserve his life; see Genesis 12:10-20; 20:1-18), Genesis 19 clearly indicates the distinction between the righteousness of Lot and the wickedness of the inhabitants of Sodom. The sodomites even hinted at such when they declared that Lot “keeps acting as a judge” (Genesis 19:9). This was the distinction Peter made—not that Lot was perfect, but that he remained uncontaminated by the intense iniquity prevalent throughout Sodom. Like Christians today who strive to walk in the light, though they are imperfect (1 John 1:5-10), Lot was a righteous man, who also made some memorable mistakes.

From Roy Davison... Beware of dogs ... and people!



http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Davison/Roy/Allen/1940/056-beware.html

Beware of dogs ... and people!


This mosaic is in the Archaeological Museum of Naples, Italy.
They say that barking dogs never bite. This is true. They always stop barking before they bite!
The dog that bit me, did not bark. When I was twelve, I was distributing advertising for my father’s TV repair business. An elderly dog silently walked up behind me and left a clear set of teeth marks in my leg. He obviously had an intense dislike of advertising distributors!
Roman villas in Paul’s day often had a floor mosaic in the entrance showing a dog on a chain, sometimes with the words, “CAVE CANEM” (Beware of the dog)!
It is wise to beware of dogs, but when Paul tells us, “Beware of dogs” in Philippians 3:2, he is referring to dogs of the human variety. Jesus tells us, “Beware of people” (Matthew 10:17).
“Beware of” means to be on guard against, to be cautious about, to be alert to potential danger from, to be ready to avoid danger from.
People are dangerous!
Humans are the most dangerous creatures on earth. What other form of life has destroyed cities with atomic bombs, and maintains huge stockpiles of nuclear weapons?
The most powerful hydrogen bomb ever detonated (by the Soviet Union on Severny Island above the Arctic Circle on October 30, 1961) had 1400 times the power of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs combined, and ten times the power of all other explosives used in World War II. This picture was taken at a distance of 160 km. The atmospheric shock wave broke windows in northern Norway and Finland, a thousand kilometers away.
In 1985 there were 68,000 active nuclear weapons. In the meantime this has been reduced to about 20,000 that are active or could easily be reactivated. Some of this reduction comes from treaties, but most of it results from decommissioning outmoded, obsolete weapons. Although there are fewer bombs, their destructive capability has been increased.
This is not something that mankind may be proud of. Consider the resources this gobbles up, when much of the world lacks food.

Yet, spiritual dangers are even greater.

A volcanic eruption in 79 AD buried Pompeii, Italy under five meters of ash, killing 15,000 people. Excavations have unearthed several “Beware of the dog” mosaics. Someone should have warned: “Beware of the volcano!” There are greater dangers than dogs.
Although the danger of nuclear destruction threatens us like a smoking Mount Vesuvius, we live in a world that is even more dangerous spiritually. God warns us about spiritual dangers that threaten our souls. Satan has laid spiritual landmines along both sides of the narrow way that leads to life.
We must beware of falling away because of sin. We must beware of false teachers, of religious leaders who exalt themselves, and of persecutors.

Beware of falling away because of sin.

Beware, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God; but exhort one another daily, while it is called ‘Today’ lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin” (Hebrews 3:12, 13).
The deceitfulness of sin is our greatest spiritual danger. We must beware of anything that tempts us to sin and leads us away from God.
Sin is glorified in the media, on the Internet, on television, on the radio, in magazines.
At school, young people are taught how to be immoral, and are fooled into thinking that immorality has no negative consequences.
The fashion world emphasizes sensuality. Social pressure encourage us to be “like everyone else.” 
We must beware of these corruptive influences.
We must exhort one another not to depart from the living God through sin.
Referring to people who twist the Scriptures “to their own destruction,” Peter gives a similar warning: “You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked; but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 3:17, 18). 
These verses refute the false doctrine of “Once saved, always saved”!
We must beware lest we “fall from our own steadfastness”; we must beware lest we “depart from the living God”!
To avoid falling away through the deceitfulness of sin, we must beware of anyone who tries to lead us into sin.
This includes being alert to dangers from false teachers, religious leaders who exalt themselves, and persecutors.

Beware of persecutors.

Jesus warned His followers: “Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves. Therefore be wise as serpents and harmless as doves. But beware of men, for they will deliver you up to councils and scourge you in their synagogues” (Matthew 10:16, 17).
How do Christians react to persecution? Jesus said: “When they persecute you in this city, flee to another” (Matthew 10:23). “Do not fear them” (Matthew 10:26). “He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it” (Matthew 10:39).
Paul warned Timothy: “Alexander the coppersmith did me much harm. May the Lord repay him according to his works. You also must beware of him, for he has greatly resisted our words” (2 Timothy 4:14, 15).
Paul was thankful that God had protected him: “But the Lord stood with me and strengthened me, so that the message might be preached fully through me, and that all the Gentiles might hear. Also I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion. And the Lord will deliver me from every evil work and preserve me for His heavenly kingdom” (2 Timothy 4:17, 18).
We must beware of persecutors. Yet, we need not be afraid. An eternal home with God is waiting, whatever happens to us.

Beware of religious leaders who exalt themselves.

Jesus warned, “Beware of the scribes, who desire to go around in long robes, love greetings in the marketplaces, the best seats in the synagogues, and the best places at feasts, who devour widows’ houses, and for a pretense make long prayers” (Mark 12:38-40).
Pretentious religious leaders glorify themselves, not God. We must beware of them.

Beware of false teachers.

We must beware of those who introduce teachings and practices that are contrary to sound doctrine, that deviate from the original teaching of Christ and His apostles: “But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies” (2 Peter 2:1).
Jesus warns about their deceptive appearance and tells us how to identify them: “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits” (Matthew 7:15, 16).
Jesus warned His followers against two prevalent errors: “Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees” (Matthew 16:6). The disciples did not know what He meant by leaven until He clarified it. “Then they understood that He did not tell them to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees” (Matthew 16:12).
The Pharisees and Sadducees were the two major denominations among the Jews at the time of Christ. They both taught false doctrine.
The Sadducees rejected most of the Old Testament outright, recognizing only the five books of Moses. They did not believe in a resurrection, in angels, or in spirits (Acts 23:8). They were liberalistic in their interpretation and application of Scripture.
The Pharisees were “the strictest sect” of the Jews (Acts 26:5), but their piety was superficial. Jesus told them, “You pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith” (Matthew 23:23); “All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition” (Mark 7:9). They were also “lovers of money” (Luke 16:14).
Thus, we are duly warned to beware of these doctrinal errors, which are still prevalent today: a liberalistic interpretation and application of Scripture, and a superficial piety that exalts human doctrine above the word of God.
Jesus refers to these errors as leaven because they spread easily.

Beware of those who base doctrine on the Old Covenant.

In the early church certain false teachers tried to impose requirements of the Old Covenant, such as circumcision and Sabbath-keeping, on Christians (Colossians 2:11-17). Paul warns against them in the harshest of terms, “Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the mutilation! For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh” (Philippians 3:2, 3).

Beware of those who base doctrine on philosophy and human traditions.

Paul warns: “Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ” (Colossians 2:8, 9).
“Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them” (Romans 16:17).
Referring to John’s baptism, Jesus asked the Jewish leaders, “Was it from heaven or from men?” (Mark 11:30). We ought to ask this question about all religious principles, doctrines and practices: Is it from heaven or from men? Everything that is not from God must be rejected.
Beware!
During a recent walk I saw on a gate: “Beware! Poisonous frogs!” Although I doubt that poisonous frogs were lurking behind that gate, they really do exist! Touch the moisture on the back of a Yellow Golden Poison Dart Frog and put your finger in your mouth, and almost instantly you die. As the name indicates, their poison was used on arrows. They are among the most poisonous creatures on earth.
It is certainly wise to be wary of poisonous frogs, vicious dogs, and a nuclear holocaust. But even more we must beware of spiritual dangers.
Take heed to yourselves” (Luke 17:3). “Take heed what you hear” (Mark 4:24). “Take heed that no one deceives you” (Matthew 24:4). “Take heed , watch and pray” (Mark 13:33).
God warns us to beware of falling away through the deceitfulness of sin, to beware of persecutors, to beware of money-loving religious leaders who exalt themselves, to beware of false teachers who interpret the Scriptures liberalistically, to beware of false teachers who follow their own rigid regulations rather than the Scriptures, to beware of false teachers who base doctrine on the Old Covenant, on philosophy or on human traditions.
Peter’s warning in 1 Peter 5:8, 9 is applicable: “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour. Resist him, steadfast in the faith.” Amen.
Roy Davison
The Scripture quotations in this article are from
The New King James Version. ©1979,1980,1982, Thomas Nelson Inc., Publishers.
Permission for reference use has been granted.

Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)

From Gary... "fill-er-up"


For my grandchildren

I looked out my window and to my delight
I saw Santa refueling after a hard night

I know he is busy and has a long way to go
so he uses a  high-altitude route don't-you-know

And when he is finished and ready for bed
his thoughts are of the next year's travel ahead

And of all those dear children who still will believe
in the power of love and hope on Christmas eve.


Okay, this picture is a little funny, but there is truth here if we but look. We all need to "fuel up" to "get er done". And teamwork is an absolute essential to accomplishing great things. While there is more myth to Santa than I would like to admit, still, seeing people trying to do the "right" thing, the "good" thing and the "selfless" thing for all the right motives, brings hope to us all in this world of conflict and turmoil. Oh, that we all would remember what is was like to think like a innocent young child and love and trust in the goodness of all human beings.  This upcoming year, let us aim for our personal best and here is the standard I suggest we use...

1 Corinthians, Chapter 13 (WEB)
 4  Love is patient and is kind; love doesn’t envy. Love doesn’t brag, is not proud,  5 doesn’t behave itself inappropriately, doesn’t seek its own way, is not provoked, takes no account of evil;  6 doesn’t rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth;  7 bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.  8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will be done away with. Where there are various languages, they will cease. Where there is knowledge, it will be done away with.  9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part;  10 but when that which is complete has come, then that which is partial will be done away with.  11 When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I felt as a child, I thought as a child. Now that I have become a man, I have put away childish things.  12 For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I will know fully, even as I was also fully known.  13 But now faith, hope, and love remain—these three. The greatest of these is love. 

May God bless you all richly until next Christmas and beyond!!!