Eclipses and the Totality of 2017 by Alana May, M.S. & Branyon May, Ph.D.

 

https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=5448

Eclipses and the Totality of 2017

by	Alana May, M.S. & Branyon May, Ph.D.

On Monday, August 21st, the entire United States was treated to the exciting experience of seeing a solar eclipse, with a total solar eclipse visible to millions along the path of totality from Oregon to South Carolina. This event was a magnificent showing of an alignment between the Earth, Moon, and Sun. At just after 9:00 a.m. PDT the partial eclipse made its debut on the Western shores of Oregon. Shortly before 4:00 p.m. EDT the Moon’s remaining shadow moved off South Carolina’s coastal region. The umbral shadow of totality had a 70-mile wide diameter as it made its way across the country. While the entire continental United States was able to view the eclipse to some degree, only the regions within the 70-mile swath saw a total solar eclipse.

So what causes an eclipse? Although the Sun is physically 400 times larger than the Moon, it is also 400 times farther away. The Moon is approximately 240,000 miles from Earth, while the Sun is 93 million miles away. Yet from our view on Earth, the Sun and the Moon appear to be about the same angular size. This correspondence in apparent size is why we on Earth are able to experience solar eclipses. This type of eclipse (solar) is when the Moon passes exactly through our view toward the Sun, and it blocks the Sun’s light casting a shadow of darkness on Earth during the daytime.

When we consider this amazing event, we find Earth is the only planet where life can view a total solar eclipse. Mars is the only other terrestrial planet with moons. However, they are irregularly shaped and too small to eclipse the Sun. The Gas Giant planets cannot host life to view any possible eclipses. God’s design of the Earth-Moon-Sun system includes the precise correspondence necessary for such a rare and unique event to occur. Humanity has made use of eclipses throughout history to mark time and probe further the details of the Sun and Moon.

Dragonfly Flight and the Designer by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

 

https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=1796

Dragonfly Flight and the Designer

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D.

More proof of the existence of the Master Designer comes from research conducted by Z. Jane Wang, professor of theoretical and applied mechanics at Cornell University (Gold, 2006). Centering on flying systems and fluid dynamics, Dr. Wang notes that the best way to learn about flight is by first looking at what happens naturally. Interesting. In order for the complex human mind to comprehend the principles of flight, that mind must focus on the natural order—the Creation. So mind must learn from that which, according to evolutionists, came into being and developed without any mind. Intelligence is dependent on non-intelligence. Who can believe it?

Reporting her findings at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Dr. Wang observed that her research calls into question the conventional wisdom that ascribes to airplanes (human inventions) more flight efficiency than the flying creatures of the natural realm. Dragonflies, for example, are “a marvel of engineering” (Gold, 2006). “Marvel of engineering”—without an Engineer? So claims the evolutionist—despite the irrationality of such a conclusion.

Indeed, the dragonfly possesses four wings, instead of the standard two, enabling it to dash forward at speeds approaching 60 kph. Its unusual pitching stroke allows this amazing insect to hover and even shift into reverse. According to Wang: “Dragonflies have a very odd stroke. It’s an up-and-down stroke instead of a back-and-forth stroke.... Dragonflies are one of the most maneuverable insects, so if they’re doing that they’re probably doing it for a reason” (Gold, 2006, emp. added). “For a reason”? But doesn’t “a reason” imply a reasonable mind behind the reason that thinks and assigns a logical rationale to specific phenomena?

The more scientists study dragonflies the more they are impressed with these “marvels of flight engineering” (“How Do Things...,” n.d.). They appear to twist their wings on the downward stroke, creating a whirlwind of air that flows across the wings, facilitating the lift that keeps them flying. Even more amazing, one Australian scientist, Akiko Mizu­tani, of the Centre for Visual Science at the Australian National University, has studied dragonflies at length in the past few years. She observes that, while chasing its prey, dragonflies “shadow their enemies in complex manoeuvres that military fighter pilots can only dream of. Their tricks create the visual illusion that they’re not moving” (as quoted in “How Stealthy...,” 2003, 2398:26, emp. added). In fact, according to Dr. Javaan Chahl, the quick aerial movements allow the dragonfly to disguise itself as a motionless object (“Military Looks to Mimic...,” 2003, emp. added). These insights are not lost on the military establishment. They recognize the incredible implications for technological development—from the ability of fighter aircraft to approach the enemy undetected, to greater maneuverability, to enhanced helicopter logistics. Indeed, “scientists believe the insect’s flight control could have applications in new planes and helicopters” (2003). Is it any wonder that one of the very first helicopters produced was named “Dragonfly” (“Sikorsky...,” 2003)? If no one considers the helicopter as the product of time and chance, why would any reasonable person believe that the insect to which scientists are looking for an understanding of principles of flight evolved from mindless, mechanistic forces of nature?

If the human mind, with all of its complexity and ingenious design, is necessary to engineer flight capability (e.g., airplanes), what must be said for the Mind behind the human mind? If scores of intelligent scientists must expend vast amounts of time, energy, intention, deliberation, knowledge, and thought in order to discover the secrets of the “efficient motions” of the dragonfly, what must have been required to create that dragonfly in the first place? Mindless, non-intelligent, unconscious, non-purposive “evolutionary forces”? Ridiculous! Time and chance do not and cannot account for the amazing design found in insects like the dragonfly. The only logical, plausible explanation is that dragonflies were designed by the God of the Bible, and they testify to His wisdom: “You are worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power; for You created all things, and by Your will they exist and were created” (Revelation 4:11).

REFERENCES

Gold, Lauren (2006), “On the Wings of Dragonflies: Flapping Insect Uses Drag to Carry its Weight, Offering Insight into Intricacies of Flight,” Cornell University Chronicle, February 19, [On-line], URL: http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/Feb06/AAAS.dragonflies.lg.html.

“How Do Things Fly?” (no date), Boeing, [On-line], URL: http://www.boeing.com/compan yoffices/aboutus/wonder_of_flight/dragon.html.

“Military Looks to Mimic Dragonflies” (2003), ABC News, June 5, [On-line], URL: http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200306/s872489.htm.

“How Stealthy Insects Outsmart Their Foe” (2003), New Scientist, 2398:26, June 7.

“Sikorsky HO2S-1/HO3S-1G ‘Dragonfly’” (2003), USCG Homepage, [On-line], URL: http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-cp/history/WEBAIRCRAFT/AC_Sikorsky_HO3S.html.

Don’t Bank Your Bucks in Big Bang Theory by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

 

https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=1483

Don’t Bank Your Bucks in Big Bang Theory

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

For the past several decades, untold millions of students around the world have been taught that the Universe and everything in it is the result of a tiny ball of matter exploding 13-15 billion years ago (e.g., Hurd, et al., 1992, p. 61). Immediately following this “big bang,” the exploding material supposedly expanded in less than a millisecond to cause “most of the growth” of the 14-billion-light-year observable Universe (see Coles, 2007). This expansion, called “inflation,” has purportedly been “well established as an essential component of cosmology” (Coles, 2007, p. 33, emp. added). In fact, in an article penned in 2007 titled “Boomtime,” Dr. Peter Coles recognized that the theory of “[i]nflation puts the ‘bang’ in the big bang” (p. 36). Now, however, scientists are inching closer and closer to the conclusion that “the theory seems to have failed” (Brooks, 2008, 198[2659]:31).

The journal New Scientist recently ran an article by Michael Brooks titled “Inflation Deflated” (2008, 198[2659]:30-33). In the article, Brooks admitted that “[i]nflation is arguably the most important theoretical idea in cosmology since the big bang” (p. 31). Inflationary theory has “suggested that the major problems in cosmology could be solved if the universe had blown up like a balloon, inflating faster than the speed of light in the moments after its birth” (p. 31, emp. added). Yet now, the theory first proposed nearly 30 years ago to solve “major problems” with big bang cosmology, and the theory that has been advanced in classrooms all over the world as fact, is sheepishly “starting to look a little vulnerable” (p. 31). “[T]he theory seems to have failed,” wrote Brooks. Why? First, “there is the lack of any solid scientific idea for why or how inflation might have happened” (p. 32, emp. added). Second, “satellite measurements of the cosmic microwave background radiation...seem to contradict the predictions of inflation” (p. 31). In short, although Brooks and others believe it is still “too early to say that simple inflation is definitely on the skids” (p. 33), “the theory seems to have failed” (p. 31). Atheistic cosmology’s “best theory of the early universe is starting to look a tad insecure” (p. 30, emp. added).

That must surely be a depressing thought to atheists: their “best theory” for the origin of the cosmos is “insecure,” lacking “any solid scientific idea for why or how inflation might have happened.” A better alternative to ultimate origins is found in the first verse of the Bible: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth” (Genesis 1:1). “For He commanded and they were created” (Psalm 148:5). So, “[l]ift up your eyes on high, and see Who has created these things” (Isaiah 40:26).

REFERENCES

Brooks, Michael (2008), “Inflation Deflated,” New Scientist, 198[2659]:30-33, June 7.

Coles, Peter (2007), “Boomtime,” New Scientist, 193[2593]:33-37, March 3.

Hurd, Dean, George Mathias, and Susan Johnson, eds. (1992), General Science: A Voyage of Discovery (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall).

"THE GOSPEL OF MARK" The Source Of True Defilement (7:14-23) by Mark Copeland

 

 "THE GOSPEL OF MARK"

 The Source Of True Defilement (7:14-23)

INTRODUCTION

1. When confronted by the Pharisees and scribes regarding eating with unclean hands...
   a. Jesus described the danger of traditions - Mk 7:1-13
   b. How they can make our worship vain and the commands of God void - ibid.

2. Jesus then used the occasion to teach concerning true defilement...
   a. First to the multitude - Mk 7:14-16
   b. Then privately to His disciples - Mk 7:17-23

[Having the benefit of both His public and private teaching in Mark's
gospel, we can learn "The Source Of True Defilement."  From Jesus
remarks to both the multitude and His disciples we learn that it is...]

I. NOT THE FOOD

   A. DIETARY RESTRICTIONS IN THE PAST...
      1. From the Creation, man (and animals) may have been vegetarian - Gen 1:29-30
      2. After the Flood, God gave animals as food, but not their blood - Gen 9:3-4
      3. With the Law of Moses, Israelites were restricted in their diet - Lev 11:1-47
      -- In Old Testament times, God did have some stringent dietary guidelines

   B. DIETARY FREEDOMS IN THE PRESENT...
      1. Jesus has declared all foods clean - Mk 7:14-19
         a. To the multitude, Jesus hints at the source of true defilement - Mk 7:14-16
         b. To His disciples, He explains His parable - Mk 7:17-19
         c. "...purifying all foods" is likely a parenthetical statement  Mk 7:19
         d. For while the Law of Moses was in force, Jesus observed it in full - cf. Mt 5:17-18
         e. Thus Mark's parenthetical statement was intended for
            disciples living after the cross
      2. Paul later taught that all food is acceptable
         a. Teaching to abstain from foods would be a sign of apostasy - 1Ti 4:1-3
         b. Nothing is to be refused when received with thanksgiving and prayer - 1Ti 4:4-5
      3. There are a few exceptions...
         a. Things offered to idols, blood, and things strangled - Ac 15:28-29; 21:25
         b. Especially when connected to idolatry - 1Co 10:19-23; Re 2:14,20
         c. When certain foods becomes a stumbling block to the weak - Ro 14:14-21; 1Co 8:8-13
      -- From the New Testament, we learn of the dietary freedom we have in Christ

[From what Jesus taught His disciples, true defilement comes not from food...]

II. BUT THE HEART

   A. MAN HAS A HEART PROBLEM...
      1. The heart (mind) is a fountain out of which much that impacts life flows - Pr 4:23
      2. Affected by sin, it becomes deceitful and wicked - Ec 9:3; Jer 17:9
      3. Thus the heart is a source of much evil that defiles man - Mk 7:20-23
      -- The heart (or mind) of man is the real source of defilement

   B. EVIL THOUGHTS LEAD TO TRUE DEFILEMENT...
      1. Evil thoughts
         a. The general term translated 'evil thoughts' precedes the
            verb in the Greek text and is viewed as the root of various
            evils which follow - Bible Knowledge Commentary
         b. Evil thoughts generated in a heart unite with one's will to
            produce evil words and actions - ibid.
      2. Adulteries
         a. Illicit sexual relations by a married person
         b. Which Jesus said could occur in the heart - Mt 5:27-28
      3. Fornications
         a. Illicit sexual activities of various kinds, prompted by lust - cf. 1Th 4:3-5
         b. Including pre-marital sex, homosexuality, etc.
      4. Murders
         a. Taking life intentionally
         b. Which is connected to hate in the heart - 1Jn 3:15
      5. Thefts
         a. Stealing
         b. Including shoplifting, pilfering, etc.
      6. Covetousness
         a. Greediness
         b. Which makes one an idolater - Ep 5:5; Col 3:5
      7. Wickedness
         a. Evil acts
         b. Done with malice
      8. Deceit - acting with guile and intent to defraud
      9. Lewdness
         a. Unrestrained and unconcealed immoral behavior
         b. Closely related to lust - cf. Ro 13:13
     10. An evil eye - a Hebrew idiom for stinginess - cf. Pr 28:22
     11. Blasphemy - slander, verbal abuse against God or man
     12. Pride - arrogance, boastful opinion of one's self, often with disdain toward others
     13. Foolishness - lack of common sense, with moral and spiritual insensitivity
      -- Such sins prompted by evil thoughts are what truly defile us!

CONCLUSION

1. Today, many people choose to restrict their diet...
   a. Some for health reasons (allowed by the liberty we have in Christ)
   b. Others for religious reasons (not bound by the liberty we have in Christ)

2. From Christ and His apostles, we learn that all foods have been declared clean...
   a. When received with thanksgiving
   b. When sanctified by prayer

Thus we learn where our true focus should be:  removing that defilement
which springs from sinful hearts (Ep 4:17-24; 1Pe 4:1-3).  It begins
with obedience to the gospel of Christ... - cf. Ac 2:38; 22:16

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

Some Thoughts on Small, But Not Struggling Churches by Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

 

https://thepreachersword.com/2018/08/07/some-thoughts-on-small-but-not-struggling-churches/

Some Thoughts on Small, But Not Struggling Churches

When we first arrived in Ontario, Mike Stephens, the Wellandport preacher for over 20 years, and I were discussing my schedule for the summer. This discussion turned to the topic of small, struggling churches. He commented regarding one of the congregations, “Oh, they’re struggling to reach 200, but they are not struggling spiritually.”

In reflecting on the summer and my association with several, but not all, of the Ontario churches, I echo this sentiment. Often in the States, we equate strength with numbers. But careful observation and scriptural consideration reveal this is not necessarily so.

The strength of a church is not measured in numbers, modern buildings, financial ability, the wealth of their members, the notoriety of their preacher, or even the ability to fully support a preacher financially.

The Bible speaks of Christians being “strong in the Lord” when they put on the armor of God, stand against the schemes of Satan, uphold the Truth, hold fast to the faith, live righteous lives, share their faith, persist in prayer, practice perseverance through trials and are spiritually alert (Eph 6:10-20).

These qualities that I observed, again and again, visiting with churches that were small in number, but large in faith, hope, and love. Our teaching and preaching was received with enthusiasm and appreciation. Never once was it suggested that I had a time limit. In fact, I was encouraged more than once to continue preaching or teaching past the time I thought it was advisable to conclude my lesson.

We are impressed with the eagerness of the brethren to study, learn and discuss spiritual matters. In one meeting we had appointments every day with those who had Bible questions and sincerely wanted answers.

The fellowship of the brethren in Ontario is unique. It crosses congregational lines. Not in an unscriptural way. But in a show of support. Care. Concern. And compassion. Brethren visit each other’s meetings. Some drive quite a distance and bring their children to be with other Christians for youth devotions or Bible studies. One sister remarked, “Our churches are all small, so we need to encourage each other.” And indeed they do.

Paul’s admonition to Timothy was to “be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus.” We witnessed God’s grace among these brethren. And a reliance on the Lord to provide what they need and when they need it. We never heard complaints regarding what they didn’t have or the size of their congregations, but ever an appreciation for their salvation. And gratitude for those who ministered in the Word to guide them into a knowledge of the Truth. Like Barnabas when he came to Antioch, we saw the grace of God among them in Ontario.

To the churches and brethren in the States who are financially supporting these men in Ontario, I commend you. You are doing a good work. And you are supporting men who love the Lord, love the brethren, and are doing their very best to strengthen the churches were they labor and lead the lost to the Lord.

Are the brethren perfect? No. Is there room for improvement? Of course. Can they grow stronger spiritually and in numbers? Absolutely! Do they know that? Yes! And obviously, that can be said for not only the churches in the States but throughout the world.

In fact, these observations regarding small churches who are strong spiritually can be seen in many of the more difficult areas in the United States and in other parts of the world.

We leave Canada with a warm feeling for these brethren and a deep appreciation for their spiritual strength. Until we return, we encourage you to “Watch, stand fast in the faith, be brave, be strong. Let all that you do be done with love” (1 Cor 16:13-14).

–Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

SUBJECT TO INTERPRETATION. REALLY? by steve finnell

 

https://steve-finnell.blogspot.com/2017/01/

SUBJECT TO INTERPRETATION. REALLY?  by steve finnell

Scripture is subject to interpretation. Is honesty and lack of pride a requirement in order to interpret Scripture accurately ?

Mark 16:16 "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. (NKJV)

My interpretation of Mark 16:16 is, he who believes and is immersed in water will be saved.

-------------------------------------------

The following are some denominational interpretations of Mark 16:16.

1. He who believes is saved and shall be baptized as a testimony of their faith.

2. He who is baptized as an unbelieving infant will be forgiven of the guilt of Adam's sin as well as all sins they commit in the future, and they will be added to the body of Christ. [ Note: The only person guilty of Adam's sin, is Adam.]

3. He who is dead and is baptized by proxy will be forgiven.

4. Dead infants will be baptized and will have faith imputed to them by God so they will be saved. [Note: No infant dead or alive is guilty of sin.]

5. He who believes is saved by faith only and should be baptized because Jesus commanded baptism.

6. He who believes, believes because God forced him to believe, therefore he is saved by grace alone. Baptism is a work, therefore it is not essential for salvation.

7. He who believes is saved, however, he needs to be baptized in order to join a denominational church of his choice.

8. Belief and water baptism are not essential in order to be saved, because God will save all men.

9. Mark 16:16 does not apply because the church catechism of my denomination overrules all Scripture. Man-made creeds are more reliable than Scripture.

10. Mark 16:16 is invalid because the majority of those who claim Jesus as Savior do not believe it to be true.

11. He who believes and is baptized will be saved is a false statement, because there are many other ways to get heaven rather than Jesus.

Scripture is subject to interpretation, however, Scripture more likely to be misinterpreted.

Will Good Works Save Me? by Richard Mansel

 

https://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Mansel/Richard/Dale/1964/works.html

Will Good Works Save Me?

I was speaking to a non-Christian who had not attended in a long time and he said, "I'm hoping good works will save me." This person certainly is not alone in their wish. Millions harbor the same desire to be saved without any commitment or change in lifestyle. Spending any time with Scripture will show this is certainly wishful thinking. God called us to live for Him through dying to self (Romans 6:1-11).

We ask, "What are good works?" They are considered to be kind deeds done to others. What would this include? How far should this go? If I go to the grocery store and a lady in front of me drops her grocery list and I pick it up for her, have I earned heaven? What if I help a child across the parking lot? Will that earn me heaven? What if I offer to carry someone's case of beer and cigarettes to the car? Will that earn me heaven? What if I go to a crack den and offer to hold the spoons and mix the drugs? Will that earn me heaven? What if I offer to feed the fish while an assassin goes across the country to execute someone? Will that earn me heaven since it is a good deed? What if I offer to sweep up for free at a brothel? Will that good deed earn me heaven? What if I volunteer to keep the supplies ready for satanists to worship Satan? Will that good deed earn me heaven?

My point is that "good deeds" are terribly subjective. Everyone will have their own definitions. There won't be any standard. What if I hold the coats while a Christian is executed in China? Will that good deed earn me heaven? Paul certainly did not think so.

In Acts 7:58, Saul (whose name would later be changed to Paul) held the coats of those who executed Stephen for preaching the gospel. In the next chapter he hunted down Christians and had them executed. Of the entire ordeal he later said he was the chief sinner of all men (1 Timothy 1:15). Paul by no means felt good deeds where going to save him. They won't save us either. If so, there was no point in Jesus coming to this earth to die for our sins.

God could have had a prophet tell us that good deeds will save us and saved millions of martyrs for the Cross. There would have been no use to spend the blood and pain of men getting the Bible into our hands. There would have been no reason to start the church because anyone could do good works without the church.

Jesus said we must do good works toward other men if we will be saved (Matthew 25). But, they are to be extensions of our faith and not in place of it (Ephesians 2:10). In fact, the previous two verses say, "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast" (Ephesians 2:8-9).

If we will be saved by good works then we will be lost by bad works. So, do we get merits for good works and demerits for bad works? Does that mean if you help ten old ladies across the street then you can push two down the steps? Won't it just be a mathematical equation? And who decides what are bad works? And what if some decide they are good while others decide they are bad? How do we solve that dilemma? Why didn't God just give us an exhaustive list?

It all becomes very messy. It won't matter though as it is not true anyway. Praise the Lord.

Richard Mansel

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

Enjoy! by Gary Rose

 

 

I have had enough of anything political; its time I thought of something on the lighter side of life. This picture more than qualifies. Here is someone who is enjoying life in a more light-hearted manner. My guess is that the bike probably belongs to his grand-daughter, but, who knows?

Anyway, life for most of us is but a few decades, so I say, enjoy it the best you can! Then I remembered the wise words of Solomon in the book of Ecclesiastes…

Ecclesiastes 5 ( World English Bible )

¹⁸ Behold, that which I have seen to be good and proper is for one to eat and to drink, and to enjoy good in all his labor, in which he labors under the sun, all the days of his life which God has given him; for this is his portion.

¹⁹ Every man also to whom God has given riches and wealth, and has given him power to eat of it, and to take his portion, and to rejoice in his labor—this is the gift of God.

God has given us many blessings. We should from time to time take stock of them and rejoice. Every so often, we sing the following at the Southside, Zephyrhills congregation…

When upon life's billows you are tempest tossed
When you are discouraged, thinking all is lost
Count your many blessings, name them one by one
And it will surprise you what the Lord hath done

Are you ever burdened with a load of care?
Does the cross seem heavy you are called to bear?
Count your many blessings, every doubt will fly
And you will keep singing as the days go by

So, amid the conflict, whether great or small
Do not be disheartened, God is over all
Count your many blessings, angels will attend
Help and comfort give you to your journey's end

Count your blessings, name them one by one
Count your blessings, see what God hath done
Count your blessings, name them one by one
And it will surprise you what the Lord hath done 

 And, just in case you feel like singing….

 Yesterday is but a memory, tomorrow, anything can happen. The only thing we genuinely have is the here and now. I often think of what the Apostle Paul has said…

Philippians 4 ( WEB )

 

Rejoice in the Lord always! Again I will say, “Rejoice!”

Be happy, for God loves us all. Do something today for the pure fun of it.

(riding a pink bike is but one option)