10/4/17

Calling Abortion “Good”—Really? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=5195


Calling Abortion “Good”—Really?

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.


What do Americans call it when a doctor uses a knife-like device and suction from a powerful hose and pump (“29 times more powerful than a household vacuum cleaner”) to chop and suck a human being out of the mother’s womb (“Abortion Methods,” 2010)? What is it called when a doctor uses plier-like devices to twist and tear a four-month-old unborn baby into pieces? (Usually this procedure requires crushing the baby’s skull and snapping the child’s spine in order to extract him/her.) How do Americans feel about a procedure where a doctor injects a strong salt solution through a mother’s abdomen, which acts as a corrosive and burns an unborn child inside and out, normally causing the child to suffer for an hour or more before dying (“Abortion Methods”)? What do Americans think about such actions?
Just a few miles from our offices at Apologetics Press, doctors perform such appalling procedures on living, unborn human beings on a weekly basis. According to the Guttmacher Institute, nearly 10,000 innocent unborn children were slaughtered in Alabama in 2011 (“State Facts About Abortion: Alabama,” 2015). Many of these abortions were performed at the Reproductive Health Services of Montgomery, which “has provided abortion services and other health care for women for more than 30 years” (2015). Consider some of the feedback from various patients that this abortion clinic highlights on its Web site:
  • Thank you for your hard work and for changing people’s lives with your compassion and dignity.”
  • “Keep up the good work. As my very religious friend told me, I was against abortion until my own fifteen year old daughter became pregnant.”
  • “To all who work to allow me to keep that right to choose: What you do is important, empowering and fine. I chose to have an abortion because it was theright decision for me at the time….”
  • I am saying prayers for your safety and success.”
  • “Keep up the good work….”
  • “Thank you for your brave work for justice and freedom for women.”
  • “Every woman I know who has exercised her right to abortion made that decision with thoughtfulness, tortured consideration and integrity. All the recent talk of heroes comes into focus for me when I think of people like you who’ve been on the front line for so long. Please know you are supported not only with good thoughts and thanks but with resources, will and active determination.”
  • I thank God I was given a choice in September 1973. Abortion was just legalized a few weeks earlier” (emp. added).
Compassion. Dignity. Integrity. Justice. Fine, heroic, and good work. Prayers for success. Even thankfulness to God! These are the thoughts that various ones in our community have toward those who shed the blood of the most innocent among us?! Even President Barack Obama, in support of Planned Parenthood, the organization that murders more unborn children than anyone else in the United States, has stated:
No matter how great the challenge, no matter how fierce the opposition, there’s one thing the past few years have shown—it’s that Planned Parenthood is not going anywhere. It’s not going anywhere today. It’s not going anywhere tomorrow. As long as we’ve got a fight to make sure women have access to quality, affordable health care, and as long as we’ve got to fight to protect a woman’s right to make her own choices about her own health, I want you to know that you’ve also got a president who’s going to be right there with you, fighting every step of the way. Thank you, Planned Parenthood. God bless you. (“President Obama...,” 2013).
God bless you?! The Obama administration has proudly published the video from which these comments were made on the White House YouTube Channel.
What’s more, so committed are some elected officials to the murderous cause of Planned Parenthood that when evidence recently surfaced that the organization was not only killing hundreds of thousands of unborn children every year, but also attempting to sell their body parts, some Democrats in Congress petitioned the Department of Justice to investigate, not Planned Parenthood, but the whistleblowers (Ludden, 2015). And, apparently, the DOJ “agreed to look into…the group” (Mershon and Ehley, 2015). Did you catch that? There are some who are more up in arms about exactly how an undercover video was procured, rather than “whether Planned Parenthood illegally trafficked baby body parts” (“Obama DOJ…”). Why? It seems, at least in part, because some have vowed to fight to ensure that Planned Parenthood is not going anywhere today…or tomorrow.
These are sad and absurd times in which we live. Rather than “abhor what is evil” and “cling to what is good” (Romans 12:9), millions in the U.S. (including many so-called Christians) reject the Creator’s standard of right and wrong, choosing rather to do what is right in their own eyes (cf. Judges 21:25). As in Isaiah’s day, they “call evil good, and good evil” and put “darkness for light, and light for darkness” (5:20). Though God is the giver of life (Acts 17:25) and “hates…hands that shed innocent blood” (Proverbs 6:16-17), many actually proceed as if they can pray to Him for the “success” of abominable abortion clinics and thank Him for the legality of willfully destroying innocent human life. God said to the degenerate city of Jerusalem in Isaiah’s day, “When you spread out your hands, I will hide My eyes from you; even though you make many prayers, I will not hear. Your hands are full of blood” (Isaiah 1:15, emp. added). The once-“faithful city…full of justice” and “righteousness,” had become a city “full of…murderers” (1:21).
What is the message to America, to the world, to those who are wandering in darkness, and to those hypocrites who claim to be Christians, yet act nothing like the Christ? Repent (Luke 13:3,5; Acts 2:38). Stop calling evil good and good evil. Stop glorying in sin and shame—such “are the enemies of the cross of Christ: whose end is destruction” (Philippians 3:18-19). “Put away the evil of your doings from before My eyes. Cease to do evil, learn to do good; seek justice, rebuke the oppressor; defend the fatherless, plead for the widow” (Isaiah 1:16-17). Stop provoking Almighty God to anger and submit to His Son and His Will. He can (and will!) save a sinner—but not before the sinner comes to grips with the reality that God hates sin and can have no fellowship with it (Isaiah 59:1-2; 1 John 1:5-6).
“Come now, and let us reason together,” says the Lord, “though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall be as wool. If you are willing and obedient, you shall eat the good of the land; but if you refuse and rebel, you shall be devoured by the sword;” for the mouth of the Lord has spoken.

REFERENCES

“Abortion Methods” (2010), http://www.lifesitenews.com/abortiontypes/.
Ludden, Jennifer (2015), “Sting Videos Part of Longtime Campaign Against Planned Parenthood,” NPR, July 22, http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/07/22/425314909/sting-videos-part-of-longtime-campaign-against-planned-parenthood.
Mershon, Erin and Brianna Ehley (2015), “IPAB’s on the Horizon—House Republicans Vow to Subpoena Planned Parenthood Official—Casey Takes on Foster Children’s Health Insurance,” Politico, July 23, http://www.politico.com/politicopulse/0715/politicopulse19266.html.
“Obama DOJ Plans to Investigate…The Group That Busted Planned Parenthood” (2015), The Federalist, July 23, http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/23/doj-investigate-planned-parenthood-video/.
“President Obama Speaks at the Planned Parenthood Gala” (2013), The White House YouTube Channel, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laYQ2DDFmCg, April 26.
Reproductive Health Services (2015), http://www.rhs4choice.com/index.html.
“State Facts About Abortion: Alabama” (2015), Guttmacher Institute, https://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/sfaa/alabama.html.

Motives Matter by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/AllegedDiscrepancies.aspx?article=750&b=Hosea

Motives Matter

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

In roughly 841 B.C., the commander of Israel’s army, Jehu the son of Jehoshaphat, was anointed king over the northern kingdom and was instructed by the Lord to “strike down the house of Ahab” and “cut off from Ahab all the males in Israel, both bond and free” (2 Kings 9:6-10). After receiving this command from the Lord via one of “the sons of the prophets,” Jehu began his assassination of Ahab’s family. He started by slaying Ahab’s son, Joram (also known as Jehoram), who was ruling Israel at the time Jehu was anointed king. He then proceeded to kill Ahaziah (the king of Judah and grandson of Jezebel—9:27-29) and forty-two of Ahaziah’s brethren (10:12-14). Later, he slew (or had others slay) Jezebel (the mother of Joram and former wife of the deceased Ahab—9:30-37), all seventy sons of Ahab who were living in Samaria, and “all who remained to Ahab in Samaria” (10:1-10,17), and “all who remained of the house of Ahab in Jezreel,” including “all his great men and his close acquaintances, and his priests” (10:11). Jehu’s final stop was at the temple of Baal where, upon gathering all the Baal-worshipping leaders of Israel into the temple, he locked them up and had them massacred (10:18-27).
After Jehu had carried out his orders to obliterate all males from the house of Ahab, the Lord said to him, “Because you have done well in doing what is right in My sight, and have done to the house of Ahab all that was in My heart, your sons shall sit on the throne of Israel to the fourth generation” (10:30). Jehu had taken the most thorough means of suppressing the idolatry in Israel, and thus was granted protection on his throne, along with his sons after him unto “the fourth generation.” The following chapters of 2 Kings indicate that the Lord was true to His word (as always; cf. Titus 1:2). Although the reigns of Jehu’s sons were described as kings who “did evil in the sight of Yahweh,” the Lord allowed them to reign to the fourth generation in order to fulfill His promise to Jehu.
Several years after the above events took place, the prophet Hosea expressed words that many skeptics have claimed are in opposition to what is stated in 2 Kings 9-10. When Gomer, Hosea’ s wife, bore a son, Hosea declared that the Lord said, “Call his name Jezreel, for in a little while I will avenge the bloodshed of Jezreel on the house of Jehu, and bring an end to the kingdom of the house of Israel” (1:4). Those trying to discredit the Bible’s integrity argue that Hosea put himself into obvious disagreement with the inspired writer of 2 Kings, who thought that Jehu had done “all” that was in God’s heart. Skeptics claim that the author of 2 Kings heaped praise on Jehu for the Jezreel massacre, but Hosea contradicted him when he said that Lord would avenge the blood of Jezreel and end the reign of the house of Jehu in Israel.
What can be said about this “obvious disagreement”? Are these two passages harmonious, or is this a legitimate contradiction that should cause all Bible believers to reject the book that has been tried and tested for hundreds of years?
First, we cannot be 100% certain that Hosea 1:4 is referring to the events in 2 Kings 9-10. Although nearly all skeptics and Bible commentators link the two passages together, it must be understood that just because 2 Kings 9-10 is the only place in the Old Testament that describes suitable events located at Jezreel, it does not mean that Hosea must have been referring to those events. The honest student of God’s Word has to admit that Hosea may have been referring to Jehu’s sons who reigned after him. Perhaps his sons performed serious atrocities in Jezreel that are not recorded in 2 Kings. One cannot be certain that Hosea was indeed referring to the events recorded in 2 Kings 10. Having made such a disclaimer, it is my position that these two passages should be linked, and thus the alleged contradiction raised by skeptics deserves an adequate explanation: How could God tell Jehu to destroy the house of Ahab, and then later condemn him (his house) through the words of Hosea for having done so?
The answer really is quite simple. As Norman Geisler and Thomas Howe observed: “God praised Jehu for obeying Him in destroying the house of Ahab, but condemned Jehu for his sinful motive in shedding their blood” (1992, p. 194). Skeptics are fond of citing 2 Kings 10:30 to support their position, but they often conveniently overlook verses 29 and 31, which state: “ Jehu did not turn away from the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat, who had made Israel sin, that is, form the golden calves that were at Bethel and Dan.... Jehu took no heed to walk in the law of the Lord God of Israel with all his heart; for he did not depart from the sins of Jeroboam, who had made Israel sin.” Jehu obeyed God’s command to “strike down the house of Ahab” and utterly exterminate his descendents (2 Kings 9:7-8; 10:30), but he did not obey God in all that he did. The passage in 2 Kings 10:29-31 indicates that even though Jehu had done what God commanded, “he did so out of a carnal zeal that was tainted with protective self-interest” (Archer, 1982, p. 208). It seems obvious that since Jehu followed in the footsteps of Israel’s first wicked king by worshipping false gods and not walking according to God’s law, he did not destroy Ahab’s descendents out of any devotion to the Lord. Furthermore, in commentating on Jehu’s actions, biblical scholar Gleason Archer noted:
The important principle set forth in Hosea 1:4 was that when blood is shed, even in the service of God and in obedience to His command, blood-guiltiness attaches to God’s agent himself if his motive was tainted with carnal self-interest rather than by a sincere concern for the purity of the faith and the preservation of God’s truth (such as, for example, animated Elijah when he had the 450 prophets of Baal put to death after the contest with them on Mount Carmel) [p. 209].
Considering Jehu’s actions by examining the motives behind those actions solves the alleged contradiction. Jehu’s failure to obey God’s commands and depart from the sins of Jeroboam reveals that he would have equally disobeyed the other commands as well, had it been contrary to his own desires. The story of Jehu’s conquest teaches a great lesson, which Albert Barnes acknowledged in his commentary on Hosea: “[I]f we do what is the will of God for any end of our own, for anything except God, we do, in fact, our own will, not God’s.” Indeed, just as the apostle Paul taught in his discourse on love—motives matter (1 Corinthians 13:1-3)!
REFERENCES
Archer, Gleason L. (1982), An Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).
Barnes, Albert (1997), Barnes’ Notes (Electronic Database: Biblesoft).
Geisler, Norman L. and Thomas A. Howe (1992), When Critics Ask: A Comprehensive Handbook on Bible Difficulties(Wheaton, IL: Victor Books).

The Allegory of the Vine and the Branches by Wayne Jackson

http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Jackson/Boyd/Wayne/1937/vineandbranches.html

The Allegory of the Vine and the Branches
The Holy Scriptures are supremely rich. The Christian who does not plumb the depth of these treasures is poorer indeed.
There is a brief context in John’s Gospel record that we would like to explore briefly, not only for the instruction and edification that it imparts on its own, but also for the opportunity of illustrating how one may reap great rewards in surveying a biblical text analytically, though we do not mean to suggest that this study exhausts all possibilities.
Near the end of his earthly ministry, the Lord Jesus, speaking to his disciples, declared: (Note: The following rendition employs more contemporary language for those not versed in ancient, agricultural vocabulary.)
“I am the true vine, and my Father is the vinedresser. Every branch in me that does not bear fruit, he takes away: and every branch that bears fruit, he prunes, that it may bear more fruit. Already you are clean because of the word I have spoken unto you. Remain in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it remains in the vine; so neither can you, unless you remain in me. I am the vine, you are the branches: He who remains in me, and I in him, the same bears much fruit: for away from me you can do nothing. If a man does not remain in me, he is thrown away as a branch, and is withered; and they gather them, and throw them into the fire, and they are burned. If you remain in me, and my words remain in you, ask whatsoever you will, and it shall be done unto you” (John 15:1-7; with supplementary instruction following).
In the following study we wish to explore these elements: the contextual background, the literary format, the characters in the illustration, some verbal forms, along with some vocabulary points of emphasis and interest.

The Background

Jesus and his disciples had concluded the meeting in the upper room in Jerusalem where they celebrated the Passover. Apparently they had just left that event, and were making their way eastward toward the garden of Gethsemane situated on the western slope of the Mt. of Olives (John 14:31b; 18:1). Undoubtedly, the disciples were exceedingly anxious (cf. 14:1), and perplexed as to what loomed ahead.
The discourse in chapters 15-17, therefore, was calculated to calm, to instruct, and to strengthen these courageous (though somewhat fragile — at least at this point) men. They needed some crucial preparation for the ordeal that would follow in the next twenty-four hours.

Literary Format

The literary format of the narrative is that of the “allegory.” An allegory is an expanded metaphor. The metaphor is a figure of speech where a comparison is made between two objects for the purpose of illustration. It constitutes a more dramatic mode of teaching than by means of a simple prosaic narrative.
The allegory draws the comparison, but without the use of common comparative terms (e.g., as, like, such like, even as, etc.). This format allows for a more potent form of expression than that of the simile. A good example, comparing these two figures, is found in Jacob’s prophecy concerning the tribe of Judah (Genesis 49). He says on the one hand that Judah “is a lion’s whelp” (v. 9a; metaphor); then again, Judah “crouched as a lion and as a lioness” (v. 9b; two similes).
In this allegory, the Savior sets forth some wonderful truths in the motif of the agricultural environment of his day. A good Bible class teacher will do some research in this area, in preparation for his/her presentation. Background details can add real “sparkle” to a class.

The Characters in the Illustration

There are four characters in the Lord’s illustration.
(1) There is the “husbandman.” This term is rather obscure in our modern culture. “Husbandman” does not signify a “husband,” but rather a tiller of the ground, a vinedresser, or, in our vernacular, a farmer. He is the one in charge of the vines and to whom ultimate accountability is to be rendered. He does everything within his power to see that the plant bears fruit. If it does not, the fault is not his.
Jesus identifies the “husbandman” as “my Father,” i.e., God, the Father. Of special notice should be the singular pronoun “my,” rather than “our.” As the Son of God, Christ entertained a very unique relationship to his heavenly Father, and that is emphasized several times in John’s Gospel (5:17-18; 20:17; cf. also Luke 2:49). The expression is a subtle affirmation of the Savior’s deity.
(2) There also is the “vine.” The vine is the source of life for the branches. It provides the water and nutrients by which the grapes are produced. Without the vine, no fruit could ever result. Branches are utterly dependent upon the vine. Without Christ, of course, there is no spiritual life or hope of eternal reward (John 14:6; Acts 4:11-12).
It is interesting that Christ designates himself as the “true” vine. The Greek term denotes that which is genuine; the word stands in contrast to that which is fictitious, counterfeit, imaginary, simulated or pretentious (Thayer, p. 27). Inasmuch as the Israelite nation was portrayed on occasion as a “vine” by the Old Testament prophets (see Isaiah 5:1-7; cf. Matthew 21:33ff), one can scarcely avoid thinking that this is a rebuke aimed at a considerable segment of the Hebrew family; the nation largely had failed in its mission, and was on the precipice of murdering its Messiah (cf. John 10:7ff).
(3) The “branches” are identified explicitly as the Lord’s “disciples” (v. 8). How anyone can possibly contend that Christ is the vine, and various denominational churches are the branches, is an unfathomable mystery; it is an example of the most irresponsible scholarship imaginable.
(4) Finally, there is that ambiguous “they,” to which reference is made in verse 6. These will be responsible for gathering the withered/pruned branches, and committing them to fire for burning. One might surmise that these individuals correspond to the “reapers” mentioned in the parable of the tares (Matthew 13:24-30), identified later as the Lord’s “angels” (v. 39). They will “gather out” of God’s kingdom those who cause others to stumble, and who themselves practice iniquity (v. 41).

Verbal Actions and Vocabulary Emphases

Grammar is very important in a book, the words of which are inspired of God (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Within this context, there are at least ten significant verbal actions set forth. Some have a positive emphasis; others are adverse. Let us consider the positive first, and then the negative. We will survey five actions in each category.
(1) Christ spoke of the necessity of the branches “bearing (i.e., producing) fruit.” The term is used eight times in this chapter. The present tense form indicates a sustained productivity. The unfruitful branch is considered worthless. The fruit, in the immediate context, consists of the converts one personally makes, or is instrumental in helping to bring to the Lord (see vv. 8,16; cf. Romans 7:4). Elsewhere in the New Testament, however, there is also the admonition to produce the “fruit” of Christian character (Galatians 5:22-23).
(2) There is a “cleansing” or “purging” that takes place even with reference to productive branches. The purpose in the cleansing (an allusion to trimming) is to enhance branch production. Every disciple should attempt to be wise enough to be grateful to God for whatever disciplinary procedures are necessary for the development of his service to Christ (see Hebrews 12:7ff). Just as the farmer uses the cutting knife to sever dead branches, even so he “often cuts back the living wood so far that His method seems cruel [to the spiritually dull]. Nevertheless, from those who have suffered the most there often comes the greatest fruitfulness” (Tenney, pp. 227-228).
(3) The Lord emphasized the necessity of “abiding” (i.e., remaining) joined to him. Seven times in this general context there is stressed the urgency of “remaining” with the vine (Christ). The verb meno (118 times in the NT; 67 times in John’s writings) carries the idea of sustaining a union with, continuing with, being steadfast, or enduring. The exhortation assuredly implies the possibility of not doing so!
(4) For those who abide in the Lord, there is the promise that they may “ask” God for those things necessary for their personal spiritual development and the conversion of others (v. 7). Of course many of us have insufficient faith to “ask,” hence, we do not receive (James 4:2). The Christian life is one of trust; and trusting, we petition our Father for heavenly-oriented needs.
(5) In response to unselfish requests (cf. James 4:3), there is Heaven’s pledge that “it shall be done,” i.e., God will respond to our prayers. This promise, of course, is not without limitation. The “whatsoever” of the text must be qualified by other passages that bear on the same theme. See Paul’s requests, and the Lord’s response, in 2 Corinthians 12:7-10. Even Jesus, when praying that “the cup” pass from him, qualified the request, “your will be done.” This is the most selfless request of all!
(6) But there are verbals of a different tone. Every branch that does not bear fruit is to be “taken away” (v. 2). In this context, the Greek word aireo signifies to “take off” that which is attached to something else — to rend or cut off (Thayer, p. 16). Practically speaking, it is the equivalent of being “severed from Christ,” the expression used by Paul to depict certain Judaizers who were corrupting the gospel (Galatians 5:4). It is utterly incredible that any scholar could suggest: “We should not regard this as proof that true believers may fall away” (Morris, p. 594). What else could have been said to make it plainer? What lengths men will go to, in order to preserve their cherished doctrines!
(7) Those who choose not to remain with Christ are to be “thrown away” (v. 6). They are trash; unfit for further use.
(8) The “cast off” state is said to be subject to “withering.” The original word suggests the idea of simply “drying up.” Interestingly, the verb is in the passive voice; the thrown-away branches “are withered” (as a result of forces exercised upon them). Could this hint of the removal of divine blessings? Or might it be the accelerated influences of the world in a spiritually impoverished environment?
(9) There is reference to the withered branches being “gathered” in preparation for final disposal. As noted earlier [see “Characters in the Illustration,” (4)], this could have to do with the work of angels at the time of the Judgment.
(10) Finally, there is the verb “burned” (v. 6). Dead branches are thrown into the “fire” where they are burned (literally, being burned — present tense). There can hardly be any doubt but that Christ is here warning about the danger of eternal punishment in the hell of fire (Matthew 13:41-42; 25:46). And, as Lenski observes, the verb “affords no support for the annihilation of the wicked — the cast off branches are burning” (p. 1038). Calvinists, of course, would emasculate this context of any reference to hell, because they do not believe that a child of God can fall from grace (cf. Beasley-Murray, p. 273).

Conclusion

In concluding this summary of John 15:1-7, one other word-combination should be stressed. Six times in this context the Lord used the expression “in me.” The term is employed of those who are in “union” with Christ. It initially referred to those “disciples” to whom he was giving instruction on that occasion; later, though, the application would be to those who have become “disciples” in a more technical sense (Matthew 28:19), and thus have entered into the “in Christ” relationship by means of obedience to the gospel (Romans 6:3-4; Galatians 3:26-27). These became known formally as “Christians” (Acts 11:26; 26:28; 1 Peter 4:16).
Wayne Jackson
Sources/Footnotes
  • Beasley-Murray, G.R. (1987), John – Word Bible Commentary (Waco: Word).
  • Lenski, R.C.H. (1943), The Interpretation of St. John’s Gospel (Minneapolis: Augsburg).
  • Morris, Leon (1995), The Gospel According to John — Revised (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans).
  • Tenney, Merrill C. (1948), John — The Gospel of Belief (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans).
  • Thayer, J.H. (1958), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark).
Copyright © 2013 Christian Courier. All rights reserved. Used by permission.

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

"What shall be done...?" by Gary Rose

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/article-2235284/New-Yorks-Teardrop-John-Craven-tracks-forgotten-monument-9-11-victims.html

Here is a picture of a monument you probably have never heard of: The Teardrop monument. This monument was a gift to The U.S. by the U.S.S.R. in 2006, given in honor of the tragedy of the terrorist attack of 2001. Until very recently, I had never heard of the impressive gift, either. Why? I don't KNOW, but my guess is that it is a "political" decision and so the news media just ignored it.

As I viewed this massive structure, I wondered and wondered about it and then a question came to me: What shall be done to thank Russia for this?  And then I remembered a similar question that was asked a long time ago...


Esther, Chapter 6 (World English Bible)
  1 On that night, the king couldn’t sleep. He commanded the book of records of the chronicles to be brought, and they were read to the king.  2 It was found written that Mordecai had told of Bigthana and Teresh, two of the king’s eunuchs, who were doorkeepers, who had tried to lay hands on the King Ahasuerus.  3 The king said, “What honor and dignity has been given to Mordecai for this?” 

Then the king’s servants who attended him said, “Nothing has been done for him.” 
  4 The king said, “Who is in the court?” Now Haman had come into the outer court of the king’s house, to speak to the king about hanging Mordecai on the gallows that he had prepared for him. 

  5 The king’s servants said to him, “Behold, Haman stands in the court.” 

The king said, “Let him come in.”  6 So Haman came in. The king said to him, “What shall be done to the man whom the king delights to honor?” (emphasis added, vs. 6b)

Now Haman said in his heart, “Who would the king delight to honor more than myself?”  7 Haman said to the king, “For the man whom the king delights to honor,  8 let royal clothing be brought which the king uses to wear, and the horse that the king rides on, and on the head of which a royal crown is set.  9 Let the clothing and the horse be delivered to the hand of one of the king’s most noble princes, that they may array the man whom the king delights to honor with them, and have him ride on horseback through the city square, and proclaim before him, ‘Thus it shall be done to the man whom the king delights to honor!’” 


Bill Clinton dedicated this memorial in 2006 and nothing has been done for Russia (at least to my knowledge, anyway). Ahasuerus' question applies in this instance and so I ask: What shall be done for Russia?

Dear president Trump: Please thank them for this gift and use it as a springboard to better our relationship with the U.S.S.R.!!!

PS. Dear God: Please help ME to remember the good that others do and to thank them appropriately for each and every act of kindness!!!

10/3/17

"THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS" To The Churches Of Galatia (1:1-2) by Mark Copeland

                     "THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS"

                   To The Churches Of Galatia (1:1-2)

INTRODUCTION

1. We live in troubling times...
   a. Sin is ever present, depravity seemingly on the rise
   b. There are many religions seeking to address the problem, but their
      solutions are amiss

2. Christians in the first century A.D. found themselves facing similar
   circumstances...
   a. Immorality was rampant, moral virtue was scarce
   b. Religions were many, yet ineffective in saving and sanctifying
      souls

3. In his letter to the churches of Galatia, Paul addressed such
   concerns...
   a. Dealing with false gospels and false hopes
   b. Providing guidance for salvation and godly living

[Paul's epistle to the Galatians remains a powerful and relevant guide
for Christians today.  In this lesson, we shall consider some background
information on the book of Galatians...]

I. THE AUTHOR OF THE EPISTLE (1:1-2)

   A. PAUL...
      1. Mentions himself by name twice - Ga 1:1; 5:2
      2. Known formerly as Saul of Tarsus, persecutor of the church 
         - Ac 9:1-2
      3. Who became known as the "apostle to the Gentiles" - Ac 9:15
      4. Author of half of the books of the New Testament
      5. Regarding his authorship of Galatians
         a. This was the unanimous view of the early church
         b. Even modern critics who challenge the authorship of many of
            the New Testament books concede that Galatians is truly
            Pauline

   B. AN APOSTLE...
      1. He immediately identifies as an apostle
         a. "not from men nor through man"
         b. "but through Jesus Christ and God the Father who raised Him
            from the dead"
      2. His gospel and apostleship were questioned by some, this
         epistle offers an aggressive defense beginning with this
         opening statement

   C. THE BRETHREN WITH HIM...
      1. "and all the brethren who are with me"
      2. Other Christians send their greetings along with Paul
      3. Though not named, their inclusion implies support of Paul and
         the gospel he preached

[Having identified himself as the author of this epistle, Paul then
addresses...]

II. THE RECIPIENTS OF THE EPISTLE (1:2)

   A. THE REGION OF GALATIA...
      1. Galatia was a name used both geographically and politically in
         the first century - ISBE
      2. Geographically, it was used to describe the northern part of
         central Asia minor
      3. Politically, it included parts of Pontus, Phrygia and Lycaonia,
         i.e., more southern regions of central Asia Minor
      4. I believe Paul like had reference to the latter (the Roman
         province of Galatia)

   B. THE CHURCHES OF GALATIA...
      1. During their first missionary journey (45-47 A.D.), Paul and
         Barnabas had the opportunity to establish several churches in
         the Roman province of Galatia - Ac 13:14-14:23
      2. On Paul's second trip (51-54 A.D.), he and Silas visited them
         again - Ac 16:1-5
      3. On Paul's third trip (54-58 A.D.), he visited them yet again
         - Ac 18:23
      4. It is quite likely that the churches of Galatia included those
         established on his first journey
         a. E.g., Antioch, Lystra, Derbe
         b. The home of Timothy - Ac 16:1-6
      5. Paul and Peter would later make mention of these brethren in
         other epistles
         a. Paul in reference to the collection for the saints 
            - 1Co 16:1
         b. Peter in writing his first epistle - 1Pe 1:1

[The time and place of writing is uncertain (perhaps from Ephesus,
sometime around 55 A.D.).  What is more certain because of what was
written is...]

III. THE PURPOSE AND CONTENT OF THE EPISTLE

   A. THE PURPOSE...
      1. The churches in Galatia were being influenced by those who
         would "pervert the gospel of Christ" - Ga 1:6-7; cf. 3:1
      2. Known as 'Judaizing teachers', these individuals taught that
         Gentile Christians needed to be circumcised and keep the Law of
         Moses - cf. Ac 15:1
      3. Paul recognized this doctrine would jeopardize the salvation of
         those souls who accepted it - cf. Ga 5:4
      4. Because the enemies of the true gospel were trying to support
         their case by undermining Paul's authority as an apostle of
         Christ, it was necessary to verify that he was truly an apostle
         "not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God
         the Father" - Ga 1:1
      5. Therefore, Paul writes to verify His apostleship and the gospel
         of justification by faith in Christ

   B. THE CONTENT...
      1. Because of his outstanding defense of the gospel of Christ in
         which we have freedom from sin and the Law, this epistle has
         been called "The Magna Carta Of Christian Liberty"
      2. Here is a brief outline of the epistle:
         a. Paul's defense of his apostleship - Ga 1-2
            1) Introduction - Ga 1:1-10
            2) Divine origin of his gospel - Ga 1:11-17
            3) Relationship to the other apostles - Ga 1:18-2:21
         b. Paul's defense of the gospel of justification by faith - Ga
            3-4
            1) Personal argument - Ga 3:1-5
            2) Scriptural argument - Ga 3:6-25
            3) Practical argument - Ga 3:26-4:7
            4) Sentimental argument - Ga 4:8-20
            5) Allegorical argument - Ga 4:21-31
         c. Call to stand fast in the liberty of the gospel - Ga 5-6
            1) Liberty that excludes the necessity of circumcision 
               - Ga 5:1-6
            2) Liberty that fulfills the Law - Ga 5:7-15
            3) Liberty in which one is led by the Spirit - Ga 5:16-26
            4) Liberty with a sense of responsibility - Ga 6:1-10
            5) Conclusion - Ga 6:11-18

CONCLUSION

1. A passage that expresses the theme of this epistle is Ga 5:1...

   "Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ has made us
   free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage."

2. The liberty of which Paul writes about in this epistle pertains to...
   a. Freedom from the bondage of sin - cf. Ga 2:16
   b. Freedom from the Law of Moses - cf. Ga 4:4-5
   c. Freedom to serve one another in love - cf. Ga 5:13
   d. Freedom from the works of the flesh - cf. Ga 5:16,19-21
   e. Freedom to produce the fruit of the Spirit - cf. Ga 5:22-25

3. Do you desire to learn more about the freedom that Christ
   provides...?
   a. Jesus spoke of it during His earthly ministry - Jn 8:34-36
   b. Then He chose Paul to write about it in this epistle!

If you want to learn more about true freedom, then give special
attention to the epistle written "To The Churches Of Galatia"...

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

eXTReMe Tracker 

Babylon: A Test Case in Prophecy [Part I] by Wayne Jackson, M.A.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=282

Babylon: A Test Case in Prophecy [Part I]

by Wayne Jackson, M.A.


It was the most remarkable community of its day—a San Francisco, New York, or London of the antique world. Herodotus (484-425 B.C.), known as the father of ancient history, once visited the great metropolis. He said that “in magnificence there is no other city that approaches to it” (I.178). It was Babylon!
Babylon’s roots reached back almost to the dawn of civilization. Its genesis was with the mighty hunter, Nimrod, who conquered men and made them his unwilling subjects (Genesis 10:10). From that ignoble origin eventually evolved the Neo-Babylonian empire (614-539 B.C.), which figures so prominently in Old Testament history.

THE GOLDEN CITY

The city of Babylon straddled the Euphrates River about fifty miles south of what is now modern Baghdad in Iraq. Herodotus claimed that the town was laid out in an exact square, approximately fifteen miles on each side. The historian suggested that the city was surrounded by a moat (more than 260 feet broad), behind which was a massive wall—some 75 feet thick and 300 feet high, with 15 large gates of brass on each side. Later writers (e.g., Strabo and Diodorus Siculus) gave somewhat smaller dimensions. But these may reflect different areas of measurement, or perhaps other historical periods (Keith, 1840, p. 271). When Jacob Abbott wrote his fascinating volume, History of Cyrus the Great, he suggested that Babylon was four or five times the size of London (1850, p. 190). Modern archaeological investigations have involved a significantly smaller area. One of the prominent features of this illustrious city was Nebuchadnezzar’s Hanging Gardens, constructed for his Median wife who was homesick for her hill-country environment. This botanical marvel was considered one of the seven wonders of the ancient world.
The Scriptures take note of the fame that characterized this community. The prophets designated Babylon as “great” (Daniel 4:30), the “glory of the kingdoms” (Isaiah 13:19), the “golden city” (Isaiah 14:4), the “lady of the kingdoms” (Isaiah 47:5) who was “abundant in treasures” (Jeremiah 51:13), and the “praise of the whole earth” (Jeremiah 51:41). Surely a kingdom of this nature could last forever.

BABYLON:THE INSTRUMENT OF PROVIDENCE

In order to appreciate the significance of Babylon in light of Bible prophecy, one must understand something of Hebrew history. The northern kingdom of Israel had been destroyed by the Assyrians in 722-721 B.C. The southern kingdom (Judah) had been spared that catastrophe (see Isaiah 37) but, due to her progressive apostasy, was on a clear collision course with Babylon. The prophets warned that if Judah continued her rebellion, Jehovah would raise up Nebuchadnezzar as His “servant” to punish the wayward Hebrews. Many of them would be killed; others would be captured and taken away as prisoners by the marauding Babylonians (Jeremiah 25:9). The Chaldean monarch, however, would not be commended or rewarded for this endeavor; rather, after his subjugation of Judah, the Lord would punish him, and the Babylon regime would commence a journey toward oblivion. Jeremiah summed up the history of this affair in the following way:
Israel is a hunted sheep; the lions have driven him away: first, the king of Assyria devoured him; and now at last Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon has broken his bones. Therefore thus says Jehovah of hosts, the God of Israel: Behold I will punish the king of Babylon and his land, as I have punished the king of Assyria (Jeremiah 50:17-18).
But Babylon was the epitome of arrogance. She boasted that no one would be able to conquer this powerful citadel. The Babylonians felt absolutely secure within their mighty fortress, and believed that the capital city would never be vanquished. “I shall be mistress forever.... I am, and there is none else besides me; I shall not sit as a widow, neither shall I know the loss of children” (Isaiah 47:7-8). Inscriptions from the Chaldean archives have illustrated the haughty disposition that characterized the Babylonian rulers (Millard, 1985, p. 138).

PROPHECY AS AN APOLOGETIC

Before I discuss prophecies relating to Babylon, there are some preliminary matters that must be considered. First, there is the nature of God—the eternal “I AM” (Exodus 3:14). He is the One Who is, Who was, and Who is to come (Revelation 1:4). He, and only He, knows the future as well as the past. The Lord, therefore, is able to speak of those things that “are not” as though “they were” (Romans 4:17).
Only God can know the future. If, then, we are able to establish the fact that the prophets announced—many years in advance—truths regarding the desolation of Babylon, it would amount to a demonstration that ultimately the biblical record was given by God Himself. These matters never could have been known by mere chance.
There is an interesting passage in the book of Jeremiah that illustrates this point. On a certain occasion in the prophet’s ministry to Judah, Jeremiah was told by the Lord that his cousin, Hanamel, would arrive soon, offering to sell him a parcel of land in the town of Anathoth. Presently, Hanamel came to the prophet and made that very offer. Jeremiah subsequently uttered this significant statement: “Then I knew that this was the word of Jehovah” (Jeremiah 32:8, emp. added). When a prophecy is made—and the prediction comes to pass—one can knowthat God has spoken, provided other prophetic guidelines are in place.

PROPHETIC PRINCIPLES

In this two-part study, we will survey some of the prophecies that focus upon Babylon’s demise. First, though, let us remind ourselves of several principles that govern the validity of genuine prophecy. (1) True prophecies are stated emphatically; they are not couched in the jargon of contingency (unless, of course, contextual evidence suggests that one is dealing with a conditional prophecy). (2) Generally, a significant time frame must lapse between the prophetic utterance and the fulfillment, so as to exclude the possibility of “educated speculation.” (3) The prophecy must involve specific details, not vague generalities. (4) The predictive declarations must be fulfilled precisely and completely. No mere substantial percentage will suffice. One should recognize, though, that occasionally a prophecy may contain figurative terminology; this does not, however, militate against its evidential validity.
In the forthcoming reflections, we will emphasize these important points: (1) Babylon’s fall is announced unequivocally: (2) the time of the beginning of her end is declared; (3) the invading forces are specified; (4) particular details of the Chaldean destruction are chronicled; (5) the final result—Babylon’s utter dissipation—is portrayed quite graphically. These factors, considered in concert, testify eloquently to the divine inspiration of the sacred Scriptures.

BABYLON TO FALL

In addition to the passage mentioned earlier (Jeremiah 50:17-18), there are many other prophecies that affirm the ultimate desolation of Babylon. In the early eighth century before the birth of Christ, and almost two hundred years before Cyrus conquered the “golden city,” Isaiah declared: “Fallen, fallen is Babylon; and all the graven images of her gods are broken unto the ground” (21:9). The double use of “fallen” is for emphasis. Although the verb “fallen” is in the present tense form in English, it actually is in the perfect tense in Hebrew, which representscompleted action. This reflects a grammatical idiom commonly known as the “prophetic perfect,” frequently employed in the Old Testament to stress the absolute certainty of fulfillment (Freeman, 1968, pp. 122-123). The action thus is expressed confidently—as though it had been accomplished already.
Again Jehovah, through his prophet, rhetorically calls to Babylon: “Come down, and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of Babylon; sit on the ground without a throne, O daughter of the Chaldeans” (Isaiah 47:1). Babylon is designated as a “virgin” because for many years she had escaped the ravages of other nations. But that status would come to an end!
Or consider the announcements of Jeremiah: “Declare you among the nations and publish, and set up a standard; publish, and conceal not: say, Babylon is taken” (Jeremiah 50:2). “Babylon is suddenly fallen and destroyed; wail for her; take balm for her pain” (Jeremiah 51:8). Among other contexts, a survey of Isaiah, chapters 13 and 14, and Jeremiah, chapters 50 and 51, will reveal numerous declarations concerning Babylon’s impending fall and ultimate desolation.

THE PROPHETIC CHRONOLOGY

In giving consideration to the “time” factor in prophecies regarding the destruction of Babylon, two things must be kept in view. First, there was to be an initial defeat of the superpower. Second, afterward there would be a gradual but progressive degeneration of the locale that ultimately would result in total ruin. At this point, we will consider only the first of these matters.
After Judah’s good king, Josiah (639-608 B.C.), died during the battle of Megiddo, he was succeeded by his son Jehoahaz, a miserable failure who reigned only three months. Jehoahaz was taken captive to Egypt (2 Kings 23:30-34), where, as Jeremiah prophesied, he died (Jeremiah 22:11-12). Then Jehoiakim, Josiah’s second son, came to Judah’s throne. He reigned eleven years (608-597 B.C.). During his administration, the compassionate Jeremiah, via his prophetic proclamations, was attempting to bring the southern kingdom to a state of repentance—with little success, I might add. Let us focus momentarily upon the oracles of Jeremiah, chapter 25.
First, we must observe that the material of this important chapter is dated. “The word that came to Jeremiah concerning all the people of Judah, in the fourth year of Jehoiakim” (25:1). Thus, the following prophecies can be dated to 605 B.C. The prophet described the horrors that were to be visited upon Palestine by the impending Babylonian invasion. He then announced the fate of Babylon herself.
And this whole land shall be a desolation, and an astonishment; and these nations [Judah and several of her neighbors—WJ] shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years. And it shall come to pass, when seventy years are accomplished, that I will punish the king of Babylon, and that nation, says Jehovah, for their iniquity (Jeremiah 25:11-12).
Thus, almost three-quarters of a century before Babylon fell, when there was absolutely no indication of Chaldean vulnerability, Jeremiah announced the impending doom of the ancient world’s superpower, and he gave a time indicator as to when those circumstances would unfold. There simply was no natural way he could have “guessed” it.

THE CONQUERORS SPECIFIED

But who would overthrow mighty Babylon? Both Isaiah and Jeremiah provide that information. In a section that concludes with: “Fallen, fallen is Babylon,” the messianic prophet wrote: “Go up, O Elam; besiege O Media; all the sighing thereof have I made to cease” (Isaiah 21:2). As I have noted elsewhere, “Elam is here used to facilitate the Hebrews’ understanding of the source of the impending invasion, since Persia was not yet prominent. Later, Elam is considered as a part of the Persian empire...” (Jackson, 1991, p. 48). Skinner observed that Elam and Media were
[t]he dominions of Cyrus. The former lay east of the Tigris and north of the Persian Gulf; Media was the mountainous district adjoining it on the north. Cyrus, according to the Babylonian records, was originally king of Anzan, in the north of Elam; in 549 he conquered Media, uniting the two in one kingdom (1963, 1:170).
Rawlinson noted that “Elam” is named because it was familiar to the Hebrews, whereas “Persia” would have been a designation alien to them at the time of Isaiah’s writing (1950, 10:336). What precision!
Again, Isaiah detailed the conquering exploits of Cyrus, leader of the Medo-Persian forces and the brilliant strategist who overthrew the city of Babylon:
Thus says Jehovah to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden, to subdue nations before him, and I will loose the loins of kings; to open the doors before him, and the gates shall not be shut (45:1).
The prophecy was uttered two centuries before the birth of the Persian monarch, and yet, as I shall demonstrate subsequently, it set forth a number of remarkable events in connection with the conquest of the Chaldean capital.
Jeremiah was equally specific regarding the invaders of Babylon. “Make sharp the arrows, hold firm the shields: Jehovah has stirred up the spirit of the kings of the Medes; because his purpose is against Babylon to destroy it” (51:11). Some have suggested that this passage sarcastically urged the Babylonians to sharpen their arrows and firmly clutch their shields—as if they would be able to defend themselves against the Lord’s forces (Clarke, n.d., 4:388). Others feel that this is a rhetorical charge to the Medo-Persian soldiers to prepare their military implements for attack against the Chaldean forces (Plumptre, 1959, 5:168). “The Persians were famous among the ancients for their archers” (McClintock and Strong, 1969, 1:372). Jehovah has plans for Babylon. He will destroy it by means of the “kings” (tribal rulers) of the Medes. Again, the accuracy of the biblical text is demonstrated by the precise terminology used. As Wiseman has noted concerning Jeremiah 51:11: “Babylonian texts (Nabonidus) show that the title ‘king of the Medes’ (11) was correctly in use in 544 B.C.” (Wiseman, 1979, p. 849).
The historical facts are not disputed. The Babylonian ruler, Nebuchadnezzar (605-562 B.C.), was succeeded by his son, Evil-Merodach (562-560 B.C.), who is mentioned in 2 Kings 25:27-30 and in Jeremiah 52:31-34. Next came Neriglissar (560-556 B.C.), an evil conspirator who was defeated and slain in battle by the Medes and Persians (Sanderson, et al., 1900, 1:54). Labashi-Marduk subsequently came to the Chaldean throne in 556 B.C., but was assassinated after a few months. Finally, there was Nabonidus, who ruled from 556-539 B.C. His son, Belshazzar, was co-regent with his father. Actually it was Belshazzar who was occupying the city of Babylon when it fell (see Daniel 5:1ff.). Inscriptions have been discovered which make it clear that Nabonidus had entrusted the “kingship” of the capital city to his son while he campaigned in Arabia for about a decade (Vos, 1988, 1:276). When Cyrus advanced against Babylon, Nabonidus marched east to meet him, but fled before the Persian general’s army. Later, after Cyrus had captured the city (539 B.C.), Nabonidus surrendered to the Persians. And so, the biblical prophecies regarding the conquerors of the city of Babylon were fulfilled exactly.
In the second installment of this study, I will present some of the many details concerning the fall and deterioration of Babylon—details that were previewed prophetically by the great seers of Israel.

REFERENCES

Abbott, Jacob (1850), History of Cyrus the Great (New York: Harper Brothers).
Clarke, Adam (n.d.), Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible (Nashville, TN: Abingdon).
Freeman, Hobart (1968), An Introduction to the Old Testament Prophets (Chicago, IL: Moody).
Herodotus (1956 reprint), The History of Herodotus, George Rawlinson, translator (New York: Tudor).
Jackson, Wayne (1991), Isaiah: God’s Prophet of Doom and Deliverance (Abilene, TX: Quality).
Keith, Alexander (1840), Evidence of the Truth of the Christian Religion Derived From Prophecy(Edinburgh, Scotland: William Shyte and Co.).
McClintock, John and James Strong (1969 reprint), Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).
Millard, Alan (1985), Treasures From Bible Times (Oxford, England: Lion Publishing).
Plumptre, E.H. (1959 reprint), Ellicott’s Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).
Rawlinson, George (1950 Reprint), “Isaiah,” The Pulpit Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Sanderson, Edgar, J.P. Lamberton, and John McGovern (1900), The World’s History and Its Makers (Chicago, IL: Universal History Publishing Co.).
Skinner, J. (1963), “Isaiah: I-XXXIX,” The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press).
Vos, Howard (1988), “Belshazzar,” Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible, ed. Walter A. Elwell (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).
Wiseman, D.J. (1979), “Jeremiah,” The New Layman’s Bible Commentary, ed. G.C.D. Howley, F.F. Bruce, and H.L. Ellison (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).