1/21/15

From Ed Healy... Freedom!


Freedom!

This article looks to the meaning of freedom we share as Americans and  especially for Christians anywhere because of the true meaning of Freedom.
On each July 4th, America celebrates its Independence, our freedom. Our freedom as a country is very important. I wonder, as Americans, how often do we reflect on our gift of freedom? Yes, freedom is a gift, a gift from God for as long as we live in His righteousness.
I thank God daily that I was born an American! America is, to me, the "Greatest Country" in the world. It is great because it is free. It is the country where peoples from many backgrounds have the same blessings shared like nowhere else. Many do not believe in God. But, I believe we are blessed because many more people in America do believe and, therefore, God blesses America.
There is much about us that endangers our freedom. But perhaps the greatest threat is apathy and indifference to sin. This is a blindness that leads to destruction.
(Proverbs 14:34) Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people. (NIV)

Jesus dealt with this same kind of condition when He spoke of what true freedom is and where it is. (John 8:30-36) Even as he spoke, many put their faith in him. To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." They answered him; "We are Abraham's descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?" Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin. Now a slave has no permanent place in the family, but a son belongs to it forever. So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed. (NIV)
 Our freedom as a country is only for a season, but eternal freedom that really counts is found in Jesus Christ. As Christians, we can insure freedom for our country first by making the people truly free and thereby abolishing the effects of sin upon our freedom as a country.
 As Christians we need to reflect upon our freedom and restore within us the desire to make men truly free. "So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed."
"You can tell when you are on
the right road – it’s upgrade."

Are the Genealogies of the Bible Useful Chronologies? by Bert Thompson, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1143

Are the Genealogies of the Bible Useful Chronologies?

by Bert Thompson, Ph.D.

Q. I have heard it said that biblical genealogies are so filled with gaps that they are “useless” in matters of chronology. Is this true, or do the genealogies provide accurate chronological information as well? Can these genealogies be trusted in matters of chronology?

A.

Through the years, religionists who have become enamored with (and who have ardently defended) pseudoscientific attempts to date the Earth in evolutionary terms of billions of years, have stated that the biblical genealogies must not be used for chronological purposes because they allegedly contain “huge gaps” that render them ineffective for that purpose. In so commenting, most writers reference the classic work of William H. Green (1890) in this area. The work of Green on Old Testament genealogies usually is highly acclaimed, and accepted uncritically, by those who wish to place “gaps” (of whatever size) in the biblical genealogies. The argument usually goes something like this (to quote one writer): “Unfortunately for those who wish to attach a precise date on some historical events by using genealogies, their attempts are thwarted.” Thus, we are asked to believe that the genealogies are relatively useless in matters of chronology.
However, these same writers usually evince a complete omission of more recent work in this area—work which has shown that much of what Green had to say is at best incomplete, and at worst, irrelevant. When one discusses the genealogies, he does his audience (or reader) a disservice if he omits a discussion of Luke’s genealogy. Some are quick to talk about Genesis 5 and 11, but rarely do you see a discussion of Luke’s material (often it is conspicuously missing from any such discussions on genealogical materials). One performs a further disservice if he does not point out two very important points that come to bear on this whole discussion. First, to use the words of Arthur C. Custance:
We are told again and again that some of these genealogies contain gaps: but what is never pointed out by those who lay the emphasis on these gaps, is that they only know of the existence of these gaps because the Bible elsewhere fills them in. How otherwise could one know of them? But if they are filled in, they are not gaps at all! Thus, in the final analysis the argument is completely without foundation (1967, p 3).
If anyone should want to find “gaps” in the genealogies, it certainly would be a man like Custance, who spent his life desperately searching for ways to allow the Bible to contain an “old Earth” scenario. Yet even he admitted that the argument that the genealogies contain sizable gaps is ill-founded.
Second, and this point cannot be overemphasized, even if there were gaps in the genealogies, there would not necessarily be gaps in the chronologies therein recorded. The question of chronology is not the same as that of genealogy! This is a major point overlooked by those who accuse the genealogies of being “useless” in matters of chronology. The “more recent work” alluded to above, which sheds additional light on the accuracy of the genealogies, comes from James B. Jordan’s timely articles (1979, 1980). Jordan has done an extensive review of the work of Green, and has shown Green’s arguments to be untrustworthy in several important respects. To quote Jordan:
Gaps in genealogies, however, do not prove gaps in chronologies. The known gaps all occur in non-chronological genealogies. Moreover, even if there were gaps in the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11, this would not affect the chronological information therein recorded, for even if Enosh were the great-grandson of Seth, it would still be the case that Seth was 105 years old when Enosh was born, according to a simple reading of the text. Thus, genealogy and chronology are distinct problems with distinct characteristics. They ought not to be confused (p. 12).
Much recent material has confused these two issues. For example, one writer stated: “Obviously, abridgment of the genealogies has taken place and these genealogies cannot be chronologies,” when exactly the opposite is true, as Jordan’s work accurately documents. Matthew, for example, was at liberty to arrange his genealogy of Christ in three groups of 14 (making some “omissions”) because his genealogy was derived from complete lists found in the Old Testament. In the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11, remember also that the inclusion of the father’s age at the time of his son’s birth is wholly without meaning unless chronology is intended! Else why would the Holy Spirit provide such “irrelevant” information?
There can be little doubt that some have painted a distorted picture for audiences and readers when suggesting to them that substantial “gaps” occur in the biblical genealogies. Such distortion occurs, for example, when it is suggested that genealogy and chronology are one and the same, for they most certainly are not.
In addition, there are other major points that should be made available on these topics. Observe the following information in chart form. Speaking in round figures, from the present to Jesus is 2,000 years—a matter of historical record that no one doubts. From Jesus to Abraham is 2,000 years; that, too, is a matter of historical record which is well known. Each of those figures is extractable from secular history.
Present to Jesus2,000 years
Jesus to Abraham2,000 years
Abraham to Adam? years
The only figure now lacking is that representing the date from Abraham to Adam. Since we know that Adam was the first man (1 Corinthians 15:45), and since we know that man has been on the Earth “from the beginning of the creation” (Mark 10:6, the Lord speaking; Romans 1:20-21, Paul speaking), if it were possible to obtain the figures showing how long it has been from Abraham to Adam, we would have chronological information giving us the relative age of the Earth (since we know that the Earth is only five days older than man—Exodus 20:11; 31:17; Genesis 1-2).
The figure for the time span between Abraham and Adam, of course, is not obtainable from secular history, since those records were destroyed in the Great Flood. Fortunately, however, we are not dependent on the records of secular history for such information; the biblical record provides that material for us. Note the following (and this is why Luke’s genealogy is so critically important in this discussion). In Luke’s genealogy, he listed 55 generations between Jesus and Abraham. We know from secular history (as documented by archaeology—see Kitchen and Douglas, 1982, p. 189) that this time frame covered only about 2,000 years. Between Abraham and Adam, Luke listed only twenty generations. And no one doubts that from the present to Jesus has been about 2,000 years. So, our chart now looks like this:
Present to Jesus2,000 years
Jesus to Abraham2,000 years (55 generations)
Abraham to Adam? years (20 generations)
From this chronological information it is an easy matter to use the 20 generations from Abraham to Adam to determine the approximate number of years contained therein. In round numbers, the figure is 2,000. That completes the chart, which then appears as follows:
Present to Jesus2,000 years
Jesus to Abraham2,000 years (55 generations)
Abraham to Adam2,000 years (20 generations)
Of course, some have argued that there are “gaps” in the genealogies. But where, exactly, would those gaps be placed, and how would they help? Observe the following: No one can put any usable gaps between the present and the Lord’s birth; secular history records that age-information for us. No one can put any usable gaps between the Lord and Abraham; secular history also records that age-information for us. The only place one could try to place any “usable” gaps (viz., usable in regard to extending the age of the Earth) would be in the 20 generations represented between Abraham and Adam. Yet note that actually there are not 20 generations available for inserting “gaps,” because Jude (14) noted that “Enoch was the seventh from Adam.” Examining the Old Testament genealogies establishes exactly that. Enoch was the seventh, beginning from Adam, which then provides us divinely inspired testimony (from Jude) on the accuracy of the first seven of the names. That leaves only 13 generations remaining into which any “gaps” could be placed. Wayne Jackson has observed that in order to get the Earth back only to the time of the evolutionary age of man (approximately 3.6 million years as suggested by the late Mary Leakey and her present-day colleagues), one would have to place 291,125 years in between each of the remaining 13 generations (1978). It does not take an overdose of either biblical knowledge or common sense to see that this quickly becomes ludicrous to the extreme for two reasons. First, who could believe (knowing anything about proper exegesis and hermeneutics) that the first seven of these generations could be so exact, and the last thirteen be so inexact? Second, what good would all of this time do anyone? All it would accomplish is the establishment of a 3.6-million-year-old Earth; evolutionists, theistic evolutionists, and progressive creationists need a 4.6-billion-year-old Earth. So, in effect, all of this inserting of “gaps” into the biblical text is much ado about nothing!
And therein lies the point. While it may be true on the one hand to say that a precise age of the Earth is unobtainable from the genealogies, at the same time let us hasten to point out that using the best information available to us from Scripture, the genealogies hardly can be extended (via “gaps”) to anything much beyond 6,000 to 7,000 years. For someone to leave the impression (even if inadvertently) that the genealogies do not contain legitimate chronological information, or that the genealogies are full of “gaps” that render them impotent, is to misrepresent the case and distort the facts.

REFERENCES

Custance, Arthur (1967), The Genealogies of the Bible, (Ottawa, Canada: Doorway papers #24).
Green, William H. (1890), “Primeval Chronology,” Bibliotheca Sacra, 47:294-295, April. Reprinted inClassical Evangelical Essays in Old Testament Interpretation (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1972).
Jackson, Wayne (1978), “The Antiquity of Human History,” Words of Truth, 14[18]:1, April 14.
Jordan, James B. (1979) Creation Social Sciences & Humanities Quarterly, 2[2]:9-15.
Jordan, James B. (1980) Creation Social Sciences & Humanities Quarterly, 2[3]:17-26.
Kitchen, K.A. and J.D. Douglas, eds. (1982) The New Bible Dictionary (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale), second edition.

From Mark Copeland... The Olivet Discourse - II (Mark 13:24-37)

                          "THE GOSPEL OF MARK"

                  The Olivet Discourse - II (13:24-37)

INTRODUCTION

1. In our previous lesson, we covered the first half of Mark 13...
   a. Commonly called "The Olivet Discourse", delivered by Jesus on the
      Mount of Olives
   b. A challenging passage of scripture, believed to discussing
      either...
      1) The destruction of Jerusalem, which occurred in 70 A.D.
      2) The second coming of Christ, which is yet to occur
      3) Or both events, described either in turn or intertwined

2. I’ve proposed that the discourse foretells the destruction of
   Jerusalem, based first upon the setting...
   a. Jesus’ words spoken previously in the temple
      1) His parables about Israel’s rejection of Him - cf. Mt 21:28-32,33-46; 22:1-14
      2) His condemnation of the scribes and Pharisees - cf. Mt 23:27-36
      3) His lamentation over Jerusalem - cf. Mt 23:37-39
   b. Jesus’ prophecy regarding about the temple - Mk 13:1-2
   c. The disciples’ questions, which when Mark and Luke’s account is
      considered, appear to be:
      1) "When will these things be?"
      2) "What will be the sign when all these things will be
         fulfilled?"
      -- Cf. Mt 24:3; Mk 13:4; Lk 21:7

3. We then saw that in vs. 5-23, Jesus describes...
   a. What will not be the sign (other than the gospel preached to all
      nations) - Mk 13:5-13
   b. What will be the sign - Mk 13:14
      1) The abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel - Dan 9:26-27; 12:11
      2) Which Luke explains to be Jerusalem surrounded by armies - Lk 21:20
   c. What to do when they saw the sign - Mk 13:15-23
      1) Those in Judea were to flee to the mountains to avoid a great
         tribulation
      2) They were not to be misled by false christs or false prophets

[Up to vs. 24, Jesus described a local, escapable judgment to befall
Jerusalem.  He does not describe the worldwide, inescapable judgment
taught elsewhere in the Scriptures.  But with vs. 24, many believe Jesus
now addresses His second coming (cf. J. W. McGarvey’s Fourfold Gospel).
As we continue with our study, I propose that the destruction of
Jerusalem is still under consideration...]

II. THE OLIVET DISCOURSE (continued)

   D. WHAT WILL HAPPEN NEXT...
      1. Events to occur "after the tribulation of those days"...
         a. Cosmic disturbances - Mk 13:24-25
            1) The sun will be darkened
            2) The moon will not give its light
            3) The stars of heaven will fall
            4) The powers in the heavens will be shaken
         b. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven
            with power and great glory - Mk 13:26
            1) The sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven - cf. Mt 24:30
            2) All the tribes of the earth will mourn - cf. Mt 24:30
         c. The elect will be gathered - Mk 13:27
            1) For with a great sound of the trumpet, angels will be
               sent - cf. Mt 24:31
            2) They shall gather the elect from the four winds, from the
               farthest part of earth to the farthest part of heaven
      2. Such events certainly sound like the second coming of Christ,
         but consider two reasons why they may not be referring to Jesus’
         coming at the Last Day...
         a. The events were to occur "immediately after the tribulation
            of those days" ("in those days, after that tribulation")
            - Mt 24:29; Mk 13:24
            1) They are connected in time to the tribulation described
               in Mk 13:15-28
            2) This "coming" of Jesus was to occur at the conclusion of
               the siege of Jerusalem
         b. The events are similar to those used to foretell God’s
            judgment of other nations
            1) Babylon - Isa 13:1,6-13
            2) Egypt - Isa 19:1-2; cf. Eze 32:2,7-9
            2) Tyre - Isa 23:1; 24:21-23
            3) Edom - Isa 34:4-6
            4) Nineveh - Nah 1:1-5
            5) Israel - Am 8:9
            6) Judah - Jer 4:5-6,23-28
      3. Jewish prophets foretold God’s judgment upon such nations...
         a. Using figures of worldwide destruction, even though the
            judgment was local
         b. Perhaps because such judgments foreshadow God’s Final
            Judgment to come upon the entire world at the Last Day
      4. Like other Jewish prophets, Jesus used figurative language to
         depict:
         a. The judgment to befall the religious leaders of Israel (in
            terms of worldwide destruction)
         b. The provision made for faithful disciples of Christ (in
            terms of the gathering by angels)
      5. Therefore I suggest that even in Mk 13:24-27 Jesus refers to
         the destruction of Jerusalem

   E. ADMONITIONS TO BE PREPARED...
      1. The parable of the fig tree - Mk 13:28-29
         a. New branches and leaves indicate summer is near
         b. When you see these things (Jerusalem surrounded by armies),
            the time is near
      2. It would happen before "this generation" passed away - Mk 13:30
         a. Some define "generation" as a race of people (i.e., the
            Jews) - cf. McGarvey, B. W. Johnson
         b. But note its use by Jesus just prior to this discourse - cf.
            Mt 23:33-36 (esp. 36)
         c. The destruction of Jerusalem came to pass within forty
            years!
      3. The words of Jesus will come to pass - Mk 13:31
         a. Heaven and earth shall pass away one day - cf. 2Pe 3:7,10
         b. But Jesus’ words will by no means pass away
      4. Of that day and hour, only the Father knows - Mk 13:32
         a. Many believe at this point Jesus begins to talk about the
            second coming - e.g., France, NIGTC; Short, NIBC
         b. The disciples might discern the general timing with the
            advance of armies toward Jerusalem
         c. But the day and hour when the siege would begin, only the
            Father knew
      5. Therefore, take heed, watch and pray! - Mk 13:33-37
         a. You don’t know when the time is - e.g., Ac 1:7
         b. Don’t be caught off guard, like a servant caught sleeping
            when his master returns
         c. Be ready, for the Son of Man will come when you not expect
            Him
         d. The siege of Jerusalem might begin promptly, so flee Judea
            promptly when you see the armies surrounding Jerusalem!

CONCLUSION

1. Admittedly, there is much in "The Olivet Discourse" that alludes to
   our Lord’s second coming at the Last Day...
   a. But it no different than prophecies by other Jewish prophets who
      foretold God’s judgment upon nations and cities
   b. Such figurative language was a common motif used by Jewish
      prophets
   c. We should not be surprised to see Jesus using the same motif in
      this context
   -- And rightly so, for God’s judgments upon nations in the past are
      types and shadows of the Final Judgment to befall the entire world
      when Jesus comes again

2. In addition to the setting leading up to the discourse, there is the
   natural flow of the discourse itself that leads me to conclude it is
   entirely about the destruction of Jerusalem...
   a. Jesus’ disciples are told what will not be the sign - Mk 13:1-13
   b. They are told will be the sign that His coming is near - Mk 13:14
   c. They are told what to do when they see the sign - Mk 13:14-23
   d. His coming in judgment (the fall of Jerusalem) is described in
      terms reminiscent of other Jewish prophets who foretold of God’s
      judgments upon various nations - Mk 13:24-27
   e. Admonitions are given for them to be prepared and watchful, for
      all these things will happen before the current generation passed
      away, though the exact time was unknown - Mk 13:28-37

So I view "The Olivet Discourse" to describe a local, escapable judgment
which occurred as Jesus foretold in 70 A. D.

However, there is still the worldwide, inescapable judgment at the Last
Day.  Are you ready for that Day?  The admonitions to be prepared and
productive are very similar:

   "But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in
   which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the
   elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the
   works that are in it will be burned up."

   "Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner
   of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking
   for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which
   the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements
   will melt with fervent heat?"

   "Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens
   and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.  Therefore, beloved,
   looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in
   peace, without spot and blameless;"
                                                       - 2Pe 3:10-14

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011

eXTReMe Tracker 

From Gary... Maybe someday I'll do just one...


Coffee, one of the most wonderful things in the world. It may or may not be good for you (I keep hearing conflicting "authorities"), but I have learned to keep it down to three (20 oz.) cups a day.  Last Tuesday, we went to Cracker Barrel for lunch and browsed their shop and found probably the biggest coffee cup (besides the one above) ever. Every one of them was the size of a oil can and had markings from various oil companies like Texaco and Penns-oil.   I didn't purchase one, because the price was a little too dear, but, hey, I just will have to deal with my 60oz. of coffee.  After seeing a video this morning about the new K-cup brewers with their DRM (Digital Rights Management) restrictions, I am very thankful for what I have and am content. Reminds me of Paul...
 
Philippians, Chapter 4
 10 But I rejoice in the Lord greatly, that now at length you have revived your thought for me; in which you did indeed take thought, but you lacked opportunity. 11 Not that I speak in respect to lack, for I have learned in whatever state I am, to be content in it.  12 I know how to be humbled, and I know also how to abound. In everything and in all things I have learned the secret both to be filled and to be hungry, both to abound and to be in need.  13 I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me.

Be thankful for what you have, things could always be worse. But, even if they do become more challenging, friends will help; and the best friend is GOD!!!