8/26/15

From Mark Copeland... "GIVE ME THE BIBLE" Why I Obey The Bible



                          "GIVE ME THE BIBLE"

                          Why I Obey The Bible

INTRODUCTION

1. In this series ("Give Me The Bible"), thus far we have explored...
   a. The Problem Of Biblical Illiteracy
   b. Why I Read The Bible
   c. Why I Believe The Bible
   d. Why I Love The Bible

2. But it does us no good to...
   a. Read the Bible
   b. Believe the Bible
   c. Love the Bible
   -- If we are unwilling to obey the Bible!

[To drive this point home, let's first take a close look at...]

I. THE NECESSITY OF OBEDIENCE

   A. AS TAUGHT BY JESUS...
      1. Necessary to enter the kingdom of heaven - Mt 7:21-23; Lk 6:46
         a. It is not enough to believe in Jesus as Lord
         b. Not even to do many things in His name
         c. We must do the will of His Father in heaven
         d. We must do what Jesus says!
      2. Necessary to qualify as good soil - Lk 8:15
         a. It is not enough to hear (read) the Word of God
         b. Not even to initially do what the Word says
         c. We must receive the Word with good and noble hearts
         d. We must bear fruit with patience!
      3. Necessary to be faithful disciples of Christ - Mt 28:18-20
         a. It is not enough to simply believe in Jesus
         b. Not even to be baptized into the name of the Father, Son,
            and Holy Spirit
         c. We must be disciples of Christ (i.e., adherents)
         d. We must observe (do) what He says!

   B. AS TAUGHT BY HIS APOSTLES...
      1. Necessary in order to be saved - He 5:9
         a. Jesus is the author (source) of eternal salvation
         b. But for those who obey Him!
      2. Necessary to avoid God's wrath - Ro 2:4-11
         a. The goodness of God is designed to lead one to repent
         b. The righteous judgment of God is coming, a day of wrath!
         c. Eternal life is for "those who keep on doing good" (NLT)
         d. Indignation and wrath is for those who do not obey the truth!
      3. Necessary to avoid eternal destruction - 1Pe 4:17; 2Th 1:7-9
         a. What will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel?
         b. Vengeance in the form of everlasting destruction!

[Of course, we must understand that obedience does not earn or merit
salvation (cf. Ep 2:8-9; Tit 3:4-7; Lk 17:10), but obedience is
necessary nonetheless.  Especially so when one considers...]

II. THE BLESSINGS OF OBEDIENCE

   A. AS TAUGHT BY JESUS...
      1. Enables one to withstand the storms of life - Mt 7:24-27
         a. It is not enough to hear the sayings of Jesus
         b. We must both hear and keep His says
         c. Only then will we be blessed to stand strong against the
            storms of life!
      2. Qualifies one to be in the family of God - Lk 8:21
         a. It is not enough to simply listen to the Word of God
         b. We must both hear and do it
         c. Only then will we blessed to be a member of the family of God!
      3. The key to blessedness (joy) - Jn 13:17
         a. It is not enough to know what Jesus teaches
         b. We must do what He teaches
         c. The blessedness (joy) of following Jesus is in the doing!

   B. AS TAUGHT BY HIS APOSTLES...
      1. Delivers from the bondage of sin - Ro 6:16-18
         a. We are slaves to that which we obey
         b. When one obeys from the heart the doctrine of God, they are
            set free from sin!
      2. Purifies one's soul - 1Pe 1:22-23
         a. Obeying the truth purifies our souls
         b. It leads to being born again by the Word of God
      3. Saves and blesses one's soul - Jm 1:21-25
         a. The Word has the potential to save our souls
         b. But we must doers, not hearers only
         c. Again, the blessedness (joy) is in the doing!

CONCLUSION

1. Why do I obey the Bible?  Because obedience is necessary...
   a. If we truly love Jesus  - Jn 14:15
   b. If we want Jesus and His Father to abide in us - Jn 14:21-24;15:10
   c. If we want to truly know the Lord and experience the love of God
      - 1Jn 2:3-5

2. Again, such obedience is not an effort to earn or merit salvation...
   a. Salvation is by grace through faith, not of works - Ep 2:8-9
   b. But grace does not preclude obedience done in faith - He 5:9
   c. We obey the Word of God, not to earn salvation, but to receive salvation!

As Jesus stated on one occasion:  "Blessed rather are those who hear the
word of God and keep it!" (Lk 11:28).  Are you keeping (obeying) the
Word of God in order to be blessed...?

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011

Obviously Not the Bible by Kyle Butt, M.A.


https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=1489

Obviously Not the Bible

by  Kyle Butt, M.A.

In the wake of the best-selling book, The Da Vinci Code, questions have arisen about certain “lost books” of the Bible. Many want to know why the books we find in the Bible are there, and why other books are not. The simple answer to such an inquiry is that the 66 books in the Bible can be proven to be inspired by God, while the others can be proven not to have come from God.
Numerous books allege to be part of the divine collection—books such as the Gospel of Nicodemus, the Infancy Gospels, the Protevangelion, 1 and 2 Clement, Shepherd of Hermes, and so on. Some of these apocryphal books claim to be “additions” to the gospel accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Others claim to be epistles from men like Barnabas or Paul. A brief look at a few selected passages in one of these writings quickly reveals a few of the more obvious reasons why these books did not make it into the biblical canon.
In the first Infancy Gospel, Jesus is portrayed as a young boy who does amazing things. On one occasion, while playing with some other boys, Jesus’ playfellows ran and hid from Him. Upon finding them hidden in a furnace, He turned them into goats. The women watching the scene begged Jesus to turn the goats back into boys, which Jesus promptly did (1 Infancy 17:10 in The Lost, 1979, p. 54). About two chapters later, 1 Infancy states: “Another time, when the Lord Jesus was coming home in the evening with Joseph, he met a boy, who ran so hard against him, that he threw him down; to whom the Lord Jesus said, As thou has thrown me down, so shalt thou fall, nor ever rise. And that moment the boy fell down and died” (1 Infancy 19:22-24 in The Lost, p. 57). Narratives such as these directly contradict the personality of Christ as presented in the canonical gospels, and are evidence of the lack of divine inspiration in such works.
Jesus did not turn his playmates into goats, nor kill boys who bumped into Him. Neither did God allow any pertinent books to be left out of the canon of Scripture. Truly, “all things that pertain to life and godliness” can be found in the 66 inspired books of the Bible.

REFERENCES

The Lost Books of the Bible (1979), (New York: Random House).

God's Mercy and Justice by Caleb Colley, Ph.D.


https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=960

God's Mercy and Justice

by  Caleb Colley, Ph.D.

The inspired writers of the Bible recorded a remarkable amount of material about two characteristics of God: mercy and justice. These two qualities, at first glance, might seem contradictory. Can a gracious, merciful God punish people?
First, observe a portion of the biblical record of God’s mercy. Just after the children of Israel crossed the Red Sea, Moses led them in a song of praise to God, which included this verse: “You in Your mercy have led forth the people whom You have redeemed; You have guided them in Your strength to Your holy habitation” (Exodus 15:13, emp. added). It was not long after this that God gave the Israelites instructions to build the Ark of the Covenant, the lid of which was called the mercy seat. The mercy seat was made of pure gold, and was the place where God communicated with Moses (Exodus 25:22; 30:6). The Greek word used to name the mercy seat is hilasterion (Hebrews 9:5), a word that also is used to designate Jesus (Romans 3:25; McCord, 128[17]:527). In a sense, Jesus is the “mercy seat” for Christians—His merciful sacrifice and eternal presence allow us to communicate with the Father (see 1 John 2:1; Hebrews 7:27), and through Christ we receive God’s mercy (Isaiah 53:4-6; 1 Timothy 1:2; 1 Peter 1:3).
When revealing the Ten Commandments to Moses, God Himself proclaimed both His divine mercy and justice:
You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth, you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love me and keep My commandments (Exodus 20:4-7).
Just as God’s mercy continues to exist, the justice of God likewise is not limited to the long ago. God is still serious about people serving Him, and about the consequences for people who choose not to serve Him. It is fascinating and startling to study the numerous passages where God’s vengeance is under consideration. For example, Hebrews 10:30 records: “For we know Him who said, ‘Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord. And again, ‘The Lord will judge His people.’ ” In Romans 12:19, Paul wrote: “Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord.” Our perfect God cannot allow sin to go unpunished (see Matthew 25:41; 2 Peter 2:9). God always has been just—He punished Adam, for example, because sin has consequences (Genesis 2:17). Norman L. Bales observed of God’s punishing Adam: “Had He not done so, our relationship with Him would be as unpredictable as the relationship the ancient pagan people imagined they had with their numerous deities” (1989, p. 33). We can depend on God’s system of ethics because God has never treated the righteous and the wicked in the same way (p. 34).
Many sincerely ask: “How could a merciful God allow souls to be eternally lost?” Some people conclude that mercy and justice must be mutually exclusive characteristics of God, and, consequently, God never could exercise justice or wrath on anyone, because His mercy prevails. Their picture of God is skewed, because they picture Him as akin to a benevolent, grandfather who constantly gives generous gifts, but is extremely hesitant to discipline. In God’s dealings with humans, both mercy and justice are present, with the two characteristics balancing each other.
If God is truly good (and He is), then He cannot tolerate or overlook evil. He did not overlook the sin of Adam (Genesis 3:17-19), Cain (Genesis 4:11-13), Saul (1 Samuel 15:26), or David (2 Samuel 12:8-10), and He certainly will not overlook sin in the modern world. However, God has mercifully provided a way for sinners to escape His wrath: He sacrificed His spotless, sinless Son. Christ was the only One Who was qualified to be a sacrifice for sin, and because He never sinned, His pure blood can wash away our sins (Revelation 1:5; Hebrews 13:20), allowing us to stand justified before God on the Day of Judgment (Titus 3:7; Hebrews 10:19). However, we must take the necessary steps to appropriate that blood to our souls (Romans 6:3-4; Colossians 2:12).
The justice and mercy of God have never contradicted each other. In fact, our perfect Creator balances the two qualities masterfully. If that were not true, the psalmist would not have been able to proclaim, “Righteousness and justice are the foundation of Your throne; Mercy and truth go before Your face” (Psalm 89:14, emp. added).

REFERENCES

Bales, Norman L. (1989), How Do I Know I’m Saved?: A Study of God’s Grace (Nashville, TN: Gospel Advocate)
McCord, Hugo (1987), “The Mercy Seat,” Gospel Advocate, 128:527, September 3.

Controversial Collagen Confirmation Points to Creation by Eric Lyons, M.Min.


https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=338

Controversial Collagen Confirmation Points to Creation

by  Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Imagine watching an interview on television and hearing a blind, deaf, wrinkled, hunched-back, bedridden man claim that he was 130 years old. Although many would likely be skeptical of such a declaration, if ever there was a man in modern times to live 130 years on Earth, he surely would have looked as worn out as this man. Imagine, however, if a quick-witted, strong, marathon runner with fair skin, thick, dark hair, low blood pressure, high bone mineral density, good memory, etc., claimed to be 130 years old. What reasonable individual would believe such a claim? Virtually everyone would doubt the declaration, especially the doctors, who had found the man’s overall health to be comparable to that of a 20-year-old.
Now take a step into the world of evolutionary science. According to evolution’s assumption-based geologic timetable, since dinosaurs supposedly became extinct 65 million years ago, any dinosaur fossil found in the ground must be at least 65 million years old. But what if the fossils don’t “appear” to be that old? What if, when inspected by scientists, various dinosaur bones around the world were discovered with “highly fibrous,” “flexible,” and “resilient” bone tissue that “when stretched, returns to its original shape” (Schweitzer, et al., 2005, 307:1952,1953; Schweitzer, et al., 2007, 316:277)? What if proteins such as collagen were found, along with “haemoglobin, elastin and laminin, as well as cell-like structures resembling blood and bone cells” (Hecht, 2009)? Would evolutionists come to a similar conclusion as most everyone would about a marathon-running, 130-year-old? Apparently not.
In the last few years, scientists have reported unearthing a variety of dinosaur bones from around the world that contain intact protein fragments (see Lyons, 2007), including collagen, hemoglobin, elastin, and laminin. Amazingly, once the minerals are chemically stripped away from the apparent soft tissue, the researchers were even able to squeeze round, dark-red-to-deep-brown microscopic structures from the presumed dinosaur blood vessels (Perkins, 2005, 167[13]:195). However, since, according to evolutionist and Science writer Robert Service, “proteins in tissue normally degrade quickly after an animal dies,” the research by Dr. Mary Schweitzer and her colleagues has remained “controversial” and “contentious” (Service, 2009, 324[5927]:578; cf. Schweitzer, et al., 2005; Schweitzer, et al., 2007).
Since Schweitzer published her findings in 2005 and 2007 about “68-million-year-old” T. rex soft tissue, a much more thorough study has been done on an “80-million-year-old fossil from a duck-billed dinosaur” (Service, 2009, p. 578). What did researchers find? This time “Schweitzer and colleagues report finding an even larger number of protein fragments” (p. 578, emp. added). After using “chemicals to dissolve away the minerals,” scientists have seen what appears to be “a network of soft, transparent vessels, cells, and extracellular matrix” (p. 578). Biochemist Raghu Kalluri of Harvard Medical School independently confirmed the presence of “collagen, as well as laminin and elastin, two proteins found in blood vessels” (p. 578).
Any strong, marathon-running, dark-haired, fair-skinned, wrinkle-free, 20-year-old-looking, modern man who claims to be 130 years old would be discredited immediately. Science and common sense would demand that the 130-year date be rejected. But what about the dates evolutionists give us for these “young looking” dinosaur bones—bones with “miraculously preserved soft tissue” (Gebel, 2007)? Now that the once “controversial” and “contentious” dinosaur collagen has been confirmed, are evolutionists reconsidering the age of dinosaur fossils? Are evolutionists considering the possibility that dinosaurs may have lived hundreds or thousands of years ago rather than 65+ million years ago? Apparently not—at least not in their writings. Evolutionists are eerily silent about this blatant contradiction: how can dinosaur fossils reportedly 80 million years (or 29 billion 200 million days) old contain “collagen...haemoglobin, elastin, and laminin, as well as cell-like structures resembling blood and bone cells” (Hecht, 2009)? The problem is not with the dinosaur bones: repeated studies over the last four years have verified the presence of collagen. The problem is with the assumption-based evolutionary dating methods (see DeYoung, 2005). Hello! The bones are not 80 million years old!
[NOTE: For an outstanding treatment of the evidence that proves the co-existence of dinosaurs and humans, see The Dinosaur Delusion: Dismantling Evolution's Most Cherished Icon available from Apologetics Press.]

REFERENCES

DeYoung, Don (2005), Thousands...Not Billions (Green Forest, AR: Master Books).
Gebel, Erika (2007), “T. Rex May Be Close Relation to the Chicken,” Charleston Daily Mail, April 16, [On-line], URL: http://www.dailymail.com/story/Life/2007041620/T-Rex-may-be-close- relation-to-the-chicken/.
Hecht, Jeff (2009), “First Dino ‘Blood’ Extracted from Ancient Bone,” New Scientist, [On-line], URL: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17060-first-dino-blood-extracted-from-ancient-bone.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news.
Lyons, Eric (2007), “More Soft Dinosaur Tissue,” [On-line], URL: http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/3518.
Lyons, Eric and Kyle Butt (2008), The Dinosaur Delusion: Dismantling Evolution’s Most Cherished Icon (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press).
Perkins, Sid (2005), “Old Softy: Tyrannosaurus Fossil Yields Flexible Tissue,” Science News, 167[13]:195, March 26, [On-line], URL: http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20050326/fob1.asp.
Service, Robert F. (2009), “‘Protein’ in 80-Million-Year-Old Fossil Bolsters Controversial T. rex Claim” Science, 324[5927]:578, May 1.
Schweitzer, Mary H., Jennifer L. Wittmeyer, John R. Horner, and Jan K. Toporski (2005), “Soft-Tissue Vessels and Cellular Preservation in Tyrannosaurus rex,” Science, 307:1952-1955, March 25.
Schweitzer, Mary, et al. (2007), “Analyses of Soft Tissue from Tyrannosaurus rex Suggest the Presence of Protein,” Science, 316:277-285, April 13.

Gay Birds and Bees: Is Homosexuality Really Unnatural? by Kyle Butt, M.A.


https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=2010

Gay Birds and Bees: Is Homosexuality Really Unnatural?

by  Kyle Butt, M.A.

Every philosophy contains its own inherent logical implications. For instance, Charles Darwin once suggested: “There is no fundamental difference between man and the higher mammals in their mental faculties” (1898). If such a philosophy were adopted by a society, how would that civilization seek to explain the behavior of its members? One way would be to study the behaviors of animals and reason that since humans are little more than “complex” animals, bestial behaviors could be justified and accounted for based solely on the assertion that animals in the natural world perform them.
Justification of heinously immoral behavior based on an observance of such in the animal kingdom has become fashionable. Barbara Burke said humans can potentially justify murdering their babies because animals (such as pigs and dogs) often murder their offspring (1974, 185:653). Randy Thornhill and Craig Palmer suggested that rape is an evolutionary by-product that can be explained based on behaviors in the animal kingdom (2000). The villainous Adolf Hilter justified his crimes in a 1933 speech in Nuremberg by comparing his atrocities to animal behavior. He stated: “Thus there results the subjection of a number of people under the will, often of only a few persons, a subjection based simply upon the right of the stronger, a right which, as we see in Nature, can be regarded as the sole conceivable right, because it is founded on reason” (see “The Einsatzgruppen Case,” 1998).
Following suit, the Oslo Natural History Museum recently opened the world’s first exhibit documenting cases of “homosexual” behavior in nature. The exhibit suggests that because animals such as penguins, parrots, beetles, whales, giraffes, and others display certain behaviors that could be construed as homosexual, then homosexuality among humans cannot be viewed as “unnatural.” One of the statements on the exhibit reads: “We may have opinions on a lot of things, but one thing is clear—homosexuality is found throughout the animal kingdom, it is not against nature” (Doyle, 2006).
In response to such thinking, several points need to be considered. Humans are not animals. There is no documented evidence verifying the false idea that humans evolved from lower organisms (see Harrub and Thompson, 2002). In fact, all observable evidence verifies that humans maintain a completely unique status in regard to their mental, emotional, and cognitive components (see “In the Image...,” 2001; Lyons and Thompson, 2002). To justify human behavior based on behavior observed in the animal world exhibits a grotesque ignorance of everything humans understand about morality. Ten percent of the diet of an adult Komodo dragon often consists of its cannibalizing young Komodo dragons. Would anyone be so irrationally disturbed as to suggest that because we see infant cannibalism in Komodo dragons it is a natural practice for humans that cannot be classified as “unnatural”? The ploy to justify homosexuality by suggesting that it is “natural” is little more than an attempt to cast aside all moral constraints and debase society to the point of mindless bestiality.
In truth, homosexuality is against nature, that is, the natural way that God designed humans to function. The inspired apostle Paul condemned homosexuality as a sin:
For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due (Romans 1:26-27, emp. added).
Homosexuality goes against human nature in at least two fundamental ways. First, on a basic physical, anatomical level, homosexuality disregards the natural use of the sexual organs of men and women. Humans were designed to be sexually compatible in order to reproduce and bear offspring (see Genesis 1:28). If homosexuality were a natural, genetic occurrence (which it is not—see Harrub and Miller, 2004), the genes responsible for it would quickly disappear due to the inability of same sex couples to reproduce. Second, God designed men and women to be capable of a relationship in marriage unlike any other human relationship. When a man and a woman are joined together, they become “one-flesh,” a biblical phrase that describes the epitome of intimacy and compatibility (Genesis 2:23). God specifically designed Eve, and all future women, to be perfect helpers suitable for Adam, and subsequent men. And, while it is true that sinful humans often fail to achieve the intimacy and oneness designed by God, it is not because of faulty design, but of people’s sinful decisions. God designed men and women to be naturally compatible both physically and emotionally.
If human behavior can be justified based on the idea that it mimics animal behavior, then why not abolish all laws, allow stronger humans to kill the weaker ones, allow mothers to eat their babies, allow men to murder sexual rivals, allow women to murder and cannibalize their lovers after intercourse, and simply chalk such a deplorable situation up to “nature”? The logical consequences of such a philosophical justification are as obvious as they are ridiculous. God created humans, so He knows what is in accordance with human nature, and He has clearly stated that homosexuality is aberrant, unnatural, sinful behavior.

REFERENCES

Burke, Barbara (1974), “Infanticide,” Science, 185:653.
Darwin, Francis (1898), The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin (New York: D. Appleton).
Doyle, Alister (2006), Birds and Bees May Be Gay: Museum Exhibition, [On-line], URL: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061012/sc_nm/environment_homosexuality_ dc;_ylt=AhEiR4DtDaCUi1h7KCssWvms0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3ODdxdHBhBHNlYwM5NjQ-.
“The Einsatzgruppen Case” (1998), [On-line], URL: http://www.einsatzgruppenarchives.com/mt/ndsir.html.
Harrub, Brad and Bert Thompson (2002), “Creationists Fight Back! A Review of U.S. News and World Report,” Reason & Revelation, 22[9]:65-71, September, [On-line], URL: http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2094.
Harrub, Brad and Dave Miller (2004), “This is the Way God Made Me: A Scientific Examination of Homosexuality and the ‘Gay Gene,’” Reason & Revelation, 24[8]:73-79, August, [On-line], URL: http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2553.
“In the Image and Likeness of God” (2001), [On-line]: URL: http://www.apologeticspress.org/pdfs/courses_pdf/hsc0203.pdf.
Lyons, Eric and Bert Thompson (2002), “In the Image and Likeness of God: Part 1,” Reason & Revelation, 22[3]:17-23, [On-line]: URL: http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/123.
Thornhill, Randy and Craig T. Palmer (2000), A Natural History of Rape (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).

From Gary... Life is like a camera

Life is short- just a "few" years ago I became a father and then a grandfather and perhaps in October I will become a great-grandfather. Time passes so quickly and I find myself looking at old photos more and more as the years pass by. And so, I found myself looking at the above picture this lovely morning.  I thought- how true!!!  Then I remembered that a passage from the book of Hebrews linked with this picture. After a bit of searching, I finally found it...

Hebrews, Chapter 12 (WEB)
  1 Therefore let us also, seeing we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, lay aside every weight and the sin which so easily entangles us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,  2 looking to Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising its shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. 

We do NOT live alone, others see us throughout our lives. God sees everything (and I mean EVERYTHING) that we do. It seems reasonable that others in heaven do as well (perhaps verse 1 above MAY teach this). What I am sure is that this passage from Hebrews teaches is that we are to lay aside sin and look to Jesus for help.  I like the way the GodsWord translation puts the beginning of verse 2.

GodsWord, Chapter 12
 2 We must focus on Jesus, the source and goal of our faith... 

Its like we stop looking at all the things this world has to offer and picture Jesus (focus on Jesus, if you will).  And, like the picture above, we choose our shots (both what we do and what we make a priority) and start over when our life becomes "blurred" by sin. If we do things right, we will make a beautiful "picture show" in heaven. If not, well- I can only hope that Jesus will edit out the "bad pictures" (that is why he shed his blood, after all) and make us a movie worth watching.  

One more thing- 
its not the fancy camera that is important; it the amount of the light of God that you allow in that matters!!!