11/27/20

"No Proof of God...But the Universe Might Just Be a Simulation"? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

 

https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=5322

"No Proof of God...But the Universe Might Just Be a Simulation"?

by  Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson is one of America’s most well-known evolutionary astrophysicists. He has worked as the Director of the Hayden Planetarium in New York City for two decades. He also frequently appears on television shows such as The Colbert Report and Real Time with Bill Maher. Though Dr. Tyson has made some oppressive comments regarding theism (and theists) in the past,1 he is not an atheist; Tyson is agnostic: he admits that he is “someone who doesn’t know” and “hasn’t really seen evidence for” God, but “is prepared to embrace the evidence” if it is ever presented.2

Interestingly, Dr. Tyson recently made some outlandish comments at the 2016 Isaac Asimov Memorial Debate at the American Museum of Natural History about the nature of the Universe. According to Tyson, “the likelihood of the universe being a simulation ‘may be very high.’”3 News organizations reported that Tyson indicated “it’s not too hard to imagine that some other creature out there is far smarter than us” (emp. added).4 Perhaps we’re just “some sort of alien simulation.”5 Tyson went so far as to say, “[I]t is easy for me to imagine that everything in our lives is just the creation of some other entity for their entertainment. I’m saying, the day we learn that it is true, I will be the only one in the room saying, I’m not surprised.”6

Isn’t it baffling what evolutionary agnostics and atheists will believe and what they won’t (or don’t) believe? Dr. Tyson is a very educated scientist who seems to have no problem imagining that god-like aliens made our Universe for their pleasure despite the complete lack of evidence for such a belief. Yet, at the same time, Tyson refuses to believe in God because he does not believe there is enough evidence to come to the conclusion that God actually created the Universe for His own glory (Psalm 19:1-4; Isaiah 43:7) and to be inhabited by His human creatures (Isaiah 45:18), who are made in His image (Genesis 1:26-27).

One thing that Dr. Tyson did allude to that everyone should freely admit based upon the evidence: “[I]t is easy for me to imagine that everything in our lives is just the creation of some other entity” (emp. added). In truth, Creation makes sense.7 “For every house is built by someone, but He who built all things is God” (Hebrews 3:4, emp. added). “The heavens declare the glory” of the eternal, omnipotent Creator (Psalm 19:1), not some supposed alien civilization (who, in turn, would need an explanation for their existence if they really did exist).8 Sadly, men such as Dr. Tyson seem so open to the idea of “super” aliens, yet not to The Supernatural Creator, Who will judge our actions or lack thereof at the end of time (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14).

Endnotes

1  See Michael Brooks (2006), “In Place of God,” New Scientist, 192[2578]:8-11. See also Eric Lyons and Kyle Butt (2007), “Militant Atheism,” Reason & Revelation, 27[1]:1-5, /APContent.aspx?category=12&article=2051&topic=296.

2  “Neil deGrasse Tyson: Atheist or Agnostic?” (2012), Big Think, April 25, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzSMC5rWvos.

3  Kevin Loria (2016), “Neil deGrasse Tyson Thinks There’s a ‘Very High’ Chance the Universe is just a Simulation,” Business Insider, http://www.businessinsider.sg/neil-degrasse-tyson-thinks-the-universe-might-be-a-simulation-2016-4/#.VypZthVrjq0.

4  Ibid.

5  Michael Lazar (2016), “Could the Universe Be a Simulation? Nel deGrasse Tyson Thinks It Might,” Huffington Post, May 1, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-lazar/could-the-universe-be-a-s_b_9816034.html.

6  Ibid.

7  Eric Lyons (2010), “Science, Common Sense, and Genesis 1:1,” Apologetics Press, http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=3758&topic=93.

8  Cf. Bert Thompson (2004), “Is There Intelligent Life in Outer Space?” Apologetics Press, /apcontent.aspx?category=9 &article=1129.

"Jesus Gave Him No Answer" by Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

 

https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=5463

"Jesus Gave Him No Answer"

by  Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

"To err is human," the poet rightly said, and apologists are humans. But as apologists, it is also inevitable that the writers and speakers for Apologetics Press will be unjustly criticized, viciously and publicly attacked, brazenly misrepresented, unethically plagiarized, or even outright lied about—and not infrequently. After all, Jesus predicted that persecution will come to those who attempt to speak the truth (John 15:18-20). From time to time, individuals will witness examples of such shocking behavior and ask us with incredulity, “Do you guys respond to that kind of behavior? And if so, how!?” Answers range from, “The best we can, though not always perfectly” to “sometimes better than at other times” to “not always in the wisest ways, but always with the desire to defend the faith and trying to speak the truth in love.” The real question in our minds, however, is not “How do we respond?” but how does God tell us to respond to that type of persecution?

Jude 3 tells us that we are to “contend earnestly for the faith,”1 but how? Jude 3 is a mandate, but it does not prescribe a manner. Scripture certainly has a lot to say about the attitudes we should have when we are publicly mistreated and the ways we should respond to people, making it clear that different people and situations often call for different approaches. While we should always speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15), it is also true that sometimes love demands different approaches. The New Testament tells us repeatedly that agape love is fundamental to Christianity.2 Without love, one simply cannot be a Christian (1 John 4:7-8). That single motivation—to love—would govern every decision and action that a Christian takes, if he would be perfect. After all, according to the New Testament and Jesus, Himself, sin ultimately boils down to a lack of agape3love towards God and our fellow man.

Gathering all of the relevant passages on agape, we learn that it can be defined in the following way:

Having such concern for the well-being of someone else that I am willing to unselfishly act on that concern for that person’s well-being, no matter who it is or the cost to me.4

Notice, then, that love is not a feeling, but a choice (1 John 3:18). If we were to summarize the definition of agape in one word, it would be unselfishness, and it is always manifested through some form of a selfless act.5 That attitude encapsulates Who God is (1 John 4:7-8), while the opposite—being self-serving—is described as being demon-like (James 3:14-16). Truly, if we wish to be like God, we will unselfishly put ourselves aside and do what’s best for others, even when they are mistreating us.

Jesus faces Pilate.

That said, a common misconception about biblical love is that it can be defined solely as being gentle, tolerant, and without judgment. If one were to be anything else in his evangelism or defense of truth, he would be unloving and guilty of sin—according to the common misconception. In truth, biblical love is not always manifested gently,6 with tolerance,7 or without judgment.8 In truth, different approaches are appropriate at different times. Sometimes rebuking—an approach we would not generally deem gentle—might be necessary (Luke 17:3), while at other times admonishing/warning (Romans 15:14), edifying/building up (Romans 14:19), or exhorting/encouraging (Titus 1:9) are appropriate. Notice, however, that in all cases, love is the motivation: a desire to do whatever is necessary to help others be pleasing to God—whether through gentle pleading (Galatians 6:1) or through “tough love” (Hebrews 12:5-11; Titus 1:13). Further, boldness is certainly encouraged for evangelists (Acts 4:29), but it is to be tempered with humility (2 Timothy 2:25), prudence (Proverbs 22:3), and being slow to speak (James 1:19), as Peter learned the hard way on more than one occasion.9 Knowing the best response for each situation would require more wisdom than any single human could have, which is why humbly gaining knowledge through experience (Proverbs 16:31), study (Proverbs 10:14), and counsel (Proverbs 11:14) is emphasized in Scripture.

Preparation for the day of persecution and challenges to your beliefs is also emphasized in Scripture. Peter reminds us to “always be ready to give a defense” (1 Peter 3:15), since there will be a day when a person will ask us why we have hope in God, if we are living as we should before them. So we should strive to “be ready, in season and out of season” (2 Timothy 4:2) to use whatever tactic might be appropriate in various situations—whether it be merely convincing them of the truth, or rebuking, or exhorting another Christian. Such readiness takes diligence—incessant study and preparation (2 Timothy 2:15; Acts 17:11).

That said, Who better to study to learn how to respond to public persecutions and challenges than the Chief Apologist, Himself—Jesus Christ? After all, it is He Whom the Christian must emulate. Reading through the gospel accounts, watching how Jesus chose to respond to His critics, is a fascinating practice. Jesus was never looking for a fight, but was always prepared to contend for the Faith and defend Himself when necessary, and chose to do so many times throughout His ministry. Typically, He did so seemingly dispassionately—using pure logic and reason.10 The word used to describe Him in 2 Corinthians 10:1 is “meek”—the word often used to describe, not a wild bull in a China shop, but a trained war horse: strength and fearlessness that is bridled or under control. Jesus recognized that He had ultimately nothing to lose by teaching the truth and, therefore, did not get “riled” up and respond defensively to skeptics and antagonists. That is not to say, however, that He never showed passion when the circumstance called for it; but He was always controlled in His responses, being fearless of the possible consequences. Oh that we all could emulate our Lord in this regard.

At times, we at Apologetics Press have been criticized for not responding to every comment on our Facebook page or choosing not to debate every person who wishes to engage us in a public debate (which apparently some do not realize happens often and would require several more full-time representatives than we have on staff). Of particular interest to those of us that study apologetics is the observation that, though Christ was always ready for a debate, He also knew when not to do so—whether because the timing was not right for a response, a response would be pointless (e.g., Matthew 21:27), or a response would even be detrimental to His ultimate cause. Just because a person challenged Him did not mean that He felt He needed to respond. Since the human inclination is to respond to every person, lest we be perceived as not having an answer and, hence, “losing the debate,” Jesus’ wisdom is awe-inspiring. In Matthew 7:6, while preaching the greatest sermon the world has ever heard, Jesus warned His audience that some people do not care about the truth and are like “swine”—unworthy of the valuable information we might wish to impart. If we choose to proceed and reason with the “pigs,” they are likely not only to stamp on the valuable jewels we have given them, but they will likely stampede us as well. In Proverbs 26:4, Solomon admonished the wise, “Do not answer a fool according to his folly, lest you also be like him.” The principle is clear: if the person or people to whom we are talking are not genuinely interested in the truth, to spend time trying to convince them of the truth would be wasteful and potentially even dangerous or counterproductive.

In Matthew 10, Jesus again warned His apostles that there will be those who “will not receive you nor hear your words” (vs. 14). In such cases, they were not to continue pressing the issue, but rather, “shake off the dust from your feet” and move on—a practice which Paul and Barnabas implemented in their evangelistic journeys as well (Acts 13:51). With that principle in mind, it is noteworthy to see Jesus’ implementation of that principle in His own life. At times, He chose to respond to challenges, depending on the audience, but at other times, He chose not to do so, in spite of how He might be perceived. For instance, when challenged by the chief priests and elders in the Temple to announce who gave Him authority to teach, after posing a question of His own, Jesus chose simply not to respond to their question (Matthew 21:23-27).

Surely the most notable example of Jesus practicing what He preached about remaining silent at times was what was prophesied about Him in Isaiah 53:7 regarding His crucifixion: “He was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He opened not His mouth; He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so He opened not His mouth.” All four gospel records highlight Jesus’ refusal to respond to various attackers in the illegal trials leading up to His crucifixion.11 Again, His willingness to remain silent when most would respond defensively was a manifestation of such superhuman self-control that Pilate “marveled greatly” (Matthew 27:14).

The principle is clear: there are times when not responding to attacks is the best course of action. We would do well to gain the wisdom necessary to recognize those moments. We pray that God will grant to all Christians in the perilous times in which we live the wisdom to know when to fight and when to remain silent, as well as the boldness to fight when the time calls for it.

Endnotes

1 In 2 Timothy 2:24 the text says that “a servant of the Lord must not quarrel,” which commentators clarify as meaning not “striving contentiously” [Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary (2012), WORDsearch Corp, Electronic Database.]. The ESV, therefore, translates the word “quarrel” as “quarrelsome” (i.e., looking for a fight). One can “contend” without being “contentious.”

2 James 2:8; 1 John 3:13-18; 4:7; John 13:34-35; 1 Corinthians 13:1-3; 16:14; Colossians 3:14.

3 Matthew 22:36-40; Galatians 5:14; Romans 13:9-10.

4 Galatians 5:23; Romans 5:8; 1 John 4:10; John 3:16; John 15:13; Matthew 5:43-48; cf. Endnotes 2 and 3.

5 Matthew 7:12; 16:24; Philippians 1:15-17; 2:3-8; 1 Corinthians 10:24; 2 Corinthians 5:15.

6 Hebrews 12:6; Titus 1:13; Proverbs 15:10; 20:30; 27:5; Hosea 6:5. Consider Jesus’ behavior in John 2—overturning tables and making a whip of cords to drive the moneychangers and animals from the Temple. Consider also that sometimes loving a child involves physically striking him (Proverbs 13:24). Note that the term translated “gentle” in 2 Timothy 2:24 (apiov) means to be “kind toward someone”—a significant distinction in this case [William Arndt, F.W. Gingrich, and Frederick W. Danker (1979), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press), second edition revised, p. 348]. The ESV, NIV, RSV, and NASB renderings capture this meaning. One can be kind to someone and simultaneously not necessarily be gentle, as the above passages indicate.

7 2 Thessalonians 3:6,14; Titus 3:10; Romans 16:17; 1 Timothy 5:20.

8 John 7:24; 2 Corinthians 5:10.

9 John 13:5-9; Matthew 16:22-23; 17:1-5.

10 Dave Miller (2011), “Jesus Used Logic,” Apologetics Press, http://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=11& article=3755; Dave Miller (2011), “Is Christianity Logical? [Part I],” Reason & Revelation, 31[6]:50-59, http://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx? category=12&article=3869; Dave Miller (2011), “Jesus Was Logical,” Apologetics Press, https://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=653&topic=71; Dave Miller (2011), “Jesus Was Rational,” Apologetics Press, http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=1245&topic=71.

11 E.g., Matthew 26:62-63; 27:13-14; Mark 14:60-61; 15:4-5; Luke 23:9; John 19:9.

"I Just Believe in One Less God Than You" by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

 

https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=5854

"I Just Believe in One Less God Than You"

by  Kyle Butt, M.Div.

When searching YouTube for “Best Atheist Arguments,” several videos appear that include a popular saying often repeated by atheists: “I just believe in one less God than you.” What do atheists mean when they use this argument? They list several “gods” such as Zeus, Poseidon, Vishnu, Buddha, Horus, and Apollo. They then say something to the effect of, “Tell me why you don’t believe in those gods, and I will use your very same reasons to tell you why I don’t believe in yours.”

The problem with this “argument” is that it’s not an argument at all. It’s a neat little play on words, but when looked at closely, it is not a logical reason for anything. The idea being presented is that just because there are many wrong answers, then all the answers must be wrong. In fact, the statement implies that the “one less” answer is just the next step in the sequence. But let’s think through that. If there really is just one correct answer, then of course all the others would be incorrect. For instance, if a person were to say, “You don’t believe that 2+2 equals 5 or 6 or 7 etc., therefore 2+2 does not have an answer. See, I just believe in one less answer than you.” The problem with such reasoning is easy to see: If there is a singular answer, then the “one less” statement leaves out the one most important correct answer.

To further illustrate, when Thomas Edison invented the light bulb, the story is told that he said that after trying 10,000 different filaments, he had not failed; he just found 10,000 things that don’t work in a light bulb. Now suppose a person were to say, “Tell me why those 10,000 substances did not work and I will use the same reasoning to tell you why the one thing you say will work, won’t. I just believe in one less filament than you.” Again, the fault in the reasoning is evident. The characteristics of the filaments that don’t work are obviously different from the ones that do. Yes, it may be true that atheists believe in one less God than the God of the Bible. But the fact is, no other God is the all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good Creator of life Who came down to the Earth in human form and sacrificed His life for His human creatures simply because He loved them. Yes, atheists believe in one less God, but it is that God, and only that God, Who truly fits all the criteria to be the singularly correct answer (John 11:26).1

Endnotes

1 Eric Lyons and Kyle Butt (2014), “7 Reasons to Believe in God,” http://apologeticspress.org/apPubPage.aspx?pub=1&issue=1175.

"THE GOSPEL OF MARK" Jesus And The Tax Collector (2:13-17) by Mark Copeland

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
"THE GOSPEL OF MARK"

Jesus And The Tax Collector (2:13-17)
 

INTRODUCTION

1. As Jesus went about preaching and healing, He called people to follow Him...
   a. Such as Simon and Andrew - Mk 1:16-18
   b. Also James and John - Mk 1:19-20

2. Today, Jesus wants us to call people to follow Him...
   a. To become His disciples - cf. Mt 28:19-20
   b. To enjoy His salvation - cf. Mk 16:15-16

[Who are suitable prospect for discipleship and salvation?  We might
think those who are religiously inclined.  But our text for this study
(Mk 2:13-17) should caution us not to limit our prospects...]

I. THE NARRATIVE

   A. JESUS CALLS THE TAX COLLECTOR...
      1. Jesus was teaching by the shores of Galilee - Mk 2:13; cf. 4:1
      2. He saw Levi, son of Alphaeus, sitting at the tax office - Mk 2:14
         a. Better known as Matthew, the apostle and gospel writer - cf. Mt 9:9; 10:3
         b. His father was Alphaeus, not likely the father of James - cf. Mk 3:18
      3. He was a tax collector (publican), a profession not well-liked - cf. Lk 5:27
         a. Viewed as traitors - as Jews working for the Roman government
         b. Viewed as extortionists - for publicans often charged exorbitant fees
         c. Classed together with sinners and harlots - cf. Lk 15:1-2; Mt 21:31-32
      4. Yet Jesus calls him to become a disciple - Mk 2:14
         a. "Follow Me" - cf. Mk 1:17-18
         b. He "left all" and followed Jesus - cf. Lk 5:28
      -- Not someone you might consider having potential as a follower of Christ

   B. THE TAX COLLECTOR HOSTS JESUS...
      1. Levi (Matthew) gave Jesus a great feast in his house - Mk 2:15; cf. Lk 5:29
      2. There were many tax collectors and sinners present - Mk 2:15
      3. The scribes and Pharisees are shocked - Mk 2:16
         a. Luke says they "complained" - cf. Lk 5:30
         b. They wondered how Jesus could eat with tax collectors and sinners
      4. Jesus' response - Mk 2:17
         a. "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick"
         b. "I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance"
      -- Jesus' words reveal why Levi (Matthew) was a prospect for discipleship

[As we reflect on this narrative, what lessons might we glean from it?
Starting at the end of our text and working backward, here are...]

II. SOME LESSONS

   A. JESUS IS LOOKING FOR SINNERS...
      1. "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance"
         a. His purpose was to seek and save the lost - cf. Lk 19:10
         b. This gives great hope to those burdened by the guilt of sin
      2. "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick"
         a. In regards to the disease of sin, we are all sick - cf. Ro 3:23
         b. But the Great Physician is ready to heal those willing to repent of sin
      -- If you are burdened and suffering because of sin, Jesus is looking for you!

   B. FRIENDS OFFER GREAT POTENTIAL...
      1. Levi (Matthew) provides a wonderful method of personal evangelism
         a. He invited friends and co-workers to his home
         b. He provided opportunity for them to hear Jesus
      2. Cornelius did the same thing, even before he became a Christian
         a. He invited family and friends - cf. Ac 10:24
         b. He provided opportunity for them to hear Peter - cf. Ac 10:33
      -- Inviting family and friends for a home Bible study is a great way to share the gospel!

   C. WE ARE TO BE SEPARATE, NOT ISOLATED...
      1. The Bible teaches the principle of separation
         a. Evil company can corrupt good habits - cf. 1Co 15:33
         b. We are to be separate, not unequally yoked with unbelievers - cf. 2Co 6:14-18
      2. But separation does involve total isolation
         a. Otherwise we would have to leave this world - cf. 1Co 5:9-10
         b. Jesus and His disciples were willing to eat with sinners- Mk 2:15-16
      -- To heal those sick with sin, we must be willing to spend time with them!

   D. JESUS OFTEN CALLS THE BUSY TO SERVE...
      1. Consider those whom Jesus called to follow Him
         a. Fishermen like Simon and Andrew, James and John - cf. Mk 1:16-20
         b. A tax collector sitting at the tax office - cf. Mk 2:14
      2. We should not think that God wants only those with youth or time on their hands
         a. E.g., only young men who go to school to become preachers
         b. E.g., only older people who are retired with nothing better to do
      -- Remember the adage:  "If you want something done, ask a busy man to do it"

CONCLUSION

1. Jesus' interaction with the tax collector should serve to remind us...
   a. We are never too sinful to be saved by Jesus
   b. We are never too busy to serve Jesus
   c. We must be willing to reach out to those who are lost
   d. Good prospects are family, friends, and co-workers

2. How about you...?
   a. Are you willing to let Jesus be your Great Physician?
   b. Are you willing to serve Jesus no matter how busy you may be?

Are you willing to join Him in seeking and saving the lost...?   
 
Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

337,162 Pageviews

Our Mixed Up, Messed Up Culture by Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

 

https://thepreachersword.com/2015/06/02/our-mixed-up-messed-up-culture/

Our Mixed Up, Messed Up Culture

Sexual Preference

Mary Gonzalez, a Texas Legislator, is trying to trying to change people’s minds about gender diversity. Mary is a pansexual.

Pansexual? Yes. In 60+ years on earth I’ve never heard of a pansexual. I guess I live too sheltered a life! So, of course, I googled it.

A pansexual, or pan for short, “is not limited in choice with regard to biological sex, gender, or gender identity.” The Urban Dictionary says that pansexuals are ‘a group that is open to members of all sexual orientations or gender identities including straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transsexual, or transvestite.”

Gonzalez laments that “The media labeled me [as a lesbian]. I always identified as queer or LGBT-identified or pan. When I first came out in politics, I used to say I was LGBT-identified and the media took that [as], ‘Well she must be lesbian’ as opposed to having a more complex understanding of our sexual community. And so, because of that I had to clarify that and say, ‘No, not lesbian. I identify as pan and talk about what that means.” She says she’s trying to dispel misinformation about her identity.

Does that clarify it for everyone?

Me? I’m still a little confused. But not as much as Bruce Jenner who now says he’s a she! And to call him Caitlyn! Of course, the liberal, left-wing media from Vanity Fair to the New York Times is tripping all over themselves to call Bruce brave and courageous. I would call Bruce bizarre and confused.

The Bible says that in the beginning God created the first pair “male and female.” He pronounced a blessing upon them and said, “Be fruitful and multiply.” (Gen 1:27-28). Later when Jesus was asked by the Pharisees a question relating to marriage, he responded this way.

“Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.” (Matt 19:4-6)

Bruce Jenner and others like him can grow their hair long, wear lipstick and shop in the women’s section at Dillards, but that will not change their God-given gender!

The Bible does not give us free rein to choose our sexual preferences whether Bi-sexual, Pansexual, Transsexual or Homosexual!  The Bible identifies all sexual activity outside the relationship of a married man and woman as immoral (Eph 5:3; 1Cor 6:9; Gal. 5:19; Heb 13:2).

Our culture has taken something simple, and obvious and made it so complex and complicated that it goes beyond the absurd! Yet, “enlightened” educators, politicians, journalists and sadly some church leaders, nod with some kind of knowing empathy that everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, feelings, behavior and sexual identity or preference.

Our societal problem is that we have forgotten what God said about gender and sexual behavior. Our culture has lost its way. There is a crisis of values today. One writer said we are experiencing “truth decay.” People don’t value Truth. They value pleasure and convenience. Our world is influenced by individualism, secularism  and relativism.

Individualism is the deification of self. It says, “I can only judge for myself what is right or wrong. What is right for you, may be wrong for me. And what is right for me, may be wrong for you.”

Secularism seeks to remove religion from public life. It basically denies the need for God. And spiritual values are replaced with secular values and human self-sufficiency.

Relativism ironically proclaims there are no absolutes! Everything is relative to what you choose to believe is Truth! Moral standards become obsolete.

Mary Gonzalez says, “Changing minds by exposing people to the diversity of gender isn’t easy, but it can be done. Mary may be right. But I fear that because the direction our culture is going, it’s going to be more difficult to convince people this is a bunch of foolishness as well as sinful.

–Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

Masonic Baptism by steve finnell

 

https://steve-finnell.blogspot.com/2017/02/masonic-baptism-by-steve-finnell-would.html

Masonic Baptism by steve finnell

Would it be hypocritical for a so-called Christian Masons' to accept Masonic baptism as a purifying ritual and then reject Christian baptism as being essential to the forgiveness of sins?

Can you be a Christian and a Mason at the same time?

MASONIC BAPTISM

The elements to be used in administering this rite are water, oil, salt, lighted candles.
 Worshipful Master:---In the name, and under the auspices of the Supreme Council of Sovereign Grand Inspectors General of the thirty-third and last degree, I proclaim these children to be purified by  Masonic baptism, and anointed with oil of consecration to Masonic duty. (Page 576 Book of Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, By Charles T. McClenachan, 33 degree.) [Ref. Ronayne's Hand-Book of FREEMASONRY. Ezra A. Cook Publication, Inc. P.O. Box 796 Chicago 9-, Ill.]  Published in 1976.


Jesus on water baptism. Mark 16:16 He who has believed, and has been baptized shall be saved.....(NASB)

Jesus on water baptism. John 3:5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly I say to you, unless one is born  of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.(NASB)

Jesus on water baptism. Matthew 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,(NASB)

Which baptism would you chose? Masonic baptism.  or Christian baptism.

SECOND CORINTHIANS by Paul Southern

 

 

https://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Southern/Paul/1901/cor2.html


SECOND CORINTHIANS

  1. THE TITLE
  2. This book is called II Corinthians because it is the second of two letters addressed to the church at Corinth (II Corinthians 1:1). Suggestions found in I Corinthians 5:9 and elsewhere cause some scholars to assume that Paul wrote another letter to the Corinthians, but only two have come down to us. It is possible that we have in I and II Corinthians everything that Paul wrote to the Corinthian church.

  3. THE WRITER
  4. From II Corinthians 1:1 we learn that Paul, "an apostle of Jesus Christ," was the writer. Elsewhere in these outlines we have given a brief summary of his life.

  5. TIME AND PLACE OF WRITING
  6. It was written from some point in Macedonia, probably in the fall of A.D. 57. Some name Philippi as the exact place of writing.

  7. OCCASION OF THE LETTER
  8. Shortly after Paul wrote I Corinthians, Demetrius and his guild of silversmiths stirred up a riot in Ephesus and Paul nearly lost his life (Acts 19; II Corinthians 1:8-10). At the urging of the brethren, the apostle departed on his journey to visit the churches of Europe. He had hoped to meet Titus at Troas with good news from Corinth. When Titus failed to show up, Paul became anxious and proceeded immediately into Macedonia (II Corinthians 1:15,16; 2:12,13). Somewhere in Macedonia he met Titus and in response to the good news wrote this second letter (II Corinthians 7:5-7).

  9. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LETTER
  10. Second Corinthians is both didactic and appreciative. Paul rejoices that the church reacted favorably to his first letter (II Corinthians 1:13,14; 7:9,15,16), and now proceeds to convey further counsel on needful matters. It contains a medley of emotions-joy, grief, indignation. The letter is the least systematic and perhaps the most personal of all Paul's epistles. It is invaluable as a source book on the life and character of the apostle. Solicitude for the Corinthians, defense of Paul, warnings against error, instructions in matters of duty and joy over spiritual triumphs make the letter an interesting treatise. The keynote is loyalty to Christ. The extreme emotion of the writer's mind is expressed in the following words: tribulation, consolation, boasting, weakness, simplicity, manifest, manifestation, folly. The predominant word is tribulation, although in the English version it occurs in various synonyms.

  11. SUMMARY OF CONTENTS
    1. Paul's account of the character of his spiritual labors (Chs. 1-7). Here the apostle portrays his feelings over the condition of the Corinthian church, and shows his relief after the coming of Titus. The central theme is consolation in tribulation, with an undercurrent of apology and suppressed indignation.
    2. Instructions concerning collections for the poor saints (Chs. 8,9). The apostle appeals for and tells of the blessedness of liberality.
    3. Paul's defense of his apostolic authority (Chs. 10-13). Judaizing teachers everywhere were trying to destroy Paul's influence as an apostle and bring churches under bondage to the Jewish law. In this division of the book Paul tells what his apostolic labors had cost him in earthly sufferings.

  12. TOPICS FOR SPECIAL STUDY
    1. The inner man vs. the outer man (4:16-18; 5:1-10).
    2. The grace of giving (Chs. 8 and 9; also I Corinthians 16:1,2).
    3. Paul's thorn in the flesh (II Corinthians 12:7-9; Galatians 4:13; Acts 9).
    4. Personal attacks on Paul (2:17; 4:3; 10:10; 11:6).
    5. When, how, why and of what things did Paul boast? (11:16 to 12:13).
    6. Discuss the attitude that Christians should have toward erring church members (I Corinthians 5:1-13; II Corinthians 2:1-11).
    7. Using the Corinthian letters as your source, prepare a paper on "The Man Who Would Preach," a study of the gospel preacher and his work.
    8. Under what conditions should Christians defend themselves?
    9. Study Paul's vision of the third heaven (II Corinthians 12:1-4). Did the vision have any connection with his thorn in the flesh? (II Corinthians 12:5-10).
    10. Study the history of Corinth as given in unabridged Bible encyclopedias.

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

Parallels of light and darkness by Gary Rose


 

Cats are such mysterious creatures; unlike dogs, they can be loving, but also have a wildness about them and an air of unpredictability; you just never know what they will do next. Yet, millions upon millions of people have them as pets and adore them.


This picture seems to accurately reflect the feline character and that aurora of uncertainty that surrounds their nature. A cat coming out of darkness into the light, wary of its surroundings and undoubtedly prepared to handle any situation.


Humans can also be unpredictable; we can create such lovely works or art or architecture, use language to compose prose and poetry that enlightens the spirit or any one of a thousand things the human mind can accomplish. However, our race also has the capacity for great evil and atrocities beyond imagination.


In parallel to these things is the concept of light as compared to darkness; good versus evil. A life with God, directed by HIM to follow the loftiest of ideals, or a human being that, left to his or her own base desires, can commit actions that can are unspeakable.


The good news is that we have a choice- Good or Evil. As I contemplate these attitudes and actions, I think of the apostle Paul and his change from opposing Jesus, to proclaiming the message of hope from God.


Paul says to king Agrippa…



Acts 26 ( World English Bible )

1 Agrippa said to Paul, “You may speak for yourself.” Then Paul stretched out his hand, and made his defense.

2 “I think myself happy, King Agrippa, that I am to make my defense before you this day concerning all the things that I am accused by the Jews,

3 especially because you are expert in all customs and questions which are among the Jews. Therefore I beg you to hear me patiently.

4 “Indeed, all the Jews know my way of life from my youth up, which was from the beginning among my own nation and at Jerusalem;

5 having known me from the first, if they are willing to testify, that after the strictest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee.

6 Now I stand here to be judged for the hope of the promise made by God to our fathers,

7 which our twelve tribes, earnestly serving night and day, hope to attain. Concerning this hope I am accused by the Jews, King Agrippa!

8 Why is it judged incredible with you, if God does raise the dead?

9 “I myself most certainly thought that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.

10 This I also did in Jerusalem. I both shut up many of the saints in prisons, having received authority from the chief priests, and when they were put to death I gave my vote against them.

11 Punishing them often in all the synagogues, I tried to make them blaspheme. Being exceedingly enraged against them, I persecuted them even to foreign cities.

12 “Whereupon as I traveled to Damascus with the authority and commission from the chief priests,

13 at noon, O king, I saw on the way a light from the sky, brighter than the sun, shining around me and those who traveled with me.

14 When we had all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew language, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.’

15 “I said, ‘Who are you, Lord?’ “He said, ‘I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.

16 But arise, and stand on your feet, for I have appeared to you for this purpose: to appoint you a servant and a witness both of the things which you have seen, and of the things which I will reveal to you;

17 delivering you from the people, and from the Gentiles, to whom I send you,

18 to open their eyes, that they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive remission of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in me.’


Paul’s message: Turn to God for forgiveness of sins and receive the blessing He offers. A simple defining choice that can echo through eternity. Choose God and live in HIS light or the ignorance of the darkness of the rebellion of Satan.


Choice is a wonderful thing; that cat in the picture chose to come into the light and so can we! Choose light and life and God, you will be glad you did!