Galaxy's Distance Doesn't Tell Age by Kyle Butt, M.Div.



Galaxy's Distance Doesn't Tell Age

by  Kyle Butt, M.Div.

Maggie Fox recently reported that scientists believe they have discovered the “oldest” galaxy ever seen. This galaxy is supposed to be 13.2 billion years old, “only” 480 million years younger than the entire Universe (Fox, 2011). How do scientists arrive at such a great age? They base their calculations on the Big Bang theory and equate distance with age. What the scientists have actually found is what they believe to be the most distant galaxy ever seen. By equating distance with age, they conclude that the most distant galaxy must be the oldest.

If the Big Bang theory is incorrect, however, the assumption that distance equals age is false. It has been repeatedly shown that Big Bang theory cannot possibly be scientifically, mathematically, or historically true (see Thompson, Harrub, and May, 2003). Not only that, it is also true that the dating methods used to arrive at the billions-of-years scenario are faulty (DeYoung, 2005). Thus we can know that a galaxy’s distance does not indicate its age in billions of years. What we “know” (I put the word “know” in quotation marks because science often even gets the distances wrong) is approximately how far the galaxy is. The incorrect interpretation shackled to that knowledge is the idea that distance equals age.

We regularly see this tactic used in the biological sciences. Often a biologist will measure the amount of similarity between two organisms’ molecular structures. The biologist will assume Darwinian evolution to be true and report how closely the organisms are related. Yet similarity only equals relationship if evolution is true (which it is not). The irony of the situation is that these similarity studies are often used as evidence of evolution. This becomes the epitome of circular reasoning: proving evolution by proving how closely organisms are related, and basing that “relationship” on similarities that only “prove” evolution if you assume it in the first place.

As a critically thinking society, we should demand from the scientific community that they keep their incorrect assumptions and faulty interpretations to themselves, and simply report the “facts.” We are reminded of the admonition to “test all things; hold fast what is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21). Distance does not equal age, similarity does not equal relationship, and the Big Bang theory and evolution do not equal good science.


DeYoung, Don (2005), Thousands...Not Billions (Green Forest, AR: Master Books).

Fox, Maggie (2011), “Telescope Spots Oldest Galaxy Ever Seen,” Reuters, http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110127/sc_nm/us_space_galaxy/print.

Thompson, Bert, Brad Harrub and Branyon May (2003), “The Big Bang Theory—A Scientific Critique,” Reason & Revelation, http://apologeticspress.org/articles/2635.

From Whence Came Morals? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.



From Whence Came Morals?

by  Eric Lyons, M.Min.

“[E]volutionary psychologists believe they are closing in on one of the remaining mysteries of life, the universal ‘moral law’ that underlies our intuitive notions of good and evil.” Such were the words of Newsweek senior editor Jerry Adler in his article, titled “The New Naysayers” (2006).

It has long been understood that morality exists (see Taylor, 1945, p. 83). Even the most renowned atheists have admitted such (see Simpson, 1967, p. 346): there is good and there is evil; there is right and there is wrong. Different people draw the moral line at different places, but “they all agree that there is such a line to be drawn” (Taylor, 1945, p. 83). Why?

Why are humans moral beings if, as evolutionists teach, we merely evolved from lifeless, mindless, unconscious matter over billions of years? Why do humans feel a sense of “ought” to help the poor, weak, and oppressed if we simply evolved by the natural law of “might makes right” (i.e., survival of the fittest)? Adler highlighted Richard Dawkins in his “New Naysayers” article as one of three scholars who “argue that atheism is smarter” (2006, p. 47). Apparently, one example of atheism’s superiority comes from evolutionists’ new explanation for morality, which they describe as “one of the remaining mysteries of life” (p. 48). According to Adler,

Dawkins attempts to show how the highest of human impulses, such as empathy, charity and pity, could have evolved by the same mechanism of natural selection that created the thumb. Biologists understand that the driving force in evolution is the survival and propagation of our genes. They may impel us to instinctive acts of goodness...even when it seems counterproductive to our own interests—say, by risking our life to save someone else. Evolutionary psychology can explain how selfless behavior might have evolved (pp. 48-49, emp. added).

And what exactly are these explanations? (1) “The recipient [of our acts of goodness—EL] may be a blood relation who carries some of our own genes.” (2) “Or our acts may earn us future gratitude, or reputation for bravery that makes us more desirable as mates.” (3) “The impulse for generosity must have evolved while humans lived in small bands in which almost everyone was related, so that goodness became the default human aspiration” (p. 49).

There you have it—atheism’s “smarter” explanations for morality. Although the “driving force” of evolution—natural selection—runs contrariwise to such moral, human impulses as empathy, charity, and pity, now we are told it “may impel us to instinctive acts of goodness...even when it seems counterproductive to our own interests” (p. 48). In summary, our sense of moral “oughtness” allegedly comes (1) from wanting to pass on our genes, (2) from a desire to be a hero and gain popularity, and/or (3) by default.

In actuality, “smarter” atheism is as foolish as ever (Psalm 14:1; 1 Corinthians 1:25). The desire to pass on one’s genes or to be a hero fails to explain the origins of human morality. When a person sees an unfamiliar child hanging from a six-story balcony and feels compelled to save that child from death (even though no one is watching), that sense of moral obligation must be explained in some way other than evolution. When a person is compelled to spend valuable time, money, and energy to help a poor stranger survive, even though such action may mean risking injury or death, naturalistic explanations simply will not do. To say, “goodness became the default human aspiration” is simply a copout for lacking an adequate naturalistic explanation.

Morality exists and makes sense only if there is a God, because only God could have created it. If all naturalistic explanations for the existence of morality have been shown to be inadequate, by default, the only logical explanation must be Supernatural (i.e., God).


Adler, Jerry (2006), “The New Naysayers,” Newsweek, September 11, pp. 47-49.

Simpson, George Gaylord (1967), The Meaning of Evolution (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press), revised edition.

Taylor, A.E. (1945), Does God Exist? (London: Macmillan).

From Nonlife to Nonlife by Trevor Major, M.Sc., M.A.



From Nonlife to Nonlife

by  Trevor Major, M.Sc., M.A.


Organic evolution is based on the concept of something inorganic and nonliving becoming organic and living. Do the actual scientific data support such a concept?


How did life arise from nonliving chemicals? This is the most fundamental, yet sketchiest chapter of evolutionary theory.

One proposal is to start with seemingly lifelike chemicals. This is the approach taken by Julius Rebek and his coworkers (Hong, et al., 1992; Feng, et al., 1992). Like DNA, Rebek’s chemicals can make copies of themselves (i.e., replicate). Further, Rebek can make more efficient replicators by subjecting them to ultraviolet radiation. These new varieties outproduce other forms, eventually dominating their test-tube world. Supposedly, these chemicals could provide the missing link between nonlife and life.

Yet, the gap remains because Rebek’s system contains little information (see Hurst and Dawkins, 1992, 357:199). Life is defined by a set of elegant instructions recorded on the DNA molecule, and there is more to life than replication.

Another proposal tries to circumvent the famous chicken-and-egg problem of chemical evolution by starting with RNA. If we think of DNA as the “brain,” then RNA is the “nervous system” carrying the message of protein formation to the rest of the cell. However, the whole process involves crucial enzymes (specialized proteins). So which came first, the protein or the DNA?

The answer, many evolutionists believe, lies in the discovery that a special part of RNA can act like an enzyme. This means it can carry information and do various jobs within the cell. If this is the case, then perhaps evolution worked both ways, turning RNA into DNA for better information storage, and into specialized enzymes for more efficient copying. Last year, the proponents of this RNA world received a boost from the work of Beaudry and Joyce (1992) who used selection and mutations to make a more efficient RNA enzyme.

Some journalists and scientists have made extraordinary claims about this new research. First, they described the techniques and chemical processes in evolutionary terms such as “selection” and “mutation.” One newspaper article hailed Beaudry and Joyce’s work as the “first complete laboratory demonstration of evolution” (Graham, 1992). Second, they believe the experiments show that “darwinian selection is universal for all lifes” (Hurst and Dawkins, 1992, 357:198), not just for “life as we know it.” And third, because this research has a practical application in biotechnology, they wish to promote evolution as a fundamental tool of science, and not a mere theory.

However, using terms such as selection, mutation, and evolution does not explain the origin of life. These experiments entail a great deal of design and technical innovation. The human experimenters are forcing or directing “evolution” to achieve goals they have set (Culotta, 1992). As Leslie Orgel noted, to really show how life could have evolved, we need to start with something that does not require the “intervention of organic chemists” (1992, 358:207).

Further, this research may come closer to Darwin’s arguments than they would really like. By showing that man can use artificial selection to change species dramatically, even within recorded history, Darwin hoped to establish his case for long-term, large-scale evolution by natural selection (1859, pp. 133,153). But this analogy breaks down because artificial selection, by definition, involves human intelligence. The same is true for this recent research. We are seeing nothing more than high-tech horse breeding. Actually, we may be seeing less, because the experiments do not deal with life at all. If anything, they resemble Edison’s efforts to find a better filament for his electric light bulb.

What we must emphasize is that an evolutionist can invent any theory about the origin of life, no matter how implausible it may sound. He might succeed in modeling that theory in the laboratory. However, a model is not necessarily the same as reality; he has not proved that life evolved in that way. Ultimately, all he would have displayed is his God-given intellectual and physical abilities.


Beaudry, Amber A. and Gerald F. Joyce (1992), “Directed Evolution of an RNA Enzyme,” Science, 257:635-641, July 31.

Culotta, Elizabeth (1992), “Forcing the Evolution of an RNA Enzyme in the Test Tube,” Science, 257:613, July 31.

Darwin, Charles (1859), The Origin of Species (New York: Avenel Books, 1979 reprint of the 1968 Penguin edition).

Feng, Qing, Tae Kyo Park and Julius Rebek, Jr. (1992), “Crossover Reactions Between Synthetic Replicators Yield Active and Inactive Recombinants,” Science, 256:1179-1180, May 22.

Graham, David (1992), “Evolution in the Lab at Scripps,” San Diego-Union Tribune, July 31, pp. A1-A2, July 31.

Hong, Jong-In, Qing Feng, Vincent Rotello and Julius Rebek, Jr. (1992), “Competition, Cooperation, and Mutation: Improving a Synthetic Replicator by Light Irradiation,” Science, 255:848-850, February 14.

Hurst, Lawrence D. and Richard Dawkins (1992), “Life in a Test Tube,” Nature, 357:198-199, May 21.


"THE GOSPEL OF MARK" The Blind Man At Bethsaida (8:22-26)



The Blind Man At Bethsaida (8:22-26)


1. Among the many people Jesus healed included the blind...
   a. As foretold by Isaiah - cf. Lk 4:18
   b. Offered as evidence to John the Baptist - cf. Lk 7:20-22

2. The healing of a blind man in our text is unique in two ways...
   a. It is found only in Mark's gospel
   b. It is the only miracle by that occurs in two stages

[Opening our Bibles to our text (Mk 8:22-26), let's first examine...]


      1. Bethsaida Julias, near where the 5000 had been fed - Mk 8:22; cf. Lk 9:10
      2. On the NE side of the Sea of Galilee, near the entrance of the Jordan

      1. By those who begged Jesus to touch him - Mk 8:22
      2. By concerned friends, similar to those who brought the paralytic - cf. Mk 2:3

      1. Leading the blind man by the hand - Mk 8:23
      2. Similar to what He did with the deaf mute - cf. Mk 7:33

      1. Stage one - Mk 8:23-24
         a. Jesus spat on his eyes and then touched him
            1) Similar to what He did with the deaf mute - cf. Mk 7:33
            2) Perhaps to convey to the blind man His intentions
            3) The spit - His intention was to heal, saliva was thought
               to have medicinal properties
            4) The touch - "Something will be done for your eyes...and I will do it."
         b. When asked if he saw anything, he looked up and said, "I see men like trees, walking"
      2. Stage two - Mk 8:25
         a. Jesus put His hands on his eyes again and made him look up
         b. His sight was completely restored and saw everyone clearly

      1. To his house, not into town, not to tell anyone - Mk 8:26
      2. Similar to earlier admonitions following His healings - cf. Mk1:44; 5:43; 7:36
      3. Undue attention would hinder His ability to travel and do His work
      4. Especially by the Pharisees, Sadducees, and the Herodians - cf. Mk 8:11

[With the account of this unusual miracle fresh on our minds, allow me to share...]


      1. Why take the blind man out of the town of Bethsaida?
         a. To avoid publicity?
         b. To establish a one-to-one relationship with the man?
         c. Because Bethsaida had been judged already? - cf. Mt 11:21-22
      2. Why didn't the man receive perfect sight immediately?
         a. Was it the spiritual condition of the man himself?
         b. Was it to illustrate the slow progress of the disciples' faith? - cf. Mk 8:18
      -- Any explanation is speculation at best

      1. Jesus healed at least eight blind men, using a variety of approaches
         a. Two men were healed by a simple touch of their eyes - Mt 9:27-31
         b. A blind and mute man was simply healed - Mt 12:22
         c. Two more blind men were healed by a simple touch of the eyes - Mt 20:30-34
         d. In our text, the blind man was healed with touch and spittle, in two stages - Mk 8:22-26
         e. Blind Bartimaeus was healed with but a simple word - Mk 10:46-52
         f. A blind man was healed with the anointment of the eyes with
            clay and spittle, followed by washing in the pool of Siloam - Jn 9:1-7
      2. Similarly, prayer is not always answered the same way
         a. God may say "yes" and the prayer answer immediately
         b. God may say "yes, but wait awhile"
         c. God may say "yes, but not in the way you expect"
      -- Faith is content to receive God's working, however He deems proper

      1. Similar to how this particular miracle occurred
      2. Such was the case with Jesus' disciples - cf. Mk 8:18
      3. So we should expect our spiritual growth to take time - cf. 1Co 3:1-2; 2Pe 3:18
      -- Faith is patient, understanding that important things often take time


1. Many commentators have noted our similarity with "The Blind Man At Bethsaida"...
   a. We are spiritually blinded by sin, in need of "healing" - Ro 3:23
   b. We need the special attention of Jesus to be "healed" - Mt11:28-30; Mk 16:15-16; Col 2:11-13
   c. When Jesus "heals" us of spiritual blindness, it may take awhile to see clearly - He 5:12-14

2. Are you still in sin...?
   a. Blinded by sin, and alienated from the life of God? - cf. Ep 4:17-19
   b. Then you need Jesus to be renewed in righteousness and holiness - cf. Ep 4:20-24

Begin by coming to Jesus through obedience to His gospel, and continue
by walking with Him, seeing more clearly day by day...!   
Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

eXTReMe Tracker

The Deconversion of Christians by Ken Weliever, The Preacherman



The Deconversion of Christians

Do you ever miss being a Christian?”

“No,” replied Anthony B. Pinn comfortably.

In an online story by The ChristianPost, Leonardo Blair relates the deconversion of a professor of humanities and religion at Rice University in Houston, Texas.

Deconversion is a strange-sounding new word to Christians. We’re familiar with conversion. But deconversion? It’s defined as a loss of faith or leaving one’s religion for another religion, or no religion at all.

Professor Pinn professes “no longer being a Christian doesn’t mean that I’m without ritual, without community, that I’m without relationship or without a sense of awe. I continue to have a sense of awe, but it’s secular. I walk outside and I’m baffled by the beauty. I think about life even from an evolutionary perspective and it creates a sense of awe that we are here.”

Pinn reports that his deconversion wasn’t an “aha! moment,” but a “slow build” over a period of years.

Pinn’s loss of faith is reflected in a recently released study by the Pew Research Center that said the number of those who identify as Christians has dropped to 65 percent. And the number of those who identify as “religiously unaffiliated,” which includes atheists, agnostics, and people who don’t identify with any religion, has swelled to 26 percent of the population. That’s a drop of 12% of those identifying as Christians in the last 10 years. The change, Pew noted, was particularly high among young adults.

Blair writes in the Post that “millions of Americans who were once committed Christians have continued to increasingly disengage with their religion in recent decades, and churches have been struggling with the culture shift in which there are no absolute answers.”

While not as dramatic in terms of denying the existence of God and turning to humanism, the problem of deconversion is increasingly growing among the fellowship of churches of Christ in the past decade. It is been troubling to personally see young people who’ve grown up in Christian homes turning away from “the faith once delivered unto the saints.”

While this trend is perplexing, it’s important to realize that it’s not new. The apostle Paul spoke of those in the first century who once were believers but had “made shipwreck of their faith” (1 Tim. 1:9). He also spoke of Demas who had forsaken him and the Lord because he “loved this present world” (2 Tim. 4:10). And he even warned the Ephesian elders that some spiritual shepherds would arise “speaking perverse things,” distorting the truth, and would “draw away disciples after them” (Ax 20:28-30).

In his parable of the Seed and Sower, Jesus reminds us that tribulation, persecution, the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches can choke out the Word. And of course, some are not properly grounded in the first place. Their faith is not deeply rooted in Truth and so they fall away.

Of course, this offers little comfort to those who’ve seen young people in their families and church families “depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits” (1 Tim. 4:1).

It reminds us not to take our young people for granted just because they’ve grown up in Christian homes. To recognize that each person’s faith is personal and individual. It cannot be inherited or inborn. Faith comes through the seed of God’s Word. It must be nurtured and nourished. Spiritually cultivated. Watered. And fertilized.

Furthermore, it’s important to teach new converts not only what we believe, but why we believe it. To provide answers to difficult questions. To patiently deal with doubts. To establish the authority of the Bible. To speak the Truth in love. To ground them in the Truth of God’s Word instead of the traditions of our church. And to fortify their faith in Christ rather than American customs.

All of this points to the Truth of the second part of Jesus’ Great Commission– “teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you” (Matt 28:20).

Conversion does NOT end with baptism. It really just begins. Discipleship is not an event, but an ongoing process.

–Ken Weliever, The Preacherman





Those who deny that water baptism is essential for salvation are guilty of improper Scriptural hermeneutics. When studying the Bible to find the answer to the question, "What must I do to be saved," proper hermeneutics is a must. All the Scriptures about salvation must be considered.

Some assert that men are saved by "faith alone." They claim that if water baptism was essential for salvation it would be mentioned every time the gospel was preached and every time salvation is addressed. That argument is nothing less than fallacious, hypocritical rhetoric.

Acts 15:11 "But we believe that through the grace of of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they." (NKJV)

Does the fact that Acts 15:11 only mentions grace prove that men can be saved without faith, without water baptism, without confessing that Jesus was raised from the dead by God, without confessing that Jesus is the Son of God, or without repenting? No, it does not. Proper hermeneutics dictates all relevant Scriptures must be considered.

Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and not that of yourselves; it is the gift of God,(NKJV)

Does Ephesians 2:8 prove we are saved by grace only or faith only? No, it does not.

Mark 16:16 "He who believes and is baptized will be saved...(NKJV)

Because Mark 16:16 does not mention grace. Does that prove  that men can be saved without God's grace? Of course not.

Titus 3:5 not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit. (NKJV)

In Titus 3:5 we are told we are saved because of God's mercy. Since mercy is not mentioned in every Scripture concerning salvation, does that mean God's mercy is not essential in order to be saved? No it does not.

Romans 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus Christ and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.(NKJV)

Seeing that Romans 10:9 does not state that grace and immersion in water are part of salvation, does that prove they are not essential in order to be saved? No, it does not.

1 Peter 3:21 There is also an antitype which now saves us, namely baptism(not the removal of filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,(NKJV)

Does 1 Peter 3:21 prove that water baptism alone saves men? Of course not.

WHAT MEN HAVE TO DO TO BE SAVED? They need to obey the gospel. 2 Thessalonians 1:8 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God and those who not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. (NKJV).

Ephesians 2:8
John 3:16
Acts 16:30-31
Acts 2:38
Acts 3:19
Mark 16:16
John 3:5
Romans 10:9
Acts 15:11
Romans 10:13
Acts 22:16
1 Peter 3:21
Galatians 3:27
Romans 6:3-7
Acts 2:21
Ephesians 5:25-27
John 8:24
Acts 8:35-38
Matthew 28:19
John 14:6
Acts 4:10-12
Luke 24:46-47






Jesus made salvation very simple. HE THAT BELIEVES AND IS BAPTIZED SHALL BE SAVED.    

The Testimony of Enemies by Richard Mansel



The Testimony of Enemies

We recently studied about Judas and why Jesus chose him to be an Apostle knowing the kind of character he possessed. The last reason we examined was Judas' testimony. Matthew 27:3-5 tells us that Judas felt remorse and tried to return the blood money he had received for his betrayal of Jesus. They ignored him. He had given them what they wanted and he was no longer of any use to them. Finding no outlet for his pain, he committed suicide.

Judas was called the "son of perdition" in John 17:12. Only the "Man of Sin" in 2 Thessalonians 2:3 is given this terrible title besides Judas. It refers to someone "doomed to eternal misery."

Yet, with Judas being such an evil man, he said, "I have sinned by betraying innocent blood." This astounding admission matches up with the accounts of so many avowed enemies of the cross. Their testimony is a clarion call to all of today's doubters.

In Job 1:6-12 we find Satan conversing with God about those who belong to Him. Couple this with Satan's words in Genesis 3 and you see that he obviously knows the Divinity of God.

Interestingly, every time demons speak in the New Testament they affirm the divinity of Christ. In Matthew 8:28-34 we find Jesus meeting two demon-possessed men in the "country of the Gergesenes." When they saw Jesus they cried out, "What have we to do with You, Jesus, You Son of God? Have you come here to torment us before our time?" (28:29).

Luke 4:40-41 finds Jesus casting out demons who say, "You are the Christ, the Son of God!"

James 2:19 says, "You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe -- and tremble."

Sadly, the so-called 'people of God' are often the ones with doubts.

In 1 Samuel 4:3 we find Israel doubting they can defeat the Philistines. Accordingly, God lets them go down to defeat and the Ark of the Covenant is stolen. Then from 4:6 through 7:1 the enemies of God show more faith in Him than His own people. This is further evidenced in chapter 8 when Israel demanded a king because they had rejected God.

Today we have members of the Lord's church denying the inspiration of the scriptures and teaching evolution. We have atheists in schools of theology where men are receiving their training. We have Muslims saying Jesus was a great prophet of God and 'Christians' saying He was just a 'good teacher.'

Is it any wonder America is in a crises of faith? Many people need to stop listening to so-called 'men of God' and heed, in these respects, the testimony of the enemies of God! Saying God is not real will not make it true.

His word is "settled in heaven" (Psalm 119:89) and He will come back "taking vengeance on those who do not know God" (2 Thessalonians 1:8).

Study the Word yourself and find those who are speaking the truth (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Listen to God and His Word and not men (Romans 10:17).

Richard Mansel

Published in The Old Paths Archive

Bible Reading for February 8 and 9 by Gary Rose


Bible Reading for February 8 and 9

World  English  Bible


Feb. 8

Genesis 39

Gen 39:1 Joseph was brought down to Egypt. Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh's, the captain of the guard, an Egyptian, bought him from the hand of the Ishmaelites that had brought him down there.

Gen 39:2 Yahweh was with Joseph, and he was a prosperous man. He was in the house of his master the Egyptian.

Gen 39:3 His master saw that Yahweh was with him, and that Yahweh made all that he did prosper in his hand.

Gen 39:4 Joseph found favor in his sight. He ministered to him, and he made him overseer over his house, and all that he had he put into his hand.

Gen 39:5 It happened from the time that he made him overseer in his house, and over all that he had, that Yahweh blessed the Egyptian's house for Joseph's sake; and the blessing of Yahweh was on all that he had, in the house and in the field.

Gen 39:6 He left all that he had in Joseph's hand. He didn't concern himself with anything, except for the food which he ate. Joseph was well-built and handsome.

Gen 39:7 It happened after these things, that his master's wife cast her eyes on Joseph; and she said, "Lie with me."

Gen 39:8 But he refused, and said to his master's wife, "Behold, my master doesn't know what is with me in the house, and he has put all that he has into my hand.

Gen 39:9 He isn't greater in this house than I, neither has he kept back anything from me but you, because you are his wife. How then can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?"

Gen 39:10 As she spoke to Joseph day by day, he didn't listen to her, to lie by her, or to be with her.

Gen 39:11 About this time, he went into the house to do his work, and there were none of the men of the house inside.

Gen 39:12 She caught him by his garment, saying, "Lie with me!" He left his garment in her hand, and ran outside.

Gen 39:13 When she saw that he had left his garment in her hand, and had run outside,

Gen 39:14 she called to the men of her house, and spoke to them, saying, "Behold, he has brought in a Hebrew to us to mock us. He came in to me to lie with me, and I cried with a loud voice.

Gen 39:15 It happened, when he heard that I lifted up my voice and cried, that he left his garment by me, and ran outside."

Gen 39:16 She laid up his garment by her, until his master came home.

Gen 39:17 She spoke to him according to these words, saying, "The Hebrew servant, whom you have brought to us, came in to me to mock me,

Gen 39:18 and it happened, as I lifted up my voice and cried, that he left his garment by me, and ran outside."

Gen 39:19 It happened, when his master heard the words of his wife, which she spoke to him, saying, "This is what your servant did to me," that his wrath was kindled.

Gen 39:20 Joseph's master took him, and put him into the prison, the place where the king's prisoners were bound, and he was there in custody.

Gen 39:21 But Yahweh was with Joseph, and showed kindness to him, and gave him favor in the sight of the keeper of the prison.

Gen 39:22 The keeper of the prison committed to Joseph's hand all the prisoners who were in the prison. Whatever they did there, he was responsible for it.

Gen 39:23 The keeper of the prison didn't look after anything that was under his hand, because Yahweh was with him; and that which he did, Yahweh made it prosper. 


Feb. 9

Genesis 40

Gen 40:1 It happened after these things, that the butler of the king of Egypt and his baker offended their lord, the king of Egypt.

Gen 40:2 Pharaoh was angry with his two officers, the chief cupbearer and the chief baker.

Gen 40:3 He put them in custody in the house of the captain of the guard, into the prison, the place where Joseph was bound.

Gen 40:4 The captain of the guard assigned them to Joseph, and he took care of them. They stayed in prison many days.

Gen 40:5 They both dreamed a dream, each man his dream, in one night, each man according to the interpretation of his dream, the cupbearer and the baker of the king of Egypt, who were bound in the prison.

Gen 40:6 Joseph came in to them in the morning, and saw them, and saw that they were sad.

Gen 40:7 He asked Pharaoh's officers who were with him in custody in his master's house, saying, "Why do you look so sad today?"

Gen 40:8 They said to him, "We have dreamed a dream, and there is no one who can interpret it." Joseph said to them, "Don't interpretations belong to God? Please tell it to me."

Gen 40:9 The chief cupbearer told his dream to Joseph, and said to him, "In my dream, behold, a vine was in front of me,

Gen 40:10 and in the vine were three branches. It was as though it budded, its blossoms shot forth, and its clusters brought forth ripe grapes.

Gen 40:11 Pharaoh's cup was in my hand; and I took the grapes, and pressed them into Pharaoh's cup, and I gave the cup into Pharaoh's hand."

Gen 40:12 Joseph said to him, "This is its interpretation: the three branches are three days.

Gen 40:13 Within three more days, Pharaoh will lift up your head, and restore you to your office. You will give Pharaoh's cup into his hand, the way you did when you were his cupbearer.

Gen 40:14 But remember me when it will be well with you, and show kindness, please, to me, and make mention of me to Pharaoh, and bring me out of this house.

Gen 40:15 For indeed, I was stolen away out of the land of the Hebrews, and here also have I done nothing that they should put me into the dungeon."

Gen 40:16 When the chief baker saw that the interpretation was good, he said to Joseph, "I also was in my dream, and behold, three baskets of white bread were on my head.

Gen 40:17 In the uppermost basket there was all kinds of baked food for Pharaoh, and the birds ate them out of the basket on my head."

Gen 40:18 Joseph answered, "This is its interpretation. The three baskets are three days.

Gen 40:19 Within three more days, Pharaoh will lift up your head from off you, and will hang you on a tree; and the birds will eat your flesh from off you."

Gen 40:20 It happened the third day, which was Pharaoh's birthday, that he made a feast for all his servants, and he lifted up the head of the chief cupbearer and the head of the chief baker among his servants.

Gen 40:21 He restored the chief cupbearer to his position again, and he gave the cup into Pharaoh's hand;

Gen 40:22 but he hanged the chief baker, as Joseph had interpreted to them.

Gen 40:23 Yet the chief cupbearer didn't remember Joseph, but forgot him. 


Feb. 8, 9

Matthew 20

Mat 20:1 "For the Kingdom of Heaven is like a man who was the master of a household, who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard.

Mat 20:2 When he had agreed with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into his vineyard.

Mat 20:3 He went out about the third hour, and saw others standing idle in the marketplace.

Mat 20:4 To them he said, 'You also go into the vineyard, and whatever is right I will give you.' So they went their way.

Mat 20:5 Again he went out about the sixth and the ninth hour, and did likewise.

Mat 20:6 About the eleventh hour he went out, and found others standing idle. He said to them, 'Why do you stand here all day idle?'

Mat 20:7 "They said to him, 'Because no one has hired us.' "He said to them, 'You also go into the vineyard, and you will receive whatever is right.'

Mat 20:8 When evening had come, the lord of the vineyard said to his manager, 'Call the laborers and pay them their wages, beginning from the last to the first.'

Mat 20:9 "When those who were hired at about the eleventh hour came, they each received a denarius.

Mat 20:10 When the first came, they supposed that they would receive more; and they likewise each received a denarius.

Mat 20:11 When they received it, they murmured against the master of the household,

Mat 20:12 saying, 'These last have spent one hour, and you have made them equal to us, who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat!'

Mat 20:13 "But he answered one of them, 'Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Didn't you agree with me for a denarius?

Mat 20:14 Take that which is yours, and go your way. It is my desire to give to this last just as much as to you.

Mat 20:15 Isn't it lawful for me to do what I want to with what I own? Or is your eye evil, because I am good?'

Mat 20:16 So the last will be first, and the first last. For many are called, but few are chosen."

Mat 20:17 As Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, he took the twelve disciples aside, and on the way he said to them,

Mat 20:18 "Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be delivered to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn him to death,

Mat 20:19 and will hand him over to the Gentiles to mock, to scourge, and to crucify; and the third day he will be raised up."

Mat 20:20 Then the mother of the sons of Zebedee came to him with her sons, kneeling and asking a certain thing of him.

Mat 20:21 He said to her, "What do you want?" She said to him, "Command that these, my two sons, may sit, one on your right hand, and one on your left hand, in your Kingdom."

Mat 20:22 But Jesus answered, "You don't know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?" They said to him, "We are able."

Mat 20:23 He said to them, "You will indeed drink my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with, but to sit on my right hand and on my left hand is not mine to give; but it is for whom it has been prepared by my Father."

Mat 20:24 When the ten heard it, they were indignant with the two brothers.

Mat 20:25 But Jesus summoned them, and said, "You know that the rulers of the nations lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them.

Mat 20:26 It shall not be so among you, but whoever desires to become great among you shall be your servant.

Mat 20:27 Whoever desires to be first among you shall be your bondservant,

Mat 20:28 even as the Son of Man came not to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

Mat 20:29 As they went out from Jericho, a great multitude followed him.

Mat 20:30 Behold, two blind men sitting by the road, when they heard that Jesus was passing by, cried out, "Lord, have mercy on us, you son of David!"

Mat 20:31 The multitude rebuked them, telling them that they should be quiet, but they cried out even more, "Lord, have mercy on us, you son of David!"

Mat 20:32 Jesus stood still, and called them, and asked, "What do you want me to do for you?"

Mat 20:33 They told him, "Lord, that our eyes may be opened."

Mat 20:34 Jesus, being moved with compassion, touched their eyes; and immediately their eyes received their sight, and they followed him.

TRUTH BOMB by Gary Rose


I saw this graphic and was a bit unsure as to what a “truth bomb” meant, so I looked it up in the “Urban dictionary”. The site said that it originated from a TV show called 30 rock (which I have never seen) and defined it as...

"truth bomb

A fact spoken in clear, easy to understand terms and without bias.”

From: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=truth%20bomb

So, the term “truth bomb” is something that refers to a communication of “THE TRUTH”, based on facts which are given without bias. As far as the bomb part goes, I think it conveys a bit of surprise on the part of the hearer.

The Source of Truth

Today, in our 21st century truth has become a “relative” concept to many people. This is especially true in the media where facts and straightforward truth is “spinned” (frankly, I prefer the term.. twisted) to take on whatever meaning is consistent with their biases.

The truth is that TRUTH is absolute. Facts are facts and changing THE TRUTH into something else is a lie. Absolute truth comes from the creator. To know God is to come to grips with true reality and understanding of THE TRUTH. The apostle John said...

John 1 ( World English Bible )

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God.

3 All things were made through him. Without him was not anything made that has been made.

4 In him was life, and the life was the light of men.

5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness hasn’t overcome it.

6 There came a man, sent from God, whose name was John.

7 The same came as a witness, that he might testify about the light, that all might believe through him.

8 He was not the light, but was sent that he might testify about the light.

9 The true light that enlightens everyone was coming into the world.

10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, and the world didn’t recognize him.

11 He came to his own, and those who were his own didn’t receive him.

12 But as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become God’s children, to those who believe in his name:

13 who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

14 The Word became flesh, and lived among us. We saw his glory, such glory as of the one and only Son of the Father, full of grace and truth.

15 John testified about him. He cried out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me, for he was before me.’”

16 From his fullness we all received grace upon grace.

17 For the law was given through Moses. Grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ.

18 No one has seen God at any time. The one and only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him.

God has given us truth and it is found in the Bible and therein is refined by the explanations by Jesus and his apostles through the guidance of the Holy Spirit.


The Freedom of Truth

Our lives are bound up in what we accept as facts. What we believe has consequences. If we accept only what humans teach as truth, then our future is limited by the limitations of the finite human mind. In other words, we are in bondage to our own intellectual abilities. To overcome this limitation, we need to turn to the Bible to understand the absolute truth of God. Jesus said….

John 8 ( WEB )

31 Jesus therefore said to those Jews who had believed him, “If you remain in my word, then you are truly my disciples.

32 You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”

33 They answered him, “We are Abraham’s seed, and have never been in bondage to anyone. How do you say, ‘You will be made free?’

34 Jesus answered them, “Most certainly I tell you, everyone who commits sin is the bondservant of sin.

35 A bondservant doesn’t live in the house forever. A son remains forever.

36 If therefore the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.

37 I know that you are Abraham’s seed, yet you seek to kill me, because my word finds no place in you.

38 I say the things which I have seen with my Father; and you also do the things which you have seen with your father.”

39 They answered him, “Our father is Abraham.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham.

40 But now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God. Abraham didn’t do this.

41 You do the works of your father.” They said to him, “We were not born of sexual immorality. We have one Father, God.”

42 Therefore Jesus said to them, “If God were your father, you would love me, for I came out and have come from God. For I haven’t come of myself, but he sent me.

43 Why don’t you understand my speech? Because you can’t hear my word.

44 You are of your father, the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and doesn’t stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks on his own; for he is a liar, and its father.

45 But because I tell the truth, you don’t believe me.

46 Which of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me?

47 He who is of God hears the words of God. For this cause you don’t hear, because you are not of God.”

48 Then the Jews answered him, “Don’t we say well that you are a Samaritan, and have a demon?”

49 Jesus answered, “I don’t have a demon, but I honor my Father, and you dishonor me.

50 But I don’t seek my own glory. There is one who seeks and judges.

51 Most certainly, I tell you, if a person keeps my word, he will never see death.”

52 Then the Jews said to him, “Now we know that you have a demon. Abraham died, and the prophets; and you say, ‘If a man keeps my word, he will never taste of death.’

53 Are you greater than our father, Abraham, who died? The prophets died. Who do you make yourself out to be?”

54 Jesus answered, “If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say that he is our God.

55 You have not known him, but I know him. If I said, ‘I don’t know him,’ I would be like you, a liar. But I know him, and keep his word.

56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day. He saw it, and was glad.”

57 The Jews therefore said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?”

58 Jesus said to them, “Most certainly, I tell you, before Abraham came into existence, I AM.”

59 Therefore they took up stones to throw at him, but Jesus was hidden, and went out of the temple, having gone through their midst, and so passed by.

The Jews of the 1st century had the old covenant Scriptures, but Jesus showed them God-in-the-flesh. They simply would not listen, not accept him. In fact, they tried to kill him.

The Way to Truth

Sooner or later we all will ask questions that show our desire to know things that we do not innately understand. Little children ask questions like: Where did I come from or where will I go when I die or why is there evil in the world?

Want to know what life is truly about? Seek Jesus and L-E-A-R-N what genuine truth is. Jesus said…

John 14 ( WEB )

1 “Don’t let your heart be troubled. Believe in God. Believe also in me.

2 In my Father’s house are many homes. If it weren’t so, I would have told you. I am going to prepare a place for you.

3 If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and will receive you to myself; that where I am, you may be there also.

4 Where I go, you know, and you know the way.”

5 Thomas said to him, “Lord, we don’t know where you are going. How can we know the way?”

6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father, except through me.

Jesus spoke the above words to his twelve disciples and they did in fact believe and learn the truth. In reality there is ONLY ONE way to God, ONE truth and ONE life. Unfortunately, not everyone will accept this “TRUTH BOMB”.

The Choice of Truth

John 18 ( WEB )

33 Pilate therefore entered again into the Praetorium, called Jesus, and said to him, “Are you the King of the Jews?”

34 Jesus answered him, “Do you say this by yourself, or did others tell you about me?”

35 Pilate answered, “I’m not a Jew, am I? Your own nation and the chief priests delivered you to me. What have you done?”

36 Jesus answered, “My Kingdom is not of this world. If my Kingdom were of this world, then my servants would fight, that I wouldn’t be delivered to the Jews. But now my Kingdom is not from here.”

37 Pilate therefore said to him, “Are you a king then?” Jesus answered, “You say that I am a king. For this reason I have been born, and for this reason I have come into the world, that I should testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice.”

38 Pilate said to him, “What is truth?” When he had said this, he went out again to the Jews, and said to them, “I find no basis for a charge against him.

This passage recounts Jesus’ interaction with Pilate. In the end of this discussion Pilate obviously views Jesus as nothing more than a Philosopher, because he asks the question “What is truth?”.

Pilate’s choice was one of disbelief, what is your choice?