4/2/21

Nature Sticks to Design by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

 

https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=2190

Nature Sticks to Design

by  Kyle Butt, M.Div.

Kimm Groshong, a science writer in California, penned an article titled “Unbreakable” for the June 15, 2007 edition of New Scientist. She filled much of the article examining and extolling the amazing capabilities of certain well-designed structural components. The components she analyzed possess an intriguing adhesive, referred to in the article as “self-healing glue.” This amazing glue has the ability to allow less important bonds to be broken, so that crucial structures can flex without breaking, and then re-bond the broken bonds when stress and pressure are relaxed. Groshong noted that knowledge of the technology involved in the self-healing adhesive “could lead to new high-performance equipment, vehicles and even radical space hardware ranging from inflatable moon habitats to space-elevator cables” (194[2607]:43-45).

What company is responsible for this astounding material? What brilliant minds converged to produce such advanced technology? What genius devised the intricate workings of self-healing adhesives that have capabilities which surpass the designs and inventions of thousands of brilliant scientists for the last several years? No human company and no human scientists made this technology a reality. The self-healing adhesive is a property and capability of human bones, as well as other natural structures such as shells, spider silk, and micro-algae.

Even with brilliant men and women applying thousands of hours and tens of thousands of dollars in research costs to study nature’s self-healing glues, researchers such as Paul Hansma recognize that there is still a long way to go. He said: “It will require a lot of further research for people to be able to translate our discovery, together with a lot of other discoveries, into the materials of the future” (as quoted in Groshong, 194[2607]:45).

To summarize the situation, then, nature maintains engineered properties that are so advanced that our current knowledge of them must be supplemented by many more finds and discoveries in order for humans to properly use them to construct synthetic, useful structures. Nature, however, currently employs these engineering marvels to construct things like bones, shells, and spider silk. How are we told that nature has this phenomenal ability? Somehow, we are supposed to believe that nature “miraculously” evolved these engineering marvels over multiplied millions of years by random processes. Interestingly, this explanation remains extremely difficult to maintain when presented by scientists who imply intelligence when describing nature’s non-intelligent origin. Grosshong explains that “lessons are emerging” from nature. One wonders what intelligent teacher is responsible for teaching these lessons. In truth, the rational, logical explanation of such natural marvels is that they were designed by an Engineer with capabilities and knowledge far superior to those possessed by humans. The God who created and designed the natural world is using nature to teach humans that they can observe the material Universe and know for a fact that He exists (Romans 1:20).

REFERENCE

Groshong, Kimm (2007), “Unbreakable,” New Scientist, 194[2607]:43-45, June 15.

Natural Attenuation: Proof of Divine Design by James Spencer, M.S., P.G.

 

https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=49

Natural Attenuation: Proof of Divine Design

by  James Spencer, M.S., P.G.


[EDITOR’S NOTE: The following article was written by one of A.P.’s auxiliary staff scientists. James Spencer holds a B.S. degree in Environmental Geology and an M.S. degree in Geology from the University of Mississippi. He has 24 years of technical services in the geosciences, including six years with the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, as well as 18 years with private environmental consulting firms. Accredited as a Professional Geologist in three states (Mississippi, Tennessee, and Arkansas), Mr. Spencer holds membership in the Association of Environmental and Engineering Geologists. He presently serves as Senior Hydrogeologist with EcoScience Resource Group.]

As a working hydrogeologist, I am constantly reminded of God’s handiwork. From the stratigraphic layers examined during drilling operations, to the calculation of groundwater velocities and contaminant transport based on complex governing equations, it is evident that a pre-planned, intentional system is in place. Evolutionists would have us believe that these natural processes have occurred by chance. Nevertheless, I have no doubt that these systems are the work of God. I am reminded of Deuteronomy 3:24—“O Lord God, You have begun to show Your servant Your greatness and Your mighty hand, for what god is there in heaven or on earth who can do anything like Your works and Your mighty deeds?”

GROUNDWATER & REACTIVE TRANSPORT MODELING FOR REMEDIAL DESIGN

In 1984, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) named a hazardous waste site in the state of Louisiana to the National Priority List (NPL). It was estimated at the time that the site held approximately eight million cubic feet of contaminated materials. A computer model was constructed for the site that would simulate the contaminant movement in the subsurface. Modeling efforts resulted in a successful negotiation with the EPA for monitored natural attenuation as the accepted remediation alternative. (“Natural attenuation” refers to the reduction, weakening, and eventual elimination of toxic substances in the soil and groundwater by nature’s own processes.) This EPA determination was a milestone for the site. Previously a pump-and-treat system, which was based on an initial groundwater model developed to simulate hydraulic containment, had cost millions of dollars to install, operate, and maintain. A carbon absorption system was used to treat the contaminated water recovered. By July 1998, over 170 wells were operational.

During this time of recovery well installation in the mid-1990s, field investigations continued in the direction the contaminants were anticipated to flow. Laboratory analysis of water samples discovered the presence of vinyl chloride (VC)—a compound not present in the parent (original waste) material. At the time, the presence of vinyl chloride confused investigators. After consultation with other governmental agencies, it was assumed that degradation (chemical breakdown) of the parent material was producing vinyl chloride as a daughter product. However, the driving agent of this degradation process, known as reductive dechlorination, was not fully understood. Natural attenuation was discussed, but was not yet an accepted environmental remedial alternative (i.e., clean-up solution) with the regulatory agencies. Change came with the release of a 1999 directive by the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER), titled “Use of Monitored Natural Attenuation at Superfund, RCRA Corrective Action, and Underground Storage Tank Sites.”

As research continued at this site (and others throughout the United States), the degradation process became better understood. Reductive dechlorination is a biological process that is used to describe certain types of biodegradation of chlorinated solvents in groundwater. For example, tetrachloroethene (PCE), trichloroethene (TCE), and other chlorinated aliphatic hydrocarbons in groundwater, can be biodegraded by naturally occurring anaerobic bacteria (i.e., bacteria that are able to live without oxygen), most commonly of the genera dehalococcoides through a sequential degradation process. PCE degrades to TCE, TCE to dichloroethene (DCE), DCE to vinyl chloride (VC), and VC to ethene. This biodegradation occurs when anaerobic bacteria present in the contaminated site take electrons from organic compounds (called “electron donors”) and produce H2. The dechlorinating bacteria use the electron in the H2 to replace a chlorine atom.

Scientists wanted to substantiate these degradation processes, as well as develop rate constants for the reactive transport model (a computer model to simulate the transport of chemical compounds in groundwater, including the degradation of parent compounds and generation of daughter compounds). With the goal of observing the potential for natural attenuation of the chlorinated ethanes and ethenes present at the site, hydrogeologists conducted microcosm experiments to determine both the pathways and rates of contaminant transformation under natural conditions. The results indicated that the microbial population necessary to dechlorinate contaminants was naturally present in the site sediments. With this fact in hand, researchers could now define the degradation pathway.

Researches then developed a three-dimensional reactive transport model (RT3D—a multi-species reactive flow and transport simulation computer software) for the site, utilizing the results of the microcosm experiments to develop a site-specific reaction package to simulate the degradation processes. The model was calibrated to current conditions in order to make future predictions. Results indicated that the contaminant plume would stabilize over time and no sensitive receptors (i.e., drinking water aquifer, surface water body, etc.) would be impacted. Consequently, the EPA approved monitored natural attenuation as the selected remedial alternative.

Microbial Population

Researchers conducted laboratory experiments in an attempt to identify, define, and quantify the microbial population present within the site subsurface (see Bae, et al., 2006; Bowman, et al., 2006). These efforts resulted in the identification of several unique microscopic bacteria, known as 16S rRNA gene sequences, that are closely related to Dehalococcoides ethenogenes. In addition, two new anaerobic bacterial strains were isolated and identified for the first time, and subsequently named after the site. The data demonstrated that a large number of novel bacteria were present in groundwater within the source zone, and the population appeared to contain bacterial components necessary to carry out reductive dechlorination.

Evolution of Thought

As noted in the above discussion, the “expert” thought has evolved from a pump-and-treat-solution to monitored natural attenuation as the accepted remedial alternative at this site. A computer model to simulate the degradation processes was developed for the site to simulate groundwater flow and contaminant transport with a site-specific reaction package. With a better understanding of the degradation processes and bacteria populations providing the driving force, natural attenuation has become an accepted remedial alternative at this site and many contaminated sites throughout the country. Despite increased understanding, scientists have yet to provide a complete and adequate definition of the microbial populations naturally present at all remedial sites.

BUT WHERE DID IT COME FROM?

To recap, in order to develop a computer model to simulate groundwater flow and contaminant transport, scientists must come to a proper understanding of the geologic, hydrologic, and biological processes occurring at the site. This understanding is fundamental when the goal is to develop a defensible strategy for monitored natural attenuation for presentation to regulatory agencies. Most importantly, the biologic processes at the Louisiana NPL site have been shown to be active and sufficient for reductive dechlorination of contaminants. But where did these microbial populations come from? Did they evolve to serve this purpose? Impossible, since, in direct contradiction to the evolutionary hypothesis, they would have had to evolve over a short period of time. After all, the contaminants present were not in existence millions of years ago. For example, PCE is a manufactured chemical compound widely used to dry clean fabrics and degrease metals. Michael Faraday first synthesized it in 1821 by heating hexachloroethane until it decomposed into PCE and chlorine. Since evolution cannot account for their presence, where did these microbes come from?

For creationists, the answer is simple and obvious. God created these bacteria. Humans did not create this built-in method of breaking down and neutralizing the artificial/synthetic toxic chemicals introduced by humans into the environment. All the efforts of feeble man to decontaminate the hazardous waste site were secondary, perhaps even superfluous, to the naturally occurring attenuation processes already present in the environment. The only logical explanation is that the Creator of the Earth deliberately embedded restorative properties in the environment in order for it to sustain itself for the Creator’s purpose. Essentially, all we “educated” humans can do is observe, monitor, document, and assign sophisticated jargon to what nature does automatically. God created His earthly creation to be self-sustaining, restorative, and resilient.

BIBLICAL PERSPECTIVE

In the beginning, God created the Earth to be inhabited by man, and for man to rule the Earth and its resources (Genesis 1:26-30; Psalm 8:6-8). In addition, God placed within the dynamics of the Earth the processes by which He sustains it. The microbial populations that we scientists are just now identifying, and whose purpose we are just now beginning to understand, were created by God to sustain His creation. It is certainly true that man has made mistakes that have been detrimental to God’s Earth. However, it is also true that God is in control, and no matter what humans do—accidentally or purposefully—that may be harmful to the environment, God will sustain this Earth until it has served His purpose! “By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible” (Hebrews 11:3).

REFERENCES

Bae, H.S., Moe, W.M., Yan, J., Tiago, I., da Dosta, M.S., and Rainey, F.A. (2006), “Brooklawnia Cerclae Gen. Nov., Sp. Nov., A Propionate-Forming Bacterium Isolated From Chlorosolvent-Contaminated Groundwater,” International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 56:1977-1983.

Bowman, K.S., Moe, W.M, Rash, B.A., Bae, H.S., and Rainey, R.A. (2006), “Bacterial Diversity of an Acidic Louisiana Groundwater Contaminated by Dense Nonaqueous-Phase Liquid Containing Chloroethanes and Other Solvents,” FEMS Microbiology and Ecology, 58:120-133, Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

U.S. EPA (1999), “Use of Monitored Natural Attenuation at Superfund, RCRA Corrective Action, and Underground Storage Tank Sites.” United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Directive Number 9200 (Washington, D.C.: OSWER).

Motivation: Chimpanzees and Humans by Trevor Major, M.Sc., M.A.

 https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=268

 Motivation: Chimpanzees and Humans

by  Trevor Major, M.Sc., M.A.

In late April 1996, I had the privilege of hearing a speech by Dr. Jane Goodall, the famed animal behaviorist. As you may know, she was a protégée of Louis Leakey who blazed trails for women scientists in the 1960s and achieved considerable recognition for her work on chimpanzees in East Africa. For all that, she has an innocent, soft-spoken charm about her. Most of all, she has a passionate concern for all animals, and for chimpanzees in particular. Although her research continues, she devotes much of her time to the preservation of wild chimp populations. Hunting, diminishing habitat, and the largely illegal live-animal trade have earned these creatures an unenviable place on the Endangered Species list.

Throughout most of her fascinating presentation, Goodall portrayed chimpanzees as intelligent beings, having complex social relations, showing a range of deep emotional states, and making rudimentary tools. In other words, audience members were supposed to get the message that these creatures differed from us only by degree (see Major, 1995, “Do Humans and Apes Differ Only by Degree?”). And, indeed, the audience made the right noises at the sight of an adorable baby chimp playing with its older sibling, and at the less pleasant sight of a grief-stricken juvenile who had lost its aged mother.

Goodall’s plea was quite simple: our sympathy for these animals should motivate us to come to their aid. She barely mentioned the “e” word (evolution, that is), but her approach resembled the appeals of others who would have us respect all individuals within our own species, and other species (especially those closest to us on the putative evolutionary tree), for no other reason than our shared ancestry. Richard Leakey has suggested that our common heritage “is a powerful motivation for reconsidering the blatant inequities in the world” (1981, p. 245).

But is it? Can a belief in the preeminence of chance and natural selection sustain us in our altruism toward chimps? Where, in a naturalistic ethic, is the incentive to avoid apathy? Without the sort of personal involvement enjoyed by Jane Goodall, many people are driven to put their own needs first. Ideally, Christians are motivated by love for God and, yes, fear also of transgressing His commands (1 John 2:3-5). This may not impress the atheist, but it encourages believers to make Christ-centered, rather than purely self-centered, decisions regarding their stewardship of God’s creation (Colossians 3:23; Psalm 8:3-8).

REFERENCES

Leakey, Richard (1981), The Making of Mankind (London: Michael Joseph).

Major, Trevor (1995), “Do Humans and Apes Differ Only by Degree?,” Reason & Revelation, 15:87-88, November.

"THE GOSPEL OF MARK" Is It From Heaven Or From Men? (11:27-33)

 

"THE GOSPEL OF MARK"

Is It From Heaven Or From Men? (11:27-33)

 
INTRODUCTION

1. Upon return to the temple on Tuesday, Jesus was confronted by the
   chief priests and elders...
   a. They questioned His authority - Mk 11:27-28
   b. In response, Jesus challenged them regarding the authority behind
      the baptism of John - Mk 11:29-30
   c. Since they would not answer, Jesus refused to answer their question - Mk 11:31-33

2. In this passage, we find an important principle regarding authority in matters of religion...
   a. All religious practices must come from one of two sources
   b. They come either from heaven or from men - Mk 11:30

3. What Jesus asked regarding John’s baptism, could be asked of many religious practices...
   a. Infant baptism
   b. Sprinkling or pouring instead of immersion
   c. Denominationalism, a clergy-laity distinction
   d. The impossibility of apostasy, observing the Sabbath
   e. Instrumental music, burning of incense, etc., in our worship
   -- Are such practices from heaven or from men?

[In this study we shall consider how one can know whether a particular
religious practice is from heaven or from man...]

I. TO BE FROM HEAVEN

   A. IT MUST COME FROM JESUS...
      1. For He has been given all authority - Mt 28:18
      2. Both in heaven and on earth
      -- Certainly if Jesus commanded it, it is from heaven!

   B. IT MUST COME THROUGH HIS APOSTLES...
      1. For Jesus delegated His authority to His apostles - Jn 13:20
      2. They serve as His official ambassadors - 2Co 5:20
      3. To ensure their reliability, Jesus promised the Spirit to
         remind them of what He taught, and to guide them into all the
         truth - Jn 14:26; 16:12-13
      4. This is why the church continued steadfastly in the apostles’
         doctrine - Ac 2:42; 1Co 14:37; 1Th 2:13
      -- If the apostles of Christ taught it, it is from heaven!

   C. IT MUST COME ONLY FROM THE APOSTLES...
      1. The apostles were given, and proclaimed, the whole counsel of God - Ac 20:27
      2. They were given all things that pertain to life and godliness- 2Pe 1:3
      3. The faith revealed through them was delivered once for all
         (lit., one time for all times) - Ju 3
      -- There is no need for modern day revelations, for in the
         Scriptures we have all we need to be "complete, thoroughly
         equipped for every good work" - 2 Ti 3:16-17

[If a religious practice can be found to be taught by Jesus or His
apostles, then it is truly from heaven!  Religious practices that are
from men, however, might come from a variety of sources...]

II. IT IS FROM MAN

   A. IF BASED SOLELY UPON WHAT THE MAJORITY THINKS...
      1. Many people will accept whatever most people think about something
      2. Yet Jesus warned against following the majority - Mt 7:13-14
      3. If you had followed the majority...
         a. In Noah’s day, you would have perished in the flood
         b. In Joshua’s day, you would have perished in the wilderness
      -- What the majority believes or does is not likely to be from
         heaven, but from men!

   B. IF BASED SOLELY UPON WHAT PARENTS TAUGHT US...
      1. Some believe "If it was good enough for Mom and Dad, it is good enough for me."
      2. As much as we may love and respect our parents, Christ must come first - Mt 10:37
      3. If every generation had simply followed their parents, then we
         who are Gentiles would likely still be idol-worshippers and polytheistic!
      -- Let us honor our parents, not by following them blindly, but by
         applying principles they themselves likely taught us, such as
         seek to do the right thing, obey God, etc.

   C. IF BASED SOLELY UPON WHAT PREACHERS TELL US...
      1. It is common for people to place their trust in their "preacher," "priest," or "pastor"
      2. They reason that surely these "men of God" could not be wrong or lead them astray
         a. Yet Paul warned of how we can easily be misled - cf. 2Co 11:13-15
         b. And Jesus warned about the "blind leading the blind" - Mt 15:12-14
      3. Our attitude needs to be like that of the Bereans, who
         carefully examined Paul’s teachings in light of the Scriptures - Ac 17:11
      -- What a preacher teaches is only as good as the authority behind
         it; unless we wish to be led astray, we have the responsibility
         to ask "Is it from God, or men?"

   D. IF BASED SOLELY UPON CREEDS AND TRADITIONS OF MEN...
      1. This is where the denominations really get most of their authority
         a. E.g., for such things as infant baptism, pouring or sprinkling instead of immersion
         b. E.g., for such things as denominationalism, once saved always saved
      2. Indeed, adherence to the creeds of men is what produces denominations
         a. Accept the Bible only, and you become a Christian only
         b. Accept some man-made creed or tradition, and you become something else!
            1) Accept the Book of Mormon, and you become a Mormon
            2) Accept papal authority, and you become a Roman Catholic
            3) Accept the Lutheran Catechism, and you become a Lutheran
      3. Creeds are really not even necessary...
         a. If they say more than what the Bible says, they say too much
         b. If they say less than what the Bible says, they say too little
         c. If they say exactly what the Bible says, then why not let
            the Bible be our creed book?
      -- The fact is creeds are filled with the traditions and commands
         of men, many of which conflict with and displace the commands
         of God! - cf. Mk 7:6-9

   E. IF BASED SOLELY UPON WHAT YOUR CONSCIENCE TELLS YOU...
      1. "Let your conscience be your guide" is the motto of many
      2. But our conscience cannot always be reliable
         a. Paul had served God with a good conscience throughout his life - Ac 23:1
         b. Even at a time when he was persecuting Christians! - cf. Ac 26:9-11
      3. Our conscience is like a clock, which works properly if set properly
      4. Once our conscience has been "set" by the "apostles’ doctrine",
         then it can be a good guide
      -- Unless what your conscience is telling you can be confirmed by
         the Word of God, then what you believe is from man, not God!

   F. IF BASED SOLELY UPON WHAT IS HUMAN WISDOM...
      1. Many believe that through their own wisdom they can determine right and wrong
         a. If it makes sense to them, they reason it must be true
         b. If it doesn’t make sense, they won’t accept it
      2. But God’s thoughts and ways are not always our own - cf. Isa 55:8-9
      3. In fact, God has chosen to save man in a manner specifically
         designed to confound those who depend solely upon human wisdom - cf. 1Co 1:18-29
      4. For us to know God’s will, it was necessary for Him to reveal it to us - 1Co 2:9-12
         a. This He has done through His Spirit-inspired apostles
         b. Who in turn shared it with us through their writings - Ep 3:1-5
      -- Appeal to human reason to justify a certain practice, and it
         will likely be from man, not God!

   G. IF BASED SOLELY UPON FEELINGS...
      1. This is often the "standard of authority" for many people
         a. Who go by whatever "feels right"
         b. Who place stock in a religion "better felt than told"
      2. Yet the Bible declares the danger of trusting in "feelings"
         a. "There is a way which seems right to a man, But its end is
            the way of death." - Pr 14:12
         b. "He who trusts in his own heart is a fool..." - Pr 28:26
         c. "O LORD, I know the way of man is not in himself; It is not
            in man who walks to direct his own steps." - Jer 10:23
      -- It should be evident that any religious practice or doctrine
         based upon "feelings" alone is from man, not God!

   H. IF BASED SOLELY UPON THE OLD TESTAMENT...
      1. People will sometimes resort to the O.T. to provide authority for some practice
         a. When they can’t find authority for it in the teachings of
            Christ and/or His apostles
         b. For example, a clergy-laity system, burning of incense and
            use of instrumental music in worship, keeping the Sabbath
      2. But the O.T. was designed to be temporary, to fulfill a
         specific purpose and as a covenant has been replaced by the New
         Covenant (i.e., the New Testament)
         a. It was given because of transgressions, till Christ should come - Ga 3:19
         b. For those under the Law (Israel), it was a tutor
            1) A tutor designed to lead them to Christ - Ga 3:24
            2) A tutor that has been taken away - Ga 3:25
         c. When those who were under the Law came to Christ...
            1) They became dead to the Law - Ro 7:4
            2) They were delivered from the Law - Ro 7:6
         d. As prophesied by Jeremiah, God has made a "new covenant" to
            replace the "first covenant" which is now obsolete - He 8:7-13
      3. In handling of the issue of circumcision, the apostles
         demonstrated that one cannot use the O.T. to teach something
         which the apostles themselves did not command
         a. Some sought to enforce circumcision and the Law upon Gentile believers - Ac 15:1,6
         b. But the apostles, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit,
            were able to defuse the problem by simply stating they "gave
            no such commandment" - Ac 15:22-29
      4. This is not to say the O.T. is not of value to Christians...
         a. It was written for our learning, to provide patience,
            comfort, and hope - Ro 15:4
         b. It was written for our admonition, that we not make similar mistakes - 1Co 10:6,11
         c. We just can’t use it to enjoin religious practices upon
            others which the apostles themselves did not teach!

CONCLUSION

1. Do we want to avoid being led astray...?
   a. By "blind leaders of the blind"? - cf. Mt 15:14
   b. By "false teachers...who will secretly bring in destructive heresies"? - cf. 2Pe 2:1

2. Then we need to know how to ascertain whether a religious doctrine or practice...
   a. Is from God or from men
   b. Is based upon what the apostles of Christ taught, or some other "authority"

3. The solution is simple, but requires effort on our part...
   a. We must "continue steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine" - Ac 2:42
   a. We must "search the Scriptures daily" - Ac 17:11

Only then can we be sure that what we believe or someone teaches is
truly from God, and not from man!         
 Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

eXTReMe Tracker


An Abortionist: “I Sell Dead Babies” by Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

https://thepreachersword.com/2015/07/21/an-abortionist-i-sell-dead-babies/#more-7524

 An Abortionist: “I Sell Dead Babies”

deborah-nucatola-twitter 

In the past few days an undercover video has been released by the Center for Medical Progress that should be shocking and disgusting to all civilized people.

Dr. Deborah Nucatola, Planned Parenthood’s Senior Director of Medical Services, is describing how her organization sells the body parts of unborn aborted children during a luncheon appointment.

As Nucatola sips her wine and eats a salad she casually describes how to best crush an unborn child to preserve those body parts. Her description was so gross and insensitive, that the President of Planned Parenthood, Cecile Richards offered this apology for the “tone” of Dr. Nucatola.

“Our top priority is the compassionate care that we provide. In the video, one of our staff members speaks in a waydeborah-nucatola that does not reflect that compassion. This is unacceptable, and I personally apologize for the staff member’s tone and statements.”

Of course, Richards, did not offer any apology for the procedure that has claimed the lives of 57 million innocent children since 1973 when abortion was legalized in the united States.

The reaction has been swift and pointed by pro-life advocates.

Senator James Langford said that he had spent last Thursday in a meeting about protected ora whales and horses when he heard  the news.

In an emotional speech on the Senate floor, Senator Langford addressed his colleagues, often fighting back tears. “You can’t say in one moment that’s not a human and then sell it for the next moment as a human organ and say now suddenly it is. It was a human all the way through. There was never a time that wasn’t a child, never a time that wasn’t a human, and it seems the ultimate irony to me that we spend time talking about humane treatment of animals being put down… and we completely miss children being ripped apart in the womb and their body parts being sold.”

In a recent interview, retired Johns Hopkins neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson, who dedicated his career to saving lives observed, “What’s really disturbing,” Carson said, “is the fact that we have become so calloused that a lot of people don’t even realize that this is shocking. To see the callousness with which we are treating human life… There are so many people who are concerned about little spiders and things, and yet, the human being inside the mother’s womb… is much more sophisticated than many of these creatures that they’re trying to preserve.”

/Planned Parenthood insist that fetal tissue is important to medical research, a claim which Dr Carson called “spurious” and explained “There’s nothing that can’t be done without fetal tissue.”

Cries from many quarters have denounced Planned Parenthood’s procedures. Yet, when a society ignores and discards the rule of God’s divine law, what can we expect?

The Psalmist David knew who made his body parts and gave him life in his mother’s wombs when he described the greatness of Jehovah’s power and majesty.

For you created my innermost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be. (Ps 139:13-16)

Our concerns about Planned Parenthood and abortion are not political, but spiritual. The blood of 57 million children cry, “How long, how long?” In the meantime, we wait for God’s answer.

–Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

DO JUDAIZERS HAVE ETERNAL SECURITY? by steve finnell

 

https://steve-finnell.blogspot.com/2016/11/do-judaizers-have-eternal-security-by.html

DO JUDAIZERS HAVE ETERNAL SECURITY? by steve finnell

Do Judaizers have eternal security, are they once saved always saved?

 Who were the Judaizers? They were false teachers of the gospel.
Acts 15:1 Some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brethren, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved." (NASB)

Who were the Judaizers? They were Jewish Christians.

Acts 15:5 But some of the sect of the Pharisees who had believed stood up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them and to direct them to observe the Law of Moses."(NASB)[THE JUDAIZERS WERE BELIEVERS IN CHRIST]

Who were the Judaizers? They were false brothers.

Galatians 2:1-4.....But it was because of false brethren secretly brought in, who had sneaked in to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage. (NASB)

Who were the Judaizers? They were the ones that fell from grace.

Galatians 5:3-4 And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law. 4 You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. (NASB)

Who were the Judaizers? They were the ones accursed for distorting the gospel of Christ.

Galatians 1:6-9 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; 7 which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you  and want to distort the gospel of Christ......9 As we have said before, so I again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed! (NASB)

Were unrepentant Judaizers once saved always saved? Of course not.

If unrepentant Christian Jews were lost for perverting the gospel by adding to it, what will be the fate of contemporary Christians who distort the gospel by taking away terms for pardon by denying the truth.

Are the men who proclaim that Jesus is simply one of many ways to heaven once saved always saved?

John 14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way , and the truth, and the truth, and the life; no ones comes to the Father but through Me. (NASB)

Are the believers in Christ who are guilty of perverting the gospel by declaring the baptism is not essential to salvation once saved always saved?

Mark 16:16 He who has believed and is baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.(NASB)

Are believers who preach that men are saved by grace alone once saved always saved? Is it not a distortion of the gospel to teach that God selects certain men to be saved and then forces them to believe so they might be saved?

Can those who distort the gospel, but fail to repent be saved? 

Galatians 1:8 Let God's curses fall on anyone, including myself, who preaches any other way to be saved than the one we told you about; yes, if an angel comes from heaven and preaches any other message, let him be forever cursed. (The Living Bible -Paraphrased)

Adding to or taking away from the terms of the gospel plan of salvation is distorting God's plan of salvation.   


What happened to that gay city Sodom? by Roy Davison

 

http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Davison/Roy/Allen/1940/gaycity.html

What happened to that gay city Sodom?

“The men of Sodom were exceedingly wicked and sinful against the LORD” (Genesis 13:13). The people of Sodom had ‘gay rights’. Homosexuality was unrestrained in Sodom (Genesis 19:4, 5). They declared their sin, they did not hide it (Isaiah 3:9).

Before God destroyed Sodom, the Dead Sea region was a fertile plain (Genesis 13:10). Because their sin was very grave (Genesis 18:20) the Lord rained sulfur and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding plain, destroying the cities, the inhabitants and all vegetation (Genesis 19:24, 25).

It became a land of sulfur, salt and burning. “It is not sown, nor does it bear, nor does any grass grow there” (Deuteronomy 29:23). It was “overrun with weeds and salt pits, and a perpetual desolation” (Zephaniah 2:9). Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them “having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire” (Jude 7).

God explained why He destroyed Sodom: “Look, this was the iniquity of your sister Sodom: She and her daughter had pride, fullness of food, and abundance of idleness; neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty and committed abomination before Me; therefore I took them away as I saw fit” (Ezekiel 16:49, 50).

In the time of Ezekiel, God condemned Jerusalem for having a tolerant attitude toward Sodom: “For your sister Sodom was not a byword in your mouth in the days of your pride” (Ezekiel 16:56).

Because of their “filthy conduct” and “lawless deeds” God, “turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly” (2 Peter 2:6-8).

Holland legalized same-sex marriages in 2001, Belgium in 2003, supposedly implementing a clause in the European Union’s Treaty of Amsterdam which forbids discrimination on the basis of ‘sexual orientation,’ a vague term used to encompass homosexual and lesbian relationships, but which arguably could also be made to include pedophilia and bestiality. I say ‘supposedly’ because it is not discrimination to make allowances for biological realities or to respect moral and religious convictions which are also protected by the treaty.

Perverted sexual relationships may be called marriages by governments of this world, but they are not recognized by the High Court of Heaven. Same-sex relationships are condemned by God in both the Old and the New Testaments.

They are perversions of the beautiful and pure relationship God has given husbands and wives within the bonds of matrimony. Jesus said: “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” (Matthew 19:4-6). “Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge” (Hebrews 13:4). Same-sex relationships are a form of fornication (sexual immorality).

The Law of Moses pronounced the death sentence on those who engaged in homosexual relationships. “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination” (Leviticus 18:22). “If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them” (Leviticus 20:13).

The condemnation of the New Testament is also severe: along with all sinners, homosexuals and lesbians are worthy of death, but they are called to repentance and offered forgiveness. God will help them live pure lives if they repent, turn away from their sins, and accept His offer of salvation through Christ.

“Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 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 1:24-27), “who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them” (Romans 1:32).

“Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Corinthians 6:9-11).

The Greek word translated ‘homosexuals’ here is MALAKOS, defined in this passage by Thayer as “effeminate, of a catamite, a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness” and by Arndt & Gingrich as “effeminate, esp. of catamites, men and boys who allow themselves to be misused homosexually.”

The Greek word translated ‘sodomites’ is ARSENOKOITEES (a combination of the words for ‘male’ and ‘bed’), defined in this passage by Thayer as “one who lies with a male as with a female, a sodomite” and by Arndt & Gingrich as “a male homosexual, pederast, sodomite.” This word is also found in 1 Timothy 1:10 where it is stated that the law is ‘for sodomites’. The English word ‘sodomy’ means ‘carnal copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal or unnatural copulation with a member of the opposite sex’ (Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary).

The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah is a warning for those committing abomination in our time.

We do not know all the cosmic or geological mechanisms involved when God devastated the Dead Sea area with sulfurous meteorites. The region is now below sea level and is on a major fault in the earth’s crust.

San Francisco and Amsterdam are the gay capitals of the modern world. Both cities are suspended by a thread in the hand of God. Forty percent of Holland is below sea level and San Francisco is on a major earthquake fault. At any moment, an earthquake or a storm could destroy these wicked cities. The accusation against them is great and their sin is very grave. God may delay judgment for the sake of the righteous who live there.

In the end, however, there will be no escape: “The Judge is standing at the door!” (James 5:9). The day is coming when the whole universe will be dissolved by fire: “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up. Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat?” (2 Peter 3:10-12). “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad” (2 Corinthians 5:10).

This warning is not only for homosexuals and lesbians. All must repent to be saved. “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23). On the day of judgment all sinners will stand condemned unless they have repented and accepted the gift of salvation offered by grace through the blood of Christ. “If the righteous one is scarcely saved, where will the ungodly and the sinner appear?” (1 Peter 4:18).

Roy Davison

The Scripture quotations in this article are from The New King James Version. ©1979, 1980, 1982, Thomas Nelson Inc., Publishers unless indicated otherwise. Permission for reference use has been granted.

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

Harmonious Reality by Gary Rose


 First of all, I think this is a bit funny. But, agreeing with the impossible is possible, but being correct is unlikely. However, finding a common ground for communication has the possibility of both parties finding a common ground and finding truth.


Apart from preconceived ideas and prejudices, money can (and often is) one of the greatest obstacles to harmony. Especially, if one of the parties loves money more than anything else. The Apostle Paul knew this and worked as a tentmaker for much of his ministry. Regarding this aspect of his ministry, he said…


1 Corinthians 9 ( World English Bible )

6 Or have only Barnabas and I no right to not work?

7 What soldier ever serves at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard, and doesn’t eat of its fruit? Or who feeds a flock, and doesn’t drink from the flock’s milk?

8 Do I speak these things according to the ways of men? Or doesn’t the law also say the same thing?

9 For it is written in the law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain.” Is it for the oxen that God cares,

10 or does he say it assuredly for our sake? Yes, it was written for our sake, because he who plows ought to plow in hope, and he who threshes in hope should partake of his hope.

11 If we sowed to you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we reap your fleshly things?

12 If others partake of this right over you, don’t we yet more? Nevertheless we did not use this right, but we bear all things, that we may cause no hindrance to the Good News of Christ.

13 Don’t you know that those who serve around sacred things eat from the things of the temple, and those who wait on the altar have their portion with the altar?

14 Even so the Lord ordained that those who proclaim the Good News should live from the Good News.

15 But I have used none of these things, and I don’t write these things that it may be done so in my case; for I would rather die, than that anyone should make my boasting void.

16 For if I preach the Good News, I have nothing to boast about; for necessity is laid on me; but woe is to me, if I don’t preach the Good News.

17 For if I do this of my own will, I have a reward. But if not of my own will, I have a stewardship entrusted to me.

18 What then is my reward? That, when I preach the Good News, I may present the Good News of Christ without charge, so as not to abuse my authority in the Good News.

19 For though I was free from all, I brought myself under bondage to all, that I might gain the more.

20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain Jews; to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain those who are under the law;

21 to those who are without law, as without law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ), that I might win those who are without law.

22 To the weak I became as weak, that I might gain the weak. I have become all things to all men, that I may by all means save some.

23 Now I do this for the sake of the Good News, that I may be a joint partaker of it.


Having worked as a preacher for a number of years, I can tell you from personal experience that what Paul said is true. If people supply you with money, they begin to think that they are your BOSS and can order you about. This sort of pressure can subconsciously affect your ministry and therefore your limit your effectiveness as a preacher of the Gospel. It is a fact that people will give you more leeway once they realize that you are partially or totally supporting yourself.


If by working, you can think you are independent, you will become more independent. Humm, what was that again about the man who thought he was invisible? Reality can be hard to see sometimes...