Scientists, Soldiers, and Fish Scales by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

 https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=2313

Scientists, Soldiers, and Fish Scales

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Operating on a grant from the U.S. Army, scientists from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology are developing better body armor for soldiers. Surprisingly, the inspiration for their work comes from a foot-long African fish known as Polypterus senegalus.

According to scientists, the fish’s “armor” is able to protect it from others of its own species, as well as other carnivores. Its overlapping armored scales “first dissipate the energy of a strike, then protect against any penetrations to the soft tissues below and finally limit any damage to the shield to the immediate area surrounding the assault” (Crane, 2008). What makes the fish’s armor so effective? Aside from its four layers of overlapping scales, “researchers believe the dermal scales’ different composite materials [including bone and dentine—EL] and the geometry and thickness of various layers” all contribute to the armor’s strength and effectiveness in protecting the animal (Crane, 2008). Dr. Christine Ortiz, lead MIT researcher on the Polypterus project, stated: “Such fundamental knowledge holds great potential for the development of improved biologically inspired structural materials” (Bryner, 2008).

Brilliant scientists in the 21st century are spending an untold amount of time, energy, and money studying the scale structure of a fish, in hopes of designing new and improved armor applications for U.S. soldiers and military vehicles. Scientists admit that the “design” of the overlapping scale layers is “fascinating, complex and multiscale” (Crane, 2008). Yet, at the same time, we are told that this fish, which is inspiring state-of-the-art human armor systems, had no Designer (Bryner, 2008). Once again, naturalistic evolution allegedly was the great cause of a “fascinating” and “complex” creature. But design demands a designer. An effect (especially one of this magnitude) demands an adequate cause. In truth, blind chance, plus non-intelligence, plus random mutations, plus eons of time, neither designed nor caused Polypterus senegalus. Only an intelligent Designer could make such an awe-inspiring creature. As the psalmist wrote: “This great and wide sea, in which are innumerable teeming things, living things both small and great. O Lord, how manifold are Your works! In wisdom You have made them all” (104:25,24, emp. added).

REFERENCES

Bryner, Jeanna (2008), “Incredible Fish Armor Could Suit Soldiers,” LiveScience, July 27, [On-line], URL: http://www.livescience.com/animals/080727-fish-armor.html.

Crane, David (2008), “Flexible Biological Scalar Body Armor for Future Soldiers?” Defense Review, July 31, [On-line], URL: http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article& amp;sid=1159.

 

Scientists Are Human, Too! by Trevor Major, M.Sc., M.A.

 

https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=3746

Scientists Are Human, Too!

by	Trevor Major, M.Sc., M.A.

The scientific community has been doing some soul-searching of late. At the center of the issue is the question of objectivity in science. The philosophy of scientism would have us believe that science is the only road to truth and, therefore, that scientists are the sole guardians of knowledge. Practically speaking, most scientists probably would acknowledge that science is a human endeavor and, consequently, subject to the imperfections of its practitioners. Nonetheless, the scientific establishment is wrestling with issues of pseudoscience, bias, and fraud.

PSEUDOSCIENCE

This first category usually includes the paranormal, various New Age beliefs, and personal encounters with UFOs. Proponents of naturalism and materialism expand this definition to include any scientific theory that challenges their personal perception of the world. Examples would be creationism, cold fusion, homeopathic medicine, and the Gaia hypothesis. Personally, I do not subscribe to the last three ideas. However, some scientists depart from objectivity in their harsh criticism of such unconventional views.

BIAS

Of course, creationists have argued that their view can compete on the same level as evolutionary theories (e.g., Geisler and Anderson, 1987). It is here that I raise the issue of bias. In the big picture, the purpose of consensus is to prevent confusion arising from unconfirmed or seemingly suspect research. Supposedly, scientists will not accept any new theory until their collective learning and experience tell them that it is better than the existing one. Still, some charge that editors of professional journals, and peer reviewers, occasionally resist publishing opposing views. Consensus should not censor, but should encourage more rigorous work.

Sometimes the resistance can be great indeed. For example, Halton Arp thinks he has found evidence that supports his theory against the prevailing Big Bang theory. However, he has difficulty getting access to major telescopes because other scientists do not believe he could possibly be right (Arp, 1990).

The same people will hardly give creationism a fair hearing. The following list is a small selection of attitudes that illustrate my point.

Faith in creation is personal and subjective, whereas faith in evolution is universal and objective (Ferrell, 1991).

Any scientific experiments that set out to confirm the Bible are automatically unscientific (Rice, 1989).

Although Werhner von Braun led America into space, his belief in creationism prevents him from being considered a “true” scientist (Jones, 1989).

One evolutionist said this in response to the young age of dinosaur bones dated by a group of creationists: “No matter what date they claim, the dinosaurs died out 66 million years ago” (Lafferty, 1991).

FRAUD

Sadly, fraud and misconduct have tainted the history of science. Perhaps the most famous example is the so-called Piltdown man, which was announced to the world in 1912. Clever forgers put a human skull with the jaw bone of a modern ape, and aged it artificially. The hoax fooled many great experts until the early 1950s, when new techniques exposed the deception. This is an embarrassing incident, not just for science, but for evolution. For almost forty years, evolutionists pointed to the Piltdown man as an example of the alleged ape-man transition. The Piltdown case has a positive side, however. It teaches us that science can correct itself, despite the consensus.

CONCLUSION

Some scientists may call our view pseudoscience, look with bias on our scientific case, and present false arguments to the world, whether intentional or otherwise. However, science itself is not the enemy of truth. Certainly, science and scientists have their limitations, but we can work within those limitations to advance the cause of our Creator.

REFERENCES

Arp, Halton (1990), “Discordant Observations,” Science, 249:611, August 10.

Ferrell, Keith (1991), “The Chasm of Creationism,” Omni, 14[1]:14, October.

Geisler, Norman L. and J. Kerby Anderson (1987), Origin Science (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).

Jones, Lewis (1989), “The Two Cultures: A Resurrection,” Skeptical Inquirer, 14[1]:57-64, Fall.

Lafferty, Michael B. (1991), “Creationists Say Dinosaurs Lived With Man,” Columbus Dispatch, pp. 1B-2B, November 3

Rice, Stanley (1989), “ ‘Faithful in the Little Things’: Creationists and ‘Operation Science,’ ” Creation/Evolution, 25:8-14.

Science: Instituted by God by Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

 

https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=4213

Science: Instituted by God

by	Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

Some contend that science is at odds with religion. They suggest that the scientific method requires empirical testing, but God’s existence cannot be empirically verified. Science supposedly proves the Big Bang, evolutionary theory, a very old Universe, and dinosaurs that never co-existed with humans, while the Bible mistakenly contends that the Universe was created in six literal, 24-hour days only a few thousand years ago, with humans and dinosaurs being created together on day six. Supposedly, science is based on verifiable evidence, whereas religion is based on “blind faith” and ambiguous “tinglies” attributed to the Holy Spirit. For such reasons, it is claimed that science and Scripture cannot be harmonized—that they are diametrically opposed to each another.

In reality, however, true science agrees perfectly with Scripture. Though God’s existence cannot be empirically verified, it can be easily verified through deductive reasoning from the scientific evidence available to us—in the same way forensic scientists use science to investigate events that they did not personally witness. While atheists have successfully created the mirage that science supports their theories, abundant scientific evidence exists which disproves the Big Bang Theory, evolutionary theory, an old Universe, and proves that dinosaurs and humans co-existed (see www.apologeticspress.org for more information on these matters). And yet, no scientific evidence exists that contradicts the true creation model. Rather, the evidence always supports it. The concept of “blind faith,” though championed by many who call themselves Christians, is at odds with Scripture, which defines faith as choosing to believe in something, based on the evidence that has been presented for it, and responding accordingly (see Miller, 2003). Atheistic scientists are simply wrong in their sweeping accusation that science and religion are at odds.

Though some theistic beliefs contradict science, when handled accurately (2 Timothy 2:15), Scripture and science compliment each other perfectly. For instance, science has shown us that matter is not eternal, according to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, and could not have spontaneously generated—popping into existence from nothing—according to the First Law of Thermodynamics. This fact indicates that matter must have been placed here by an Entity outside the physical Universe (see Miller, 2007). This truth, arrived at through science and deductive reasoning, is not in harmony with atheism and much of today’s pseudo-science. But this truth is in keeping with the Bible, which says in its very first verse that God—a Being not subject to the laws of nature (i.e., a supernatural Being)—created the heavens and the Earth. Science supports Scripture.

Science has shown us that in nature, life comes only from life and that of its kind, according to the Law of Biogenesis. Again, this fact indicates that a Being outside of nature must exist Who initiated life (see Miller, 2012). This truth, arrived at through science and deductive reasoning, is not in harmony with atheism and much of today’s pseudoscientific world which must contend, without scientific support, that life popped into existence from non-life. Rather, this truth is in keeping with the Bible, which says in Genesis 1:11,24 and 2:7 that God created life.

Science—the Law of Biogenesis and the Laws of Genetics—has shown us that living beings produce other living beings of their own kind (see Thompson, 2002). There may be small changes along the way (e.g., beak size, color, size, etc.), but the offspring of a bird is still a bird. The offspring of a fish is still a fish. Therefore, since there is no common ancestor for all living beings from which all species evolved, there must be a supernatural Being Who initially created various kinds of life on Earth. This truth, arrived at through science and deductive reasoning, is not in harmony with the teachings of atheism and much of today’s pseudo-scientific world, which argues against the evidence, that various kinds of living beings can give rise to completely different kinds of living beings. But this truth is in keeping with the Bible, which says in Genesis 1:21 and 1:24-25 that God directed living beings to reproduce after their kind.

True science is in harmony with true religion. Why would science lie? It does not have a mind of its own. It has no bias or agenda. It can certainly be misrepresented or its findings misinterpreted, but science is not the enemy of true religion. In fact, according to the Bible, God, Himself, instituted the field of science. When God created human beings on day six and told them to “have dominion” over the Earth and “subdue” it (Genesis 1:28), He was commanding mankind to do something that would require extensive scientific investigation and experimentation. If God founded science, why would science be at odds with religion? When God, through His servant Paul, said in Romans 1:20 that His existence and some of His attributes could be learned from His creation, He was putting His stamp of approval on the scientific study of creation. When He said in 1 Thessalonians 5:21 to “[t]est all things; hold fast what is good,” He was essentially summarizing the scientific method. Bottom line: God founded science. When legitimate scientific findings are interpreted properly and fairly, science supports the Bible and Christianity. It certainly is not at odds with the Bible.

REFERENCES

Miller, Dave (2003), “Blind Faith,” Apologetics Press, http://apologeticspress.org/article/444.

Miller, Jeff (2007), “God and the Laws of Thermodynamics: A Mechanical Engineer’s Perspective,” Reason & Revelation, 27[4]:25-31, April (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press), http://apologeticspress.org/articles/3293.

Miller, Jeff (2012), “The Law of Biogenesis,” Reason & Revelation, 32[1]:2-11, January (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press), http://apologeticspress.org/apPubPage.aspx?pub=1&issue=1018&article=1722.

Thompson, Bert (2002), The Scientific Case for Creation (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press).

"THE GOSPEL OF MARK" The Olivet Discourse - I (13:1-23) by Mark Copeland

 

"THE GOSPEL OF MARK"

 The Olivet Discourse - I (13:1-23) 

  INTRODUCTION

1. A challenging passage in the Bible is Jesus’ discourse on the Mount of Olives...
   a. Given shortly after He left the temple with His disciples
   b. Recorded in Mt 24, Mk 13, Lk 21
   c. Commonly referred to as "The Olivet Discourse"
   -- Our focus in this study will be primarily on Mark’s account

2. It’s difficulty becomes apparent as one considers the diversity of interpretations...
   a. Some maintain it is entirely about events preceding the Lord’s
      second and final coming
   b. Others that it is entirely about events related to the destruction
      of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
   c. Yet others believe it contains reference to both events

3. Even those who say it refers to both events differ as to when a
   particular event is described...
   a. Some say that vs. 5-23 refer to the destruction of Jerusalem, and
      vs. 24 begins the discussion about the Lord’s second coming - cf. J.W. McGarvey
   b. Others contend that vs. 32 begins talking about the second coming
   c. Others say Jesus switches back and forth throughout the discourse

[At this time, I view "The Olivet Discourse" in Mk 13 as depicting the
destruction of Jerusalem which occurred in 70 A.D., though it
foreshadows His second coming.  To see why, let’s start with...]

I. THE SETTING OF THE OLIVET DISCOURSE

   A. THE WORDS OF JESUS IN THE TEMPLE...
      1. His parables depicting Israel’s rejection of Him, and its consequence
         a. The parable of the wicked vinedressers - Mk 12:1-12; cf. Mt 21:33-46
         b. Matthew includes the parable of two sons - cf. Mt 21:28-32
         c. Also the parable of the wedding feast - cf. Mt 22:1-14
      2. His condemnation of the scribes and Pharisees
         a. The warning against the pretentious scribes - Mk 12:38-40
         b. Matthew records a more elaborate condemnation - cf. Mt 23:1-28
         c. Who would fill up the measure of their fathers’ guilt - Mt 23:29-32
         d. Who kill, crucify, scourge, and persecute the prophets, wise
            men, and scribes He would send to them - Mt 23:33-34
         e. Upon whom the blood of all the righteous would come, upon
            that very generation - Mt 23:35-36
      3. His lamentation over Jerusalem, recorded by Matthew
         a. The city who kills the prophets and stones those sent to her - cf. Mt 23:37
         b. The city unwilling to accept the love shown to her - cf. Mt 23:37
         c. Whose house would be left desolate - Mt 23:38-39

   B. THE PROPHECY OF JESUS ABOUT THE TEMPLE...
      1. After his disciples were showing Him the buildings of temple - Mk 13:1
      2. Declaring that not one stone would be left upon another - Mk  13:2

   C. THE QUESTIONS OF THE DISCIPLES...
      1. In Mark’s gospel, two questions are asked - Mk 13:4
         a. "When will these things be?"
         b. "What will be the sign when all these things will be fulfilled?"
      2. In Luke’s gospel, the two questions are similar - Lk 21:7
         a. "When will these things be?"
         b. "What sign will there be when these things are about to take place?"
      3. In Matthew’s gospel, the second question is worded differently  Mt 24:3
         a. "When will these things be?"
         b. "What will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?"
      4. Observations regarding these questions:
         a. Only Matthew makes reference to a "coming" and "end of the age"
         a. Matthew wrote his gospel for a Jewish audience
            1) Who would likely view the destruction of temple as a
               judgment against Jerusalem and the complete end of the
               Jewish age (as evidently His disciples did)
            2) Re: the end of the Jewish age - the end began with the
               death of Jesus making the OT covenant obsolete (He 9:15-16); 

               it ended in fullness with the destruction of the temple and cessation

               of its OT covenantal sacrifices (cf. He 8:13)
         b. Mark and Luke wrote their gospels to Gentiles
            1) To avoid misunderstanding by non-Jewish readers, the
               disciples’ questions are worded to reflect what the Olivet discourse is about
            2) I.e., the destruction of the temple (i.e., "these
               things") and the sign when its destruction would be imminent

[When the setting leading up to "The Olivet Discourse" is carefully
considered, the subject becomes clear.  The destruction of the temple is
under consideration, not the second coming of Christ.  Now let’s proceed
to examine more closely...]

II. THE OLIVET DISCOURSE

   A. WHAT WILL NOT BE THE SIGN...
      1. Be careful that none deceive you, claiming to be the Christ - Mk 13:5-6
      2. Don’t be troubled by wars, earthquakes, famines, pestilence - Mk 13:7-8
         a. Such things will come, but the end (destruction of the temple) is not yet
         b. They are only the beginning of sorrows (not the sign of the end)
      3. Anticipate persecution and hard times - Mk 13:9-13
         a. You will be killed and hated for His name’s sake
         b. Many will be offended, betray one another, and hate one another
         c. False prophets will deceive many
         d. The love of many will grow cold because of lawlessness
         e. But he who endures to "the end" will be saved -- "the end" refers here:
            1) Not to the second coming (implying one must live until Christ comes again)
            2) Nor to the destruction of Jerusalem (implying once one
               has survived that event, one’s salvation is secured)
            3) But to the end of one’s life - cf. Re 2:10
      4. The gospel of the kingdom will be preached to all nations - Mk 13:10
         a. As a witness to all the nations - cf. Mt 24:14
         b. Then the end (the destruction of the temple) will come - cf. Mt 24:14
            1) This would end the Jewish sacrifices, and other remnants of OT worship
            2) That which was nailed to the cross, abolished by Jesus’
               death, would pass away - cf. Col 2:14-17; Ep 2:14-16; He  8:13
         c. Was the gospel preached to all nations prior to the destruction of the temple?
            1) Note what Paul wrote prior to 70 A.D. - Ro 10:16-18; Col 1:23
            2) Whether we take Jesus’ and Paul’s words as literal or
               accommodative, according to Paul it had!

   B. WHAT WILL BE THE SIGN...
      1. The "abomination of desolation" - Mk 13:14
         a. Standing where it ought not (the holy city Jerusalem)
         b. As foretold by Daniel - cf. Dan 9:26-27
      2. When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies - cf. Lk 21:20
         a. Luke therefore explains the "abomination of desolation"
         b. In 70 A.D., Roman armies surrounded Jerusalem prior to
            destroying it and the temple
      3. Thus Jesus answers the disciples’ question:  "What sign will
         there be when these things are about to take place?"

   C. WHAT TO DO WHEN YOU SEE THE SIGN...
      1. Those in Judea are to flee to the mountains - Mk 13:14-20
         a. Don’t delay by going to your homes and getting your clothes
         b. It will be a difficult time for pregnant and nursing mothers
         c. Pray that your flight be not in winter (when travel is
            difficult) or on the Sabbath (when city gates are closed to travel)
         d. For there will be "great tribulation", though shortened for the elect’s sake
            1) Luke specifies the nature of this tribulation - Lk 21:23b-24
            2) A Jewish general taking captive by the Romans just prior
               to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 offered this summary:
               a) All the calamities which had befallen any nation from
                  the beginning of the world were but small in comparison with those of the Jews
               b) In the siege of Jerusalem, no fewer than 1,100,000
                  perished (it was during the time of the Passover, when
                  more than 3,000,000 Jews were assembled)
               c) In surrounding provinces 250,000 were slain
               d) 97,000 were taken captive, some killed by beasts in
                  Roman theaters, some sent to work in Egypt, others sold as slaves
               -- Flavius Josephus, Jewish Wars, quoted by Barnes on Matthew 
            3) The "elect" were Christians, spared by a shortened siege
               a) The Jews in the city engaged the Romans in battle
               b) Titus, the Roman general, being called to return to
                  Rome, proceeded to end the siege and stormed the city
                  - Barnes Commentary on Matthew
      2. Don’t be misled by false christs and false prophets - Mk 13:21-23
         a. Even those who show great signs and wonders to deceive
         b. For the coming (judgment) of the Son of Man will be like lightning across the sky
            1) Do not expect to find Him in the desert or in inner rooms
            2) When He comes in judgment, it will be swift - cf. Lk 17:22-24

CONCLUSION (Part One)

1. So far, all this depicts a local, escapable judgment...
   a. Where Jesus warned those in Judea of what is to come - Mk 13:23
   b. Where they are given a sign to let them know when to flee - Mk 13:14

2. It does not fit a worldwide, inescapable judgment...
   a. As will characterize the second coming of Christ - 2Pe 3:10-12
   b. As Paul taught the Christians in Thessalonica - cf. 1Th 5:2-3; 2Th 1:7-10

3. Our next study will continue to examine "The Olivet Discourse", starting with verse 24...
   a. Which certainly sounds like the second coming of Christ, but is it?
   b. Or was Jesus still describing events pertaining to the destruction of Jerusalem?

Eusebius (ca. 300 A.D.) in his "Ecclesiastical History" wrote that
Christians heeded the warnings of Jesus in Matthew 24, and fled
Jerusalem when it was surrounded by the Roman army.

May we likewise heed the words of Jesus:

   *  not be misled by false prophets and false christs
   *  not be troubled by wars, famines, pestilence, earthquakes, or even persecution
   *  enduring to the end by remaining faithful to Him

...looking forward to His final coming at the Last Day!             

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

When Adversity Strikes by Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

 https://thepreachersword.com/2020/03/06/when-adversity-strikes/#more-15581

 When Adversity Strikes

Currently our country, and even the world, is concerned about the spread of the Coronavirus.

Every day we receive updates regarding its impact. Although the majority of the infected reside in China, worldwide there have been over 100,00 reported cases and over 3,400 deaths. In the US there have been 233 confirmed cases and 14 deaths.

The concern over this disease has put some folks in quarantine. Caused travel plans to be canceled. And literally left some folks stranded at sea.

In the meantime folks around Nashville and Cookeville, Tennessee, are digging through the debris of the March 3rd Tornadoes that ripped through their communities destroying homes, businesses, places of worship and claiming the lives of least 25 people. Dozens more are still reported missing.

However, I wondered how many have suffered sickness, heartache and loss in the past week? Whose home has death invaded suddenly and unexpectedly? Or learned of a loved one who suffered a heart attack? Or has been diagnosed with stage 4 cancer? Somewhere there are mothers and fathers in hospitals right now fighting for their lives. And children who are suffering from disease. Or neglect. Or abuse.

The names of the hurting are unknown to the general public and news media. Their stories untold. Their cries unheard. Their suffering unalleviated. But their pain is real. Their hearts are heavy. And their emotions are drained.

How do I know these things? Because life is filled with pain. Suffering. Sickness. And death. Every day somewhere relationships are ruptured. Spirits are disquieted. Souls are distressed. Hearts are broken.

It reminds us of Job’s reflection in the long ago. “Man who is born of a woman is few of days and full of trouble (Job 14:1). How true it is.

So what is the answer? How do we cope? Where do we turn when adversity strikes?

Here are four suggestions based on Biblical teaching.

(1) Live in God’s Presence. James said, “Draw near to God and He will draw near to you.” Jesus promised “I am with you always even to the end of the world” (Mt 28:29).

When we suffer adversity, we can know that we are in the presence of God. What a great encouragement, comfort and consolation.

Once a man accusingly questioned, “Where was God when my son died?” The answer? The same place He was when His son died. If you feel forsaken, Jesus knows how you feel. God is not a spectator of our pain. We are in His presence.

(2) Learn from God’s Promises. The Psalmist affirmed that God would be with us. That he is “our refuge and strength, a very present help in time of trouble.” God promises help. Comfort. Hope. He says, “I care.” And I will care for you.” (I Pet. 5:7). He feels our pain. And will supply our every need (Phil 4:19).

(3) Lean on God’s Power. When Sennacherib, king of Assyria invaded Judah, the king stood up and said. “Be strong and courageous; do not be afraid nor dismayed before the king of Assyria, nor before all the multitude that is with him; for there are more with us than with him. 8 With him is an arm of flesh; but with us is the Lord our God, to help us and to fight our battles.” And the people were strengthened by the words of Hezekiah king of Judah” (2 Chron. 32:7-8).

Finite strength is undependable and expendable, but God’s infinite power is sufficient for every challenge. Indeed we are “kept by the power of God” (1 Pet 1:5).

(4) Look For God’s Purpose. God’s purpose is not to make you miserable. Paul said to “rejoice in the Lord.” God does not send pain, problems and pressures. God is the giver of good gifts. (Jas. 1:18)

So why does adversity strike?

Maybe it’s because of the evil of other people. Sometimes it is the result of living in a world that is filled with sin, suffering and separation. It could be through our own poor choices (Gal. 6:7-8). Maybe the Devil is trying to trap us (1 Pet. 5:8). Furthermore, we live in a world where natural calamities occur. And as the wise man observed “time and chance happens to them all” (Eccl. 9:11). And honestly sometimes there are no answers.

So what is God’s Purpose for me in adversity? To walk by faith and not by sight (2 Cor 5:7). To Use adversity to make us stronger (Jas 1:2-3). To focus on the eternal plan in Jesus (Eph. 3:11). To claim victory through his love, grace and mercy (Rom 8:30-31). To comfort, encourage, and minister to others who are suffering (1 Thess. 5:11; Gal. 5:13; 6:10).

We all will suffer adversity in this life. Sometimes extreme tragedy will befall us. Yet, whatever the trial or trouble, there is help. There is hope. There is God.

–Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

THINK ABOUT IT...by George L. Faul

 

http://steve-finnell.blogspot.com/2016/11/think-about-it.html

THINK ABOUT IT...by George L. Faul

Vol. 28 No. 2 April 2015 George L. Faull, Editor Think About It…

 --By George L. Faull GOD HAS SAID,

 “Thou shalt not commit adultery”. Can people have sex with those who are not their spouse? Yes, they are capable of it and both may enjoy it. Does capability and their enjoying it justify them for doing so?

 JESUS HAS SAID, “If a man puts away his (innocent) wife and marries another commits adultery”. Can he do that? Is he capable of doing that? Does he enjoy his second wife more than his first wife? Would that justify him? Does capability and pleasure and contentment justify his doing it?

 JESUS HAS SAID, “He that believeth and is baptized (immersed) shall be saved”. Can anyone change “baptizo” (immerse, dip, plunge) to “rantizo” (sprinkle) instead? Are they capable of it for convenience or tradition of their church’s preference? Yes. Does capability, tradition, or doctrinal change justify it?

 THE INSPIRED APOSTLE PAUL SAID that it is a shame for a woman to speak in the Church and she is not to be the teacher of men or have authority over the man. Is she capable of doing so? The Elders may approve of it. Is her ability to do so, or even do better than some male teachers, justify her doing so?

 PAUL SAYS that those who practice homosexuality will not inherit the Kingdom of God. Is a man capable of homosexuality? Does he enjoy it? It has become socially accepted. Some churches even approve of it and even ordain them to ministry. Does that justify it?

 Capability, enjoyment, ability, tradition, or social acceptability or thinking in one’s heart that it is okay does not justify disobedience to God.

 Does God want your happiness and enjoyment or does He want your obedience? Just ask those of Sodom and Gomorrah.

By Whose Standards? by Sandra Cobble

 

 http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Cobble/Sandra/Fontaine/1933/standard.html

 

 By Whose Standards?

Who sets your standards? Your God? Your peers? Your relatives? Your past? By what, or by whom do you determine whether your actions are acceptable or unacceptable?

Most of us who are adults are aware of these peer pressures. We do not readily yield to them. Yet we yield to pressure from within. Often these pressures originate in our past. For example, if a person has failed at something in the past, he is hesitant to attempt that thing again. One who has been told that he is a failure, or of little worth may, as an adult, think of himself as a failure or of little worth. Sometimes a parent may cause a child to determine that he is a failure, not by saying so, but rather by setting standards so high that the child just never seems to reach them. Consequently, the child may think of himself as a failure. He may carry this self-evaluation on into adulthood. He may think of himself as a failure even when he is viewed by others as quite successful. He is letting those from his past determine that his actions of today are failures. He is letting others set his standards.

Thus we have seen how some of our standards may have been acquired. But what or whose standard shall we accept? Shall we adhere to the standards others have set for us? Shall traditions set our standards? Shall our conscience set our standards? Or could we let the voices of the past, traditions, and our conscience all set our standards?

Ideally, we should adhere to the highest standards of our religious faith. Often, however, we adhere only loosely to religious tenets held by others rather than to our own personal faith. Is this sufficient? Should we not establish our own faith? Will not the truth of one's faith bear investigation and proving? Did not God, himself, say through Paul in 1 Thessalonians 5:21, "Prove all things?" And in 2 Corinthians 13:5, "Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves." Then, when one has investigated and proved his faith, should he not adhere to its highest standards?

But what about the person who does not believe in any religion? By what does he set his standards? If a person thinks, "I have no belief," should not his disbelief also be investigated and proven? Everyone believes something! The person who says, "There is no God," if he is honest, believes that proposition. Upon what does he base his belief that there is no God? The behavior of "believers" in God? An unwillingness in himself or in others to adhere faithfully to the tenets of some system of faith? Or on carefully investigated and proven evidence?

Should we let traditions set our standards? It was traditionally taught that the earth was flat. Preachers and priests found scriptures upon which they based their belief. That is, they thought those scriptures upheld their conclusions. Now we have proven the earth to be round -- or approximately so. So the tradition was proven to be wrong. But is all tradition wrong? Did not Paul say in 2 Thessalonians 2:15, "Hold fast the traditions which ye have been taught?" When does one leave old traditions? The Greek word, paradosis, from which the word is translated simply means, "that which is given over or handed down." Should one hold to a tradition when it is proven to his satisfaction that it is only handed down from previous generations and is not an eternal truth, handed down from God? Should one let tradition or truth be his standard? Jesus said, "Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8:32).

What about our past experiences? Shall they be our standard? If we have thought we were of little worth as a child, shall we continue to think that way as adults? When Jesus said we were of much more value than many sparrows (Matthew 10:31) was he not simply saying in a different way that each of us is really worth more than the whole world? (Mark 8:36). When we let childhood experiences set our standards, are we not still acting immaturely, like children? Yet are not children expected to grow into adulthood? Does this not include the putting away of childish standards concerning our own worth? (1 Corinthians 13:11). But what if we have failed since becoming adults? Should we let failure set our standards? Is this not permitting the dead past to be in control of us who are alive? Is this reasonable?

And what about our own conscience? Shall it set our standards? Was not our conscience clear when we believed a lie? For example, when we believed in Santa Claus, or when we held erroneous beliefs about where babies came from? Have we not done things in all good conscience and later found out we had done the wrong thing? Paul was not unusual in this respect. He said, "I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day" (Acts 23:1) although he had been persecuting Christians unto death. Can we trust our conscience to set our standards?

Having examined various standards, we find that often they prove to be insufficient. Does that mean we should disregard all standards? Can we not learn from our past experiences? Are there not many traditions to which we may still hold? Does not our conscience play a vital role in setting, or helping us to meet, our standards? Can we not, as adults, critically examine the standards by which we evaluate our actions? Can we not discard those which prove to be insufficient, measuring all of them by the guidelines of Him who said, "All authority is given unto me" (Matthew 28:18)? Can we not then do what Paul said in 1 Thessalonians 5:21, "Hold fast that which is good"?

Let us carefully examine our standards, not only to see what they are, but upon what they are based. Then let us walk according to the highest standards of which we are capable.

Sandra F. Cobble

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

From the womb... by Gary Rose

 

Abortion is a national disgrace. Tens of millions of unborn babies are murdered before they see the light of day. The procedures used to accomplish this abomination are cruel and exceedingly gruesome.

Why is this situation allowed to continue? The government adheres to power like one totally addicted to Heroin. They think that by giving women the convenience of not paying the penalty for sexual misconduct, they will gain votes and stay in power.

As I was thinking of the verse quoted in the picture, I remembered something about Bible interpretation; namely, that one should never just pick one verse to hang one’s understanding on.

The Bible also says...

Psalm 139 ( World English Bible )

¹ For the Chief Musician. A Psalm by David. Yahweh, you have searched me, and you know me.

² You know my sitting down and my rising up. You perceive my thoughts from afar.

³ You search out my path and my lying down, and are acquainted with all my ways.

⁴ For there is not a word on my tongue, but, behold, Yahweh, you know it altogether.

⁵ You hem me in behind and before. You laid your hand on me.

⁶ This knowledge is beyond me. It’s lofty. I can’t attain it.

⁷ Where could I go from your Spirit? Or where could I flee from your presence?

⁸ If I ascend up into heaven, you are there. If I make my bed in Sheol, behold, you are there!

⁹ If I take the wings of the dawn, and settle in the uttermost parts of the sea;

¹⁰ Even there your hand will lead me, and your right hand will hold me.

¹¹ If I say, “Surely the darkness will overwhelm me; the light around me will be night;”

¹² even the darkness doesn’t hide from you, but the night shines as the day. The darkness is like light to you.

¹³ For you formed my inmost being. You knit me together in my mother’s womb.

¹⁴ I will give thanks to you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Your works are wonderful. My soul knows that very well.

¹⁵ My frame wasn’t hidden from you, when I was made in secret, woven together in the depths of the earth.

¹⁶ Your eyes saw my body. In your book they were all written, the days that were ordained for me, when as yet there were none of them.

Those who do not know God and do not want to know God, have hardened their heart towards HIM and exalted their wishes over those of the Almighty creator of the entire universe and in their minds have made themselves a god. The terrible truth is that the vast majority of them will never listen to what the Bible teaches, no matter how many verses you use or how correct and precise your logical presentation of God’s truth is. How sad!

The truth is that God directly made Adam and Eve and everyone else that has ever lived. Yes, there is the human reproductive act, but to believe that somehow God is independent of life in the womb is to invalidate the Psalmists passage above. God loves us and guides us, even from the very beginning of our creation. He knows us in totality and there is no escaping his presence. Oh, we can deny HIM, but we can not escape the eternal penalty for doing so.

Those who love God come to realize during a reflection on their life as a whole, that God has been there all the time. Dear friend, come to Jesus for rest, turn away from all forms of wickedness. Love and obey God’s will for your life and do your very best to please God in every way. God will never abandon you or forsake you, in this world or the next!