The Only True God by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=5014

The Only True God

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

The Bible is full of scriptures that, when quoted without any consideration of the immediate and remote contexts, a person can misuse in all sorts of ways. As proof that we do not have to work to provide for our family’s material needs, some may quote Jesus’ statement, “Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life” (John 6:27). In order to show that Jesus was a liar, the Bible critic might quote Jesus’ acknowledgement: “If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true” (John 5:31). Those who exclude baptism from God’s plan of salvation often quote John 4:2: “Jesus Himself did not baptize, but His disciples.” When the Bible reader is “rightly dividing” (2 Timothy 2:15, NKJV) or “handling accurately the word of truth” (NASB), however, he will remember that “[t]he sum of thy [God’s] word is truth” (Psalm 119:160, emp. added). Since the Bible teaches “if anyone will not work, neither shall he eat” (2 Thessalonians 3:10; cf. 1 Timothy 5:8), Jesus never implied that working to help feed one’s family is wrong (John 6:27). “He simply was saying that spiritual food is more important than physical food, and as such, should be given a higher priority” (Butt, 2003, emp. in orig.). Jesus did not confess wrongdoing in John 5:31. He simply acknowledged that, in accordance with the law (cf. Deuteronomy 19:15), His testimony apart from other witnesses would be considered invalid or insufficient to establish truth (cf. John 8:13-20; see Lyons, 2004). Likewise, Jesus never taught that baptism was unnecessary for salvation. In fact, He taught the very opposite (cf. John 3:3,5; Mark 16:16; Matthew 28:18-20; see Lyons, 2003).

Consider another proof text from the Gospel of John regarding the nature of Christ. Some (e.g., Jehovah’s Witnesses) contend that Jesus was not deity since, on one occasion, He prayed to the Father: “And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent” (John 17:3; cf. “Should You Believe...?,” 2000). Allegedly, by calling the Father, “the only true God,” Jesus excluded Himself from being deity. Such an interpretation of John 17:3, however, contradicts numerous other passages within John’s own gospel account. From beginning to end, John bore witness to the deity of Christ. Some of the evidence from the Gospel of John includes the following:

• In the very first verse of John, the apostle testified: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (emp. added; cf. 1:14,17).
• Two verses later the reader learns that “[a]ll things came into being by Him [the Word], and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being” (John 1:3, NASB).
• Still in the first chapter of John, the apostle testified that John the Baptizer was the one whom Isaiah foretold would “prepare...the way of Jehovah” (Isaiah 40:3; John 1:23; cf. 14:6). For Whom did John the Baptizer come to prepare the way? Isaiah called Him “Jehovah.” The apostle John, as well as John the Baptizer, referred to Jehovah as “Jesus” (John 1:17), “the Christ” (3:28), “the Word” (1:1), “the Light” (1:17), “the Lamb” (1:29), “the Truth” (5:33), etc.
• When the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well told Jesus, “I know that Messiah is coming” (John 4:25), Jesus responded, “I who speak to you am He” (vs. 26). Isaiah foretold that the Messiah would be called “Mighty God” (9:6) and “Jehovah” (40:3). Thus, by claiming to be the Messiah, Jesus was claiming to be God.
• In John chapter nine, Jesus miraculously healed a man with congenital blindness (vs. 1). When this man appeared before various Jews in the synagogue and called Jesus a prophet (vs. 17), he was instructed to “give glory to God,” not Jesus, because allegedly Jesus “is a sinner” (vs. 24). Later, after the man born blind was cast out of the synagogue, he confessed faith in Jesus and worshiped (Greek proskuneo) Him (vs. 38). In the Gospel of John, this word (proskuneo) is found 11 times: nine times in reference to worshiping the Father (John 4:2-24), once in reference to Greeks who came to “worship” in Jerusalem during Passover (12:20), and once in reference to the worship Jesus received from a man whom He had miraculously healed, and who had just confessed faith in Jesus. Indeed, by accepting worship Jesus acknowledged His deity (cf. Matthew 4:10; Hebrews 1:6).
• While at the Feast of Dedication in Jerusalem, Jesus claimed: “I and My Father are one” (John 10:30). “Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him” (vs. 31). Why did Jesus’ enemies want to stone Him? The Jews said to Christ: “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God” (vs. 33, emp. added; cf. 5:17-18).
• After Jesus rose from the dead, the apostle Thomas called Jesus, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28). Jesus responded: “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed” (vs. 29). Notice that Jesus did not deny His deity, rather He acknowledged Thomas’ faith and commended future believers. Believers in what? In that which Thomas had just confessed—that Jesus is Lord and God.

It was in the overall context of John’s gospel account, which is filled with statements testifying of Jesus’ deity, that the apostle recorded Jesus’ prayer to His Father the night of His betrayal (John 17). But how can Jesus’ statement about His Father being “the only true God” (17:3) be harmonized with statements by Jesus, the apostle John, John the Baptizer, Thomas, etc. affirming the deity of Christ? When a person understands that Jesus’ statement was made in opposition to the world’s false gods, and not Himself, the reference to the Father being “the only true God” harmonizes perfectly with the many scriptures that attest to the deity of Christ (including those outside of the book of John; cf. Matthew 1:23; Colossians 2:9; Hebrews 1:5-13). On the eve of Jesus’ crucifixion, it was completely natural for Him to pray that “all flesh/people” (John 17:2, NKJV/NIV), many of whom were (and still are) pagan idolaters, would come to know “the only true God” and receive eternal life (17:3). Thus, Jesus contrasted Himself not with the Father, but “with all forms of pagan polytheism, mystic pantheism, and philosophic naturalism” (Jamieson, et al., 1997).

Furthermore, if Jesus’ reference to the Father being “the only true God” somehow excludes Jesus from being deity, then (to be consistent) Jesus also must be disqualified from being man’s Savior. Jehovah said: “Besides me there is no savior” (Isaiah 43:11; cf. Hosea 13:4; Jude 25). Yet, Paul and Peter referred to Jesus as our “Savior” several times in their inspired writings (Ephesians 5:23; Philippians 3:20; 2 Timothy 1:10; 2 Peter 1:1,11; 2:20; etc.). Also, if Jesus is excluded from Godhood (based on a misinterpretation of John 17:3), then, pray tell, must God the Father be excluded from being man’s Lord? To the church at Ephesus, Paul wrote that there is “one Lord” (4:4, emp. added), and, according to Jude 4 (using Jehovah’s Witnesses own New World Translation) “our only Owner and Lord” is “Jesus Christ” (emp. added). Yet, in addition to Jesus being called Lord throughout the New Testament, so is God the Father (Matthew 11:25; Luke 1:32; Acts 1:25) and the Holy Spirit (2 Corinthians 3:17).

Obviously, when the Bible reveals that there is only one God, one Savior, one Lord, one Creator (Isaiah 44:24; John 1:3), etc., reason and revelation demand that we understand the inspired writers to be excluding everyone and everything—other than the triune God. As former Jehovah’s Witness David Reed explained: “Jesus’ being called our ‘only’ Lord does not rule out the Lordship of the Father and the Holy Spirit, and the Father’s being called the ‘only’ true God does not exclude the Son and the Holy Spirit from deity” (1986, p. 82).

REFERENCES

Butt, Kyle (2003), “Wearing Gold and Braided Hair,” Apologetics Press, http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2264.

Jamieson, Robert, et al. (1997), Jamieson, Faussett, Brown Bible Commentary (Electronic Database: Biblesoft).

Lyons, Eric (2003), “The Bible’s Teaching on Baptism: Contradictory or Complementary?” Apologetics Press, http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/617.

Lyons, Eric (2004), “Was Jesus Trustworthy?” Apologetics Press, http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/516.

Reed, David (1986), Jehovah’s Witnesses Answered Verse by Verse (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).

“Should You Believe in the Trinity?” (2000), The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society.

Jesus, the Syrophoenician Woman, and Little Dogs by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=317

Jesus, the Syrophoenician Woman, and Little Dogs

by	Kyle Butt, M.Div.

Any honest student of the Bible must admit certain biblical episodes seem to be problematic when encountered for the first time. Upon further investigation, however, the apparent difficulties in the text vanish and the meanings become increasingly clear. One episode in the life of Jesus that historically has been misunderstood by some Bible believers and misrepresented by the skeptic is Jesus’ encounter with the Syrophoenician woman. Mark records the episode as follows:

For a woman whose young daughter had an unclean spirit heard about Him [Jesus—KB], and she came and fell at His feet. The woman was a Greek, a Syro-Phoenician by birth, and she kept asking Him to cast the demon out of her daughter. But Jesus said to her, “Let the children be filled first, for it is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the little dogs.” And she answered and said to Him, “Yes, Lord, yet even the little dogs under the table eat from the children’s crumbs.” Then He said to her, “For this saying go your way; the demon has gone out of your daughter.” And when she had come to her house, she found the demon gone out, and her daughter lying on the bed (7:25-30; see also Matthew 15:21-28).

Based on a cursory reading of the text, one may be startled that Jesus referred to this Gentile woman as a “little dog.”

Jesus’ statement in this context certainly has not escaped the notice of the skeptical community. The prolific infidel Steve Wells documented hundreds of cases of alleged intolerance in the biblical text. Jesus’ encounter with the Syrophoenician women is number 421 on his list. Of the episode, Wells wrote: “Jesus initially refuses to cast out a devil from a Syrophoenician woman’s daughter, calling the woman a ‘dog’. After much pleading, he finally agrees to cast out the devil” (2006).

Even many religious writers and speakers view Jesus’ statements to the woman as unkind, intolerant, racially slurred, and offensive. Dean Breidenthal, in a sermon posted under the auspices of the Princeton University Office of Religious Life, said concerning Jesus’ comment: “I suspect we would not be so bothered by Jesus’ unkind words to the Syrophoenician woman if they were not directed against the Gentile community. Those of us who are Gentile Christians have less trouble with Jesus’ invectives when they are directed against the Jewish leadership of his day” (2003, emp. added). Please do not miss the implication of Breidenthal’s comment. If the statement made by Jesus actually could be construed as unkind, then Jesus would be guilty of violating one of the primary characteristics of love, since love “suffers long and is kind” (1 Corinthians 13:4), which would cast doubt on His deity. Is it true that Jesus exhibited an unkind attitude in His treatment of the Syrophoenician woman?

TO THE JEWS FIRST AND ALSO TO THE GREEKS

In order for one to understand Jesus’ statement, he or she must recognize the primary purpose of the comment. Jesus was passing through the land of the Gentiles (Greeks) and was approached by a woman who was not a Jew. While Jesus’ message would eventually reach the Gentile world, it is evident from the Scriptures that the Jewish nation would be the initial recipient of that message. In his account of Jesus’ encounter with the Syrophoenician woman, Matthew recorded that Jesus said: “I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (15:24). When Jesus sent the twelve apostles on the “limited commission,” He told them: “Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter a city of the Samaritans. But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matthew 10:5-6).

Just before Jesus ascended to heaven after His resurrection, He informed the apostles: “[A]nd you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth” (Acts 1:8). The sequence of places where the apostles would witness manifests the order in which the Gospel would be preached (i.e., the Jews first and then the Gentiles). In addition, the apostle Paul, in his epistle to the church at Rome, stated: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek” (1:16). Jesus’ statement to the Syrophoenician woman indicated that the Jewish nation was Jesus’ primary target for evangelism during His earthly ministry.

HOW FAR CAN AN ANIMAL ILLUSTRATION BE TAKEN?

To our 21st-century ears, the idea that Jesus would refer to the Gentiles as “little dogs” has the potential to sound belittling and unkind. When we consider how we often use animal terms in illustrative or idiomatic ways, however, Jesus’ comments are much more benign. For instance, suppose a particular lawyer exhibits unyielding tenacity. We might say he is a “bulldog” when he deals with the evidence. Or we might say that a person is “as cute as a puppy” or has “puppy dog eyes.” If someone has a lucky day, we might say something like “every dog has its day.” Or if an adult refuses to learn to use new technology, we might say that “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks.” In addition, one might say that a person “works like a dog,” is the “top dog” at the office, or is “dog tired.” Obviously, to call someone “top dog” would convey no derogatory connotation.

For Jesus’ statement to be construed as unkind or wrong in some way, a person would be forced to prove that the illustration or idiom He used to refer to the Gentiles as “little dogs” must be taken in a derogatory fashion. Such cannot be proved. In fact, the term Jesus used for “little dogs” could easily be taken in an illustrative way without any type of unkind insinuation. In his commentary on Mark, renowned commentator R.C.H. Lenski translated the Greek term used by Jesus (kunaria) as “little pet dogs.” Lenski further noted concerning Jesus statement: “In the Orient dogs have no owners but run wild and serve as scavengers for all garbage and offal.... It is an entirely different conception when Jesus speaks of ‘little pet dogs’ in referring to the Gentiles. These have owners who keep them even in the house and feed them by throwing them bits from the table” (1961, p. 304). Lenski goes on to write concerning Jesus’ statement: “All that Jesus does is to ask the disciples and the woman to accept the divine plan that Jesus must work out his mission among the Jews.... Any share of Gentile individuals in any of these blessings can only be incidental during Jesus’ ministry in Israel” (pp. 304-305). In regard to the non-derogatory nature of Jesus’ comment to the Gentile woman, Allen Black wrote: “The form of his statement is proverbial. And the basis of the proverb is not an antipathy for Gentiles, but the necessary Jewish focus of Jesus’ earthly ministry” (1995, p. 137).

So before people “dog” Jesus for the way He used an animal illustration, they might need to reconsider that “their bark is much worse than their bite” when it comes to insinuating that Jesus was wrong. It seems that they are simply “barking up the wrong tree” by attempting to call Jesus’ character into question. They need to “call off the dogs” on this one and “let sleeping dogs lie.”

REFERENCES

Black, Allen (1995), The Book of Mark (Joplin, MO: College Press).

Breidenthal, Dean (2003), “The Children’s Bread,” [On-line], URL: http://web.princeton.edu/sites/chapel/Sermon%20Files/2003_sermons/ 090703.htm.

Lenski, R.C.H. (1961), The Interpretation of Mark’s Gospel (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg).

Wells, Steve (2006), Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, [On-line], URL: http://www.Skepticsannotatedbible.com.

A Galactic Glossary by Bert Thompson, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=47

A Galactic Glossary

by	Bert Thompson, Ph.D.

“Let us examine for a moment the current all-encompassing science of cosmology.... The big bang theory proclaims that the whole universe created itself instantly out of nothing. I believe there are many observations by now that disprove this...” (astrophysicist Halton Arp, 2000, 14[3]:448).

[NOTE: Words and phrases in bold type within these definitions also appear in the glossary.]

Absolute Zero—The theoretical temperature at which substances possess no thermal energy and all molecular motion ceases. Equal to 0 Kelvin, -273.15° Celsius, or -459.67° Fahrenheit.

Anisotropy—From Greek anisos, meaning “unequal”; having properties that vary according to the direction of measurement; opposite of isotropy.

Axions—Theoretical particles that have no charge or spin, and an extremely small mass. They have been proposed to explain unknown characteristics of the strong nuclear force.

Baryonic Matter—All conventional (“normal”) matter comprised of protons and neutrons.

“Big Chill”—Cosmological theory which suggests that the Universe will accelerate its expansion, growing increasingly cold with its infinite advance.

“Big Crunch”—Cosmological theory which suggests that the Universe expanded originally from a singularity, eventually will collapse back again, and will repeat such a cycle indefinitely.

Black Hole—A theoretical object whose mass is at such an intense density that the escape velocity exceeds the speed of light, thus preventing even light from exiting.

Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMB)—An observed cosmic radiation on the order of microwaves [waves that have the shortest wavelength in the radio wave spectrum] emanating from space, independent of directional measurements.

Cosmological Redshift—The “apparent movement” of matter in space, caused by the movement of space itself rather than the motion of matter itself; also known as Hubble flow or expansion redshift.

Cosmology—From Greek kosmos, meaning “order”; the study of the Cosmos (i.e., the ordered Universe) in all its aspects.

Dark Energy—Theoretical “missing energy” that has been suggested to account for a deficiency in the Big Bang Theory and its variants; hypothesized, but not yet documented to exist.

Dark Matter—Theoretical particles that emit little or no detectable radiation of their own, and that are postulated to exist because of the effects of gravitational forces on other astronomical objects; hypothesized, but not yet documented to exist.

Doppler Effect—The change in the observed frequency of an electromagnetic wave due to the relative motion of source and/or observer.

Entropy—Measure of the disorder or randomness in a system; the portion of heat (energy) content unavailable to perform work.

Expansion—The concept in astronomy which suggests that the distance between galaxies in the Universe is continually increasing in size (which means that galaxies outside our own are receding from us).

Expansion Redshift—The “apparent movement” of matter in space caused by the movement of space itself rather than the motion of matter; also known as Hubble flow or cosmological redshift.

First Law of Thermodynamics—The scientific law which states that neither matter nor energy can be created or destroyed in a closed system, but can only be conserved.

Galaxy—Large-scale collection of stars, gas, and debris. The Milky Way Galaxy, where Earth resides, is classified as a spiral galaxy.

Globular Cluster—A group of many thousands of stars, which are traveling through space together and that are much closer to each other than the stars around the group.

Gravitational Redshift—The movement of matter in space caused, not by the expansion of space around the matter, but by gravitational forces that actually cause the matter itself to move (cf. Hubble flow/cosmological redshift/expansion redshift).

Homogeneity—The concept which suggests that matter is distributed uniformly throughout the Universe.

Hubble Constant—The scientific constant of proportion between relative velocity and distance that is used to calculate the expansion rate of the Universe.

Hubble Flow—The “apparent movement” of matter in space, caused by the movement of space itself rather than the motion of matter itself; also known as cosmological redshift or expansion redshift.

Inflation—Rapid expansion of the Universe, required for the Inflationary Big Bang Hypothesis.

Inflaton—Theoretical particle whose sole purpose is to provide the vacuum of space with the required energy to produce inflation.

Irtrons—Theoretical points that spontaneously produce hydrogen from nothing and spew it into the Universe; hypothesized in an attempt to maintain a steady-state type of Universe.

Isotropy—From Greek isos meaning “equal”; having identical properties in all directions.

Light-years—A unit of measurement of astronomical distance; the distance that light travels in a vacuum in one year (approximately 5.88 trillion miles). [Distances expressed in light-years represent the time that light would take to cross that distance.]

Nebula—A diffuse mass of interstellar dust or gas or both, visible as luminous patches.

Nucleosynthesis—The creation of the elements via nuclear reactions; theoretically, the process by which heavier chemical elements are manufactured from hydrogen nuclei.

Quasars—Quasi-Stellar Astronomical Objects. Originally, these objects were called “quasi-stellar radio sources” (“quasars” for short). Quasars are compact, extragalactic objects that look like points of light, but which emit more energy (mostly as infrared radiation) than a hundred supergiant galaxies. Considered to be the most distant and youngest objects in the Universe.

Redshift—An increase in the wavelength of radiation emitted by a celestial body; often considered to be the consequence of the Doppler effect.

Second Law of Thermodynamics—Also known as the “Law of Increasing Entropy”; basically, the Second Law says three things: (a) systems will tend toward the most probable state; (b) systems will tend toward the most random state, and (c) systems will increase in entropy, where entropy is a measure of the unavailability of energy to do useful work.

Steady State Theory—Cosmological theory which proposed the spontaneous generation of hydrogen from nothing at hypothetical points known as “irtrons,” thereby causing the Universe to expand forever and thus remain in a “steady state.”

Sunyaev-Zeldovich Effect—The thermal effect arising from the frequency shift when cosmic microwave background radiation is scattered by the hot electrons in interstellar gas.

Superclusters—A large group of neighboring clusters of galaxies.

Universe—All matter and energy, including the Earth, the galaxies, and the contents of intergalactic space, regarded as a whole.

Vortices—The swirling or circular motion, tending to form a cavity or vacuum at its center.

Ylem—The hypothetical primordial matter, which according to the Big Bang, existed prior to the formation of the elements. Sometimes referred to as the “cosmic egg,” it is the alleged seed that contained all the matter in the known Universe.

Are All Divorced Persons Eligible to Remarry? by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=1182

Are All Divorced Persons Eligible to Remarry?

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D.

American civilization is experiencing significant moral decay. “Traditional American values,” i.e., values that were drawn from the Bible, are being jettisoned by a sizable portion of the nation’s citizenry. This spiritual and social deterioration is nowhere more evident than in the breakdown and dissolution of the family. Divorce rates have consistently climbed to higher and higher levels. The marriage relationship no longer commands the respect it once did. This God-ordained institution, though originally intended to be held in honor and sanctity, has been significantly undermined and cheapened.

The religious response to this situation generally has been accommodative, as many within the church find their own families adversely affected by divorce. They have been intimidated by two factors: (1) the large numbers of divorced people; and (2) the emotional trauma associated with divorce. “Rethinking” their understanding of Bible teaching, they have decided to relax the high standards that God enjoined. The various viewpoints now available to those who wish to justify their marital decisions are legion.

The clear teaching of the Bible is that God wants one man for one woman for life (Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:4-6). The only exception to this foundational premise was articulated by Jesus when He said a person is permitted to divorce the original mate only for the specific reason of that mate’s sexual infidelity. Then and only then may the innocent mate form a second marriage with an eligible partner (Matthew 19:9). Consequently, the primary thrust of Scripture as it pertains to marriage is “God hates divorce” (Malachi 2:16). In fact, He permits it on only one ground.

This divine aversion to divorce refers specifically to divorce that occurs between two people who are scripturally married. Men and women who marry for the first time in their youth should so conduct themselves that they remain together. God does not want that first marriage to dissolve. He hates it when these couples unscripturally dissolve their scriptural marriage. Unscriptural divorce is the kind of divorcing that God hates.

However, not all divorce is contrary to God’s will. Jesus said an individual has permission to divorce the mate that commits fornication (Matthew 19:9). So divorce for that innocent marriage partner is not sinful. In Ezra’s day, exiled Jews had formed illicit marriages and were required to sever those marriages (Ezra 10:3,11). Divorce in that instance was likewise not sinful. John the baptizer informed Herod that when he married Herodias, he was sinning, and would have to dissolve the marriage (Mark 6:17-18). Divorce in that case was not sinful. When Paul identified several Corinthian Christians as having previously been adulterers (1 Corinthians 6:9), the putting away (i.e., divorce) that would have been necessary to end their adultery in order to be “washed” and “sanctified” (1 Corinthians 6:11) would not have been sinful. (The same principle would have applied equally to all other forms of fornication mentioned in the context—including homosexuality). These scriptural examples show that not all divorce is wrong in God’s sight.

On the other hand, much of the divorcing that is occurring today is contrary to the will of God. Any person who divorces their scriptural spouse for any reason, other than fornication, is sinning in so doing. They sin when they divorce! They sin on at least two counts. First, they sin because they have divorced for some reason other than fornication. Second, they sin because they violated the vows they took when they married (i.e., “until death do us part”).

In this divorced condition (i.e., having divorced for some reason other than fornication), the individual has placed himself in a predicament that comes under additional divine restrictions. Paul pinpointed those restrictions in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 where he insisted that scripturally married couples ought not to divorce. However, should their marriage break up unscripturally, both are to remain unmarried. Some feel this verse does not refer to a technical divorce but merely to a separation. Either way, their breakup (whether by separation or divorce) is contrary to God’s will, and neither of the two is eligible to marry someone else.

People are permitted to participate in marriage only insofar as God says they are eligible to do so. The Hebrews writer insisted that marriage (and the sexual relationship that accompanies marriage) is to be undertaken honorably—i.e., in accordance with God’s regulations. To engage in marriage (and the sexual relations that accompany marriage) out of harmony with God’s regulations is to be guilty of fornication and adultery (Hebrews 13:4). Fornication, by definition, refers to illicit sexual intercourse. Adultery is one type of fornication, and refers to the sexual relations between a man and a woman, at least one of whom has prior marital responsibilities. Adultery, by definition, derives its meaning on the basis of a person’s prior marital connections.

A person does not have to be married in order to please God and go to heaven. All a person has to be is a Christian. He does not have to be an elder, a deacon, or a preacher. He or she does not have to be a father, or a mother, or a parent. These are relationships and roles that God designed to be helpful to the human condition. However, not everyone qualifies to fill these roles, and people can go to heaven without ever occupying these roles. So it is with marriage. All people must meet God’s designated prerequisites before marriage may be had in honor. God nowhere promises anyone unlimited access to the marriage relationship.

Notice, then, that in view of God’s regulations, three categories of divorced persons are ineligible to remarry: (1) the person who committed fornication and was divorced for that act by his or her spouse (Matthew 19:9a); (2) the person who was unscripturally divorced (i.e., put away for some reason other than fornication) by a spouse (Matthew 19:9b); and (3) the person who was deserted by an unbelieving spouse (1 Corinthians 7:12-15). In these three instances, the divorced person is ineligible to remarry. Putting the entire matter positively, the only divorced person who is eligible in God’s sight to remarry (while the former mate is still living—Romans 7:3) is the person who divorced his/her original mate for that mate’s sexual unfaithfulness.

Many people feel that such strict limitations are out of harmony with the grace, love, and forgiveness of God. They believe that such high standards make divorce the “unpardonable sin.” But this conclusion does not follow. People can be forgiven of mistakes they make in the realm of divorce and remarriage. Forgiveness is not the issue. The issue is: can they remain in whatever marriage relationship they choose? Can they so sin that they forfeit their right to participate in a future marriage relationship? Jesus made the answers to these questions clear in His discussion in Matthew 19:1-12. All people who divorce their scriptural mates for any reason except fornication continue to commit adultery when they remarry.

However, do we have any indication elsewhere in Scripture that people can so sin that they forfeit their privilege to participate in a state, condition, or relationship that they previously enjoyed—even though they may be forgiven? As a matter of fact, the Bible is replete with such instances! Adam and Eve violated God’s word and were responsible for introducing sin into the Universe. One consequence of their sin was that they were expelled from Eden. Could they be forgiven? Yes! Could they ever return to the garden? No! Their expulsion was permanent. They had so sinned that they forfeited the privilege of enjoying that previous status.

Esau was guilty of profanity when he sold his birthright (Hebrews 12:16). Could he be forgiven for this mistake? Yes! Could he regain his birthright? No, “though he sought it diligently with tears” (Hebrews 12:17)!

Virtually the entire adult population of the nation of Israel sinned when they refused to obey God by proceeding with a military assault against the land of Canaan (Numbers 14:11-12). Could they be forgiven? Yes, and they were (Numbers 14:19-20). Were they then permitted to enter into the Promised Land? Absolutely not! They were doomed to wander in the desert for forty years (Numbers 14:33-34).

Moses allowed himself to be goaded into disobedience on one occasion by the incessant complaining of the nation committed to his keeping (Numbers 20:7-12). Could Moses be forgiven? Yes! In heaven, we will sing the song of Moses and the Lamb (Revelation 15:3)! But was Moses permitted to enter into the Promised Land? No. He was banned permanently from that privilege due to his own sinful choice (Deuteronomy 32:51-52).

Eli failed to manage his family properly, and so brought down upon himself lasting tragedies (1 Samuel 3:11-14). Though Saul acknowledged his own sin, his disobedience evoked God’s permanent rejection of him as king (1 Samuel 15:11,23,26,28). Samuel never visited Saul again. David’s sin, though forgiven, brought several negative consequences that could not be altered (2 Samuel 12:11-14). Solomon’s sin resulted in personal calamity and the division of the nation (1 Kings 11-12).

These biblical examples demonstrate that sin produces lasting consequences, despite the availability of God’s grace and forgiveness. If biblical history teaches us anything, it teaches that people cannot sin and then expect to have things the way they were before. More often than not, much suffering comes upon those who violate God’s will, making it impossible for them to enjoy past privileges—though they can be forgiven and have the hope of heaven.

Many people feel that God would be unkind, unfair, or overly harsh if He did not permit divorced and remarried couples to stay together, regardless of their previous marital choices. Undoubtedly, these same people would feel that God was unfair to Adam and Eve for ejecting them from the garden, making it impossible for them to enjoy the condition that they once sustained! That would mean that God was unfair and harsh toward the Israelites as well as Moses! Such thinking betrays an inaccurate and unscriptural grasp of the nature and person of God. It reflects a failure to possess a healthy fear of God (Exodus 20:5; Ecclesiastes 12:13-14; Luke 12:5; 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9; Hebrews 10:31; 12:29; Revelation 6:16-17).

God elevated the marriage relationship to a high plane when, at the beginning of the human race, He laid down the strict standards that govern marriage (Genesis 2:24; Matthew 19:4-6). Many apparently feel that they have a right to be married regardless of their previous conduct. They feel that God’s high standards ought to be adjusted in order for them to exercise their “right.” Yet, the Bible teaches that the institution of marriage was founded by God to provide cohesion and orientation in life. Unlike one’s spiritual marriage (i.e., to Christ), which will proceed right on into eternity, human marriage is for this life alone (Matthew 22:30). Therefore, marriage is not a right; it is a privilege. People must conform to God’s marriage rules in order for marriage to serve its earthly purpose. Failure to comply neutralizes the ability of the marriage institution to do what it was divinely designed to do. Failure to comply with God’s “directions for use” causes us to forfeit our opportunity to participate in the institution. We must remember: Father knows best.

Does God REALLY Know Everything? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/AllegedDiscrepancies.aspx?article=787&b=Psalms

Does God REALLY Know Everything?

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Numerous passages of Scripture clearly teach that God is omniscient. The Bible declares that God “knows the secrets of the heart” (Psalm 44:21), that His eyes “are in every place” (Proverbs 15:3), and that “His understanding is infinite” (147:5). Of Jehovah, the psalmist also wrote:

O Lord, You have searched me and known me. You know my sitting down and my rising up; You understand my thought afar off. You comprehend my path and my lying down, and are acquainted with all my ways. For there is not a word on my tongue, but behold, O Lord, You know it altogether.... Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain it. Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your presence? If I ascend into heaven, You are there; if I make my bed in hell, behold, You are there (139:1-4,6-8).

The New Testament reemphasizes this truth: “God is greater than our heart, and knows all things” (1 John 3:20, emp. added). Not only does He know the past and the present, but the future as well (Acts 15:18; cf. Isaiah 46:10). According to the Bible, there is nothing outside of the awareness of God.

Atheist Dan Barker, however, alleged in his February 12, 2009 debate with Kyle Butt that the Bible paints a contradictory picture of God and His knowledge. Whereas some scriptures indicate that God knows the future, supposedly, the God of the Bible cannot exist because other passages reportedly teach that God does not know the future. Twelve minutes and 54 seconds into his first speech, Barker exclaimed:

Look what God said after he stopped it [Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac—EL]. He said: “Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for I know now, I now know, that you fear God, seeing that you have not withheld thy son.” I know now? I thought God knew everything. The Bible says God knows the future but here He is saying, “I didn’t even know.” The Bible even says that God searches and understands all the imaginations of the heart. The God of the Bible knows the future. The God of the Bible does not know the future (2009).

Is Barker correct? Does the Bible paint a contradictory picture of God’s knowledge? Do some passages testify to the omniscience of God, while others indicate that He is finite in His understanding?

The kind of language found in Genesis 22:12 actually is present throughout Scripture. As early as Genesis chapter three, God asked Adam, “Where are you?” (3:9). In Genesis four, He asked Cain, “Where is Abel your brother?” (4:9). The book of Job reveals that at the beginning of God’s first speech to Job, God asked the patriarch, “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?” (38:4, emp. added). Are we to assume questions like these or statements like those found in Genesis 22:12 and 18:21 (“I will know”) imply a lack of knowledge on God’s part?

First, one must acknowledge that questions often are asked and statements frequently are made for a variety of reasons. Are we really to assume that the Creator of heaven and Earth was ignorant of Adam’s whereabouts when He asked him, “Where are you?” (Genesis 3:9)? Are we to believe that God did not know where Job was when He made the world (Job 38:4)? Certainly not! What father, having seen his son dent a car door, would imply ignorance by asking, “Who did that?” Obviously, the father did not ask the question to obtain information, but to see if the son would admit to something the father knew all along. On occasion, Jesus used questions or made statements for the same purpose. When He questioned the Pharisees’ disciples and the Herodians regarding whose inscription was on a particular coin, it clearly was not because He did not know (Matthew 22:15-22). Likewise, when Jesus asked the multitude that thronged Him, “Who touched Me?” (Luke 8:45), it was not because the woman who touched Him was hidden from Him (Luke 8:47). Jesus knew the woman who was made well by touching His garment before she confessed to touching Him (Mark 5:32). His question was intended to bring attention to her great faith and His great power (Mark 5:34). In no way are the questions God asks or the statements He makes an indication of Him being less than omniscient.

Second, the term “know” (Hebrew yada, Greek ginosko) or one of its derivatives (i.e., knew, known, etc.) is used in Scripture in a variety of ways. Several times it is used in reference to a man and woman having sexual intercourse (Genesis 4:1,17,25; Judges 11:39; 19:25). Jesus used the term to refer to His regard for His sheep (i.e., people—John 10:27). In contrast to the way of the wicked that will perish, the psalmist wrote that God “knows” (i.e., approves, takes delight in, etc.) the way of the righteous (Psalm 1:6). Paul used the term “know” in Ephesians 3:19 in the sense of knowing “experimentally what intellectually is beyond our powers of knowing”—the love of Christ (Jamieson, 1997). The fact is, like so many words in Scripture (and in modern times) the word “know” has a variety of meanings. What’s more, neither Dan Barker nor any Bible critic can prove that the term “know” in Genesis 22:12 directly contradicts God’s omniscience.

Third, the Bible’s usage of phrases such as “now I know” (Genesis 22:12) or “I will know” (Genesis 18:21) in reference to God actually are for the benefit of man. Throughout the Bible, human actions (such as “learning”) frequently are attributed to God for the purpose of helping us better understand His infinity. When Jehovah “came down to see the city and the tower” built at Babel (Genesis 11:5), it was not for the purpose of gaining knowledge. Anthropomorphic expressions such as these are not meant to suggest that God is not always fully aware of everything. Rather, as in the case of Babel, such wording was used to show that He was “officially and judicially taking the situation under direct observation and consideration” (Morris, 1976, p. 272). Almighty God visited Sodom and Gomorrah likely “for appearance’ sake, that men might know directly that God had actually seen the full situation before He acted in judgment” (p. 342). “These cities were to be made ensamples to all future ages of God’s severity, and therefore ample proof given that the judgment was neither rash nor excessive (Ezek 18:23; Jer 18:7)” [Jamieson, 1997]. Similarly, in the case of God testing Abraham regarding Isaac, although God already knew what Abraham would choose to do, there still was a reason to allow Abraham the opportunity to actually show his great faith and know that God indeed had witnessed (in real time and not just in His foreknowledge), Abraham’s actions. God came “to know” of Abraham’s faith by actual experiment. The meaning of the phrase, “now I know” (Genesis 22:12), therefore, “is not that God had, by the events of this probation, obtained information regarding Abraham's character that He did not previously possess; but that these qualities had been made apparent, had been developed by outward acts” (Jamieson, 1997).

Similar to how God instructs man to pray and make “known” to Him our petitions for our benefit (Philippians 4:6), even though He actually already knows of our prayers and needs before they are voiced (Matthew 6:8), for our profit the all-knowing God sometimes is spoken of in accommodative language as acquiring knowledge.

REFERENCES

Butt, Kyle and Dan Barker (2009), Does the God of the Bible Exist? (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press).

Jamieson, Robert, et al. (1997), Jamieson, Fausset, Brown Bible Commentary (Electronic Database: Biblesoft).

Morris, Henry M. (1976), The Genesis Record (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).

There is good news for fallen humanity by Roy Davison

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

There is good news for fallen humanity

What is this good news? God is willing to forgive our sins! The Scriptures reveal what God has done so He can forgive sinful people without compromising His own righteousness.
“God made man upright” (Ecclesiastes 7:29); He “created man in His own image” (Genesis 1:27). But “sin entered the world” through Adam (Romans 5:12) and now: “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). Sin separates man from God (Isaiah 59:2). “The wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23).
God remedies this sad situation by assigning His righteousness to people on the basis of their faith, and by allowing His sinless Son to suffer the penalty for the sins of mankind in their stead. 
None of God’s servants in the Old Testament were without sin. But they trusted and obeyed God. This is called living by faith. “The just shall live by his faith” (Habakkuk 2:4).
This has a twofold meaning. A servant of God lives his life on the basis of his faith (he does not draw back but “believes to the saving of the soul” - Hebrews 10:37-39) and God gives him life on the basis of his faith (not on the basis of his own righteousness - Galatians 3:11). He lives by his faith and he lives by his faith! God enhances and upgrades his faith to righteousness.
Paul refers to this double meaning when he states that in the gospel “the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, ‘The just shall live by faith’” (Romans 1:17).
For example: “Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. ... Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God” (Genesis 6:8, 9). “Thus Noah did; according to all that God commanded him, so he did” (Genesis 6:22). Although Noah lived an exemplary life based on his faith, he was not without sin. He needed the grace of God and God was gracious to him because of his faith.
“By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith” (Hebrews 11:7). Because Noah based his life on faith, he became an heir of the righteousness God gives to believers.
In the tenth generation after Noah, a man lived whose name was Abraham. “He believed in the LORD, and He accounted it to him for righteousness” (Genesis 15:6). God promised Abraham that all nations would be blessed by one of his descendants (Genesis 22:18; Galatians 3:16). Paul says that the gospel (the good news) was preached to Abraham when God gave him this promise (Galatians 3:8). Jesus said, “Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad” (John 8:56).
“By faith Abraham obeyed” (Hebrews 11:8). When God passed this promise on to Abraham’s son, Isaac, He explained: “In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed; because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws” (Genesis 26:4, 5). Although Abraham lived a life of faithful obedience, he was not without sin. But “faith was accounted to Abraham for righteousness” (Romans 4:9). God booked Abraham’s faith as righteousness.
Jacob, the grandson of Abraham, had twelve sons whose descendants became the twelve tribes of Israel. Four hundred years after the time of Abraham, the Israelites had become a numerous people as foreigners in Egypt, but also an enslaved people.
They prayed for help and God sent Moses to rescue them from slavery. Moses was the liberator and law-giver of Israel. He said God would send them another Prophet, a (liberator and law-giver) like himself, and that only those who listened to that Prophet would be God’s people (Deuteronomy 18:15-19; Acts 3:22, 23; Acts 7:37).
About 500 years after the exodus from Egypt, David became the second king of Israel. Because of David’s faith, God promised that he would have a descendent who would establish an eternal kingdom of peace and righteousness (2 Samuel 7:12-16; Isaiah 9:6; Daniel 2:44).
Through the centuries God sent prophets who predicted the coming of this King, referred to as the Messiah or the Christ, which means the Anointed One.
Successive powerful kingdoms were established by the Babylonians, by the Medes and Persians, by the Greeks and by the Romans. About 1000 years after the death of King David, when Augustus was emperor of Rome, a baby boy was born to a virgin by the power of God’s Spirit. His name was Jesus. On the day of His birth an angel declared that He was the promised King: “For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord” (Luke 2:11).
About 30 years later John the Baptist began to preach that the great King was coming. To get ready, people were to repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of sins (Mark 1:4).
When Jesus was baptized by John, the Holy Spirit came upon Him and God testified from heaven: “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased” (Matthew 3:16, 17). John the Baptist testified: “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29). 
During three years Jesus performed miracles and preached the good news that the kingdom of God soon would come with power (Mark 9:1). His powerful teachings and His miracles confirmed that He was the promised King.
The prophets had foretold that the Christ would suffer, that He would be rejected by His own people, and that He would be killed. These prophecies were fulfilled in the life of Jesus.
The Jewish leaders were jealous because Jesus was popular with the people. They imprisoned Him and turned Him over to Pilate, the Roman governor, to be crucified. Pilate wanted to release Jesus because he knew that He was innocent. But under pressure he gave in to the cries of the mob, and had Him crucified.
Jesus was without sin (Hebrews 4:15). Thus, He did not have to die as punishment for sins of His own. He said, “Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again” (John 10:17, 18).
As the sinless Son of God, Jesus could have called more than twelve thousand angels to rescue Him (Matthew 26:53). But He allowed himself to be crucified to endure the punishment for the sins of mankind, He “bore our sins in His own body on the tree” (1 Peter 2:24).
Jesus died to free us from the grasp of sin and death. His sacrifice enables God to forgive our sins without compromising His righteousness. God’s justice demands that sin be punished. He sent His own Son to meet this requirement in our stead.
When Jesus died, His followers thought He had failed. They had not understood the predictions of the prophets and of Jesus himself. Not only would Christ die, He would also rise from the grave! (Psalm 16:8-11).
“The Lord is risen indeed!” (Luke 24:34). To the apostles He “presented Himself alive after His suffering by many infallible proofs, being seen by them during forty days and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:2, 3). “He was seen by over five hundred brethren at once” (1 Corinthians 15:6).
After His resurrection, Jesus went back to heaven and took His place at the right hand of His Father. Before He ascended into heaven, He commanded His followers: “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned (Mark 16:15, 16). They were to tell the whole world that God is willing to forgive sinful people if they believe in Jesus, turn away from a life of sin, and become His disciples.
Jesus said, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem” (Luke 24:46, 47).
Ten days after Jesus went back to His Father, the Holy Spirit came upon the apostles at Jerusalem. They proclaimed that Jesus is the Christ. When the hearers realized that they had crucified the promised King, “they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, ‘Men and brethren, what shall we do?’ Then Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit’” (Acts 2:37, 38). “Those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them” (Acts 2:41). God’s salvation had come. There was good news for fallen man.
The believers went everywhere preaching the good news of salvation by the blood of Christ. They proclaimed that God “commands all men everywhere to repent” (Acts 17:30). Those who believed were baptized to wash away their sins (Acts 22:16).
Baptism is an immersion in water as a participation in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus: “Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life” (Romans 6:3, 4).
Now, two thousand years later, millions call themselves Christians, but are they real followers of Christ? Jesus said: “Many false prophets will rise up and deceive many” (Matthew 24:11). Paul said it is not good news when people accept “a different gospel,” when people “pervert the gospel of Christ” (Galatians 1:6-9).
In our time, most of those who claim to be Christians, follow traditions and dogmas of men rather than the gospel of Christ. They are like people God described in earlier times: “In vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men” (Mark 7:7). Such people reject God’s good news of salvation and replace it with a man-made imitation.
Baptism of believers by immersion for the forgiveness of sins is replaced by rituals that are worthless because they are different from the baptism Jesus commanded. A valid baptism must be based on personal faith and a personal decision to turn away from sin and follow Christ. It must be based on the same good news preached by Christ and His apostles.
Although apostate people have perverted many aspects of the original faith, God’s word does not change. The good news of salvation by the blood of Christ is just as powerful today as it was in the first century.
People who believe in Jesus and repent of their sins, who confess their faith in Christ, who are baptized for the forgiveness of sins, are saved by the grace of God. Their faith is imputed to them by God as righteousness (Romans 4:11, 24). 
Jesus is “the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him” (Hebrews 5:9). The promise is for all. “For ‘whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved’” (Romans 10:13). 
“Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).
This is good news for sinful people like us!
Do you want to be forgiven by God and to inherit eternal life? Turn away from sin! Believe in Jesus! Confess your faith and be baptized in His name for the forgiveness of your sins! Then you will be sanctified, made holy, and dedicated to God. You will be a citizen of God’s kingdom, a member of His church. Amen.
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)

Seek and find by Gary Rose

I have no idea who this person is, but I like him!!! His sense of humor is wonderful!!! Being able to accept yourself for what you are and then find the humor "of it all" is the sign of a healthy mind. Many people seek for meaning in this life, but few find it.

Here are some thoughts about life from that wisest of kings, Solomon...

Ecclesiastes, Chapter 2 (World English Bible)

  ¹ I said in my heart, “Come now, I will test you with mirth: therefore enjoy pleasure;” and behold, this also was vanity.  ² I said of laughter, “It is foolishness;” and of mirth, “What does it accomplish?” 

  ³ I searched in my heart how to cheer my flesh with wine, my heart yet guiding me with wisdom, and how to lay hold of folly, until I might see what it was good for the sons of men that they should do under heaven all the days of their lives.  ⁴ I made myself great works. I built myself houses. I planted myself vineyards.  ⁵ I made myself gardens and parks, and I planted trees in them of all kinds of fruit.  ⁶ I made myself pools of water, to water from it the forest where trees were grown.  ⁷ I bought male servants and female servants, and had servants born in my house. I also had great possessions of herds and flocks, above all who were before me in Jerusalem.  ⁸ I also gathered silver and gold for myself, and the treasure of kings and of the provinces. I got myself male and female singers, and the delights of the sons of men: musical instruments, and that of all sorts.  ⁹ So I was great, and increased more than all who were before me in Jerusalem. My wisdom also remained with me.  ¹⁰ Whatever my eyes desired, I didn’t keep from them. I didn’t withhold my heart from any joy, for my heart rejoiced because of all my labor, and this was my portion from all my labor.  ¹¹ Then I looked at all the works that my hands had worked, and at the labor that I had labored to do; and behold, all was vanity and a chasing after wind, and there was no profit under the sun. 

with...

Ecclesiastes, Chapter 12 (WEB)

 ¹³ This is the end of the matter. All has been heard. Fear God and keep his commandments; for this is the whole duty of man.  ¹⁴ For God will bring every work into judgment, with every hidden thing, whether it is good, or whether it is evil. 

Solomon eventually learned to turn to God almighty for meaning in life. So should we. Your sense of humor may not improve, but a healthy respect for God and obedience to his will are the highest goals one can attain to. 

PS.

humm, I wonder why that man chose brown grass instead of green for his tatoo???