Musings on Leadership (5) by Jim McGuiggan

Musings on Leadership (5)

Righteousness and Justice for all

32. Biblical leadership (which should be the norm for human society) is about justice and honour and righteousness before God and Man. Biblical leadership has to do with enabling people to live joyfully and honourably and lovingly in community with one and another and with God! To connect it immediately with the decision-making process and with the (often) very important specific issues which must be settled, is to cheapen it and to secularize it. It is to cut it off from its roots in God and in the character of God who embodies love and justice and honor and righteousness.  Where leadership can’t be rooted in the relations between God and Man and man and man, it is not biblical! Leadership which sees itself as a guidance-giving, decision-making body rather than an instrument of justice, righteousness, honour and love is forgetting its own roots and its reason for existing. And when the leadership forgets this, those who follow forget it, if ever they learn it. 

33. In Micah 6:6-7 self-serving worshipers were stung into response by the preaching of the prophets. ‘What does God want?’ they protested. ‘Does he want child-sacrifice? What does it take to please him?’ The prophet (6:8) says God has made himself very clear in this matter. He called them: “To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.” (I think Christ had this passage in mind in Matt 23:23.)

34. Even a surface reading about leadership (especially in the OT) will tell you that justice is a central concern of God. Deut 16:18-20 is typical. “Appoint judges and officials for each of your tribes in every town the Lord your God is giving you, and they shall judge the people fairly. Do not pervert justice or show partiality. Do not accept a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and twists the words of the righteous. Follow justice and justice alone, so that you may live and possess the land the Lord your God is giving you.” (A slow thoughtful reading of this text is an education.) Here’s another (Deut 1:9-18): “...So I took leading men of your tribes, wise and respected men, and appointed them to have authority over you...And I charged your judges at that time: Hear the disputes between your brothers and judge fairly, whether the case is between brother Israelites or between one of them and an alien. Do not show partiality in judging; hear both small and great alike. Do not be afraid of any man, for judgement belongs to God...” (This is another text just filled with rich truths.) In Deut 27:19 God places a curse on those who pervert justice in favour of those who have and against the ‘have nots’.

35. I won’t multiply texts on this but I must urge you to take the time to look into the biblical testimony on this matter. To bear in mind that Jesus himself surveyed the whole of the OT and placed justice as one of the “more important matters of the law” (Matt 23:23) should sound a note of warning within us. Hearing that leadership is repeatedly and bluntly placed in immediate connection with justice should warn us against trivializing leadership. If justice is of paramount importance to God and leaders are one of his instruments to see that justice remains paramount, then leadership takes on a solemn (and highly privileged) status.

36. In the NT we find the same message (though not as developed, to be sure) as in the OT. The first leaders appointed in Acts were appointed to see that justice was done (see 6:1-7).  The Greek-speaking widows were being passed by when the food was being distributed among the poor and the reason appears to be that they weren’t Palestinian widows. This was thoroughly unjust and the people complained about it to the apostles. We’re told that seven men were chosen by the Community and that they were given authority to deal with the matter. (It’s in the context of justice being done and being seen to be done that verse 7 says: “So the word of God spread. The number of the disciples in Jerusalem increased rapidly, and a large number of the priests became obedient to the faith.” This might be of real theological significance for us.) 

37. It would be wrong for us to draw the conclusion that these few texts is where this stress on justice and leadership in connection with justice is taught. Wrong because this teaching permeates the whole biblical corpus. Texts and sections such as those cited only bring into focus what is everywhere taught or assumed even when the precise words are not mentioned.

38. And biblical leadership is aimed at procuring justice for all. There is no elitist teaching in the Bible. The Bible opens with the creation of all humans! Moses wrote Genesis in light of the tremendous self-revelation of God in the events surrounding the Exodus and in light of that he opened the message of God with God’s creation of humanity and not an elite family, sex, group or nation. The narrative continues with God’s choice of men and families who would be his instruments through which he would bring blessing to all the nations of the earth! And this truth (that God wants justice and blessing for all) is seen in the prophetic sections of the prophets which speak directly to the nations and about the nations. The Psalms, too, are filled with this teaching (see Psa 67 and 104 as a two examples of many).

39. We see it too in passages about leadership and justice. We saw it in Deut 1:16 where we read that the judges were not to favour home grown Israelites over aliens (see the literature on what, precisely, the Pentateuch meant by an ‘alien’). Exodus 23:6-9 calls for justice for the ‘alien’ as does Lev 19:33-34. One of the elements which should motivate the home born to treat aliens fairly was that Israel had known what it was like to be an alien. “You yourselves know how it feels to be an alien” says the Exodus passage. Behind that ethical motivation is the truth that God feels for all the marginal people. As Israel ‘cried’ (a word indicating an appeal for justice— see David Daube’s, Exodus Pattern and the Bible), God heard and executed justice on their behalf. See Exodus 2:23-25 and elsewhere. It is this God, who loves the oppressed who calls Israel to secure justice for all; it is this God who appoints leaders to see to it that justice is secured for all. (It is for the NT Church to see to it that justice is for all, inside and outside of the Church. Since biblical leadership is immediately connected with securing justice, Church leadership must be taken with the utmost seriousness.)

40. Walter Brueggemann reminds us of Samuel’s appeal when Israel rejects the judge/priest/prophet leadership and asks for a centralizing of power in a human king. Defending his leadership before God, the king (Saul), his sons and the people, Samuel points to the fairness and uprightness of his dealings. He took no bribes and pandered to no special interest. Leadership is again linked with justice, fairness and honour in the sight of God and men. Scores of biblical texts make this connection and when Israelite leadership is denounced by the prophets it isn’t at all unusual to hear them scathe the leadership for injustice and oppression. The ‘wisdom’ books of Job, Proverbs and Ecclesiastes deal again and again with good and bad leadership in terms of justice and righteousness upheld or denied. The Psalms add their testimony to the same effect.  The NT has a great deal to say about  the abuse of power whether  it  deals  with   government (Matt 20:25), slave-owners (1 Pet 2:18ff; Col 3:25-4:1) parents (Eph 6:4; Col 4:21) or church leaders (1 Pet 5:2-4) etc. 

41. Since it is true —and it is true— that the Bible presents such an emphasis, churches ought to pay attention to it. Congregations must lay this on the hearts of their leaders and expect them to major in it. Leaders must acknowledge this instruction from God and make this aspect of leadership a priority. Good leaders will ruthlessly delegate authority over many minor issues to competent people and they will allow as much self-determination in minor areas as possible so that they can use their time and energy in the matters of a more critical nature. This will require a great deal of communication with the assembly in general and with those who are influential in the assembly but it will be effort well spent. Making justice a prime directive will set the tone for the biblical community. A ‘God imitating justice’ will be promoted between disciple and disciple and disciple and non-Christian. There will be no accepting of bribes (flattery, praise, or the like) resulting in the leaders pandering to special interest groups on the left or on the right. In the assemblies there will be no voiceless and those who would oppress the more vulnerable would know they had righteous leaders to deal with; leaders who are the voice of the marginal or weak. Leaders like these would create a context in which cheerful justice would be the order of the day. Even ‘aliens’ would know that the ‘judges’ of such an assembly would not allow them to be treated unjustly. Assemblies like these under the guidance of such leaders would bear powerful testimony to the reign of God. 

I need only to say this once: The justice of which I’m speaking is not a legalistic and ‘code-fulfilling’ exercise; it is a cheerful and glad-hearted giving to others the rights we would reasonably expect for ourselves. And more specifically, for believers, it is the behaviour they have seen in the God who has called them and to whom they have committed themselves. It is “God-imitating righteousness”.

©2004 Jim McGuiggan. All materials are free to be copied and used as long as money is not being made.

Many thanks to brother Ed Healy, for allowing me to post from his website, theabidingword.com

After This, the Judgment by Kyle Butt, M.A.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=554

After This, the Judgment

by	Kyle Butt, M.A.

Life is not fair. Every day, in hundreds of ways, this fact makes itself abundantly clear to us. September 11, 2001 marked a day when the unfairness of this physical life became especially apparent. The entire world stood with mouth agape as it watched four hijacked United States commercial planes used as weapons against our unsuspecting nation. Within minutes, the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were rocked by the impact of these planes. Fires burned, smoke billowed, and the loss of innocent human life shocked us all. Through the carnage and terror, one primary feeling emerged from the collective mind of the United States—we will find and punish whoever did this.

When this type of tragedy occurs and the heinousness of criminal activity comes into full focus, the question always arises: Is it right in God’s eyes for humans to demand that the perpetrators be brought to justice and punished for their dastardly act of vicious cowardice? And if so, who has the authority to administer such punishment. Fortunately, the Bible provides clear answers to such questions. In Romans 13, the inspired apostle Paul explained that each citizen has an obligation to be obedient to the governing authorities because “the authorities that exist are appointed by God.” Furthermore, the government “does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil” (Romans 13:1-4).

The Bible plainly teaches that the government has the God-given authority to execute wrath on those who do evil. What does the statement “does not bear the sword in vain” mean in this context? Without a doubt, the sword in the first century (as well as in previous and subsequent centuries) was looked upon as a weapon of death. The Old Testament is replete with references to the sword being just such an instrument. Hosea 11:6 records: “And the sword shall slash in his cities, devour his districts, and consume them.” Again in Jeremiah 15:3 it is written: “ ‘And I will appoint over them four forms of destruction,’ says the Lord: ‘the sword to slay, the dogs to drag, the birds of the heavens and the beasts of the earth to devour and destroy.’ ” New Testament references support the idea as well. Revelation 6:8 states: “So I looked, and behold, a pale horse. And the name of him who sat on it was Death, and Hades followed with him. And power was given to them over a fourth of the earth, to kill with sword, with hunger, with death, and by the beasts of the earth” (emp. added). When Paul stated that the government does not bear the sword in vain, he explicitly advocated the idea that the government reserves the right to administer capital punishment.

One reason God has given this right to the government can be found in Ecclesiastes 8:11: “Because the sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.” If proper punishment is not meted out to the perpetrators of crimes, then more and more people embolden themselves to commit crimes against the government and their fellow human beings.

Along with this authority, the government has been given a tremendous responsibility to administer justice properly and without partiality. The Proverbs writer commented: “When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice, but when a wicked man rules, the people groan” (29:2). It is true that many unrighteous rulers have taken power and misused the authority of the government. Consider Herod, for instance, who “killed the brother of John with the sword” (Acts 12:2). Or bring to mind the evil Roman Emperor Nero who captured Christians and tortured them via heinous acts of persecution. And no list of evil rulers would be complete without the infamous Hitler, who murdered over six million Jews. But even though these rulers have abused the office and authority that God gave the governing powers, the authority given to the government by God has not been lessened because of their abuse. The government “does not bear the sword in vain.”

Unfortunately, certain unalterable limitations make it impossible for the government to catch and punish every person who has committed criminal acts. Some villains inevitably slip through the cracks of the justice system and never are punished in this life. Each year thousands of parents abuse their own children physically and sexually and receive none of their just deserts. Each year hundreds of murder cases are filed away stamped “UNSOLVED,” and will stay that way. Each day thieves loot and plunder, making themselves fat and rich off of the toil and labor of their victims, yet they get away scot-free.

Because of the injustice that goes unpunished, many wonder if there is a righteous God Who sees and acts on behalf of the victims. They need wonder no more, because God “has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness” (Acts 17:31). The wicked have been warned that “God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap” (Galatians 6:8). And: “ ‘Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord. And again, ‘The Lord will judge His people.’ It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Hebrews 10:30-31). While it is the case that God’s retributive justice is not meted out to its full extent in this present age, it is not the case that it will remain muted so forever. Paul had this to say to those who persisted in wickedness: “But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who ‘will render to each one according to his deeds’: eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil” (Romans 2:5-9). Some may escape the sword of the state, but they will not escape the sword of their God.

“The Laws of Thermodynamics Don't Apply to the Universe!” by Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=3704

“The Laws of Thermodynamics Don't Apply to the Universe!”

by	Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

Many in the atheistic community have realized various problems with their theories in light of what we know about the laws of thermodynamics. In order for atheism to be a plausible explanation for the origin of the Universe, matter must either be eternal or have the capability of creating itself (i.e., spontaneous generation). Yet the Second Law of Thermodynamics implies that the first option is impossible, and the First Law implies that the second option is impossible (see Miller, 2007 for a more in depth discussion of the laws of thermodynamics and their application to the origin of the Universe). Upon grudgingly coming to this conclusion, but being unwilling to yield to the obvious alternative (i.e., Someone outside of the Universe put matter here), some have tried to find loopholes in the laws that will allow for their flawed atheistic ideologies to survive.

A common assertion being raised today by some is that the laws of thermodynamics do not apply to the Universe as a whole, and therefore cannot be used to prove that God played a role in the origin of the Universe. More specifically, some question whether our Universe can be considered an “isolated system” (i.e., a system in which mass and energy are not allowed to cross the system boundary; Cengel and Boles, 2002, p. 9). In their well-known thermodynamics textbook, Fundamentals of Classical Thermodynamics, Van Wylen and Sonntag note concerning the Second Law of Thermodynamics: “[W]e of course do not know if the universe can be considered as an isolated system” (1985, p. 233). Dr. Robert Alberty, author of Thermodynamics of Biochemical Reactions, is quoted as saying, “I do not agree that the universe is an isolated system in the thermodynamic sense” (as quoted in Holloway, 2010).

What if the Universe is not an isolated system? How would that fact impact the creation/evolution controversy? First of all, the creationist has always argued that the Universe is not an isolated system, or at least has not always been one. According to the creationist, in the beginning, God created the Universe’s system barrier, then crossed it and placed energy and matter within the system—thus making the Universe non-isolated. So, recognizing that the Universe is, in fact, not an isolated system would really mean that some evolutionists are starting to move in the right direction in their understanding of the Universe! Acquiescence of this truth by atheists in no way disproves the existence of God. In fact, quite the contrary is true. Admission that the Universe is not isolated does not help the case for atheism, but rather tacitly acknowledges a creator of sorts. [More on this point later.]

What this admission would do, however, is make some of the creationists’ arguments against atheism less applicable to the discussion about the existence of God—specifically some of the uses of the laws of thermodynamics and their application to the Universe as a whole. For instance, if the Universe is not an isolated system, it means that something or someone outside of the Universe can open the proverbial box that encloses the Universe and put matter and energy into it. Therefore, the Universe could be eternal, as long as something/someone is putting more usable energy into the box to compensate for the energy loss and counter entropy. Thus, the argument against the eternality of matter by way of the Second Law of Thermodynamics could potentially be null and void. Also, with a non-isolated system, it could be argued that the original, imaginary pre-Big Bang ball (which never actually existed—since the Big Bang is flawed [see May, et al., 2003) was not eternal in its existence. Further, it could be contended that it did not have to spontaneously generate in order to explain its existence. Rather, energy and matter could have been put here from a source outside of this Universe other than God.

From a purely scientific perspective, one of the problems with claiming that the Universe is not isolated is that such an assertion presupposes the existence of physical sources outside of this Universe (e.g., multiple universes outside of our own). And yet, how can such a claim be made scientifically, since there is no verifiable evidence to support such a contention? Stephen Hawking has advanced such an idea, but he, himself, recognizes the idea to be merely theoretical (Shukman, 2010). Speculation, conjecture, assertion—not evidence. As Gregory Benford wrote: “This ‘multiverse’ view represents the failure of our grand agenda and seems to me contrary to the prescribed simplicity of Occam’s Razor, solving our lack of understanding by multiplying unseen entities into infinity” (Benford, 2006, p. 226). Belief in the multiverse model is like proclaiming the existence of fairies just because you can imagine one. But such speculation is hardly scientific evidence—and that is the problem.

What does the scientific evidence actually convey today? We live in the only known Universe, and it had to come from somewhere. That is a fact. If the Big Bang occurred, and all matter and energy in the Universe—everything that exists—was initially in that little imaginary sphere the size of the period at the end of this sentence (or much smaller, depending on which “expert” cosmologist you ask), by implication, the evolutionist admits that the Universe is of a finite size. That is a fact. A finite Universe is an isolated system. Since the Universe as a whole is the only true isolated system, the laws of thermodynamics apply perfectly. That is why some reputable scientists examine the evidence, draw reasonable conclusions, and articulate statements in reputable textbooks like the following:

• “Isolated system: It is the system which exchange [sic] neither matter nor energy with the surroundings. For such a system, the matter and energy remain constant. There is no such perfectly isolated system, but our universe can be considered as an isolated system since by definition it does not have any surroundings” (Senapati, 2006, p. 64, emp. added).
• “A spontaneous process in an isolated system increases the system’s entropy. Because the universe—our entire surroundings—is in contact with no other system, we say that irreversible processes increase the entropy of the universe” (Fishbane, et.al., 1996, p. 551, italics in original).

The truth is, if one is unwilling to accept the existence of God, yet desires to accept the laws of science, one must conjure up other options for how the Universal box could have been legally opened and its contents altered. Envision several atheists sitting around a table speculating options, no matter how wild, in order to avoid conceding the existence of God, and you will have a clear picture of how many in the scientific community operate today. “Okay, people. How did we get here? Think!” “Other universes?” “Maybe.” “Nothing put us here?” “Not bad.” “Aliens?” “Why not?” “The God of the Bible?” “Shut your mouth. You are unscientific. Leave the room.” How can evolutionists like Richard Dawkins and Stephen Hawking safely postulate the existence of alien creators without being laughed out of the spotlight, while creationists get expelled from the scientific community for recognizing the reasonableanswer to the matter of origins (Stein and Miller, 2008; BBC News, 2010)?

Ironically, when the atheistic community asserts alleged creative agents outside the Universe, they tacitly acknowledge a creator of some sort. What is the difference between these concessions and the true Creator? Why not accept the God of the Bible? The answer is obvious. Their brand of designer comes packaged without the demands and expectations that come with belief in God. Very convenient—but sad and most certainly unscientific.

Note also that accepting the possibility of alternative creative causes leaves atheists with the same problem with which they started. They claim to use the laws of physics to arrive at the multiverse conclusion (Shukman, 2010). But if the laws of physics apply to their conclusion about multiple universes, why would the laws of physics not apply to those universes? If the laws of science apply to those hypothetical universes (and it would be reasonable to conclude that they would since, according to atheists, the universes interact), then the matter of origins has merely shifted to those other universes. How did they come into being? There are still only three options—they always existed (in violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics); they created themselves (in violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics); or they were created. The laws of thermodynamics still echo the truth from the remotest parts of the created order: “You cannot explain it all without God in the equation!”

The truth is, the scientific evidence leads unbiased truth-seekers to the conclusion that there simply must be a Creator. How do we know that the laws of thermodynamics are true on Earth? No one has ever been able to document an exception to them (except when divine miracles have occurred). Theyalways hold true. Why does the same principle not hold when observing the rest of the Universe? As Borgnakke and Sonntag articulate in Fundamentals of Thermodynamics concerning the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics:

The basis of every law of nature is experimental evidence, and this is true also of the first law of thermodynamics. Many different experiments have been conducted on the first law, and every one thus far has verified it either directly or indirectly. The first law has never been disproved.... [W]e can say that the second law of thermodynamics (like every other law of nature) rests on experimental evidence. Every relevant experiment that has been conducted, either directly or indirectly, verifies the second law, and no experiment has ever been conducted that contradicts the second law. The basis of the second law is therefore experimental evidence (2009, p. 116-220, emp. added).

There has been no verifiable evidence that the laws of thermodynamics have been violated throughout the Universe. Sure, there has been speculation, conjecture, and theory that it “could” happen. Yet, through it all, the laws still stand unscathed. Granted, atheists may cloud the air when they blow forth their unreasonable, unproven, jargon-filled, imaginary fairy-dust theories, but when the fairy-dust settles, the laws of thermodynamics still declare the truth to all who will listen (Psalm 19:1). The scientific evidence shows that there is unmistakable order and design in the Universe. Design implies a Designer. The God of the Bible. Now that’s scientific.

REFERENCES

BBC News (2010), “Hawking Warns Over Alien Beings,” April 25, http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/8642558.stm.

Benford, Gregory (2006), What We Believe But Cannot Prove, ed. John Brockman (New York: Harper Perennial).

Borgnakke, Claus and Richard E. Sonntag (2009), Fundamentals of Thermodynamics (Asia: John Wiley and Sons), seventh edition.

Cengel, Yunus A. and Michael A. Boles (2002), Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach (New York: McGraw-Hill), fourth edition.

Fishbane, Paul M., Stephen Gasiorowicz, and Stephen T. Thornton (1996), Physics for Scientists and Engineers (New Jersey: Prentice Hall), second edition.

Holloway, Robert (2010), “Experts on Thermodynamics Refute Creationist Claims,” http://www.ntanet.net/Thermo-Internet.htm.

May, Branyon, et al. (2003), “The Big Bang Theory—A Scientific Critique,” Reason & Revelation, 23[5]:32-34,36-47, May, http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2635.

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

Senapati, M.R. (2006), Advanced Engineering Chemistry (New Delhi: Laxmi Publications), second edition.

Shukman, David (2010), “Professor Stephen Hawking Says No God Created Universe,” BBC News, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11172158.

Stein, Ben and Kevin Miller (2008), Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (Premise Media).

Van Wylen, Gordon J. and Richard Sonntag (1985), Fundamentals of Classical Thermodynamics(New York: John Wiley and Sons), third edition.

Genealogies and the Virgin Birth of Christ by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=862

Genealogies and the Virgin Birth of Christ

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Rarely (if ever) have I read the words “genealogy” and “exciting” in the same sentence. It seems most people consider the genealogies of Christ as some of the Bible’s dullest reading. They frequently are described as boring, dry, and monotonous—full of “begets” that many would just as soon “forget.” In reality, however, exciting pearls of truth often are overlooked. One of these truths that escapes the reader who simply skims (or skips) the genealogies is the virgin birth of Christ.

In Matthew’s genealogy of Christ, it may be that one fails to see how the verb “begot” is used 39 times between Abraham and Joseph (verses 2-16a). And yet, instead of claiming that Joseph begot Jesus, Matthew wrote: “…and Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ” (1:16, emp. added). This wording stands in stark contrast to the format in the preceding verses (“Abraham begot Isaac, Isaac begot Jacob, etc.”). Joseph did not beget Jesus; rather, he is referred to as “the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus.” The Holy Spirit was emphasizing the fact that Jesus was not conceived as the result of anything Joseph did. Rather, Mary “was found with child of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:18, emp. added). An angel even informed Joseph that he was not the father of Jesus, rather that which was conceived [literally, “begotten”] in her was “of the Holy Spirit” (Matthew 1:20).

Matthew gave us a second “hint” of the virgin birth of Christ when he wrote: “…and Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ” (1:16, emp. added). One might assume that the “whom” in this verse refers to Joseph as Jesus’ father. Others may think it is talking about both Joseph and Mary as His parents. An English teacher likely would point out that we cannot tell to whom the word “whom” belongs in this verse, because when the English word “whom” is used in a sentence it can refer to either men or women; or, it can refer to both. Though usually we can tell the meaning by the context in which the word is found, such is not the case in Matthew 1:16. Our English translations simply do not reveal the marvelous truth concealed in this verse. In order to unveil this “Gospel gem,” one must consult the language in which the New Testament was written originally—Greek. The English phrase “of whom was born Jesus” is translated from the Greek relative feminine pronoun (hes). In this verse, the feminine gender can refer only to Mary. Biblical genealogies regularly emphasize the fathers who sire a child, but here Matthew indicates that Jesus received His humanity only from His mother. Thus, Joseph is excluded from any involvement in the birth of Christ, the Son of God.

While Matthew’s genealogy clearly establishes Christ as the legal heir to the throne by tracing His ancestry down through the royal line of the kings of Israel all the way to Joseph the carpenter (and to Jesus), he still emphasizes Mary as the biological parent “of whom” Jesus was born. What accuracy! What precision! What a wonderful truth found within a genealogy so often overlooked.

Are We “100% Sure” Goldilocks Planet has Life? by Kyle Butt, M.A.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=3756

Are We “100% Sure” Goldilocks Planet has Life?

by	Kyle Butt, M.A.

Associated Press science writer Seth Borenstein recently reported on a new planet that seems to be in what scientists call the “Goldilocks zone.” What is the “Goldilocks zone?” Very few places in our Universe maintain conditions that are suitable for life. One of those conditions is that liquid water must be present. The “Goldilocks zone” is a specific distance from any star that is “not too hot, not too cold. Juuuust right,”—a situation that allows water to remain in its liquid form (Borenstein, 2010). According to atheistic, evolutionary ideas about the origin of the Universe, in theory, there should be hundreds, thousands, or even millions of planets in our Universe that maintain conducive conditions for life to “begin.” In fact, we are incessantly informed by the media and the scientific community that it is just a matter of time before we discover other planets where life has evolved from non-living chemicals. One would think, according to the propaganda about life arising in other places, that a little liquid water and a few amino acids thrown together will inevitably produce life.

Thus, we have a report of the first Earth-like planet that could possibly “support life.” The planet, labeled Gliese 581g, is the sixth planet from a dwarf star named Gliese 581. Borenstein described the planet in the following way:

It is about three times the mass of Earth, slightly larger in width and much closer to its star—14 million miles away versus 93 million. It’s so close to its version of the sun that it orbits every 37 days. And it doesn’t rotate much, so one side is almost always bright, the other dark. Temperatures can be as hot as 160 degrees or as frigid as 25 degrees below zero, but in between—in the land of constant sunrise—it would be “shirt-sleeve weather,” said co-discoverer Steven Vogt (Borenstein, 2010).

Gliese 581g is of interest, then, because there is a chance that it could have liquid water on its surface. Of course, as Borenstein noted: “It’s unknown whether water actually exists on the planet.” What, then, is so important about liquid water, as opposed to any other constraints that are necessary for life to survive? Vogt said that “chances for life on this planet are 100 percent” since “there always seems to be life on Earth where there is water.” Wow! Look at that reasoning. This new planet might have some water, so we are 100% sure there is life on the planet. We are not even 100% sure it has water. How in the world could we be sure it has life?

The false idea that finding liquid water is the equivalent of finding biological life is easy to debunk. Take some water, kill all the microscopic organisms in it so that no life exists. Add any amino acids or “building blocks” of life that you want, then shock the mixture, blow it up, heat it, cool it, or whatever else you want to do, and see if you get life. News flash—you don’t get life! Louis Pasteur proved that almost 150 years ago (Butt, 2002). Yet Vogt boldly stated: “It’s pretty hard to stop life once you give it the right conditions” (as quoted in Borenstein). And what, pray tell, are the right conditions? Vogt can’t tell you, and neither can any other human alive. Water is certainly not “the right conditions” for life, because we can supply water to any mixture of non-living chemicals all day long for the next 20 billion years and not get life.

What, in reality, are the “right conditions” for life to begin? There is really only one: an intelligent Creator must superintend the process. “In the beginning was water,” will not produce life. But “in the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth,” will supply the necessary condition for life on Earth or any other planet—God. Beware of the false assumptions that fill the media and “scientific” discussions of other planets and life in outer space.

REFERENCES

Borentstein, Seth (2010), “Could ‘Goldilocks’ Planet Be Just Right for Life?”, http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100929/ap_on_sc/us_sci_new_earths.

Butt, Kyle (2002), “Biogenesis—The Long Arm of the Law,”http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/1769.

Camels and the Composition of Genesis by Eric Lyons, M.Min. A.P. Staff

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=858

Camels and the Composition of Genesis

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min. A.P. Staff

Arguably, the most widely alleged anachronisms used in support of the idea that Moses could not have written the first five books of the Bible (a theory known as the Documentary Hypothesis) are the accounts of the early patriarchs possessing camels. The word “camel(s)” appears 23 times in 21 verses in the book of Genesis. The first book of the Bible declares that camels existed in Egypt during the time of Abraham (12:14-17), in Palestine in the days Isaac (24:63), in Padan Aram while Jacob was working for Laban (30:43), and were owned by the Midianites during the time Joseph was sold into Egyptian slavery (37:25,36). Make no mistake about it, the book of beginnings clearly teaches that camels were domesticated since at least the time of Abraham.

According to skeptics (and a growing number of liberal scholars), however, the idea that camels were domesticated in the time of Abraham directly contradicts archaeological evidence. Over one hundred years ago, T.K. Cheyne wrote: “The assertion that the ancient Egyptians knew of the camel is unfounded” (1899, 1:634). In his oft’-quoted book on the various animals of the Bible, George Cansdale stated:

The Bible first mentions the camel in Gen. 12:16, where the presents are listed which the pharaoh gave to Abram. This is generally reckoned to be a later scribe’s addition, for it seems unlikely that there were any camels in Egypt then (1970, p. 66, emp. added).

More recently, Finkelstein and Silberman confidently asserted:

We now know through archaeological research that camels were not domesticated as beasts of burden earlier than the late second millennium and were not widely used in that capacity in the ancient Near East until well after 1000 BCE (2001, p. 37, emp. added).

By way of summary, what the Bible believer has been told is: “[T]ame camels were simply unknown during Abraham’s time” (Tobin, 2000).

While these claims have been made repeatedly over the last century, the truth of the matter is that skeptics and liberal theologians are unable to cite a single piece of solid archaeological evidence in support of their claims. As Randall Younker of Andrews University stated in March 2000 while delivering a speech in the Dominican Republic: “Clearly, scholars who have denied the presence of domesticated camels in the 2^nd millennium B.C. have been committing the fallacy of arguing from silence. This approach should not be allowed to cast doubt upon the veracity of any historical document, let alone Scripture” (2000). The burden of proof actually should be upon skeptics to show that camels were not domesticated until after the time of the patriarchs. Instead, they assure their listeners of the camel’s absence in Abraham’s day—without one shred of archaeological evidence. [Remember, for many years they also argued that writing was unknown during the time of Moses—a conclusion based entirely on “silence.” Now, however, they have recanted that idea, because evidence has been found to the contrary. One might think that such “scholars” would learn not to speak with such assurance when arguing from silence.]

What makes their claims even more disturbing is that several pieces of evidence do exist (and have existed for some time) that prove camels were domesticated during (and even before) the time of Abraham (roughly 2,000 B.C.). In an article that appeared in the Journal of Near Eastern Studies a half-century ago, professor Joseph Free listed several instances of Egyptian archaeological finds supporting the domestication of camels [NOTE: The dates given for the Egyptian dynasties are from Clayton, 2001, pp.14-68]. The earliest evidence comes from a pottery camel’s head and a terra cotta tablet with men riding on and leading camels. According to Free, these are both from predynastic Egypt (1944, pp. 189-190), which according to Clayton is roughly before 3150 B.C. Free also listed three clay camel heads and a limestone vessel in the form of camel lying down—all dated at the First Dynasty of Egypt (3050-2890 B.C.). He then mentioned several models of camels from the Fourth Dynasty (2613-2498 B.C.), and a petroglyph depicting a camel and a man dated at the Sixth Dynasty (2345-2184 B.C.). Such evidence has led one respected Egyptologist to conclude that “the extant evidence clearly indicates that the domestic camel was known [in Egypt—EL] by 3,000 B.C.”—long before Abraham’s time (Kitchen, 1980, 1:228).

Perhaps the most convincing find in support of the early domestication of camels in Egypt is a rope made of camel’s hair found in the Fayum (an oasis area southwest of modern-day Cairo). The two-strand twist of hair, measuring a little over three feet long, was found in the late 1920s, and was sent to the Natural History Museum where it was analyzed and compared to the hair of several different animals. After considerable testing, it was determined to be camel hair, dated (by analyzing the layer in which it was found) to the Third or Fourth Egyptian Dynasty (2686-2498 B.C.). In his article, Free also listed several other discoveries from around 2,000 B.C. and later, which showed camels as domestic animals (pp. 189-190).

While prolific in Egypt, finds relating to the domestication of camels are not isolated to the African continent. In his book, Ancient Orient and the Old Testament, professor Kenneth Kitchen (retired) of the University of Liverpool reported several discoveries made outside of Egypt proving ancient camel domestication around 2,000 B.C. Lexical lists from Mesopotamia have been uncovered that show a knowledge of domesticated camels as far back as this time. Camel bones have been found in household ruins at Mari in present-day Syria that fossilologists believe are also at least 4,000 years old. Furthermore, a Sumerian text from the time of Abraham has been discovered in the ancient city of Nippur (located in what is now southeastern Iraq) that clearly implies the domestication of camels by its allusions to camels’ milk (Kitchen, 1966, p. 79).

All of these documented finds support the domestication of camels in Egypt many years before the time of Abraham. Yet, as Younker rightly observed, skeptics refuse to acknowledge any of this evidence.

It is interesting to note how, once an idea gets into the literature, it can become entrenched in conventional scholarly thinking. I remember doing research on the ancient site of Hama in Syria. As I was reading through the excavation reports (published in French), I came across a reference to a figurine from the 2nd millennium which the excavator thought must be a horse, but the strange hump in the middle of its back made one think of a camel. I looked at the photograph and the figurine was obviously that of a camel! The scholar was so influenced by the idea that camels were not used until the 1st millennium, that when he found a figurine of one in the second millennium, he felt compelled to call it a horse! This is a classic example of circular reasoning (2000, parenthetical comment in orig.).

Finds relating to the domestication of camels are not as prevalent in the second millennium B.C. as they are in the first millennium. This does not make the skeptics’ case any stronger, however. Just because camels were not as widely used during Abraham’s time as they were later, does not mean that they were entirely undomesticated. As Free commented:

Many who have rejected this reference to Abraham’s camels seem to have assumed something which the text does not state. It should be carefully noted that the biblical reference does not necessarily indicate that the camel was common in Egypt at that time, nor does it evidence that the Egyptians had made any great progress in the breeding and domestication of camels. It merely says that Abraham had camels (1944, p. 191, emp. added).

Similarly, Younker noted:

This is not to say that domesticated camels were abundant and widely used everywhere in the ancient Near East in the early second millennium. However, the patriarchal narratives do not necessarily require large numbers of camels…. The smaller amount of evidence for domestic camels in the late third and early second millennium B.C., especially in Palestine, is in accordance with this more restricted use (1997, 42:52).

Even without the above-mentioned archaeological finds (which to the unbiased examiner prove that camels were domesticated in the time of Abraham), it only seems reasonable to conclude that since wild camels have been known since the Creation, “there is no credible reason why such an indispensable animal in desert and semi-arid lands should not have been sporadically domesticated in patriarchal times and even earlier” (“Animal Kingdom,” 1988). The truth is, all of the available evidence points to one conclusion—the limited use of domesticated camels during and before the time of Abraham did occur. The supposed “anachronism” of domesticated camels during the time of the patriarchs is, in fact, an actual historical reference to the use of these animals at that time. Those who reject this conclusion cannot give one piece of solid archaeological evidence on their behalf. They simply argue from the “silence” of archaeology…which is silent no more!

REFERENCES

“Animal Kingdom” (1988), The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary (Electronic Database: Biblesoft).

Cansdale, George (1970), All the Animals of the Bible Lands (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan).

Cheyne, T.K. (1899), Encyclopedia Biblica (London: A. & C. Black).

Clayton, Peter A. (2001), Chronicle of the Pharaohs (London: Thames & Hudson).

Finkelstein, Israel and Neil Asher Silberman (2001), The Bible Unearthed (New York: Free Press).

Free, Joseph P. (1944), “Abraham’s Camels,” Journal of Near Eastern Studies, 3:187-193, July.

Kitchen, K.A. (1966), Ancient Orient and Old Testament (Chicago, IL: InterVarsity Press).

Kitchen, K.A. (1980), The Illustrated Bible Dictionary, ed. J.D. Douglas (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale).

Tobin, Paul N. (2000), “Mythological Element in the Story of Abraham and the Patriachal Narratives,”The Refection of Pascal’s Wager [On-line], URL: http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/abraham.html.

Younker, Randall W. (1997), “Late Bronze Age Camel Petroglyphs in the Wadi Nasib, Sinai,” Near East Archaeological Society Bulletin, 42:47-54.

Younker, Randall W. (2000), “The Bible and Archaeology,” The Symposium on the Bible and Adventist Scholarship [On-line], URL: http://www.aiias.edu/ict/vol_26B/26Bcc_457-477.htm.

Polygamy and the Quran by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=8&article=4029

Polygamy and the Quran

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Those people who have modeled their thinking after New Testament Christianity are, to say the least, a bit surprised (if not shocked and appalled) to learn that the religion of Islam countenances polygamy. But the Christian mind must realize that Muhammad’s Islam arose out of Arabia in the sixth and seventh centuries A.D. The Arab culture was well-known for the practice of polygamy, in which the men were allowed to have as many wives as they desired. The Quran addressed this social circumstance by placing a limitation on the number of wives a man could have. The wording of the pronouncement is in a surah titled “Women”: “And if ye fear that ye will not deal fairly by the orphans, marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four; and if ye fear that ye cannot do justice (to so many) then one (only) or (the captives) that your right hands possess” (Surah 4:3).

Setting aside the issue of why Muhammad himself was exempt from this limitation (Surah 33:50—see Miller, “Muhammad’s Polygamy,” 2004), the divine origin of the Quran is discredited on the basis of its stance on polygamy. In the first place, for all practical purposes, the Quran authorizes a man to have as many wives as he chooses, since its teaching on divorce contradicts its teaching on marriage. Unlike the New Testament, which confines permission to divorce on the sole grounds of sexual unfaithfulness (Matthew 19:9), the Quran authorizes divorce for any reason (e.g., Surah 2:226-232,241; 33:4,49; 58:2-4; 65:1-7). If a man can divorce his wife for any reason, then the “command” that limits a man to four wives is effectively meaningless—merely restricting a man to four legal wives at a time. Theoretically, a man could have an unlimited number of wives—all with the approval of God!

In the second place, Jesus declared in no uncertain terms that “whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery” (Matthew 19:9, emp. added). Jesus gave one, and only one, reason for divorce in God’s sight. In fact, even the Old Testament affirmed that God “hates divorce” (Malachi 2:16). The teaching of the Bible on divorce is a higher, stricter, nobler standard than the one advocated by the Quran. The two books, in fact, contradict each other on this point.

In the third place, why does the Quran stipulate the number “four”? Why not three or five wives? The number four would appear to be an arbitrary number with no significance—at least, none is given. Though the passage in question indicates the criterion of a man’s ability to do justice to those he marries, there is no reason to specify the number four, since men would vary a great deal in the number of women that they would have the ability to manage fairly.

The answer may be seen in the influence of the contemporaneous Jewish population of Arabia. Sixth century Arabia was a tribal oriented society that relied heavily on oral communication in social interactions. Muhammad would have been the recipient of considerable information conveyed orally by his Jewish, and even Christian, contemporaries. Many tales, fables, and rabbinical traditions undoubtedly circulated among the Jewish tribes of Arabia. The Jews themselves probably were lacking in book-learning, having been separated from the mainstream of Jewish thought and intellectual development in their migration to the Arabian peninsula. The evidence demonstrates that the author of the Quran borrowed extensively from Jewish and other sources. The ancient Talmudic record (Arbah Turim, Ev. Hazaer, 1) stated: “A man may marry many wives, for Rabba saith it is lawful to do so, if he can provide for them. Nevertheless, the wise men have given good advice, that a man should not marry more than four wives” (see Rodwell, 1950, p. 411; Tisdall, 1905, pp. 129-130). The similarity with the wording of the Quran is too striking to be coincidental. It can be argued quite convincingly that the magic number of four was drawn from currently circulating Jewish teaching.

REFERENCES

Miller, Dave (2004), “Muhammad’s Polygamy,” http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2219.

Rodwell, J.M., trans. (1950 reprint), The Koran (London: J.M. Dent and Sons).

Tisdall, W. St. Clair (1905), The Original Sources of the Quran (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge).

From Gary... Bible Reading May 6

Bible Reading  

May 6

The World English Bible

May 6

Deuteronomy 27, 28

Deu 27:1 Moses and the elders of Israel commanded the people, saying, Keep all the commandment which I command you this day.

Deu 27:2 It shall be on the day when you shall pass over the Jordan to the land which Yahweh your God gives you, that you shall set yourself up great stones, and plaster them with plaster:

Deu 27:3 and you shall write on them all the words of this law, when you have passed over; that you may go in to the land which Yahweh your God gives you, a land flowing with milk and honey, as Yahweh, the God of your fathers, has promised you.

Deu 27:4 It shall be, when you have passed over the Jordan, that you shall set up these stones, which I command you this day, in Mount Ebal, and you shall plaster them with plaster.

Deu 27:5 There you shall build an altar to Yahweh your God, an altar of stones: you shall lift up no irontool on them.

Deu 27:6 You shall build the altar of Yahweh your God of uncut stones; and you shall offer burnt offerings thereon to Yahweh your God:

Deu 27:7 and you shall sacrifice peace offerings, and shall eat there; and you shall rejoice before Yahweh your God.

Deu 27:8 You shall write on the stones all the words of this law very plainly.

Deu 27:9 Moses and the priests the Levites spoke to all Israel, saying, Keep silence, and listen, Israel: this day you have become the people of Yahweh your God.

Deu 27:10 You shall therefore obey the voice of Yahweh your God, and do his commandments and his statutes, which I command you this day.

Deu 27:11 Moses commanded the people the same day, saying,

Deu 27:12 These shall stand on Mount Gerizim to bless the people, when you have passed over the Jordan: Simeon, and Levi, and Judah, and Issachar, and Joseph, and Benjamin.

Deu 27:13 These shall stand on Mount Ebal for the curse: Reuben, Gad, and Asher, and Zebulun, Dan, and Naphtali.

Deu 27:14 The Levites shall answer, and tell all the men of Israel with a loud voice,

Deu 27:15 Cursed be the man who makes an engraved or molten image, an abomination to Yahweh, the work of the hands of the craftsman, and sets it up in secret. All the people shall answer and say, Amen.

Deu 27:16 Cursed be he who sets light by his father or his mother. All the people shall say, Amen.

Deu 27:17 Cursed be he who removes his neighbor's landmark. All the people shall say, Amen.

Deu 27:18 Cursed be he who makes the blind to wander out of the way. All the people shall say, Amen.

Deu 27:19 Cursed be he who wrests the justice due to the foreigner, fatherless, and widow. All the people shall say, Amen.

Deu 27:20 Cursed be he who lies with his father's wife, because he has uncovered his father's skirt. All the people shall say, Amen.

Deu 27:21 Cursed be he who lies with any manner of animal. All the people shall say, Amen.

Deu 27:22 Cursed be he who lies with his sister, the daughter of his father, or the daughter of his mother. All the people shall say, Amen.

Deu 27:23 Cursed be he who lies with his mother-in-law. All the people shall say, Amen.

Deu 27:24 Cursed be he who strikes his neighbor in secret. All the people shall say, Amen.

Deu 27:25 Cursed be he who takes a bribe to kill an innocent person. All the people shall say, Amen.

Deu 27:26 Cursed be he who doesn't confirm the words of this law to do them. All the people shall say, Amen.

Deu 28:1 It shall happen, if you shall listen diligently to the voice of Yahweh your God, to observe to do all his commandments which I command you this day, that Yahweh your God will set you on high above all the nations of the earth:

Deu 28:2 and all these blessings shall come on you, and overtake you, if you shall listen to the voice of Yahweh your God.

Deu 28:3 You shall be blessed in the city, and you shall be blessed in the field.

Deu 28:4 You shall be blessed in the fruit of your body, the fruit of your ground, the fruit of your animals, the increase of your livestock, and the young of your flock.

Deu 28:5 Your basket and your kneading trough shall be blessed.

Deu 28:6 You shall be blessed when you come in, and you shall be blessed when you go out.

Deu 28:7 Yahweh will cause your enemies who rise up against you to be struck before you. They will come out against you one way, and will flee before you seven ways.

Deu 28:8 Yahweh will command the blessing on you in your barns, and in all that you put your hand to; and he will bless you in the land which Yahweh your God gives you.

Deu 28:9 Yahweh will establish you for a holy people to himself, as he has sworn to you; if you shall keep the commandments of Yahweh your God, and walk in his ways.

Deu 28:10 All the peoples of the earth shall see that you are called by the name of Yahweh; and they shall be afraid of you.

Deu 28:11 Yahweh will make you plenteous for good, in the fruit of your body, and in the fruit of your livestock, and in the fruit of your ground, in the land which Yahweh swore to your fathers to give you.

Deu 28:12 Yahweh will open to you his good treasure in the sky, to give the rain of your land in its season, and to bless all the work of your hand: and you shall lend to many nations, and you shall not borrow.

Deu 28:13 Yahweh will make you the head, and not the tail; and you shall be above only, and you shall not be beneath; if you shall listen to the commandments of Yahweh your God, which I command you this day, to observe and to do them,

Deu 28:14 and shall not turn aside from any of the words which I command you this day, to the right hand, or to the left, to go after other gods to serve them.

Deu 28:15 But it shall come to pass, if you will not listen to the voice of Yahweh your God, to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes which I command you this day, that all these curses shall come on you, and overtake you.

Deu 28:16 You shall be cursed in the city, and you shall be cursed in the field.

Deu 28:17 Your basket and your kneading trough shall be cursed.

Deu 28:18 The fruit of your body, the fruit of your ground, the increase of your livestock, and the young of your flock shall be cursed.

Deu 28:19 You shall be cursed when you come in, and you shall be cursed when you go out.

Deu 28:20 Yahweh will send on you cursing, confusion, and rebuke, in all that you put your hand to do, until you are destroyed, and until you perish quickly; because of the evil of your doings, by which you have forsaken me.

Deu 28:21 Yahweh will make the pestilence cling to you, until he has consumed you from off the land, where you go in to possess it.

Deu 28:22 Yahweh will strike you with consumption, and with fever, and with inflammation, and with fiery heat, and with the sword, and with blight, and with mildew; and they shall pursue you until you perish.

Deu 28:23 Your sky that is over your head shall be brass, and the earth that is under you shall be iron.

Deu 28:24 Yahweh will make the rain of your land powder and dust: from the sky shall it come down on you, until you are destroyed.

Deu 28:25 Yahweh will cause you to be struck before your enemies; you shall go out one way against them, and shall flee seven ways before them: and you shall be tossed back and forth among all the kingdoms of the earth.

Deu 28:26 Your dead body shall be food to all birds of the sky, and to the animals of the earth; and there shall be none to frighten them away.

Deu 28:27 Yahweh will strike you with the boil of Egypt, and with the tumors, and with the scurvy, and with the itch, of which you can not be healed.

Deu 28:28 Yahweh will strike you with madness, and with blindness, and with astonishment of heart;

Deu 28:29 and you shall grope at noonday, as the blind gropes in darkness, and you shall not prosper in your ways: and you shall be only oppressed and robbed always, and there shall be none to save you.

Deu 28:30 You shall betroth a wife, and another man shall lie with her: you shall build a house, and you shall not dwell therein: you shall plant a vineyard, and shall not use its fruit.

Deu 28:31 Your ox shall be slain before your eyes, and you shall not eat of it: your donkey shall be violently taken away from before your face, and shall not be restored to you: your sheep shall be given to your enemies, and you shall have none to save you.

Deu 28:32 Your sons and your daughters shall be given to another people; and your eyes shall look, and fail with longing for them all the day: and there shall be nothing in the power of your hand.

Deu 28:33 The fruit of your ground, and all your labors, shall a nation which you don't know eat up; and you shall be only oppressed and crushed always;

Deu 28:34 so that you shall be mad for the sight of your eyes which you shall see.

Deu 28:35 Yahweh will strike you in the knees, and in the legs, with a sore boil, of which you can not be healed, from the sole of your foot to the crown of your head.

Deu 28:36 Yahweh will bring you, and your king whom you shall set over you, to a nation that you have not known, you nor your fathers; and there you shall serve other gods, wood and stone.

Deu 28:37 You shall become an astonishment, a proverb, and a byword, among all the peoples where Yahweh shall lead you away.

Deu 28:38 You shall carry much seed out into the field, and shall gather little in; for the locust shall consume it.

Deu 28:39 You shall plant vineyards and dress them, but you shall neither drink of the wine, nor gatherthe grapes; for the worm shall eat them.

Deu 28:40 You shall have olive trees throughout all your borders, but you shall not anoint yourself with the oil; for your olive shall cast its fruit.

Deu 28:41 You shall father sons and daughters, but they shall not be yours; for they shall go into captivity.

Deu 28:42 All your trees and the fruit of your ground shall the locust possess.

Deu 28:43 The foreigner who is in the midst of you shall mount up above you higher and higher; and you shall come down lower and lower.

Deu 28:44 He shall lend to you, and you shall not lend to him: he shall be the head, and you shall be the tail.

Deu 28:45 All these curses shall come on you, and shall pursue you, and overtake you, until you are destroyed; because you didn't listen to the voice of Yahweh your God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which he commanded you:

Deu 28:46 and they shall be on you for a sign and for a wonder, and on your seed forever.

Deu 28:47 Because you didn't serve Yahweh your God with joyfulness, and with gladness of heart, by reason of the abundance of all things;

Deu 28:48 therefore you shall serve your enemies whom Yahweh shall send against you, in hunger, and in thirst, and in nakedness, and in want of all things: and he shall put a yoke of iron on your neck, until he has destroyed you.

Deu 28:49 Yahweh will bring a nation against you from far, from the end of the earth, as the eagle flies; a nation whose language you shall not understand;

Deu 28:50 a nation of fierce facial expressions, that shall not regard the person of the old, nor show favor to the young,

Deu 28:51 and shall eat the fruit of your livestock, and the fruit of your ground, until you are destroyed; that also shall not leave you grain, new wine, or oil, the increase of your livestock, or the young of your flock, until they have caused you to perish.

Deu 28:52 They shall besiege you in all your gates, until your high and fortified walls come down, in which you trusted, throughout all your land; and they shall besiege you in all your gates throughout all your land, which Yahweh your God has given you.

Deu 28:53 You shall eat the fruit of your own body, the flesh of your sons and of your daughters, whom Yahweh your God has given you, in the siege and in the distress with which your enemies shall distress you.

Deu 28:54 The man who is tender among you, and very delicate, his eye shall be evil toward his brother, and toward the wife of his bosom, and toward the remnant of his children whom he has remaining;

Deu 28:55 so that he will not give to any of them of the flesh of his children whom he shall eat, because he has nothing left him, in the siege and in the distress with which your enemy shall distress you in all your gates.

Deu 28:56 The tender and delicate woman among you, who would not adventure to set the sole of her foot on the ground for delicateness and tenderness, her eye shall be evil toward the husband of her bosom, and toward her son, and toward her daughter,

Deu 28:57 and toward her young one who comes out from between her feet, and toward her children whom she shall bear; for she shall eat them for want of all things secretly, in the siege and in the distress with which your enemy shall distress you in your gates.

Deu 28:58 If you will not observe to do all the words of this law that are written in this book, that you may fear this glorious and fearful name, YAHWEH YOUR GOD;

Deu 28:59 then Yahweh will make your plagues wonderful, and the plagues of your seed, even great plagues, and of long continuance, and sore sicknesses, and of long continuance.

Deu 28:60 He will bring on you again all the diseases of Egypt, which you were afraid of; and they shall cling to you.

Deu 28:61 Also every sickness, and every plague, which is not written in the book of this law, Yahweh will bring them on you, until you are destroyed.

Deu 28:62 You shall be left few in number, whereas you were as the stars of the sky for multitude; because you didn't listen to the voice of Yahweh your God.

Deu 28:63 It shall happen that as Yahweh rejoiced over you to do you good, and to multiply you, so Yahweh will rejoice over you to cause you to perish, and to destroy you; and you shall be plucked from off the land where you go in to possess it.

Deu 28:64 Yahweh will scatter you among all peoples, from the one end of the earth even to the other end of the earth; and there you shall serve other gods, which you have not known, you nor your fathers, even wood and stone.

Deu 28:65 Among these nations you shall find no ease, and there shall be no rest for the sole of your foot: but Yahweh will give you there a trembling heart, and failing of eyes, and pining of soul;

Deu 28:66 and your life shall hang in doubt before you; and you shall fear night and day, and shall have no assurance of your life.

Deu 28:67 In the morning you shall say, Would it were evening! and at evening you shall say, Would it were morning! for the fear of your heart which you shall fear, and for the sight of your eyes which you shall see.

Deu 28:68 Yahweh will bring you into Egypt again with ships, by the way of which I said to you, You shall see it no more again: and there you shall sell yourselves to your enemies for bondservants and for bondmaids, and no man shall buy you.

May 6, 7

Luke 20

Luk 20:1 It happened on one of those days, as he was teaching the people in the temple and preaching the Good News, that the priests and scribes came to him with the elders.

Luk 20:2 They asked him, "Tell us: by what authority do you do these things? Or who is giving you this authority?"

Luk 20:3 He answered them, "I also will ask you one question. Tell me:

Luk 20:4 the baptism of John, was it from heaven, or from men?"

Luk 20:5 They reasoned with themselves, saying, "If we say, 'From heaven,' he will say, 'Why didn't you believe him?'

Luk 20:6 But if we say, 'From men,' all the people will stone us, for they are persuaded that John was a prophet."

Luk 20:7 They answered that they didn't know where it was from.

Luk 20:8 Jesus said to them, "Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things."

Luk 20:9 He began to tell the people this parable. "A man planted a vineyard, and rented it out to some farmers, and went into another country for a long time.

Luk 20:10 At the proper season, he sent a servant to the farmers to collect his share of the fruit of the vineyard. But the farmers beat him, and sent him away empty.

Luk 20:11 He sent yet another servant, and they also beat him, and treated him shamefully, and sent him away empty.

Luk 20:12 He sent yet a third, and they also wounded him, and threw him out.

Luk 20:13 The lord of the vineyard said, 'What shall I do? I will send my beloved son. It may be that seeing him, they will respect him.'

Luk 20:14 "But when the farmers saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, 'This is the heir. Come, let's kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.'

Luk 20:15 They threw him out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore will the lord of the vineyard do to them?

Luk 20:16 He will come and destroy these farmers, and will give the vineyard to others." When they heard it, they said, "May it never be!"

Luk 20:17 But he looked at them, and said, "Then what is this that is written, 'The stone which the builders rejected, the same was made the chief cornerstone?'

Luk 20:18 Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces, but it will crush whomever it falls on to dust."

Luk 20:19 The chief priests and the scribes sought to lay hands on him that very hour, but they feared the people-for they knew he had spoken this parable against them.

Luk 20:20 They watched him, and sent out spies, who pretended to be righteous, that they might trap him in something he said, so as to deliver him up to the power and authority of the governor.

Luk 20:21 They asked him, "Teacher, we know that you say and teach what is right, and aren't partial to anyone, but truly teach the way of God.

Luk 20:22 Is it lawful for us to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?"

Luk 20:23 But he perceived their craftiness, and said to them, "Why do you test me?

Luk 20:24 Show me a denarius. Whose image and inscription are on it?" They answered, "Caesar's."

Luk 20:25 He said to them, "Then give to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."

Luk 20:26 They weren't able to trap him in his words before the people. They marveled at his answer, and were silent.

Luk 20:27 Some of the Sadducees came to him, those who deny that there is a resurrection.

Luk 20:28 They asked him, "Teacher, Moses wrote to us that if a man's brother dies having a wife, and he is childless, his brother should take the wife, and raise up children for his brother.

Luk 20:29 There were therefore seven brothers. The first took a wife, and died childless.

Luk 20:30 The second took her as wife, and he died childless.

Luk 20:31 The third took her, and likewise the seven all left no children, and died.

Luk 20:32 Afterward the woman also died.

Luk 20:33 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them will she be? For the seven had her as a wife."

Luk 20:34 Jesus said to them, "The children of this age marry, and are given in marriage.

Luk 20:35 But those who are considered worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage.

Luk 20:36 For they can't die any more, for they are like the angels, and are children of God, being children of the resurrection.

Luk 20:37 But that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush, when he called the Lord 'The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.'

Luk 20:38 Now he is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for all are alive to him."

Luk 20:39 Some of the scribes answered, "Teacher, you speak well."

Luk 20:40 They didn't dare to ask him any more questions.

Luk 20:41 He said to them, "Why do they say that the Christ is David's son?

Luk 20:42 David himself says in the book of Psalms, 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at my right hand,

Luk 20:43 until I make your enemies the footstool of your feet." '

Luk 20:44 "David therefore calls him Lord, so how is he his son?"

Luk 20:45 In the hearing of all the people, he said to his disciples,

Luk 20:46 "Beware of the scribes, who like to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the marketplaces, the best seats in the synagogues, and the best places at feasts;

Luk 20:47 who devour widows' houses, and for a pretense make long prayers: these will receive greater condemnation."