From Gary... Bible Reading May 20

Bible Reading  

May 20

The World English Bible

May 20

Joshua 21, 22

Jos 21:1 Then the heads of fathers' houses of the Levites came near to Eleazar the priest, and to Joshua the son of Nun, and to the heads of fathers' houses of the tribes of the children of Israel.

Jos 21:2 They spoke to them at Shiloh in the land of Canaan, saying, "Yahweh commanded Moses to give us cities to dwell in, with their suburbs for our livestock."

Jos 21:3 The children of Israel gave to the Levites out of their inheritance, according to the commandment of Yahweh, these cities with their suburbs.

Jos 21:4 The lot came out for the families of the Kohathites. The children of Aaron the priest, who were of the Levites, had thirteen cities by lot out of the tribe of Judah, out of the tribe of the Simeonites, and out of the tribe of Benjamin.

Jos 21:5 The rest of the children of Kohath had ten cities by lot out of the families of the tribe of Ephraim, out of the tribe of Dan, and out of the half-tribe of Manasseh.

Jos 21:6 The children of Gershon had thirteen cities by lot out of the families of the tribe of Issachar, out of the tribe of Asher, out of the tribe of Naphtali, and out of the half-tribe of Manasseh in Bashan.

Jos 21:7 The children of Merari according to their families had twelve cities out of the tribe of Reuben, out of the tribe of Gad, and out of the tribe of Zebulun.

Jos 21:8 The children of Israel gave these cities with their suburbs by lot to the Levites, as Yahweh commanded by Moses.

Jos 21:9 They gave out of the tribe of the children of Judah, and out of the tribe of the children of Simeon, these cities which are mentioned by name:

Jos 21:10 and they were for the children of Aaron, of the families of the Kohathites, who were of the children of Levi; for theirs was the first lot.

Jos 21:11 They gave them Kiriath Arba, named after the father of Anak (the same is Hebron), in the hill country of Judah, with its suburbs around it.

Jos 21:12 But they gave the fields of the city and its villages to Caleb the son of Jephunneh for his possession.

Jos 21:13 To the children of Aaron the priest they gave Hebron with its suburbs, the city of refuge for the manslayer, Libnah with its suburbs,

Jos 21:14 Jattir with its suburbs, Eshtemoa with its suburbs,

Jos 21:15 Holon with its suburbs, Debir with its suburbs,

Jos 21:16 Ain with its suburbs, Juttah with its suburbs, and Beth Shemesh with its suburbs; nine cities out of those two tribes.

Jos 21:17 Out of the tribe of Benjamin, Gibeon with its suburbs, Geba with its suburbs,

Jos 21:18 Anathoth with its suburbs, and Almon with its suburbs; four cities.

Jos 21:19 All the cities of the children of Aaron, the priests, were thirteen cities with their suburbs.

Jos 21:20 The families of the children of Kohath, the Levites, even the rest of the children of Kohath, had the cities of their lot out of the tribe of Ephraim.

Jos 21:21 They gave them Shechem with its suburbs in the hill country of Ephraim, the city of refuge for the manslayer, and Gezer with its suburbs,

Jos 21:22 Kibzaim with its suburbs, and Beth Horon with its suburbs; four cities.

Jos 21:23 Out of the tribe of Dan, Elteke with its suburbs, Gibbethon with its suburbs,

Jos 21:24 Aijalon with its suburbs, Gath Rimmon with its suburbs; four cities.

Jos 21:25 Out of the half-tribe of Manasseh, Taanach with its suburbs, and Gath Rimmon with its suburbs; two cities.

Jos 21:26 All the cities of the families of the rest of the children of Kohath were ten with their suburbs.

Jos 21:27 They gave to the children of Gershon, of the families of the Levites, out of the half-tribe of Manasseh Golan in Bashan with its suburbs, the city of refuge for the manslayer, and Be Eshterah with its suburbs; two cities.

Jos 21:28 Out of the tribe of Issachar, Kishion with its suburbs, Daberath with its suburbs,

Jos 21:29 Jarmuth with its suburbs, En Gannim with its suburbs; four cities.

Jos 21:30 Out of the tribe of Asher, Mishal with its suburbs, Abdon with its suburbs,

Jos 21:31 Helkath with its suburbs, and Rehob with its suburbs; four cities.

Jos 21:32 Out of the tribe of Naphtali, Kedesh in Galilee with its suburbs, the city of refuge for the manslayer, Hammothdor with its suburbs, and Kartan with its suburbs; three cities.

Jos 21:33 All the cities of the Gershonites according to their families were thirteen cities with their suburbs.

Jos 21:34 To the families of the children of Merari, the rest of the Levites, out of the tribe of Zebulun, Jokneam with its suburbs, Kartah with its suburbs,

Jos 21:35 Dimnah with its suburbs, and Nahalal with its suburbs; four cities.

Jos 21:36 Out of the tribe of Reuben, Bezer with its suburbs, Jahaz with its suburbs,

Jos 21:37 Kedemoth with its suburbs, and Mephaath with its suburbs; four cities.

Jos 21:38 Out of the tribe of Gad, Ramoth in Gilead with its suburbs, the city of refuge for the manslayer, and Mahanaim with its suburbs,

Jos 21:39 Heshbon with its suburbs, Jazer with its suburbs; four cities in all.

Jos 21:40 All these were the cities of the children of Merari according to their families, even the rest of the families of the Levites. Their lot was twelve cities.

Jos 21:41 All the cities of the Levites in the midst of the possession of the children of Israel were forty-eight cities with their suburbs.

Jos 21:42 Each of these cities included their suburbs around them. It was this way with all these cities.

Jos 21:43 So Yahweh gave to Israel all the land which he swore to give to their fathers. They possessed it, and lived in it.

Jos 21:44 Yahweh gave them rest all around, according to all that he swore to their fathers. Not a man of all their enemies stood before them. Yahweh delivered all their enemies into their hand.

Jos 21:45 Nothing failed of any good thing which Yahweh had spoken to the house of Israel. All came to pass.

Jos 22:1 Then Joshua called the Reubenites, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh,

Jos 22:2 and said to them, "You have kept all that Moses the servant of Yahweh commanded you, and have listened to my voice in all that I commanded you.

Jos 22:3 You have not left your brothers these many days to this day, but have performed the duty of the commandment of Yahweh your God.

Jos 22:4 Now Yahweh your God has given rest to your brothers, as he spoke to them. Therefore now return and go to your tents, to the land of your possession, which Moses the servant of Yahweh gave you beyond the Jordan.

Jos 22:5 Only take diligent heed to do the commandment and the law which Moses the servant of Yahweh commanded you, to love Yahweh your God, to walk in all his ways, to keep his commandments, to hold fast to him, and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul."

Jos 22:6 So Joshua blessed them, and sent them away; and they went to their tents.

Jos 22:7 Now to the one half-tribe of Manasseh Moses had given inheritance in Bashan; but to the other half gave Joshua among their brothers beyond the Jordan westward. Moreover when Joshua sent them away to their tents, he blessed them,

Jos 22:8 and spoke to them, saying, "Return with much wealth to your tents, with very much livestock, with silver, with gold, with brass, with iron, and with very much clothing. Divide the spoil of your enemies with your brothers."

Jos 22:9 The children of Reuben and the children of Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh returned, and departed from the children of Israel out of Shiloh, which is in the land of Canaan, to go to the land of Gilead, to the land of their possession, which they owned, according to the commandment of Yahweh by Moses.

Jos 22:10 When they came to the region about the Jordan, that is in the land of Canaan, the children of Reuben and the children of Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh built there an altar by the Jordan, a great altar to look at.

Jos 22:11 The children of Israel heard this, "Behold, the children of Reuben and the children of Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh have built an altar in the forefront of the land of Canaan, in the region about the Jordan, on the side that pertains to the children of Israel."

Jos 22:12 When the children of Israel heard of it, the whole congregation of the children of Israel gathered themselves together at Shiloh, to go up against them to war.

Jos 22:13 The children of Israel sent to the children of Reuben, and to the children of Gad, and to the half-tribe of Manasseh, into the land of Gilead, Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest,

Jos 22:14 and with him ten princes, one prince of a fathers' house for each of the tribes of Israel; and they were everyone of them head of their fathers' houses among the thousands of Israel.

Jos 22:15 They came to the children of Reuben, and to the children of Gad, and to the half-tribe of Manasseh, to the land of Gilead, and they spoke with them, saying,

Jos 22:16 "Thus says the whole congregation of Yahweh, 'What trespass is this that you have committed against the God of Israel, to turn away this day from following Yahweh, in that you have built you an altar, to rebel this day against Yahweh?

Jos 22:17 Is the iniquity of Peor too little for us, from which we have not cleansed ourselves to this day, although there came a plague on the congregation of Yahweh,

Jos 22:18 that you must turn away this day from following Yahweh? It will be, seeing that you rebel today against Yahweh, that tomorrow he will be angry with the whole congregation of Israel.

Jos 22:19 However, if the land of your possession is unclean, then pass over to the land of the possession of Yahweh, in which Yahweh's tabernacle dwells, and take possession among us; but don't rebel against Yahweh, nor rebel against us, in building an altar other than the altar of Yahweh our God.

Jos 22:20 Didn't Achan the son of Zerah commit a trespass in the devoted thing, and wrath fell on all the congregation of Israel? That man didn't perish alone in his iniquity.' "

Jos 22:21 Then the children of Reuben and the children of Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh answered, and spoke to the heads of the thousands of Israel,

Jos 22:22 "The Mighty One, God, Yahweh, the Mighty One, God, Yahweh, he knows; and Israel shall know: if it was in rebellion, or if in trespass against Yahweh (don't save us this day),

Jos 22:23 that we have built us an altar to turn away from following Yahweh; or if to offer burnt offering or meal offering, or if to offer sacrifices of peace offerings, let Yahweh himself require it.

Jos 22:24 If we have not out of concern done this, and for a reason, saying, 'In time to come your children might speak to our children, saying, "What have you to do with Yahweh, the God of Israel?

Jos 22:25 For Yahweh has made the Jordan a border between us and you, you children of Reuben and children of Gad. You have no portion in Yahweh." ' So your children might make our children cease from fearing Yahweh.

Jos 22:26 Therefore we said, 'Let's now prepare to build ourselves an altar, not for burnt offering, nor for sacrifice;

Jos 22:27 but it will be a witness between us and you, and between our generations after us, that we may perform the service of Yahweh before him with our burnt offerings, with our sacrifices, and with our peace offerings;' that your children may not tell our children in time to come, 'You have no portion in Yahweh.'

Jos 22:28 Therefore we said, 'It shall be, when they tell us or our generations this in time to come, that we shall say, "Behold the pattern of the altar of Yahweh, which our fathers made, not for burnt offering, nor for sacrifice; but it is a witness between us and you." '

Jos 22:29 Far be it from us that we should rebel against Yahweh, and turn away this day from following Yahweh, to build an altar for burnt offering, for meal offering, or for sacrifice, besides the altar of Yahweh our God that is before his tabernacle!"

Jos 22:30 When Phinehas the priest, and the princes of the congregation, even the heads of the thousands of Israel that were with him, heard the words that the children of Reuben and the children of Gad and the children of Manasseh spoke, it pleased them well.

Jos 22:31 Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest said to the children of Reuben, to the children of Gad, and to the children of Manasseh, "Today we know that Yahweh is in the midst of us, because you have not committed this trespass against Yahweh. Now you have delivered the children of Israel out of the hand of Yahweh."

Jos 22:32 Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, and the princes, returned from the children of Reuben, and from the children of Gad, out of the land of Gilead, to the land of Canaan, to the children of Israel, and brought them word again.

Jos 22:33 The thing pleased the children of Israel; and the children of Israel blessed God, and spoke no more of going up against them to war, to destroy the land in which the children of Reuben and the children of Gad lived.

Jos 22:34 The children of Reuben and the children of Gad named the altar "A Witness Between Us that Yahweh is God."

 May 20, 21

John 3

Joh 3:1 Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews.

Joh 3:2 The same came to him by night, and said to him, "Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, for no one can do these signs that you do, unless God is with him."

Joh 3:3 Jesus answered him, "Most certainly, I tell you, unless one is born anew, he can't see the Kingdom of God."

Joh 3:4 Nicodemus said to him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb, and be born?"

Joh 3:5 Jesus answered, "Most certainly I tell you, unless one is born of water and spirit, he can't enter into the Kingdom of God!

Joh 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh. That which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

Joh 3:7 Don't marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born anew.'

Joh 3:8 The wind blows where it wants to, and you hear its sound, but don't know where it comes from and where it is going. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit."

Joh 3:9 Nicodemus answered him, "How can these things be?"

Joh 3:10 Jesus answered him, "Are you the teacher of Israel, and don't understand these things?

Joh 3:11 Most certainly I tell you, we speak that which we know, and testify of that which we have seen, and you don't receive our witness.

Joh 3:12 If I told you earthly things and you don't believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?

Joh 3:13 No one has ascended into heaven, but he who descended out of heaven, the Son of Man, who is in heaven.

Joh 3:14 As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up,

Joh 3:15 that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

Joh 3:17 For God didn't send his Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world should be saved through him.

Joh 3:18 He who believes in him is not judged. He who doesn't believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God.

Joh 3:19 This is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their works were evil.

Joh 3:20 For everyone who does evil hates the light, and doesn't come to the light, lest his works would be exposed.

Joh 3:21 But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his works may be revealed, that they have been done in God."

Joh 3:22 After these things, Jesus came with his disciples into the land of Judea. He stayed there with them, and baptized.

Joh 3:23 John also was baptizing in Enon near Salim, because there was much water there. They came, and were baptized.

Joh 3:24 For John was not yet thrown into prison.

Joh 3:25 There arose therefore a questioning on the part of John's disciples with some Jews about purification.

Joh 3:26 They came to John, and said to him, "Rabbi, he who was with you beyond the Jordan, to whom you have testified, behold, the same baptizes, and everyone is coming to him."

Joh 3:27 John answered, "A man can receive nothing, unless it has been given him from heaven.

Joh 3:28 You yourselves testify that I said, 'I am not the Christ,' but, 'I have been sent before him.'

Joh 3:29 He who has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom's voice. This, my joy, therefore is made full.

Joh 3:30 He must increase, but I must decrease.

Joh 3:31 He who comes from above is above all. He who is from the Earth belongs to the Earth, and speaks of the Earth. He who comes from heaven is above all.

Joh 3:32 What he has seen and heard, of that he testifies; and no one receives his witness.

Joh 3:33 He who has received his witness has set his seal to this, that God is true.

Joh 3:34 For he whom God has sent speaks the words of God; for God gives the Spirit without measure.

Joh 3:35 The Father loves the Son, and has given all things into his hand.

Joh 3:36 One who believes in the Son has eternal life, but one who disobeys the Son won't see life, but the wrath of God remains on him." 

From Jim McGuiggan... Humanity on the Jericho Road

Humanity on the Jericho Road

Blood Alley may have been a specific location on a road leading down to Jericho but there’s a real sense in which it’s the story of the planet. In actual experience the three categories certainly overlap but it won’t hurt us to muse on the fact that Jesus introduced us to three categories of people in this Luke 10 story. Humans are divided into three groups, 1) Those that wound, 2) Those that hurry on by the wounded and (3) those that make it part of living to help the wounded.

Because we’ve all sinned and all are sinners (Romans 3:23) we’re all part of the "wounders" group. No sinner ever became a sinner all by him/herself. Since the Garden rebellion every human has been born into a sinful world and has been shaped by it. We’ve been born in sin and shaped by iniquity, as one great sinner confessed. Whatever we should say about genes and chromosomes everyone confesses that environment is a profoundly powerful factor in the making of a sinner. Environment isn’t omnipotent—only God is that, but it’s plain foolishness not to take a child’s environment seriously when we’re making judgements about his/her attitudes and behaviour.

We’ve helped one another to sin! Your bitterness, my greed, his cruelty or her craftiness—they not only belong to each one of us that is marked by them, they are the work product of entire societies. And that truth (and it is truth!) needs to be kept in mind when we’re tempted to think we’re the solitary virgins in a world of hookers.

Nations would like to place all the blame on other nations for the awful hatred and torture and pillage that goes on in our world. But in our hearts we know—however we end up acting in response to someone’s current response—in our hearts we know we’ve all got it wrong at some time or another. It just isn’t done that those in power confess, "We helped produce this situation." It doesn’t matter whether you live in the East or West—blame it all on the other side.

Nevertheless, there is a specificity of responsibility. If others should share the blame, we who act out the cruelty or greed or spread the moral infection, verbally and in our attitudes, we should not be free of blame.

And then there are those of us that are cruel and sinister and without (apparently) a particle of remorse. Like all others we have moral weakness and in practice can’t live without offending but some of us rejoice in the evil we do. We are humanity’s "finest" in the matter of doing evil. We wound and rejoice in it, take pleasure in the hurt in another’s eyes. As a prophet indicated, we lie at night hatching out evil on our bed and wake in the morning and eagerly go after it with both hands. We hunt our vulnerable prey; family or otherwise, infant or aged, poor or wealthy, educated or ignorant, foreigners or home-born—it matters nothing who or what they are, just so long as we can hurt them without getting hurt.

We ravage the children, gloat and send the pictures to each other and boast of how shrewdly we groomed the victims and covered our tracks. We rehearse in our minds the words that we know will cut like a knife, correcting them as we rehearse, changing a phrase for something more ugly, more mean, more humiliating, more undeserved. Then we deliver them and rejoice in the look of astonished dismay. We make no inner attempt to justify what we do—it’s enough that we enjoy it. We spread the shame of someone who lives with it daily, as in an emotional purgatory and (rascals that we are) we sometimes look for justification for why we did it. And we find it! No surprise there.

We betray our husband/wife in a godless way and still insist on being treated as though innocent. We demand a gracious attitude (demand it! and take the moral high ground if we aren’t getting it) from the one we’ve treacherously hurt. We breeze in and out of their lives as if nothing had happened. We wound deeply and know that we wound deeply and saunter off leaving our victim oozing blood in a ditch. Saunter off to church, for pity’s sake! And saunter from it! Where we sat before the God of the people we’re crippling!

More "respectably" we negotiate deals with little countries, buying their national resources at a pittance for the population that by and large lives in poverty. The loans we offer them to get the resources out of the ground and to the market have "conditions". You will allow this or that company to supply the equipment, you will give them such tax exemption as will persuade them to be willing to engage with you in the resource extraction, and on and on. Muggers with spotless hands and heartless chests mug the little nation. And the stockholders are pleased with the return on their investments while the vulnerable foreigners (like Bolivians) sit wondering when the revenue on their vast gas reserves is going to produce some hospitals etc. Pharmaceutical companies, with their well-placed agents and subsidised hospitals and agencies, prowl the world for a market for their stocks of this and that to sell before they’re past their sell-by date. They bully governments into thinking that if they don’t supply this or that drug for their citizens that they’re uncaring. Vast amounts of money are put into antiviral drugs that are confessed to be of very limited value, if valuable at all. And other crying needs and projects are starved of funds. Scientists selling their voices and burying truths.

Wounders all! All of us!

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

America’s Most Pressing Concern by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=3577

America’s Most Pressing Concern

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Many concerns occupy the minds of those who are disturbed by what is happening to the United States: bloated deficits, oppressive taxation, alleged global warming, rampant crime, and the influx of intruders who do not share the values and worldview of Americans. What are the central issues and topics that the average American pinpoints as of greatest concern? What issues stir widespread social and political fervor? For example, in the recent election, what concerns were most important to Americans as they cast their votes? By far, the top issue among all party groups was the economy. Healthcare was #2, followed by the size and power of federal government (“Economy Top Issue...,” 2010). But make no mistake: “The economy in general and the specific economic problem of unemployment or lack of jobs far outpace all other issues when Americans are asked to name the most important problem facing the country” (“Economy, Jobs...,” 2010, emp. added).

Beyond the economy, contemplate for a moment a few of the other issues that occupy the concern of many Americans:

War in Iraq/Afghanistan	Illegal immigration	Federal deficit
Education	Environmental issues	Energy availability
Terrorism	Foreign affairs	Social security and Medicare

Many other issues might be listed, but these are sufficient to make the point: Most Americans are more concerned about physical and financial matters than spiritual matters. When one contemplates the multitude of pressing concerns, it is easy to feel “scattered” and overwhelmed as to (1) what the real problem is and (2) the antidote.

While these matters certainly merit the attention and due concern of citizens, the fact of the matter is that the Founders of our Republic pinpointed a much more critical, logically prior issue. Consider the forthright remarks of three:

In a letter written to fellow Founder and signer of the federal Constitution, James McHenry, on November 4, 1800, Declaration signer Charles Carroll of Carrollton declared:

[W]hat motive can be stronger than the belief, founded on revelation, that a virtuous life will be rewarded by a happy immortality? Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure...are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments (as quoted in Steiner, 1907, p. 475, emp. added).

Consider carefully the admonitions of Founder Noah Webster regarding the indispensable nature of Christianity to the existence of our Republic:

[O]ur citizens should early understand that the genuine source of correct republican principles is the Bible, particularly the New Testament or the Christian religion.... [T]he religion which has introduced civil liberty, is the religion of Christ and his apostles, which enjoins humility, piety, and benevolence; which acknowledged in every person a brother, or a sister, and a citizen with equal rights. This is genuine Christianity, and to this we owe our free constitutions of government.... [T]he Christian religion ought to be received, and maintained with firm and cordial support. It is the real source of all genuine republican principles.... The religion of Christ and his apostles, in its primitive simplicity and purity, unencumbered with the trappings of power and the pomp of ceremonies, is the surest basis of a republican government.... [T]hose who destroy the influence and authority of the Christian religion, sap the foundations of public order, of liberty, and of republican government.... (1832, pp. v,247,310-311, emp. added).

The United States commenced their existence under circumstances wholly novel and unexampled in the history of nations. They commenced with civilization, with learning, with science, with constitutions of free government, and with that best gift of God to man, the Christian religion (as quoted in Scudder, 1881, p. 242, emp. added).

In his 1780 inaugural address as the governor of his home state of Massachusetts, Declaration signer John Hancock reminded his fellow citizens of the importance of Christianity to the perpetuation of the nation:

Sensible of the importance of Christian piety and virtue to the order and happiness of a state, I cannot but earnestly commend to you every measure for their support and encouragement.... A due observation of the Lord’s Day is not only important to internal religion, but greatly conducive to the order and benefit of civil society.... Manners, by which not only the freedom, but the very existence of the republics, are greatly affected, depend much upon the public institutions of religion and the good education of youth (as quoted in Brown, 1898, p. 269, emp. added).

There you have it. The Founders repeatedly articulated the #1 concern—the paramount, ultimate, most pressing issue facing the nation. Without this singular, critically important quality—if America does not get this one matter correct—the economy will be the least of our worries. Stated succinctly, that all-consuming, quintessential, premiere concern is: We the citizens, and our leaders, must reinstate acknowledgement of God and His religion (i.e., Christianity), and turn to Him in humble, penitent obedience. According to the Founders themselves, the God of the Bible was solely responsible for the establishment and perpetuation of the Republic. And that national recognition is the only thing that will preserve and sustain us, as it has done for over two centuries. Even if we could snap our fingers and fix all our economic woes instantaneously, without God’s favor we remain in deadly danger. Indeed, rather than fearing terrorists or economic depression, the time has come to reinstate a healthy, sober fear of God (Proverbs 1:7,29-33; Ecclesiastes 12:13; Hebrews 10:31; 12:29—see Miller, 2003; Miller, 2009).

Unless America can get this one, critical issue sorted out; unless a sizable percentage of Americans will go back to God, Christ, and the Bible, and recognize their foremost need of receiving divine favor; unless citizens can restore moral and sexual sanity to their behavior based on Christian principles, the country is destined to destruction. “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people” (Proverbs 14:34). May God bless America.

REFERENCES

Abram Brown (1898), John Hancock: His Book (Boston, MA: Lee & Shepard Publishers).

“Economy, Jobs Easily Top Problems in Americans’ Minds” (2010), Gallup, September 21, http://www.gallup.com/poll/143135/Economy-Jobs-Easily-Top-Problems-Americans-Minds.aspx.’

“Economy Top Issue for Voters; Size of Gov’t. May Be More Pivotal” (2010), Gallup, October 26, http://www.gallup.com/poll/144029/Economy-Top-Issue-Voters-Size-Gov-May-Pivotal.aspx.

Miller, Dave (2003), “Who Believes in Hell Anymore?” http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2258.

Miller, Dave (2009), “God’s Fierce Anger,”  http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2242.

Scudder, Horace (1881), Noah Webster (Boston, MA: Houghton, Mifflin, & Co.).

Steiner, Bernard (1907), The Life and Correspondence of James McHenry (Cleveland, OH: Burrows Brothers).

Webster, Noah (1832), History of the United States (New Haven, CT: Durrie & Peck).

A Response to the 21st Century Science Coalition Standards of Science Education by Joe Deweese, Ph.D. Will Brooks, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=346

A Response to the 21^st Century Science Coalition Standards of Science Education

by	Joe Deweese, Ph.D. Will Brooks, Ph.D.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: The following article was written by two A.P. auxiliary staff scientists. Dr. Brooks holds a Ph.D. in Cell Biology from the University of Alabama at Birmingham. Dr. Deweese holds a Ph.D. in Biochemistry from Vanderbilt University.]

Lines have been drawn and sides have been taken in Texas as scientists and educators battle with one another over whether the weaknesses in evolutionary theory should be taught in the public school system. Since 1998, the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) curriculum for the sciences has remained unchanged. Now, 11 years later, revisions and updates are being made regarding many points within this curriculum, including how evolutionary biology should be taught in the public school system. The 1998 TEKS for high school reads:

The student knows the theory of biological evolution. The student is expected to: (A) identify evidence of change in species using fossils, DNA sequences, anatomical similarities, physiological similarities, and embryology; and (B) illustrate the results of natural selection in speciation, diversity, phylogeny, adaptation, behavior, and extinction (“Comparison of Current...,” 2009).

A few points can quickly be drawn from this excerpt. First, the opening sentence states that students are expected to know the theory of evolution. It does not state or even directly imply that evolution is the single true explanation for the origin of life. Second, nowhere in the statement or the remainder of the 1998 TEKS are students indoctrinated with the idea that evolution is scientific law; although, students are still expected to recognize that similarities among different species are evidence of change rather than a common creator. For 11 years, the above standard for biological education has guided middle and high school teachers in their pursuit to educate young minds. But now, evolutionists have made dramatic pushes to change what was once taught as an alleged explanation for life into nothing short of fact.

In support of the proposed changes to TEKS, the 21^st Century Science Coalition has formulated five principles that they believe must be adopted into the Texas science curriculum. The Coalition’s Web site reads: “We will not allow politics and ideology to handicap the future of our children with a 19^th-century education in their 21^st-century classroom” (“Welcome,” 2009). The five principles are:

Scientifically sound curriculum standards must:

1. acknowledge that instruction on evolution is vital to understanding all the biological sciences;
2. make clear that evolution is an easily observable phenomenon that has been documented beyond any reasonable doubt;
3. be based on the latest, peer-reviewed scholarship;
4. encourage valid critical thinking and scientific reasoning by leaving out all references to ‘strengths and weaknesses,’ which politicians have used to introduce supernatural explanations into science courses; and
5. recognize that all students are best served when matters of faith are left to families and houses of worship (“Scientist Statement,” 2009, emp. added).

As of the writing of this article, over 600 men and women who currently hold faculty positions at Texas colleges and universities have signed a petition in favor of implementing these standards into Texas public school curricula. The signers include faculty members from several universities affiliated in some way with Christianity, including Baylor, Texas Christian, and Abilene Christian, among others. By signing the petition, these men and women are indicating a personal conviction that evolution is essentially scientific law and believe it should be taught as fact to middle and high school students. Further, they intend to remove from the classroom any and all references to the weaknesses of the evolutionary hypothesis. In effect, this petition and its signers are attempting to force onto unsuspecting youths an unproven idea as pure, clear fact.

The principles endorsed by the Coalition manifest several flaws. First, the Coalition claimed that “evolution is vital to understanding all the biological sciences” (“Scientist Statement”). This echoes the modern push for evolutionary thought to permeate all areas of science. By interpreting all things in terms of an evolutionary history, the influence of evolution becomes widespread—particularly in the biological sciences. However, there is nothing about biological science that requires macroevolutionary explanations (see discussion of macroevolution below). In fact, science can be taught without invoking macroevolution—despite what we are bullied into thinking. The biochemical, structural, developmental, and functional similarities between organisms can be explained in terms of a common Designer without the need for common descent. Both authors acknowledge that their own research in biochemistry and molecular biology is conducted without consideration of macroevolution with absolutely no detriment to its quality or its conclusions. So, biology can be understood—even researched—without requiring a context of Darwinian macroevolution. In fact, postulating common design by a Designer is a more effective working model than assuming biological structures are the result of accidental, random processes.

Second, the Coalition wants to “make clear that evolution is an easily observable phenomenon that has been documented beyond any reasonable doubt” (“Scientist Statement”). This is a very misleading statement. By using the common term “evolution,” the authors avoid clearly defining what the “easily observable phenomena” are and claim the evidence is “beyond any reasonable doubt.” (Of course, the implication is that if you doubt it—you obviously are not reasonable). This is a frequent tactic of those who would like us to assume that “all” evolution is the same.

Interestingly, the Coalition did not acknowledge the difference between microevolution (changes at or below species level using existing genetic information) and macroevolution (large-scale changes requiring new genetic information, taking place over long periods of time) in their statement. Some claim that creationists invented these terms, but they are commonly used in the scientific literature and textbooks (e.g., Erwin, 2000; Starr, 2006). While microevolution is an “easily observable phenomenon” and well documented, macroevolution is not. The term “evolution” is routinely used to refer to the combination of the two processes, and this quickly leads to misunderstanding, because while microevolution is clearly documented, the same cannot be said for macroevolution. It has been assumed by some evolutionists that the mechanisms responsible for microevolution could account for macroevolution given enough time (e.g., Erwin, 2000). However, there is much disagreement on this point. The development of new organisms requires more than changes in existing genetic information—it requires the generation of new information altogether in order to form new organs and body structures. There is no known mechanism for the spontaneous generation of new information. [NOTE: There are mutagenic processes which result in random insertions, deletions, duplications, and rearrangements. But these undirected events are typically deleterious and always insufficient for generating the information needed for macroevolution.] The situation is far more complex than the Coalition’s second statement implies.

Third, there is no argument about whether education should be based on peer-reviewed scholarship. However, there probably would be disagreement over the definition of “scholarship.” The modern “peer-review” process is not without bias. Searches of manuscript databases display a marked bias against questioning Neo-Darwinism. We completely agree that students should be kept current on the latest science, but we must remember that teaching biological science is distinct from teaching about evolution.

Fourth, the Coalition wants to change a statement in the 1998 TEKS standards calling for students in science to “analyze, review, and critique scientific explanations, including hypotheses and theories, as to their strengths and weaknesses using scientific evidence and information,” to “analyze and evaluate scientific explanations using empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and experimental and observational testing” (“Comparison of Current...,” 2009, emp. added). It is argued that language mentioning “strengths and weaknesses” can be used to “introduce supernatural explanations” (“Scientist Statement”). It is interesting that this change is intended to “encourage valid critical thinking and scientific reasoning.” So, are we to assume that valid critical thinking excludes taking account of the strengths and weaknesses of a given theory or hypothesis? In our scientific training as graduate students in the biological sciences, we were routinely encouraged to be skeptical and to question existing ideas and conclusions. This proposed change does not reflect the type of critical thinking we expect of graduate students. Why is the Coalition afraid of leaving theories open to question?

Fifth, the Coalition’s effort to ban all religious ideas from the classroom is actually a veiled attempt to dismiss the possibility of a Creator as a rational explanation of life and to keep students from analyzing the faults of evolutionary theory. Their desire to teach children that life originated via evolution goes beyond science into the realm of subjective beliefs—beliefs that cannot be tested or validated scientifically. We are told, “science must be taught in a science class”—which is precisely what those of us who believe in the Creator do—we teach science in our science classrooms. The fact is that the Universe and even life must have had a Cause and cannot be explained by “natural” means.

What effect would these proposed standards have on education? Young minds are very pliable. When scientists holding Ph.D.s in biology claim certain theories as fact, young minds are very likely to believe that those theories are, indeed, fact. And, why shouldn’t they? When the most educated, best-trained men and women speak, many teenagers cannot but listen and assume truth is being conveyed. The problem with making unsubstantiated statements (such as “evolution...has been documented beyond any reasonable doubt”) is that such statements inherently exclude alternate explanations for the origin of life. The Coalition conveniently ignores the fact that hundreds of credentialed scientists are skeptical of evolution. Proponents of evolutionary theory have bullied their explanation for life’s origin into education to the exclusion of all other explanations. They use propaganda techniques to indoctrinate young minds early in order to perpetuate this ill-conceived idea.

Science education has always been a two-faceted approach. On one side, students are taught facts, equations, and principles that research has shown to be true. For example, physics equations regarding force and acceleration (e.g., F=ma), proven biological facts such as that DNA is the genetic material, and universal principles such as that energy can be neither destroyed nor created. The other, equally important aspect of science education is instruction in the scientific method and critical analysis of information. This second facet of education has traditionally been applied in the laboratory, where students conduct experiments and evaluate their results. Both the learning of information and the development of critical thinking skills are fundamental to education at levels of both secondary and higher education. One vital component to the critical evaluation of data is the analysis of both itsstrengths and weaknesses. If weaknesses in data were ignored, untold numbers of incorrect scientific ideas would have been propagated over the years. The Coalition is in favor of removing discussion of strengths and weaknesses of evolutionary biology from the classroom. This very idea is in stark contrast to the scientific method and the principle of critical evaluation. If this standard is put into effect, it would undermine an educator’s ability to teach these aspects of science to the students. In order to properly train students, they must be allowed to use their minds, to weigh the positive and negative data, to analyze, and to think for themselves.

CONCLUSION

The 21^st Century Science Coalition is not the only voice in this fight. Texans for Better Science Education is offering an alternative to the changes recommended by the Coalition (Texans for Better..., 2009). Furthermore, hundreds of scientists from universities around the world have signed Discovery Institute’s “Dissent from Darwinism” which states, “We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged” (“A Scientific Dissent...,” 2009). Contrary to the opinion of the Coalition, there are many scientists who recognize the failure of Darwinism to explain the “origin of species” (and the origin of life!).

On March 27, 2009, the Texas State Board of Education approved a final draft of changes to theTEKS, which will be implemented with the 2010-2011 academic year. Who won the battle is still a matter of debate. The new TEKS, which can be accessed through the Texas Education Agency’s Web site, reads:

In all fields of science, analyze, evaluate, and critique scientific explanations by using empirical evidence, logical reasoning, and experimental and observational testing, including examining all sides of scientific evidence of those scientific explanations, so as to encourage critical thinking by the student (“Texas Essential...,” 2009).

Noticeably, the terms “strengths and weaknesses” do not appear in the new curriculum standards. However, the phrase “examining all sides of scientific evidence” was included. It appears that Texas education officials have attempted to keep both sides happy by straddling the fence on this issue. In another excerpt regarding the changes in Earth’s atmosphere, the phrase “that could have occurred” was added to produce the following final statement:

Analyze the changes of Earth’s atmosphere that could have occurred through time from the original hydrogen-helium atmosphere, the carbon dioxide-water vapor-methane atmosphere, and the current nitrogen-oxygen atmosphere (“Texas Essential...,” 2009, emp. added).

We may never know the true motivations for these changes—political, scientific, or other—but whatever the reasons, educators are left with this manuscript, the 2009 TEKS, to guide their curricula in the sciences.

REFERENCES

“Comparison of Current 1998 Science TEKS with Proposed 2009 Recommendations to ScienceTEKS—Grades 9-12” (2009), TEKS, [On-line], URL:http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/teks/science/SciTEKS_9_12_Comparepdf.pdf.

Erwin, Douglas (2000), “Macroevolution is More Than Repeated Rounds of Microevolution,” Evolution and Development, 2[2]:78-84.

“A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism” (2009), Discovery Institute, [On-line], URL:http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/index.php.

“Scientist Statement” (2009), The 21^st Century Science Coalition, [On-line], URL:http://www.texasscientists.org/sign.html.

Starr, C. (2006), Basic Concepts in Biology (Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole-Thomson Learning Publishing), sixth edition.

Texans for Better Science Education (2009), [On-line], URL:http://www.strengthsandweaknesses.org/.

“Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills for Science Subchapter C. High School” (2009), TEKS, [On-line], URL: http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/teks/science/ch112c_as_approved032709.pdf.

“Welcome” (2009), The 21^st Century Science Coalition, [On-line], URL:http://www.texasscientists.org/index.html.

Bat “Vision” by Caleb Colley, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=1450

Bat “Vision”

by	Caleb Colley, Ph.D.

Bats often fly speedily through stalactite-filled caves and seemingly impenetrable wooded areas. For bats, one wrong move or turn can mean serious injury or death. Contrary to popular opinion, most bats possess at least decent vision. However, bats’ hearing is so sensitive that, for navigational purposes, bats use their ears more than their eyes. Bats are capable of emitting a sound that humans cannot hear. Some species use this very high-pitched, shrill tone when flying to determine what is in front of them (see “Echolocation,” n.d.). The sound bounces off objects in a bat’s path, and the bat hears the echo. Amazingly, the bat is able to determine precisely the direction he should fly in order to avoid smashing into the looming object. This process is referred to as “echolocation.” Bats also use echolocation to find food, especially flying insects.

Bats make this sound from a few, to two hundred, times per second. Do not confuse this sound with the squeaky noise you hear when you stand next to the bat exhibit at your local zoo. That noise is made by bats when they are frustrated, excited, or mating. Bats use different sounds, along with their large ears, to perform echolocation. Scientists use bat detectors to transpose the sounds to a lower frequency—one that humans can hear (see “California Underground...,” 1999). Not all bats, however, use echolocation; approximately 200 species of fruit bats in Africa, Asia, and Australia have larger eyes and are able to use their sharp vision to quickly negotiate obstacles.

Other animals, including dolphins and orca and beluga whales, use echolocation under water, like sonar signals (see “Echolocation”). The process of echolocation also has been observed in terrestrial mammals such as rodents, insectivores, Megachiroptera, and in nocturnal cave-dwelling oil birds and cave swiftlets (see Uy, 1994, p. 1; Blackshear, n.d., p. 1.). In addition, scientific research over the past fifty years has revealed that the auditory system is a major tool employed by blind humans as a means of perception.

Did the complex auditory and navigation systems of bats evolve, as many would have us believe?

REFERENCES

Blackshear, Jim (no date), “A Research Proposal: Echolocation—How Can We Best Teach It?,”Stephen F. Austin State University, [On-line], URL: http://hubel.sfasu.edu/courseinfo/SL02/jb2echolocation.htm.

“California Underground: Bat Echolocation Station” (1999), Oakland Museum of California, [On-line],URL: http://www.museumca.org/caves/onli_echo.html.

“Echolocation” (no date), National Parks Conservation Association, [On-line], URL: http://www.eparks.org/wildlife_protection/wildlife_facts/bats/echolocation.asp.

Uy, Christine (1994), “ ‘Seeing’ Sounds: Echolocation by Blind Humans,” ed. Bridget Wagner, Tony Chen, Harvard Undergraduate Society for Neuroscience, [On-line], URL: http://hcs.harvard.edu/husn/BRAIN/vol1/echo.html.