From Gary.... Hello there...

Hello there... you're a funny looking fella, aren't you?  I feel so sorry for you because you don't have claws to climb up a tree a be safe from those nasty people who just want to bite you. And your face; how do you ever manage to make it out here without enough hair to keep out the cold or whiskers to warn you in case someone just gets too close? And I really don't understand how you ever manage to hear anything with those little things that pass for ears. You poor fella, you may be bigger than me, but you definitely need my help!!! Stay close, I will help you in any way I can!!! I have always been a sucker for a hard luck case!!!

People are different all over this wonderful world and its high time we appreciated others and helped them in any way we can, even if it costs us something!!! 

Consider....

Philippians, Chapter 2 (WEB)

 5  Have this in your mind, which was also in Christ Jesus,  6 who, existing in the form of God, didn’t consider equality with God a thing to be grasped,  7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men.  8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself, becoming obedient to death, yes, the death of the cross.  9 Therefore God also highly exalted him, and gave to him the name which is above every name;  10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, those on earth, and those under the earth,  11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. 

Now, THAT is looking at the state of others and really, really doing something!!!! 

From Gary... Bible Reading February 2

Bible Reading  

February 2

The World English Bible

Feb. 2

Genesis 33

Gen 33:1 Jacob lifted up his eyes, and looked, and, behold, Esau was coming, and with him four hundred men. He divided the children between Leah, Rachel, and the two handmaids.

Gen 33:2 He put the handmaids and their children in front, Leah and her children after, and Rachel and Joseph at the rear.

Gen 33:3 He himself passed over in front of them, and bowed himself to the ground seven times, until he came near to his brother.

Gen 33:4 Esau ran to meet him, embraced him, fell on his neck, kissed him, and they wept.

Gen 33:5 He lifted up his eyes, and saw the women and the children; and said, "Who are these with you?" He said, "The children whom God has graciously given your servant."

Gen 33:6 Then the handmaids came near with their children, and they bowed themselves.

Gen 33:7 Leah also and her children came near, and bowed themselves. After them, Joseph came near with Rachel, and they bowed themselves.

Gen 33:8 Esau said, "What do you mean by all this company which I met?" Jacob said, "To find favor in the sight of my lord."

Gen 33:9 Esau said, "I have enough, my brother; let that which you have be yours."

Gen 33:10 Jacob said, "Please, no, if I have now found favor in your sight, then receive my present at my hand, because I have seen your face, as one sees the face of God, and you were pleased with me.

Gen 33:11 Please take the gift that I brought to you, because God has dealt graciously with me, and because I have enough." He urged him, and he took it.

Gen 33:12 Esau said, "Let us take our journey, and let us go, and I will go before you."

Gen 33:13 Jacob said to him, "My lord knows that the children are tender, and that the flocks and herds with me have their young, and if they overdrive them one day, all the flocks will die.

Gen 33:14 Please let my lord pass over before his servant, and I will lead on gently, according to the pace of the livestock that are before me and according to the pace of the children, until I come to my lord to Seir."

Gen 33:15 Esau said, "Let me now leave with you some of the folk who are with me." He said, "Why? Let me find favor in the sight of my lord."

Gen 33:16 So Esau returned that day on his way to Seir.

Gen 33:17 Jacob traveled to Succoth, built himself a house, and made shelters for his livestock. Therefore the name of the place is called Succoth.

Gen 33:18 Jacob came in peace to the city of Shechem, which is in the land of Canaan, when he came from Paddan Aram; and encamped before the city.

Gen 33:19 He bought the parcel of ground where he had spread his tent, at the hand of the children of Hamor, Shechem's father, for one hundred pieces of money.

Gen 33:20 He erected an altar there, and called it El Elohe Israel.

Feb. 2, 3

Matthew 17

Mat 17:1 After six days, Jesus took with him Peter, James, and John his brother, and brought them up into a high mountain by themselves.

Mat 17:2 He was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his garments became as white as the light.

Mat 17:3 Behold, Moses and Elijah appeared to them talking with him.

Mat 17:4 Peter answered, and said to Jesus, "Lord, it is good for us to be here. If you want, let's make three tents here: one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah."

Mat 17:5 While he was still speaking, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them. Behold, a voice came out of the cloud, saying, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Listen to him."

Mat 17:6 When the disciples heard it, they fell on their faces, and were very afraid.

Mat 17:7 Jesus came and touched them and said, "Get up, and don't be afraid."

Mat 17:8 Lifting up their eyes, they saw no one, except Jesus alone.

Mat 17:9 As they were coming down from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying, "Don't tell anyone what you saw, until the Son of Man has risen from the dead."

Mat 17:10 His disciples asked him, saying, "Then why do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?"

Mat 17:11 Jesus answered them, "Elijah indeed comes first, and will restore all things,

Mat 17:12 but I tell you that Elijah has come already, and they didn't recognize him, but did to him whatever they wanted to. Even so the Son of Man will also suffer by them."

Mat 17:13 Then the disciples understood that he spoke to them of John the Baptizer.

Mat 17:14 When they came to the multitude, a man came to him, kneeling down to him, saying,

Mat 17:15 "Lord, have mercy on my son, for he is epileptic, and suffers grievously; for he often falls into the fire, and often into the water.

Mat 17:16 So I brought him to your disciples, and they could not cure him."

Mat 17:17 Jesus answered, "Faithless and perverse generation! How long will I be with you? How long will I bear with you? Bring him here to me."

Mat 17:18 Jesus rebuked him, the demon went out of him, and the boy was cured from that hour.

Mat 17:19 Then the disciples came to Jesus privately, and said, "Why weren't we able to cast it out?"

Mat 17:20 He said to them, "Because of your unbelief. For most certainly I tell you, if you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will tell this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move; and nothing will be impossible for you.

Mat 17:21 But this kind doesn't go out except by prayer and fasting."

Mat 17:22 While they were staying in Galilee, Jesus said to them, "The Son of Man is about to be delivered up into the hands of men,

Mat 17:23 and they will kill him, and the third day he will be raised up." They were exceedingly sorry.

Mat 17:24 When they had come to Capernaum, those who collected the didrachma coins came to Peter, and said, "Doesn't your teacher pay the didrachma?"

Mat 17:25 He said, "Yes." When he came into the house, Jesus anticipated him, saying, "What do you think, Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth receive toll or tribute? From their children, or from strangers?"

Mat 17:26 Peter said to him, "From strangers." Jesus said to him, "Therefore the children are exempt.

Mat 17:27 But, lest we cause them to stumble, go to the sea, cast a hook, and take up the first fish that comes up. When you have opened its mouth, you will find a stater coin. Take that, and give it to them for me and you." 

From Roy Davison... “If the Lord wills, we shall live and do this or that” (James 4:15)

http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Davison/Roy/Allen/1940/040-Lordwilling.html

“If the Lord wills, we shall live and do this or that”
(James 4:15)

Believers recognize their dependence on the will of God.
James admonishes: “Come now, you who say, 'Today or tomorrow we will go to such and such a city, spend a year there, buy and sell, and make a profit'; whereas you do not know what will happen tomorrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapor that appears for a little time and then vanishes away. Instead you ought to say, 'If the Lord wills, we shall live and do this or that.' But now you boast in your arrogance. All such boasting is evil” (James 4:13-16).

Arrogant boasting is evil.
It does not show proper respect for God.
Some people are always boasting about the great things they are going to do in the future.
As king Ahab of Israel replied to arrogant BenHadad, king of Syria, whose army God had decided to deliver into the hand of Israel, “Let not the one who puts on his armor boast like the one who takes it off” (1 Kings 20:11).
But what is so wrong with saying, “We will go to such and such a city, spend a year there, buy and sell, and make a profit”? Many people see nothing wrong with that at all.
This is arrogant boasting because due consideration is not being given to man's dependence on God.
Jesus illustrates this truth in a parable: “The ground of a certain rich man yielded plentifully. And he thought within himself, saying, 'What shall I do, since I have no room to store my crops?' So he said, 'I will do this: I will pull down my barns and build greater, and there I will store all my crops and my goods. And I will say to my soul, “Soul, you have many goods laid up for many years; take your ease; eat, drink, and be merry.”' But God said to him, 'Fool! This night your soul will be required of you; then whose will those things be which you have provided?' So is he who lays up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God” (Luke 12:16-20).
This man did not include God in his plans. God blessed him with abundance. But rather than laying up treasure in heaven by helping the poor (Luke 18:22), he was self-centered and thought only of his own comfort. He was not rich toward God and he was not prepared to die. God calls him a fool. It is never wise to plan for this life without giving priority to the afterlife.
Jesus asks, “What will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?” (Mark 8:36).
James warns the rich that they will suffer misery if their wealth was gained unjustly: “Come now, you rich, weep and howl for your miseries that are coming upon you! Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are moth-eaten. Your gold and silver are corroded, and their corrosion will be a witness against you and will eat your flesh like fire. You have heaped up treasure in the last days. Indeed the wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, cry out; and the cries of the reapers have reached the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. You have lived on the earth in pleasure and luxury; you have fattened your hearts as in a day of slaughter” (James 5:1-5).

Saying 'Lord willing' recognizes our dependence on God.
“Instead you ought to say, 'If the Lord wills, we shall live and do this or that'” (James 4:15).
Our lives are in the hand of God. He “gives to all life, breath, and all things” (Acts 17:25). As Solomon says, “No one has power over the spirit to retain the spirit, and no one has power in the day of death” (Ecclesiastes 8:8).
Our lives are short. “For what is your life? It is even a vapor that appears for a little time and then vanishes away” (James 4:14). Job says, “My days are but a breath” (Job 7:16).
God has established a maximum lifespan, but there is no guaranteed minimum. Today can be the last day for any one of us. Thus we “ought to say, 'If the Lord wills, we shall live and do this or that'” (James 4:15).

Paul submitted his life and plans to the will of God.
When Paul was zealously persecuting Christians, he mistakenly thought he was doing the will of God (1 Timothy 1:13). Because of his sincerity, God intervened that he might truly know His will. The preacher, Ananias, informed Paul: “The God of our fathers has chosen you that you should know His will, and see the Just One, and hear the voice of His mouth” (Acts 22:14).
Paul began many of his letters with, “Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God” (see the first verses of 1 and 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Colossians and 2 Timothy).
When he departed from Ephesus on his second missionary journey, he told the brethren, "I must by all means keep this coming feast in Jerusalem; but I will return again to you, God willing" (Acts 18:21).
He wrote to the brethren at Corinth: “But I will come to you shortly, if the Lord wills” (1 Corinthians 4:19).
To the saints at Rome he wrote: “For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of His Son, that without ceasing I make mention of you always in my prayers, making request if, by some means, now at last I may find a way in the will of God to come to you” (Romans 1:9, 10). Near the close of the letter he asked them to pray with him “that I may come to you with joy by the will of God” (Romans 15:32).
These statements show that Paul was ever conscious of his dependence on the will of God.
On the way to Jerusalem after his third journey, he told the brethren at Ephesus: “And see, now I go bound in the spirit to Jerusalem, not knowing the things that will happen to me there, except that the Holy Spirit testifies in every city, saying that chains and tribulations await me. But none of these things move me; nor do I count my life dear to myself, so that I may finish my race with joy, and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God. And indeed, now I know that you all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, will see my face no more” (Acts 20:22-25).
As he neared Jerusalem, when he was at Philip's house in Caesarea, a prophet named Agabus revealed what would happen to Paul: “When he had come to us, he took Paul's belt, bound his own hands and feet, and said, 'Thus says the Holy Spirit, “So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man who owns this belt, and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.”' Now when we heard these things, both we and those from that place pleaded with him not to go up to Jerusalem. Then Paul answered, 'What do you mean by weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be bound, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.' So when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, 'The will of the Lord be done'” (Acts 21:11-14).

What have we learned from the Scriptures about our dependence on the will of God?
It is evil to arrogantly boast about what we are going to do in the future without consideration of the brevity of life and the providence of God. When we qualify our plans with 'Lord willing' we recognize our dependence on God. We can look to the apostle Paul as an example of someone who was ever conscious of his life being circumscribed by the will of God.
“Come now, you who say, 'Today or tomorrow we will go to such and such a city, spend a yea


http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Davison/Roy/Allen/1940/040-Lordwilling.html

“If the Lord wills, we shall live and do this or that”
(James 4:15)
Believers recognize their dependence on the will of God.
James admonishes: “Come now, you who say, 'Today or tomorrow we will go to such and such a city, spend a year there, buy and sell, and make a profit'; whereas you do not know what will happen tomorrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapor that appears for a little time and then vanishes away. Instead you ought to say, 'If the Lord wills, we shall live and do this or that.' But now you boast in your arrogance. All such boasting is evil” (James 4:13-16).

Arrogant boasting is evil.
It does not show proper respect for God.
Some people are always boasting about the great things they are going to do in the future.
As king Ahab of Israel replied to arrogant BenHadad, king of Syria, whose army God had decided to deliver into the hand of Israel, “Let not the one who puts on his armor boast like the one who takes it off” (1 Kings 20:11).
But what is so wrong with saying, “We will go to such and such a city, spend a year there, buy and sell, and make a profit”? Many people see nothing wrong with that at all.
This is arrogant boasting because due consideration is not being given to man's dependence on God.
Jesus illustrates this truth in a parable: “The ground of a certain rich man yielded plentifully. And he thought within himself, saying, 'What shall I do, since I have no room to store my crops?' So he said, 'I will do this: I will pull down my barns and build greater, and there I will store all my crops and my goods. And I will say to my soul, “Soul, you have many goods laid up for many years; take your ease; eat, drink, and be merry.”' But God said to him, 'Fool! This night your soul will be required of you; then whose will those things be which you have provided?' So is he who lays up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God” (Luke 12:16-20).
This man did not include God in his plans. God blessed him with abundance. But rather than laying up treasure in heaven by helping the poor (Luke 18:22), he was self-centered and thought only of his own comfort. He was not rich toward God and he was not prepared to die. God calls him a fool. It is never wise to plan for this life without giving priority to the afterlife.
Jesus asks, “What will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?” (Mark 8:36).
James warns the rich that they will suffer misery if their wealth was gained unjustly: “Come now, you rich, weep and howl for your miseries that are coming upon you! Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are moth-eaten. Your gold and silver are corroded, and their corrosion will be a witness against you and will eat your flesh like fire. You have heaped up treasure in the last days. Indeed the wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, cry out; and the cries of the reapers have reached the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. You have lived on the earth in pleasure and luxury; you have fattened your hearts as in a day of slaughter” (James 5:1-5).

Saying 'Lord willing' recognizes our dependence on God.
“Instead you ought to say, 'If the Lord wills, we shall live and do this or that'” (James 4:15).
Our lives are in the hand of God. He “gives to all life, breath, and all things” (Acts 17:25). As Solomon says, “No one has power over the spirit to retain the spirit, and no one has power in the day of death” (Ecclesiastes 8:8).
Our lives are short. “For what is your life? It is even a vapor that appears for a little time and then vanishes away” (James 4:14). Job says, “My days are but a breath” (Job 7:16).
God has established a maximum lifespan, but there is no guaranteed minimum. Today can be the last day for any one of us. Thus we “ought to say, 'If the Lord wills, we shall live and do this or that'” (James 4:15).

Paul submitted his life and plans to the will of God.
When Paul was zealously persecuting Christians, he mistakenly thought he was doing the will of God (1 Timothy 1:13). Because of his sincerity, God intervened that he might truly know His will. The preacher, Ananias, informed Paul: “The God of our fathers has chosen you that you should know His will, and see the Just One, and hear the voice of His mouth” (Acts 22:14).
Paul began many of his letters with, “Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God” (see the first verses of 1 and 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Colossians and 2 Timothy).
When he departed from Ephesus on his second missionary journey, he told the brethren, "I must by all means keep this coming feast in Jerusalem; but I will return again to you, God willing" (Acts 18:21).
He wrote to the brethren at Corinth: “But I will come to you shortly, if the Lord wills” (1 Corinthians 4:19).
To the saints at Rome he wrote: “For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of His Son, that without ceasing I make mention of you always in my prayers, making request if, by some means, now at last I may find a way in the will of God to come to you” (Romans 1:9, 10). Near the close of the letter he asked them to pray with him “that I may come to you with joy by the will of God” (Romans 15:32).
These statements show that Paul was ever conscious of his dependence on the will of God.
On the way to Jerusalem after his third journey, he told the brethren at Ephesus: “And see, now I go bound in the spirit to Jerusalem, not knowing the things that will happen to me there, except that the Holy Spirit testifies in every city, saying that chains and tribulations await me. But none of these things move me; nor do I count my life dear to myself, so that I may finish my race with joy, and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify to the gospel of the grace of God. And indeed, now I know that you all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, will see my face no more” (Acts 20:22-25).
As he neared Jerusalem, when he was at Philip's house in Caesarea, a prophet named Agabus revealed what would happen to Paul: “When he had come to us, he took Paul's belt, bound his own hands and feet, and said, 'Thus says the Holy Spirit, “So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man who owns this belt, and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.”' Now when we heard these things, both we and those from that place pleaded with him not to go up to Jerusalem. Then Paul answered, 'What do you mean by weeping and breaking my heart? For I am ready not only to be bound, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.' So when he would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, 'The will of the Lord be done'” (Acts 21:11-14).

What have we learned from the Scriptures about our dependence on the will of God?
It is evil to arrogantly boast about what we are going to do in the future without consideration of the brevity of life and the providence of God. When we qualify our plans with 'Lord willing' we recognize our dependence on God. We can look to the apostle Paul as an example of someone who was ever conscious of his life being circumscribed by the will of God.
“Come now, you who say, 'Today or tomorrow we will go to such and such a city, spend a year there, buy and sell, and make a profit'; whereas you do not know what will happen tomorrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapor that appears for a little time and then vanishes away. Instead you ought to say, 'If the Lord wills, we shall live and do this or that'” (James 4:13-15). Amen.
Roy Davison
The Scripture quotations in this article are from
The New King James Version. ©1979,1980,1982, Thomas Nelson Inc., Publishers.
Permission for reference use has been granted.
Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)r there, buy and sell, and make a profit'; whereas you do not know what will happen tomorrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapor that appears for a little time and then vanishes away. Instead you ought to say, 'If the Lord wills, we shall live and do this or that'” (James 4:13-15). Amen.
Roy Davison

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

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

From Jim McGuiggan... HEAVEN MADE SPECIAL

HEAVEN MADE SPECIAL

Listen, I have some idea that God must be the center of all our longings and purposes and I have a hint of how awesome he is and I fully accept [as fully as a sinner like me can] that anything good that ever came to me came from his gracious hand. When I pray or just sit silent in his presence such things come to mind and they have the approval of my mind and heart—I can’t deny that but…

He’s too big for me to put my arms around him to hug him and if I’m to tell the truth the thought of hugging him isn’t something that comes into my longings as I relate to him. Now Jesus I can get some fellow-feeling about because he is God with name, rank, serial number and a Galilean accent. Still, he’s now the exalted Lord. Yes, I know, his character is the same but I’m a bit on the insecure side even with accomplished friends of mine so you can guess that my feelings about Jesus aren’t the “cosy” kind. On top of all that, I’ve never seen him. I believe it’s right that I should love God for what he is “in himself” but I’m not up to that challenge yet.

It’s at this point that the thought of my Ethel really helps me. When I’m having difficulty “getting in touch” with God or Jesus because of their glory and majesty, I think warm thoughts of them because they gave me my Ethel. God’s glory and majesty doesn’t mean he is aloof from me [or anyone else—Acts 17:27] or doesn’t care—it does mean that I can’t always make it through to that warmth that so many others feel [and I don’t deny that that warmth is real for them].

But my Ethel makes heaven a different place for me.

I’m not interested in a discussion about “heaven” right now. [There are some pieces on the site that lightly touch on it.] But I know it’s not a geographical location in some part of the universe that you can go to in a rocket. It’s a word I think the Bible uses to describe a mode of being that isn’t earth-bound. Whatever else it is, Jesus is “there” with God and my Ethel is with Jesus [Philippians 1:23] and that makes “heaven” more heavenly for me.

Exupéry’s The Little Prince [click here]has something to teach us here [well, at least it is in touch with my sense of things and offers me sympathy and understanding]. The little prince has gone to earth and left his rose behind on his very tiny planet. He discovered his rose was not the only rose in the universe and that in that sense it was just another rose. But he had committed himself to that rose and in the relationship the rose was no longer like any other rose in the entire universe. Knowing this he now knew that his planet was no longer just another little planet in the heavens because it was the only planet that held the rose that was unlike all the other roses in the universe. Now when he looked up his little planet shone even brighter. But that meant that heaven itself was no longer just a heaven that held millions of planets. It now held his planet so everything had changed. [Didn’t JB Phillips teach us that when he told us about a senior angel who was giving a junior angel a guided tour through the universe? When he came to the planet earth, Phillips tells us, in a hushed way he said, “That’s the visited planet!” The one the young Lord himself had gone to. With that truth the planet was no longer ordinary and even the universe had changed.]

I know God is “in” heaven and that finally that’s all that matters and one day I’ll be able to say that with the fullness of understanding and joy. In the meantime, while I struggle toward maturity, I don’t think he’s angry at my thinking that my Ethel’s being there gives it a special glory for I believe that he gave me Ethel so we could both “tame” each other and learn what commitment, forgiveness, love and faith are.

I don’t know how to finish this so…

The end.

©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.

Inconsistencies About Incest? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/AllegedDiscrepancies.aspx?article=2281&b=Leviticus

Inconsistencies About Incest?

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

On more than one list of “Bible discrepancies” is the allegation that Bible writers erred in their teachings about incest. In Leviticus 18:6-30, 20:11-12, and Deuteronomy 27:20-23, one learns that sexual relations between close family members is sinful and punishable by death: “None of you shall approach anyone who is near of kin to him, to uncover his nakedness” (Leviticus 18:6). Other passages, however, indicate that God tolerated incest among His people, and even blessed those involved in such relationships. Abraham married Sarah, his half-sister (Genesis 20:12; cf. Genesis 17:15-16; 22:17), while Abraham’s son, Isaac, married Rebekah, his second cousin (Genesis 22:20-23; 24:4,15), and Jacob, Abraham’s grandson, married his first cousins, Rachel and Leah (Genesis 24:29; 29:15-30). Even Moses’ father, Amram, “took for himself Jachebed, his father’s sister, as wife” (Exodus 6:20, emp. added; cf. Leviticus 20:19). Critics claim that such passages are contradictory. Were Bible writers really inconsistent when they addressed the subject of incest?

First, one must recognize that simply because Scripture mentions godly men such as Abraham or one of his righteous descendants doing something God forbade elsewhere, does not mean the Bible writers contradicted themselves. Christ was the only perfect man ever to live (2 Corinthians 5:21). Though Noah, Abraham, Moses, etc. were counted faithful to God (Hebrews 11:7-29), they occasionally disobeyed His will (e.g., Numbers 20:1-12). God never blessed their disobedience, only their faithfulness. Consider the harlot Rahab. Whereas God did not condone her harlotry, she was “justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way” (James 2:25). “By faith the harlot Rahab did not perish with those who did not believe, when she had received the spies with peace” (Hebrews 11:32). Simply because God graciously saved Rahab from the destruction of Jericho, does not mean that God condoned her past sexual sins. Similarly, just because the Bible writers mention a particular event (e.g., Amram marrying his aunt) without condemning it, does not necessarily mean the Bible writers condoned it.

Second, for one to identify a legitimate contradiction, he must be considering the same time frame. To condemn Thomas Jefferson for not paying Federal income tax would be inappropriate because there was no Federal income tax in the United States during his lifetime. Likewise, to accuse certain righteous men of breaking God’s law prior to the establishment of that law is equally erroneous. The first indication of God forbidding incestuous marriages is not until after the Israelites departed Egypt (when Moses was already 80 years old—Exodus 7:7). Prior to Mosaic Law, men could lawfully marry close family members. Indeed, God blessed Abraham (Genesis 12:1-3) while he was married to Sarah, his half-sister. What’s more, implied in the creation of Adam, the first man (1 Corinthians 15:45), and Eve, “the mother of all living” (Genesis 3:20), is that their immediate offspring married each other and had children. Furthermore, following the great Flood, the entire Earth was repopulated by Noah, his three sons, and their wives (Genesis 9:1). Thus, in the beginning God allowed incest.

There was no need for strict laws on marriage partners in the early Patriarchal Age (apart from the divine “one man, one woman, for life” institution), and for at least one good reason: during this time, man was in a relatively pure state, at least physically, having left not long before the perfect condition in which he was created and the Garden that had sustained his life....[N]o harmful genetic traits had emerged at this point that could have been expressed in the children of closely related partners. However, after many generations, and especially after the Noahic Flood (Genesis 6-9), solar and cosmic radiation, chemical and viral mutagens, and DNA replication errors, led to the multiplication of genetic disorders. God protected His people by instituting strict laws against incestuous marriages in the eighteenth chapter of Leviticus (Thompson and Major, 1987, 7[2]:7).

Laws regarding incest were given only during the Mosaic dispensation. Those living prior to this period or since this age ended (Colossians 2:14) have not been bound by its laws on incest anymore than we are bound by other Mosaic mandates (e.g., refraining from eating pork—Leviticus 11:7). That said, since “more genetic disorders have arisen in the world population since the time of Moses,...it is even more important to avoid marrying a close relative. Christianity thus far has insured that such rules have been carried forward into modern laws in the western world” (Thompson and Major, 7[2]:7). Though it may not be sinful for you to marry your first cousin, you may need to think twice before saying, “I do.”

REFERENCE

Thompson, Bert and Trevor Major (1987), “Where Did Cain Get His Wife?” Reason and Revelation, 7[2]:5-7, February.

"But What About David and Bathsheba's Marriage?" by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=4184

"But What About David and Bathsheba's Marriage?"

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Jesus’ views of divorce and remarriage are really quite concise and comprehensible. Putting a mate away and marrying another can be undertaken honorably in God’s sight only on the grounds that that mate has been sexually unfaithful (Matthew 19:9). Despite the simplicity of such statements from God, there have always been individuals who would rather try to justify themselves or others instead of humbly submitting to divine standards (cf. Luke 10:29; 16:15). In the case of the Pharisees, they stubbornly threw up to Jesus their Old Testament justification for refusing to accept the stringency of God’s law of marriage, divorce, and remarriage: “Why then did Moses...?”(Matthew 19:7). In like manner, in an effort to side step the clear thrust of New Testament teaching regarding the sinfulness of adulterous marriages and the need for the parties involved to sever the sinful relationship, some today stubbornly appeal to the Old Testament case of David and Bathsheba: “If God requires marriages to be severed today, why was David permitted to keep Bathsheba?”

The following observations merit consideration:

First, there is no parallel between the adulterous marriages being defended today and the relationship sustained by David and Bathsheba. It is true that David’s affair with Bathsheba while her husband was at the battle front constituted adultery. However, he did not further complicate or solidify his adultery by marrying her. She returned to her own home (2 Samuel 11:4). The two apparently had no intentions of further complicating their sin by forming an adulterous marital union. Instead, when Bathsheba notified David that she was pregnant, David made every effort to hide the sin by making it appear as if Uriah was the father of the child (2 Samuel 11:6-13). Repentance at this stage of the situation would entail David’s confession of his sin and his determination to never repeat such illicit behavior. David could have devised some other plan, say, the banishment of Uriah for some breach of military regulations. With Uriah expelled from the land, he could have then taken Bathsheba as his own wife. In such a case, David would have been living in adultery, and the only divinely-approved course of action would have been to sever the marriage relationship. But David did not do this. When his efforts failed, he decided the way he could “cover his tracks” was to bring about Uriah’s death (2 Samuel 11:14-15). To the sin of adultery, he added murder.

Notice that David was not going through all this rigmarole in order to free Bathsheba to be married to himself, but to keep Uriah from finding out that his wife was pregnant by another man. Thus the argument that states, “You’re saying a person ought to murder the mate of the individual that they wish to be married to,” holds no validity in this discussion. By definition, adultery entails sexual relations with a person whose scriptural mate is still living. Notice God’s own words on this matter:

For the woman who has a husband is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives. But if the husband dies, she is released from the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband lives, she marries another man, she will be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from that law, so that she is no adulteress, though she has married another man (Romans 7:2-3, NKJV).

However inappropriate David’s action after the death of Uriah may have been, his marriage to Bathsheba was not adultery and is therefore not parallel to the illicit marriages contracted by so many today whose former mates are still living.

Second, why would we wish to go to David and Bathsheba for insight into acceptable divorce and remarriage practices, anyway? Even when Scripture does not specifically condemn a certain action, we should not necessarily assume that God condones or approves it. There are numerous instances of improper behavior in the Old Testament that are in no way intended to be used today as justification for similar behavior today. Abraham (Genesis 12:13), Isaac (Genesis 26:7), and Jacob (Genesis 27:19) all behaved deceptively. Judah committed fornication (Genesis 38:18). Moses failed to trust in God as he should have (Numbers 20:12). Are these instances appropriate examples to emulate? David, himself, was guilty of additional violations of God’s law. He desecrated the tabernacle by entering and unlawfully consuming consecrated bread (1 Samuel 21:1-6; Matthew 12:3-4). He neglected Mosaic regulations concerning proper transport and treatment of the ark (2 Samuel 6; 1 Chronicles 15:13). His reliance upon troop strength (as evidenced in his military census) cost 70,000 people their lives (2 Samuel 24:15). Such instances as these are intended to remind us of the necessity to adhere strictly to God’s instructions (Romans 15:4). They are certainly not designed to encourage us to relax our own ethical behavior on the grounds that others did so in the Old Testament! Though at one time David was truly “a man after God's own heart” (1 Samuel 13:14; Acts 13:22), his behavior later in life demonstrates that he drifted from this ideal.

Third, by employing the same logic as those who fumble for the case of David and Bathsheba to justify the continuance of adulterous unions today, one could just as easily make a case for the permissibility of polygamy today. Bathsheba was only one of several wives (cf. 1 Samuel 18:27; 25:42-­43; 1 Chronicles 3:2-5). Maybe Joseph Smith, with his 28+ wives, was nearer to the truth than we have previously supposed?

Fourth, David and Bathsheba are not intended as models for ascertaining God’s requirements concerning divorce and remarriage today in any sense. For the Scriptures are exceedingly explicit concerning God’s feelings about the whole sordid affair: “But the thing that David had done displeased the Lord” (2 Samuel 11:27). He did not have to sever the marital relationship with Bathsheba since her husband was dead and she was released from that law (Romans 7:2). However, God brought down upon David untold misery and unpleasant consequences to punish David, as well as instruct us concerning His true view of such iniquity. Three direct consequences were inflicted upon David: (1) Nathan said the sword would never depart from David’s house (2 Samuel 12:10), fulfilled in the successive violent deaths of at least three sons—Amnon (2 Samuel 13:29), Absalom (2 Samuel 18:14), and Adonijah (1 Kings 2:25); (2) Nathan also declared to David that his own wives would be shamefully misused in broad daylight before all Israel by someone close to him (2 Samuel 12:11), distastefully fulfilled when Absalom “lay with his father's concubines in the sight of all Israel” (2 Samuel 16:22); (3) Further, Nathan pronounced the fatal fate of the son conceived by David’s sin with Bathsheba (2 Samuel 12:14), fulfilled seven days after Nathan’s judgment sentence (2 Samuel 12:18). All of this detailed narration suggests that we have missed a major point if we seek to justify illicit behavior today on the grounds that “David did it.”

Friends, let us not scrape the bottom of the proverbial barrel in a desperate attempt to come up with just any argument to defend our position. Let us weigh biblical data fairly, rightly handling the Word of truth, and drawing only those conclusions that are warranted by the evidence (1 Thessalonians 5:21). Only then can we be approved in God’s sight (2 Timothy 2:15).

"But Augustine Said..." by Brad Bromling, D.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=574

"But Augustine Said..."

by	Brad Bromling, D.Min.

By many estimations, Augustine was one of the most significant theologians of the Christian age. Born in north Africa in 354 to a pagan father and pious mother, Augustine lived a playboy’s life until age 33 when he was baptized by Ambrose of Milan. After his conversion, he diligently studied theology and devoted his life to preaching and teaching. Through his writings, he left an enormous legacy that has served to inform each generation since his time of the doctrinal concepts of the fourth century.

Genesis and its account of creation often were discussed by Augustine. Therefore, it is not surprising to hear his name mentioned in the creation/evolution debate. But it is surprising to see how some modern writers employ his work (Barbero, 1994, p. 38; Frye, 1983, p. 15; Ross, 1994, pp. 16-24). First, they make an issue over Augustine’s equivocation on the exact nature of the creation days: “What kind of days these were it is extremely difficult, or perhaps impossible for us to conceive, and how much more to say!” (Augustine, City of God, XI:6). Second, they observe that Augustine cautioned his readers against speaking about such things as the orbit and motion of stars, lest an infidel should hear them make a mistake on these matters and dismiss their teaching concerning the resurrection and other core doctrines of Scripture (Snow, 1990, p. 25).

The impression is given, then, that if the great theologian Augustine felt skittish about strictly defining the creation days, and was wary of Christians speaking about science, then perhaps the creation-science movement is an illegitimate venture. In other words, theology and science don’t mix.

Giving Augustine his due, the fact remains that he was only a man. He held erroneous positions and missed the mark at various junctures in his theological writings. What he said is not to be considered normative. Departing from Augustine should not be construed as departing from scriptural authority.

Truth is not determined by one’s agreement with a specific scholar. This is recognized in science as well as theology. Modern scientists would bristle at being forced to conform to all of Darwin’s views. So, creationists feel unfairly treated when told their views don’t jibe with Augustine’s. If Augustine was wrong about the creation days, so be it. His mistake need not be accepted blindly.

Augustine’s point regarding a Christian discussing science seems be that caution should be taken to ensure that what is said is true: “...it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics...” (Augustine, as quoted in Van Till, 1990, p. 149). No creationist would deny the importance of accuracy when discussing scientific matters. Obviously, a Christian who presents erroneous information from the sciences hardly will be taken seriously. That is not to say that a Christian should not present accurate science and accurate biblical exegesis together. All truth runs in parallel lines.

What often is missed in these discussions about Augustine is his firm belief in the infallibility of Scripture and in its clear teaching of creation ex nihilo (out of nothing). He wrote: “God didn’t find [some preexisting matter—BB], like something co-eternal with himself, out of which to construct the world; but he himself set it up from absolutely nothing” (Augustine, 1993, p. 151). He adamantly denied that any material thing existed before the creation week of Genesis 1: “And if the sacred and infallible Scriptures say that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth...it may be understood that he made nothing previously” (City of God, XI:6).

Historically, Augustine has made many contributions to theology: some good, some not so good. His writings are worth reading, but they are not our standard. Our “faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God” (1 Corinthians 2:5).

REFERENCES

Augustine (1993), “Sermon 214,” The Works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century, ed. John E. Rotelle (New Rochelle, NY: New City Press, translated by Edmund Hill), Sermons III/6.

Barbero, Yves (1994), “NCSE Makes Impact at AAAS Annual Meeting,” NCSE Reports, pp. 38-39, Winter/Spring.

Frye, Roland Mushat (1983), “Creation-Science Against the Religious Background,” Is God a Creationist?, ed. R.M. Frye (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons), pp. 1-28.

Ross, Hugh (1994), Creation and Time (Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress).

Snow, Robert E. (1990) “How Did We Get Here?,” Portraits of Creation, ed. Howard J. Van Till, et al. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), pp. 13-25.

Van Till, Howard J. (1990), “The Character of Contemporary Natural Science,” Portraits of Creation, ed. Howard J. Van Till, et al. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), pp. 126-165.

"Jesus Was a Vegetarian" by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=5095

"Jesus Was a Vegetarian"

by	Kyle Butt, M.Div.

Recently I read the statement, “Jesus was a vegetarian.” Supposedly, since Jesus did not eat meat, neither should we. There are several problems with this line of reasoning.

First, people often use the “Jesus did x, y, or z” to demand that we should do the same things. But the truth is, just because Jesus did or did not do something does not necessarily have any bearing on what we should or should not do. Jesus did many things that we are under no moral obligation to imitate. For instance, could we say, “Jesus rode a donkey into Jerusalem and so should you?” Or what about, “Jesus never rode in a car, and neither should we?” Would we be correct to demand, “Jesus never had electric lights, so cut off your power?” Or “Jesus never sent a text message, so stop texting?” You can quickly see the problem here. While it is the case that Jesus is the perfect example of how all humans should live, it is not the case that every aspect of His life is something that we should copy. Paul explained it well in Philippians 2:5 when he said, “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus.” Notice it is the “mind” of Christ, or His attitude, that we are to imitate. That means that while Jesus was seeking the lost He may have gone up on a mountain to preach, but we may need to use a microphone or a YouTube video. Or whereas Jesus walked from village to village, we may need to drive, fly, or ride a bus. Just because Jesus wore sandals that does not mean hiking boots are off limits for His followers.

The second reason the “Jesus was a vegetarian” statement was so strange to me is because it is patently false. He certainly was not a vegetarian. He often ate meat. In Luke 24:42-43 the text says: “So they gave Him [Jesus] a piece of broiled fish and some honeycomb. And He took it and ate in their presence.” The passage could not be more straightforward about Jesus consuming fish. In addition, since Jesus was  a Jew who faithfully followed the Old Law, He was commanded to eat the Passover Lamb every year. In Exodus 12:5-8, we read that all the Jews were to take a Passover lamb, kill it on the  14^th day of the first month and “eat the flesh on that night; roasted in fire, with unleavened bread and with bitter herbs.” In the New Testament, we see Jesus arranging this very procedure with His apostles. Luke 22:7-8 states, “Then came the Day of Unleavened Bread, when the Passover must be killed. And He [Jesus] sent Peter and John, saying, ‘Go and prepare the Passover for us, that we may eat.’” This was just one of the many animal sacrifices that Jewish people ate on a regular basis.

Third, the New Testament makes it clear that killing and eating animals is perfectly acceptable to God. In 1 Timothy 4:1-4 the Holy Spirit foretold that some were going to depart from teaching the truth and were going to command people to “abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.” Notice that in this passage, the sense in which God calls animals “good” is the fact that they are good for food. The idea that God, Jesus, or the Bible somehow morally obligate people to be vegetarians simply is incorrect.

"Calling on the Name of the Lord" by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=775

"Calling on the Name of the Lord"

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Considering how many people within “Christendom” teach that an individual can be saved merely by professing a belief in Christ, it is not surprising that skeptics claim that the Bible contradicts itself in this regard. Although Peter and Paul declared, “Whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Acts 2:21; Romans 10:13; cf. Joel 2:32), skeptics quickly remind their readers that Jesus once stated: “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven” (Matthew 7:21; cf. Luke 6:46). Allegedly, Matthew 7:21 clashes with such passages as Acts 2:21 and Romans 10:13 (see Morgan, 2003; Wells, 2001). Since many professed Christians seem to equate “calling on the name of the Lord” with the idea of saying to Jesus, “Lord, save me,” Bible critics feel even more justified in their pronouncement of “conflicting testimonies.” How can certain professed followers of Christ claim that they were saved by simply “calling out to Christ,” when Christ Himself proclaimed that a mere calling upon Him would not save a person?

The key to correctly understanding the phrase “calling on the name of the Lord” is to recognize that more is involved in this action than a mere verbal petition directed toward God. The “call” mentioned in Acts 2:21, Romans 10:13, and Acts 22:16 (where Paul was “calling on the name of the Lord”), is not equated with the “call” (“Lord, Lord”) Jesus spoke of in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 7:21).

First, it is appropriate to mention that even in modern times, to “call on” someone frequently means more than simply making a request for something. When a doctor goes to the hospital to “call on” some of his patients, he does not merely walk into the room and say, “I just wanted to come by and say, ‘Hello.’ I wish you the best. Now pay me.” On the contrary, he involves himself in a service. He examines the patient, listens to the patient’s concerns, gives further instructions regarding the patient’s hopeful recovery, and then oftentimes prescribes medication. All of these elements may be involved in a doctor “calling upon” a patient. In the mid-twentieth century, it was common for young men to “call on” young ladies. Again, this expression meant something different than just “making a request” (Brown, 1976, p. 5).

Second, when an individual takes the time to study how the expression “calling on God” is used throughout Scripture, the only reasonable conclusion to draw is that, just as similar phrases sometimes have a deeper meaning in modern America, the expression “calling on God” often had a deeper meaning in Bible times. Take, for instance, Paul’s statement recorded in Acts 25:11: “I appeal unto Caesar.” The word “appeal” (epikaloumai) is the same word translated “call” (or “calling”) in Acts 2:21, 22:16, and Romans 10:13. But, Paul was not simply saying, “I’m calling on Caesar to save me.” As James Bales noted:

Paul, in appealing to Caesar, was claiming the right of a Roman citizen to have his case judged by Caesar. He was asking that his case be transferred to Caesar’s court and that Caesar hear and pass judgment on his case. In so doing, he indicated that he was resting his case on Caesar’s judgment. In order for this to be done Paul had to submit to whatever was necessary in order for his case to be brought before Caesar. He had to submit to the Roman soldiers who conveyed him to Rome. He had to submit to whatever formalities or procedure Caesar demanded of those who came before him. All of this was involved in his appeal to Caesar (1960, pp. 81-82, emp. added).

Paul’s “calling” to Caesar involved his submission to him. “That, in a nutshell,” wrote T. Pierce Brown, “is what ‘calling on the Lord’ involves”—obedience (1976, p. 5). It is not a mere verbal recognition of God, or a verbal petition to Him. Those whom Paul (before his conversion to Christ) sought to bind in Damascus—Christians who were described as people “who call on Your [Jehovah’s] name”—were not people who only prayed to God, but those who were serving the Lord, and who, by their obedience, were submitting themselves to His authority (cf. Matthew 28:18). Interestingly, Zephaniah 3:9 links one’s “calling” with his “service”: “For then I will restore to the peoples a pure language, that they all may call on the name of the Lord, to serve Him with one accord” (emp. added). When a person submits to the will of God, he accurately can be described as “calling on the Lord.” Acts 2:21 and Romans 10:13 (among other passages) do not contradict Matthew 7:21, because to “call on the Lord” entails more than just pleading for salvation; it involves submitting to God’s will. According to Colossians 3:17, every single act a Christian performs (in word or deed) should be carried out by Christ’s authority. For a non-Christian receiving salvation, this is no different. In order to obtain salvation, a person must submit to the Lord’s authority. This is what the passages in Acts 2:21 and Romans 10:13 are teaching; it is up to us to go elsewhere in the New Testament to learn how to call upon the name of the Lord.

After Peter quoted the prophecy of Joel and told those in Jerusalem on Pentecost that “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Acts 2:21), he told them how to go about “calling on the name of the Lord.” The people in the audience in Acts 2 did not understand Peter’s quotation of Joel to mean that an alien sinner must pray to God for salvation. [Their question in Acts 2:37 (“Men and brethren, what shall we do?”) indicates such.] Furthermore, when Peter responded to their question and told them what to do to be saved, he did not say, “I’ve already told you what to do. You can be saved by petitioning God for salvation through prayer. Just call on His name.” On the contrary, Peter had to explain to them what it meant to “call on the name of the Lord.” Instead of repeating this statement when the crowd sought further guidance from the apostles, Peter commanded them, saying, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (2:38). Notice the parallel between Acts 2:21 and 2:38:

Acts 2:21	Whoever	Calls	On the name of the Lord	Shall be saved
Acts 2:38	Everyone of you	Repent and be baptized	In the name of Jesus Christ	For the remission of sins

Peter’s non-Christian listeners learned that “calling on the name of the Lord for salvation” was equal to obeying the Gospel, which approximately 3,000 did that very day by repenting of their sins and being baptized into Christ (2:38,41).

But what about Romans 10:13? What is the “call” mentioned in this verse? Notice Romans 10:11-15:

For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, who bring glad tidings of good things!” (emp. added).

Although this passage does not define precisely what is meant by one “calling on the name of the Lord,” it does indicate that an alien sinner cannot “call” until after he has heard the Word of God and believed it. Such was meant by Paul’s rhetorical questions: “How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard?” Paul’s statements in this passage are consistent with Peter’s proclamations in Acts 2. It was only after the crowd on Pentecost believed in the resurrected Christ Whom Peter preached (as is evident by their being “cut to the heart” and their subsequent question, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?”) that Peter told them how to call on the name of the Lord and be saved (2:38).

Perhaps the clearest description of what it means for an alien sinner to “call on the name of the Lord” is found in Acts 22. As the apostle Paul addressed the mob in Jerusalem, he spoke of his encounter with the Lord, Whom he asked, “What shall I do?” (22:10; cf. 9:6). The answer Jesus gave Him at that time was not “call on the name of the Lord.” Instead, Jesus instructed him to “arise and go into Damascus, and there you will be told all things which are appointed for you to do” (22:10). Paul (or Saul—Acts 13:9) demonstrated his belief in Jesus as he went into the city and waited for further instructions. In Acts 9, we learn that during the next three days, while waiting to meet with Ananias, Paul fasted and prayed (vss. 9,11). Although some today might consider what Paul was doing at this point as “calling on the name of the Lord,” Ananias, God’s chosen messenger to Paul, did not think so. He did not tell Paul, “I see you have already called on God. Your sins are forgiven.” After three days of fasting and praying, Paul still was lost in his sins. Even though he obviously believed at this point, and had prayed to God, he had yet to “call on the name of the Lord” for salvation. When Ananias finally came to Paul, he told him: “Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (22:16). Ananias knew that Paul had not yet “called on the name of the Lord,” just as Peter knew that those on Pentecost had not done so before his command to “repent and be baptized.” Thus, Ananias instructed Paul to “be baptized, and wash away your sins.” The participle phrase, “calling on the name of the Lord,” describes what Paul was doing when he was baptized for the remission of his sins. Every non-Christian who desires to “call on the name of the Lord” to be saved, does so, not simply by saying, “Lord, Lord” (cf. Matthew 7:21), or just by wording a prayer to God (e.g., Paul—Acts 9; 22; cf. Romans 10:13-14), but by obeying God’s instructions to “repent and be baptized…in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins” (Acts 2:38).

This is not to say that repentance and baptism have always been (or are always today) synonymous with “calling on the name of the Lord.” Abraham was not baptized when he “called upon the name of the Lord” (Genesis 12:8; cf. 4:26), because baptism was not demanded of God before New Testament times. And, as I mentioned earlier, when the New Testament describes people who are already Christians as “calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 9:14,21; 1 Corinthians 1:2), it certainly does not mean that Christians continually were being baptized for the remission of their sins after having been baptized to become a Christian (cf. 1 John 1:5-10). Depending on when and where the phrase is used, “calling on the name of the Lord” includes: (1) obedience to the gospel plan of salvation; (2) worshiping God; and (3) faithful service to the Lord (Bates, 1979, p. 5). However, it never is used in the sense that all the alien sinner must do in order to be saved is to cry out and say, “Lord, Lord, save me.”

Thus, the skeptic’s allegation that Matthew 7:21 contradicts Acts 2:21 and Romans 10:13 is unsubstantiated. And, the professed Christian who teaches that all one must do to be saved is just say the sinner’s prayer, is in error.

REFERENCES

Bales, James (1960), The Hub of the Bible—Or—Acts Two Analyzed (Shreveport, LA: Lambert Book House).

Bates, Bobby (1979), “Whosoever Shall Call Upon the Name of the Lord Shall be Saved,” Firm Foundation, 96:5, March 20.

Brown, T. Pierce (1976), “Calling on His Name,” Firm Foundation, 93:5, July 20.

Morgan, Donald (2003), “Biblical Inconsistencies,” [On-line], URL: http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.shtml.

Wells, Steve (2001), Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, [On-line], URL: http://www.Skepticsannotatedbible.com.