Opposition by Gary Rose

Matthew, Chapter 19 (WEB)

 ⁴ He answered and said to them: Have you not read that the Creator, at the beginning, created them male and female,

When someone says that they "identify" as a member of the opposite sex they are opposing the will of God. God made each of us the way we are; to argue with him is sinful.  Unrepentant hearts and unchanged lives will ultimately sent one to Gehenna.

I want something better than that for the both of us!!!!

Bible Reading June 8 by Gary Rose

Bible Reading June 8 (The World English Bible)

June 8

1 Samuel 9, 10

1Sa 9:1 Now there was a man of Benjamin, whose name was Kish, the son of Abiel, the son of Zeror, the son of Becorath, the son of Aphiah, the son of a Benjamite, a mighty man of valor.

1Sa 9:2 He had a son, whose name was Saul, an impressive young man; and there was not among the children of Israel a better person than he. From his shoulders and upward he was higher than any of the people.

1Sa 9:3 The donkeys of Kish, Saul's father, were lost. Kish said to Saul his son, Take now one of the servants with you, and arise, go seek the donkeys.

1Sa 9:4 He passed through the hill country of Ephraim, and passed through the land of Shalishah, but they didn't find them: then they passed through the land of Shaalim, and there they weren't there: and he passed through the land of the Benjamites, but they didn't find them.

1Sa 9:5 When they had come to the land of Zuph, Saul said to his servant who was with him, Come, and let us return, lest my father leave off caring for the donkeys, and be anxious for us.

1Sa 9:6 He said to him, See now, there is in this city a man of God, and he is a man who is held in honor; all that he says comes surely to pass: now let us go there; peradventure he can tell us concerning our journey whereon we go.

1Sa 9:7 Then said Saul to his servant, But, behold, if we go, what shall we bring the man? for the bread is spent in our vessels, and there is not a present to bring to the man of God: what have we?

1Sa 9:8 The servant answered Saul again, and said, Behold, I have in my hand the fourth part of a shekel of silver: that will I give to the man of God, to tell us our way.

1Sa 9:9 (In earlier times in Israel, when a man went to inquire of God, thus he said, Come, and let us go to the seer; for he who is now called a prophet was before called a Seer.)

1Sa 9:10 Then said Saul to his servant, Well said; come, let us go. So they went to the city where the man of God was.

1Sa 9:11 As they went up the ascent to the city, they found young maidens going out to draw water, and said to them, Is the seer here?

1Sa 9:12 They answered them, and said, He is; behold, he isbefore you: make haste now, for he is come today into the city; for the people have a sacrifice today in the high place:

1Sa 9:13 as soon as you have come into the city, you shall immediately find him, before he goes up to the high place to eat; for the people will not eat until he come, because he does bless the sacrifice; and afterwards they eat who are invited. Now therefore go up; for at this time you shall find him.

1Sa 9:14 They went up to the city; and as they came within the city, behold, Samuel came out toward them, to go up to the high place.

1Sa 9:15 Now Yahweh had revealed to Samuel a day before Saul came, saying,

1Sa 9:16 Tomorrow about this time I will send you a man out of the land of Benjamin, and you shall anoint him to be prince over my people Israel; and he shall save my people out of the hand of the Philistines: for I have looked on my people, because their cry is come to me.

1Sa 9:17 When Samuel saw Saul, Yahweh said to him, Behold, the man of whom I spoke to you! this same shall have authority over my people.

1Sa 9:18 Then Saul drew near to Samuel in the gate, and said, Tell me, Please, where the seer's house is.

1Sa 9:19 Samuel answered Saul, and said, I am the seer; go up before me to the high place, for you shall eat with me today: and in the morning I will let you go, and will tell you all that is in your heart.

1Sa 9:20 As for your donkeys who were lost three days ago, don't set your mind on them; for they are found. For whom is all that is desirable in Israel? Is it not for you, and for all your father's house?

1Sa 9:21 Saul answered, Am I not a Benjamite, of the smallest of the tribes of Israel? and my family the least of all the families of the tribe of Benjamin? why then speak you to me after this manner?

1Sa 9:22 Samuel took Saul and his servant, and brought them into the guest room, and made them sit in the best place among those who were invited, who were about thirty persons.

1Sa 9:23 Samuel said to the cook, Bring the portion which I gave you, of which I said to you, Set it aside.

1Sa 9:24 The cook took up the thigh, and that which was on it, and set it before Saul. Samuel said, Behold, that which has been reserved! set it before yourself and eat; because to the appointed time has it been kept for you, for I said, I have invited the people. So Saul ate with Samuel that day.

1Sa 9:25 When they had come down from the high place into the city, he talked with Saul on the housetop.

1Sa 9:26 They arose early: and it happened about the spring of the day, that Samuel called to Saul on the housetop, saying, Up, that I may send you away. Saul arose, and they went out both of them, he and Samuel, abroad.

1Sa 9:27 As they were going down at the end of the city, Samuel said to Saul, Bid the servant pass on before us (and he passed on), but stand still first, that I may cause you to hear the word of God.

1Sa 10:1 Then Samuel took the vial of oil, and poured it on his head, and kissed him, and said, Isn't it that Yahweh has anointed you to be prince over his inheritance?

1Sa 10:2 When you have departed from me today, then you shall find two men by Rachel's tomb, in the border of Benjamin at Zelzah; and they will tell you, The donkeys which you went to seek have been found; and behold, your father has stopped caring about the donkeys, and is anxious for you, saying, What shall I do for my son?

1Sa 10:3 Then you shall go on forward from there, and you shall come to the oak of Tabor; and three men shall meet you there going up to God to Bethel, one carrying three kids, and another carrying three loaves of bread, and another carrying a bottle of wine:

1Sa 10:4 and they will greet you, and give you two loaves of bread, which you shall receive of their hand.

1Sa 10:5 After that you shall come to the hill of God, where is the garrison of the Philistines: and it shall happen, when you have come there to the city, that you shall meet a band of prophets coming down from the high place with a psaltery, and a tambourine, and a pipe, and a harp, before them; and they will be prophesying:

1Sa 10:6 and the Spirit of Yahweh will come mightily on you, and you shall prophesy with them, and shall be turned into another man.

1Sa 10:7 Let it be, when these signs have come to you, that you do as occasion shall serve you; for God is with you.

1Sa 10:8 You shall go down before me to Gilgal; and behold, I will come down to you, to offer burnt offerings, and to sacrifice sacrifices of peace offerings: you shall wait seven days, until I come to you, and show you what you shall do.

1Sa 10:9 It was so, that when he had turned his back to go from Samuel, God gave him another heart: and all those signs happened that day.

1Sa 10:10 When they came there to the hill, behold, a band of prophets met him; and the Spirit of God came mightily on him, and he prophesied among them.

1Sa 10:11 It happened, when all who knew him before saw that, behold, he prophesied with the prophets, then the people said one to another, What is this that is come to the son of Kish? Is Saul also among the prophets?

1Sa 10:12 One of the same place answered, Who is their father? Therefore it became a proverb, Is Saul also among the prophets?

1Sa 10:13 When he had made an end of prophesying, he came to the high place.

1Sa 10:14 Saul's uncle said to him and to his servant, Where did you go? He said, To seek the donkeys; and when we saw that they were not found, we came to Samuel.

1Sa 10:15 Saul's uncle said, Tell me, Please, what Samuel said to you.

1Sa 10:16 Saul said to his uncle, He told us plainly that the donkeys were found. But concerning the matter of the kingdom, of which Samuel spoke, he didn't tell him.

1Sa 10:17 Samuel called the people together to Yahweh to Mizpah;

1Sa 10:18 and he said to the children of Israel, Thus says Yahweh, the God of Israel, I brought up Israel out of Egypt, and I delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians, and out of the hand of all the kingdoms that oppressed you:

1Sa 10:19 but you have this day rejected your God, who himself saves you out of all your calamities and your distresses; and you have said to him, No, but set a king over us. Now therefore present yourselves before Yahweh by your tribes, and by your thousands.

1Sa 10:20 So Samuel brought all the tribes of Israel near, and the tribe of Benjamin was taken.

1Sa 10:21 He brought the tribe of Benjamin near by their families; and the family of the Matrites was taken; and Saul the son of Kish was taken: but when they sought him, he could not be found.

1Sa 10:22 Therefore they asked of Yahweh further, Is there yet a man to come here? Yahweh answered, Behold, he has hid himself among the baggage.

1Sa 10:23 They ran and fetched him there; and when he stood among the people, he was higher than any of the people from his shoulders and upward.

1Sa 10:24 Samuel said to all the people, "You see him whom Yahweh has chosen, that there is none like him among all the people?" All the people shouted, and said, Long live the king.

1Sa 10:25 Then Samuel told the people the manner of the kingdom, and wrote it in a book, and laid it up before Yahweh. Samuel sent all the people away, every man to his house.

1Sa 10:26 Saul also went to his house to Gibeah; and there went with him the army, whose hearts God had touched.

1Sa 10:27 But certain worthless fellows said, How shall this man save us? They despised him, and brought him no present. But he held his peace.

Jun. 7, 8

John 12

Joh 12:1 Then six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus was, who had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.

Joh 12:2 So they made him a supper there. Martha served, but Lazarus was one of those who sat at the table with him.

Joh 12:3 Mary, therefore, took a pound of ointment of pure nard, very precious, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair. The house was filled with the fragrance of the ointment.

Joh 12:4 Then Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, one of his disciples, who would betray him, said,

Joh 12:5 "Why wasn't this ointment sold for three hundred denarii, and given to the poor?"

Joh 12:6 Now he said this, not because he cared for the poor, but because he was a thief, and having the money box, used to steal what was put into it.

Joh 12:7 But Jesus said, "Leave her alone. She has kept this for the day of my burial.

Joh 12:8 For you always have the poor with you, but you don't always have me."

Joh 12:9 A large crowd therefore of the Jews learned that he was there, and they came, not for Jesus' sake only, but that they might see Lazarus also, whom he had raised from the dead.

Joh 12:10 But the chief priests conspired to put Lazarus to death also,

Joh 12:11 because on account of him many of the Jews went away and believed in Jesus.

Joh 12:12 On the next day a great multitude had come to the feast. When they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem,

Joh 12:13 they took the branches of the palm trees, and went out to meet him, and cried out, "Hosanna! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord, the King of Israel!"

Joh 12:14 Jesus, having found a young donkey, sat on it. As it is written,

Joh 12:15 "Don't be afraid, daughter of Zion. Behold, your King comes, sitting on a donkey's colt."

Joh 12:16 His disciples didn't understand these things at first, but when Jesus was glorified, then they remembered that these things were written about him, and that they had done these things to him.

Joh 12:17 The multitude therefore that was with him when he called Lazarus out of the tomb, and raised him from the dead, was testifying about it.

Joh 12:18 For this cause also the multitude went and met him, because they heard that he had done this sign.

Joh 12:19 The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, "See how you accomplish nothing. Behold, the world has gone after him."

Joh 12:20 Now there were certain Greeks among those that went up to worship at the feast.

Joh 12:21 These, therefore, came to Philip, who was from Bethsaida of Galilee, and asked him, saying, "Sir, we want to see Jesus."

Joh 12:22 Philip came and told Andrew, and in turn, Andrew came with Philip, and they told Jesus.

Joh 12:23 Jesus answered them, "The time has come for the Son of Man to be glorified.

Joh 12:24 Most certainly I tell you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains by itself alone. But if it dies, it bears much fruit.

Joh 12:25 He who loves his life will lose it. He who hates his life in this world will keep it to eternal life.

Joh 12:26 If anyone serves me, let him follow me. Where I am, there will my servant also be. If anyone serves me, the Father will honor him.

Joh 12:27 "Now my soul is troubled. What shall I say? 'Father, save me from this time?' But for this cause I came to this time.

Joh 12:28 Father, glorify your name!" Then there came a voice out of the sky, saying, "I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again."

Joh 12:29 The multitude therefore, who stood by and heard it, said that it had thundered. Others said, "An angel has spoken to him."

Joh 12:30 Jesus answered, "This voice hasn't come for my sake, but for your sakes.

Joh 12:31 Now is the judgment of this world. Now the prince of this world will be cast out.

Joh 12:32 And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself."

Joh 12:33 But he said this, signifying by what kind of death he should die.

Joh 12:34 The multitude answered him, "We have heard out of the law that the Christ remains forever. How do you say, 'The Son of Man must be lifted up?' Who is this Son of Man?"

Joh 12:35 Jesus therefore said to them, "Yet a little while the light is with you. Walk while you have the light, that darkness doesn't overtake you. He who walks in the darkness doesn't know where he is going.

Joh 12:36 While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become children of light." Jesus said these things, and he departed and hid himself from them.

Joh 12:37 But though he had done so many signs before them, yet they didn't believe in him,

Joh 12:38 that the word of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spoke, "Lord, who has believed our report? To whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?"

Joh 12:39 For this cause they couldn't believe, for Isaiah said again,

Joh 12:40 "He has blinded their eyes and he hardened their heart, lest they should see with their eyes, and perceive with their heart, and would turn, and I would heal them."

Joh 12:41 Isaiah said these things when he saw his glory, and spoke of him.

Joh 12:42 Nevertheless even of the rulers many believed in him, but because of the Pharisees they didn't confess it, so that they wouldn't be put out of the synagogue,

Joh 12:43 for they loved men's praise more than God's praise.

Joh 12:44 Jesus cried out and said, "Whoever believes in me, believes not in me, but in him who sent me.

Joh 12:45 He who sees me sees him who sent me.

Joh 12:46 I have come as a light into the world, that whoever believes in me may not remain in the darkness.

Joh 12:47 If anyone listens to my sayings, and doesn't believe, I don't judge him. For I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.

Joh 12:48 He who rejects me, and doesn't receive my sayings, has one who judges him. The word that I spoke, the same will judge him in the last day.

Joh 12:49 For I spoke not from myself, but the Father who sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.

Joh 12:50 I know that his commandment is eternal life. The things therefore which I speak, even as the Father has said to me, so I speak."

Modern Day Miracles by Donny Weimar

http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Weimar/Donny/W/1969/miracles.html

MODERN DAY MIRACLES
ARE THEY FACT OR FICTION?

Introduction There is a large debate among modern religious thinkers concerning the issue of spiritual gifts. Some say that miracles are alive and being actively performed on a daily basis by men and women of God. Others are saying miracles ceased in the closing years of the first century. Who is right? Allowing the New Testament to be the authoritative guide in answering the question at large will increase our faith by a knowledge of truth (Romans 10:17). This exegesis of First Corinthians chapters twelve, thirteen, and fourteen will attempt to handle correctly the Word of God (2 Timothy 2:15). Either it is the case that the people of God today possess miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit, or it is not. Before you continue, please take your Bible and read First Corinthians chapters twelve through fourteen and the first two chapters of Acts. Take upon yourself the nobility of the Bereans who searched the Scriptures daily to see whether or not the things which they were being taught were so (Acts 17:11). May God bless you in your pursuit for correct understanding.

Introductory Matters I.
Bible students notice early in a study of First Corinthians chapter twelve that the different gifts mentioned therein are of the Holy Spirit's authorization. Before approaching this study, however, the more careful student will notice the miraculous capabilities of the disciples prior to the Holy Spirit's coming on the day of Pentecost in Acts chapter two. The first workings of miracles by disciples were not by the authority of the Holy Spirit but by our Lord Jesus Christ. Read Matthew chapter ten. He gave the chosen twelve power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all kinds of disease. The inquisitive mind will want to know the purpose for which Jesus commissioned His apostles with these miraculous abilities. In this limited commission, the apostles were to preach, saying, "The kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Matthew 10:7). The miracles were to accompany the preaching. Why? The purpose of the miraculous empowerment was twofold. First, it confirmed the message spoken by the apostles as the Word of God. After the Great Commission, Mark wrote concerning the apostles: "And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following." (Mark 16:20 KJV). Secondly, it proved the messenger to be sent by God's authority. For example, Nicodemus confessed to Jesus, "Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him" (John 3:2 KJV). The evidence is clear at this point that the apostles of Christ had the power to perform miracleslong before the Holy Spirit ushered in the church of our Lord on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2).

Introductory Matters II.
Perhaps two of the most misunderstood and misrepresented chapters of the Bible are the first two chapters of Acts. Paramount to the birth of New Testament Christianity is a proper understanding of this text. It is here that a discussion of Holy Spirit baptism is debated among religious thinkers. It is here that it is argued between religious minds whether or not speaking in "tongues" is visible evidence of a new Christian's conversion. It is imperative that Bible students properly handle these chapters; for, if it is the case that true saints are only those who have received the baptism of the Holy Spirit, then those who have not received such a baptism are imperfect in their conversion to Christ. If, however, it was only the apostles of the first century who received this baptism, then those who profess such gifts in modern religion have been deceived and are actively attempting to entice others into their error.
A thorough study of the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which in this paper we will not fully exhaust, will reveal the abilities which the receptors, of said baptism, would possess. Those baptized in the Holy Spirit would have total knowledge and recall (John 14:26); they would be guided into all of the truth (John 16:13). Jesus told His chosen twelve apostles they would have no need of preparation for a sermon, no study; the words would be given to them to speak (Matthew 10:19). The Holy Spirit would enable the apostles to speak the wisdom of God without prior meditation (Luke 21:14, 15; 12:11,12).
The first mention of the baptism of the Holy Spirit came from the mouth of John the Forerunner, "And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost" (John 1:33 KJV). John said that Jesus would be the One who administered Holy Spirit baptism. He did not say who would be the recipients of it. It is from Jesus that we learn that He would baptize only the apostles with this baptism (Acts 1:4,5,8).
The promised baptism of the Holy Spirit comes to fruition in the second chapter of Acts. The chosen twelve were filled with the Spirit and began to speak in other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. Contrary to the views of some religious teachers, the tongues spoken were known languages (Acts 2:5-13). There were devout men gathered there for Pentecost from many regions of the world. Each man heard the apostles speak in his own language (Acts 2:8). The miracle was not upon the hearers but those who spoke. The tongue is a physical organ and speaks human language. The languages spoken this day were not a language unknown to anyone (Acts 2:4,6,8). They spoke a language known and understood by the hearer but previously unknown by the speaker. The apostle spoke languages they had never before uttered, not in unintelligent sounds or jabber. Any man who presently claims this ability would do well to go to the United Nations Assembly in New York and preach the gospel of Christ to all present, if he truly has such a gift. Imagine the jaws that would drop to the floor!
It is imperative that the Bible student notice here something far more important than the apostle's new ability to speak in languages once foreign to them -- the purpose behind the tongues. Peter, an apostle, immediately began preaching a sermon that would win over about three thousand souls (Acts 2:41). The power of God unto salvation is not the speaking in tongues. The power of God to save souls is the gospel of Christ (Romans 1:16). It was the gospel that pricked the hearts of the hearers not linguistics (Acts 2:37).
The crowd at Pentecost had a sin problem and the solution was Peter's command, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2:38 KJV). Acts 2:38 contains two commands, a purpose, and a promise. The commands are to repent and be baptized, the purpose is for the remission of sins, and the promise is the gift of the Holy Spirit. The word "gift" is singular, thus it cannot refer to the "gifts" of the Spirit. The only two logical possibilities for the phrase are either that the "gift" refers to salvation, as "gift" is used in Romans 6:23; or else, it refers to the Holy Spirit Himself. Let us keep in mind that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit does not neccesarily equate with miraculous empowerment. John the immerser was full of the Holy Spirit; yet, he never performed a single miracle. Read and compare Luke 1:15 with John 10:41. Thus, it is certainly possible for the Holy Spirit to dwell in a saint without reference to any miraculous capabilities. Consider 1 John 3:24 which reads, "And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us." Truthfully, when we begin to understand how it is that we dwell in Christ, we will then begin to understand how it is that the Spirit, God, dwells in us. It is a covenant relationship. The Spirit is the guarantee of our salvation (Ephesians 1:13,14). Miracles guarantee nothing, in and of themselves (1 Corinthians 13:1,2). Hence, the promised gift of the Holy Spirit is not a promise of supernatural endowment; it is Divine approval and acceptance of a redeemed soul.
There were people in the first century, besides the apostles, who had the ability to perform miracles. Men upon whom the apostles "laid hands" received miraculous power. Study Acts 6:5-6,8; 8:6-7,13,17-19; 19:1-7; Rom. 1:11. These upon whom the apostles "laid hands," however, could not impart the gifts to others! Philip, the deacon, was such a man (Acts 6:5-6). See also, Acts 8:7,13. The apostles were needed to impart miraculous gifts (Acts 8:18). Yet, Philip could and did baptize believers (Acts 8:12-13). Hence, they would receive the "gift of the Holy Spirit" of Acts 2:38 and 5:32. Observe that the Holy Spirit was not given through the laying on of the apostles hands, only the miraculous element was imparted. This element, in turn, could not be passed to anyone else. The Holy Spirit as a gift came through obedience to the gospel (Acts 2:38); the miraculous manifestation came through the apostles hands only. The one and only time a miraculous manifestation occurred separate from the laying on of the apostles' hands was just prior to the conversion of the Gentiles in Acts chapter ten. God confirmed to Peter and to the rest of the Hebrew Christians that He was no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34). The flow of this context shows that God accepts Gentiles into the church (Acts 10:43). None of the converted could transfer miraculous gifts to others. There is a purpose for everything God says and does.

Corinth
We come now to the focus of our studies. Among the multitude of problems and questions addressed by Paul, the apostle, the issue of spiritual gifts is spotlighted in First Corinthians chapters twelve, thirteen, and fourteen. Specifically, these three chapters were written to correct disorders which had arisen in the church at Corinth.(1) The Christians had come to envy and strive over who had been given the superior gift. Some of them had come to abuse and misuse their gifts. Some had the same misconception that many religious people have today. The Corinthian brethren had come to desire spiritual gifts as the "end of their faith."(2) Actually, these gifts were intended to strengthen the church, to protect her, to confirm the Word, and to bring God's revelation to man. The Corinthian Christians failed to respect the fact that the gifts were given for edification.(3) It is critical that the Bible student identify the considerations Paul gives attention to concerning this vital issue at Corinth.

First Corinthians Chapter Twelve
In this passage of sacred text, Paul considers the source of miraculous gifts, the identification of those gifts, their relationship to love, the superiority of the gift of prophecy over the gift of tongues, and the confusion and disorder which was being allowed in relation to these gifts.(4)
In this text, the source of miraculous gifts is the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:4-7). According to Acts 8:14ff these gifts could be imparted only by laying on of hands of the apostles. There are nine specific gifts mentioned: the word of wisdom, the word of knowledge, faith, healings, the working of miracles, prophecy, discerning of spirits, kinds of tongues, and the interpretation of tongues (12:8-10). The last paragraph of chapter twelve lists them in rank of importance to the church (12:27-28). Notably, individual members of the church had different gifts. Not all were apostles. Not all were prophets, teachers, workers of miracles, etc. (12:29-30). Notably, the gifts of speaking in tongues and interpretation are at the bottom of the list.
The same listing here is also in Ephesians 4:11. It is found in the Ephesian letter that the granting of these gifts is the fulfillment of Psalm 68:18 (Ephesians 4:8). The purpose for the gifts given in that text was "for the edifying of the body of Christ till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ" (Ephesians 4:12,13 KJV). The clear understanding of this verse and 1 Corinthians 13:8 is that the gifts had an edifying purpose for the church and were temporary.

First Corinthians Chapter Thirteen
In all their splendor the miraculous gifts were inferior to what the inspired apostle, Paul, called "a more excellent way" (1 Corinthians 12:31). Chapter thirteen of the sacred text brings to surface the supremacy of love.
"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing." (1 Corinthians 13:1-3 KJV)
Without love, charity as the KJV reads, Paul says we are nothing. The Corinthians needed to hear this message! They had become puffed up with envy and pride because of their miraculous capabilities. Love is eternal but, eventually, the gifts would cease (13:8). The prophecies would cease; the gift of tongues and their miraculous knowledge would come to an end. More on this will be addressed later in this paper but let it suffice to say for now, the spiritual gifts were temporal.

First Corinthians Chapter Fourteen
In 57 AD, the approximate dating of this epistle, spiritual gifts were a major part of Christian education and encouragement (14:31). The overall thrust of this chapter is a command for orderly Christian worship (14:40). The more direct concern for the issue at hand will compare the proper versus the improper use of spiritual gifts in the assembly of first century saints.
For the purpose of educating the saints in eternal matters Paul cited prophecy as a greater gift than speaking in tongues (14:1-5). In the assembly, speaking in tongues would edify only the individual who spoke, unless the tongue was translated into a language understood by all. Otherwise, the spoken words would remain an unintelligible utterance. On this point, it is plausible to note that there may have been envious imposters in the assembly who babbled unintelligible words to make it appear that he or she had a miraculous gift as well as the others. To such a one would be addressed such comments of the inspired writer as, "So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air" (1 Corinthians 14:9 KJV). To those with the gift of tongues he again wrote:
I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all: Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue." (1 Corinthians 14:19 KJV)
Speaking in tongues, actually, was not even intended for the assembly of believers. It was meant to be an evangelistic tool (14:22). Nevertheless, Paul did not forbid their use (14:39). Rather, he commanded that they only be used in the assembly when an interpretation could be made (14:13,14). His reasoning was clear.
What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also. Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest? (1 Corinthians 14:15-16 KJV)
The last point to take note of in this chapter is the controllable nature of the spiritual gifts in the first century (14:26-40). These gifts were not meant to give the congregation an "emotional high" but to edify (14:26). If there was no interpreter in the assembly, the ones with the ability to speak in tongues were to remain silent (14:28). When they did speak, they were to take turns speaking one at a time (14:27). The prophets, too, were to take turns speaking, one at a time, and the others were to judge (14:29). "For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted" (1 Corinthians 14:31 KJV). The women were not permitted to speak to the assembly but were to remain submissive (14:34). "And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church" (1 Corinthians 14:35 KJV). The thrust of the lesson is "Let all things be done decently and in order" (1 Corinthians 14:40 KJV).

Perfection
Analysis Of First Corinthians 13:8-13
It is rarely debated among religious thinkers that the spiritual gifts are temporal. The heated question is as to the time at which they will or have already passed away. Arguments rise over the meaning of the word "perfect" in 1 Corinthians 13:10. By the flow of the context, once that which is "perfect" has come, then the miraculous elements would cease and only three major attributes of the Christian would remain, namely: faith, hope, and love (13:13).
Advocates of the modern existence of miraculous gifts say "perfect" refers to Christ. They say that the age of miracles will continue until the return of Christ. There is a difficulty in that rationale within the context of First Corinthians chapter thirteen. When that which is "perfect" becomes reality, faith, hope and love will yet abide. According to Hebrews 11:1, faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. Secondly, according to Romans 8:24, hope that is seen is no longer hope. When Christ returns, hope and faith will become a reality. Only love will remain, for God is love (1 John 4:8). Thus, logic prohibits the understanding of "perfect" to refer to Christ in this context.

The obvious question to propose then is, "what is the object of 'perfect'?" The affirmation made by those who believe man's possession of miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit ceased near the close of the first century say "perfect" refers to the completed revelation of God's Word. That is to say, that when the last letter of the New Testament was finished, the working of miracles had accomplished their purpose and therefore came to an end. Of a truth, the Word of God is perfect (James 1:25); in it, the saints can be made perfect (2 Timothy 3:17; Colossians 1:28; Hebrews 7:19; 10:14).
But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed" (James 1:25 KJV)

Conclusion
The creation in which we now live came into existence by the miraculous power of God. It was necessary that God sustain its existence by miraculously creating the earth, stars, the plants, animals, and man each in proper order. Once creation was complete, God ceased from His works (Genesis 2:1,2). The creation of His church followed a similar pattern. The church was miraculously introduced by the Holy Spirit on Pentecost (Acts 2). In her infancy, it was necessary for God to strengthen the church by miraculous workings. The goal was to mature the church out of childhood by a faith and knowledge in and of the Son of God (Ephesians 4:11-15). Once adulthood was reached the childish things were done away (1 Corinthians 13:11).
Since the purpose of miraculous gifts has been fulfilled, to reveal and confirm the truth, these gifts have ceased (Mark 16:20; Hebrews 2:3,4; Jude 3; Ephesians 3:3-5; John 16:13). The truth once confirmed is confirmed forever. We have the written, inspired Word to make believers (John 20:30,31). Also, the means of obtaining the miraculous gifts has ceased. Only the apostles had the ability, by the laying on of hands, to pass the gifts of the Spirit to another Christian. No apostles are living today to perform these signs, or to impart these gifts; and, based upon Ephesians 4:5, there is no Holy Spirit baptism today. Likewise, there is no one living today who has received a miraculous gift from an apostle. Thus, when the last apostle died and the last person upon whom the apostles had laid hands died, there was no one who could perform miracles!(5)
Those who claim miraculous gifts today are subject to be tested (1 John 4:1; Revelation 2:2). For the infamous reply from such advocates, "I don't have to prove I can perform miracles," read the following passages before such a hasty reply: 1 Corinthians 2:4; 1 Thessalonians 5:21; Acts 2:22; 2:43; 5:12; Romans 5:18,19. Those who try to escape from the light of proof by saying: "But, I'll be testing God," ought to read 2 Corinthians 12:12 where the apostles proved themselves by Divine signs.
"Whoso boasteth himself of a false gift is like clouds and wind without rain" (Proverbs 25:14 KJV).
Donny Weimar

Bibliography
(1) Coffman, James Burton. "Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians." Firm Foundation Publishing House, Austion, Texas, 1976.
(2) Connally, Andrew. "The Fundamentals." Connally Publications, Seagoville, Texas.
(3) Cotham, Perry B. "The Cotham-John Debate on Modern Day Miracles." Conducted at the Eastern Avenue Church of Christ, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1989.
(4) Deaver, Roy. "The Living Message Of First Corinthians." The Living Messages of the Books of the New Testament. The First Annual "Spiritual Sword" Lectureship, Memphis, Tennessee, 1976. Published by National Christian Press, Jonesboro, Arkansas.
(5) Hodge, Charles, D.D. "An Exposition Of The First Epistle To the Corinthians." W.M. Eerdmans Publishing Co. Grand Rapids, Michigan, Reprinted 1974.


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

Take It or Leave It by Eric Lyons, M.Min. Brad Harrub, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/AllegedDiscrepancies.aspx?article=295&b=Matthew

Take It or Leave It

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.
Brad Harrub, Ph.D.

Perhaps the most difficult alleged Bible contradiction that we have been asked to “tackle” at Apologetics Press was presented to us some time ago by the mother of a dear friend. She asked, “When Jesus sent out the twelve apostles on what is commonly called the ‘limited commission,’ did He instruct them to take staffs or not?” Her question was the result of studying the three following parallel passages in the synoptic Gospels (the difficult portions are in bold type).

“Provide neither gold nor silver nor copper in your money belts, nor bag for your journey, nor two tunics, nor sandals,nor staffs (literally, “a staff”); for a worker is worthy of his food” (Matthew 10:9-10).

“He commanded them to take nothing for the journey except a staff—no bag, no bread, no copper in their money belts—but to wear sandals, and not to put on two tunics” (Mark 6:8-9).

“And He said to them, ‘Take nothing for the journey, neither staffs (literally, “a staff”) nor bag nor bread nor money; and do not have two tunics apiece’ “ (Luke 9:3).

A cursory reading of the above passages admittedly is somewhat confusing. Matthew and Luke seem to agree that Jesus prohibited the disciples from taking a staff on their journeys, while Mark appears to give them permission to take one. Furthermore, although Luke does not record Jesus’ command regarding sandals, some have concluded that Matthew and Mark also contradict each other on this point. To use the words of Steve Wells, author of The Skeptic’s Annotated Bible, “In Matthew’s gospel, Jesus tells his disciples to go barefoot and take no staff. But the Jesus in Mark’s gospel (6:8-9) tells them to wear sandals and carry a staff” (emp. added). Actually then, the question at hand is about staffs and sandals, even though Luke mentioned only staffs.

The differences between Matthew and Mark are explained easily when one acknowledges that the writers used different Greek verbs to express different meanings. In Matthew, the word “provide” (NKJV) is an English translation of the Greek word ktesthe. According to Bauer’s Greek-English Lexicon, the root word comes from ktaomai, which means to “procure for oneself, acquire, get” (1979, p. 455). Based upon these definitions, the New American Standard Version used the English verb “acquire” in Matthew 10:9 (“Do not acquire….”), instead of “provide” or “take.” In Matthew, Jesus is saying: “Do not acquire anything in addition to what you already have that may tempt you or stand in your way. Just go as you are.” As Mark indicated, the apostles were to “take” (airo) what they had, and go. The apostles were not to waste precious time gathering supplies (extra apparel, staffs, shoes, etc.) or making preparations for their trip, but instead were instructed to trust in God’s providence for additional needs. Jesus did not mean for the apostles to discard the staffs and sandals they already had; rather, they were not to go and acquire more.

To illustrate this point using a modern day scenario, consider the CEO who came to his Personnel Director near the end of the day and said that he needed her to fly to Los Angeles on a business trip immediately. If he told the director not to acquire anything for this urgent trip, including clothes, shoes, or make-up, she would know that he meant not to take anything extra. Obviously the CEO did not intend for the Personnel Director to take off her shoes, clothes, and the make-up she already was wearing in order to make the trip. Furthermore, if her boss came back five minutes later (to ensure that she understood his instructions clearly) and stated, “Hurry. The plane is leaving in one hour. Don’t take anything with you except what you are wearing,” the Personnel Director would conclude the same thing she did the first time—do not take anything extra. The CEO said the same thing using two different phrases. Similarly, the wording in Matthew and Mark represent two different ways of saying virtually the same thing.

Most apologists and biblical commentators discontinue their discussion of these parallel passages at this point. They explain the difference between Matthew and Mark’s account of Jesus sending out the Twelve, but they omit Luke’s account. In order to answer the skeptic’s criticism adequately, however, Luke’s account must be included in this discussion. Otherwise, one still is left with an unanswered alleged contradiction. The differences surrounding Luke and Mark’s account are explainable, but it takes effort on the part of the reader to comprehend them. [The following facts must be read carefully in order to understand how the differences in these accounts do not point toward a contradiction.]

As is obvious from a comparison of the verses in Matthew and Luke, they are recording the same truth—that the apostles were not to spend valuable time gathering extra staffs—only they are using different words to do so.

“Provide (Greek ktaomi) neither gold nor silver…nor staffs” (Matthew 10:9-10, emp. added).

“Take (Greek airo) nothing for the journey, neither staffs” (Luke 9:3, emp. added).

Luke did not use ktaomi in his account because he nearly always used ktaomi in a different sense than Matthew did. In Matthew’s account, the word ktaomai is used to mean “provide” or “acquire,” whereas in the books of Luke and Acts, Luke used this word to mean “purchase, buy, or earn.” Notice the following examples of how Luke used this word.

“I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get” (ktaomai) [Luke 18:12, emp. added, NAS]

“Now this man purchased (ktaomai) a field with the wages of iniquity (Acts 1:18, emp. added).

“Your money perish with you, because you thought that the gift of God could be purchased (ktaomai) with money!” (Acts 8:20, emp. added).

The commander answered, “With a large sum I obtained (ktaomai) this citizenship” (Acts 22:28, emp. added).

[Luke 21:19 is the only place one could argue where Luke may have used ktaomai to mean something other than “purchase, buy, or earn,” but even here there is a transactional notion in it (Miller, 1997)].

When Luke, the beloved physician (Colossians 4:14), used the word ktaomai, he meant something different than when Matthew, the tax collector, used the same word. Whereas Luke used ktaomai to refer to purchasing or buying something, Matthew used the Greek verb agorazo (cf. Matthew 14:15; 25:9-10; 27:6-7). Matthew used ktaomai only in the sense of acquiring something (not purchasing something). As such, it would make absolutely no sense for Luke to use ktaomai in his account of Jesus sending out the apostles (9:3). If he did, then he would have Jesus forbidding the apostles to “purchase” or “buy” money [“Buy nothing for the journey, neither staffs nor bag nor bread nor money….”]. Thus, Luke used the more general Greek verb (airo) in order to convey the same idea that Matthew did when using the Greek verb ktaomai.

Just as ktaomai did not mean the same for Luke and Matthew, the Greek word airo (translated “take” in both Mark 6:8 and Luke 9:3) often did not mean the same for Luke and Mark (see Miller, 1997). [Understanding this simple fact eliminates the “contradiction” completely, for unless the skeptic can be certain that Mark and Luke were using the word in the same sense, he cannot prove that the accounts contradict each other.] Mark consistently used airo in other passages throughout his gospel to mean simply “take” or “pick up and carry” (2:9; 6:29; 11:23; 13:16). That Luke (in 9:3) did not mean the same sense of airo as Mark did (in 6:8) is suggested by the fact that in Luke 19:21-22 he used this same verb to mean “acquire.” Another piece of comparative data between Mark and Luke is that when Mark recorded Jesus informing His listeners that to be His disciple one had to “take up his cross” (Mark 8:34), he used the word airo. Luke, on the other hand, used the Greek word bastazo (14:27) [Miller, 1997].

Without going any further with these language comparisons, one simply must understand that the Greek language (like most languages) is flexible enough so that sometimes two writers can use the same word to mean different things, and sometimes they can use different words to mean the same thing (as indicated by the following chart,* which serves as a summary of the comparisons and contrasts made in this article).

	ktaomai	agorazo	airo	bastazo
Matthew	to acquire	to purchase, buy
Mark			to take, pick up and carry
Luke	to purchase, buy		to acquire	to take, pick up and carry
*NOTE: Only the definitions that pertain to this article are shown.

In case you think such “language leeway” in the Greek sounds absurd, remember that this flexibility appears frequently in the English language. Consider two basketball coaches who are commenting on a player. One says, “He is bad;” the other says, “He is good.” The coaches may be using two different words to mean the same thing. The truth is, in some contexts the words “bad” and “good” are opposites, in other situations they are synonymous.

Although many have been misled about the differences regarding Jesus’ instructions when sending out His apostles on the limited commission, the truth is that Matthew, Mark, and Luke were all saying the same thing: “Hurry up and get moving!”

REFERENCES

Bauer, Walter. (1979), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, ed. William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich; revised and augmented by F.W. Gingrich and F.W. Danker from Walter Bauer’s 5th edition (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press), second edition.

Miller, Glenn (1997), “Well, did Jesus Tell Them to Take a Staff or not? Another Contradiction?!” [On-line], URL: http://christian-thinktank.com/nostaff.html.

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

What the Founders Said [Part I] by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=3593

What the Founders Said [Part I]

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: The August and September issues of Reason & Revelation are being devoted to examining what the Founders of the American Republic said regarding a number of vital topics that are even now impacting Americans. May we soberly listen and reflect.]

The several hundred men who were responsible for orchestrating the founding of America were very explicit in their pronouncements about their intentions. They left a wealth of writings that articulate their genius. Indeed, these intelligent, well-educated men combed through the annals of human history in order to learn from the mistakes of the past. They examined the human governments that riddle the halls of history in order to construct the best possible government. Their conclusion: the form of government that “fits hand in glove” with the Christian religion (the religion professed by the vast majority of Americans at the time) is a Republic. Listen carefully to prominent Founder Noah Webster:

[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.... Almost all the civil liberty now enjoyed in the world owes its origin to the principles of the Christian religion.... [C]ivil liberty has been gradually advancing and improving, as genuine Christianity has prevailed.... [T]he religion which has introduced civil liberty, is the religion of Christ and his apostles, which enjoins humility, piety, and benevolence; which acknowledges 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 (1838, pp. v,273-274, emp. added).

In what way is our Republic dependent on Christianity? If Noah Webster (and the scores of other Founders and Framers who expressed similar sentiments) was correct, what specific features of the Republic are dependent on Christianity and Bible principles if America is to be perpetuated? Please consider what the Founders said...

ABOUT THE BASIS OF INDEPENDENCE

One of the fundamental attributes of the United States of America from its inception has been “liberty.” That is, Americans have enjoyed an unprecedented level of freedom, with minimal government intrusion, that enables them, within the bounds and confines of Christian morality, to pursue their dreams and goals, thereby achieving for themselves a standard of living and progress unparalleled in human history. Indeed, the freedom that characterizes American civilization has been the envy of the world for over two centuries. People by the thousands continue to yearn to come to America’s shores, as reflected by the inscription within the Statue of Liberty: “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free” (“Statue of Liberty...”).

The salient question is: from whence does this independence derive? What is the source of this incredible state of affairs? On what is America’s freedom based and on what does it continue to depend? Whereas the singular answer to the question was understood by the vast majority of Americans for the first century and a half of the life of the Republic, these days, a host of answers are continually articulated by political leaders and citizens alike that show a fundamental ignorance of America’s origins. For example, some would say that America’s independence is rooted in a fundamental human desire to be free, unhampered by the interference of human government or other authorities. This explanation bears a close resemblance to the 1960s attitude that clamored for freedom to pursue unrestrained, immoral behavior—to “do your own thing.” The Founders would not dignify such with the noble term “freedom.” They would use the biblical term “licentiousness” (see, for example, Washington, 1790; West, 1776) to describe such behavior, i.e., sinful in the sight of God. Others claim that at the root of America’s independence was the desire to be released from the overbearing control of British rule. They believe that such matters as “taxation without representation” and the coercive quartering of British troops in private homes lay at the basis of the desire for independence. While these, and other, circumstances were certainly part of the overall situation, the Founders did not consider them to be the basis of freedom.

Further, the “politically correct” crowd insists that the basis of American independence is pluralism and multiculturalism. That is, they claim that the Founders intended to create an environment in which all religions and ideologies could be embraced and “celebrated.” They believe that the real strength of America lies in “diversity”—the amalgamation, acceptance, and promotion of conflicting cultural, linguistic, and religious beliefs and practices. To them, America is intended to be a haven of security and affirmation for everyone—from the atheist to the homosexual—regardless of religious or moral viewpoint. Such thinking is a perverse and outrageous misrepresentation of the Founders.

Still others have come to believe that the real foundation of America’s freedom is to be found in the federal government’s intrusive effort to achieve economic equality for all Americans (i.e., socialism). They believe that the essential purpose of government is to extract money from the wealthiest citizens and redistribute those funds to the needy and the poor. They believe the government should take care of its citizens, by guaranteeing them a job, sending them a monthly check, providing them with such services as health care, etc. The Founders would be horrified at this perspective as well.

Here is the truth of the matter. On October 20, 1779, the Continental Congress—an entity that represents a host of the Founders of the country—issued a proclamation to the entire nation that contains the quintessential answer to the question: “On what was American independence founded?” Please read it closely:

Whereas it becomes us humbly to approach the throne of Almighty God, with gratitude and praise for the wonders which his goodness has wrought in conducting our forefathers to this western world; for his protection to them and to their posterity amid difficulties and dangers; for raising us, their children, from deep distress to be numbered among the nations of the earth; ...and above all, that he hath diffused the glorious light of the gospel, whereby, through the merits of our gracious Redeemer, we may become the heirs of his eternal glory: therefore, Resolved, That it be recommended to the several states, to appoint Thursday, the 9^th of December next, to be a day of public and solemn thanksgiving to Almighty God for his mercies, and of prayer for the continuance of his favor and protection to these United States; ...that he would grant to his church the plentiful effusions of divine grace, and pour out his holy spirit on all ministers of the gospel; that he would bless and prosper the means of education, and spread the light of Christian knowledge through the remotest corners of the earth; ...that he would in mercy look down upon us, pardon our sins and receive us into his favor, and finally, that he would establish the independence of these United States upon the basis of religion and virtue, and support and protect them in the enjoyment of peace, liberty and safety as long as the sun and moon shall endure, until time shall be no more. Done in Congress, the 20^th day of October, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-nine, and in the 4^th year of the independence of the United States of America.

Samuel Huntington, President.

Attest, Charles Thomson, Secretary (Journals of..., 1904-1937, 15:1191-1193, emp. added).

Establish the independence of the United States on religion and virtue? In view of such remarkable assertions by quintessential Founders of America, it is evident that a vast number of Americans have no clue regarding the foundation of the Republic. They are completely oblivious to the key to genuine freedom. Hence, they are unfamiliar with what is necessary to perpetuate the Republic (Deuteronomy 28:1 ff.). If the average American does not even understand (let alone promote) the basis on which our independence was established, how can we hope to sustain that freedom? Sadly, we cannot.

ABOUT THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS

Imagine asking the six billion plus people on the planet, “What would make you happy?” The majority would undoubtedly respond by referring to physical things or conditions that they believe would make them content—everything from cars, houses, clothes, food, and electronic gadgets, to financial security and business success, to exemption from sickness, suffering, heartache, aging, and adversity. In other words, most people believe that their happiness is directly tied to their physical and emotional status in life.

In contrast, the Bible teaches that, as a matter of fact, we humans do not really know what will make us happy (Jeremiah 10:23). We think we do—but we actually do not. We recognize this phenomenon in children. Think of the boy who is so very certain that if he could just have the latest, popular toy, he would be truly fulfilled and never ask for anything else. Or the girl who is absolutely convinced that if she could just have a certain boy as her boyfriend, she would find complete happiness. So we adults have a list in our minds of those things or accomplishments that we think would bring us into a state of ultimate fulfillment and satisfied contentment.

Yet the Bible articulates clearly that the alluring, beckoning baubles of this world cannot provide any meaningful, ultimate happiness. Instead, it teaches that true contentment resides in one’s submission to the will of God—living a spiritual life rather than relying on the temporary stimulation of fleshly appetites that are short-lived (Hebrews 11:25). The psalmist explains: “Blessed [i.e., happy—DM] is everyone who fears the Lord, who walks in His ways. When you eat the labor of your hands, you shall be happy, and it shall be well with you” (128:1-2). “Happy are the people whose God is the Lord!” (Psalm 144:15). “Happy is he who has the God of Jacob for his help, whose hope is in the Lord his God” (Psalm 146:5). “He who heeds the word wisely will find good, and whoever trusts in the Lord, happy is he” (Proverbs 16:20). “Where there is no revelation, the people cast off restraint; but happy is he who keeps the law” (Proverbs 29:18). The Bible clearly teaches that genuine happiness may be achieved in only one way: obeying God’s directives—found only in the Bible. As John Quincy Adams reminded his son:

[G]reat is my veneration for the Bible, and so strong my belief, that when duly read and meditated on, it is of all books in the world, that which contributes more to make men good, wise, and happy.... I call it the source of all human virtue and happiness.... [Man] must hold his felicity and virtue on the condition of obedience to [God’s] will (1850, pp. 9,27-28, emp. added).

This pursuit is, in fact, the entirety of human existence (Ecclesiastes 12:13).

It should come as no surprise that the Founders of American civilization understood this principle and wove it into their official utterances. After all, since they were setting up a government and launching a new nation, they were extremely sensitive to the factors that would ensure the success of such a venture. Take, for example, two proclamations formulated by the Continental Congress to the entire country about a year before the close of the Revolutionary War, the first issued on March 19, 1782:

The goodness of the Supreme Being to all his rational creatures, demands their acknowledgments of gratitude and love; his absolute government of this world dictates, that it is the interest of every nation and people ardently to supplicate his favor and implore his protection.... The United States in Congress assembled, therefore, taking into consideration our present situation, our multiplied transgressions of the holy laws of our God, and his past acts of kindness and goodness towards us, which we ought to record with the liveliest gratitude, think it their indispensable duty to call upon the several states, to set apart the last Thursday in April next, as a day of fasting, humiliation and prayer, that our joint supplications may then ascend to the throne of the Ruler of the Universe, beseeching Him to diffuse a spirit of universal reformation among all ranks and degrees of our citizens; and make us a holy, that so we may be an happy people (Journals of..., 22:137-138, emp. added).

How did the architects of American civilization believe Americans could achieve happiness? By being holy—by being submissive to “the holy laws of our God.” They believed that human happiness is integrally linked to the spiritual condition of the people—and that spirituality is tied to God and His Word.

Seven months later, on October 11, 1782, Congress issued another proclamation:

It being the indispensable duty of all nations, not only to offer up their supplications to Almighty God, the giver of all good, for his gracious assistance in a time of distress, but also in a solemn and public manner to give him praise for his goodness in general, and especially for great and signal interpositions of his Providence in their behalf; therefore, the United States in Congress assembled...do hereby recommend it to the inhabitants of these states in general, to observe, and request the several states to interpose their authority in appointing and commanding the observation of Thursday, the twenty-eighth day of November next, as a day of solemn thanksgiving to God for all his mercies: and they do further recommend to all ranks, to testify their gratitude to God for his goodness, by a cheerful obedience to his laws, and by promoting, each in his station, and by his influence, the practice of true and undefiled religion, which is the great foundation of public prosperity and national happiness (Journals of..., 23:647, emp. added).

The practice of “true and undefiled religion,” i.e., Christianity, is “the great foundation of...national happiness”? But we are being told that the happiness of a people depends on a strong economy, health care for every citizen, a monthly check from the government, ready access to abortion, same-sex marriage, and amnesty for illegal aliens. Not according to the Founders! The entire nation’s happiness depends on a majority of its citizens pursuing the Christian religion.

If these pronouncements were not enough, consider one made by the Father of our country, George Washington. After serving as the Commander-in-Chief of the American revolutionary forces, and then serving two terms as the nation’s first president, George Washington delivered his “Farewell Address” to the nation before retiring to private life. In that speech, he pinpointed the critical foundation for the survival of the nation:

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity (1796, emp. added).

The Christian religion, and the standard of morality it provides, are the “great pillars of human happiness” that are intricately woven into the fabric of human civilization to enable “private and public felicity [happiness—DM]”? Indeed. The wild pursuit of happiness ongoing in America via entertainment, lust, and immorality is doomed to complete failure. The outcome will inevitably end in national tragedy. As Moses informed the Israelites concerning their occupation of the Promised Land:

Set your hearts on all the words which I testify among you today, which you shall command your children to be careful to observe—all the words of this law. For it is not a futile thing for you, because it is your life, and by this word you shall prolong your days in the land (Deuteronomy 32:46-47, emp. added).

ABOUT THE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT

The Founders were very specific in articulating the purpose and role of government. While there were certainly disagreements among them regarding the extent to which a centralized government should involve itself in public affairs, most of them would be aghast at the extent to which the federal government now intrudes into the lives of citizens. They would also be astounded to see the extent to which religion, specifically Christianity, has been banned from the political sphere. They would be shocked at the prevailing mentality that insists that the nation as a whole, and its elected representatives in particular, should refrain from expressing publicly any connection to Christianity. It is, in fact, difficult for the average American today to conceive that the Founders would have given their official sanction to Christianity and encouraged its practice for the good of the nation. Yet, that is precisely what the Founders believed en masse. They believed that government had a prominent role to play in the promotion of Christianity throughout the nation and the world.

On March 16, 1776, four months before declaring independence, the Continental Congress issued a proclamation to the entire nation. Observe their implied understanding of the role of government by the specific appeals they made, particularly regarding the critical importance of Christianity:

In times of impending calamity and distress; when the liberties of America are imminently endangered by the secret machinations and open assaults of an insidious and vindictive administration, it becomes the indispensable duty of these hitherto free and happy colonies, with true penitence of heart, and the most reverent devotion,publickly to acknowledge the over ruling providence of God; to confess and deplore our offences against him; and to supplicate his interposition for averting the threatened danger, and prospering our strenuous efforts in the cause of freedom, virtue, and posterity.

The Congress, therefore...do earnestly recommend, that Friday, the Seventeenth day of May next, be observed by the said colonies as a day of humiliation, fasting, and prayer;...That he would be graciously pleased to bless all his people in these colonies with health and plenty, and grant that a spirit of incorruptible patriotism, and of pure undefiled religion, may universally prevail;.... And it is recommended to Christians of all denominations, to assemble for public worship, and abstain from servile labour on the said day (Journals of the..., 4:208-209, emp. added).

To the Founders, patriotism and Christianity go hand in hand. The fate of the new nation was dependent on the extent to which Americans devoted themselves to practicing the precepts of Christianity. The Congress included as part of their official governmental role to promote the universal spread of Christianity.

On November 1, 1777, they directed additional remarks to the country:

It is therefore recommended to the legislative or executive Powers of these UNITED STATES to set apart THURSDAY, the eighteenth Day of December next, for SOLEMN THANKSGIVING and PRAISE:...That it may please him...to prosper the Means of Religion, for the promotion and enlargement of that Kingdom, which consisteth “in Righteousness, Peace and Joy in the Holy Ghost” (Journals of..., 9:854-851, emp. added).

The quoted phrase at the end of their proclamation is from Romans 14:17 and refers to the Christian religion.

On March 20, 1779, their proclamation to the nation included the following:

RESOLVED, THAT it be recommended to the several States to appoint the First Thursday in May next to be a Day of Fasting, Humiliation, and Prayer to Almighty God...that he will diffuse useful knowledge, extend the influence of true religion, and give us that peace of mind, which the world cannot give (Journals of..., 13:343-344, emp. added).

Again, the Continental Congress conceptualized their role to include urging citizens to request God to spread Christianity. The peace of mind which “the world cannot give” is an allusion to the words of Jesus and Paul taken from John 14:27 and Philippians 4:7.

On March 19, 1782, they proclaimed:

The United States in Congress assembled, therefore...think it their indispensable duty to call upon the several states,...beseeching Him...that He would incline the hearts of all men to peace, and fill them with universal charity and benevolence, and that the religion of our Divine Redeemer, with all its benign influences, may cover the earth as the waters cover the seas (Journals of..., 22:137-138, emp. added).

On October 11, 1782, their proclamation included these words:

[T]he United States in Congress assembled...recommend to all ranks, to testify their gratitude to God for his goodness, by a cheerful obedience to his laws, and bypromoting, each in his station, and by his influence, the practice of true and undefiled religion (Journals of..., 23:647, emp. added).

“True and undefiled religion,” a paraphrase of James 1:27, is yet another reference to the religion of Christ. Who, today, considers such admonitions to fall within the purview of elected officials?

One of the Fathers of American Jurisprudence, Joseph Story, summarized the attitude of the Founders and most Americans in his monumental work Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. His lucid, cogent clarification of the interpenetration of religion and government is desperately needed today:

How far any government has a right to interfere in matters touching religion, has been a subject much discussed by writers upon public and political law.... [T]he right of a society or government to interfere in matters of religion will hardly be contested by any persons, who believe that piety, religion, and morality are intimately connected with the well being of the state, and indispensable to the administration of civil justice. The promulgation of the great doctrines of religion, the being, and attributes, and providence of one Almighty God; the responsibility to him for all our actions, founded upon moral freedom and accountability; a future state of rewards and punishments; the cultivation of all the personal, social, and benevolent virtues; these never can be a matter of indifference in any well ordered community. It is, indeed, difficult to conceive, how any civilized society can well exist without them. And at all events, it is impossible for those, who believe in the truth of Christianity, as a divine revelation, to doubt, that it is the especial duty of government to foster, and encourage it among all the citizens and subjects. This is a point wholly distinct from that of the right of private judgment in matters of religion, and of the freedom of public worship according to the dictates of one’s conscience. The real difficulty lies in ascertaining the limits, to which government may rightfully go in fostering and encouraging religion.... Now,there will probably be found few persons in this, or any other Christian country, who would deliberately contend, that it was unreasonable, or unjust to foster and encourage the Christian religion generally, as a matter of sound policy, as well as of revealed truth. In fact, every American colony, from its foundation down to the revolution...did openly, by the whole course of its laws and institutions, support and sustain, in some form, the Christian religion; and almost invariably gave a peculiar sanction to some of its fundamental doctrines. And this has continued to be the case in some of the states down to the present period, without the slightest suspicion, that it was against the principles of public law, or republican liberty. Indeed, in a republic, there would seem to be a peculiar propriety in viewing the Christian religion, as the great, basis, on which it must rest for its support and permanence, if it be, what it has ever been deemed by its truest friends to be, the religion of liberty.... Probably at the time of the adoption of the constitution, and of the amendment to it, now under consideration, the general, if not the universal, sentiment in America was, that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the state, so far as was not incompatible with the private rights of conscience, and the freedom of religious worship. An attempt to level all religions, and to make it a matter of state policy to hold all in utter indifference, would have created universal disapprobation, if not universal indignation (1833, Vol. III, Ch. 44, Paragraphs 1865-1868, emp. added).

American history is replete with the application of this principle. American government was founded on Christian principles—and its perpetuation depends on the continuation of those principles by a substantial portion of its citizenry. In complete harmony with the spirit of the Founders, consider the words of a 20^th century President, Calvin Coolidge, who expressed the prevailing sentiments of the nation on Wednesday, March 4, 1925, when he commenced his presidency with the following words:

Here stands our country, an example of tranquility at home, a patron of tranquility abroad. Here stands its Government, aware of its might but obedient to its conscience. Here it will continue to stand, seeking peace and prosperity,...attentive to the intuitive counsel of womanhood, encouraging education, desiring the advancement of religion, supporting the cause of justice and honor among the nations. America seeks no earthly empire built on blood and force. No ambition, no temptation, lures her to thought of foreign dominions. The legions which she sends forth are armed, not with the sword, but with the cross. The higher state to which she seeks the allegiance of all mankind is not of human, but of divine origin. She cherishes no purpose save to merit the favor of Almighty God (1925, emp. added).

Whatever varied functions and activities the government is to involve itself in, according to the original design of the Republic, according to the Founders themselves, America actually has onlyone purpose: to merit the favor of God. When the government and Americans at large lose sight of that singular, all-encompassing principle, the foundations of the Republic have been significantly compromised. God help us to return to our moorings.

ABOUT THE PURPOSE OF SCHOOLS

American public schools, especially the university, have become counterproductive to the continuation of the American way of life. In his book Freefall of the American University, Jim Nelson Black describes the decline of the American educational process:

Grade inflation, the proliferation of junk courses, and the loss of a core curriculum,...historical revisionism, moral relativism, and an emphasis on the flawed ideologies of race and gender continue virtually unchallenged.... The crisis in higher education is not only the risk of indoctrination through the vagaries of pluralism, tolerance, and diversity but also the fact that “value-neutral” socialization and radical sexual indoctrination are robbing many young Americans of their future.... The university campus is no longer a center of higher learning but a socialist conspiracy that feeds on itself, fueled by fear-mongering on the Left and apathy on the Right (2004, pp. ix,xi,xiv).

Marlin Maddoux also provides an eye-opening assessment of American schools:

While America wasn’t looking, Reading, Writing, and Arithmetic was largely replaced by Moral Relativism and Secular Humanism in our kindergartens, grade schools, and universities.... In fact, the public school system has done more to undermine the basic principles of freedom, free enterprise, patriotism, and Christianity than any other single institution (2006, inside flap, p. 76).

What an unbelievable turnaround from the intention of those who established the Republic. Their viewpoint regarding public education was articulated many times during the course of the founding of America. One such declaration came in a proclamation to the nation by the Continental Congress on November 1, 1777:

It is therefore recommended to the legislative or executive Powers of these UNITED STATES to set apart THURSDAY, the eighteenth Day of December next, for SOLEMN THANKSGIVING and PRAISE: That at one Time and with one Voice, the good People may express the grateful Feelings of their Hearts, and consecrate themselves to the Service of their Divine Benefactor;...That it may please him...[t]o take Schools and Seminaries of Education, so necessary for cultivating the Principles of true Liberty, Virtue and Piety, under his nurturing Hand (Journals of..., 9:854-851, emp. added).

Another affirmation of the role of schools was made by the Congress in a national proclamation issued on March 19, 1782:

The United States in Congress assembled, therefore, taking into consideration our present situation, our multiplied transgressions of the holy laws of our God, and his past acts of kindness and goodness towards us, which we ought to record with the liveliest gratitude, think it their indispensable duty to call upon the several states, to set apart the last Thursday in April next, as a day of fasting, humiliation and prayer, that our joint supplications may then ascend to the throne of the Ruler of the Universe, beseeching Him to diffuse a spirit of universal reformation among all ranks and degrees of our citizens;...that He would grant success to all engaged in lawful trade and commerce, and take under his guardianship all schools and seminaries of learning, andmake them nurseries of virtue and piety (Journals of..., 22:137-138, emp. added).

Declaration signer and physician, Dr. Benjamin Rush, explained the mode of education to be adopted “so as to secure to the state all the advantages to be derived from the proper instruction of youth”:

[T]he only foundation for a useful education in a republic is to be laid in Religion. Without this there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments.... [T]he religion I mean to recommend in this place, is that of the New Testament.... [A]ll its doctrines and precepts are calculated to promote the happiness of society, and the safety and well being of civil government. A Christian cannot fail of being a republican...for every precept of the Gospel inculcates those degrees of humility, self-denial, and brotherly kindness, which are directly opposed to the pride of monarchy and the pageantry of a court. A Christian cannot fail of being useful to the republic, for his religion teacheth him, that no man “liveth to himself” (1804, pp. 8-9).

I lament, that we waste so much time and money in punishing crimes, and take so little pains to prevent them. We profess to be republicans, and yet we neglect the only means of establishing and perpetuating our republican forms of government, that is,the universal education of our youth in the principles of Christianity, by means of the Bible; for this divine Book, above all others, favours that equality among mankind, that respect for just laws, and all those sober and frugal virtues, which constitute the soul of republicanism (1804, pp. 112-113, emp. added).

It is evident that whatever benefits might be received from education, according to the Founders of American civilization, the central role of schools of learning in a Republic is to instill within children Christian virtue and piety, which undergird the principles of true freedom. No wonder the school textbooks that characterized education from the very beginning of the country right up to WW2 were saturated with allusions to God, the Bible, and Christianity (e.g., the New England Primer; McGuffey’s Readers; the “Blue Back Speller”; cf. Miller, 2008, pp. 53-68). The only hope for the survival of the Republic is for education to return to the teaching of Christian principles. In the words of Jesus Christ: “Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls” (Matthew 11:29, emp. added).

[to be continued]

REFERENCES

Adams, John Quincy (1850), Letters of John Quincy Adams to His Son on the Bible and Its Teachings (Auburn, MA: James Alden).

Black, Jim Nelson (2004), Freefall of the American University (Nashville, TN: WND Books).

Coolidge, Calvin (1925), “Inaugural Address,” The Avalon Project at Yale Law School, http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/presiden/inaug/coolidge.htm.

Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789 (1904-1937), ed. Worthington C. Ford, et al. (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office), Library of Congress, http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/amlaw/lwjc.html.

Maddoux, Marlin (2006), Public Education Against America (New Kensington, PA: Whitaker House).

Miller, Dave (2008), The Silencing of God: The Dismantling of America’s Christian Heritage(Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press).

Rush, Benjamin (1804), Essays, Literary, Moral, and Philosophical (Philadelphia, PA: Thomas and William Bradford), http://books.google.com/books?id=xtUKAAAAIAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=benjamin+rush&cd=2#v=onepage&q&f=false.

“Statue of Liberty National Monument” (no date), http://www.libertystatepark.com/emma.htm.

Story, Joseph (1833), Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (Boston, MA: Hilliard, Gray, & Co.)

Washington, George (1790), “First Annual Message, January 8, 1790,” http://www.founding.com/founders_library/pageID.2222/default.asp.

Washington, George (1796), “Farewell Address,” The Avalon Project at Yale Law School, http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/washing.htm.

Webster, Noah (1838), History of the United States (Cincinnati, OH: Burgess & Crane), http://books.google.com/books?id=zRFLAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=history+of+the+united+states+noah+webster&cd=1#v=onepage&q&f=false.