"THE BOOK OF ACTS" Peter Defends His Actions (11:1-18) INTRODUCTION 1. The news of Cornelius' conversion quickly spread... a. Those in Jerusalem heard of the Gentiles' reception of the Word - Ac 11:1 b. But Peter's actions were soon criticized by some Jewish Christians - Ac 11:2-3 2. As noted previously, there are two accounts of Cornelius' conversion... a. There is Luke's description, given as it occurred - Ac 10:1-48 b. There is Peter's description, when he is called to defend his actions - Ac 11:1-18 [In this lesson, we will focus our attention to Peter's description of the events as they occurred...] I. PETER'S ACCOUNT OF THIS CONVERSION A. PETER HAS A VISION... 1. While praying in Joppa, in a trance, Peter has a vision - Ac 11:4-9 a. A sheet descends from heaven, containing all sorts of creatures b. A voice tells him "Rise, Peter; kill and eat" c. Peter objects, for he has never eaten anything common or unclean d. The voice tells him, "What God has cleansed you must not call common." 2. The vision is repeated three times - Ac 11:10 B. THE SPIRIT INSTRUCTS PETER... 1. Three men from Caesarea arrive as Peter contemplates the vision - Ac 11:11 2. The Spirit tells Peter to go with them, doubting nothing - Ac 11:12 3. Six brethren from Joppa went with him (now with Peter in Jerusalem) - Ac 11:12 4. They entered the man's house - Ac 11:12 C. CORNELIUS EXPLAINS WHY HE SENT FOR PETER... 1. He had seen an angel standing in his house - Ac 11:13 2. Who told him to send to Joppa and ask for Peter - Ac 11:13 3. "who will tell you words by which you and all your household will be saved" - Ac 11:14 D. THE SPIRIT FALLS ON THE GENTILES... 1. "As I began to speak...as upon us at the beginning." - Ac 11:15; cf. Ac 2:1-4 2. Reminded Peter of the Lord's promise to the apostles concerning being baptized with the Holy Spirit - Ac 11:16; cf. Ac 1:5 3. Convinced him that if God gave Gentiles the same gift as given to the apostles when they believed on the Lord, who was he to withstand God? - Ac 11:17 E. THE IMPACT ON THOSE AT JERUSALEM... 1. They were silenced, then glorified God - Ac 11:18 2. Saying, "Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life." - ibid. [Peter's account silenced the objectors, and led to the Gentiles considered acceptable recipients of the gospel of Christ. His account also adds a few details of which we should take careful note...] II. OBSERVATIONS REGARDING THIS CONVERSION A. THE ORDER IN WHICH EVENTS OCCURRED... 1. Peter explained the events "in order from the beginning" - Ac 11:4; cf. Lk 1:3 2. If there is any question as to the sequence of events, Peter's account takes precedence B. THE MOMENT WHEN CORNELIUS WAS SAVED... 1. Remember that Cornelius was told to send for Peter, who would tell him... a. "what you must do." - Ac 10:6 b. "words by which you...shall be saved." - Ac 11:14 2. From this, and from what we see in other conversions... a. Cornelius was not saved until he heard the "words" (i.e., after the sermon) b. Cornelius was not saved until he obeyed what he was told to do 3. What were the words he and his household were told to do? a. They were told to believe, as implied in Ac 10:43 b. They were told to be baptized, as commanded in Ac 10:48 4. Thus Cornelius and his household were not saved until they believed and were baptized! - cf. Mk 16:16; Ac 8:12,13 C. THE PURPOSE OF THE SPIRIT FALLING ON THEM... 1. Some presume that the purpose was to save Cornelius and his family a. That therefore they were saved before obeying the command to be baptized b. But the Spirit came upon them as Peter "began to speak", before they could hear words by which they could be saved! - Ac 11:14-15 2. The purpose of the Spirit can be gleaned from the following... a. The effect it had on the Jewish brethren who were present, and Peter's response - Ac 10:45-47 b. The reaction of those in Jerusalem when Peter explained what happened - Ac 11:17-18 c. Peter's explanation at the council held later in Jerusalem - Ac 15:7-11 3. The purpose of the Spirit falling on Gentiles was therefore to show Jewish brethren... a. That God was no respecter of persons - Ac 10:34-35 b. That God was willing to grant Gentiles opportunity to repent and have life - Ac 11:18 c. That Gentiles could be saved in the same way as Jews... - Ac 15:9,11; cf. Ac 2:38; 10:48 CONCLUSION 1. Peter's defense of his actions silenced those who accused him of impropriety... a. For socializing with Gentiles b. For sharing the gospel with them 2. But the issue of Gentiles in the church was not over... a. It will come up again later in Acts - cf. Ac 15:1-2 b. It was a major issue addressed in several epistles (Romans, Galatians, etc.) But we who are Gentiles today can be thankful that God in His grace has made it clear: He is no respecter of persons, and that all can be saved by the grace extended through His Son Jesus Christ...!
Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2012
May 31, 2014
From Mark Copeland... Peter Defends His Actions (Acts 11:1-18)
From Kyle Butt, M.A. ... Telling People What to Think
Telling People What to Think
by | Kyle Butt, M.A. |
Dan Barker, the ex-preacher who deconverted to atheism, is most famous for his book Losing Faith in Faith: From Preacher to Atheist. In this treatise against God and religion, Barker discussed a book that he wrote for children that contained these words: “No one can tell you what to think. Not your teachers. Not your parents. Not your minister, priest, or rabbi. Not your friends or relatives. Not this book. You are the boss of your own mind. If you have used your own mind to find out what is true, then you should be proud! Your thoughts are free!” (1992, p. 47). Noble sentiments indeed!
But, as one digs deeper into Barker’s book, it quickly becomes clear that those sentiments do not find a willing practitioner in the person of Dan Barker. In his chapter on prayer, Barker wrote:
Don’t ask Christians if they think prayer is effective. They will think up some kind of answer that makes sense to them only. Don’t ask them, tell them: “You know that prayer doesn’t work. You know you are fooling yourself with magical conceit.” No matter how they reply, they will know in their heart of hearts that you are right (1992, p. 109, emp. in orig.).From Barker’s statement about what should be “told” to those who believe in prayer, it is easy to see that he does not necessarily believe his previous statement that “no one can tell you what to think,” or that a person should use his own mind “to find out what is true.” In fact, what Barker is really trying to say is that a person should only think for himself if such thinking will lead him to believe that there is no God, or that prayer does not work, or that all religion is nonsense. If thinking for himself leads a person to believe in the efficacy of prayer or the existence of God, then that person should be “told” what to believe.
In truth, the Bible demands that each person weigh the evidence for himself or herself. First Thessalonians 5:21 states: “Test all things; hold fast what is good.” Among those things that should be tested are the writings of skeptics like Barker. When blatant inconsistencies pepper their pages like so many spots on a Dalmatian, then those writings should not be “held fast.”
REFERENCE
Barker, Dan (1992), Losing Faith In Faith—From Preacher to Atheist (Madison, WI: Freedom from Religion Foundation).From Jim McGuiggan... ELECT OR ELITE
ELECT OR ELITE
One of the dangers in choosing a special group to act on
behalf of a larger group is that misunderstanding and envy may arise.
In choosing a special priesthood out of a nation that was, at least,
priestly in calling, God was willing to risk the misunderstanding and
envy of some of the people. There are numerous texts that show that envy
and bitterness were indeed a problem connected with this.
The book of Numbers has this as one of its recurring themes. Chapters 12, 16 and 17 mention the problem. In twelve Aaron and Miriam are chafed by Moses' authority and in sixteen Korah and his companions are maddened by the peculiar claims of Aaron and his family.
In
electing a special priesthood God was not creating an elite group but
an elect group; not a 'lording it over' group but a servant group; not a
'self-chosen' class but 'an obedient to a call' class of men.
It's clear from a reading of the biblical text that God didn't make these priests
paragons of virtue, he didn't work a moral miracle and make them into
sinless beings. The behavior of Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, Eli's sons,
Hopni and Phineas this and the frequent denunciation of the priesthood
by the prophets leave us in no doubt that priests had their character
flaws. Nevertheless, though flawed like all others, these God was pleased to choose as leaders of his people.
That
being the case, there was no ground for priests to act as though butter
wouldn't melt in their mouths. They were chosen not because they were
uniformly of wonderful character. In this they were like the nation
which God reminded again and again. "I didn't choose you because of your
righteousness." Israel had no more reason to look down on their
neighbors than the priests had to scorn their fellow-worshipers, the
Israelite nation.
But while the priests had to understand and act
on that truth, Israel needed to understand that the choice of Aaron and
his family was God's choice and as such, when they opposed
Aaron, they were opposing God. And when God called Aaron and his family,
Israel needed to understand that for Aaron to say no would have been to
rebel against Yahweh.
Let me say it again, both priests and the
nation needed to understand that the special priesthood was on Israel's
behalf. They were called to serve Israel. Envy against the
priestly representatives is out of order for many reasons but it misses
the mark because it is leveled against those whose very existence was to
serve them.
And the priests needed to understand that they were called to serve not to enslave. Authority in the form of representation is for others rather than over
others. And this remains true even though the priests are given the
authority to settle certain things, they are given decision-making
power. The people in many things must submit to the instructions of the
priests and are required to regard them as God's representatives to the
nation as well as the nation's representatives to God.
This truth
of honorable representation is embedded in the very nature of humanity
as God created it. He created humans for community and so he created
them as interdependent. Deuteronomy 1:9-18; Exodus 18:13-26 and Deuteronomy 16:18-20 speak of the need of honorable representation. Moses isn't
able to care for all the needs and troubles of the nation so men who
knew and loved God and the nation are chosen to broker peace and justice
and contentment between disputing or mutually ignorant parties who
differ.Once more, the choice of these judges was for the benefit of the
nation and to defy them was to defy God's arrangement by which the
entire Community was to be blessed—it was to defy God in the form of
anarchy [Deuteronomy 18:7-13]. God-given authority is not an enemy of justice or peace or community!
Imagine
thousands who wished to offer sacrifice to God at the Tabernacle. Paint
the picture as realistically as you are able. Bearing in mind that the
manner of sacrificing was appointed by God, how could they have managed
it without priestly representation? Imagine a sinful nation with all its
inner conflicts and picture it left to the physically strong or the
wickedly influential or those who can gain overwhelming power because
they had the money to bribe support among the people [see the case of
Absalom]. Honorable and wise representation beats anarchy and national
disorder.
Social justice is viewed as profoundly serious in the
OT—it's one of the fundamental requirements of Israel's existence as
God's nation. When leaders [priests, prophets, judges or kings] become
corrupt and in this way corrupt the entire nation God moves to deal with
the situation. The authority structures he put in place are not the
problem—corruption in all its forms is the problem!
Up to this
point I've been dealing mainly with the individuals rights of the nation
and how God's choice of authoritative representation is designed to
cater to those God-given "rights". But that is only one perspective of
the larger picture. Israel's business was to image God and his ways
before the nations of the world! The self-disclosure of God in the story
of the covenant with Abraham and his children through Jacob, the Exodus
and all that is part of that self-disclosure was to shape Israel's
Story and national behavior. As a People they were to be a living
embodiment of that continuing self-revelation of God. That imaging of
God was for the benefit of the entire human family—a Community was
called to bring light to the nations and salvation to the ends of the
earth. This of necessity involved the pursuit of social justice within
the community [note God's "hearing" Israel's groaning under Egyptian
bondage—Exodus 2:23-25].
It's clear that some structures
came and went with God's appointment and/or approval because they were
no longer needed or no longer served their purpose. SEE.
It's also true that some laws were introduced that God did not approve
or promote—he tolerated and regulated them [polygamy, concubinage,
divorce "for any cause" are examples (see Matthew 19:3-9]. But
the truths that underlay all these structures, truths that these
structures served, truths about God as creatior and Redeemer—these truths abide despite change.
Democracy
and egalitarianism can foster dangerous tendencies. In a world like
ours, if we pursue equality "in every conceivable area and way" too
vigorously we can destroy something more fundamental that gaining our
"rights" in every conceivable way. We can destroy "community" without
which "rights" can't exist or if they can they could not be enjoyed.
©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.
May 30, 2014
From Gary... What you can't see
This sunrise (but wait, perhaps it is a sunset???) is awesome,
but that is NOT what I want to occupy your attention. Notice the
location; a very desolate, inhospitable place indeed. And yet, life is
there and undoubtedly flourishing. The things we experience in Life
are quite often surprising, and if this is true, then what about those
things beyond our perception? Here is but one example...
Habakkuk, Chapter 1
Hab 1:5 "Look among the nations! Observe! Be astonished! Wonder!
Because I am doing something in your days-- You would not believe if you
were told.
God does indeed work in mysterious ways and often-times in ways beyond
our understanding. So, the next time you see something beautiful like
this picture, think on these things and realize that you and I are NOT
the center of the world- God is!!!!
From Mark Copeland... The Conversion Of Cornelius (Acts 10:1-48)
"THE BOOK OF ACTS" The Conversion Of Cornelius (10:1-48) INTRODUCTION 1. Up to this point, the gospel had been somewhat limited in its outreach... a. It had spread throughout Judea, Galilee and Samaria - Ac 9:31 b. Other than Samaritans (who were half Jewish), it had gone only to the Jews 2. With "The Conversion Of Cornelius" the first Gentile is saved... a. A conversion noted not only because he was the first Gentile b. But also for the miraculous events that accompanied his conversion 3. As with Saul of Tarsus, we have more than just one account of his conversion... a. There is Luke's description, given as it occurred - Ac 10:1-48 b. There is Peter's description, when he is called to defend his actions - Ac 11:1-18 [In this lesson, we will focus our attention to Luke's description of the events as they occurred...] I. LUKE'S ACCOUNT OF THIS CONVERSION A. CORNELIUS HAS A VISION... 1. Cornelius, a centurion, is a very religious man - Ac 10:1-2 2. The angel appears to him - Ac 10:3-6 a. With an announcement that his prayers and alms have been noticed by God b. With instructions to send for Peter: "He will tell you what you must do." 3. Cornelius then sends two servants and a devout soldier to Peter - Ac 10:7-8 B. PETER HAS A VISION... 1. The next day, praying, hungry, Peter has a vision - Ac 10:9-15 a. A sheet descends from heaven, containing all sorts of creatures b. A voice tells Peter to "kill and eat" c. Peter objects, for he has never eaten anything common or unclean d. The voice tells him, "What God has cleansed you must not call common." 2. The vision is repeated three times - Ac 10:16 C. THE SPIRIT INSTRUCTS PETER... 1. The men from Cornelius arrive as Peter contemplates the vision - Ac 10:17-18 2. The Spirit tells Peter to go, "doubting nothing, for I have sent them" - Ac 10:19-20 3. Peter receives the men and takes brethren with him as they go to Cornelius - Ac 10:21-23 D. PETER ARRIVES AT CORNELIUS' HOUSE... 1. Cornelius has gathered his family and close friends - Ac 10:24 2. Peter deflects an attempt by Cornelius to worship him - Ac 10:25-26 3. Peter explains his presence is a violation of Jewish custom, but now understands "I should not call any man common or unclean" - Ac 10:27-28 4. To explain why Peter was called, Cornelius recounts the appearance and instructions of the angel - Ac 10:29-32 5. Cornelius and household were ready "to hear all things commanded you by God" - Ac 10:33 E. PETER'S SERMON TO THE HOUSEHOLD OF CORNELIUS... 1. He begins with a full perception that God shows no partiality - Ac 10:34-35 a. A perception started with the vision of the sheet and unclean beasts b. A perception continued with the Spirit's instruction to go with the messengers 2. Peter then proceeds to proclaim Jesus Christ - Ac 10:36-43 a. As Lord who was anointed with the Holy Spirit and power - Ac 10:36-38 b. Who was killed, but then raised from the dead and seen by eyewitnesses who knew Him well - Ac 10:39-41 c. Who has commanded the apostles to proclaim Him as ordained by God to be the Judge of the living and dead - Ac 10:42 d. Through Whom remission of sins is offered to those who believe - Ac 10:43 F. THE SPIRIT FALLS ON ALL WHO HEARD... 1. While Peter was still speaking - Ac 10:44 2. Astonishing those of the circumcision - Ac 10:45-46 a. Jewish Christians who had come with Peter b. Because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on Gentiles also c. Empowering them to speak with tongues and praise God G. PETER COMMANDS THEM TO BE BAPTIZED... 1. How could anyone forbid water to those who had received the Spirit just as the apostles did? - Ac 10:47; cf. Ac 2:1-4 2. So Cornelius and his household were commanded to be baptized in the name of the Lord - Ac 10:48; cf. Ac 2:38 [The events surrounding this conversion are certainly remarkable. They evidently were intended to convey important truths. As we endeavor to glean what those truths were, here are a couple of...] II. OBSERVATIONS REGARDING THIS CONVERSION A. RELIGIOUS PEOPLE NEED SAVING... 1. Many people believe that if you are religious, you will be saved a. That if you go to church, do good, etc., you have a hope of heaven b. That you will have earned the right to enter heaven 2. Yet, though Cornelius was a man who... a. Was a devout man and feared God with his whole family - Ac 10:2 b. Gave alms generously and prayed to God always - ibid. c. Still needed to be told "words by which you and all your household will be saved" - cf. Ac 11:14 3. Clearly, being religious alone isn't what saves you a. Most examples of conversion in Acts involved religious people b. It is the blood of Christ that saves! - cf. Ep 1:7 B. THE GOSPEL IS FOR ALL NATIONS... 1. Peter perceived that God is no respecter of persons - Ac 10:34-35 2. Indeed, God desires that ALL men be saved - cf. Jn 3:16; 1Ti 2:3-6; 2Pe 3:9 3. Therefore He has not predestined some to be saved and others to be lost! C. THE GOSPEL CULMINATES IN BAPTISM... 1. It begins with the need to believe in Jesus - Ac 10:42-43 2. It ends with immersion in water - Ac 10:47-48; cf. Ac 2:38; 8:35-38; 22:16 3. "Baptism is here [in Ac 2:38, MAC] a part of the proclamation of Christ. In an Apostolic sermon it comes as its logical conclusion. An effort ought to be made to restore this note in our [Baptist, MAC] preaching." - George Beasley-Murray, Baptism In The New Testament, p. 393 CONCLUSION 1. There are other observations to be made... a. Which we will consider in the next chapter b. As Peter is called to account for his actions 2. While miraculous events surrounded "The Conversion Of Cornelius", his salvation was no different from what we have already seen... a. He had to hear the gospel of Jesus Christ - e.g., Ac 8:35 b. He was taught to believe and commanded to be baptized - e.g., Ac 2:36-38; 8:36-38 3. As Peter would later say, it is "through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ" that both Gentiles and Jews are saved - cf. Ac 15:11 a. We are saved by grace, not works - cf. Ep 2:5,8; Tit 3:4-5 b. For it is not enough to be religious... 1) Who could be more religious than Cornelius? 2) Or the 3000 at Pentecost, the Ethiopian eunuch, Saul of Tarsus, Lydia of Thyatira? 4. The grace of God which saves does require a response, however... a. A response of faith - Ac 10:43 b. Faith in Jesus that comes by hearing the gospel - Ac 10:42 c. Faith which expresses itself in obedience - cf. He 5:9 1) Particularly, repentance and baptism - cf. Ac 2:38; 3:19; 10:48 2) Not as works of merit, but as acts of faith by which one receives God's grace Those of us who are not descended from Israel can rejoice in what God revealed with "The Conversion of Cornelius". As properly concluded later by Jewish brethren in Jerusalem: "God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life." - Ac 11:18 Have you taken advantage of this wonderful gift, by responding to the gospel of Jesus Christ in faith, repentance, and baptism...?
Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2012
From Bert Thompson, Ph.D. ... The Anthropic Principle
The Anthropic Principle
by | Bert Thompson, Ph.D. |
INTRODUCTION
For example, Stephen Hawking, in his book, A Brief History of Time, observed: “The whole history of science has been the gradual realization that events do not happen in an arbitrary manner, but that they reflect a certain underlying order, which may or may not be divinely inspired” (1988, p. 122). But, after acknowledging the “underlying order” in nature, Dr. Hawking quickly dispensed with it, and throughout his book extolled the rich virtues of evolution as “the way it happened.” Paul Davies, the eminent British physicist, has written a book in which the beauty, structure, and extreme complexity of both the Universe and the Earth are examined in depth. Yet Dr. Davies says we exist because of “apparent numerical accidents” and “many more apparent accidents of fortune” (1982, p. 111). Not surprisingly, then, do we discover that he titled his book The Accidental Universe. In that volume, we find this amazing statement:
Many of the rather basic features of the Universe are determined in essence by the values that are assigned to the fundamental constants of nature,...and these features would be drastically altered if the constants assumed even moderately different values. It is clear that for nature to produce a cosmos even remotely resembling our own, many apparently unconnected branches of physics have to cooperate to a remarkable degree (1982, p. 111).John Gribbin, the renowned evolutionary cosmologist, has voiced his belief that “our form of life depends, in delicate and subtle ways, on several apparent ‘coincidences’ in the fundamental laws of nature which make the Universe tick. Without those coincidences, we would not be here to puzzle over the problem of their existence.... What does this mean? One possibility is that the Universe we know is a highly improbable accident, ‘just one of those things’ ” (1981, pp. 307,309). In the May, 1983 issue of Science Digest, Dr. Gribbin penned an article that discussed in clear terms the design which is apparent in every aspect of the creation. The article concentrated specifically on the Earth, noting how it had exactly the right distance from the Sun, exactly the right distance from the Moon, exactly the right tilt, exactly the right mass, exactly the right atmosphere, and so on. Ironically, the article was titled “Earth’s Lucky Break” (p. 36).
THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE
It is, then, astonishing indeed to learn of the naming and development of one of the newest principle in science—the Anthropic Principle. As its name (from the Greek anthropos, meaning “man”) implies, this principle hinges on man’s part in the existence of the Universe. To quote Gribbin: “The ‘Anthropic Principle’ says that our Universe seems to be tailor-made for us because people like us can only evolve in this kind of Universe” (1981, p. 309).
Did Dr. Gribbin say “tailor-made”? Yes, and Robert Jastrow, founder and former director of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies at NASA, explained why:
Thus, according to the physicist and the astronomer, it appears that the Universe was constructed within very narrow limits, in such a way that man could dwell in it. This result is called the anthropic principle. It is the most theistic result ever to come out of science, in my view.... I really do not know what to make of this result—the Anthropic Principle (1984, pp. 21,22, emp. in orig.).Dr. Jastrow hardly is alone in his consternation over these latest findings in science. The obvious implications of a “tailor-made” Universe have not escaped many of his colleagues. Freeman Dyson of the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton commented: “As we look out into the Universe and identify the many accidents of physics and astronomy that have worked together to our benefit, it almost seems as if the Universe must in some sense have known we were coming” (1971, p. 50). Sir Fred Hoyle of Great Britain has stronger feelings on the matter. In speaking of the precise requirements needed in nature to synthesize the proper carbon and hydrogen atoms necessary to life, Dr. Hoyle observed:
If you wanted to produce carbon and oxygen in roughly equal quantities by stellar nucleosynthesis, these are the two levels you would have to fix, and your fixing would have to be just about where these levels are actually found to be.... A commonsense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature (1954, p. 121).Paul Davies also is troubled over these events.
A clear inspection shows that the Earth is endowed with still more amazing “conveniences.” Without the layer of ozone above the atmosphere, deadly ultraviolet radiation from the sun would destroy us, and in the absence of a magnetic field, cosmic subatomic particles would deluge the Earth’s surface. Considering that the Universe is full of violence and cataclysms, our own little corner of the cosmos enjoys a benign tranquility. To those who believe that God made the world for mankind, it must seem that all these conditions are in no way a random or haphazard arrangement of circumstances, but reflect a carefully prepared environment in which humans can live comfortably, a pre-ordained ecosystem into which life slots naturally and inevitably—a tailor-made world (1980, p. 143).What is the origin of this novel and controversial position? While the words “anthropic principle” are not new, their use in this respect is. They were first applied to these matters by Brandon Carter in 1974 in a lecture to the International Astronomical Union. Dr. Carter, then at Cambridge and now at the Paris Observatory, published his comments in an article titled “Large Number Coincidences and the Anthropic Principle in Cosmology.” In his lecture, Dr. Carter observed: “What we can expect to observe must be restricted by the conditions necessary for our presence as observers” (1974, p. 291). In other words, the conditions that we observe in the Universe must include those necessary to give rise to intelligent life, or else we would not be here to observe them.
Stephen Hawking paraphrased Carter’s point like this: “We see the Universe the way it is because we exist.” He elaborates as follows: “The idea is that there are certain conditions which are necessary for the development of intelligent life: out of all conceivable universes, only in those in which these conditions occur will there be beings to observe the Universe. Thus our existence requires the Universe to have certain properties...” (1974, pp. 285-286). In his lecture, and subsequent scientific articles, Dr. Carter set forth what he called the Weak Anthropic Principle, as opposed to what he called the Strong Anthropic Principle. Here is the difference.
The Weak Anthropic Principle
Carter said that there was a “biological selection effect” in operation. These were his words, but the idea for them, and thus the idea for the Weak Anthropic Principle (which is based on the concept of “biological selection”) actually were presented thirteen years earlier in a paper in Nature by Robert Dicke (1961, 192:440). Here, using Dicke’s illustration, is how the Weak Anthropic Principle would work. Dicke (as an evolutionist) was attempting to answer the question, “Why do we observe the Universe to be approximately 10 billion years old?” One response, of course (from a strictly evolutionary viewpoint) might be that it is merely a coincidence that we see a Universe that is 10 billion years old. Tony Rothman, writing in the popular science magazine Discover, explained how this problem was solved.But Dicke reasoned that the Universe must be at least old enough to have generated elements as heavy as carbon because “it is well known that carbon is required to make physicists”—at least physicists as we know them.
Carbon, as it happens, was not created in the Big Bang. Rather it was first synthesized in the earliest stars, and then scattered through space when the stars exploded in supernova, a process that continues today. The cooking time for carbon depends on the mass of a star, but averages a billion years or so. Thus, said Dicke, it would be impossible to observe a Universe younger than the shortest-lived stars, because the very elements we’re composed of wouldn’t exist. On the other hand, if the Universe were much older than it is, most stars would already have collapsed into white dwarfs, neutron stars, or black holes, rendering our type of life impossible for many reasons. Dicke concluded that the fact that we see the Universe to be about ten billion years old is no accident but a necessary result of the biological selection effect. The Universe’s observed age, he said, “is limited by the criteria for the existence of physicists” (1987, 8[5]:91-92).This is an example of the weak anthropic principle, and is a good illustration of what Carter meant when he said, “What we can expect to observe must be restricted by the conditions necessary for our presence as observers.” The observed values of physical quantities are restricted by the requirement that they be compatible with the development of Homo sapiens.
Stephen Hawking, in his book, A Brief History of Time, provided a simple explanation of what this means:
The weak anthropic principle states that in a Universe that is large or infinite in space and/or time, the conditions necessary for the development of intelligent life will be met only in certain regions that are limited in space and time. The intelligent beings in these regions should therefore not be surprised if they observe that their locality in the Universe satisfies the conditions that are necessary for their existence. It is a bit like a rich person living in a wealthy neighborhood not seeing any poverty (1988, p. 124).And, said Dr. Hawking, “Few people would quarrel with the validity or utility of the weak anthropic principle” (1988, p. 124).
Of course, creationists would agree, but for different reasons. We accept the fact that the Universe is intricately designed so that it supports life as we know it. We accept the fact that if this were not the case, we wouldn’t be here to observe it (for how, pray tell, could we exist in a Universe that would not support our existence?). We accept Dr. Dyson’s conclusion that the Universe looks as if it “knew we were coming.” We accept Dr. Hoyle’s assessment that a superintellect has “monkeyed with” the physics, chemistry, and biology of the Universe, and that “there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature.” We even would gladly accept Dr. Davies’ suggestion that our Universe appears to be “tailor-made.” And we concur with all these statements because: (a) The scientific evidence is in agreement with them; and (b) We know the Tailor!
The Strong Anthropic Principle
What, then, is the Strong Anthropic Principle? Carter stated it as follows: “The Universe must be such as to admit the creation of observers within it at some stage.” Most scientists interpret this strong version of the Anthropic Principle to mean that the Universe must be nearly as we know it, or life could not exist. Conversely, if life did not exist, neither, then, would the Universe.But some scientists, while passively content to accept the Weak Anthropic Principle, are visibly upset over the implications of the strong version. There is good reason for their discomfiture. Paul Davies explained why.
Now clearly the strong anthropic principle is founded on a quite different philosophical basis from the weak principle. Indeed, it represents a radical departure from the conventional concept of scientific explanation. In essence, it claims that the Universe is tailor-made for habitation, and that both the laws of physics and the initial conditions obligingly arrange themselves in such a way that living organisms are subsequently assured of existence. In this respect the strong anthropic principle is akin to the traditional religious explanation of the world: that God made the world for mankind to inhabit (1982, pp. 120-121).Astronomers, physicists, astrophysicists, biologists, and many others of an evolutionary bent have seen the serious implications of the Strong Anthropic Principle. Dr. Hawking thus observed:
The laws of science, as we know them at present, contain many fundamental numbers, like the size of the electric charge of the electron and the ratio of the masses of the proton and the electron. We cannot, at the moment at least, predict the values of these numbers from theory—we have to find them by observation. It may be that one day we shall discover a complete unified theory that predicts them all, but it is also possible that some or all of them vary from Universe to Universe or within a single Universe. The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life. For example if the electric charge of the electron had been only slightly different, stars either would have been unable to burn hydrogen and helium, or else they would not have exploded. Of course, there might be other forms of intelligent life, not dreamed of even by writers of science fiction, that did not require the light of a star like the Sun or the heavier chemical elements that are made in stars and are flung back into space when the stars explode. Nevertheless, it seems clear that there are relatively few ranges of values for the numbers that would allow the development of any form of intelligent life. Most sets of values would give rise to Universes that, although they might be very beautiful, would contain no one able to wonder at that beauty. One can take this either as evidence of a divine purpose in Creation and the choice of the laws of science or as support for the strong anthropic principle (1988, p. 125, emp. added).Dr. Davies similarly stated: “If we believe in only one Universe then the remarkable uniform arrangement of cosmic matter, and the consequent coolness of space, are almost miraculous, a conclusion which strongly resembles the traditional religious concept of a world which was purpose-built by God for subsequent habitation by mankind” (1980, p. 162). Dr. Rothman was quite blunt in his remarks about where acceptance of the Strong Anthropic Principle will lead.
It’s not a big step from the SAP to the Argument from Design. You know the Argument from Design: it says that the Universe was made very precisely, and were it ever so slightly different, man wouldn’t be here. Therefore, Someone must have made it.
Even as I write these words my pen balks, because as a twentieth century physicist I know that the last step is a leap of faith, not a logical conclusion.
When confronted with the order and beauty of the Universe and the strange coincidences of nature, it’s very tempting to take the leap of faith from science into religion. I am sure many physicists want to. I only wish they would admit it (1987, p. 99).Realizing the obvious implications of the scientific evidence supporting both the weak and strong versions of the Anthropic Principle, many evolutionary scientists have rebelled at even the mere mention of it in the halls of science. Yet, in their more candid moments, even these evolutionists are hard pressed to avoid the clear implications of their findings. Listen to Dr. Hawking’s admission on this very topic.
In the hot big bang model described above, there was not enough time in the early Universe for heat to have flowed from one region to another. This means that the initial state of the Universe would have to have had exactly the same temperature everywhere in order to account for the fact that the microwave background has the same temperature in every direction we look. The initial rate of expansion also would have had to be chosen very precisely for the rate of expansion still to be so close to the critical rate needed to avoid recollapse. This means that the initial state of the Universe must have been very carefully chosen indeed if the hot big bang model was correct right back to the beginning of time. It would be very difficult to explain why the Universe should have begun in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us (1988, pp. 126-127, emp. added).Little wonder, then, that Dr. Jastrow referred to the Anthropic Principle as “the most theistic result ever to come out of science.” And, it hardly is surprising to hear Dr. Davies state: “Many people of a religious persuasion will no doubt find support from these ideas for the belief that the Creator did not aim the cosmic pin at random, but did so with finely computed precision, with the express purpose of selecting a Universe that would be suitable for habitation” (1982, p. 123). That is exactly what the creationists have said all along! It is comforting to see that certain evolutionary scientists finally understand why.
REFERENCES
Davies, Paul (1980), Other Worlds (New York: Simon & Schuster).
Davies, Paul (1982), The Accidental Universe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
Dyson, Freeman (1971), Scientific American, September.
Gribbin, John (1981), Genesis: The Origins of Man and the Universe (New York: Delacorte Press).
Gribbin, John (1983), “Earth’s Lucky Break,” Science Digest, 91[5]:36,37,40,102, May.
Hawking, Stephen (1974), “The Anisotropy of the Universe at Large Times,” Confrontation of Cosmological Theories with Observational Data, ed. M.S. Longair (Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel).
Hawking, Stephen (1988), A Brief History of Time (New York: Bantam).
Hoyle, Fred (1954), in Astrophysics Journal Supplement, Vol. I; see also Hoyle, Fred (1964), Galaxies, Nuclei and Quasars (New York: Harper & Row).
Jastrow, Robert (1984), “The Astronomer and God,” The Intellectuals Speak Out About God,” ed. Abraham Varghese (New York: Regnery Gateway).
Rothman, Tony (1987), “A ‘What You See Is What You Beget’ Theory,” Discover, 8[5]:90-99, May.
[AUTHOR’S NOTE: Probably the most definitive book yet written on the subject of the Anthropic Principle is the 706-page volume, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, co-authored by John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler (1986, Oxford University Press). Those interested in additional information on this topic may wish to examine this book for further insight.]
Originally published in Reason & Revelation, December 1990, 10[12]:49-52. Copyright © 1990 Apologetics Press, Inc. All rights reserved.
From Jim McGuiggan... CHRISTIAN ADVANTAGE [7]
CHRISTIAN ADVANTAGE [7]
These “Christian Advantage” pieces are supposed to address the question of Christian empowerment. Let me see if I can make myself clear about what I’m working with.
The NT expressly says that the Spirit of God that indwells Christians strengthens them [see]. This is not to be denied.
The
pieces I’m working with are not aimed at denying that truth or robbing
Christians of the power given to them by the indwelling Spirit.
Presuming that my present understanding of the Scriptures in this matter
is correct [limited as it is] I just want to contribute to the
Christian’s empowerment. I’d like to remove some worry that gnaws at the
hearts of many sensitive Christians, give them peace and free them to
rejoice in some of what the Holy Spirit does in, through and for them.
I want to help them not to be at all disappointed in God or overly
disappointed in themselves. I’d like them to shift their gaze to God’s
purpose in them rather than a constant checking of their spiritual/moral
pulse and temperature.
My own experience [if I can judge by a
huge number of people I’ve known down the years and the many letters I
get] is the experience of a vast number of Christians. And what is that?
For
more than one reason their experience of the biblical promises of
empowerment fall short of their personal moral experience—the promises
are not fulfilled and there’s always some fine print that explains why.
“I
can do all things through Christ who strengthens me,” Paul says in
Philippians 4:13 and Christians who find themselves defeated by Sin and
sins—not just now and then but year after year after—wonder why they
haven’t morally matured and experienced that blessing despite the truth
of Philippians 4.
One of the worst fruits of this sense
of defeat is this—they begin to doubt the truth of Philippians 4:13.
Another is this— they begin to wonder if they truly belong to the Lord
Jesus because, if they did, they would surely have the strength to
become the devoted and morally mature Christians they long to be and
aren’t. But I would suppose that the most commonly experienced bad fruit
is that they think there is some fine print they aren’t seeing.
“Fine
print” like, “One day but not in this lifetime you will be able to do
‘all things’ through Christ who strengthens you.” [It’s true that the
passage doesn’t read like that but maybe that’s the unstated “fine
print”.]
“Fine print” like, “Of course the strength of the Lord
is offered to you but you have to have the strength to grasp and use
it.” [That sounds plausible because the Lord doesn’t turns us into
puppets, we must accept what he offers. Still, we wonder what good the
offer of the Lord’s strength is if we have to have our own strength to get it. What if we don’t have the strength to get his strength?]
The
trouble with these “explanations” as to why we don’t have Christ’s
strength to do all these lovely things [like defeat recurring sins, grow
in the lovely ways we long for and such]—the trouble with these
“explanations” is that they confirm that we lack the strength the
passage speaks of.
Two things make matters entirely worse. There are smug and self-righteous Christians who insist we should have
already become as morally mature and lovely as they are. [Smugness is a
fourth bad fruit that develops in this area.] And if the self-righteous
ones are subtle about their “accusation” and confident about their own
success the very sensitive tend to believe them—“We should be successful like them.”
The second thing is the realization that countless people who have made no commitment to Jesus as Lord live moral lives at least as morally
upright and fine as these disappointed-in-themselves Christians.
Setting aside the question: where do these non-Christians get the power?
the disappointed follower of Christ wonders why his/her moral life with Christ doesn’t compare favorably with the moral life of those without Christ.
All
this and more leads to other bad fruit. “Spiritual depression” and
dismay deepen in the defeated and so does impatience in the mature and
untroubled believers who can’t understand why no marked growth is seen
in the “weaklings”. From pulpits, lecterns and bulletins verses are
directed at the weaklings. Passages from the book of Hebrews, for
example, which were written to people in danger of apostasy, are used to
rebuke people who have no desire whatever to leave the Lord. In truth
they hunger for the opposite—they want to please him more, they want his
strength to help them to please him.
The concerns of the weak
aren’t dealt with. Passages such as Philippians 4 or Ephesians 3 or
James 4:7 are quoted as though they were self-explanatory and as though
the speakers knew by experience what these passages were talking about.
If the preachers, teachers and writers have already “arrived” at great
moral power everyone else should have or soon should. If others are not devoted, not truly involved or not morally mature it can only be that they don’t want to be. After all, there’s Philippians 4:13 and Ephesians 1:13, 19 and 3:16.
When
believers who cannot and do not want to turn from the Lord Jesus come
to believe that the promises are in some definite way beyond their grasp
they’re tempted to settle for less. The leaders who see this end up
offering the banal and the status quo as teaching/preaching because they
have tried constant rebuke or cajoling and it didn't work. It's either
that or turf the "weaklings" out.
That’s what these pieces are about.
For clarity’s sake let me just spell out some points and if you choose to pursue me on them DO write me, please.
1.
God is at work and always has been at work in the hearts and lives of
humans down the centuries. It doesn’t matter who or what they are or
where they live. God’s truth though it has been suppressed by the human
family as a family has had lovely effects on countless souls though they are all sinners.
2.
The Spirit of God did not begin his moral work on Christians only when
they became Christians. He was already at work in them long before they
came to Christ. Cornelius is a perfect illustration of that truth.
3.
The same is true about talents and giftedness [in Christians and
non-Christians]—they are gifts from God that develop variously in us in
light of our nature and nurture. The idea that the Spirit’s gifts are
newly created as if by magic when we become Christians is simply not
true. People don’t become Christians and all of a sudden have
administrative ability, medical brilliance, patience and other various
virtues.
4. The same is true about the baggage we bring with us
when we become Christians. Unhealthy fears, ingrained evil habits, ugly
attitudes, cruel tendencies and such, these don’t appear by magic—nature
and nurture, played on by the “world-spirit” result in our sinfulness
and our choosing to sin. These are aspects of who we are when we come to
the Lord Jesus for salvation, rescue and the privilege of being his
companions [see].
5.
The level and nature of our “bentness” differs depending on so many
things that there’s no getting to the bottom of an individual profile.
We have much in common as humans, of course, but no one’s life runs on
the same tracks and while some of the more obvious things about us are
predictable [concerning our evil or our moral decency] it’s almost
humorous to listen to the gurus who know everything about everyone.
6. The same thing that happens to me and to you is not
the same thing that happens to you and me. Part of “the event” is the
person to whom it happens. Your father dies and my father dies—same
thing! No, not the same thing! I am fragile and you are strong. My marriage falls apart and your marriage falls apart—same thing. No,
not the same thing! I have a strong support network and you have no
one. The “burden” is never the same because the ones bearing the burden
are not the same.
7. What is true about sadness and tragedy is
true about blessing and joy. Last year I was capable of "seeing" well;
this year [due to trouble] I lack that good vision. It’s true about
moral strength and weakness. Children raised in lovely homes with
warmth, healthy authority, acceptance and such, have an advantage over
children raised in homes of abuse, hyper-criticism and apathy. This is
true whether the warm authoritative parents are Christians, Muslims,
Jews or Hindus or agnostics.
8. People aren’t shaped by magic, not even divine magic. You want magic? Go to the movies! People are shaped by the Spirit of God but not by his working magic.
People are also shaped by an invisible [but real] power of evil that
the Scriptures would call satanic or demonic, but not by demonic magic.
9.
All this, and more, means that when people come to the Lord Jesus they
are people who enter the new creation with different weaknesses or
strengths, out of different environments, with different personality
traits and different support networks [or none], with different
susceptibilities to different forms of sin and different sensitivity to
different virtues. All these strengths and weaknesses they bring and they lay them, as part of their very selves, at Jesus’ feet.
10. Since God won’t work magic
we shouldn’t expect everyone to be healed in the same way, at the same
speed and to the same degree. We shouldn’t even expect to know how to
judge such matters. We don’t know enough nor are we pure enough to make
such judgments. We certainly know what the obvious evils are but we
don’t know the strength of the currents against which people are
swimming. You aren’t me! I’m not you! Judge the deed with care and truth but don’t overestimate what you know and don’t overestimate your ability to know!
11.
So what’s the difference between the Christian and the non-Christian if
the non-Christian is as morally upright as the Christian? So what
advantage does the Christian have if God’s Spirit is at work at the
moral level in the lives of both non-Christians and Christians?
12.
Paul severely critiques the Jewish nation in Romans 2:17-29 and uses
circumcision and the Torah to rebuke the nation. This leads to the
question [3:1], “What advantage then has the Jew?” Some scholars think
the answer should have been, “None at all!” But Paul says [3:2], “Much
in everyway! Chiefly because to them were committed the oracles of God.”
13. But how was that an “advantage” if the nation as a nation
proved itself faithless to God? The scriptures, the promises were
“entrusted” to the Jews but it’s patently obvious from Israel’s history as a nation that the scriptures and promises didn’t transform them into paragons of moral uprightness or faithfulness.
14.
The modern scholars I’ve read [I’ve read quite a few] tell us that
Israel didn’t have the Holy Spirit so they couldn’t be faithful. Their
story is that Christians now have the Holy Spirit so that they can do
what Israel could not do because, as they say, Israel didn’t have the
Holy Spirit to empower them to keep the law. I think this is nonsense
but it’s a discussion for another time [see this and also note the list of faithful heroes in Hebrews 11 whose faith Christians are called to emulate].
15.
Passing that by for now, Paul says that the Jews had all kinds of
advantage and in particular they had been entrusted with God’s
scriptures. Yes, but again, how was that an advantage if i they didn’t
morally transform them into devoted followers of God? Well, since Paul
said they were advantaged and since it's true that the advantages didn’t morally transform them we need to take a close look at advantage.
Since it is true that Christians have been entrusted with God’s
scriptures and they haven’t been transformed into moral exemplars and
are no better or worse than the decent and upright non-Christian people
what advantage do they have, what is the power the Spirit gives?
16.
What power do Christians have that non-Christians don’t have? Since OT
Israel did have the Holy Spirit’s help what is it that NT believers have
that they didn’t? What does the Holy Spirit do for Christians that he
doesn’t do for non-Christians?
God enabling I’d like to take that up in part 8.
If you choose, please pursue me on what I’ve said already.
©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.
Many thanks to brother Ed Healy, for allowing me to post from his website, theabidingword.com.
May 29, 2014
From Gary... TRUTH, OPINIONS AND DISCERNMENT
I like Jesus. Quiet, then forceful, didactic yet understanding,
determined but submissive. All things in their proper place, in just the
right amount at the correct time. Many volumes have been written about
his teachings, character, mission and legacy and I could never be even
be remotely equal to the smallest of these efforts. BUT, I know truth
when I hear it and recognize HIM for who he really is. That is not true
for everyone...
John, Chapter 18
Joh 18:33 Therefore Pilate entered again into the Praetorium, and
summoned Jesus and said to Him, "Are You the King of the Jews?"
Joh 18:34 Jesus answered, "Are you saying this on your own initiative, or did others tell you about Me?"
Joh 18:35 Pilate answered, "I am not a Jew, am I? Your own nation and the chief priests delivered You to me; what have You done?"
Joh 18:36 Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm."
Joh 18:37 Therefore Pilate said to Him, "So You are a king?" Jesus answered, "You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice."
Joh 18:38 Pilate *said to Him, "What is truth?" And when he had said this, he went out again to the Jews and *said to them, "I find no guilt in Him.
Joh 18:39 "But you have a custom that I release someone for you at the Passover; do you wish then that I release for you the King of the Jews?"
Joh 18:40 So they cried out again, saying, "Not this Man, but Barabbas." Now Barabbas was a robber.
Joh 18:34 Jesus answered, "Are you saying this on your own initiative, or did others tell you about Me?"
Joh 18:35 Pilate answered, "I am not a Jew, am I? Your own nation and the chief priests delivered You to me; what have You done?"
Joh 18:36 Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm."
Joh 18:37 Therefore Pilate said to Him, "So You are a king?" Jesus answered, "You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice."
Joh 18:38 Pilate *said to Him, "What is truth?" And when he had said this, he went out again to the Jews and *said to them, "I find no guilt in Him.
Joh 18:39 "But you have a custom that I release someone for you at the Passover; do you wish then that I release for you the King of the Jews?"
Joh 18:40 So they cried out again, saying, "Not this Man, but Barabbas." Now Barabbas was a robber.
I am quite sure that if we really put forth an effort, we could find
something to argue about when it comes to Christianity. People have
been arguing about everything concerning Jesus since he came into this
world and will continue until he comes again. The thing is - let Jesus
speak for himself; and when he speaks, listen!!! Why? Well, he is the
one who sacrificed himself for sinners like me. Eternal life rests in
HIM. As you read through the New Testament this year (and hopefully
this is something you are doing- or will begin to do) underline his
teachings and double underline those things his followers should do.
Then, do them!!! Again, Why? Because HE is a KING and do you really
want to argue with the KING of all KINGS?
From Gary... Bible Reading May 29
Bible Reading
May 29
The World English Bible
May
29
Judges
15, 16
Jdg
15:1 But it happened after a while, in the time of wheat harvest,
that Samson visited his wife with a kid; and he said, I will go in to
my wife into the chamber. But her father wouldn't allow him to go in.
Jdg
15:2 Her father said, I most certainly thought that you had utterly
hated her; therefore I gave her to your companion: isn't her younger
sister more beautiful than she? Please take her, instead.
Jdg
15:3 Samson said to them, This time shall I be blameless in regard
of the Philistines, when I do them a mischief.
Jdg
15:4 Samson went and caught three hundred foxes, and took
firebrands, and turned tail to tail, and put a firebrand in the midst
between every two tails.
Jdg
15:5 When he had set the brands on fire, he let them go into the
standing grain of the Philistines, and burnt up both the shocks and
the standing grain, and also the olive groves.
Jdg
15:6 Then the Philistines said, Who has done this? They said,
Samson, the son-in-law of the Timnite, because he has taken his wife,
and given her to his companion. The Philistines came up, and burnt
her and her father with fire.
Jdg
15:7 Samson said to them, If you behave like this, surely I will be
avenged of you, and after that I will cease.
Jdg
15:8 He struck them hip and thigh with a great slaughter: and he
went down and lived in the cleft of the rock of Etam.
Jdg
15:9 Then the Philistines went up, and encamped in Judah, and spread
themselves in Lehi.
Jdg
15:10 The men of Judah said, Why have you come up against us? They
said, To bind Samson are we come up, to do to him as he has done to
us.
Jdg
15:11 Then three thousand men of Judah went down to the cleft of the
rock of Etam, and said to Samson, "Don't you know that the
Philistines are rulers over us? What then is this that you have done
to us?" He said to them, As they did to me, so have I done to
them.
Jdg
15:12 They said to him, We have come down to bind you, that we may
deliver you into the hand of the Philistines. Samson said to them,
Swear to me that you will not fall on me yourselves.
Jdg
15:13 They spoke to him, saying, No; but we will bind you fast, and
deliver you into their hand: but surely we will not kill you. They
bound him with two new ropes, and brought him up from the rock.
Jdg
15:14 When he came to Lehi, the Philistines shouted as they met him:
and the Spirit of Yahweh came mightily on him, and the ropes that
were on his arms became as flax that was burnt with fire, and his
bands dropped from off his hands.
Jdg
15:15 He found a fresh jawbone of a donkey, and put forth his hand,
and took it, and struck a thousand men therewith.
Jdg
15:16 Samson said, With the jawbone of a donkey, heaps on heaps,
With the jawbone of a donkey I have struck a thousand men.
Jdg
15:17 It happened, when he had made an end of speaking, that he cast
away the jawbone out of his hand; and that place was called Ramath
Lehi.
Jdg
15:18 He was very thirsty, and called on Yahweh, and said, You have
given this great deliverance by the hand of your servant; and now
shall I die for thirst, and fall into the hand of the uncircumcised.
Jdg
15:19 But God split the hollow place that is in Lehi, and water came
out of it. When he had drunk, his spirit came again, and he revived:
therefore its name was called En Hakkore, which is in Lehi, to this
day.
Jdg
15:20 He judged Israel in the days of the Philistines twenty years.
Jdg
16:1 Samson went to Gaza, and saw there a prostitute, and went in to
her.
Jdg
16:2 It was told
the Gazites, saying, Samson is come here. They surrounded him, and
laid wait for him all night in the gate of the city, and were quiet
all the night, saying, Let be
until morning light, then we will kill him.
Jdg
16:3 Samson lay until midnight, and arose at midnight, and laid hold
of the doors of the gate of the city, and the two posts, and plucked
them up, bar and all, and put them on his shoulders, and carried them
up to the top of the mountain that is before Hebron.
Jdg
16:4 It came to pass afterward, that he loved a woman in the valley
of Sorek, whose name was Delilah.
Jdg
16:5 The lords of the Philistines came up to her, and said to her,
Entice him, and see in which his great strength lies, and by what
means we may prevail against him, that we may bind him to afflict
him: and we will each give you of us eleven hundred pieces
of silver.
Jdg
16:6 Delilah said to Samson, Tell me, Please, in which your great
strength lies, and with which you might be bound to afflict you.
Jdg
16:7 Samson said to her, If they bind me with seven green cords that
were never dried, then shall I become weak, and be as another man.
Jdg
16:8 Then the lords of the Philistines brought up to her seven green
cords which had not been dried, and she bound him with them.
Jdg
16:9 Now she had an ambush waiting in the inner chamber. She said to
him, "The Philistines are on you, Samson!" He broke the
cords, as a string of tow is broken when it touches the fire. So his
strength was not known.
Jdg
16:10 Delilah said to Samson, Behold, you have mocked me, and told
me lies: now tell me, Please, with which you might be bound.
Jdg
16:11 He said to her, If they only bind me with new ropes with which
no work has been done, then shall I become weak, and be as another
man.
Jdg
16:12 So Delilah took new ropes, and bound him therewith, and said
to him, The Philistines are on you, Samson. The ambush was waiting in
the inner chamber. He broke them off his arms like a thread.
Jdg
16:13 Delilah said to Samson, Until now, you have mocked me and told
me lies. Tell me with what you might be bound. He said to her, If you
weave the seven locks of my head with the web.
Jdg
16:14 She fastened it with the pin, and said to him, The Philistines
are on you, Samson. He awakened out of his sleep, and plucked away
the pin of the beam, and the web.
Jdg
16:15 She said to him, How can you say, I love you, when your heart
is not with me? you have mocked me these three times, and have not
told me in which your great strength lies.
Jdg
16:16 It happened, when she pressed him daily with her words, and
urged him, that his soul was troubled to death.
Jdg
16:17 He told her all his heart, and said to her, "No razor has
ever come on my head; for I have been a Nazirite to God from my
mother's womb. If I am shaved, then my strength will go from me, and
I will become weak, and be like any other man."
Jdg
16:18 When Delilah saw that he had told her all his heart, she sent
and called for the lords of the Philistines, saying, Come up this
once, for he has told me all his heart. Then the lords of the
Philistines came up to her, and brought the money in their hand.
Jdg
16:19 She made him sleep on her knees; and she called for a man, and
shaved off the seven locks of his head; and she began to afflict him,
and his strength went from him.
Jdg
16:20 She said, The Philistines are on you, Samson. He awoke out of
his sleep, and said, I will go out as at other times, and shake
myself free. But he didn't know that Yahweh had departed from him.
Jdg
16:21 The Philistines laid hold on him, and put out his eyes; and
they brought him down to Gaza, and bound him with fetters of brass;
and he ground at the mill in the prison.
Jdg
16:22 However the hair of his head began to grow again after he was
shaved.
Jdg
16:23 The lords of the Philistines gathered them together to offer a
great sacrifice to Dagon their god, and to rejoice; for they said,
Our god has delivered Samson our enemy into our hand.
Jdg
16:24 When the people saw him, they praised their god; for they
said, Our god has delivered into our hand our enemy, and the
destroyer of our country, who has slain many of us.
Jdg
16:25 It happened, when their hearts were merry, that they said,
Call for Samson, that he may make us sport. They called for Samson
out of the prison; and he made sport before them. They set him
between the pillars:
Jdg
16:26 and Samson said to the boy who held him by the hand, Allow me
that I may feel the pillars whereupon the house rests, that I may
lean on them.
Jdg
16:27 Now the house was full of men and women; and all the lords of
the Philistines were there; and there were on the roof about three
thousand men and women, who saw while Samson made sport.
Jdg
16:28 Samson called to Yahweh, and said, Lord Yahweh, remember me,
Please, and strengthen me, Please, only this once, God, that I may be
at once avenged of the Philistines for my two eyes.
Jdg
16:29 Samson took hold of the two middle pillars on which the house
rested, and leaned on them, the one with his right hand, and the
other with his left.
Jdg
16:30 Samson said, Let me die with the Philistines. He bowed himself
with all his might; and the house fell on the lords, and on all the
people who were therein. So the dead that he killed at his death were
more than those who he killed in his life.
Jdg
16:31 Then his brothers and all the house of his father came down,
and took him, and brought him up, and buried him between Zorah and
Eshtaol in the burial site of Manoah his father. He judged Israel
twenty years.
May
28, 29
John
7
Joh
7:1 After these things, Jesus was walking in Galilee, for he
wouldn't walk in Judea, because the Jews sought to kill him.
Joh
7:2 Now the feast of the Jews, the Feast of Booths, was at hand.
Joh
7:3 His brothers therefore said to him, "Depart from here, and
go into Judea, that your disciples also may see your works which you
do.
Joh
7:4 For no one does anything in secret, and himself seeks to be
known openly. If you do these things, reveal yourself to the world."
Joh
7:5 For even his brothers didn't believe in him.
Joh
7:6 Jesus therefore said to them, "My time has not yet come,
but your time is always ready.
Joh
7:7 The world can't hate you, but it hates me, because I testify
about it, that its works are evil.
Joh
7:8 You go up to the feast. I am not yet going up to this feast,
because my time is not yet fulfilled."
Joh
7:9 Having said these things to them, he stayed in Galilee.
Joh
7:10 But when his brothers had gone up to the feast, then he also
went up, not publicly, but as it were in secret.
Joh
7:11 The Jews therefore sought him at the feast, and said, "Where
is he?"
Joh
7:12 There was much murmuring among the multitudes concerning him.
Some said, "He is a good man." Others said, "Not so,
but he leads the multitude astray."
Joh
7:13 Yet no one spoke openly of him for fear of the Jews.
Joh
7:14 But when it was now the midst of the feast, Jesus went up into
the temple and taught.
Joh
7:15 The Jews therefore marveled, saying, "How does this man
know letters, having never been educated?"
Joh
7:16 Jesus therefore answered them, "My teaching is not mine,
but his who sent me.
Joh
7:17 If anyone desires to do his will, he will know about the
teaching, whether it is from God, or if I am speaking from myself.
Joh
7:18 He who speaks from himself seeks his own glory, but he who
seeks the glory of him who sent him is true, and no unrighteousness
is in him.
Joh
7:19 Didn't Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keeps the
law? Why do you seek to kill me?"
Joh
7:20 The multitude answered, "You have a demon! Who seeks to
kill you?"
Joh
7:21 Jesus answered them, "I did one work, and you all marvel
because of it.
Joh
7:22 Moses has given you circumcision (not that it is of Moses, but
of the fathers), and on the Sabbath you circumcise a boy.
Joh
7:23 If a boy receives circumcision on the Sabbath, that the law of
Moses may not be broken, are you angry with me, because I made a man
completely healthy on the Sabbath?
Joh
7:24 Don't judge according to appearance, but judge righteous
judgment."
Joh
7:25 Therefore some of them of Jerusalem said, "Isn't this he
whom they seek to kill?
Joh
7:26 Behold, he speaks openly, and they say nothing to him. Can it
be that the rulers indeed know that this is truly the Christ?
Joh
7:27 However we know where this man comes from, but when the Christ
comes, no one will know where he comes from."
Joh
7:28 Jesus therefore cried out in the temple, teaching and saying,
"You both know me, and know where I am from. I have not come of
myself, but he who sent me is true, whom you don't know.
Joh
7:29 I know him, because I am from him, and he sent me."
Joh
7:30 They sought therefore to take him; but no one laid a hand on
him, because his hour had not yet come.
Joh
7:31 But of the multitude, many believed in him. They said, "When
the Christ comes, he won't do more signs than those which this man
has done, will he?"
Joh
7:32 The Pharisees heard the multitude murmuring these things
concerning him, and the chief priests and the Pharisees sent officers
to arrest him.
Joh
7:33 Then Jesus said, "I will be with you a little while
longer, then I go to him who sent me.
Joh
7:34 You will seek me, and won't find me; and where I am, you can't
come."
Joh
7:35 The Jews therefore said among themselves, "Where will this
man go that we won't find him? Will he go to the Dispersion among the
Greeks, and teach the Greeks?
Joh
7:36 What is this word that he said, 'You will seek me, and won't
find me; and where I am, you can't come'? "
Joh
7:37 Now on the last and greatest day of the feast, Jesus stood and
cried out, "If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me and drink!
Joh
7:38 He who believes in me, as the Scripture has said, from within
him will flow rivers of living water."
Joh
7:39 But he said this about the Spirit, which those believing in him
were to receive. For the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus
wasn't yet glorified.
Joh
7:40 Many of the multitude therefore, when they heard these words,
said, "This is truly the prophet."
Joh
7:41 Others said, "This is the Christ." But some said,
"What, does the Christ come out of Galilee?
Joh
7:42 Hasn't the Scripture said that the Christ comes of the seed of
David, and from Bethlehem, the village where David was?"
Joh
7:43 So there arose a division in the multitude because of him.
Joh
7:44 Some of them would have arrested him, but no one laid hands on
him.
Joh
7:45 The officers therefore came to the chief priests and Pharisees,
and they said to them, "Why didn't you bring him?"
Joh
7:46 The officers answered, "No man ever spoke like this man!"
Joh
7:47 The Pharisees therefore answered them, "You aren't also
led astray, are you?
Joh
7:48 Have any of the rulers believed in him, or of the Pharisees?
Joh
7:49 But this multitude that doesn't know the law is accursed."
Joh
7:50 Nicodemus (he who came to him by night, being one of them) said
to them,
Joh
7:51 "Does our law judge a man, unless it first hears from him
personally and knows what he does?"
Joh
7:52 They answered him, "Are you also from Galilee? Search, and
see that no prophet has arisen out of Galilee."
Joh
7:53 Everyone went to his own house,
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)