Just How Useful is Evolution Anyway? by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=1762

Just How Useful is Evolution Anyway?

by	Kyle Butt, M.Div.

The late Theodosius Dobzhansky remains well-known for a particularly catchy article title that he penned in the 1970s. In fact, the title of his article contains an idea that is accepted and maintained by a large portion of the modern scientific community—“Nothing in Biology Makes Any Sense Except in the Light of Evolution” (1973). This idea—that without a “proper” understanding of evolution one cannot understand, much less contribute to, biological studies—has taken a firm hold of many professors and science teaching professionals. Professor Michael Dini of the Department of Biological Sciences at Texas Tech University stated: “The central, unifying principle of biology is the theory of evolution, which includes both micro- and macro-evolution, and which extends to ALL species. Someone who ignores the most important theory in biology cannot expect to properly practice in a field that is now so heavily based on biology” (n.d., emp. in orig.).
Is it true that a proper understanding of evolution is a prerequisite for any person who wishes “to properly practice” in some field of biology? The eminent evolutionist and outspoken Darwinist, Richard Dawkins, offered some interesting thoughts along these lines. In a discussion of one particular group of scientists, Dawkins stated:

They have decided, perhaps rightly, that they can do taxonomy better if they forget about evolution, and especially if they never use the concept of the ancestor in thinking about taxonomy. In the same way, a student of, say, nerve cells, might decide that he is not aided by thinking about evolution. The nerve specialist agrees that his nerve cells are the products of evolution, but he does not need to use this fact in his research. He needs to know a lot about physics and chemistry, but he believes that Darwinism is irrelevant to his day-to-day research on nerve impulses. That is a defensible position.... A physicist certainly doesn’t need Darwinism in order to do physics (1996, p. 283, emp. added).

Therefore, according to Dawkins, it is very possible for a person to engage in productive cell research (an extremely important branch of biology) without using evolutionary ideas in any of his procedures. In fact, evolution could defensibly be “irrelevant to his day-to-day research.” Please notice, however, that Dawkins makes sure to include the idea that the researcher believes that the cells are the “products of evolution.”
But let’s take Dawkins’ thoughts a step further. Could it be that the researcher would not have to believe that the cells are the product of evolution? Would that belief affect his “day-to-day research”? Dawkins must answer, “No.” Then, according to Dawkins’ line of thinking, it could be the case that a person who does not believe in evolution could be just as (or more) successful in the biological sciences than one who does believe in evolution.
It should not be surprising, then, to hear statements like the one made by Thomas Geelan. Geelan is a teacher of Advanced Placement Biology in Buffalo, New York. His course is titled, “An Interdisciplinary Course in Evolution.” In the abstract that describes the class, the first line states: “Evolution is the central organizing theme in all biology, yet few biology courses are taught that way” (n.d., emp. added). In the introduction to the class, a similar statement is made: “Evolution is the central organizing theme in all biology, but it is ironic that most biology curricula are pitifully deficient in their treatment of it” (emp. added).
What is the primary reason for this deficiency in “most” biology courses? The answer simply is that evolution is of no practical value in day-to-day research. In fact, evolution can be considered an irrelevant idea that has no bearing on the outcome of any scientific experiment. The cell researcher does not need it. The taxonomist not only does not need it, but it gets in his way so much that he is better off if he does not consider it. The physicist does not need it. In truth, not only is evolution a false idea, but it is light years away from being the central tenet of biology. It is a counterproductive, anti-knowledge theory that at the least is useless, and is many times actually destructive. Dobzhansky’s title might be better worded, “Nothing in Biology Makes Any Sense in Light of Evolution.”

REFERENCES

Dawkins, Richard (1996), The Blind Watchmaker (New York: W.W. Norton).
Dini, Michael (no date), “Letters of Recommendation,” [On-line], URL: http://www2.tltc.ttu.edu/dini/Personal/letters.htm.
Dobzhansky, Theodosius (1973), “Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution. “The American Biology Teacher, March, [On-line], URL: http://www.evolutionary.tripod.com/dobzhansky_abt_35_125-29.html.
Geelan, Thomas (no date), “An Interdisciplinary Course in Evolution,” [On-line], URL: http://www.accessexcellence.org/AE/AEC/AEF/1996/geelan_evolution.html.

The Only True God by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=5014

The Only True God

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

The Bible is full of scriptures that, when quoted without any consideration of the immediate and remote contexts, a person can misuse in all sorts of ways. As proof that we do not have to work to provide for our family’s material needs, some may quote Jesus’ statement, “Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life” (John 6:27). In order to show that Jesus was a liar, the Bible critic might quote Jesus’ acknowledgement: “If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true” (John 5:31). Those who exclude baptism from God’s plan of salvation often quote John 4:2: “Jesus Himself did not baptize, but His disciples.” When the Bible reader is “rightly dividing” (2 Timothy 2:15, NKJV) or “handling accurately the word of truth” (NASB), however, he will remember that “[t]he sum of thy [God’s] word is truth” (Psalm 119:160, emp. added). Since the Bible teaches “if anyone will not work, neither shall he eat” (2 Thessalonians 3:10; cf. 1 Timothy 5:8), Jesus never implied that working to help feed one’s family is wrong (John 6:27). “He simply was saying that spiritual food is more important than physical food, and as such, should be given a higher priority” (Butt, 2003, emp. in orig.). Jesus did not confess wrongdoing in John 5:31. He simply acknowledged that, in accordance with the law (cf. Deuteronomy 19:15), His testimony apart from other witnesses would be considered invalid or insufficient to establish truth (cf. John 8:13-20; see Lyons, 2004). Likewise, Jesus never taught that baptism was unnecessary for salvation. In fact, He taught the very opposite (cf. John 3:3,5; Mark 16:16; Matthew 28:18-20; see Lyons, 2003).
Consider another proof text from the Gospel of John regarding the nature of Christ. Some (e.g., Jehovah’s Witnesses) contend that Jesus was not deity since, on one occasion, He prayed to the Father: “And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent” (John 17:3; cf. “Should You Believe...?,” 2000). Allegedly, by calling the Father, “the only true God,” Jesus excluded Himself from being deity. Such an interpretation of John 17:3, however, contradicts numerous other passages within John’s own gospel account. From beginning to end, John bore witness to the deity of Christ. Some of the evidence from the Gospel of John includes the following:

• In the very first verse of John, the apostle testified: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (emp. added; cf. 1:14,17).
• Two verses later the reader learns that “[a]ll things came into being by Him [the Word], and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being” (John 1:3, NASB).
• Still in the first chapter of John, the apostle testified that John the Baptizer was the one whom Isaiah foretold would “prepare...the way of Jehovah” (Isaiah 40:3; John 1:23; cf. 14:6). For Whom did John the Baptizer come to prepare the way? Isaiah called Him “Jehovah.” The apostle John, as well as John the Baptizer, referred to Jehovah as “Jesus” (John 1:17), “the Christ” (3:28), “the Word” (1:1), “the Light” (1:17), “the Lamb” (1:29), “the Truth” (5:33), etc.
• When the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well told Jesus, “I know that Messiah is coming” (John 4:25), Jesus responded, “I who speak to you am He” (vs. 26). Isaiah foretold that the Messiah would be called “Mighty God” (9:6) and “Jehovah” (40:3). Thus, by claiming to be the Messiah, Jesus was claiming to be God.
• In John chapter nine, Jesus miraculously healed a man with congenital blindness (vs. 1). When this man appeared before various Jews in the synagogue and called Jesus a prophet (vs. 17), he was instructed to “give glory to God,” not Jesus, because allegedly Jesus “is a sinner” (vs. 24). Later, after the man born blind was cast out of the synagogue, he confessed faith in Jesus and worshiped (Greek proskuneo) Him (vs. 38). In the Gospel of John, this word (proskuneo) is found 11 times: nine times in reference to worshiping the Father (John 4:2-24), once in reference to Greeks who came to “worship” in Jerusalem during Passover (12:20), and once in reference to the worship Jesus received from a man whom He had miraculously healed, and who had just confessed faith in Jesus. Indeed, by accepting worship Jesus acknowledged His deity (cf. Matthew 4:10; Hebrews 1:6).
• While at the Feast of Dedication in Jerusalem, Jesus claimed: “I and My Father are one” (John 10:30). “Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him” (vs. 31). Why did Jesus’ enemies want to stone Him? The Jews said to Christ: “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God” (vs. 33, emp. added; cf. 5:17-18).
• After Jesus rose from the dead, the apostle Thomas called Jesus, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28). Jesus responded: “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed” (vs. 29). Notice that Jesus did not deny His deity, rather He acknowledged Thomas’ faith and commended future believers. Believers in what? In that which Thomas had just confessed—that Jesus is Lord and God.

It was in the overall context of John’s gospel account, which is filled with statements testifying of Jesus’ deity, that the apostle recorded Jesus’ prayer to His Father the night of His betrayal (John 17). But how can Jesus’ statement about His Father being “the only true God” (17:3) be harmonized with statements by Jesus, the apostle John, John the Baptizer, Thomas, etc. affirming the deity of Christ? When a person understands that Jesus’ statement was made in opposition to the world’s false gods, and not Himself, the reference to the Father being “the only true God” harmonizes perfectly with the many scriptures that attest to the deity of Christ (including those outside of the book of John; cf. Matthew 1:23; Colossians 2:9; Hebrews 1:5-13). On the eve of Jesus’ crucifixion, it was completely natural for Him to pray that “all flesh/people” (John 17:2, NKJV/NIV), many of whom were (and still are) pagan idolaters, would come to know “the only true God” and receive eternal life (17:3). Thus, Jesus contrasted Himself not with the Father, but “with all forms of pagan polytheism, mystic pantheism, and philosophic naturalism” (Jamieson, et al., 1997).
Furthermore, if Jesus’ reference to the Father being “the only true God” somehow excludes Jesus from being deity, then (to be consistent) Jesus also must be disqualified from being man’s Savior. Jehovah said: “Besides me there is no savior” (Isaiah 43:11; cf. Hosea 13:4; Jude 25). Yet, Paul and Peter referred to Jesus as our “Savior” several times in their inspired writings (Ephesians 5:23; Philippians 3:20; 2 Timothy 1:10; 2 Peter 1:1,11; 2:20; etc.). Also, if Jesus is excluded from Godhood (based on a misinterpretation of John 17:3), then, pray tell, must God the Father be excluded from being man’s Lord? To the church at Ephesus, Paul wrote that there is “one Lord” (4:4, emp. added), and, according to Jude 4 (using Jehovah’s Witnesses own New World Translation) “our only Owner and Lord” is “Jesus Christ” (emp. added). Yet, in addition to Jesus being called Lord throughout the New Testament, so is God the Father (Matthew 11:25; Luke 1:32; Acts 1:25) and the Holy Spirit (2 Corinthians 3:17).
Obviously, when the Bible reveals that there is only one God, one Savior, one Lord, one Creator (Isaiah 44:24; John 1:3), etc., reason and revelation demand that we understand the inspired writers to be excluding everyone and everything—other than the triune God. As former Jehovah’s Witness David Reed explained: “Jesus’ being called our ‘only’ Lord does not rule out the Lordship of the Father and the Holy Spirit, and the Father’s being called the ‘only’ true God does not exclude the Son and the Holy Spirit from deity” (1986, p. 82).

REFERENCES

Butt, Kyle (2003), “Wearing Gold and Braided Hair,” Apologetics Press, http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2264.
Jamieson, Robert, et al. (1997), Jamieson, Faussett, Brown Bible Commentary (Electronic Database: Biblesoft).
Lyons, Eric (2003), “The Bible’s Teaching on Baptism: Contradictory or Complementary?” Apologetics Press, http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/617.
Lyons, Eric (2004), “Was Jesus Trustworthy?” Apologetics Press, http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/516.
Reed, David (1986), Jehovah’s Witnesses Answered Verse by Verse (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).
“Should You Believe in the Trinity?” (2000), The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society.

Perspectives Matter by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1372

Perspectives Matter

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Twice a year for the past few years I have visited the offices of a certified public accountant in Montgomery, Alabama. Since I rarely went to his place of business (or even the area in which his business is located), I had a difficult time remembering exactly what side of the road it was on. When I expected to see it on my right, it would strangely appear on my left. Then, just as sure as I thought it might be on my left, I would find it on my right. Maybe I was just confused. Perhaps my memory was failing me. For whatever reason, I never took the time to figure out why I had the distinct impression that sometimes this building should be on the opposite side of the road. Whenever the time came for me to see the CPA, I simply headed in the direction of his office, confident that I could find it, but unsure on which side of the road it would appear.
Recently, I finally learned why sometimes the building was on my left and other times it was on my right: I had not realized that the street on which this office is located is a long, slow-curving semi-circle. Both ends of the street eventually meet up at the same road, just one intersection apart from each other. Since the two intersections look very similar, I (like many men who are rather unobservant) never realized that I sometimes turned left at one intersection and other times turned left at the next intersection. When I took the first left, the office building always appeared on my right. When I took the second left, the building was always on my left. For whatever reason, I had never paid close enough attention. I had failed to consider that the apparent contradiction was merely the result of two different perspectives: one from the North, and one from the South.
Sadly, many people approach a study of the Bible as carelessly as I approached the CPA’s office building: they fail to consider the various perspectives at play. Approximately 40 different inspired men from all walks of life wrote the Bible over a period of 1,600 years. These men lived at different times in different places among different people in different cultures. They wrote in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, and the original recipients of their writings varied greatly—from Jewish, to Greek, to Roman, to all men. Sometimes the Bible writers wrote chronologically (e.g., Genesis 1; Matthew 4:1-11); at other times they wrote thematically (e.g., Genesis 2; Luke 4:1-13). Sometimes they focused on a group of people (e.g., Matthew 28:1; Luke 23:55-24:1); at other times they targeted a particular person within the group (e.g., John 20:1).
Oftentimes when two or more Bible writers differ in their description of a certain event, skeptics cry “contradiction.” In reality, however, the skeptics have merely overlooked or dismissed the fact that the inspired penmen wrote from different perspectives. One question I continually get asked and hear skeptics frequently repeat is, “How did Judas die?” “Did he hang himself as Matthew wrote (27:5), or, as Luke indicated (Acts 1:18), did he fall headlong and ‘burst open in the middle’ and all his entrails gush out?” The answer: Judas hanged himself, and later his body fell (from wherever it was hanging), burst open, and his entrails spilled. Are Matthew and Luke’s accounts different? Yes. Are they contradictory? No. They simply wrote about two different, specific moments during the same general event.
If we fail to recognize the logical reasons for differences in life, we will continually find ourselves dazed and confused. Just as I was perplexed for years over the exact location of a particular office building, because I had not taken the time to consider the exact direction from which I approached the building, skeptics and others will never come to a proper understanding of Scripture until they recognize that perspectives play a major role.

What is Bigger and More Incomprehensible than the God of Christians? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=2052

What is Bigger and More Incomprehensible than the God of Christians?

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

In a recent TIME magazine article, wherein senior staff writer David Van Biema interviewed renowned atheist Richard Dawkins and theist Francis Collins, Dawkins made a comment about the existence of God that revealed a serious flaw in his case against Creation and Christianity. Although he believes the idea of “a supernatural intelligent designer” is “refutable,” he speculated, saying, “If there is a God, it’s going to be a whole lot bigger and a whole lot more incomprehensible than anything that any theologian of any religion has ever proposed” (quoted in Van Biema, 2006, 168[20]:55). Thus, every “God” ever conceptualized by mankind is simply too small and too comprehensible for Dawkins.
It certainly is the case that gods of various religious groups of the past and present have lacked size and intelligence. The gods of ancient Egypt were exposed as counterfeit when the God of Israel demonstrated His superiority over them. He brought 10 plagues on Egypt, executing judgment “against all the gods of Egypt” (Exodus 12:12; Numbers 33:4), that (among other things) man might “know that Jehovah is greater than all gods” (Exodus 18:11, ASV). In Elijah’s day, Jehovah God revealed His supremacy over Baal on Mount Carmel when He sent fire down from heaven, totally consuming Elijah’s sacrifice (1 Kings 18:20-38), while the sacrifices of Baal’s prophets lay quiescent. Then, “[w]hen all the people saw it, they fell on their faces; and they said, ‘The Lord, He is God! The Lord, He is God’” (1 Kings 18:39). Furthermore, the millions of Hindu gods of the past and present also lack sufficient magnitude and intelligence. They are lifeless, powerless, man-made idols that both atheists and theists rightly refuse to acknowledge.
To conclude, however, that no one from any religion has ever proposed a God that is of adequate size and mystery is simply untrue. What about the God of the Bible? Considering that approximately two billion people on Earth claim to believe in this God (see “Major Religions...,” 2005), Dawkins no doubt had the God of Christians in mind when he said, “If there is a God, it’s going to be a whole lot bigger and a whole lot more incomprehensible than anything that any theologian of any religion has ever proposed.” What (or Who) could be larger, mightier, and more incomprehensible than the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the God that Christians worship and serve?
The God of the Bible is omnipresent. The psalmist proclaimed: “Where can I go from Thy Spirit? Or where can I flee from Thy presence? If I ascend to heaven, Thou art there; If I make my bed in Sheol, behold, Thou art there. If I take the wings of the dawn, if I dwell in the remotest part of the sea, even there Thy hand will lead me, and Thy right hand will lay hold of me (139:7-10, NASB). Try as he might, no one can hide from God (Jeremiah 23:23-24). He is everywhere. His eyes “are in every place” (Proverbs 15:3). “There is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of Him to whom we must give account” (Hebrews 4:13, emp. added).
God not only is omnipresent, He also knows everything. Numerous passages of Scripture clearly teach that God is omniscient. The psalmist declared that God “knows the secrets of the heart” (44:21) and that “His understanding is infinite” (147:5). Of Jehovah, the psalmist also wrote:

O Lord, You have searched me and known me. You know my sitting down and my rising up; You understand my thought afar off. You comprehend my path and my lying down, and are acquainted with all my ways. For there is not a word on my tongue, but behold, O Lord, You know it altogether (139:1-4).

“God is greater than our heart, and knows all things” (1 John 3:20, emp. added). Not only does He know the past and the present, but the future as well (Acts 15:18; cf. Isaiah 46:10). There is nothing outside of the awareness of God. What’s more, at the end of time, He “will bring every work into judgment, including every secret thing, whether good or evil” (Ecclesiastes 12:14, emp. added).
Perhaps the most awesome attribute of Jehovah is His unlimited power. He is “God Almighty” (Genesis 17:1). Nothing is too hard for Him (Genesis 18:14). As Job confessed to God, “I know that You can do everything, and that no purpose of Yours can be withheld from You” (42:2, emp. added). By simply speaking, God can create that which is visible from that which is invisible (Hebrews 11:3; cf. Genesis 1), and can turn the physical into the celestial (1 Corinthians 15:50-54). He can turn water into wine simply by desiring it to happen (John 2:1-10). He can miraculously heal a paralytic by merely willing it to “be done” (Matthew 8:13). He can raise a man from the dead simply by commanding him to “come forth” (John 11:43). The God of Christians is omnipotent.
What more does Dawkins need from a god? By definition, the God of the Bible could not be any bigger, more powerful, or more intelligent than He already is. Jehovah is all-powerful, all-knowing, and everywhere present. In addition, He is eternal (cf. Deuteronomy 33:27; Psalm 102:27; Revelation 1:8). He is from “everlasting to everlasting” (Psalm 90:2). What could be “bigger” and “more incomprehensible” for finite humans to grasp?
Nothing is bigger than God. Nothing is more powerful than God. And no one can rationally fathom a being more intelligent than God. As far as being “a whole lot more incomprehensible,” the psalmist addressed God’s unfathomable intelligence, confessing that “[s]uch knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain it” (139:6, emp. added). God said: “My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways.... For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts” (Isaiah 55:8-9). Centuries later Paul praised the “depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God,” exclaiming “[h]ow unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out!” (Romans 11:33, emp. added). Indeed, there are “the secret things” that “belong to the Lord our God,” which we will never know this side of eternity, and perhaps not even on the other side (Deuteronomy 29:29). Thankfully, the one true and living God did reveal a substantial amount of information about Himself through nature, and much more through the Scriptures (Romans 1:20; Deuteronomy 29:29), that we might “have eternal life” (1 John 5:13).
The God that the prominent, militant atheist Richard Dawkins said would exist, “if there is a God,” actually does exist. Sadly, Dawkins and millions of others simply have “refused to have God in their knowledge” (Romans 1:28, ASV), for which “they are without excuse” (Romans 1:20).

REFERENCES

“Major Religions of the World Ranked by Number of Adherents” (2005), [On-line], URL: http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html.
Van Biema, David (2006), “God vs. Science,” TIME, 168[20]:48-55, November 13.

Academia’s Asinine Assault on the Bible by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=1813

Academia’s Asinine Assault on the Bible

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D.

The professor, age 50, wearing casual slacks and a sport coat over a sweater, arrived at the lecture auditorium to teach his afternoon class, as some 350 students streamed in for Religion 202—one of the most popular classes on the campus of the large state university. Exuding an energetic, intellectually sophisticated manner, and projecting an endearing personality, the professor proceeded to propound a “problem” pertaining to the Bible. Pacing back and forth across the stage, he launched a ruthless but passionately eloquent tirade against the Bible’s alleged “anomalies,” “contradictions,” and “discrepancies.” It went something like this:

Entire stories have been added that were not in the original gospels. The woman taken in adultery is nothing other than a bit of tradition added by the Catholics 300 years after the New Testament was written. In contrast with Matthew, Mark, and Luke, in the book of John Jesus wasn’t born in Bethlehem, he did not tell any parables, he never cast out a demon, and there’s no last supper. The crucifixion stories differ with each other. In Mark, Jesus was terrified on the cross, while in John, he was perfectly composed. Key dates are different. The resurrection stories are different. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, you find no trace of Jesus being divine, while in John you do. It’s time for you to think for yourself. You need reasons. That applies to religion. That applies to politics. Just because your parents believe something—isn’t good enough.

So it goes, week after week, a relentless, rapid-fire barrage of bombastic barbs intended to overwhelm, intimidate, and bully their young, uninformed, ill-equipped victims. This scenario has been repeated thousands of times over the past half century in universities all across America. The result has been catastrophic. One heartbroken mother’s recent remarks are typical: “My 22-year-old son just graduated from ________ University where he lost his faith in God and His Word. My husband and I did the best we knew how to raise him to love the church and God’s Word. But he has allowed the world to sway his beliefs.” Like toxic waste, sinister propaganda has been dumped on the youth of the nation by biased, dishonest professors who have no interest in allowing the so-called “academic freedom” they tout in the form of equal time for reputable rebuttal. As a result of their decades’ long labor, a liberal, anti-Christian academic atmosphere now thoroughly permeates the university system of America.
Never mind the fact that these guys have nothing new to say that has not already been said by skeptics over the centuries. Their claims are merely a repackaged version quickly seized upon by a complicit liberal media that eagerly creates instant credibility by thrusting the new “prophet” before a larger audience—as if what he is saying is fresh and newly discovered. The fact of the matter is that all their points have been made and answered long ago. For those who have taken the time to examine the evidence, it is readily apparent that their accusations are slanted, overstated, exaggerated, and transparently biased.
Observe that the above professorial tirade issues two charges: (1) the text of the Bible is tenuous and uncertain, and (2) the gospel records contradict each other. The latter claim has been soundly refuted in detail by biblical scholars over the centuries. The Apologetics Press Web site is loaded with articles and books that defeat accusations of alleged discrepancy (see, for example, Eric Lyons’ Anvil Rings 1 & 2). Regarding the former claim, Textual Criticism is a longstanding discipline that long ago yielded abundant evidence for the trustworthiness of the text of the New Testament. Over the last two centuries, the manuscript evidence has been thoroughly examined, resulting in complete exoneration for the integrity, genuineness, and accuracy of the Bible. Prejudiced professors refrain from divulging to their students that the vast majority of textual variants involve minor matters that do not affect salvation nor alter any basic teaching of the New Testament. Even those variants that might be deemed doctrinally significant pertain to matters that are treated elsewhere in the Bible where the question of genuineness is unobscured. No feature of Christian doctrine is at stake. When all of the textual evidence is considered, the vast majority of discordant readings have been resolved (e.g., Metzger, 1978, p. 185). One is brought to the firm conviction that we have in our possession the Bible as God intended.
The world’s foremost textual critics have confirmed this conclusion. Sir Frederic Kenyon, longtime director and principal librarian at the British Museum, whose scholarship and expertise to make pronouncements on textual criticism was second to none, stated: “Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established” (Kenyon, 1940, p. 288). The late F.F. Bruce, longtime Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism at the University of Manchester, England, remarked: “The variant readings about which any doubt remains among textual critics of the New Testament affect no material question of historic fact or of Christian faith and practice” (1960, pp. 19-20). J.W. McGarvey, declared by the London Times to be “the ripest Bible scholar on earth” (Brigance, 1870, p. 4), conjoined: “All the authority and value possessed by these books when they were first written belong to them still” (1956, p. 17). And the eminent textual critics Westcott and Hort put the entire matter into perspective when they said:

Since textual criticism has various readings for its subject, and the discrimination of genuine readings from corruptions for its aim, discussions on textual criticism almost inevitably obscure the simple fact that variations are but secondary incidents of a fundamentally single and identical text. In the New Testament in particular it is difficult to escape an exaggerated impression as to the proportion which the words subject to variation bear to the whole text, and also, in most cases, as to their intrinsic importance. It is not superfluous therefore to state explicitly that the great bulk of the words of the New Testament stand out above all discriminative processes of criticism, because they are free from variation, and need only to be transcribed (1964, p. 564, emp. added).

Noting that the experience of two centuries of investigation and discussion had been achieved, these scholars concluded: “[T]he words in our opinion still subject to doubt can hardly amount to more than a thousandth part of the whole of the New Testament” (p. 565, emp. added).
Think of it. Men who literally spent their lives poring over ancient Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, devoting their lives to meticulous, tedious analysis of the evidence, conversant with the original languages, without peer in their expertise and qualifications, have concluded that the Bible has been transmitted accurately. Then a prejudiced professor of religion has the unmitigated gall to brush aside the facts and pummel students with a slanted, half-baked viewpoint that flies in the face of two centuries of scholarly investigation? It is nothing short of inexcusable and intellectually dishonest. It’s time for parents to rise up and make universities accountable, or else cease sacrificing their children on the altar of pseudo-education. [NOTE: Those who are fearful that the integrity of the text of the Bible is compromised by the reality of textual variants need to be reminded that the world’s foremost textual critics have demonstrated that currently circulating copies of the New Testament do not differ substantially from the original (see Miller, 2005a, “Is Mark...,” 25[12]:89-95; Miller, 2010).]

REFERENCES

Brigance, L.L. (1870), “J.W. McGarvey,” in A Treatise on the Eldership by J.W. McGarvey (Murfreesboro, TN: DeHoff Publications, 1962 reprint).
Bruce, F.F. (1960), The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), revised edition.
Kenyon, Sir Frederic (1940), The Bible and Archaeology (New York, NY: Harper).
McGarvey, J.W. (1956 reprint), Evidences of Christianity (Nashville, TN: Gospel Advocate).
Metzger, Bruce M. (1978 reprint), The Text of the New Testament (New York, NY: Oxford University Press), second edition.
Westcott, B.A. and F.J.A. Hort (1964 reprint), The New Testament in the Original Greek (New York, NY: MacMillan).

"THE BOOK OF ACTS" Righteousness, Self-Control, And The Judgment (24:25) by Mark Copeland

                          "THE BOOK OF ACTS"

          Righteousness, Self-Control, And The Judgment (24:25)

INTRODUCTION

1. After Paul's initial defense before Felix, he had another opportunity
   to speak to him...
   a. Along with his wife Drusilla who was Jewish (approximately age 16)
      - Ac 24:24
   b. Talking to them about "the faith in Christ" - ibid.

2. Felix and Drusilla had a marital history tainted by promiscuity (Kistemaker)...
   a. Drusilla was the third wife of Felix, according to the Roman historian Suetonius
   b. Drusilla married Azizus king of Emesa (Syria) at age 14, and soon
      after married Felix

[We're told Paul "reasoned about righteousness, self-control, and the
judgment to come." (Ac 24:25).  From his epistles and sermons in Acts,
we can surmise what Paul may have said to them...]

I. CONCERNING RIGHTEOUSNESS

   A. GOD'S RIGHTEOUSNESS...
      1. I.e., God's way of making man righteous - Ro 3:21
      2. Through faith in Jesus Christ - Ro 3:22
      3. For all who believe, for all are sinners - Ro 3:22-23
      4. Justified by grace through redemption in Christ - Ro 3:24
      5. For Christ has been set forth as a propitiation by His blood - Ro 3:25
      6. Demonstrating God's own righteousness as being both Just and the
         Justifier - Ro 3:25-26
      -- Perhaps, then, Paul reasoned thus about God's system of
         righteousness in saving us

   B. OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS...
      1. We are made righteous in Christ, according to God's righteousness - Ro 3:21-26
      2. And in baptism we die to sin, that we might rise to walk in
         newness of life - Ro 6:1-4
      3. Having died to sin, we are freed from sin, that we might now
         live with Christ - Ro 6:5-11
      4. Thus we must not let sin reign in our bodies, but let them be
         instruments of righteousness - Ro 6:12-14
      -- Perhaps, then, Paul reasoned that saved by grace, we must now 
         live righteously for God

[As Paul spoke about righteousness to Felix and Drusilla, I suspect their
consciences were made uneasy by their disregard for God's law on marriage
(cf. Mal 2:14-16).  Perhaps even more, as he spoke...] 

II. CONCERNING SELF-CONTROL

   A. BEFORE CONVERSION...
      1. The inability to live righteously as one carnal, sold under sin
         - Ro 7:14-20; cf. Jn 8:34
      2. The law of sin wages war against the law of one's mind, leading
         to slavery - Ro 7:21-24 
      -- Perhaps Paul reasoned that self-control was unattainable by
         sinners outside of Christ

   B. AFTER CONVERSION...
      1. In Christ, there is no condemnation and there is now freedom from sin! - Ro 8:1-4
      2. But only for those who live according to the Spirit, with minds
         set on the Spirit - Ro 8:5-8
      3. For if the Spirit indwells a person, by the Spirit they can put
         to death the deeds of the flesh
         - Ro 8:11-14; cf. Ep 3:16,20-21
      4. Thus walking by the Spirit, led by the Spirit, they can produce
         the fruit of the Spirit, which includes self-control! - Ga 5:16-18,22-23
      -- Perhaps Paul reasoned that Spirit-aided self-control would help
         them live righteously

[But why should Felix and Drusilla even be concerned about righteousness
and self-control?  Perhaps Paul made that very clear when he spoke to them...] 

III. CONCERNING THE JUDGMENT

   A. THE DAY OF JUDGMENT...
      1. To philosophers, Paul spoke of God's command for all men to repent - Ac 17:30
      2. Because God has appointed a day on which He will judge the world - Ac 17:31
      3. God will judge the world by His Son Jesus Christ - Ac 17:31;
         cf. Ro 14:9-12; 2Co 5:10
      -- Perhaps Paul reasoned that a righteous God will have to judge 
         mankind for their sins

   B. THE RESULT OF JUDGMENT...
      1. Knowing the terror of the Lord when He comes, Paul persuaded men - 2Co 5:11
      2. He warned of flaming fire for those who know not God, nor obey
         the gospel - 2Th 1:7-9
      -- Perhaps Paul reasoned that punishment would be fearful beyond comprehension

CONCLUSION

1. We may not know exactly what Paul covered when he reasoned about
   righteousness, self-control, and the judgment...

2. We do know the effect it had on Felix...
   a. At first Felix was afraid - Ac 24:25
   b. But he put off making the right decision, looking for a more
      opportune time - ibid.

Sadly, Felix seemed hardened by his lust for money, and despite other
opportunities to hear Paul for two years, he never responded to gospel
of Christ (Ac 24:26-27). 

What about us today?  Have we given heed to the Biblical revelation and
reasoning concerning such things as righteousness, self-control, and the
judgment?  Or have we endangered our souls by saying like Felix, "When I
have a more convenient time..."  

Remember Paul's plea in his epistle to the Corinthians:

   We then, as workers together with Him also plead with you not to
   receive the grace of God in vain.  For He says:

     "In an acceptable time I have heard you,
      And in the day of salvation I have helped you."

   Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.
                                                - 2Co 6:1-2

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2013

A matter for reflection by Gary Rose

This past weekend we went to my sister-in-laws' wake and funeral. Dorothy Campbell was a bit older than Linda and I but we were friends during high school and went on dates with her future husband Dick during that time. For those of you who never knew her, Dorothy is the one in the middle of this picture who is wearing the white blouse.

Memorial services tend to be times of reflection and Saturday was no exception. For some reason, I kept looking at the funeral card and after awhile, I realized that I liked the poem a great deal. Here it is...

 

For those of us who are Christians, we focus our thoughts on Jesus and what will happen in the next life. To me, there is no more appropriate passage to think of than the following...

John, Chapter 11 (WEB)

 ¹⁷ So when Jesus came, he found that he had been in the tomb four days already.  ¹⁸ Now Bethany was near Jerusalem, about fifteen stadia away.  ¹⁹ Many of the Jews had joined the women around Martha and Mary, to console them concerning their brother.  ²⁰ Then when Martha heard that Jesus was coming, she went and met him, but Mary stayed in the house.  ²¹ Therefore Martha said to Jesus, “Lord, if you would have been here, my brother wouldn’t have died.  ²² Even now I know that whatever you ask of God, God will give you.”  ²³ Jesus said to her,“Your brother will rise again.” 

  ²⁴ Martha said to him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection at the last day.” 

  ²⁵ Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will still live, even if he dies.   ²⁶ Whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?” 

  ²⁷ She said to him, “Yes, Lord. I have come to believe that you are the Christ, God’s Son, he who comes into the world.” 

Life beyond this life will be because of what Jesus did- rose from the dead. He is our hope of heaven and the only true source of peace. 

I knew Dorothy for 53 years and can honestly say that she was my friend. I have always wished the best for her- and still do!!!

Bible Reading May 15 by Gary Rose

Bible Reading May 15 (World English Bible)

May 15

Joshua 11, 12

Jos 11:1 It happened, when Jabin king of Hazor heard of it, that he sent to Jobab king of Madon, to the king of Shimron, to the king of Achshaph,

Jos 11:2 and to the kings who were on the north, in the hill country, in the Arabah south of Chinneroth, in the lowland, and in the heights of Dor on the west,

Jos 11:3 to the Canaanite on the east and on the west, and the Amorite, and the Hittite, and the Perizzite, and the Jebusite in the hill country, and the Hivite under Hermon in the land of Mizpah.

Jos 11:4 They went out, they and all their armies with them, many people, even as the sand that is on the seashore in multitude, with very many horses and chariots.

Jos 11:5 All these kings met together; and they came and encamped together at the waters of Merom, to fight with Israel.

Jos 11:6 Yahweh said to Joshua, "Don't be afraid because of them; for tomorrow at this time, I will deliver them up all slain before Israel. You shall hamstring their horses and burn their chariots with fire."

Jos 11:7 So Joshua came, and all the people of war with him, against them by the waters of Merom suddenly, and fell on them.

Jos 11:8 Yahweh delivered them into the hand of Israel, and they struck them, and chased them to great Sidon, and to Misrephoth Maim, and to the valley of Mizpeh eastward. They struck them until they left them none remaining.

Jos 11:9 Joshua did to them as Yahweh told him. He hamstrung their horses and burnt their chariots with fire.

Jos 11:10 Joshua turned back at that time, and took Hazor, and struck its king with the sword: for Hazor used to be the head of all those kingdoms.

Jos 11:11 They struck all the souls who were in it with the edge of the sword, utterly destroying them. There was no one left who breathed. He burnt Hazor with fire.

Jos 11:12 Joshua captured all the cities of those kings, with their kings, and he struck them with the edge of the sword, and utterly destroyed them; as Moses the servant of Yahweh commanded.

Jos 11:13 But as for the cities that stood on their mounds, Israel burned none of them, except Hazor only. Joshua burned that.

Jos 11:14 The children of Israel took all the spoil of these cities, with the livestock, as spoils for themselves; but every man they struck with the edge of the sword, until they had destroyed them. They didn't leave any who breathed.

Jos 11:15 As Yahweh commanded Moses his servant, so Moses commanded Joshua. Joshua did so. He left nothing undone of all that Yahweh commanded Moses.

Jos 11:16 So Joshua captured all that land, the hill country, all the South, all the land of Goshen, the lowland, the Arabah, the hill country of Israel, and the lowland of the same;

Jos 11:17 from Mount Halak, that goes up to Seir, even to Baal Gad in the valley of Lebanon under Mount Hermon. He took all their kings, struck them, and put them to death.

Jos 11:18 Joshua made war a long time with all those kings.

Jos 11:19 There was not a city that made peace with the children of Israel, except the Hivites, the inhabitants of Gibeon. They took all in battle.

Jos 11:20 For it was of Yahweh to harden their hearts, to come against Israel in battle, that he might utterly destroy them, that they might have no favor, but that he might destroy them, as Yahweh commanded Moses.

Jos 11:21 Joshua came at that time, and cut off the Anakim from the hill country, from Hebron, from Debir, from Anab, and from all the hill country of Judah, and from all the hill country of Israel: Joshua utterly destroyed them with their cities.

Jos 11:22 There were none of the Anakim left in the land of the children of Israel. Only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod, did some remain.

Jos 11:23 So Joshua took the whole land, according to all that Yahweh spoke to Moses; and Joshua gave it for an inheritance to Israel according to their divisions by their tribes. The land had rest from war.

Jos 12:1 Now these are the kings of the land, whom the children of Israel struck, and possessed their land beyond the Jordan toward the sunrise, from the valley of the Arnon to Mount Hermon, and all the Arabah eastward:

Jos 12:2 Sihon king of the Amorites, who lived in Heshbon, and ruled from Aroer, which is on the edge of the valley of the Arnon, and the middle of the valley, and half Gilead, even to the river Jabbok, the border of the children of Ammon;

Jos 12:3 and the Arabah to the sea of Chinneroth, eastward, and to the sea of the Arabah, even the Salt Sea, eastward, the way to Beth Jeshimoth; and on the south, under the slopes of Pisgah:

Jos 12:4 and the border of Og king of Bashan, of the remnant of the Rephaim, who lived at Ashtaroth and at Edrei,

Jos 12:5 and ruled in Mount Hermon, and in Salecah, and in all Bashan, to the border of the Geshurites and the Maacathites, and half Gilead, the border of Sihon king of Heshbon.

Jos 12:6 Moses the servant of Yahweh and the children of Israel struck them. Moses the servant of Yahweh gave it for a possession to the Reubenites, and the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh.

Jos 12:7 These are the kings of the land whom Joshua and the children of Israel struck beyond the Jordan westward, from Baal Gad in the valley of Lebanon even to Mount Halak, that goes up to Seir. Joshua gave it to the tribes of Israel for a possession according to their divisions;

Jos 12:8 in the hill country, and in the lowland, and in the Arabah, and in the slopes, and in the wilderness, and in the South; the Hittite, the Amorite, and the Canaanite, the Perizzite, the Hivite, and the Jebusite:

Jos 12:9 the king of Jericho, one; the king of Ai, which is beside Bethel, one;

Jos 12:10 the king of Jerusalem, one; the king of Hebron, one;

Jos 12:11 the king of Jarmuth, one; the king of Lachish, one;

Jos 12:12 the king of Eglon, one; the king of Gezer, one;

Jos 12:13 the king of Debir, one; the king of Geder, one;

Jos 12:14 the king of Hormah, one; the king of Arad, one;

Jos 12:15 the king of Libnah, one; the king of Adullam, one;

Jos 12:16 the king of Makkedah, one; the king of Bethel, one;

Jos 12:17 the king of Tappuah, one; the king of Hepher, one;

Jos 12:18 the king of Aphek, one; the king of Lassharon, one;

Jos 12:19 the king of Madon, one; the king of Hazor, one;

Jos 12:20 the king of Shimron Meron, one; the king of Achshaph, one;

Jos 12:21 the king of Taanach, one; the king of Megiddo, one;

Jos 12:22 the king of Kedesh, one; the king of Jokneam in Carmel, one;

Jos 12:23 the king of Dor in the height of Dor, one; the king of Goiim in Gilgal, one;

Jos 12:24 the king of Tirzah, one: all the kings thirty-one. 

May 14, 15

Luke 24

Luk 24:1 But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they and some others came to the tomb, bringing the spices which they had prepared.

Luk 24:2 They found the stone rolled away from the tomb.

Luk 24:3 They entered in, and didn't find the Lord Jesus' body.

Luk 24:4 It happened, while they were greatly perplexed about this, behold, two men stood by them in dazzling clothing.

Luk 24:5 Becoming terrified, they bowed their faces down to the earth. They said to them, "Why do you seek the living among the dead?

Luk 24:6 He isn't here, but is risen. Remember what he told you when he was still in Galilee,

Luk 24:7 saying that the Son of Man must be delivered up into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again?"

Luk 24:8 They remembered his words,

Luk 24:9 returned from the tomb, and told all these things to the eleven, and to all the rest.

Luk 24:10 Now they were Mary Magdalene, Joanna, and Mary the mother of James. The other women with them told these things to the apostles.

Luk 24:11 These words seemed to them to be nonsense, and they didn't believe them.

Luk 24:12 But Peter got up and ran to the tomb. Stooping and looking in, he saw the strips of linen lying by themselves, and he departed to his home, wondering what had happened.

Luk 24:13 Behold, two of them were going that very day to a village named Emmaus, which was sixty stadia from Jerusalem.

Luk 24:14 They talked with each other about all of these things which had happened.

Luk 24:15 It happened, while they talked and questioned together, that Jesus himself came near, and went with them.

Luk 24:16 But their eyes were kept from recognizing him.

Luk 24:17 He said to them, "What are you talking about as you walk, and are sad?"

Luk 24:18 One of them, named Cleopas, answered him, "Are you the only stranger in Jerusalem who doesn't know the things which have happened there in these days?"

Luk 24:19 He said to them, "What things?" They said to him, "The things concerning Jesus, the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people;

Luk 24:20 and how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him up to be condemned to death, and crucified him.

Luk 24:21 But we were hoping that it was he who would redeem Israel. Yes, and besides all this, it is now the third day since these things happened.

Luk 24:22 Also, certain women of our company amazed us, having arrived early at the tomb;

Luk 24:23 and when they didn't find his body, they came saying that they had also seen a vision of angels, who said that he was alive.

Luk 24:24 Some of us went to the tomb, and found it just like the women had said, but they didn't see him."

Luk 24:25 He said to them, "Foolish men, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken!

Luk 24:26 Didn't the Christ have to suffer these things and to enter into his glory?"

Luk 24:27 Beginning from Moses and from all the prophets, he explained to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.

Luk 24:28 They drew near to the village, where they were going, and he acted like he would go further.

Luk 24:29 They urged him, saying, "Stay with us, for it is almost evening, and the day is almost over." He went in to stay with them.

Luk 24:30 It happened, that when he had sat down at the table with them, he took the bread and gave thanks. Breaking it, he gave to them.

Luk 24:31 Their eyes were opened, and they recognized him, and he vanished out of their sight.

Luk 24:32 They said one to another, "Weren't our hearts burning within us, while he spoke to us along the way, and while he opened the Scriptures to us?"

Luk 24:33 They rose up that very hour, returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and those who were with them,

Luk 24:34 saying, "The Lord is risen indeed, and has appeared to Simon!"

Luk 24:35 They related the things that happened along the way, and how he was recognized by them in the breaking of the bread.

Luk 24:36 As they said these things, Jesus himself stood among them, and said to them, "Peace be to you."

Luk 24:37 But they were terrified and filled with fear, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.

Luk 24:38 He said to them, "Why are you troubled? Why do doubts arise in your hearts?

Luk 24:39 See my hands and my feet, that it is truly me. Touch me and see, for a spirit doesn't have flesh and bones, as you see that I have."

Luk 24:40 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet.

Luk 24:41 While they still didn't believe for joy, and wondered, he said to them, "Do you have anything here to eat?"

Luk 24:42 They gave him a piece of a broiled fish and some honeycomb.

Luk 24:43 He took them, and ate in front of them.

Luk 24:44 He said to them, "This is what I told you, while I was still with you, that all things which are written in the law of Moses, the prophets, and the psalms, concerning me must be fulfilled."

Luk 24:45 Then he opened their minds, that they might understand the Scriptures.

Luk 24:46 He said to them, "Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day,

Luk 24:47 and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name to all the nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

Luk 24:48 You are witnesses of these things.

Luk 24:49 Behold, I send forth the promise of my Father on you. But wait in the city of Jerusalem until you are clothed with power from on high."

Luk 24:50 He led them out as far as Bethany, and he lifted up his hands, and blessed them.

Luk 24:51 It happened, while he blessed them, that he withdrew from them, and was carried up into heaven.

Luk 24:52 They worshiped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy,

Luk 24:53 and were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God. Amen.