"A CLOSER WALK WITH GOD"
Overcoming Sin
INTRODUCTION
1. A wonderful blessing we receive when we become Christians is the
forgiveness of sins through the blood of Jesus Christ
a. At our BAPTISM, the blood of Christ cleanses us from all PAST sins
b. Compare Ac 22:16 with Re 1:5
2. This does not mean that our problem with sin is over...
a. We still sin at times - 1Jn 1:8,10
b. Satan does his best to cause us to sin - 1Pe 5:8
3. If we are to maintain a close walk with God, and ultimately receive
the riches of glory He has prepared for us, we must overcome the
problem of sin in two ways:
a. By sinning less and less - 1Jn 2:1a
b. By knowing what to do when we do sin - 1Jn 2:1b-2
4. This lesson is concerned with helping us see how sin develops, and
how to overcome sin with its terrible consequences
[To overcome sin, we need to understand how it develops. The Bible
outlines the development of sin in Jm 1:12-15...]
I. HOW SIN DEVELOPS
A. THE FIRST STAGE IS "TEMPTATION"...
1. In Jm 1:14, we see that "temptation" includes two things:
a. DESIRE (some translations say "lust", suggesting a strong
desire for something)
b. ENTICEMENT (an opportunity and encouragement to satisfy the desire)
2. Putting it in the form of a simple equation:
TEMPTATION = DESIRE + OPPORTUNITY
3. To illustrate:
a. A small boy is TEMPTED to steal some cookies when he WANTS
(desire) them and has an OCCASION (opportunity) to take them
b. The temptation becomes stronger if he wants them badly, and
has a good chance of getting them without being seen
4. PLEASE NOTE: At this stage in the development of sin, actual
sin has not yet been committed
a. It is not a sin to be "tempted"
b. For Jesus Himself was "tempted as we are, yet without sin"
- He 4:15; 2:18
B. THE SECOND STAGE IS "SIN" ITSELF...
1. "When desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin" - Jm 1:15
2. It becomes sin when we ACT and YIELD to the temptation
3. Thus sin involves the added step of some sort of action on our part
4. Again, in the form of a simple equation:
SIN = DESIRE + OPPORTUNITY + ACTION
C. THE THIRD STAGE INVOLVES THE CONSEQUENCES OF UNREPENTED AND
UNFORGIVEN SIN: "DEATH"
1. "And sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death"
- Jm 1:15
2. The "death" spoken here refers to spiritual separation from God
a. This separation occurs first in this life - cf. Is 59:2
b. If we die physically in this state, then we will experience
the "second death", which involves eternal punishment!
- Re 21:8
3. Putting all this into a final equation:
DESIRE + OPPORTUNITY + ACTION + NO FORGIVENESS = DEATH
D. OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT OF SIN...
1. Sin will have overcome us if we receive the "final punishment"
of Re 21:8
2. But we will have overcome sin if we can avoid this punishment
and experience the glories God has prepared for His children!
3. How can we be sure to overcome sin? BY STOPPING ITS DEVELOP-
MENT AT ANY ONE OF THE FOUR POINTS LEADING TO THE FINAL PUNISHMENT!
[Now let's examine how this may be done...]
II. HOW TO OVERCOME SIN
A. CHANGE OUR "DESIRES"...
1. Since this is where the process of sin begins, it is the best
place for us to begin
2. Bear in mind that it is a part of Christian growth to change
our desires - Ro 12:1-2; Ga 5:24
3. How do we change our desires?
a. Notice that the WORD OF GOD has always been instrumental in
helping people overcome sin - Ps 119:11; Mt 4:3-10
b. To see how the Word of God can change our desires...
1) As we read of God's love, longsuffering and mercy, we
desire to serve Him - Ps 116:12-14
2) As we read of sin and its damnable consequences, we come
to hate it! - Ps 119:104
4. So the more we study God's Word, the less likely we will have
the DESIRE to sin, thereby beginning to overcome sin by
"nipping it in the bud"!
[But changing our desires takes time; while engaged in the process
of changing our desires, what else can we do?]
B. LIMIT OUR "OPPORTUNITIES"...
1. Remember, we are tempted only when there is BOTH desire and opportunity
2. So while we work on changing our desires, we should limit the
opportunities to fulfill wrongful desires
3. This can be done by ASKING FOR GOD'S PROVIDENTIAL HELP, as
Jesus taught - Mt 6:13; 26:41
4. We can cooperate with God by:
a. Purposely avoiding situations that might excite wrongful desires
1) Following the example of David - Ps 101:3-4
2) And the example of Job - Job 31:1
b. Avoiding those whose evil behavior encourages us to sin with them
1) Again, David sets a good example - Ps 101:6-7
2) Paul also adds his warning - 1Co 15:33
[But we will unlikely remove EVERY desire and opportunity to sin in
this life, what then?]
C. EXERCISE "SELF-CONTROL"...
1. Remember, it becomes sin when we yield to ACTION in fulfilling
our sinful desires
2. If we can control ourselves so as to not yield, then we can
overcome sin!
3. How does the Christian exercise self-control?
a. Self-control is but one aspect of the "fruit of the Spirit"
- Ga 5:22-23
b. When we become Christians, we receive the gift of the Holy
Spirit in our lives - Ac 2:38; 5:32
c. The Spirit is God's instrumental agent by which He imparts
strength to us - Ep 3:16
d. Strengthened by the Spirit, we are able to "put to death
the deeds of the body" - Ro 8:12-13
e. As Paul said: "I can do all things through Him who
strengthens me." - Php 4:13
4. It is through faith in God's Word that the Christian believes
that he has this divine help - Ep 3:20
a. It is certainly proper to pray for it, as Paul did in
behalf of the Ephesians - Ep 3:16
b. But equally important, to act upon it, trusting that you
are not alone as you try to do God's will - Php 2:12-13
c. As an exercise commercial once said: JUST DO IT!
5. The Christian, then, has no excuse for yielding to a
temptation - 1Co 10:13
[But there may be times when we don't take advantage of the
strength God provides through His Spirit, and we sin; what then?]
D. OBTAIN "FORGIVENESS"...
1. Remember that sin is victorious when it results in punishment
2. But if we obtain forgiveness through the blood of Christ, we
can avoid that punishment and thereby still overcome sin!
- 1Jn 2:1-2
3. Yes, Christ is truly the "propitiation" for our sins!
a. By His blood, we were forgiven of past sins when united
with Him in BAPTISM - Ac 2:38; 22:16; Re 1:5
b. By His blood, we can be forgiven of present sins when we
REPENT, PRAY, and CONFESS our sins to God - Ac 8:22;
1Jn 1:9
4. At any time the Christian can overcome sins that were
committed, by repenting and confessing them to God!
E. SOME OBSERVATIONS ABOUT OVERCOMING SIN...
1. If you noticed carefully, you should have seen that at each of
the four points in the development of sin, God is able and
willing to help us overcome sin!
a. God helps us to "control our desires" by providing His WORD
to renew our minds
b. God helps us to "limit the opportunities" through His
PROVIDENCE as we pray for such
c. God helps us to "exercise self-control" over our actions
through His SPIRIT strengthening the inner man
d. God helps us to "obtain forgiveness" through the BLOOD OF
HIS SON as we repent and pray
-- Isn't the grace of God wonderful? - 2Th 3:3; 1Co 10:13
2. In this discussion we have concentrated on "sins of commission"
a. That is, sins we commit by overt action on our part
b. There are also "sins of omission"
1) Sins which come from failing to do what is right
- Jm 4:17
2) Overcoming these sins is similar...
a) Change our desires so we want to do what is right
b) Exercise self-control so we act the way we should
when we have the opportunity
c) When guilty of sins of omission, obtain forgiveness
in the same way
3. In learning the four points at which we may overcome sin,
don't think that we can simply wait until we reach the fourth
point to act...
a. That is, to just go ahead and sin, then ask God for forgiveness
b. There are several reasons why we should not do this:
1) In baptism, we were freed from the power of sin, and
should now present ourselves to God as servants of
righteousness - Ro 6:1-23
2) Though we can receive forgiveness for sin, we might
still suffer the "temporal" consequences of sins
- Ga 6:7-9
3) If we allow sin to deceive us so as to become
"hardened",we may get to the point of sinning
"willfully" and lose our salvation! - He 3:12-14;
10:26-31
c. So don't take the grace of God lightly and attempt to abuse it!
CONCLUSION
1. How much better it would be to praise God for His grace, and use it
to overcome sin in our lives!
2. May the promise found in Jm 1:12 help motivate us to do so:
"Blessed is the man who endures temptation; for when he has been
proved, he will receive the crown of life which the Lord has
promised to those who love Him."
SOME QUESTIONS TO STIMULATE YOUR THINKING...
1. Are you engaged in a daily Bible study program which will help you
develop the proper kind of desires?
2. Do you "watch and pray, lest you enter into temptation"?
3. Do you avoid circumstances and companions that you know would entice
you to sin?
4. Do you pray that God will strengthen you "by His Spirit in the inner man"?
5. Do you ask God daily to forgive your sins, and to help you overcome
sin in your life?
May 6, 2015
"A CLOSER WALK WITH GOD" Overcoming Sin by Mark Copeland
From Gary... Common sense
This is a "math" problem. A simple problem, something that any 2nd grader (or perhaps earlier than that) could handle. However, as a human being, I see this as more than JUST a math problem- it is a matter of common sense. Sit yourself in the cat's seat for a moment. It doesn't care about chalk, chalkboards, or computational reasoning. It knows what it needs and therefore looks at the "fish" for what they are F-I-S-H!!! And that means L-U-N-C-H!!!! And how about us, how do we reason- with common sense? The following is a common sense test...
Acts, Chapter 2 (WEB)
14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and spoke out to them, “You men of Judea, and all you who dwell at Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and listen to my words. 15 For these aren’t drunken, as you suppose, seeing it is only the third hour of the day. 16 But this is what has been spoken through the prophet Joel:
that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh.
Your sons and your daughters will prophesy.
Your young men will see visions.
Your old men will dream dreams.
I will pour out my Spirit, and they will prophesy.
and signs on the earth beneath;
blood, and fire, and billows of smoke.
and the moon into blood,
before the great and glorious day of the Lord comes.
22 “Men of Israel, hear these words! Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved by God to you by mighty works and wonders and signs which God did by him in your midst, even as you yourselves know, 23 him, being delivered up by the determined counsel and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by the hand of lawless men, crucified and killed; 24 whom God raised up, having freed him from the agony of death, because it was not possible that he should be held by it. 25 For David says concerning him,
‘I saw the Lord always before my face,
For he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved.
Moreover my flesh also will dwell in hope;
neither will you allow your Holy One to see decay.
You will make me full of gladness with your presence.’
29 “Brothers, I may tell you freely of the patriarch David, that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. 30 Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, he would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, 31 he foreseeing this spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that neither was his soul left in Hades, nor did his flesh see decay. 32 This Jesus God raised up, to which we all are witnesses. 33 Being therefore exalted by the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this, which you now see and hear. 34 For David didn’t ascend into the heavens, but he says himself,
‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit by my right hand,
36 “Let all the house of Israel therefore know certainly that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”
37 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”
38 Peter said to them, “Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is to you, and to your children, and to all who are far off, even as many as the Lord our God will call to himself.” 40 With many other words he testified, and exhorted them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation!”
41 Then those who gladly received his word were baptized. There were added that day about three thousand souls. 42 They continued steadfastly in the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and prayer. 43 Fear came on every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. 44 All who believed were together, and had all things in common. 45 They sold their possessions and goods, and distributed them to all, according as anyone had need. 46 Day by day, continuing steadfastly with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread at home, they took their food with gladness and singleness of heart, 47 praising God, and having favor with all the people. The Lord added to the assembly day by day those who were being saved.
Peter preaches the first Gospel sermon. The Jews get it. They ask what to do. Peter says to repent, be baptized and you will receive the Holy Spirit. They did it. Why, to obey God, receive the promise of God and be saved. Doubt it, then look at the last part of verse 47. The Lord did the adding and the saving. Please notice- there was no altar call, no one recited a "sinner's prayer" and absolutely no one put there hands on a TV set!!!! The Jews didn't view their situation as something to be analyzed like a math equation, they saw their spiritual condition and the way out. Do what they did and don't listen to someone twisting the Bible to make it say something other than what it plainly says.
May 5, 2015
Musings on Leadership (4)
Musings on Leadership (4)
God’s equipping
20. The basis of all biblical leadership and authority is God’s blessing of the person; God’s enabling and empowering of that person. Was Deborah recognized as a prophetess? It was God who enabled her. Was Samuel recognized as a judge, priest and prophet? It was God who enabled him. Did Bezalel work at and teach others how to work in metals and other materials? God had equipped him to do so. The OT is filled with this truth and these few instances only bring into focus what permeates the OT scriptures. The NT proclaims the same truth. 1 Cor 12 (in pursuit of loving unity as it reflects the unity of God) develops the thought that all those who lead the congregation have been equipped by God. Eph 4 says with grand simplicity that the leaders are ‘gifts’ of God (to the Body).
21. Once again, much of the time the leader expresses the mind of the community as a spokesman of the community. At other times he/she shapes and moulds the vision and practice of that community. In this he/she is “leading”. Characteristically the leader embodies and/or promotes the principles on which a group is founded to a “better than average” degree. He would be acknowledged as a leader precisely because he stands for and lives out those esteemed principles to a marked degree. It’s because we recognize others as more capable or devoted than ourselves that we are pleased to acknowledge them as our leaders. Our convictions are important to us so we want our wisest and most articulate people to lead us in this area. There’s nothing strange or sinister about any of this. As C.H. Dodd put it, “Truly religious people recognize their betters.” (Even truly non-religious people can recognize their betters. Christians have no monopoly on humility and honesty.)
22. Whether the leader’s “equipment” consists of moral grandeur in character or expertise in some specific area, he has been equipped by God to lead. The existence of his equipment is the mark God has placed on him and that’s why people receive him as a leader given by God. The basis of a good man’s authority is his goodness. The basis of a great teacher’s authority is the greatness of his teaching. In both cases, these are the gifts of God and that’s the basis of his leadership and authority.
21. Once again, much of the time the leader expresses the mind of the community as a spokesman of the community. At other times he/she shapes and moulds the vision and practice of that community. In this he/she is “leading”. Characteristically the leader embodies and/or promotes the principles on which a group is founded to a “better than average” degree. He would be acknowledged as a leader precisely because he stands for and lives out those esteemed principles to a marked degree. It’s because we recognize others as more capable or devoted than ourselves that we are pleased to acknowledge them as our leaders. Our convictions are important to us so we want our wisest and most articulate people to lead us in this area. There’s nothing strange or sinister about any of this. As C.H. Dodd put it, “Truly religious people recognize their betters.” (Even truly non-religious people can recognize their betters. Christians have no monopoly on humility and honesty.)
22. Whether the leader’s “equipment” consists of moral grandeur in character or expertise in some specific area, he has been equipped by God to lead. The existence of his equipment is the mark God has placed on him and that’s why people receive him as a leader given by God. The basis of a good man’s authority is his goodness. The basis of a great teacher’s authority is the greatness of his teaching. In both cases, these are the gifts of God and that’s the basis of his leadership and authority.
The person’s willingness to lead
23. 1 Pet 5:2 reminds shepherds that they are to exercise leadership willingly. Phillips translates it like this: “Accept the responsibility of looking after them willingly and not because you feel you can’t get out of it...”
24. Only the ignorant think that leaders have it easy! Leadership involves lots of work, disappointment, frustration and loss of comforts as well as satisfaction, joy and other perks. Giftedness must be developed by involvement whether one is a concert pianist, a business man or a religious leader. Good leadership (religious or otherwise) means the individual must make a genuine commitment. It must be his/her commitment. When times get tough and they aren't willing to continue to pay the price it won’t impress anyone if they say: “I never wanted to do it anyway. They talked me into it.” A leader worth the name doesn’t have to be endlessly entreated to do his business. Giving room for human frailty, weariness and emotional lows, a leader ought to be willing to face the demands that his place of leadership makes on him. If he doesn’t want to lead then he shouldn’t allow himself to be placed in that position. If he’s going to do it he must personally commit to it.
24. Only the ignorant think that leaders have it easy! Leadership involves lots of work, disappointment, frustration and loss of comforts as well as satisfaction, joy and other perks. Giftedness must be developed by involvement whether one is a concert pianist, a business man or a religious leader. Good leadership (religious or otherwise) means the individual must make a genuine commitment. It must be his/her commitment. When times get tough and they aren't willing to continue to pay the price it won’t impress anyone if they say: “I never wanted to do it anyway. They talked me into it.” A leader worth the name doesn’t have to be endlessly entreated to do his business. Giving room for human frailty, weariness and emotional lows, a leader ought to be willing to face the demands that his place of leadership makes on him. If he doesn’t want to lead then he shouldn’t allow himself to be placed in that position. If he’s going to do it he must personally commit to it.
The person’s unwillingness to lead
25. The previous point needs to be made but this point balances it. We see it everywhere we look. We see it in school-teachers who are underpaid, unappreciated and over-burdened but who can’t leave the job alone. We see it in decent and powerful business women who have made more money than they can spend and who have no greed for predatory wealth. They thrill to the challenge of building another thriving business which makes life easier for employees and needy families. We see it in business men who have (despite their honest and diligent efforts) failed in the market. They can hardly wait to raise more money to have another shot at it. We see it in over-worked doctors and nurses who could have an easier time in some other job but who won’t turn from medicine or patient-care. We see it in a few genuine statesmen who, without being smug or too sweet to be wholesome, fight corruption and work for “the people”. All the people! And they do this despite the daily harassment by political jackals and self-serving foxes. When they are feeling the strain and you urge people like these to change their jobs, they tell you they can’t. It’s in their blood. They’d be unhappy at anything else. It isn’t so much that they have chosen the vocation; the vocation holds them prisoner. This is biblical-style leadership. In this Christian leaders and non-Christian leaders often share a common experience. Yes! They do!
26. Jeremiah was a glorious prophet! At times he staggered under the pressure. At times he complained that his service to God had brought him nothing but pain. He felt deeply for his people but he had his moments when he felt more deeply for himself and he plainly said so to God. He sometimes wished he had a wilderness house where he could go and have a good cry and on more than one occasion he wasn’t sure about the message God had given him to deliver. If he found it so tough and complained so much, why didn’t he quit? He couldn’t! He thought about it (20:9) but the message wouldn’t stay inside. He told himself he wouldn’t speak any more but as he walked around silent and fuming the message began to eat at his bones until he could keep it in no longer and off he went again. He was really a prisoner to the vocation. About six centuries later another Jewish prophet, another very human human, confessed he had no choice but to speak for God (1 Cor 9:16-18). Here’s how he put it: “For I take no special pride that I preach the gospel. I feel compelled to do so; I should be utterly miserable if I failed to preach it. If I do this work because I choose to do so then I am entitled to a reward. But if it is no choice of mine, but a sacred responsibility put upon me, what can I expect in the way of reward?” (Phillips)
27. These two illustrations are typical. This is the norm for outstanding biblical leaders. From Moses to Gideon to Elijah to Amos to Nehemiah to Peter. Despite the moments of balking and protest, of discouragement and disillusionment, of self-pity and ‘burn-out’ they couldn’t help themselves. They had been touched by God for a noble endeavour and there was no turning back. Wasn’t it Caruso, the famous tenor, who said he didn’t have a voice, the voice had him? Moses and some unknown modern school-teacher would have a lot to share, wouldn’t they? Daniel and some modern noble statesman could get well acquainted. Deborah and some honourable lady judge or lawyer would have plenty in common. All good leaders, in the Bible or out of it, religious or non-religious, prominent or coming up in the rear have this in common: they feel a sense of vocation so deeply that their commitment has gone beyond willingness into the realm of healthy impulsion. (And to see a school-teacher leaving for home at the end of the day, weary after wrestling for the minds of mainly hard to inspire students—to see him leave with a satisfied look because of some hard-won victory is gorgeous. To see the joy in the faces of a poorly-paid preacher and his wife when their life and message have finally begun to show fruit in the growing selflessness of some of the disciples— that’s contagious. To hear the excitement in a Sunday-school teacher’s voice as she rehearses the bravery of some of her young students in the face of awful family situations is humbling. To share the joy of a successful business woman who has created an honest stall in the marketplace where people see an island of cheerful fairness operate in a sea of shoddy goods and sharp practices—to share that joy is inspiring.)
26. Jeremiah was a glorious prophet! At times he staggered under the pressure. At times he complained that his service to God had brought him nothing but pain. He felt deeply for his people but he had his moments when he felt more deeply for himself and he plainly said so to God. He sometimes wished he had a wilderness house where he could go and have a good cry and on more than one occasion he wasn’t sure about the message God had given him to deliver. If he found it so tough and complained so much, why didn’t he quit? He couldn’t! He thought about it (20:9) but the message wouldn’t stay inside. He told himself he wouldn’t speak any more but as he walked around silent and fuming the message began to eat at his bones until he could keep it in no longer and off he went again. He was really a prisoner to the vocation. About six centuries later another Jewish prophet, another very human human, confessed he had no choice but to speak for God (1 Cor 9:16-18). Here’s how he put it: “For I take no special pride that I preach the gospel. I feel compelled to do so; I should be utterly miserable if I failed to preach it. If I do this work because I choose to do so then I am entitled to a reward. But if it is no choice of mine, but a sacred responsibility put upon me, what can I expect in the way of reward?” (Phillips)
27. These two illustrations are typical. This is the norm for outstanding biblical leaders. From Moses to Gideon to Elijah to Amos to Nehemiah to Peter. Despite the moments of balking and protest, of discouragement and disillusionment, of self-pity and ‘burn-out’ they couldn’t help themselves. They had been touched by God for a noble endeavour and there was no turning back. Wasn’t it Caruso, the famous tenor, who said he didn’t have a voice, the voice had him? Moses and some unknown modern school-teacher would have a lot to share, wouldn’t they? Daniel and some modern noble statesman could get well acquainted. Deborah and some honourable lady judge or lawyer would have plenty in common. All good leaders, in the Bible or out of it, religious or non-religious, prominent or coming up in the rear have this in common: they feel a sense of vocation so deeply that their commitment has gone beyond willingness into the realm of healthy impulsion. (And to see a school-teacher leaving for home at the end of the day, weary after wrestling for the minds of mainly hard to inspire students—to see him leave with a satisfied look because of some hard-won victory is gorgeous. To see the joy in the faces of a poorly-paid preacher and his wife when their life and message have finally begun to show fruit in the growing selflessness of some of the disciples— that’s contagious. To hear the excitement in a Sunday-school teacher’s voice as she rehearses the bravery of some of her young students in the face of awful family situations is humbling. To share the joy of a successful business woman who has created an honest stall in the marketplace where people see an island of cheerful fairness operate in a sea of shoddy goods and sharp practices—to share that joy is inspiring.)
The people’s willingness to follow
28. This point can easily be overstated but it does need to be made. In a democratic society (and in a world which is careering toward democratization) and in a culture shaped by such a society, it's necessary to deal with the desire of the people. In societies and cultures where democracy is unknown, leaders are appointed in ways unacceptable to western standards. In some structures (such as some privately owned businesses), the situation is clear—the owner is the leader. If you don’t like that, you indicate your disagreement by clearing out your desk on your way to another job.
29. In theory, in non-religious structures, the difficulties in harmonizing leadership and ‘people power’ should be greater since Bible believers are given clear guidelines about leadership and ‘followership’. But everyone with even a little insight knows that guidelines aren’t what leadership/followership problems are about. It would be pleasing to be able to say that Christian people need only to be told how to handle such challenges and it would be done. But it would be untrue! Non-Christians have no monopoly on arrogance or excessive self-interest. Christians are very capable of division, pride and unhealthy self-determination. There are men in religious communities who want to call the shots and crack the whips as there are those who will follow no one however gifted or qualified they are.
30. Nevertheless, in a religious community, those who are the gifted and more than willing to serve as leaders and they’ll have the support of the people in general. They’ll be acknowledged as leaders even before any public or formal appointment takes place. (I’ll say more about this shortly.) So, despite the possible problem situations, common sense usually prevails and people are glad to follow leaders of the calibre we’ve sketched in the previous paragraphs. Just the same, the man who is not wanted as a leader by the community cannot serve the community as a leader no matter how qualified he is (or thinks he is)!
31. I’m old enough to know that people have often followed bad leaders and that people have often rejected good leaders. Ultimate goodness lies only in God and that ultimate goodness was manifested in Jesus Christ. Apart from that qualifier, nobody is absolutely good or evil. No leader is without his flaws. Equally, no follower is without his flaws. For good or ill, people only follow leaders they judge to be good and sometimes their appraisal of what is ‘good’ is not good.
29. In theory, in non-religious structures, the difficulties in harmonizing leadership and ‘people power’ should be greater since Bible believers are given clear guidelines about leadership and ‘followership’. But everyone with even a little insight knows that guidelines aren’t what leadership/followership problems are about. It would be pleasing to be able to say that Christian people need only to be told how to handle such challenges and it would be done. But it would be untrue! Non-Christians have no monopoly on arrogance or excessive self-interest. Christians are very capable of division, pride and unhealthy self-determination. There are men in religious communities who want to call the shots and crack the whips as there are those who will follow no one however gifted or qualified they are.
30. Nevertheless, in a religious community, those who are the gifted and more than willing to serve as leaders and they’ll have the support of the people in general. They’ll be acknowledged as leaders even before any public or formal appointment takes place. (I’ll say more about this shortly.) So, despite the possible problem situations, common sense usually prevails and people are glad to follow leaders of the calibre we’ve sketched in the previous paragraphs. Just the same, the man who is not wanted as a leader by the community cannot serve the community as a leader no matter how qualified he is (or thinks he is)!
31. I’m old enough to know that people have often followed bad leaders and that people have often rejected good leaders. Ultimate goodness lies only in God and that ultimate goodness was manifested in Jesus Christ. Apart from that qualifier, nobody is absolutely good or evil. No leader is without his flaws. Equally, no follower is without his flaws. For good or ill, people only follow leaders they judge to be good and sometimes their appraisal of what is ‘good’ is not good.
©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.
Adult Stem-cell Research by Dave Miller, Ph.D.
http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=496
Adult Stem-cell Research
by | Dave Miller, Ph.D. |
As the hype and propaganda by liberal politicians and Hollywood entertainers continues to fuel the debate over embryonic stem-cell research, new evidence once again has demonstrated the ongoing success of adult stem-cell research (Serafini, et al., 2007). Stem cells from adult bone marrow, “multipotent adult progenitor cells” (MAPCs), were injected into mice whose immune cells had been neutralized by radiation. The MAPCs replenished the bone marrow, spleen, peripheral blood, and lymph nodes of the immunodeficient mice (Williams, 2007). What’s more, none of the recipient mice developed tumors—an ongoing problem with the use of transplanted embryonic stem cells (ESCs). The conclusion? “The potential of long-term culture followed by tumor-free cell transfer thus givesMAPCs a therapeutic advantage over both ESCs and HSCs” (Williams). In other words, adult stem-cell research continues to produce effective results, while embryonic stem-cell research has yet to demonstrate significant value (see Harrub, 2006; Harrub and Thompson, 2004).
The moral, spiritual, and biblical issue is very simple: the shedding of innocent blood is a despicable thing to God (Proverbs 6:17). Solomon warned: “My son, if sinners entice you, do not consent. If they say, ‘Come with us, let us lie in wait to shed blood; let us lurk secretly for the innocent without cause... My son, do not walk in the way with them, keep your foot from their path; for their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed blood” (Proverbs 1:10-16, emp. added). Even if embryonic stem cells one day were shown to be beneficial to the infirmed, saving one human at the expense of another is not the right solution. Indeed, murdering millions of innocent babies through both abortion and embryonic stem-cell research is the evil scourge of our time (cf. Jeremiah 19:5; 32:35).
REFERENCES
Harrub, Brad (2006), “False Marketing of Embryonic Stem Cells,” [On-line], URL:http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2976.
Harrub, Brad and Bert Thompson (2004), “Presidential Elections, Superman, Embryonic Stem Cells, Bad Science, and False Hope,” [On-line], URL: http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2621.
Serafini, Marta, S.J. Dylla, et al. (2007), “Hematopoietic Reconstitution by Multipotent Adult Progenitor Cells: Precursors to Long-Term Hematopoietic Stem Cells,” The Journal of Experimental Medicine, January 16, [On-line], URL: http://www.jem.org/cgi/content/abstract/jem.20061115v1.
Williams, Ruth (2007), “Cell Replacement Therapy—Are MAPCs the Answer?” The Journal of Experimental Medicine, January 16, [On-line], URL: http://www.jem.org/cgi/content/full/jem.2041iti1v1.
“So We Make Up Stories” About Human Evolution by Kyle Butt, M.A
http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=2431
“So We Make Up Stories” About Human Evolution
by | Kyle Butt, M.A. |
Dr. Richard Lewontin is the Alexander Agassiz Research Professor at the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard University. Harvard University Press describes him as one of their “most brilliant evolutionary biologists.” A Harvard professor since 1973, he has impeccable academic credentials, and has gained worldwide notoriety for authoring several books, including The Triple Helix, The Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change, and Biology as Ideology.
During the week of February 14-18, Dr. Lewontin was invited to speak at the American Association for the Advancement of Science’s annual meeting held in Boston, Massachusetts. Michale Balter, writing for Science magazine, reported briefly on Lewontin’s comments that caused quite a stir in the evolutionary community. Balter titled his article “How Human Intelligence Evolved—Is It Science or ‘Paleofantasy’?” (2008). In the first paragraph, Balter quipped that Lewontin really “knows how to grab an audience’s attention.”
What did Lewontin say that was so noteworthy and attention-grabbing? Lewontin “led off a session titled ‘The Mind of a Toolmaker’ by announcing that scientists know next to nothing about how humans got so smart. ‘We are missing the fossil record of human cognition,’ Lewontin said at the meeting. ‘So we make up stories’” (Balter, 2008, emp. added). While Balter spent the rest of his article scrambling to show that Lewontin’s conclusions are not recognized by all in the scientific community, Lewontin’s devastating blow to evolution’s long-cherished scenario of human development could not be papered over so easily.
James Randerson, science correspondent for the United Kingdom’s Guardian, wrote an article titled “We Know Nothing About Brain Evolution” in which he, too, reported on Lewontin’s speech. Lewontin titled his speech, “Why We Know Nothing About the Evolution of Cognition.” Randerson reported that, in the lecture, the eminent Harvard professor “systematically dismissed every assumption about the evolution of human thought, reaching the conclusion that scientists are still completely in the dark about how natural selection prompted the massive hike in human brain size in the human line” (2008, emp. added).
Lewontin then turned his attention to the fossil record. Randerson summarized Dr. Lewontin’s statements by saying: “The main problem is the poor fossil record. Despite a handful of hominid fossils stretching back 4m [million—KB] years or so, we can’t be sure that any of them are on the main ancestral line to us. Many or all of them could have been evolutionary side branches” (2008). Randerson continued, stating: “Worse, the fossils we do have are difficult to interpret. ‘I don’t have the faintest idea what the cranial capacity [of a fossil hominid] means,’ Lewontin confessed. What does a particular brain size tell us about the capabilities of the animal attached to it?” (2008).
Of course, Lewontin’s comments fly in the face of everything the general population has been led to believe about human evolution. The beautiful drawings showing ape-like creatures gradually evolving in a straight line into humans have been plastered on science-lab walls, in science textbooks, and in popular science magazines for the last five decades. We have been told that the hominid fossil record is so complete that it provides irrefutable evidence verifying human evolution. We have been told that our “ancestral” fossils indicate exactly when our ancient great-grandparents began to walk upright, when they evolved greater cognitive skills, and when they evolved into us.
Lewontin was not finished tearing into the standard evolutionary party line about hominid fossils. Randerson noted that Lewontin “is even skeptical that palaeoanthropologists can be sure which species walked upright and which dragged their knuckles. Upright posture is crucial for freeing up the hands to do other useful things” (2008).
What, then, did Lewontin conclude regarding the prevailing status of ignorance that pervades the scientific community regarding the supposed evolution of humans? He said: “We are in very serious difficulties in trying to reconstruct the evolution of cognition. I’m not even sure what we mean by the problem” (as quoted in Randerson, 2008).
The bombshell that Lewontin dropped on the 2008 AAAS annual meeting will leave devastating and lasting carnage in its wake in the evolutionary community. He debunked 50 years of orchestrated evolutionary propaganda. Randerson concluded his summary of Lewontin’s statements by observing: “All in all, despite thousands of scientific papers and countless National Geographic front covers, we have not made much progress in understanding how our most complicated and mysterious organ [brain—KB] came about” (2008).
After reviewing Lewontin’s statements and the various journal articles describing them, the writers ofCreation/Evolution Headlines appropriately admonished the reader:
Remember this entry the next time you get a National Geographic cover story of a hominid with a philosopher’s gaze. Remember it when you are told stories about hominids walking upright, their hands now freed to scratch their chins and think. Remember it when you are shown a chimpanzee on NOVA performing memory tricks for a banana or smashing bugs with a rock. Remember it when a stack of erudite scientific papers on human evolution is placed on the witness table at a trial over whether students should be allowed to think critically about evolution in science class (“Paleofantasy...,” 2008).
REFERENCES
Balter, Michael (2008), “How Human Intelligence Evolved—Is It Science or ‘Paleofantasy’?” Science, 319 [5866]:1028, [On-line], URL: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/319/5866/1028a.
“Paleofantasy: Brain Evolution is Mere Storytelling” (2008), Creation/Evolution Headlines, February 22, [On-line], URL: http://www.creationsafaris.com/crev200802.htm.
Randerson, James (2008), “We Know Nothing About Brain Evolution,” Guardian, [On-line], URL:http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/02/the_distinguished_biologist _pr.html.
Faith, Evidence, and Credible Testimony by Eric Lyons, M.Min.
http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=4146
Faith, Evidence, and Credible Testimony
by | Eric Lyons, M.Min. |
Those closest to Jesus during His ministry initially doubted His resurrection from the dead and were justifiably rebuked for their unbelief. Although many of us likely would have been guilty of the same doubts, still, the apostles should have believed the witness of Mary Magdalene as soon as she testified to the empty tomb and risen Savior. Believers today, however, must be careful not to misinterpret Jesus’ rebukes of unbelief as promoting the popular notion that Christianity is an emotion-based, feel-good religion where evidence is unavailable or unnecessary.
EVIDENCE
Since the Bible repeatedly testifies that the faith of Christians is grounded in truth, reason, knowledge, and evidence (Romans 1:20; Psalm 19:1-4; John 5:31-47; Acts 1:3; 26:25), some wonder why Jesus rebuked the apostles for doubting His resurrection prior to seeing Him alive (Mark 16:14; cf. Luke 24:38). Had Jesus expected His apostles to have faith in His resurrection without proof? And why did Jesus tell Thomas, “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed” (John 20:29, emp. added)? Was Jesus commending an unverifiable, fickle faith?
The fact is, neither Thomas nor any apostle was rebuked for wanting evidence of Jesus’ resurrection. They were rightly rebuked, however, (1) for doubting the credible evidence they had already received, and (2) for demanding more evidence than was necessary for them to have solid faith in the risen Savior.
Prophecies
The same Man Whom Peter confessed was “the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16); the same Man Whom the apostles had seen raise Lazarus from the dead (John 11:43-44); the same Man Whom they saw transfigured (Matthew 17:5-9); the same Man Who had worked many amazing miracles in their presence (John 20:30); the same Man Who foretold precisely Peter’s triple denial (Matthew 26:34,75); the same Man Who accurately prophesied His own betrayal, scourging, and crucifixion (Matthew 20:18-19): this same Man repeatedly prophesied of His resurrection, even foretelling the very day on which it would occur (John 2:19; Matthew 12:40; 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19; 26:32). So well known were Jesus’ prophecies of His resurrection from the dead on the third day that even His enemies were aware of them. In fact, the “chief priests and Pharisees gathered together to Pilate, saying, ‘Sir, we remember, that while He was still alive, how that deceiver said, “After three days I will rise.” Therefore command that the tomb be made secure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night and steal Him away’” (Matthew 27:62-64).
So why did Jesus rebuke His apostles for their unbelief following His resurrection? Was He implying that they should have behaved like simpletons and believed everything they ever heard from anyone? (“The simple believes every word, but the prudent considers well his steps”—Proverbs 14:15.) Not at all. Jesus had every right to rebuke His apostles’ unbelief, first and foremost, because they refused to believe His Word (cf. Romans 10:17). They had seen Him raise the dead. They had witnessed His perfect life. They had heard His consistent words of Truth, including His repeated and accurate prophecies of various matters, including His betrayal, arrest, scourging, and crucifixion. They had every logical reason to believe what Jesus had prophesied about His resurrection. Everything they had ever seen and heard from Jesus was pure, right, and true. However, rather than expect a risen Redeemer on Sunday morning, such an idea “appeared to them as nonsense” (Luke 24:11, NASB, emp. added). Rather than traveling to Galilee and searching for the living Lord as soon as the Sun appeared on the third day (Matthew 26:32), they remained in Jerusalem behind closed doors “for fear of the Jews” (John 20:19).
Jesus wanted His disciples to understand about His death and resurrection. He told them: “Let these words sink down into your ears, for the Son of Man is about to be betrayed into the hands of men” (Luke 9:43, emp. added). He desired for them to have a sincere, strong, evidence-based faith. Sadly, fear, preconceived ideas about the Messiah and His kingdom, and spiritual blindness (Luke 9:44; cf. 2 Corinthians 4:4) initially interfered with the apostles’ belief in His resurrection.
Credible Testimony
When Jesus told Thomas, “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed” (John 20:29), was He condoning a careless faith? Was He advancing the idea of an emotion-driven, feel-good religion? Should we expect Christians living 2,000 years this side of the resurrection of Christ to have a reasonable faith in the risen Savior? If, unlike Thomas and the rest of the apostles, Jesus has never appeared to us, how can we expect to have a fact-based faith?
The same God Who rightly expects His human creation to examine the evidence and come to a knowledge of Him without ever literally seeing Him, is the same God Who expects man to follow the facts that lead to a resurrected Redeemer without ever personally witnessing His resurrection. No one believes in God because they can put Him under a microscope and see Him. No one can prove He exists by touching Him. We cannot use the five senses to see and prove the actual essence of God (cf. John 4:24; Luke 24:39). What we have at our fingertips, however, is a mountain of credibleevidence that testifies on God’s behalf. The very existence of finite matter testifies to a supernatural, infinite, eternal Creator. The endless examples of design in the Universe bear witness to a grand Designer. The laws of science (e.g., the Law of Biogenesis) testify to God’s existence. [NOTE: For additional information on the existence of God, see http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12.]
A reasonable faith in Jesus’ resurrection is, likewise, based upon a mountain of credible testimony. Just as credible testimony (and not first-hand knowledge) has lead billions of people to believe, justifiably so, that Alexander the Great, Napoleon, and George Washington were real people, millions of Christians have come to the logical conclusion that Jesus rose from the dead. Nineteen-hundred-year-old eyewitness accounts of Jesus’ resurrection exist in the most historically documented and accurate ancient book in the world—the New Testament. The event was foreshadowed and prophesied in the Old Testament (Psalm 16:10; Jonah 1:17-2:10; Matthew 12:40). Though very serious preventative steps were taken to keep the lifeless body of Jesus buried (Matthew 27:62-66), the tomb was found empty on the exact day He promised to arise. The body of Christ was never found (and, no doubt, first-century skeptics, especially the impenitent Jews who put Him to death, would have loved nothing more than to present Jesus’ dead body to early Christians).
The once fearful and skeptical disciples quickly transformed into a courageous, confident group of Christians who suffered and eventually died for their continual belief and teachings regarding the resurrected Lord. Hundreds of early Christians were able to testify to having seen Jesus firsthand after His resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:5-8). Tens of thousands of once-skeptical Jews, not the least of which was Saul of Tarsus, examined the evidence, left Judaism, and confessed Jesus Christ as the Son of God (Acts 2:41,47; 4:4; 5:14; 6:7; 21:20). What’s more, these same Jews changed their day of worship from Saturday to Sunday (Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:1-2). As with evidence for the existence of God or the inspiration of the Bible, the cumulative case for the resurrection of Christ from credible testimony lies at the heart of a fortified faith.
CONCLUSION
Jesus rightly rebuked His apostles following His resurrection. They should have believed Mary Magdalene because she was a credible witness who said nothing more than what the Son of God had previously said many times would happen: He would arise on the third day following His death. What’s more, the blessing that Jesus mentioned to the apostle Thomas (“Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed”—John 20:29) was not an endorsement of a blind, emotion-based, feel-good religion, but Heaven-sent support for the truthful, credible evidence that leads the open-minded, truth-seeker to confess Him as “Lord and God.”
Are Diamonds “Life’s Best Friend”? by Kyle Butt, M.A.
http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=1127
Are Diamonds “Life’s Best Friend”?
by | Kyle Butt, M.A. |
The theory of organic evolution is fraught with irreconcilable errors. One of the foremost is the fact that evolution demands that living organisms arose from non-living, inorganic chemicals. As all origin-of-life researchers are well aware, this idea flies in the face of the Law of Biogenesis, the most experimentally substantiated biological law in the history of science. Be that as it may, evolutionists continue their futile efforts to explain how life could have arisen from primitive, non-living substances.
According to three German scientists from the University of Ulm, diamonds most likely helped get life off the ground. In an article reporting on the work, Robert Britt stated:
Diamonds are crystallized forms of carbon that predate the oldest known life on the planet. In lab experiments aimed to confirm work done more than three decades ago, researchers found that when treated with hydrogen, natural diamonds formed crystalline layers of water on the surface. Water is essential for life as we know it. Also, the tests found electrical conductivity that could have been key to forcing chemical reactions needed to generate the first birth (2008).
Those who read Britt’s article are struck by the numerous qualifying statements such as “diamonds may have been,” “the resulting reaction may have been,” and “the new research does not conclusively determine how life began” (emp. added). Such qualifying statements are certainly needed in light of the “evidence” that is presented. Supposedly diamonds would have made a good platform for life because they can form layers of water and can possess electrical conductivity. Yet, in labs all across the globe for the past 50 years, scientists have been able to work with an endless supply of water and electricity and still have not produced life from non-life—as if water and conductivity are equivalent to life production.
Furthermore, diamonds supposedly “predate the oldest known life forms” on Earth. The ancient age of diamonds, however, has fallen upon very hard times. In 2005, Donald DeYoung published results from a team research project referred to as RATE. The name RATE is an acronym for Radioisotopes and the Age of The Earth. This team of scientists studied 12 diamond samples, each about 50 milligrams in weight. If diamonds are as old as suggested, they certainly would not contain any traces of Carbon-14, since C-14 should have escaped from the samples billions of years ago. After closely analyzing the samples, however, Carbon-14 was present in every one. DeYoung wrote: “The presence of C-14 in ‘very old’ fossils, rocks, coal, and diamond samples is clearly a major conflict with the long-age time scale” (2005, p. 56, emp. added).
Britt appropriately included in his brief article the fact that some scientists postulate the idea of panspermia, in which aliens allegedly seeded planet Earth with life. In truth, there is as much evidence for little green men dropping off packets of bacteria as there is that life spontaneously generated on the surface of a diamond. All such concepts are devoid of experimental verification. The presence of life on this Earth is not a scientific mystery that remains to be solved. It is a historic occurrence that most elementary school children can explain: “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth” (Genesis 1:1), including all kinds of living organisms.
REFERENCES
Britt, Robert Roy (2008), “Diamonds May Have Jumpstarted Life on Earth,” LiveScience.com, [On-line], URL: http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20080726/sc_livescience/ diamondsmayhavejumpstartedlifeonearth.
DeYoung, Don (2005), Thousands...Not Billions (Green Forest, AR: Master Books).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)