Chalk One up for Academic Freedom by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=776

Chalk One up for Academic Freedom

by	Kyle Butt, M.Div.

For several decades now, the theory of evolution has maintained an unwarranted, undeserved strangle hold on practically every public school science curriculum across our nation. Those who have dared question the beloved dogma have been intimidated, threatened, fired, and mocked for their dissenting views. One of the primary reasons for this censure is that the tenuous theory does not find evidentiary backing from any major field of science. While its proponents boast about the theory’s virtual factuality and the mounds of evidence that “prove” it to be the fundamental scientific theory, hard core, experimental evidence in favor of the theory has been lacking for years—a fact which has been admitted by evolutionists in their more candid moments (see Miller, 2004).

It is refreshing to see that there are those who have the courage to stand up and allow the purported evidence for evolution to be examined critically. On November 8, 2005, the Kansas Board of Education adopted new public school science standards that open the door for critical evaluation of the erroneous theory of evolution, as well as for consideration of alternative ideas of origins such as intelligent design. An article by John Hanna of the Associated Press explained that the new standards “say high school students must understand the major evolutionary concepts. But they also declare that basic Darwinian theory...has been challenged in recent years by fossil evidence and molecular biology” (2005).

Of course, the proponents of evolution are irate. Leading evolutionist and educator Eugenie Scott was quoted as saying, “We can predict this fight happening elsewhere” (Hanna, 2005). I think they certainly can predict that this fight will happen elsewhere. It is high time that the theory of evolution be evaluated critically and be seen for what it really is: a fallacious theory based more upon a belligerent adherence to the philosophy of materialism than an honest assessment of scientific discovery.

Kansas Board of Education member, Kathy Martin, responded to the board’s decision by saying: “Students will be informed and not indoctrinated” (Hanna, 2005). Her assessment hit the nail on the head. If evolution is such a well-grounded, virtual fact, it should be able to withstand a critical evaluation, and it should outstrip competing ideas. The fact that evolutionists do not want any other information considered is a telling hint that, deep down, they know their precious doctrine cannot withstand the test. In desperate efforts to keep evolution entrenched, evolutionists will claim that all other ideas (such as intelligent design) are unscientific, only held by ignorant radicals, backdoor advances of fundamentalist Christianity, and other such diversionary tactics. In reality, they are simply trying to draw attention away from the real issue: Does accurate, scientific evidence confirm the theory of evolution? Those on the Kansas Board of Education, and an increasing number of truth-seekers, are beginning to realize that the overwhelming answer to that question is a resounding “No!”

REFERENCES

Hanna, John (2005), “Evolution Critics Score Win in Kansas,” [On-line], URL: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1295774.

Miller, Dave (2004), “Atheist Finally ‘Sobers Up,’” [On-line], URL: http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2662.

Did Jesus Condone Law-breaking? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=1276

Did Jesus Condone Law-breaking?

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

The Pharisees certainly did not think that the Son of God was beyond reproach. Following Jesus’ feeding of the four thousand, they came “testing” Him, asking Him to show them a sign from heaven (Matthew 16:1). Later in the gospel of Matthew (19:3ff.), the writer recorded how “the Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, ‘Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?’ ” It was their aim on this occasion, as on numerous other occasions, to entangle Jesus in His teachings by asking Him a potentially entrapping question—one that, if answered in a way that the Pharisees had anticipated, might bring upon Jesus the wrath of Herod Antipas (cf. Matthew 14:1-12; Mark 6:14-29) and/or some of His fellow Jews (e.g., the school of Hillel, or the school of Shammai). A third time the Pharisees sought to “entangle Him in His talk” (Matthew 22:15) as they asked, “Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?” (22:17). The jealous and hypocritical Pharisees were so relentless in their efforts to destroy the Lord’s influence that on one occasion they even accused Jesus’ disciples of breaking the law as they “went through the grainfields on the Sabbath…were hungry, and began to pluck heads of grain and to eat” (Matthew 12:1ff.). [NOTE: “Their knowledge of so trifling an incident shows how minutely they observed all his deeds” (Coffman, 1984, p. 165). The microscopic scrutiny under which Jesus lived, likely was even more relentless than what some “stars” experience today. In one sense, the Pharisees could be considered the “paparazzi” of Jesus’ day.] Allegedly, what the disciples were doing on this particular Sabbath was considered “work,” which the Law of Moses forbade (Matthew 12:2; cf. Exodus 20:9-10; 34:21).

Jesus responded to the criticism of the Pharisees by giving the truth of the matter, and at the same time revealing the Pharisees’ hypocrisy. As was somewhat customary for Jesus when being tested by His enemies (cf. Matthew 12:11-12; 15:3; 21:24-25; etc.), He responded to the Pharisees’ accusation with two questions. First, He asked: “Have you not read what David did when he was hungry, he and those who were with him: how he entered the house of God and ate the showbread which was not lawful for him to eat, nor for those who were with him, but only for the priests?” (12:3-4). Jesus reminded the Pharisees of an event in the life of David (recorded in 1 Samuel 21:1ff.), where he and others, while fleeing from king Saul, ate of the showbread, which divine law restricted to the priests (Leviticus 24:5-9). Some commentators have unjustifiably concluded that Jesus was implying innocence on the part of David (and that God’s laws are subservient to human needs—cf. Zerr, 1952, 5:41; Dummelow, 1937, p. 666), and thus He was defending His disciples “lawless” actions with the same reasoning. Actually, however, just the opposite is true. Jesus explicitly stated that what David did was wrong (“not lawful”—12:4), and that what His disciples did was right—they were “guiltless” (12:7). Furthermore, as J.W. McGarvey observed: “If Christians may violate law when its observance would involve hardship or suffering, then there is an end to suffering for the name of Christ, and an end even of self-denial” (1875, p. 104). The disciples were not permitted by Jesus to break the law on this occasion (or any other) just because it was convenient (cf. Matthew 5:17-19). The Pharisees simply were wrong in their accusations. The only “law” Jesus’ disciples broke was the Pharisaical interpretation of the law (which seems to have been more sacred to the Pharisees than the law itself). In response to such hyper-legalism, Burton Coffman forcefully stated:

In the Pharisees’ view, the disciples were guilty of threshing wheat! Such pedantry, nit-picking, and magnification of trifles would also have made them guilty of irrigating land, if they had chanced to knock off a few drops of dew while passing through the fields! The Pharisees were out to “get” Jesus; and any charge was better than none (1984, p. 165, emp. added).

Jesus used the instruction of 1 Samuel 21 to get the Pharisees to recognize their insincerity, and to justify His disciples. David, a man about whom the Jews ever boasted, blatantly violated God’s law by eating the showbread, and yet the Pharisees justified him. On the other hand, Jesus’ disciples merely plucked some grain on the Sabbath while walking through a field, an act that the law did not forbid, and yet the Pharisees condemned them. Had the Pharisees not approved of David’s conduct, they could have responded by saying, “You judge yourself. You’re all sinners.” Their reaction to Jesus’ question, however, was that of hypocrites who had been exposed—silence.

Jesus then asked a second question, saying, “Have you not read in the law that on the Sabbath the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless?” (Matthew 12:5). Here, Jesus wanted the Pharisees to acknowledge that even the law itself condoned some work on the Sabbath day. Although the Pharisees acted as if all work was banned on this day, it was actually the busiest day of the week for priests.

They baked and changed the showbread; they performed sabbatical sacrifices (Num. xxviii. 9), and two lambs were killed on the sabbath in addition to the daily sacrifice. This involved the killing, skinning, and cleaning of the animals, and the building of the fire to consume the sacrifice. They also trimmed the gold lamps, burned incense, and performed various other duties (McGarvey, n.d., pp. 211-212).

One of those “other duties” would have been to circumcise young baby boys when the child’s eighth day fell on a Sabbath. The purpose of Jesus citing these “profane” priestly works was to prove that the Sabbath prohibition was not unconditional. [NOTE: Jesus used the term “profane,” not because there was a real desecration of the temple by the priests as they worked, but “to express what was true according to the mistaken notions of the Pharisees as to manual works performed on the Sabbath” (Bullinger, 1898, p. 676).] The truth is, the Sabbath law “did not forbid work absolutely, but labor for worldly gain. Activity in the work of God was both allowed and commanded” (McGarvey, n.d., p. 212). Coffman thus concluded: “Just as the priests served the temple on the Sabbath day and were guiltless, his [Jesus’—EL] disciples might also serve Christ, the Greater Temple, without incurring guilt” (p. 167). Just as the priests who served God in the temple on the Sabbath were totally within the law, so likewise were Jesus’ disciples as they served the “Lord of the Sabbath” (Matthew 12:8), Whose holiness was greater than that of the temple (12:6).

REFERENCES

Bullinger, E.W. (1898), Figures of Speech Used in the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1968 reprint).

Coffman, Burton (1984), Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Abilene, TX: ACU Press).

Dummelow, J.R. (1937), One Volume Commentary (New York: MacMillan).

McGarvey, J.W. (n.d.), The Fourfold Gospel (Cincinnati, OH: Standard).

McGarvey, J.W. (1875), Commentary on Matthew and Mark (Delight AR: Gospel Light).

Zerr, E.M. (1952), Bible Commentary (Raytown, MO: Reprint Publications).

Which Law Was Abolished? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=531

Which Law Was Abolished?

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

A great deal of confusion exists in the religious world concerning what spiritual law man is under today. Some say the old law still is binding—all of it. Others say that most of it has been abolished, but that some of it still is in effect. Many simply pick and choose laws out of both testaments and abide only by those that are appealing to them. Much of the confusion today about the old law and the new law is a result of the false teachings of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church. This intensely evangelistic group teaches that the Ten Commandments still are binding in the present age. Although most Christians readily agree that nine of the Ten Commandments either are stated explicitly or are implied in the New Testament (and thus binding today because they are part of the new law), Seventh-Day Adventists actively teach that the Ten Commandments (including and especially the command to observe the Sabbath day—Exodus 20:8) are part of “God’s unchangeable law” (from the Seventh-Day Adventist’s official Web site—www.adventist.org/beliefs). Whereas certain parts of the Old Testament have been abolished, they insist that God intended for the Ten Commandments to be an eternal covenant that all of His children must follow.

In response to such teachings, some Christians (like myself) quickly cite passages of Scripture that indicate the old law has been taken away. For example, the writer of Hebrews plainly stated that “if that first covenant had been faultless, then no place would have been sought for a second” (8:7). Then, quoting the prophet Jeremiah, he wrote: “Because finding fault with them, He says: ‘Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah— not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt’ ” (8:8-9; cf. Jeremiah 31:31-34). Elsewhere, the apostle Paul stated that Christ has “wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross” (Colossians 2:14, emp. added). The old law has become “obsolete” (Hebrews 8:13; cf. 7:12; Ephesians 2:14-16). Although we still can learn numerous valuable lessons and principles about how to live godly lives from the old law (cf. Romans 15:4), we are bound by it no longer.

What some like the Seventh-Day Adventists teach, however, is that that God gave two laws on Mt. Sinai. They differentiate between the Ten Commandments and the ceremonial laws, saying that one (the Ten Commandments) is the Law of God and the other (the ceremonial laws) is the Law of Moses. Moreover, they assert that all of the passages in the Bible that refer to the old law being abolished are speaking of the ceremonial laws and not the Ten Commandments, which (they stress) were written with the very finger of God (Exodus 31:18).

Those who separate the “the Law of God” and “the Law of Moses” (in an attempt to find approval for continuing to follow portions of the old law) fail to realize that the Bible does not make such distinctions. Ezra read from “the Book of the Law of Moses,” which also was called “the Book of the Law of God” (Nehemiah 8:1,18). Luke recorded that after Mary gave birth to Jesus “when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were completed, they brought Him to Jerusalem to present Him to the Lord (as it is written in the law of the Lord, ‘Every male who opens the womb shall be called holy to the Lord’), and to offer a sacrifice according to what is said in the law of the Lord, ‘A pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons’ ” (Luke 2:22-24, emp. added). The Law of Moses and the Law of the Lord were the same thing and still are. When writing to the brethren in Rome, the apostle Paul quoted from the Ten Commandments and taught that it was part of the old law to which they had “become dead…through the body of Christ” (Romans 7:4,7). In his second epistle to the Corinthians, Paul wrote:

[C]learly you are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart…. But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious…. For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels. For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious (3:3-11, emp. added).

What was “passing away”? The law written on the “tablets of stone.” What was the law “engraved on stones” that was given to Moses on Mt. Sinai? The Ten Commandments (Exodus 20). In this passage, Paul teaches the very opposite of what Seventh-Day Adventists teach—the Ten Commandments are not an eternal covenant.

The New Testament explicitly teaches that the old law has been abolished. Whether one is talking about the Ten Commandments or the ceremonial laws, the Law of Moses or the Law of God, all are considered the old law that no longer is in effect. Jesus Christ fulfilled that law and nailed it to the cross forever (Matthew 5:17-18; Colossians 2:13-17).

God's Electrical Heavens by Branyon May, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=1269

God's Electrical Heavens

by	Branyon May, Ph.D.

According to atmospheric scientists, the Earth has a functioning dynamic global electric circuit. “In the conventional picture, the main components of Earth’s global electric circuit include thunderstorms, the conducting ionosphere, the downward fair-weather currents and the conducting Earth” (Su, et al., p. 974). [The ionosphere is a portion of the upper atmosphere composed of ionized particles formed by the x-ray and ultraviolet irradiative effects of the Sun.] In a greatly simplified picture, the global electric circuit can be viewed as a large spherical capacitor (i.e., a device for the storage of electrical charge). In this model, the ionosphere serves as the upper boundary, and the ground serves as the lower boundary. Between these two boundaries, scientists have measured an existing potential difference of 300,000 volts (Pasko, 2003, 423:927). The electric potential that exists due to this natural capacitor is vital to the global electric circuit. The balance of this potential is vital to the proper functioning of the atmospheric system. Victor Pasko, professor of electrical engineering at Penn State University, commented: “There are many components contributing to the balance of potential between the plates, but two are critical: thunderstorms, of which there are about 2,000 globally at any given time and which act as batteries charging the capacitor; and fair-weather regions, in which the capacitor can discharge continuously through the weakly conducting atmosphere” (p. 927). During fair weather, there is a continual discharge occurring in the global electric circuit. This discharge has been estimated to account for a leakage of approximately one kiloampere, on the global scale.

The traditional view held that the role of thunderstorms was to counteract the continual fair-weather discharge, by acting as a generator driving current into the Earth’s capacitor, both recharging and maintaining the potential difference found between the ionosphere and ground. However, the discovery by Su and his colleagues has introduced another aspect to thunderstorm activity. As Pasko remarked, there is “a new factor in the model of the Earth’s electrical and chemical environment” (p. 927). These “gigantic optical jets” have acted against the commonly held view of thunderstorms as recharging mechanisms; rather, the measurements support the view that they serve to discharge the global capacitor, removing approximately 30 Coulombs each, from the ionosphere. The researchers stated that this would account for only a fraction of one percent of the total charge in the atmosphere, but does “account for a substantial fraction of charges residing in the lower ionosphere” (Su, et al., p. 976). With the new data, Su and his colleagues concluded: “[T]he conventional picture of the global electric circuit needs to be modified to include the contributions of gigantic jets and possibly sprites” (p. 974).

In addition to the electrical environment, Pasko also mentioned that these jets present a new factor in the chemical environment. Oxygen is one of the primary constituents of Earth’s atmosphere, accounting for approximately 21%. Oxygen is considered a diatomic element, meaning that it has an affinity for being paired with itself, as in atmospheric oxygen (O₂ ). The explosion of thunder that can be heard is the result of a rapid expansion of air. The expansion of air is caused by the intense heating of atmospheric molecules by the electrical discharge. As it extends, lightning scorches the air, reaching temperatures more than four times hotter than the surface of the Sun—nearly 50,000 degrees Fahrenheit. According to John Roach, writer for National Geographic, lightning produces “enough energy to keep a 100-watt light bulb lit for three months” (2003). Through its electrical nature, lightning also has the capacity to ionize particles. It has been documented that lightning has the capacity of initiating chain reactions, whereby atmospheric oxygen molecules are dissociated, leading to the formation of ozone. This process has been duplicated in the production of industrial ozone for the past century (see van Veldhuizen, 2000). Concerning their chemical effects, Pasko commented: “The ionization created by a gigantic jet is likely to have a significant chemical effect on that volume of atmosphere” (p. 928). He went on to correlate the known surface effects with the high-altitude conditions that would be present in TLEs. He commented that in high altitude situations, streamers would “have the ability to produce highly active chemical species and can effectively ‘treat’ thousands of cubic kilometers of atmosphere” (p. 928). Finally, Pasko concluded: “So the known chemical impact of streamers may be a good indication that TLEs noticeably affect the chemistry of the atmosphere” (p. 929).

EVOLUTION VS. DESIGN

The atmosphere is of vital importance to all life on Earth. It contributes to more aspects of life than we are able to quantify, or that could be qualified. For the evolutionist, the changing, early atmosphere of the Earth accounts for the chance emergence of life and the subsequent organic evolutionary process. However, scientists constantly are being confounded by their observations. Although men have been viewing the natural world since the dawn of time, there continues to be an unending stream of intricacies to discover.

Concerning the atmospheric discoveries mentioned, scientists have declared: “It has not been clear, however, whether all the important components of the global circuit have even been identified” (Su, et al., p. 974). They also have commented: “This field is in its infancy, and it remains to be seen how important the electrical and chemical effects of the gigantic jets and other TLEs are for our planet” (Pasko, p. 929). The design of the Earth’s atmosphere continues to impress humanity’s combined intellectual prowess. When discussing the driving forces behind the formation of lightning, Roach described the particle collisions that are needed to produce a separation of electrical charge, which results in the imbalance between cloud and ground. Senior meteorologist Stephen Hodanish of the National Weather Service concluded that a correction (i.e., lightning) for this imbalance results because, “Mother Nature doesn’t like to see that” (as quoted in Raoch, 2003). By ascribing the ultimate cause to an ethereal Mother Nature, Hodanish unknowingly proved the presence of design. Whether it was his intention or not, Hodanish’s comments illustrate the extent of naturalism that now pervades science, and the extent to which that naturalism has reached even into the common aspects of everyday life. Yet, by the scientists’ own admission, it is known that with the brilliantly obvious effect of lightning, there also is a brilliantly obvious Cause.

In the book of Job, the inspired writer penned the words of Elihu, as he declared God’s majesty: “He spreadeth abroad the cloud of his lightning: and it is turned round about by his guidance” (Job 37:11). And to Job, the questions were asked: “O Job: stand still, and consider the wondrous works of God. Dost thou know how God layeth his charge upon them, and causeth the lightning of his cloud to shine? Dost thou know the balancings of the clouds, the wondrous works of him who is perfect in knowledge?” (Job 37:14-16). Job was chastened for placing honor upon himself, neglecting to acknowledge The Most Honorable. For that, Job was reproved—by God Himself.

“Suffer me a little, and I will show thee; for I have yet somewhat to say on God's behalf ” (Job 36:2). In discussing such wonderful design, we also must pay tribute to the Designer; in standing in awe of such an incredible effect, we also must stand in awe of the far greater Cause. As Elihu boldly proclaimed in the verse above as he rebuked Job for self-righteously questioning God’s majesty, we, too, ask, “on God’s behalf,” that time be taken to behold the extraordinary design that is present in the world around us. We must not ascribe it to some mystic, ethereal force; rather, we must acknowledge the ever-so-loving and familiar Father Who can be clearly seen and perceived (Romans 1:20), and Who is “upholding all things by the word of his power” (Hebrews 1:3).

REFERENCES

Pasko, Victor P. (2003), “Atmospheric Physics: Electric Jets,” Nature, 423:927-929. June 26.

Pickrell, John (2003), “Huge Mystery Flashes Seen In Outer Atmosphere,” National Geographic News, [On-line], URL: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/06/0625_030625_atmospherethunder.html, June 25.

Roach, John (2003), “Key to Lightning Deaths: Location, Location, Location,” National Geographic News, [On-line], URL: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/05/0522_030522_lightning.html, May 22.

Su, Han-Tzong, Rue-Ron Hsu, A.B. Chen, Y.C. Wang, W.S. Hsiao, W.C. Lai, L.C. Lee, M. Sato, and H. Fukunishi (2003), “Gigantic Jets Between a Thundercloud and the Ionosphere,” Nature, 423:974-976. June 26.

Van Veldhuizen, E.M. ed. (2000), Electrical Discharges for Environment Purposes: Fundamentals and Applications (Nova Science: New York).

Does Matthew 18:11 Belong in the New Testament? by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=5404

Does Matthew 18:11 Belong in the New Testament?

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Q:

My resources are limited to find a decent enough answer for the passage at Mt. 18:11. I would like to know why or why not it should be in our Bibles.

A:

During the early centuries of Christianity, copies of New Testament books were made by Christians as those books came from the hands of the apostles. Then copies were made of copies, and then copies of copies of copies, and so on. It was inevitable that slight/minor changes would occur in some copies. In later years, New Testament books were copied by monks and even by professional copyists who did so for their living. Those who became very familiar with the synoptic Gospel accounts sometimes unnecessarily attempted to harmonize them with each other in those passages that are parallel, even though the Holy Spirit used different wording in, say Matthew, than He did in Luke, where the same incident is reported. Hence, copyists sometimes introduced words from one Gospel account into another to force them to be uniform in wording. That is clearly what happened with Matthew 18:11. Somewhere along the line, a copyist who was very familiar with Luke introduced the words of Luke 19:10 into the copy of Matthew 18 that he was making. The words are authentic from Luke’s pen, but were not written by Matthew. Many manuscript copies do not contain the verse, but the copies that ultimately influenced the KJV were copies that had the interpolation introduced. Observe that no doctrine of Scripture is placed in jeopardy and no new information is added to the text by such variants in certain copies, and the original text is still preserved in the aggregate of manuscripts. See our article at: http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=5196&topic=103.

"THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS" Our Condition Outside Of Christ (2:1-3) by Mark Copeland

                     "THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS"

                 Our Condition Outside Of Christ (2:1-3)

INTRODUCTION

1. In the last half of chapter one, we saw where Paul mentioned several 
   things for which he had been praying in behalf of the Ephesians:
   a. That they might know God - Ep 1:17
   b. That they might know the hope of His calling - Ep 1:18a
   c. That they might know the glorious riches of His inheritance in the
      saints - Ep 1:18b
   d. That they might know the exceeding greatness of God's power toward
      believers - Ep 1:19

2. In a previous lesson we briefly noted that Paul equated this great 
   power with the working of God that was exercised...
   a. In raising Jesus from the dead and exalting Him to be the head of 
      all things - Ep 1:20-23
   b. In our own conversion, when God took us who were "dead in sin" and
       made us "alive together with Christ" - Ep 2:1-7

3. In order that we might appreciate more fully the grace and power that
   was at work in our conversion, this lesson will focus on the 
   description of our condition BEFORE our conversion
   a. For we will not likely appreciate our PRESENT wealth, unless we 
      fully appreciate our FORMER poverty!
   b. Without a proper appreciation of our PRESENT wealth, we will not 
      likely heed the exhortations found later in this epistle (e.g., 
      Ep 4:1,17; 5:1-2)

[As we consider, then, "Our Condition Outside of Christ", we learn that 
prior to our conversion we were truly "the walking dead"!  For as Paul 
states at first, we were...]

I. DEAD IN TRESPASSES AND SINS (1)

   A. "DEAD" IN WHAT WAY?
      1. Not in the sense of being devoid of ANY good or godly desires
         a. As some who believe in "Total Hereditary Depravity" would 
            teach
         b. For consider that most of those people whose conversions are
            described in Acts were "God-fearing, Bible-believing" people
            BEFORE their conversion!
            1) The thousands of "devout men" in Jerusalem for Pentecost 
               - Ac 2:5
            2) The Ethiopian Eunuch, who had traveled great distances to
               worship God and was reading Isaiah when Philip found him 
               - Ac 8:27-28
            3) Cornelius, a devout God-fearing Gentile who "prayed to 
               God always" - Ac 10:2
            4) Lydia, a prayerful woman "who worshipped God" - Ac 16:
               13-14
            5) The "fair-minded" Bereans - Ac 17:11
            6) Saul of Tarsus (i.e., the apostle Paul) - Ac 22:3; Php 3:
               4-6
      2. Rather, "dead" in the sense of being "separated" from God
         a. Just as "physical death" is a separation of body and spirit 
            - cf. Jm 2:26
         b. So "spiritual death" exists when we are separated from God 
            - cf. Ro 6:23; Is 59:1-2
   
   B. THE CAUSE OF THIS "DEATH"...
      1. Our separation from God has been brought about by "trespasses 
         and sins" - cf. Ro 6:23
         a. "trespasses" (deviations from the straight and narrow path, 
            Hendriksen) - what we might call "sins of COMMISSION"
         b. "sins" (inclinations, thoughts, words, and deeds which "miss
            the mark" of glorifying God, Hendriksen) - including what we
            might call "sins of OMISSION"
      2. "trespasses and sins" that WE committed...
         a. As made clear in verse two of this chapter ("in which you 
            once walked...")
         b. Not those of our forefathers - cf. Ezek 18:20

[Before our conversion to Christ, then, we were "dead" because of our 
OWN sins, and as such, spiritually separated from God, even if we were 
as religiously devout as those described in the book of Acts.  That 
should tell us something about the terribleness of sin!

But the terribleness of sin becomes clearer as we learn what sort of 
"company" we kept before our conversion.  For though "dead", we were...]

II. WALKING WITH THE WORLD AND THE DEVIL (2)

   A. WALKING "ACCORDING TO THE COURSE OF THIS WORLD"...
      1. Before conversion, one walks "in conformity with the customs 
         and manners of the world at large" (Barnes)
      2. The moral condition of those still "in the world" is described 
         more fully in Ep 4:17-19
         a. Alienated from the life of God because of ignorance and 
            hardened hearts, those "in the world"...
            1) Walk in the futility of their mind
            2) Have their understanding darkened
         b. Being past feeling, those "in the world"...
            1) Give themselves over to licentiousness
            2) Work all uncleanness with greediness
         -- Sounds pretty much like our own present generation, doesn't 
            it?
      3. With keeping such "company" before one's conversion, you can 
         understand why they are spiritually "dead" (separated from God) 
         - cf. 1Jn 2:15-17

   B. WALKING "ACCORDING TO THE PRINCE OF THE POWER OF THE AIR"...
      1. Before our conversion, it is not just the "world" we walk 
         according to, but "him" who Paul describes as:
         a. "the prince of the power of the air"
         b. "the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience"
      2. This can be none other than Satan himself!
         a. The great "Adversary" (the word "satan" literally means 
            "adversary") who seeks to "devour" all he can 

             - cf. 1Pe 5:8
         b. Those "in the world" are under his influence, captives to do
            his will - cf. 2Ti 2:26
      3. Those still under his influence are called the "sons of 
         disobedience", because they serve him rather than obey God!

[Influenced by Satan, walking "according to the course of this world", 
we can see why a person before their conversion is truly "dead in 
trespasses and sins"!

But is this also true of those devout, religious souls who are not yet 
"in Christ"?  Like those devout Jews at Pentecost, the Ethiopian Eunuch, 
Lydia, the Bereans, Saul of Tarsus, and God-fearing Gentiles like 
Cornelius?

Yes!  For as Paul says in verse 3, "among whom ALSO WE ALL once
conducted ourselves...".  Yes, even the religiously devout before 
conversion to Christ were...]

III. FULFILLING THE DESIRES OF THE FLESH AND MIND (3)

   A. BEFORE HIS CONVERSION, EVEN A RELIGIOUSLY DEVOUT PERSON LIKE 
      PAUL...
      1. Conducted himself "in the lusts of our flesh"
         a. "Living to gratify the flesh" (Barnes)
         b. As described in Ro 7:14-24, even one who desires to do 
            good, outside of Christ finds himself "enslaved" to the "law
            of sin" in the members of his flesh
      2. Fulfilled "the  desires of the flesh and of the mind"
         a. The "desires of the flesh" are those "unrighteous cravings, 
            such as belong to and are spawned by the flesh" (Hendriksen)
         b. The "desires...of the mind" would include "all kinds of 
            hostile, self-righteous, and/or immoral plans and 
            cogitations, which finally result in wicked deeds"
            (Hendriksen)

   B. THUS, EVEN RELIGIOUSLY DEVOUT PEOPLE BEFORE CONVERSION ARE
      "CHILDREN OF WRATH"...
      1. "just as the others", Paul says, placing himself before 
         conversion on the same level as the "sons of disobedience" 
         described in verse two
      2. All are "children of wrath" (or "sons of disobedience") "by 
         nature"...
         a. Some understand this "nature" to be something one is born 
            with
            1) This passage (Ep 2:1-3) does not actually say "when" we
               began to be "children of wrath"
            2) Only that before we became "children of God" (at our 
               conversion), we were "children of wrath"
         b. The term "nature" can be understood as "a mode of feeling 
            and acting which by long habit has become nature" (Thayer)
            1) In the context of Ep 2:1-3, Paul is not talking about 
               sinful conduct committed by ancestors, the consequence of
               which is felt by their descendants
            2) But sins in which "YOU once walked", "WE all once 
               conducted ourselves", i.e., sins PERSONALLY committed
         c. Therefore, because of our "conduct" before our conversion, 
            we developed a "nature" that resulted in our being:
            1) "sons of disobedience" - 2:2
            2) "children of wrath" - 2:3

CONCLUSION

1. We have seen that "Our Condition Outside Of Christ" is one in which 
   we are...
   a. Dead in trespasses and sins - Ep 2:1
   b. Walking with the world and the devil - Ep 2:2
   c. Fulfilling the desires of the flesh and mind - Ep 2:3
   -- And thus "sons of disobedience", and "children of wrath"!

2. How can such "sons of disobedience" and "children of wrath" ever 
   become...
   a. "holy and without blame"? - Ep 1:4
   b. Receive the "adoption as sons"? - Ep 1:5
   c. And be "accepted" by God? - Ep 1:6

3. The answer will be explained more fully in Ep 2:4-10, where we 
   learn of "Salvation By Grace Through Faith"
   a. We will examine that answer in detail in our next lesson
   b. But for now, compare carefully Ep 2:5 with Col 2:11-13

Have you experienced the working of God's grace in your life, by being 
buried with Christ in baptism where your sins are "cut away" and then 
raised with Christ, thereby "made alive together with Him"...?

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

 

Get a life by Gary Rose

"if I get a life"? If you can see the sign, you have a life, so what's this person referring to? So, I turned to my electronic dictionary for some definitions...

My Wordnet 3.0 defines life as...
The noun life has 14 senses (first 13 from tagged texts)                  
1. (66) life -- (a characteristic state or mode of living; "social life"; "city life"; "real life")  (emphasis added)
2. (54) life, living -- (the experience of being alive; the course of human events and activities; "he could no longer cope with the complexities of life")  (emphasis added)
3. (41) life -- (the course of existence of an individual; the actions and events that occur in living; "he hoped for a new life in Australia"; "he wanted to live his own life without interference from others")  (emphasis added)
4. (29) animation, life, living, aliveness -- (the condition of living or the state of being alive; "while there's life there's hope"; "life depends on many chemical and physical processes")
5. (22) life, lifetime, life-time, lifespan -- (the period during which something is functional (as between birth and death); "the battery had a short life"; "he lived a long and happy life")
6. (18) life -- (the period between birth and the present time; "I have known him all his life")
7. (5) life -- (the period from the present until death; "he appointed himself emperor for life")
8. (5) life -- (a living person; "his heroism saved a life")
9. (5) liveliness, life, spirit, sprightliness -- (animation and energy in action or expression; "it was a heavy play and the actors tried in vain to give life to it")
10. (5) life -- (living things collectively; "the oceans are teeming with life")
11. (3) life -- (the organic phenomenon that distinguishes living organisms from nonliving ones; "there is no life on the moon")
12. (2) biography, life, life story, life history -- (an account of the series of events making up a person's life)  (emphasis added)
13. (1) life -- (a motive for living; "pottery was his life") (emphasis added)
14. life sentence, life -- (a prison term lasting as long as the prisoner lives; "he got life for killing the guard")

While most of these seem to apply generically, number 14 doesn't (to me, anyway). However, some of those definitions seemed particularly relevant to me and perhaps you as well, so I emphasized them. 

So, what does it mean to "get a life"?

The apostle John says...

John, Chapter 1 (World English Bible)

  ¹ In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ² The same was in the beginning with God.  ³ All things were made through him. Without him, nothing was made that has been made.  ⁴ In him was life, and the life was the light of men.  ⁵ The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness hasn’t overcome it. ⁶ There came a man, sent from God, whose name was John.  ⁷ The same came as a witness, that he might testify about the light, that all might believe through him.  ⁸ He was not the light, but was sent that he might testify about the light.  ⁹ The true light that enlightens everyone was coming into the world. 

  ¹⁰ He was in the world, and the world was made through him, and the world didn’t recognize him.  ¹¹ He came to his own, and those who were his own didn’t receive him. ¹² But as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become God’s children, to those who believe in his name:  ¹³ who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (emphasis added)¹⁴ The Word became flesh, and lived among us. We saw his glory, such glory as of the one and only Son of the Father, full of grace and truth.  ¹⁵ John testified about him. He cried out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me, for he was before me.’”  ¹⁶ From his fullness we all received grace upon grace.  ¹⁷ For the law was given through Moses. Grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ.  (emphasis added)  ¹⁸ No one has seen God at any time. The one and only Son,  who is in the bosom of the Father, has declared him.

If I understand him correctly, John's answer to that question is-  Jesus. This solitary man, this man among and above all others is the answer. Why? Several reasons. First, because he lived a GOD directed life and therefore embodied perfection in all that he did. I wonder, can we say the same about the way we live? Second, he answered the question of what life really is- a life lived with the one who is the creator. Lastly, Jesus provided a way to be with God that went beyond adhering to rules and regulations- Grace, given by Jesus' sacrifice of his own perfect life for all who will come to him as LORD and SAVIOR. 

Those who will follow Jesus in obedience to God's will have their sins forgiven and will be with him in heaven, forever. 

I don't know what you think about all this- but to me, it sounds a lot like "getting a life"!!!

Get one.

Bible Reading January 3, 4 by Gary Rose

Bible Reading January 3, 4

(World English Bible)

Jan. 3

Genesis 3

Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any animal of the field which Yahweh God had made. He said to the woman, "Has God really said, 'You shall not eat of any tree of the garden?' "

Gen 3:2 The woman said to the serpent, "Of the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat,

Gen 3:3 but of the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat of it, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.' "

Gen 3:4 The serpent said to the woman, "You won't surely die,

Gen 3:5 for God knows that in the day you eat it, your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

Gen 3:6 When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit, and ate; and she gave some to her husband with her, and he ate.

Gen 3:7 The eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked. They sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.

Gen 3:8 They heard the voice of Yahweh God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of Yahweh God among the trees of the garden.

Gen 3:9 Yahweh God called to the man, and said to him, "Where are you?"

Gen 3:10 The man said, "I heard your voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself."

Gen 3:11 God said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?"

Gen 3:12 The man said, "The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I ate."

Gen 3:13 Yahweh God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?" The woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate."

Gen 3:14 Yahweh God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, cursed are you above all livestock, and above every animal of the field. On your belly you shall go, and you shall eat dust all the days of your life.

Gen 3:15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring. He will bruise your head, and you will bruise his heel."

Gen 3:16 To the woman he said, "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth. In pain you will bring forth children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."

Gen 3:17 To Adam he said, "Because you have listened to your wife's voice, and have eaten of the tree, of which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat of it,' cursed is the ground for your sake. In toil you will eat of it all the days of your life.

Gen 3:18 Thorns also and thistles will it bring forth to you; and you will eat the herb of the field.

Gen 3:19 By the sweat of your face will you eat bread until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken. For you are dust, and to dust you shall return."

Gen 3:20 The man called his wife Eve, because she was the mother of all living.

Gen 3:21 Yahweh God made coats of skins for Adam and for his wife, and clothed them.

Gen 3:22 Yahweh God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil. Now, lest he put forth his hand, and also take of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever..."

Gen 3:23 Therefore Yahweh God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from which he was taken.

Gen 3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed Cherubs at the east of the garden of Eden, and the flame of a sword which turned every way, to guard the way to the tree of life.

Jan. 4

Genesis 4

Gen 4:1 The man knew Eve his wife. She conceived, and gave birth to Cain, and said, "I have gotten a man with Yahweh's help."

Gen 4:2 Again she gave birth, to Cain's brother Abel. Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.

Gen 4:3 As time passed, it happened that Cain brought an offering to Yahweh from the fruit of the ground.

Gen 4:4 Abel also brought some of the firstborn of his flock and of its fat. Yahweh respected Abel and his offering,

Gen 4:5 but he didn't respect Cain and his offering. Cain was very angry, and the expression on his face fell.

Gen 4:6 Yahweh said to Cain, "Why are you angry? Why has the expression of your face fallen?

Gen 4:7 If you do well, will it not be lifted up? If you don't do well, sin crouches at the door. Its desire is for you, but you are to rule over it."

Gen 4:8 Cain said to Abel, his brother, "Let's go into the field." It happened when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel, his brother, and killed him.

Gen 4:9 Yahweh said to Cain, "Where is Abel, your brother?" He said, "I don't know. Am I my brother's keeper?"

Gen 4:10 Yahweh said, "What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood cries to me from the ground.

Gen 4:11 Now you are cursed because of the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother's blood from your hand.

Gen 4:12 From now on, when you till the ground, it won't yield its strength to you. You shall be a fugitive and a wanderer in the earth."

Gen 4:13 Cain said to Yahweh, "My punishment is greater than I can bear.

Gen 4:14 Behold, you have driven me out this day from the surface of the ground. I will be hidden from your face, and I will be a fugitive and a wanderer in the earth. It will happen that whoever finds me will kill me."

Gen 4:15 Yahweh said to him, "Therefore whoever slays Cain, vengeance will be taken on him sevenfold." Yahweh appointed a sign for Cain, lest any finding him should strike him.

Gen 4:16 Cain went out from Yahweh's presence, and lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden.

Gen 4:17 Cain knew his wife. She conceived, and gave birth to Enoch. He built a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

Gen 4:18 To Enoch was born Irad. Irad became the father of Mehujael. Mehujael became the father of Methushael. Methushael became the father of Lamech.

Gen 4:19 Lamech took two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.

Gen 4:20 Adah gave birth to Jabal, who was the father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock.

Gen 4:21 His brother's name was Jubal, who was the father of all who handle the harp and pipe.

Gen 4:22 Zillah also gave birth to Tubal Cain, the forger of every cutting instrument of brass and iron. Tubal Cain's sister was Naamah.

Gen 4:23 Lamech said to his wives, "Adah and Zillah, hear my voice. You wives of Lamech, listen to my speech, for I have slain a man for wounding me, a young man for bruising me.

Gen 4:24 If Cain will be avenged seven times, truly Lamech seventy-seven times."

Gen 4:25 Adam knew his wife again. She gave birth to a son, and named him Seth, "for God has appointed me another child instead of Abel, for Cain killed him."

Gen 4:26 There was also born a son to Seth, and he named him Enosh. Then men began to call on Yahweh's name.

Jan. 3,4

Matthew 2

Mat 2:1 Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the east came to Jerusalem, saying,

Mat 2:2 "Where is he who is born King of the Jews? For we saw his star in the east, and have come to worship him."

Mat 2:3 When Herod the king heard it, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.

Mat 2:4 Gathering together all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he asked them where the Christ would be born.

Mat 2:5 They said to him, "In Bethlehem of Judea, for thus it is written through the prophet,

Mat 2:6 'You Bethlehem, land of Judah, are in no way least among the princes of Judah: for out of you shall come forth a governor, who shall shepherd my people, Israel.' "

Mat 2:7 Then Herod secretly called the wise men, and learned from them exactly what time the star appeared.

Mat 2:8 He sent them to Bethlehem, and said, "Go and search diligently for the young child. When you have found him, bring me word, so that I also may come and worship him."

Mat 2:9 They, having heard the king, went their way; and behold, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, until it came and stood over where the young child was.

Mat 2:10 When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceedingly great joy.

Mat 2:11 They came into the house and saw the young child with Mary, his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him. Opening their treasures, they offered to him gifts: gold, frankincense, and myrrh.

Mat 2:12 Being warned in a dream that they shouldn't return to Herod, they went back to their own country another way.

Mat 2:13 Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying, "Arise and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and stay there until I tell you, for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him."

Mat 2:14 He arose and took the young child and his mother by night, and departed into Egypt,

Mat 2:15 and was there until the death of Herod; that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, "Out of Egypt I called my son."

Mat 2:16 Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked by the wise men, was exceedingly angry, and sent out, and killed all the male children who were in Bethlehem and in all the surrounding countryside, from two years old and under, according to the exact time which he had learned from the wise men.

Mat 2:17 Then that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled, saying,

Mat 2:18 "A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children; she wouldn't be comforted, because they are no more."

Mat 2:19 But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, saying,

Mat 2:20 "Arise and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel, for those who sought the young child's life are dead."

Mat 2:21 He arose and took the young child and his mother, and came into the land of Israel.

Mat 2:22 But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning over Judea in the place of his father, Herod, he was afraid to go there. Being warned in a dream, he withdrew into the region of Galilee,

Mat 2:23 and came and lived in a city called Nazareth; that it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophets: "He will be called a Nazarene."