WAL MART AND CREATION
ONVIDEO-
.Profiling me?
.Pops don’t like that store?
.How old is the earth?
.Did they make encyclopedias?
.The flood
.Evolution
.Punctuated Equilibrium
.Kerry’s tongue?
PAST POSTS- [verses below]
(949)
. ECCLESIASTES 3:11 ‘No man can find out the
work that God has made, from the beginning to the end’. No man can completely
find out Gods works from beginning to end. A few weeks ago as I was
praying/meditating I had a thought; I said to myself ‘what in the world are the
evolutionists going to say when science ultimately overthrows their theory’ and
in a moment of clarity, I kinda heard ‘they will slowly develop ideas that will
make it look like they were right all along, even when these ideas themselves
are contrary to evolution’. I realized that mans inability to admit he was
wrong will cause him to lie. Sure enough, a few days later I caught an
interview on the P.B.S. news that had 2 scientists who were speaking on Darwin.
It just so happens that both Darwin and Lincoln celebrated their 200 year
anniversaries on the same day. During the interview these men reveled in the
wonder and amazement of Darwin, they were falling over themselves in
worshipping the man. They explained how evolution is this reality that is the
basis of all types of scientific advances. They went on and on. The interviewer
then asked about all the science and opponents on the other side. How there
were most certainly proofs that seemed to debunk Darwin’s theory. They
responded by saying ‘Evolution has opened the door for all sorts of
understanding and theories, one of them is called ‘punctuated equilibrium’,
evolution has made this idea possible. Therefore thanks to evolution we have
these other truths to look to for answers’. These men were doing the exact
thing I ‘thought about’ a few days earlier. They were taking the scientific
data that disproves evolution, and saying ‘evolution made this possible’!
Punctuated Equilibrium [or Equilibria] is a theory that was espoused to explain
how things really did not slowly evolve over millions of years. In effect the
scientific evidence shows us no slow evolving of one species into another. As
this reality began to settle in, the scientists realized that they needed to
begin floating alternative theories to Darwin. They knew that if they
religiously stuck with Darwin, that someday they would be disproved. So they
floated this competing theory. The theory basically says that since the fossil
record shows no data that things slowly evolved, how do we answer this? They
said ‘maybe things changed so fast [what!] that the fossil record didn’t catch
it’. In essence this theory says things did not slowly evolve! This theory does
not back up evolution at all, it denies it. In essence the evolutionists in the
interview were contradicting themselves, they were taking proofs against
evolution and saying ‘see, the wonderful knowledge of evolution has lead us to
this point in human history where we now know species DID NOT slowly evolve’.
Are you guys kidding or what?
GREAT AWAKENING- In between studies I have been reading the
‘shelf of books’ I bought a few months ago. I bought about 70 dollars worth of
books at the half price book store, they are worth a few hundred at least. The
last three I just went thru were published by universities; Oxford, Princeton,
etc. I have learned over the years that your time is well spent in the ‘higher
education’ category. You can spend a lifetime reading the popular Christian
culture stuff and never really get educated. The book I
[parts]
(1421) THE FOOL HAS SAID IN HIS HEART, THERE IS NO GOD-
Psalms. Caught an interesting special last night on evolution; they got into
many of the fallacies and false things that have been foisted upon the general
population over the years. They went to a famous natural history museum and
interviewed the scientist responsible for teaching one of the most popular
missing links for whales. Darwin believed that whales came from swimming bears
who after many years evolved into whales- stuff that today would put you into
the intellectual category of believing in a flat earth! Darwin held to many
primitive beliefs that are disproven today, many of these beliefs were central
to his theory. He believed in spontaneous generation, that living cells can
self generate from dead matter. His proof? Well look at the piece of meat that
is left out and rots, sure enough over time maggots ‘self generate’. This man
believed this! It took a simple test to prove this theory false; they put
cheesecloth over the meat, which prevented flies from landing on the meat and
laying their eggs in the meat, and Walla- no maggots. This silly belief of
Darwin cannot be written off as ‘well he wasn’t perfect’ no, this belief is
central to the idea of evolution; it has been proven false beyond all doubt. So
back to the whale fossil, as they interviewed the famous scientist responsible
for the whale fossil, they also spoke to other scientists who fully held to the
belief that science has proven the missing link of the whale. They pointed to the
famous specimen of a 4 legged animal with this elongated nose and, well yes,
the tail of a whale! All the men interviewed used this as proof of evolution,
many school text books taught it, surely it must be true! As they looked at the
actual fossil [not just the pictures in the books] they discovered that the
famous fossil actually has no tail. They then asked the scientist where he came
up with the tail. He said he had to speculate at that point. What! The most
famous evidence for the evolution of the whale, the fossil that all the other
experts noted as absolute proof for evolution- it was a creation in the mind of
an evolutionist. The history of fossil hunting is shot thru with these types of
examples; there is actually an entire cottage industry of ‘fossil hunters’ who
have been caught time and again fabricating missing links. Why so much effort?
They know that many would pay much money for these fossils. Why? Because they
do not exist for real. If you were finding tons of these transitional fossils, which
Darwin said we would have to eventually find if his theory were true, then
there would be no market for the fake ones. And the history of fake ones is
quite large; they have caught people doing this a lot. Chinese fossil hunters
presented to national geographic 2 so
called fossils that were supposedly proof that dinosaurs turned into birds.
They hired a top team of researchers to look at the fossils. The team
determined that the Chinese fossils were frauds. The first fossil was shown to
have been fabricated with modern day materials. Then the Chinese finders found
another one- hey there’s much money in this field. The second fossil was also
proven to have been ‘fixed’ by the finders. To the surprise of the researchers,
national geographic went with the fossil anyway [hey they need to pay the bills
too!] and it was presented as absolute proof for evolution. When the true
researchers, the ones who proved the fossils fake, confronted the scientists
who were on the payroll of national geographic, they responded that yes- all
the fossils coming from china have these types of problems. In essence they
said the standard practice of faking it was to be expected. These types of
things are usually not known by the general public at large, hey we’re taught
things in school, we see the pictures, and who has time to do the research? The
apostle Paul said men chose to reject the knowledge of God; they have made a
conscience choice to do stuff like this. There actually is a psychology to
atheism. Believers need to be aware of these so called belief systems and
contend for the truth. In the end many of the opponents have reprobate minds;
they don’t want to really see the truth, and they will fabricate stuff to prove
their points.
(1414) A SMASHING SUCCESS-
This week we had the first successful test of the Hadron Collider. This
is an underground tunnel/chamber like device that stretches 17 miles around in
a circle and is used to smash atoms. It was built in Switzerland at much cost
and when they first tried it out around 6 months ago it failed. Well this week
they did a test and it worked great. They shot 2 protons at each other at 99%
the speed of light and
[parts]
THE
5TH ELEMENT.Ok- let’s talk philosophy today- the last post on this subject I traced what we normally refer to as the beginning of Greek philosophy- a man by the name of Thales- 6th century BCE.
We said that Thales had an idea that water was the principle element- water seemed to have the ability to move [motion] by itself- so Walla- maybe water is the principle thing.
He was what we refer to as a Monist.
Monists believed that there was one principle element- responsible for all other things.
Now- the pre Socratic philosophers debated about this- some said it was air- others earth- some said fire- as a matter of fact- some said all 4 of these elements were responsible for existence.
Now- some sought a 5th element- some yet to be discovered thing that would explain it all.
A man by the name of Anaximander described it as ‘the boundless’- something that has no origin- he said it was ‘both unborn- and immortal’ ahh- you can already see the attributes of God in this [boundless- what Theologians call omnipresent- God having no limits- he is everywhere [but not everything- get to that in a moment] and ‘unborn’ that is he himself has no beginning].
Ok- this 5th element [some called it Ether- or Aether- a sort of wave theory- that light travels along this ether- this idea lasted till the day of Einstein- who showed us that Ether does not exist [in this way] but that light itself is made up of particles- photons- this was one of the major breakthroughs of modern physics].
A few years ago the movie ‘the 5th Element’- Bruce Willis- hit on this theme- sort of like the ‘God particle’- that is they were in search for some type of being that was eternal – self existent.
The term Quintessence [quint- 5] came to be defined as this 5th element- and today we use the word Quintessential to describe the pure essence of a thing- the perfect embodiment of something.
Over time the Greek thinkers would arrive at the idea that yes indeed- there was one main thing- Monism- that could be the source of all other things.
It is interesting to note that the Jewish prophets- and wisdom literature- which predates these guys- already started from the standpoint of Monotheism- one God.
Now- Monism is not Monotheism.
Monism is really a form of what we call Pantheism [in the study of religion].
Pantheism says that God is ‘everything’- some eastern religions hold to this concept.
The Christian view is that God is separate from creation- that he is indeed the original source of creation- but not the creation itself.
The Geek philosophers even described this 5th element as ‘The One’- see- they were getting close.
In today’s debates- some espouse an idea that there was no beginning point- that the universe is either eternal [something Einstein disproved with the Big Bang theory] or that there is a sort of infinite regress- that there is no one starting point- but that there have been a never ending [or beginning] series of ‘big bangs’ that go on forever.
This defies the laws of logic- and math.
Math?
Yeah- many of the great physicists were also great mathematicians [like Einstein- and Max Plank- who was first a mathematician].
If there was no beginning point- mathematically it doesn’t ‘work’.
You would never be able to arrive at the present time- if there was no starting point to measure from [I know this might sound strange- but this is indeed a proof- that there had to be a starting point].
What these thinkers show us is that even thru the ancient field of Philosophy- you still arrive at some type of ‘thing’ that is responsible for all other things.
Some Christians reject the Big Bang theory- but in my view it gave the Christian apologist the greatest tool to argue for the existence of God.
For many centuries it was believed that the universe was eternal- and if that was true- then indeed you did not have to have an outside source that was responsible for it.
But Einstein showed us that there was a beginning point- that the universe is in a continual expansion mode- and if it is getting ‘bigger’ by the second- then yes- it did have a starting point.
Many today think that it ‘popped’ into existence on its own- this is both scientifically and logically impossible- it violates the law of Cause and Effect [every effect has to have a cause also ‘out of nothing- nothing comes’].
There was a famous Christian who abandoned the faith- Bertrand Russell- he said ‘if everything has to have a cause- then God must have one too- and if God needs a cause- then why not see the universe as the cause’.
[parts]
[1582]
HITCHENS-PIRATES AND M THEORY- Let’s talk a little more about
Christopher Hitchens book- God is not great. As I’m reading thru the book- and
also doing some studying on Modernity- it’s obvious for me to see the errors in
the arguments Hitchens is making in trying to refute the existence of God.
Instead of attempting to refute each argument he makes [and to be honest- he
does make many classic mistakes- things that are not really hard to show as
false]. Let me give you just a few points- Hitchens comes at you from all
angles- history, science, historical criticism [a view of the bible that tries
to undermine the historical accuracy of the faith] politics- he basically
covers all the angles that I too like to engage in. He is smart- no doubt about
it- and he mocks Christians, Jews, Muslims- and he does it in a way that says
‘you are all idiots’. So that’s why when attempting to refute him- when I see
him doing something stupid- I try and bring that out. Okay- one of the major
mistakes Hitchens makes [a common mistake in the field of apologists versus
atheists] is he appeals to the basic idea ‘we- as intellectual people do not
accept things based on faith- we only believe things that can be scientifically
proven to be true’ now- how many times have you heard this? This argument is
only made by those who are ‘novices’ in this debate. Why? Because at face value
it is very easy to refute. Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris- and all the other famous
atheists believe in all types of historical events- things that happened in the
past- without a single shred of ‘scientific proof’. Let’s see- Do you believe
Lincoln was shot? Have you personally done DNA tests on the remains? Have you
even seen the remains? Let’s see- what about Aristotle and Socrates and Plato-
surely as refined as these men are- they most certainly believe that these
great Greek philosophers lived 4 centuries before Christ. Again- what scientific
proof can you show me- you know- the standard that you’re using to judge
whether or not Jesus ever lived? Basically the argument that says 'faith and
Jesus and God are not real truth- not like science’ is a totally illogical
argument- unless these men would have us believe that they reject all of the
above historical figures I just mentioned. So how does the bible- Jesus- God-
hold up to the historical test [not the scientific test!]? Point of fact- there
is no other historical person- in the history of the world- with more
historical proofs of his existence. There are no other ancient documents-
dating back to the time of Christ- that have the historical accuracy that we
find in the New Testament- Luke- the writer of both the gospel of Luke and the
book of Acts- from a purely historical point of view- is considered the best-
most accurate- first century historian to have ever lived [I explained it all
before under the Evolution/Cosmology section- I think it’s in the 8-2010
posts]. Basically the argument Hitchens is making is dishonest at its core.
Then- he gets into M Theory [geez- didn’t really want to go there] Okay- I love
studying science, history, Physics. And to be honest- Physics is really not my
‘field’ that is I prefer to show you the mistakes Hitchens is making when he
pretends to be a bible student [he makes statements that he is a regular reader
of the bible- who goes thru it often- I seriously doubt that claim- he seems to
be familiar with certain critical scholars of scripture- theories that have
long been rejected- documentary theory by Wellhausen- and you can kinda tell he
simply reads the critics and incorporates their ideas into his own- heck- if
there is no God- then what’s wrong with plagiarism?] Okay- Hitchens seems to be
enamored with Stephen Hawking- I wrote about Hawking a month or so ago- in his
recent book- Grand Design- he made some ‘Grand mistakes’ and I refuted these
errors. Now Hitchens seems fascinated by certain theories of Hawking- and his
worship of the man’s theories goes to the extreme. Hitchens speaks of the
famous idea in theoretical physics called M Theory- modern physics [standard
theory] says our universe is made up of Pixels- fine points of matter that are
unseen by the naked eye- but exist as the basic fabric of the universe. Now- we
all accept this- Atoms- Neutrons- etc. all little ‘dots’ if you will, that make
up our universe. So M theory [a theory that expands upon String theory] says
‘no- maybe the universe is made up of these strings- these vibrating strings
that form into circles- and under these hoops- there are buckets that make up
the matter of the universe’ Okay- just think in your head of a piece of string-
make a loop- under the loop stick a basketball net. Walla- that’s the theory.
Now- does this sound stupid to you? Well you’re in good company- it also sounds
stupid to a growing number of very able physicists! Yes- many brilliant- non
religious scientists- will tell you that doing science like this- just making
stuff up- is loony. So to be honest- as interesting as theoretical physics is-
there are many things that simply do not meet the standard of ‘solid science’.
So- why mention this. Hitchens uses this theory as proof against the existence
of God [in a weird- tortured way] and at the same time says ‘I don’t accept
things that can’t be scientifically proven’ yet the whole M theory field is
very doubtful- some think the whole thing is simply not true. So it’s stuff
like this- obvious mistakes- that are sprinkled all thru out his book. I mean
he even makes mistakes that novices make- he mistakenly refers to the
establishing of the state of Israel as having occurred in the 19th
century- I mean I can’t believe he doesn’t know the actual date- 1948- I have
to think that he simply made the common mistake of thinking the years 1900-1999
are the ‘19th century- a common mistake made by people who are just
beginning the journey of learning [obviously the 1900’s are the 20th
century]. But at the same time he lambasts Christians as idiots and does stuff
like this. It reminds me of the time I was watching MSNBC- now this cable
channel is filled with nonstop mocking of the political right- one morning the
host [Scarborough] was doing his show- and he reads the upcoming story to come
on after the commercial- but you can see he’s confused- he asks someone off
screen ‘does that say Pirates’? And they tell him yes- he then says ‘folks-
your not gonna believe this- but when we get back- yes- we will cover the
developing story of Pirates- yes I know it sounds unbelievable- Pirates
attacked a ship off the coast of Somalia’. Now- no one ever said anything- he
came back and simply reported the story. What’s wrong? He obviously thought
Pirates meant ‘Pirates’ you know- Johnny Depp and the Caribbean. I’m sure
someone informed him during the commercial ‘Piracy is the official term for
robbery on the high seas- you dummy’! Can you imagine the mocking they would
have done if Sarah Palin had done this? So I see in Hitchens a mocking of
religion and at the same time a conceited view of his own intellect- and the
intellect of other atheists- he engages in a sort of debate that says ‘look-
you religionists are idiots- we are not’ and he makes such obvious mistakes-
things that ‘uneducated’ people do all the time- not bad people- just common
mistakes like the ‘19th century’ thing. And if people make mistakes
like this [Pirates- etc.] fine- we don’t want to beat people up- but if the
entire premise of your book [or cable channel] is ‘look at all the Christian
idiots’ and then you make the same mistakes your criticizing the Christians
for- well then yes- you look as silly as Joe Scarborough thinking Johnny Depp
and his crew were out robbing ships!
[parts]
(1132)
Nehemiah 9- as the people repent, they stand, fast, confess their sins and read
from God’s law for a quarter of the day! There is a real renewal that takes
place thru the reading of the word. In the last chapter we saw the emphasis on
the teaching of Gods word, the bible says the Levites not only taught/read, but
also gave the sense, the meaning of it. Jesus rebuked the religious leaders of
his day, not because they weren’t ‘reading/quoting’ bible verses, they were
doing it all the time! But because they weren’t really grasping the principles
behind the word. In this chapter the people were not only hearing, but also
understanding. Now they also do an historical remembrance of Gods great past
works. They recount his promise to Abraham, the story of Egypt and Gods great deliverance.
The giving of the law to Moses and the rebellion of their fathers during the
time of the judges. It’s a great retelling of their history, sort of like
Stephen in Acts 7. They also praise and worship God as the creator of all
things. I have been reading a good book on the current debate between ‘young
earth’ and ‘old earth’ creationists. Though I personally lean towards the old
earth idea, yet the book brings out very good arguments for a young earth. They
show the historical development of the geologic table [the levels of earth and
the dating of these levels] and the book also brings out the fact that though
many of the church fathers spiritualized the days of creation, this did not mean
they were old earth creationists! Augustine believed in ‘instantaneous
creation’ in a moment. So his idea was really young earth, even though he did
not take the creation days as literal. One of the points brought out is the
basic belief in God as creator, man seems to have a difficult time simply
believing in the fact that God made all things out of nothing [Ex-Nihilo]
whether you are an old earth or young earth advocate, the fact is God made it
all by his word! The people in Nehemiah’s day praised him for his great works
as seen in creation. It’s important to see the role that the reading of the law
played in this national revival. We see this happen a few times in Israel ’s
history. Times where they rediscover the law after many years and repent as they
return to Gods precepts. Recently I have been reading/studying from around
11:00 am to 3-4 pm. Not every day, but a few days a week. I found it
interesting that the people were giving one fourth of their day to reading the
law; God saw it as vital for the restoration of his city and people. I want to
encourage all my Pastor friends, as you build Gods people, don’t underestimate
the importance of good bible teaching. Don’t just give people verses to
memorize/hear [what the Pharisees were good at] but give them the understanding
too. God used his law [word] to revive the people after the walls were built.
1936 EINSTEIN THE DETERMINIST.
In keeping with the last post
[propaganda] I read an interesting AP article on Syria.
As most of you know Syria has been
in a civil war for many months- they are the 1st ‘Arab spring’
nation that has not ‘fallen’ to the rebels.
Now- there are lots of political
things going on in the region [Russia and China not supporting a Libyan style
NATO action] that are sustaining Assad’s regime.
But I found it funny how the
western media have chosen to portray the war.
In order for the media to side
with those who want to depose Assad- they must ‘side’ with the ‘deposers’.
So- the article spoke about the
outside Al Qaeda groups who are coming in to assist the rebels.
It used terms like ‘heroism’
‘valor’ ‘experienced fighters who know what they are doing’.
These terms were used to describe
Al Qaeda fighters- in contrast to Assad- a ‘crimes against humanity’
description.
Wow- I never thought the media
would actually try and honor Al Qaeda fighters- in order to accomplish their
agenda.
That my friends is the ultimate
in propaganda.
Okay- I read some more on
Einstein over the weekend- and wanted to cover a few things.
Over the years as you read
various sources about famous folk- you need to be aware of the source.
For instance- Christian writers
[writing from that perspective] often portray the religious tendencies of a
figure in a more favorable light then an atheist writer would.
So you have to be careful that
the author is not writing his own story into the person he is covering.
But the biography I’m reading was
not written from a religious view.
Yet- the author does share the
various positions Einstein has taken about God over the years.
One thing to note is Einstein was
a lover of philosophy- he admired men like Hume, Kant and Spinoza.
If you remember- a few years ago
I covered the history of philosophy and how much of it dealt with what the
causes of things are.
The law of Cause and Effect [also
referred to as causality].
As a Physicist- Einstein had a
great interest in these subjects.
At the end of the day- Einstein
fell into a camp of thinkers called Determinists.
That means he believed that that
the universe was ruled by definite principles- even though we did not have the
answers to all the puzzles- yet he was convinced that if we searched long
enough- we would find order to it.
This belief is in keeping with
Theistic thinkers- not with those who ascribe chance and disorder to the
creation.
I might have bitten off a little
much here- but the point is- at the end of the day Einstein rejected the
commonly held belief that there is no real cause to the things we see.
Many thinkers who argue against the
existence of God argue form a perspective that chance is behind the ‘perceived’
design we see in nature.
Dawkins [the famous atheist]
calls it ‘the appearance of design’.
Einstein did not simply believe
in the ‘appearance’ of design- but he believed that the Cosmos was indeed a
product of some type of cause that gave it design.
Now- I’m not saying Einstein was
a Christian [or observant Jew]- but the point is- in his thinking- he rejects
the most commonly held arguments that are made against the Theistic world view
[in Cosmology- science] and sides with the Christian thinkers of our day.
Einstein famously said ‘God does
not roll dice’ meaning he did not believe in the atheistic argument that things
just happen without any cause.
No- Einstein seems to agree with
one of his favorite thinkers- Spinoza said ‘All things are determined by the
necessity of Divine nature’.
Yes- Einstein was a Determinist
in his thinking- he did indeed side with the Theists at the end of the day.
Note- Do me a favor, those who
read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read
them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] -
I have posted lots.
[parts]
. (1258) WHAT LASTS? - These past
few weeks while praying early in the mornings, I have been meditating on verses
like ‘the steps/paths of a good man are ordered by the Lord and he delights in
his way’. David said he desired to always dwell in Gods ‘tabernacle’, while
thinking on these verses I felt like the Lord was speaking to me about the
effects we have, the planting of his word in regions. I even began thinking
about the fact that we will die, and the people we minister to will pass away,
but in some sense the words we taught will remain. In essence the thing that
will last is the gospel and truth that is sown, not the institutions, or even
the people, but the word. Now John says because we have the word in us we will
abide forever, that is the word of God will raise the dead up some day and they
will endure forever; but it’s the word of truth that is lasting. So anyway I
felt like the Lord was directing me to read Isaiah, I read the first 10 verses
of chapter 40 and the theme goes like this ‘all flesh is like grass, it will
pass away; but the word of God endures forever’ basically exactly what God was
speaking to me. This section also speaks of John the Baptist ‘prepare the way
of the Lord, make a straight highway/path for him in the desert’ this was along
the lines of ‘creating a path/ place for God’s word to flow’. Isaiah also has
the famous verse ‘you will be called the restorer of paths to dwell in’. I felt
like God was telling us to lay down some paths, have consistent areas where you
faithfully teach and speak truth and these areas will ‘abide forever’ that is
your impact will affect many generations to come. Right after the 16th
century Reformation you had what is referred to as the Enlightenment, or the
‘age of reason’. Many thinkers began to challenge the institutional church [and
institutions in general] and believed that reason and rationality would lead
the way. In France [1700’s] Paris became a center of thinking for these Deists.
These men were smart enough to realize that the total denial of God was too
ridiculous to accept, they instead embraced Deism. Deism is a type of belief
that said God started the ball rolling, but he left the rest on auto pilot; the
same belief that the Greek philosophers embraced. Now, one of the famous
‘Philosphes’ [sic] was a man by the name of Voltaire, he is well-known as an
infamous atheist today, but he did not totally reject God. These men did have
tremendous influence and they produced the French Encyclopedias which backed up
their cause. Eventually they would overthrow the Catholic Church and kill the
king in their mad rush towards ‘reason’. They were wrong on their basic
understanding of reason and rationality as they applied it to the church. They
believed that rational thought meant
‘naturalistic thought’ that is in order for things to be rational, they
could not be supernatural. They were wrong, in fact those who would later take
the next step into full atheism would deny the laws of reason and logic all
together. I saw Richard Dawkins do an interview the other day, he is one of the
popular atheists of our day. These men who reject God accept a view of creation
that violates the laws of logic; they teach/believe that all things came from
‘no-thing’ a scientific impossibility. This idea violates the law of ‘reason’
known as the law of ‘non contradiction’. This law states that a thing cannot be
and ‘not be’ at the same time and in the same relationship. For all things to
have come from nothing [self creation] would mean that all things created
itself. It would have to 'have been’ before it was. This common system of
belief is absolutely irrational, even though the atheist believes it to be
rational. To believe that God is a self existent being who created all things
does not violate the laws of logic, you might think it does, but it doesn’t.
For someone to have existed forever does not violate the classic laws of logic.
So these thinkers who thought that their rejection of God was ‘rational’ were in
fact wrong. Their ideas led to effects that were horrendous, they in effect
‘planted seed’ [bad doctrines] that would outlast them and their generation,
their bad ideas had bad consequences. But the truth of God and his kingdom have
also been ‘planted’ in the world, these
seeds will last forever. If you want to effect society for good, then plant the
seeds that will have an eternal impact, for ‘he that does the will of God will
abide forever’ [1st John].
(1255) 2ND KINGS 8:7-29 Elisha goes to Damascus
and the king of Syria hears about it, he sends his servant to inquire ‘of the
prophet’ whether or not he will get well from some sickness. The servant goes
and finds Elisha and Elisha says ‘yes, he would recover. But instead he will
die’. What ? Elisha sees that the sickness would not be fatal, but that the
king will be assassinated! The servant in front of him will be the killer. So
Hazael goes back to the king and says ‘he said you would get well’ true enough,
but he left out the part where he was going to kill him! So the
[parts]
principles of scripture. Now,
let’s try and finish up chapter 11. Paul is basically telling Israel and the
Gentiles that God’s dealings are beyond our understanding [last few verses].
God is using the ‘unbelief’ of Israel as an open door to the Gentiles. He is
also using the mercy that he is showing to the Gentiles as an ‘open door’ to
Israel! He will ‘provoke them to jealousy’. There are a few difficult verses
that would be unfair for me to skip over. ‘All Israel shall be saved’. Paul
uses this to show that God’s dealings with natural Israel as a nation are not
finished. Who are ‘all Israel’? Some say ‘the Israel of God’ [the church]. I
don’t think this fits the text. Some say ‘all Israel that will be alive at the
second coming’ I think this is closer. To be honest I think this can simply
mean ‘all Israel’ all those who are alive and also raised at the return of the
Lord. Now, this would be a form of universalism [all people eventually being
saved]. I am not a Universalist, but I don’t want any ‘preconceived’ mindset
[even my own!] to taint the text. I think God has the ability to reveal himself
to the whole nation of Israel in such a way that ‘they all will be saved’. If I
were a Jewish person I wouldn’t wait for this to happen! Just like the
Calvinists argument of ‘why witness’? Because God commands it. So even though
you can make an argument here for a type of universal redemption at Christ’s
revealing of himself to Israel at the second coming [which is in keeping with
this chapter, as well as other areas in scripture; ‘they will look upon him
whom they have pierced’ ‘God will pour out the spirit of mourning and
supplication on Israel at his appearing’. Which by the way would fit in with
‘whoever calls on the Lord will be saved’ which I taught in chapter 10. This is
a futurist text implying a time of future judgment and wrath’]. So God’s
dealings with Israel are not finished. Paul also warns the Gentiles ‘don’t
boast, if God cut out the true branches [Israel] to graft you in. He can just
as quickly cut you out too’! It would be dishonest for me [a Calvinist] to
simply not comment on this. You certainly can take this verse in an Arminian
way. Or you can see Paul speaking in a ‘nationalistic sense’. Sort of like
saying ‘if Germany walks away from the faith, they will be ‘cut out’. [France
would have been a better example! Speaking of the so called ‘enlightenment’ and
the French Revolution]. In essence ‘you Gentiles, don’t think “wow, look at us.
God left Israel and we are now special!”’ Paul is saying ‘you Gentiles [as a
whole group] stand by faith. God could just as quickly ‘cut you out’ and
replace you with another group’. I also think the Arminians could use this type
of argument for the previous predestination chapter [9]. But to be honest I
needed to give you my view. One more thing, Paul quotes Elijah ‘lord, I am the
only one left’. He uses this in context of God having a remnant from Israel who
remained faithful to the true God. God told Elijah ‘there are 7 thousand that
have not bowed the knee to baal’. Paul uses this to show that even in his day
there were a remnant Of Jews [himself included] who received the Messiah. An
interesting side note. The prophetic ministry [Elijah] seems to function at a
‘popular level’. Now, I don’t mean ‘fame’, but Elijah was giving voice to a
large undercurrent that was running thru the nation. If you read the story of
Elijah you would have never known that there were ‘7 thousand’ who never bowed
the knee! Often times God will use prophetic people to ‘give voice’ or
popularize a general truth that is presently existing in the ‘underground
church’ at large. Sort of like if Elijah had a web site, the 7 thousand would
have been secretly reading it and saying ‘right on brother, that’s exactly what
we believe too’!
ROMANS 12
.ARE SOME GIFTS BETTER THAN
OTHERS?
.HOW SHOULD THEY FUNCTION IN THE
‘BODY’?
. HOW SHOUD WE GIVE OFFERINGS-
DID PAUL TEAHC TITHING?
.HOT COALS ON THEIR HEADS- HUH?
(864)ROMANS 12:1-8
‘I beseech you by the mercies of God to present your bodies as living
sacrifices, holy and acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service
[spiritual worship]’. Most times we see ‘by the mercies of God’ as a recap of
all that Paul has taught from chapters 1 thru 12. This is true to a degree. I
think Paul is honing in on the previous chapters that dealt with the purpose of
God specifically seen in the resurrection of the body. As we read earlier ‘for
we are saved by hope’ [the hope of the resurrection]. Basically I see Paul
saying ‘because of what I showed you concerning Gods redemptive purpose for
your body, therefore present your body now, in anticipation of it’s future
glorious purpose, as a living sacrifice ‘holy and acceptable unto God’. Why?
Because you are going to have that thing [body] forever! [in a new glorified
state] Paul exhorts us to be changed by
the renewing of our mind, the way we think. I have mentioned in the past that
this renewing is not some type of legalistic function of ‘memorizing, muttering
the do’s and don’ts all day long’. But a reorganizing of our thoughts according
to this new covenant of grace. Seeing things thru this ‘new world’ perspective.
A kingdom view based upon grace and the resurrection of Jesus. This
resurrection that is assured to us because we have the deposit of the
[parts]
VERSES-
. Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the
heaven and the earth.
. John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John
1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.John 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
. The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They
are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Ps. 14:1
In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened. Gen.
facebook.com/john.chiarello.5
Note- Do me a favor, those who read/like the posts- re-post
them on other sites as well as the site you read them on. Thanks- John.#
No comments:
Post a Comment