"Man’s Maker was made man
that the Bread might be hungry,
the Fountain thirst,
the Light sleep,
the Way be tired from the journey;
that Strength might be made weak,
that Life might die.
--Augustine
e hënë, 24 dhjetor 2007
e diel, 23 dhjetor 2007
The Every-Day Gospel
Dear Christians,
I have a few questions for ya'll:
1) Why is Christmas the biggest day of the year?
2) How does Christmas impact every other day of the year, and the way we live each day?
*I hope you guys know I'm not talking about the Westernized, materialistic view of Christmas.
I have a few questions for ya'll:
1) Why is Christmas the biggest day of the year?
2) How does Christmas impact every other day of the year, and the way we live each day?
*I hope you guys know I'm not talking about the Westernized, materialistic view of Christmas.
e hënë, 17 dhjetor 2007
e premte, 16 nëntor 2007
Christmas has come early this year
Due to scheduling conflicts, hoildays, and general life difficulties, our meetings will be cancelled this Saturday (11/17) and next Saturday (11/24).
e martë, 13 nëntor 2007
2 Samuel, part II
Chapters 9, 11, 12, 23-24. Please read chapters 13-18 at least once so you can get a flow for the story, but the discussion will not center on those chapters.
e mërkurë, 7 nëntor 2007
2 Samuel time!
We're going to be hitting chapters 1,2,4-7 this week. It might be difficult because of all these weird names and events going on, so I'll post some helps so that we won't spend the entire meeting time talking about who is who. Sola deo gloria!
e hënë, 29 tetor 2007
e hënë, 22 tetor 2007
Choice time
Ok guys, here's the deal: We were invited over to Danny Shibley's house (you guys remember him?) this Saturday for food and a movie. I don't know what time yet, but we've been invited. Is this something you guys will be able to go to, or should we still have the usual group/study time? PLEASE reply with your input.
e shtunë, 20 tetor 2007
Hell and why I don't have to go there.
This will be a (hopefully) brief reflection on forgiveness, centered on Ephesians 2:4-7 -
4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5 even when we were dead in our trangessions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
7 so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
Please take the time to read the above verses; otherwise, the following thoughts really have no meaning.
I am very distraught, friends. I did it again: I looked at something online I had no right to look at. I have to ask myself questions like, what is wrong with me? and it really begs the question why do I claim to serve Christ? and what could He possibly see in me?
I've lost my edge; I'm a dull blade lately. I can feel compassion, caring for others' spiritual lives, fire for God's will, ebbing away. My mind is centered around conquests: money, art project, looking good, impressing others, tv shows, owning things.
How embarrassing I'm telling all of you this. I thought I was walking with God, you guys were relying on me, I had a future in Christ. Now, I'm running on 6 months of undefeated sin and downhill slope. And I wonder, is it too late for me? Am I a lost cause, a man who will never fall under God's order and work for the coming kingdom?
It's a little hard to believe right now, but God's word tells me otherwise. If you read all of chapter 2, you will discover that we used to live as I live now: we were dead in our sins. This provides a background for verse 4 which begins, "But God..."
When I'm dead in my trangressions, the first person to make a move is God. Read on.
"...rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us...":
Yes. You read right. Rich in mercy toward the dead men. A great love for transgessors.
In verse 5 "made us alive together in Christ":
He gave us life in Christ. Let's put this on hold for a second.
Verse 6 "...raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places with Christ Jesus...":
Putting aside that Christ died to save us, we must note that Christ in God's eyes is the apple of His eye, the perfect son who obeyed his every wish. To be seated next to the son of honor, to share his company, this is the greatest acceptance the Lord could give. It would be like inviting the man who killed your wife to her funeral. It's unthinkable.
7 "...so that in ages to come...":
And this kind of good treatment never ends. It's a future-planned future-oriented relationship. He has more of His love in store for us, forever and ever et al.
Why me?
I said store away "alive in Christ," so here's one possible idea for that meaning: alive in Christ s as in awoken to His spirit. When my own life, my own actions, my own thoughts are of such imprisoning evil, and I cry out to Him, He saves me, breathes life in. He dwells inside me, o wretched man that I am. He graces me with His presence, His thoughts, His strength, His love.
So much for brevity. Thank you all for your prayers and friendship. If you can, leave me a message this week and let me know you are praying for me. I will do my best to do the same for you.
God bless.
4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5 even when we were dead in our trangessions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
7 so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
Please take the time to read the above verses; otherwise, the following thoughts really have no meaning.
I am very distraught, friends. I did it again: I looked at something online I had no right to look at. I have to ask myself questions like, what is wrong with me? and it really begs the question why do I claim to serve Christ? and what could He possibly see in me?
I've lost my edge; I'm a dull blade lately. I can feel compassion, caring for others' spiritual lives, fire for God's will, ebbing away. My mind is centered around conquests: money, art project, looking good, impressing others, tv shows, owning things.
How embarrassing I'm telling all of you this. I thought I was walking with God, you guys were relying on me, I had a future in Christ. Now, I'm running on 6 months of undefeated sin and downhill slope. And I wonder, is it too late for me? Am I a lost cause, a man who will never fall under God's order and work for the coming kingdom?
It's a little hard to believe right now, but God's word tells me otherwise. If you read all of chapter 2, you will discover that we used to live as I live now: we were dead in our sins. This provides a background for verse 4 which begins, "But God..."
When I'm dead in my trangressions, the first person to make a move is God. Read on.
"...rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us...":
Yes. You read right. Rich in mercy toward the dead men. A great love for transgessors.
In verse 5 "made us alive together in Christ":
He gave us life in Christ. Let's put this on hold for a second.
Verse 6 "...raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places with Christ Jesus...":
Putting aside that Christ died to save us, we must note that Christ in God's eyes is the apple of His eye, the perfect son who obeyed his every wish. To be seated next to the son of honor, to share his company, this is the greatest acceptance the Lord could give. It would be like inviting the man who killed your wife to her funeral. It's unthinkable.
7 "...so that in ages to come...":
And this kind of good treatment never ends. It's a future-planned future-oriented relationship. He has more of His love in store for us, forever and ever et al.
Why me?
I said store away "alive in Christ," so here's one possible idea for that meaning: alive in Christ s as in awoken to His spirit. When my own life, my own actions, my own thoughts are of such imprisoning evil, and I cry out to Him, He saves me, breathes life in. He dwells inside me, o wretched man that I am. He graces me with His presence, His thoughts, His strength, His love.
So much for brevity. Thank you all for your prayers and friendship. If you can, leave me a message this week and let me know you are praying for me. I will do my best to do the same for you.
God bless.
e diel, 14 tetor 2007
Let's have seconds of 1 Samuel, shall we?
For this week, we are blessed with reading 1 Samuel 15; 16; 17 (David vs. Goliath!); 24; 28; 31.
**Scheduling conflicts seem to be our new motto. How is everyone's schedule looking for this Saturday? Please reply with your timeframe for meeting this week.
**Scheduling conflicts seem to be our new motto. How is everyone's schedule looking for this Saturday? Please reply with your timeframe for meeting this week.
e hënë, 1 tetor 2007
The moment we've all been waiting for....
READING FOR THIS WEEEK!
Wipe the dust off your little Bibles, we're getting back to the study! This week we are going to be in 1 Samuel. We are going to go through chapters: 1, 3, 8, 9, 12, 13:1-14. We're planning on meeting sometime around 5:00 in the afternoon, which is a bit later than usual. It might do ya'll some good to read the other chapters once or twice to get a better flow for what goes on; if you don't, that's ok, I'll post later in the week with a summary of the events in the other chapters. Let's do it!
Wipe the dust off your little Bibles, we're getting back to the study! This week we are going to be in 1 Samuel. We are going to go through chapters: 1, 3, 8, 9, 12, 13:1-14. We're planning on meeting sometime around 5:00 in the afternoon, which is a bit later than usual. It might do ya'll some good to read the other chapters once or twice to get a better flow for what goes on; if you don't, that's ok, I'll post later in the week with a summary of the events in the other chapters. Let's do it!
e mërkurë, 26 shtator 2007
This week
I am going to be on a super-secret mission this weekend, so the regular study shall be postponed. Maybe all you guys could get together and have a sweet hang-out time or something.
e martë, 11 shtator 2007
Information!!
1) If anyone wants to change the time that we meet for group on Saturdays, please let me know. We're trying to move the meeting time back to about 11 am-3 pm. So if this time change would or wouldn't work for you, please chime in.
2) No reading for this week. You're welcome.
2) No reading for this week. You're welcome.
e martë, 4 shtator 2007
e diel, 2 shtator 2007
Reading for this week...
Judges 1-7. Taking notes will be useful to help you remember all that goes on in these chapters.
e premte, 31 gusht 2007
Looking for some vital signs
I have a question for us. It's a simple, honest-yet-important question:
Why are you guys still Christians? Or: Why do we still claim to be Christians?
Why are you guys still Christians? Or: Why do we still claim to be Christians?
e hënë, 27 gusht 2007
Reading for this week
Oh dang, we are in Joshua already! This week will have a meager 5 chapters of reading: chapters 1,2,6,7,8. Enjoy your week everybody, I hope to see you at the meeting.
UPDATE: Also, if any of you want to, I recommend reading Psalm 105 to see the people praise God for His providence and deliverance. I just read it today and it brought me to worship; I pray it does likewise to you.
UPDATE: Also, if any of you want to, I recommend reading Psalm 105 to see the people praise God for His providence and deliverance. I just read it today and it brought me to worship; I pray it does likewise to you.
e mërkurë, 22 gusht 2007
Forgiveness, Atonement, Intercession, and...Stuff
Without giving away too much of this week's discussion (as if I could possibly know or predict what we will be talking about!), a certain topic hit me today that I'll like to throw up and throw out to all ya'll.
Numbers 18:1-7 is perhaps the most amazing paragraph in the Bible. In this paragraph, God gives Israel a way to save them from Himself. To paraphrase: "I give you a priesthood so that I won't destroy you all."
So...why does God give Israel a priesthood? Why is it significant that God is the one who gives it to Israel? Let me tell you: once you understand the significance of this, then you can understand the gospel, your salvation, even Jesus.
Numbers 18:1-7 is perhaps the most amazing paragraph in the Bible. In this paragraph, God gives Israel a way to save them from Himself. To paraphrase: "I give you a priesthood so that I won't destroy you all."
So...why does God give Israel a priesthood? Why is it significant that God is the one who gives it to Israel? Let me tell you: once you understand the significance of this, then you can understand the gospel, your salvation, even Jesus.
e premte, 17 gusht 2007
Introduction to Numbers
This is a bit of review from last week:
So we are now (not us, but the Israelites) in the second year after the exodus from Egypt (10:11). After the Exodus, Israel went to Mt. Sinai and entered into the Mosaic covenant with God (Ex 19:5-6). This covenant was made with the nation of Israel, and it is a conditional covenant. The blessings of the Abrahamic covenant are now mediated by obedience to the Mosaic covenant; that is, by faithful obedience to God and His law, Israel will be blessed and be given the land God promised to their forefathers. God also gave Israel instructions for building the tabernacle, which was the center of Israel's religious practices. It was primarily God's dwelling place with His people, and religious practices like sacrifices and offerings were done there. So now we are on our way to the promised land!
So we are now (not us, but the Israelites) in the second year after the exodus from Egypt (10:11). After the Exodus, Israel went to Mt. Sinai and entered into the Mosaic covenant with God (Ex 19:5-6). This covenant was made with the nation of Israel, and it is a conditional covenant. The blessings of the Abrahamic covenant are now mediated by obedience to the Mosaic covenant; that is, by faithful obedience to God and His law, Israel will be blessed and be given the land God promised to their forefathers. God also gave Israel instructions for building the tabernacle, which was the center of Israel's religious practices. It was primarily God's dwelling place with His people, and religious practices like sacrifices and offerings were done there. So now we are on our way to the promised land!
e mërkurë, 15 gusht 2007
Meeting this week
After much head-scratching and thumb-twiddiling, a plan for this week's meeting has come about. We have tentatively planned on meeting at Sir Johnny the Buff's house around 3:00 in the afternoon, heading down to San Dimas to do a little hike, and then head back to Johnny's for some pizza. But that's not all! The real "meat" of the meeting is what we will be doing during the hike/meal.
We have given this meeting the theme of "conversation." We would like to use this meeting to stir up intentional, meaningful conversation amongst us. So, if this is not asking too much, it would be cool if we all could come with different things you'd like to talk about. Sure, that sounds a little silly, but we would like to hear what things in your life are confronting you, and we'd like to hear about them and talk about them (either events, issues, problems, back pains, etc.). You don't need a 12-page set of notes, complete with PowerPoint, but come ready to share and talk with others about what interests them. And please keep this night in prayer, as well as each of us.
We have given this meeting the theme of "conversation." We would like to use this meeting to stir up intentional, meaningful conversation amongst us. So, if this is not asking too much, it would be cool if we all could come with different things you'd like to talk about. Sure, that sounds a little silly, but we would like to hear what things in your life are confronting you, and we'd like to hear about them and talk about them (either events, issues, problems, back pains, etc.). You don't need a 12-page set of notes, complete with PowerPoint, but come ready to share and talk with others about what interests them. And please keep this night in prayer, as well as each of us.
Tear...
The saddest verse in the entire Bible (thus far)...
Numbers 14:4 "So they said to one another, 'Let us appoint a leader and return to Egypt.'"
Any thoughts?
Numbers 14:4 "So they said to one another, 'Let us appoint a leader and return to Egypt.'"
Any thoughts?
e hënë, 13 gusht 2007
For this week...
There will be no required reading this week. We will still meet, but it will be a night with a different focus. However, if anyone wants to start reading early, the reading for next week is Numbers 11-14, 16, 18:1-7, 20, 25. Also, if you are not going to be able to make it to this week's meeting (or any meeting for that matter), feel free to let me know so that we can plan accordingly. Stay tuned for any new info!
e martë, 7 gusht 2007
Exodus study #3
I don't have all the chapters picked out yet, but I'll give you what I have now.
Read: chapters 16, 17, 19, 20, 23:20-33, 40:34-38. These chapters are subject to change, but these are good for now.
Read: chapters 16, 17, 19, 20, 23:20-33, 40:34-38. These chapters are subject to change, but these are good for now.
e hënë, 6 gusht 2007
Remember
At the last meeting, one of the major themese I tried to stress was "remembrance." God wanted Israel to remember their deliverance from Egypt, so He set up a couple of festivals they would hold yearly to remember what God had done for them. Sweet.
There was a side point I wanted to add to the discussion that I felt was very pertinent to the discussion. In my reading last week, I came across a passage that takes the concept of remembrance and really drives it home for us Christians. See the passage below, 2 Peter 1:2-9:
"2Grace and peace be yours in abundance through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord. 3His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. 4Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature and escape the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.
5For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; 6and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; 7and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, love. 8For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9But if anyone does not have them, he is nearsighted and blind, and has forgotten that he has been cleansed from his past sins."
I hope that if you understood what Peter is writing about, you nearly choked like I did. Could it be that I am not being spiritually formed because I have forgotten my salvation, my cleansing of sins? C'mon Pete, you can't be serious! But really, could it be that we do not fully understand our salvation, what we have been saved from, and what we are heading towards?
There was a side point I wanted to add to the discussion that I felt was very pertinent to the discussion. In my reading last week, I came across a passage that takes the concept of remembrance and really drives it home for us Christians. See the passage below, 2 Peter 1:2-9:
"2Grace and peace be yours in abundance through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord. 3His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. 4Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature and escape the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.
5For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; 6and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; 7and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness, love. 8For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9But if anyone does not have them, he is nearsighted and blind, and has forgotten that he has been cleansed from his past sins."
I hope that if you understood what Peter is writing about, you nearly choked like I did. Could it be that I am not being spiritually formed because I have forgotten my salvation, my cleansing of sins? C'mon Pete, you can't be serious! But really, could it be that we do not fully understand our salvation, what we have been saved from, and what we are heading towards?
e premte, 3 gusht 2007
Contact (not that lame movie)
Like I promised at the last meeting, here's the post where we can post all of our "other" contact info (AIM, MySpace messenger, etc.). I can be reached on AIM under the name theekevy (I'm not creative). Please add yours so we can hassle you more often!
e martë, 31 korrik 2007
Don't Be Vague; Name Your Plague!
Hey guys -
What's you're favorite plague? I've gotta say, something about killer golf-ball sized hail just makes me shake my head in wonder. It must have been a warzone in Egypt.
How about you?
What's you're favorite plague? I've gotta say, something about killer golf-ball sized hail just makes me shake my head in wonder. It must have been a warzone in Egypt.
How about you?
e hënë, 30 korrik 2007
The Art of Blogging (Without getting a Flogging)
Hey, guys. Theekevy and I have been talking about the proper use of this blog a lot. We have occasionally popped into you guys' posts and complained that they are not "on topic;" to make matters worse, we never really defined exactly what to post on the blog. Obviously, posts about God, weekly readings and such are perfectly appropriate, but we run into gray areas pretty quickly.
Firsty, theekevy and I talked about the possibility of making another blog for more general discussion. After all, we had originally intended this blog to be strictly a Bible discussion page. But for many reasons, we came to the conclusion this is not the best idea; another blog could get confusing and messy.
So we decided the best thing was to open this blog up to more freedom. We've created a new set of blog guidelines for proper blogging. We hope you enjoy the possibilities, and that all of you involve yourselves fully into the subjects God draws you to without fear of retribution. Enjoy:
Appropriate blog topics:
- Group information
- Kevin mostly posts these things, though if someone has a get together in mind, post at your free will)
- Any topic regarding the reading
- Any topic regarding the Lord
- Any topic regarding Christian living
- Christian topics, as opposed to personal issues
- Any topic regarding temptations and spiritual battles
- Again, drawing from experience for discussion rather than merely sharing experiences
Inappropriate blog topics: (these should be emailed to group members rather than posted on the blog.)
- Politics
- Prayer requests
- Personal issues
- Secular discussions
- Somehow, your topic should relate to God. If not, use e-mail to discuss
Can't wait to hear what you guys want to discuss!
Firsty, theekevy and I talked about the possibility of making another blog for more general discussion. After all, we had originally intended this blog to be strictly a Bible discussion page. But for many reasons, we came to the conclusion this is not the best idea; another blog could get confusing and messy.
So we decided the best thing was to open this blog up to more freedom. We've created a new set of blog guidelines for proper blogging. We hope you enjoy the possibilities, and that all of you involve yourselves fully into the subjects God draws you to without fear of retribution. Enjoy:
Appropriate blog topics:
- Group information
- Kevin mostly posts these things, though if someone has a get together in mind, post at your free will)
- Any topic regarding the reading
- Any topic regarding the Lord
- Any topic regarding Christian living
- Christian topics, as opposed to personal issues
- Any topic regarding temptations and spiritual battles
- Again, drawing from experience for discussion rather than merely sharing experiences
Inappropriate blog topics: (these should be emailed to group members rather than posted on the blog.)
- Politics
- Prayer requests
- Personal issues
- Secular discussions
- Somehow, your topic should relate to God. If not, use e-mail to discuss
Can't wait to hear what you guys want to discuss!
e diel, 29 korrik 2007
Exodus study #2
For this week we will be hammering through chapters 6-14. Don't fear the eight chapters; plan your time accordingly and read two chapters per day twice each day and take notes on what happens.
e mërkurë, 25 korrik 2007
The Cross-Section of Insurrection
Sometimes I think we imagine God as a bloodthirsty warmonger out to kill His enemies; his most important goal to crush open rebellion. At least, this is the picture I get from the Old Testament. He commands the Sons of Israel to kill the pagans. He threatens the Sons of Israel with plagues, slavery and other horrors if they do not obey Him.
And it is a completely accurate description. God's justice remains perfect even if we don't think our sin is a big deal. He gives us exactly what we deserve. But we are missing a big, hugely important aspect of God if we think He is most furious with the pagans and their open rebellion. Angry, yes, but I think we can conclude from Exodus 1-4 is that what really gets Him is the behavior of His so-called "friends." Moses, for example, does not seem to have any particular vices--sure, He killed an Egyptian out of indignant, just rage for the treatment of his people, but you could hardly call that entirely evil. But, boy, does Moses get under the Lord's skin.
God provides richly for Moses from birth. An undeniably divinely scripted event, Moses is plucked out of the Nile and saved from Pharaoh's daughter herself when Pharaoh commanded the death of the Sons of Israel. A boy who should have been drowned in that river gained ownership of it, as well as all of Egypt. Again, when Moses was chased out of Egypt for murder, God protected him, and gave him a wife and family to accompany him in the wilderness (2:19-22).
As if Moses' blessed life was not up to this point proof of God's care for him and purpose for him, the Lord actually visits Moses in the wilderness, a miraculous burning bush that does not burn up. He then speaks to Moses, and grants Moses the power of miracles to go and free the people of Israel. What an amazing gift of confidence and caring. You might say, "Yeah, but God was putting Moses up to doing His dirty work." Let's not forget that Moses ran from Egypt because he KILLED A MAN for mistreating an Israelite. He is clearly passionate about the well-being of God's people. God is not demanding of Moses his time, He is granting him his dream!
But Moses argues. God, I can't do this, he says; I'm not a good public speaker (4:10). God's response to him is essentially, "I made you, and I can help you speak" (4:11-12). If I were God, I would have said, "Dude, I just turned your wooden staff into a living snake. I think I can help you not to stutter." Yet Moses persists. Basically, he says, send someone else (4:13). Verse 14 says God is pretty upset with Moses, yet relents and tells Moses to meet up with Aaron, who will be his mouthpiece.
We could attribute Moses' disobedience to abject fear, but I don't think so. Look at 4:24. "...at a lodging place on the way the Lord met him and sought to put him to death." Who is "him"? If we look at verse 23, the "him" is Moses! My study bible confirms that God was trying to kill Moses. Read on. In verse 25, Moses' wife circumcises his son and the Lord apparently relents. What was going on, here? Well, Moses was not following God's commandment to the Israelites in Genesis 17:10--to uphold the covenant by circumcising their sons. My study bible suggests that perhaps Moses' wife, Zipporah, didn't like the idea of circumcision, so Moses obeyed her instead. Whatever the reason, Moses disobeyed a direct commandment and ignored God to the last.
What I am seeing is a pattern of laziness, an uncaring heart and hesitation to place faith in God. What Moses is essentially avoiding is sacrifice: if he goes back to Egypt, his life is on the line. If he circumcises his son, his marriage is on the line. Even when shown unquestionable miracles, Moses continues to... well... not care. He doesn't want the hard work, the danger, and the sacrifice that comes with being a servant of God. And it really pisses God off.
Can you sense the irony? We constantly complain about God's decisions with humankind, the state of the world, the starving children in Africa, the unsaved. Yet when the rubber hits the road and God calls us to action, we hesitate. Will I lose friends? Will I be hated? Will I be in danger? We seem to care, to be passionate, yet there is no sobriety, and no willingness for personal sacrifice and pain.
So your dream is to see people saved to Jesus Christ, to please God, to help others, to be an example of love? Be careful what you wish for, because God may actually call you to those things. And when He does, if you back out because of a noncommittal, weak heart, it will anger Him. How else could he feel? He's being stabbed in the back by the one's He's blessed. Instead, we should be willing to risk everything for Him, and trust that His purpose is good. Has He not proved this to us over the centuries? Has he not paid for us with the murder of his only son?
I am just as convicted and guilty of these blasphemies as anyone, if not more.
And it is a completely accurate description. God's justice remains perfect even if we don't think our sin is a big deal. He gives us exactly what we deserve. But we are missing a big, hugely important aspect of God if we think He is most furious with the pagans and their open rebellion. Angry, yes, but I think we can conclude from Exodus 1-4 is that what really gets Him is the behavior of His so-called "friends." Moses, for example, does not seem to have any particular vices--sure, He killed an Egyptian out of indignant, just rage for the treatment of his people, but you could hardly call that entirely evil. But, boy, does Moses get under the Lord's skin.
God provides richly for Moses from birth. An undeniably divinely scripted event, Moses is plucked out of the Nile and saved from Pharaoh's daughter herself when Pharaoh commanded the death of the Sons of Israel. A boy who should have been drowned in that river gained ownership of it, as well as all of Egypt. Again, when Moses was chased out of Egypt for murder, God protected him, and gave him a wife and family to accompany him in the wilderness (2:19-22).
As if Moses' blessed life was not up to this point proof of God's care for him and purpose for him, the Lord actually visits Moses in the wilderness, a miraculous burning bush that does not burn up. He then speaks to Moses, and grants Moses the power of miracles to go and free the people of Israel. What an amazing gift of confidence and caring. You might say, "Yeah, but God was putting Moses up to doing His dirty work." Let's not forget that Moses ran from Egypt because he KILLED A MAN for mistreating an Israelite. He is clearly passionate about the well-being of God's people. God is not demanding of Moses his time, He is granting him his dream!
But Moses argues. God, I can't do this, he says; I'm not a good public speaker (4:10). God's response to him is essentially, "I made you, and I can help you speak" (4:11-12). If I were God, I would have said, "Dude, I just turned your wooden staff into a living snake. I think I can help you not to stutter." Yet Moses persists. Basically, he says, send someone else (4:13). Verse 14 says God is pretty upset with Moses, yet relents and tells Moses to meet up with Aaron, who will be his mouthpiece.
We could attribute Moses' disobedience to abject fear, but I don't think so. Look at 4:24. "...at a lodging place on the way the Lord met him and sought to put him to death." Who is "him"? If we look at verse 23, the "him" is Moses! My study bible confirms that God was trying to kill Moses. Read on. In verse 25, Moses' wife circumcises his son and the Lord apparently relents. What was going on, here? Well, Moses was not following God's commandment to the Israelites in Genesis 17:10--to uphold the covenant by circumcising their sons. My study bible suggests that perhaps Moses' wife, Zipporah, didn't like the idea of circumcision, so Moses obeyed her instead. Whatever the reason, Moses disobeyed a direct commandment and ignored God to the last.
What I am seeing is a pattern of laziness, an uncaring heart and hesitation to place faith in God. What Moses is essentially avoiding is sacrifice: if he goes back to Egypt, his life is on the line. If he circumcises his son, his marriage is on the line. Even when shown unquestionable miracles, Moses continues to... well... not care. He doesn't want the hard work, the danger, and the sacrifice that comes with being a servant of God. And it really pisses God off.
Can you sense the irony? We constantly complain about God's decisions with humankind, the state of the world, the starving children in Africa, the unsaved. Yet when the rubber hits the road and God calls us to action, we hesitate. Will I lose friends? Will I be hated? Will I be in danger? We seem to care, to be passionate, yet there is no sobriety, and no willingness for personal sacrifice and pain.
So your dream is to see people saved to Jesus Christ, to please God, to help others, to be an example of love? Be careful what you wish for, because God may actually call you to those things. And when He does, if you back out because of a noncommittal, weak heart, it will anger Him. How else could he feel? He's being stabbed in the back by the one's He's blessed. Instead, we should be willing to risk everything for Him, and trust that His purpose is good. Has He not proved this to us over the centuries? Has he not paid for us with the murder of his only son?
I am just as convicted and guilty of these blasphemies as anyone, if not more.
e hënë, 23 korrik 2007
Exodus study questions, week #1
Okay brethren, here we go into Exodus. Only four chapters to read this week (chapters 1-4, in case anyone forgot). Since we are still in the realm of the familiar stories, I hope we all can take time to not only read over the stories well, but think, pray, and worship (yes!) over the stories we have before us.
1) As I have kept on emphasizing in the past study questions, look for what is emphasized in each chapter. For example: in chapter 1, how much attention is placed on Israel's (not the person or the country, but the people group) hardship and suffering in Egypt (hint: not much). So again, what is each chapter focusing on?
2) How are these beginning chapters in Exodus connected with the end of Genesis? How does the story of the Israelites flow from Genesis to Exodus?
3) One thing I have done in my Bible is underline all the places where God says "I will________ (do such and such). You don't have to do this, but it might be helpful in understanding the story, as well as being an amazing testament to our great God!
You guys may have noticed that my questions are rather vague. I do that because vague questions really make us think about what we're reading.
I might be back later this week with more questions, and if you have your own questions then please throw them up here. Also, if you guys want another mid-week get-together-and-study, I'm down for that. Until then, I look forward to seeing y'all at this week's meeting with your Bibles, some notes, and stuff to write with for prayer requests!
1) As I have kept on emphasizing in the past study questions, look for what is emphasized in each chapter. For example: in chapter 1, how much attention is placed on Israel's (not the person or the country, but the people group) hardship and suffering in Egypt (hint: not much). So again, what is each chapter focusing on?
2) How are these beginning chapters in Exodus connected with the end of Genesis? How does the story of the Israelites flow from Genesis to Exodus?
3) One thing I have done in my Bible is underline all the places where God says "I will________ (do such and such). You don't have to do this, but it might be helpful in understanding the story, as well as being an amazing testament to our great God!
You guys may have noticed that my questions are rather vague. I do that because vague questions really make us think about what we're reading.
I might be back later this week with more questions, and if you have your own questions then please throw them up here. Also, if you guys want another mid-week get-together-and-study, I'm down for that. Until then, I look forward to seeing y'all at this week's meeting with your Bibles, some notes, and stuff to write with for prayer requests!
e shtunë, 21 korrik 2007
e mërkurë, 18 korrik 2007
Lust
Hey everyone,
Richard Woo here. I'm encouraging all of you to take a part of your valuable time to check out some Youtube videos on the topic of Lust. Both Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort articulated well about this sensitive and uncomfortable subject in a three part video series. I watched it and was encouraged to get a chance to see all three videos. I was fascinated to see it. You don't have to take my word for it, just watch it and see it for yourself. After you finish watching it, feel free and post some comments about it. Thanks and God Bless.
Here are the links:
The Way Of The Master : Lust (Part 1 of 3):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wl7qV-pQInA&mode=related&search=
The Way Of The Master : Lust (Part 2 of 3):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bJ3ybG4q1Q&mode=related&search=
The Way Of The Master : Lust (Part 3 of 3):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLRlQQDjz5c&mode=related&search=
Richard Woo here. I'm encouraging all of you to take a part of your valuable time to check out some Youtube videos on the topic of Lust. Both Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort articulated well about this sensitive and uncomfortable subject in a three part video series. I watched it and was encouraged to get a chance to see all three videos. I was fascinated to see it. You don't have to take my word for it, just watch it and see it for yourself. After you finish watching it, feel free and post some comments about it. Thanks and God Bless.
Here are the links:
The Way Of The Master : Lust (Part 1 of 3):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wl7qV-pQInA&mode=related&search=
The Way Of The Master : Lust (Part 2 of 3):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bJ3ybG4q1Q&mode=related&search=
The Way Of The Master : Lust (Part 3 of 3):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLRlQQDjz5c&mode=related&search=
e martë, 17 korrik 2007
Exodus!!
For the first study in Exodus, we are going to cover chapters 1-4.
*Remember that we are not having an official study this week. I just posted this ahead of time so that we all know what's coming up.
*Remember that we are not having an official study this week. I just posted this ahead of time so that we all know what's coming up.
e hënë, 16 korrik 2007
Meeting tonight, 7/16
We will be meeting at Richard's place tonight at 7. I'll post more about ride stuff when I get back.
e enjte, 12 korrik 2007
God and Time-Management
Below is a blog article taken from the Stand to Reason blog about time management. Read it now.
Time Management Isn't the Answer
Somehow, I got out of the habit of regularly (and often) praying and reading the Bible. It didn't take long for that time to be sucked away by less worthy things like laundry, cleaning, blogging, and Seinfeld reruns (some pursuits more necessary than others, clearly--but all less worthy than time with God, and certainly less beneficial).
Realizing my situation wasn't a good one, and starting to notice some more blatant ill-effects, I began asking for prayer for better time management as I tried again and again to stick to a better schedule that could fit time with God in with everything else and keep me moving in the right direction. Convinced bad time management was my problem, I tried to focus my energy on the struggle to "get more things done."
Then I read this--a monthly newsletter from Desiring God about the real reason why Martha was busy with distractions while Mary "chose the good part, which shall not be taken away from her":
Why wasn’t Mary distracted? Because Mary was enthralled with Jesus. She was captivated. What she heard as Jesus taught were words of “spirit and life” (John 6:63). She was drinking “living water” (John 4:10), and eating the “bread of life” (John 6:48). Whether or not Mary was aware of Martha’s busyness, she simply couldn’t tear herself away from Jesus. And Jesus commended her on having chosen the good portion.
Being enthralled, engrossed, captivated by someone or something has a powerful clarifying effect on our priorities. We make time for what we are passionate about and we neglect what is less important. We can be tempted to think that the right time-management technique is the answer to a well balanced life and getting the important things done. But it’s not true. Techniques may increase our efficiency, but they can’t determine our priorities. The heart does that.
Ouch.
I know this is true. My situation is a reflection of my heart, not my time. The circular part of it is that the more time I spend with God, the more time I want to spend with Him--even at the expense of other pressing matters. The less time I spend with Him, it's strange how quickly I forget what I'm missing, and how much I inexplicably resist being with Him. In other words, the right priority perpetuates itself and so do the wrong ones.
What I need now is God's mercy and power along with some self-enforced, absolute, acted-upon priorities, knowing, as Martha knew, that the hardest part comes at the beginning when we first have to tear ourselves away from our habitual tasks. Once we make it to our rightful place at Jesus' feet, nothing can tempt us away.
Time Management Isn't the Answer
Somehow, I got out of the habit of regularly (and often) praying and reading the Bible. It didn't take long for that time to be sucked away by less worthy things like laundry, cleaning, blogging, and Seinfeld reruns (some pursuits more necessary than others, clearly--but all less worthy than time with God, and certainly less beneficial).
Realizing my situation wasn't a good one, and starting to notice some more blatant ill-effects, I began asking for prayer for better time management as I tried again and again to stick to a better schedule that could fit time with God in with everything else and keep me moving in the right direction. Convinced bad time management was my problem, I tried to focus my energy on the struggle to "get more things done."
Then I read this--a monthly newsletter from Desiring God about the real reason why Martha was busy with distractions while Mary "chose the good part, which shall not be taken away from her":
Why wasn’t Mary distracted? Because Mary was enthralled with Jesus. She was captivated. What she heard as Jesus taught were words of “spirit and life” (John 6:63). She was drinking “living water” (John 4:10), and eating the “bread of life” (John 6:48). Whether or not Mary was aware of Martha’s busyness, she simply couldn’t tear herself away from Jesus. And Jesus commended her on having chosen the good portion.
Being enthralled, engrossed, captivated by someone or something has a powerful clarifying effect on our priorities. We make time for what we are passionate about and we neglect what is less important. We can be tempted to think that the right time-management technique is the answer to a well balanced life and getting the important things done. But it’s not true. Techniques may increase our efficiency, but they can’t determine our priorities. The heart does that.
Ouch.
I know this is true. My situation is a reflection of my heart, not my time. The circular part of it is that the more time I spend with God, the more time I want to spend with Him--even at the expense of other pressing matters. The less time I spend with Him, it's strange how quickly I forget what I'm missing, and how much I inexplicably resist being with Him. In other words, the right priority perpetuates itself and so do the wrong ones.
What I need now is God's mercy and power along with some self-enforced, absolute, acted-upon priorities, knowing, as Martha knew, that the hardest part comes at the beginning when we first have to tear ourselves away from our habitual tasks. Once we make it to our rightful place at Jesus' feet, nothing can tempt us away.
e martë, 10 korrik 2007
Meeting this week
Instead of meeting this Saturday, 7/14, we are going to be meeting on Monday, 7/16. And, by the gracious invitation of Sir Richard Woo the Wise, we will be meeting at his super-rad dorm room/apartment place. Stay tuned for more info.
e hënë, 9 korrik 2007
Study #3, part II
Ok, these are the chapters that the groups will read.
Isaac- 21:1-8; all of chapter 24 (yes, the WHOLE thing); 25:19-34; all of chapter 26
Jacob- chapters 27-29; 30-31 (note: I am certain that you guys will have lots of questions on this section, so please post them or e-mail me so I can help)
Joseph- 37; 39 (really look for the main point of this chapter); 40, 41 (chapters 42-44 cover the brothers going to and from Egypt, just know that much); 46:1-7; 48; 50 (this is a good amount of chapters, but I bet you guys know the stories pretty well. So you can really step this study up and hit on lots of major themes. No pressure!)
Isaac- 21:1-8; all of chapter 24 (yes, the WHOLE thing); 25:19-34; all of chapter 26
Jacob- chapters 27-29; 30-31 (note: I am certain that you guys will have lots of questions on this section, so please post them or e-mail me so I can help)
Joseph- 37; 39 (really look for the main point of this chapter); 40, 41 (chapters 42-44 cover the brothers going to and from Egypt, just know that much); 46:1-7; 48; 50 (this is a good amount of chapters, but I bet you guys know the stories pretty well. So you can really step this study up and hit on lots of major themes. No pressure!)
e diel, 8 korrik 2007
Study #3, part I
We are going to try to finish up Genesis this week, and to do that we are going to break down a few things. The rest of Genesis focuses on the lives of Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. So what I'm going to do is break you guys up into groups of two, and each group will focus on one of the characters. You will be responsible for reading and knowing the chapters well, so that when we meet again you can help the other groups understand what happened in the chapters that had your character. I will post questions for each group as well. Below is a break down of the chapters in Genesis and the characters that are covered in those chapters (note: you will not have to read all the chapters I have below; tonight or tomorrow I will post the chapters you have to read, so don't stress out "Joseph group").
Isaac- chapters 21-26: Danny, Johnny
Jacob- chapters 27-36: Eric, Drew
Joseph- chapters 37, 39-50: Patrick, Richard
I will be in everybody's group :D
Isaac- chapters 21-26: Danny, Johnny
Jacob- chapters 27-36: Eric, Drew
Joseph- chapters 37, 39-50: Patrick, Richard
I will be in everybody's group :D
e enjte, 5 korrik 2007
Study questions for this week
1. Chapter 9 is strikingly similar to chapters 1-3 in regards to its content and structure. Note the similarities and what significant events occur in chapter 9. What is a covenant? What's so great about the covenant God makes with Noah?
2. What is the significance of the tower of Babel story (11:1-9)?
3. Take special note of God's first interaction with Abram in 12:1-3. Besides the fall of man, this is THE MAJOR TURNING POINT IN HISTORY! What happens? What is important? How does this event relate to/differ from events that have happened earlier in the book?
4. Chapter 13 seems to be a pretty plain (pun?) chapter. Here the focus is placed on the land, which is one of the major themes in the book. Feel free to jot down some notes and questions about this chapter; heck, even start a discussion about it here on the blog.
5. This is another important chapter in the book. Once again, I'd like to see what is significant about the events.
6. So what does all these events mean for us anyway? If we really believe that scripture was written for our good, then what do all these stories and events have to do with us?
Try checking out the monergism.com site for articles that may help you understand what is going on.
2. What is the significance of the tower of Babel story (11:1-9)?
3. Take special note of God's first interaction with Abram in 12:1-3. Besides the fall of man, this is THE MAJOR TURNING POINT IN HISTORY! What happens? What is important? How does this event relate to/differ from events that have happened earlier in the book?
4. Chapter 13 seems to be a pretty plain (pun?) chapter. Here the focus is placed on the land, which is one of the major themes in the book. Feel free to jot down some notes and questions about this chapter; heck, even start a discussion about it here on the blog.
5. This is another important chapter in the book. Once again, I'd like to see what is significant about the events.
6. So what does all these events mean for us anyway? If we really believe that scripture was written for our good, then what do all these stories and events have to do with us?
Try checking out the monergism.com site for articles that may help you understand what is going on.
e martë, 3 korrik 2007
"Image of God" definition
"The image is a physical manifestation of divine (or royal) essence that
bears the function of that which it represents; this gives the
image-bearer the capacity to reflect attributes of the one represented and
act on his behalf. Jesus=a physical representative of God rather than a
physical representation of what God looks like."
bears the function of that which it represents; this gives the
image-bearer the capacity to reflect attributes of the one represented and
act on his behalf. Jesus=a physical representative of God rather than a
physical representation of what God looks like."
Study #2
For this weekend we will be getting into Genesis 9, 11:1-9, 12, 13, 15, and 17. We are now moving into the next era of the world's history, and the focus will be on the covenants God makes with man (in these chapters we have covenants with Noah and Abram). I'll be posting some questions soon!
e hënë, 2 korrik 2007
Water above the sky?
Hey, anyone read Genesis 1:6-8 and get confused?
God makes the waters and calls them the sea. Okay.
Then he creates an expanse, and calls it heaven (the sky). Okay.
Then he separates the waters and places some above the sky and some below the sky.
What the heck? Water above the sky? What is this talking about?
God makes the waters and calls them the sea. Okay.
Then he creates an expanse, and calls it heaven (the sky). Okay.
Then he separates the waters and places some above the sky and some below the sky.
What the heck? Water above the sky? What is this talking about?
The Science of Genesis
As many of you are aware, today there is a raging debate--many call it a war--between old-earth evolution proponents and young-earth creation proponents over the origin of the earth and mankind. For you and I, as Christians, this war becomes especially confusing and dangerous because we are torn between two conflicts: the necessary objectivity of science in understanding the world around us through fact, and our belief in the infallible truth of the Bible.
It gets worse. Genesis directly contradicts old-earth evolutionary science models of the world's and man's origins. In science we are told that the universe and the earth were formed by the "Big Bang," an explosion of matter; in Genesis we are told that God SPOKE the stars, the earth, and all matter into existence at different intervals (Gen 1:1-8). Again, direct contradiction, where evolution claims human beings have slowly evolved from other creatures, where Genesis says God made Adam from the dust of the earth and Eve from the rib of Adam. There is no getting around that He made them fully formed; the language allows no other interpretation. One final blow is the issue of time; scientists agree the earth and life took millions upon billions of years to shape and form; Genesis says that God made all of creation in a week and then lists genealogies of family lines to link us directly to modern day history: if you follow the genealogies and Genesis literally, you can arrive upon an age of the earth that is anywhere from 7000-15,000 years old. Now that is a young earth.
This problem has proved immensely troubling to Bible believers. There have been several responses to this contradiction, which I want to list off to you:
- Some have concluded the Bible is fallible
- Others have concluded the Bible is using figurative language, and cannot be taken literally
- Still others have concluded that modern science is wrong and believed in the Bible
There are no other possible responses. Now, if you are like me, you probably think that the first is morally wrong, the second is a compromise which bends the Bible incorrectly, and the third is insanity. I want to encourage you today that the third is not insanity.
Let's talk a little bit about the old-earth, Big Bang evolutionary model of origin. In order for this model to be true, two things must also be true:
1) The earth must be very old (time)
2) All of creation must have been able to occur through random mutation (chance)
If these two stipulations are not true, evolution crumbles. These two theories are the "pillars" of evolution. What you probably didn't know is that there is a lot of evidence that these two theories are not true; we see in fact strong evidence for a young, designed earth as opposed to an old, random one. The immediate question that you will ask is, "Why have I not heard your so-called evidence sooner? Why, if it is so groundbreaking, is it not broadcasted around the world?" I have no good answer to this question, other than that this war of "Science" is actually a war to remove the necessity of God from our thinking. I literally believe modern science silences the other side because they want to go on believing in pure atheism. You may or may not agree, but first allow me to present my evidence.
1) Time. The old-earthers say that we have dated rocks and bones around the earth and found them to be very, very old. They have an entire history of the earth written out, complete with full color drawings in every high school textbook. They've even named every "period," each of which consist of several hundred million years. This is very nice, but there are big flaws with their method of discovery this 6-billion year-old history, which start with their dating methods.
There are several ways to date an object. There is carbon-dating, which checks for how much carbon is left in a bone, finds out how much carbon that bone began with, finds out how much carbon leaves the bone per year, and then discovers the age of the bone based on how many "years worth" of carbon has left the bone. There is a well-known problem with carbon dating, however, even according to evolutionists: it is only accurate up to ten-thousand years, because at that point all carbon has left. Thus, most dating for "millions and billions of years" is done using a different method, radiometric dating.
Radiometric dating works like carbon dating: radioactive materials slowly leaves dead organisms, they say at a constant rate. But it is not a constant rate. Any number of atmospheric changes could drastically change the age radiometric dating finds in a bone or rock. There are so many fluctuations with radiometric dating, when a bone is dated the machine turns out a list of possible ages from 100 to 100 billion years, and the person who found the bone, the paleontologist, actually gets to pick which age they think most likely from the list. That's not science, it's imagination!
It gets worse. A team of creationists went to a beach and found a half-eaten seal. They then used radiometric dating to date the fleshy part of the seal 20,000 years old and the eaten part 40,000 years old. That's how wild radiometric dating figures can get. The seal couldn't have been more than a day old because it hadn't decomposed yet but radiometric dating turned up 20 and 40 thousand years.
So we cannot trust the dates that evolutionists give us. What's more, if there were a worldwide flood (as the Bible says there is), this would completely change radiation levels all around the earth, making things much older than they seem because of all the radioactive discharge during the surge of water. Uh-oh. The old-earth can no longer proven to be old.
2) Chance. If you have never read Darwin's "Origin of the Species," the original theory of evolution, I recommend you check it out. Particularly, you should look at chapter 9, "Problems with the Theory." In this chapter, Darwin spells out potential theories which, if proven true, could completely destroy his theory of evolution. One was the theory that if any living organism were shown to not be able to come about by chance, in other words, if this organism had such a complex design that it could never have come about by chance, it would invalidate evolution.
One biological structure which caused Darwin to fear this idea true was the human eye. He saw that the human eye had many complex, necessary structures which made it work, and without each one, it would not work at all. The eye has an iris, a pupil, retina, transistors, rods, cones, electrical pathways and many other structures which all work together in strange harmony to allow us the gift of vision. Darwin feared that no amount of evolutionary chance could ever produce such a structure.
He didn't even know the eye as well as we know it today. The eye has 19 parts which, if any one is removed, would cease to function. This means either one evolutionary leaps gets all of the functions in one successful mutation, or the creature is merely mutating a useless organ which would not help it become the fittest and survive (ala survival of the fittest). If even 18 of those parts are placed exactly correctly in all their complexity, but one is missing, the eye is a useless organ and a weak spot for the creature because it is soft tissue leading directly to the brain (easy target).
One scientist put the probability of this kind of complexity occuring randomly, by chance:
"The probability of evolution generating life as we know it today is the same probability as a hurricance sweeping through a junkyard and assembling an operational 147 B1 Bomber airplane. It's impossible."
There is much more evidence which leans toward young earth and design, and destroys the pillars of time and chance. If you are further interested, check out
http://www.answersingenesis.org/
or call me up and I will get you the scientific journals for the facts I've listed.
It gets worse. Genesis directly contradicts old-earth evolutionary science models of the world's and man's origins. In science we are told that the universe and the earth were formed by the "Big Bang," an explosion of matter; in Genesis we are told that God SPOKE the stars, the earth, and all matter into existence at different intervals (Gen 1:1-8). Again, direct contradiction, where evolution claims human beings have slowly evolved from other creatures, where Genesis says God made Adam from the dust of the earth and Eve from the rib of Adam. There is no getting around that He made them fully formed; the language allows no other interpretation. One final blow is the issue of time; scientists agree the earth and life took millions upon billions of years to shape and form; Genesis says that God made all of creation in a week and then lists genealogies of family lines to link us directly to modern day history: if you follow the genealogies and Genesis literally, you can arrive upon an age of the earth that is anywhere from 7000-15,000 years old. Now that is a young earth.
This problem has proved immensely troubling to Bible believers. There have been several responses to this contradiction, which I want to list off to you:
- Some have concluded the Bible is fallible
- Others have concluded the Bible is using figurative language, and cannot be taken literally
- Still others have concluded that modern science is wrong and believed in the Bible
There are no other possible responses. Now, if you are like me, you probably think that the first is morally wrong, the second is a compromise which bends the Bible incorrectly, and the third is insanity. I want to encourage you today that the third is not insanity.
Let's talk a little bit about the old-earth, Big Bang evolutionary model of origin. In order for this model to be true, two things must also be true:
1) The earth must be very old (time)
2) All of creation must have been able to occur through random mutation (chance)
If these two stipulations are not true, evolution crumbles. These two theories are the "pillars" of evolution. What you probably didn't know is that there is a lot of evidence that these two theories are not true; we see in fact strong evidence for a young, designed earth as opposed to an old, random one. The immediate question that you will ask is, "Why have I not heard your so-called evidence sooner? Why, if it is so groundbreaking, is it not broadcasted around the world?" I have no good answer to this question, other than that this war of "Science" is actually a war to remove the necessity of God from our thinking. I literally believe modern science silences the other side because they want to go on believing in pure atheism. You may or may not agree, but first allow me to present my evidence.
1) Time. The old-earthers say that we have dated rocks and bones around the earth and found them to be very, very old. They have an entire history of the earth written out, complete with full color drawings in every high school textbook. They've even named every "period," each of which consist of several hundred million years. This is very nice, but there are big flaws with their method of discovery this 6-billion year-old history, which start with their dating methods.
There are several ways to date an object. There is carbon-dating, which checks for how much carbon is left in a bone, finds out how much carbon that bone began with, finds out how much carbon leaves the bone per year, and then discovers the age of the bone based on how many "years worth" of carbon has left the bone. There is a well-known problem with carbon dating, however, even according to evolutionists: it is only accurate up to ten-thousand years, because at that point all carbon has left. Thus, most dating for "millions and billions of years" is done using a different method, radiometric dating.
Radiometric dating works like carbon dating: radioactive materials slowly leaves dead organisms, they say at a constant rate. But it is not a constant rate. Any number of atmospheric changes could drastically change the age radiometric dating finds in a bone or rock. There are so many fluctuations with radiometric dating, when a bone is dated the machine turns out a list of possible ages from 100 to 100 billion years, and the person who found the bone, the paleontologist, actually gets to pick which age they think most likely from the list. That's not science, it's imagination!
It gets worse. A team of creationists went to a beach and found a half-eaten seal. They then used radiometric dating to date the fleshy part of the seal 20,000 years old and the eaten part 40,000 years old. That's how wild radiometric dating figures can get. The seal couldn't have been more than a day old because it hadn't decomposed yet but radiometric dating turned up 20 and 40 thousand years.
So we cannot trust the dates that evolutionists give us. What's more, if there were a worldwide flood (as the Bible says there is), this would completely change radiation levels all around the earth, making things much older than they seem because of all the radioactive discharge during the surge of water. Uh-oh. The old-earth can no longer proven to be old.
2) Chance. If you have never read Darwin's "Origin of the Species," the original theory of evolution, I recommend you check it out. Particularly, you should look at chapter 9, "Problems with the Theory." In this chapter, Darwin spells out potential theories which, if proven true, could completely destroy his theory of evolution. One was the theory that if any living organism were shown to not be able to come about by chance, in other words, if this organism had such a complex design that it could never have come about by chance, it would invalidate evolution.
One biological structure which caused Darwin to fear this idea true was the human eye. He saw that the human eye had many complex, necessary structures which made it work, and without each one, it would not work at all. The eye has an iris, a pupil, retina, transistors, rods, cones, electrical pathways and many other structures which all work together in strange harmony to allow us the gift of vision. Darwin feared that no amount of evolutionary chance could ever produce such a structure.
He didn't even know the eye as well as we know it today. The eye has 19 parts which, if any one is removed, would cease to function. This means either one evolutionary leaps gets all of the functions in one successful mutation, or the creature is merely mutating a useless organ which would not help it become the fittest and survive (ala survival of the fittest). If even 18 of those parts are placed exactly correctly in all their complexity, but one is missing, the eye is a useless organ and a weak spot for the creature because it is soft tissue leading directly to the brain (easy target).
One scientist put the probability of this kind of complexity occuring randomly, by chance:
"The probability of evolution generating life as we know it today is the same probability as a hurricance sweeping through a junkyard and assembling an operational 147 B1 Bomber airplane. It's impossible."
There is much more evidence which leans toward young earth and design, and destroys the pillars of time and chance. If you are further interested, check out
http://www.answersingenesis.org/
or call me up and I will get you the scientific journals for the facts I've listed.
e shtunë, 30 qershor 2007
What's the deal with Genesis 6:1-7
I shall quote this article at length because it is a helpful guide in helping one understand the strangest passage in the Bible (I don't expect anyone to read it all, but for the very curious people it might do them some good):
"The first matter and indeed the main thing about which there has been the greatest amount of discussion has to do with the meaning of verses 1 and 2. What is meant by the phrase "Sons of God"? To whom is this referring? Likewise, who are the "daughters of men"? What is the reference for this phrase?
Well, as you can imagine, bible scholars over the years have speculated a great deal about these things and a number of proposals for how to understand these phrases have been put forward. However, the vast majority of scholars, as far as I can tell, end up taking one of two main positions, which we will spend the next few minutes considering.
One viewpoint takes the position that "Sons of God" is a reference to angelic beings that entered into God's creation and engaged in sexual relations with human beings - with the women who are spoken of in verse 1 as rapidly multiplying across the face of the earth, as the human race expands itself. Some of the arguments that are marshaled to support this position are:
1) The phrase "sons of God" while not appearing anywhere else in Moses' writings - and so difficult to be sure of - does nevertheless appear in other places in the Old Testament - like Job - where the context makes it clear that the phrase is a reference to angelic beings.
2) The co-habitation and co-mingling of angelic and human beings does seem to fit with a
developing plot line that shows the downward progression of sin. So, for example, sin begins with the woman and the man in the garden, starting internally with certain thought patterns which then lead to some external actions that are sinful. It then manifests itself in the man and woman's relationship with each other. It then manifests itself in a pronounced curse which affects the creation itself and all future humanity. We then see it in the story of Cain and Abel - with Abel being murdered by his brother. We next see it in the genealogy of the descendants of Cain, and especially in Lamech who is a violent murderer who boasts to his wives about his deeds. And then, in this viewpoint at least, the climax of all this is when the angelic beings come and mix with the human race, spreading the corruption of sin to cosmic, supernatural dimensions.
3) In keeping with all of that - this sort of radical, bizarre evil would help explain why God's response to it - in the form of an all-devastating flood - seems to be equally radical.
4) The view that these are angelic beings would seem to be supported by other passages in the New Testament which are possibly referring to this very event - or at least to something like it. (Read 1 Peter 3:18-19; 2 Peter 2:4-10a; Jude 6-7). It is possible that all these verses have in view the events of Genesis 6 - seen from this certain perspective.
5) As one scholar seems to suggest (Kidner), this perspective could be seen as a second attempt on the part of angelic beings to thwart the purposes of God. The first attempt was what we have already seen in Genesis 3 when Satan, in the form of the serpent, comes to the woman and tempts her to sin. After those events, in which she was promised she would become "like gods” she and her husband are cast out of the garden so that they might not eat of the tree of life in their sinful condition and thus gain immortality in their fallen state. As this one scholar suggests, in Genesis 6 we have not just one but a number of angelic beings again coming to not one but many "daughters" of men and trying to achieve for them both power and possibly the immortality that had been denied them by means of this unholy union between humanity and angels.
6) Finally, the view that these were angels is possibly linked to the account here of the Nephilim - mighty warriors. In other words, even though it is not specifically stated, it might be taken as implied that the Nephilim are the sort of "hybrid" offsping of the union between women and angels. However, this is far from obvious in the passage, but I will say more about that in a moment.
At any rate, that is one view that many scholars maintain as the most likely reading of these verses. The other view that is held by many scholars is that the phrase "Sons of God" refers not to angelic beings but simply to men who were born in the godly line of Seth.
Correspondingly, in this view the "daughters of men" are women who belong to the ungodly line - the descendants of Cain. And so, this view is simply saying that what began to happen was a mixing of the two lines - the godly with the ungodly. This greatly angered God, and then we all know what happened after that. Now, some of the main arguments in favor of this view are:
1) It does seem to fit better with the immediate context of the last couple of chapters. In Genesis 3:15, as we have already seen, contained in the curses pronounced against the woman was the promise that the offspring of the woman would crush the offspring of the serpent. And so there is forecast there the development of two lines of humanity. What we see next in Genesis takes this further with chapter 4 showing us the Cain and Abel conflict - which was simply the seed of the serpent (Cain) making a futile, but pre-emptive strike against the seed of the woman (Abel). We then see the story of Cain and his descendants and the development of that line, followed by the genealogy of Seth with his descendants the development of the other line. To then see chapter 6 as this event where the descendants of Seth were being lured away by lust and sensuality into illicit marriages with the descendants of Cain would seem to be flow quite well with the immediate context.
2) To regard the "Sons of God" as angels does, it could be argued, seem like something of an intrusion into the text. We're not really talking about angels here; that's not the subject of concern and then, all of the sudden, there they are. It does seem a little surprising but then it must be said that the same thing could be said of the events in Genesis 3. There you are, the story going along just fine about creation when suddenly, out of the blue, there is a talking snake.
3) The view that "sons of God' is referring to the descendants of Seth and not to angelic beings also seems to fit better with what follows in Genesis 6:3. In verse 3 you have God saying that he is not going to put up with the sinfulness of man forever. Indeed, God even puts a time limit on the whole thing saying that the clock is running and that after 120 years, he will carry out his judgment against humanity. The important thing' about all this for the point at hand is simply that if verses 1 and 2 were talking about a co-mingling of angelic beings and humanity, then you would think that the words here would include judgments against angels as well as humans, for they were equally guilty. But no word is mentioned. When you compare this to Genesis 3 you see that God pronounces curses and judgment against both the humans and against the serpent, or Satan. At the same time, while no word of judgment is mentioned here - if you take into account the other passages that we just read from the New Testament as
referring to these events - then in those passages you do find promised words of judgment that awaits angelic beings.
4) This view is also possibly supported by the fact that the "sons of God" here - whoever they are - are described as "taking wives" to themselves - language which is almost always used to refer to the act of marriage and thus seems to fit more naturally with what humans do, not angels. The text that is usually brought in to support this point is Matthew 22:29-30. This text, understood one way, could be read as rendering the marriage of angels outside the realm of possibility but then, read another way, does not necessarily exclude that possibility at all. So, it's not a strong point, but it is a point nonetheless.
5) Finally, in support of this view a scholar named Currid says that a better translation of Genesis 4:26 would make the meaning of this passage more obvious. In short, he makes the case that instead of saying that "people began to call upon the name of the Lord" a better translation is "men began to be called by the name Yahw*' or, in other words, men began to be called by the name of God. If that is correct, then for Genesis 6:2 to come along later and refer to actions taken by "sons of God" then it would seem to be a more obvious linguistic connection. And so, those two views - that "sons of God" refers to angelic beings OR that it refers to the descendants of Seth - those are the main ones being offered and defended. But the reality is that there are problems that arise no matter which one you take.
As far as the "angelic" view is concerned, it does seem to interrupt the flow of the story as we see the developing account of the line of Cain vs the line of Seth. And yet, while it seems to interrupt that flow, it seems to enhance another one - the downward progression of sin. The angelic view also, as we have seen, leaves us wondering why no immediate word of judgment is pronounced against the angels for their part in the sin. And, further, it seems to contradict Jesus words about angels in Matthew 22.
As far as the "two lines of humanity" view is concerned, you have the same problem as outlined above - it flows well with one line of development, but seems to interrupt another one.
Another difficulty is outlined by a guy named Motyer who says, "the mere mingling of some godly with some ungodly humans is hardly the sort of climactic sin which Gen 6 appears to require by its place in the narrative." To that, Motyer adds this comment: "there is no reason why a mixed human marriage should produce the sort of offspring that Genesis 6:4 implies (although, it must be said, the text is not necessarily implying this and, in fact, may be trying to make the exact opposite point - that the Nephilim were not at all superhuman but were simply extraordinary humans). One final problem with this view is that it would seem to present a different picture than what is suggested by the New Testament passages we read earlier."
"The first matter and indeed the main thing about which there has been the greatest amount of discussion has to do with the meaning of verses 1 and 2. What is meant by the phrase "Sons of God"? To whom is this referring? Likewise, who are the "daughters of men"? What is the reference for this phrase?
Well, as you can imagine, bible scholars over the years have speculated a great deal about these things and a number of proposals for how to understand these phrases have been put forward. However, the vast majority of scholars, as far as I can tell, end up taking one of two main positions, which we will spend the next few minutes considering.
One viewpoint takes the position that "Sons of God" is a reference to angelic beings that entered into God's creation and engaged in sexual relations with human beings - with the women who are spoken of in verse 1 as rapidly multiplying across the face of the earth, as the human race expands itself. Some of the arguments that are marshaled to support this position are:
1) The phrase "sons of God" while not appearing anywhere else in Moses' writings - and so difficult to be sure of - does nevertheless appear in other places in the Old Testament - like Job - where the context makes it clear that the phrase is a reference to angelic beings.
2) The co-habitation and co-mingling of angelic and human beings does seem to fit with a
developing plot line that shows the downward progression of sin. So, for example, sin begins with the woman and the man in the garden, starting internally with certain thought patterns which then lead to some external actions that are sinful. It then manifests itself in the man and woman's relationship with each other. It then manifests itself in a pronounced curse which affects the creation itself and all future humanity. We then see it in the story of Cain and Abel - with Abel being murdered by his brother. We next see it in the genealogy of the descendants of Cain, and especially in Lamech who is a violent murderer who boasts to his wives about his deeds. And then, in this viewpoint at least, the climax of all this is when the angelic beings come and mix with the human race, spreading the corruption of sin to cosmic, supernatural dimensions.
3) In keeping with all of that - this sort of radical, bizarre evil would help explain why God's response to it - in the form of an all-devastating flood - seems to be equally radical.
4) The view that these are angelic beings would seem to be supported by other passages in the New Testament which are possibly referring to this very event - or at least to something like it. (Read 1 Peter 3:18-19; 2 Peter 2:4-10a; Jude 6-7). It is possible that all these verses have in view the events of Genesis 6 - seen from this certain perspective.
5) As one scholar seems to suggest (Kidner), this perspective could be seen as a second attempt on the part of angelic beings to thwart the purposes of God. The first attempt was what we have already seen in Genesis 3 when Satan, in the form of the serpent, comes to the woman and tempts her to sin. After those events, in which she was promised she would become "like gods” she and her husband are cast out of the garden so that they might not eat of the tree of life in their sinful condition and thus gain immortality in their fallen state. As this one scholar suggests, in Genesis 6 we have not just one but a number of angelic beings again coming to not one but many "daughters" of men and trying to achieve for them both power and possibly the immortality that had been denied them by means of this unholy union between humanity and angels.
6) Finally, the view that these were angels is possibly linked to the account here of the Nephilim - mighty warriors. In other words, even though it is not specifically stated, it might be taken as implied that the Nephilim are the sort of "hybrid" offsping of the union between women and angels. However, this is far from obvious in the passage, but I will say more about that in a moment.
At any rate, that is one view that many scholars maintain as the most likely reading of these verses. The other view that is held by many scholars is that the phrase "Sons of God" refers not to angelic beings but simply to men who were born in the godly line of Seth.
Correspondingly, in this view the "daughters of men" are women who belong to the ungodly line - the descendants of Cain. And so, this view is simply saying that what began to happen was a mixing of the two lines - the godly with the ungodly. This greatly angered God, and then we all know what happened after that. Now, some of the main arguments in favor of this view are:
1) It does seem to fit better with the immediate context of the last couple of chapters. In Genesis 3:15, as we have already seen, contained in the curses pronounced against the woman was the promise that the offspring of the woman would crush the offspring of the serpent. And so there is forecast there the development of two lines of humanity. What we see next in Genesis takes this further with chapter 4 showing us the Cain and Abel conflict - which was simply the seed of the serpent (Cain) making a futile, but pre-emptive strike against the seed of the woman (Abel). We then see the story of Cain and his descendants and the development of that line, followed by the genealogy of Seth with his descendants the development of the other line. To then see chapter 6 as this event where the descendants of Seth were being lured away by lust and sensuality into illicit marriages with the descendants of Cain would seem to be flow quite well with the immediate context.
2) To regard the "Sons of God" as angels does, it could be argued, seem like something of an intrusion into the text. We're not really talking about angels here; that's not the subject of concern and then, all of the sudden, there they are. It does seem a little surprising but then it must be said that the same thing could be said of the events in Genesis 3. There you are, the story going along just fine about creation when suddenly, out of the blue, there is a talking snake.
3) The view that "sons of God' is referring to the descendants of Seth and not to angelic beings also seems to fit better with what follows in Genesis 6:3. In verse 3 you have God saying that he is not going to put up with the sinfulness of man forever. Indeed, God even puts a time limit on the whole thing saying that the clock is running and that after 120 years, he will carry out his judgment against humanity. The important thing' about all this for the point at hand is simply that if verses 1 and 2 were talking about a co-mingling of angelic beings and humanity, then you would think that the words here would include judgments against angels as well as humans, for they were equally guilty. But no word is mentioned. When you compare this to Genesis 3 you see that God pronounces curses and judgment against both the humans and against the serpent, or Satan. At the same time, while no word of judgment is mentioned here - if you take into account the other passages that we just read from the New Testament as
referring to these events - then in those passages you do find promised words of judgment that awaits angelic beings.
4) This view is also possibly supported by the fact that the "sons of God" here - whoever they are - are described as "taking wives" to themselves - language which is almost always used to refer to the act of marriage and thus seems to fit more naturally with what humans do, not angels. The text that is usually brought in to support this point is Matthew 22:29-30. This text, understood one way, could be read as rendering the marriage of angels outside the realm of possibility but then, read another way, does not necessarily exclude that possibility at all. So, it's not a strong point, but it is a point nonetheless.
5) Finally, in support of this view a scholar named Currid says that a better translation of Genesis 4:26 would make the meaning of this passage more obvious. In short, he makes the case that instead of saying that "people began to call upon the name of the Lord" a better translation is "men began to be called by the name Yahw*' or, in other words, men began to be called by the name of God. If that is correct, then for Genesis 6:2 to come along later and refer to actions taken by "sons of God" then it would seem to be a more obvious linguistic connection. And so, those two views - that "sons of God" refers to angelic beings OR that it refers to the descendants of Seth - those are the main ones being offered and defended. But the reality is that there are problems that arise no matter which one you take.
As far as the "angelic" view is concerned, it does seem to interrupt the flow of the story as we see the developing account of the line of Cain vs the line of Seth. And yet, while it seems to interrupt that flow, it seems to enhance another one - the downward progression of sin. The angelic view also, as we have seen, leaves us wondering why no immediate word of judgment is pronounced against the angels for their part in the sin. And, further, it seems to contradict Jesus words about angels in Matthew 22.
As far as the "two lines of humanity" view is concerned, you have the same problem as outlined above - it flows well with one line of development, but seems to interrupt another one.
Another difficulty is outlined by a guy named Motyer who says, "the mere mingling of some godly with some ungodly humans is hardly the sort of climactic sin which Gen 6 appears to require by its place in the narrative." To that, Motyer adds this comment: "there is no reason why a mixed human marriage should produce the sort of offspring that Genesis 6:4 implies (although, it must be said, the text is not necessarily implying this and, in fact, may be trying to make the exact opposite point - that the Nephilim were not at all superhuman but were simply extraordinary humans). One final problem with this view is that it would seem to present a different picture than what is suggested by the New Testament passages we read earlier."
e enjte, 28 qershor 2007
Sine - e = Sin!!
One of the major topics we will try to cover is the big naughty s-word: SIN. Try to come with some thoughts about sin, what it is, etc. I'll try to make sure we are all thoroughly depressed and ashamed by the end of the night. But remember, it is only by seeing the ugliness of our sin that our savior is glorious!
e mërkurë, 27 qershor 2007
S'more questions for this week
1) Mankind has been made in the "image of God." This is perhaps one of the most significant claims that the Bible makes regarding mankind. What do you think being made "in the image of God" entails? How was that significant to Adam and Eve then, and to us today?
2) We see that in Genesis 2-3 mankind was created to have a special relationship with God, but because of sin that relationship was lost. This isn't so much a question as something to note--the Bible is a story of restoring this relationship between God and man.
3) What was so wrong about Eve's sin? Spend some time thinking about what sin actually is, and what the fundamental problem with it is.
4) What is with the curses God proclaims after Adam and Eve sin?
2) We see that in Genesis 2-3 mankind was created to have a special relationship with God, but because of sin that relationship was lost. This isn't so much a question as something to note--the Bible is a story of restoring this relationship between God and man.
3) What was so wrong about Eve's sin? Spend some time thinking about what sin actually is, and what the fundamental problem with it is.
4) What is with the curses God proclaims after Adam and Eve sin?
e martë, 26 qershor 2007
Words from a man wiser than I
"The big problem with Bible study today is that we think it should be easier than other things we do. We study recipes for quality meals, how-to books for all kinds of things—carpentry, plumbing, automobile maintenance and so on—and read vociferously for our hobbies. Why do we think the Bible is the only subject we should not have to study?! Let me challenge you—make the Bible your hobby. At one level I do not like the analogy; the Bible must be so much more than a hobby! But at another level, what if we spent as much time and money on Bible study as we do our hobbies? What if we took the same amount we spend on golf clubs and courses or on skiing equipment and skiing trips, and put it into Bible study? Yes, encyclopedias, commentaries and other reference materials are expensive. But so is everything we do. The question is about priorities: what is important enough for our time and money? I want to encourage you to get and use the tools that enable us to bridge the gap back to Bible times and authorial intention."
Grant Osborne
Grant Osborne
e hënë, 25 qershor 2007
Study #1
Ok, here we go. We are going to kick the study off by going through Genesis 1-6.
We all have read these chapters to death and back again, I understand that. When you read it this week, try to take yourself out of your 21st mindset and context, and read it as someone would have read it centuries ago. Since the Bible wasn't directly written to us, we need to read it as the original audience would have read it (yes, we won't do this perfectly, but it's a good habit to get into). What would the original audience look for? How might they react to what was written. What would be significant to them?
I'll post more questions later, but this is just a start. May God's grace allow us to be impacted in the reading of this text!
We all have read these chapters to death and back again, I understand that. When you read it this week, try to take yourself out of your 21st mindset and context, and read it as someone would have read it centuries ago. Since the Bible wasn't directly written to us, we need to read it as the original audience would have read it (yes, we won't do this perfectly, but it's a good habit to get into). What would the original audience look for? How might they react to what was written. What would be significant to them?
I'll post more questions later, but this is just a start. May God's grace allow us to be impacted in the reading of this text!
e mërkurë, 20 qershor 2007
"More reading?"
Not wanting to be the dragon that hoards all the gold to myself, I felt it necessary to explain those links on the right side of the blog page.
Apologetics encyclopedia-a vast storehouse of (yes, you guessed it!) Christian apologetic material. I frequent it if I have a problem with a verse or passage, and it has great recommendations for books and resources.
Between two worlds-a blog that covers the gamut of theology, philosophy, and culture. Lots of great links to other resources, as well as inspiring quotes by godly men of old.
Desiring God-the ministry of John Piper. Please come to this site at least once/day. Sermons, articles, meditations, videos, the list goes on.
Dr. Albert Mohler's blog-the president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary is a man very involved in issues confronting Christendom today. Abortion, ethics, literature, books, society, and then some. Please come here often if you want to see the world we live in through a Christian lens.
Ligonier Ministries-the ministry of R.C. Sproul. Great video and audio lectures on a wide swath of Bible topics. Their motto is "renewing your mind," and that's what they achieve.
Monergism-if there could be only one website I could ever visit, it would be this one. This is the great bastion of orthodox Christianity on the internet. Articles and sermons on any topic one could want, and a killer bookstore housing anything one would ever need. I don't recommend this site, I require it!
Stand to reason-a great ministry to confronts the secular world with Christian truth. Great articles on issues like: relativism, pluralism, ethical issues, and culture hot-spots. Highly recommended.
The Gaius Project-a site I just found that addresses the relationship between art and Christianity. I think Pat might get the most out of this, but anyone could benefit from this.
Apologetics encyclopedia-a vast storehouse of (yes, you guessed it!) Christian apologetic material. I frequent it if I have a problem with a verse or passage, and it has great recommendations for books and resources.
Between two worlds-a blog that covers the gamut of theology, philosophy, and culture. Lots of great links to other resources, as well as inspiring quotes by godly men of old.
Desiring God-the ministry of John Piper. Please come to this site at least once/day. Sermons, articles, meditations, videos, the list goes on.
Dr. Albert Mohler's blog-the president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary is a man very involved in issues confronting Christendom today. Abortion, ethics, literature, books, society, and then some. Please come here often if you want to see the world we live in through a Christian lens.
Ligonier Ministries-the ministry of R.C. Sproul. Great video and audio lectures on a wide swath of Bible topics. Their motto is "renewing your mind," and that's what they achieve.
Monergism-if there could be only one website I could ever visit, it would be this one. This is the great bastion of orthodox Christianity on the internet. Articles and sermons on any topic one could want, and a killer bookstore housing anything one would ever need. I don't recommend this site, I require it!
Stand to reason-a great ministry to confronts the secular world with Christian truth. Great articles on issues like: relativism, pluralism, ethical issues, and culture hot-spots. Highly recommended.
The Gaius Project-a site I just found that addresses the relationship between art and Christianity. I think Pat might get the most out of this, but anyone could benefit from this.
e premte, 15 qershor 2007
No man is an island, and no island is a man
So let's discuss something.
Why did God make us?
I'm not asking what our purpose is, or out of what material we were made, but why we were made. What was God thinking when He dropped us on this big rock 93 million miles away from a flaming-hot lightbulb in the sky?
Why did God make us?
I'm not asking what our purpose is, or out of what material we were made, but why we were made. What was God thinking when He dropped us on this big rock 93 million miles away from a flaming-hot lightbulb in the sky?
e enjte, 14 qershor 2007
To Blog or not to Blog
Gentlemen.
This Blog is truly the first of its kind: a supplementary conversational tool to aid and promote thinking and learning in our Saturday night small group.
Let us usher in a new era of good conversation.
Each of you needs to become a MODERATOR so that you may post your own messages. Ask Kevin if you're not one already.
The purpose of this blog is to pose and discuss various questions from the reading that you would normally consider tangential to our Saturday night discussion. Simply put, we are getting more bang for our buck each week with this blog.
Hope you all like it. See you in the forums!
Patro
This Blog is truly the first of its kind: a supplementary conversational tool to aid and promote thinking and learning in our Saturday night small group.
Let us usher in a new era of good conversation.
Each of you needs to become a MODERATOR so that you may post your own messages. Ask Kevin if you're not one already.
The purpose of this blog is to pose and discuss various questions from the reading that you would normally consider tangential to our Saturday night discussion. Simply put, we are getting more bang for our buck each week with this blog.
Hope you all like it. See you in the forums!
Patro
e mërkurë, 13 qershor 2007
Abonohu te:
Postimet (Atom)