Eternal Life Is Not Given by Measure

Eternal Life Is Not Given by Measure - By Gene Lawley - https://www.raptureready.com/2020/11/12/eternal-life-is-not-given-by-measure-by-gene-lawley/ The parable Jesus told of a vineyard owner hiring workers throughout the day but paying each of them the same wage for the day’s work seems to illustrate the principle,as in the title above. The parable is recorded in Matthew 20:1-16: “…For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. Now when he had agreed with the laborers for a denariusa day, he sent them into his vineyard. And he went out about the third hour and saw others standing idle in the marketplace, and said to them, ‘You also go into the vineyard, and whatever is right I will give you.’ So they went. Again he went out about thesixth and the ninth hour, and did likewise. And about the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing idle, and said to them, ‘Why have you been standing here idle all day?’ They said to him, ‘Because no one hired us.’ He said to them, ‘You also gointo the vineyard, and whatever is right you will receive.’ “So when evening had come, the owner of the vineyard said to his steward, ‘Call the laborers and give them their wages, beginning with the last to the first.’ And when thosecame who were hired about the eleventh hour, they each received a denarius. But when the first came, they supposed that they would receive more; and they likewise received each a denarius. And when they had received it, they complained against the landowner,saying, ‘These last men have worked only one hour, and you made them equal to us who have borne the burden and the heat of the day.’ “But he answered one of them and said, ‘Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what is yours and go your way. I wish to give tothis last man the same as to you. Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with my own things? Or is your eye evil because I am good?’ So the last will be first, and the first last. For many are called, but few chosen.” It is a rather long narrative, but there are three points to be considered as insight into the “likeness of the kingdom of heaven” so revealed in this parable—the same wagebeing paid to each of the workers; the first is last and the last first; and many are called, but few are chosen. The challenge is to learn how those three points are illustrated by this parable. It brings me to that proverb that says, “And knowledge of theHoly One is understanding” (Proverbs 9:10b). But wait! The first part of that verse also has an important input to this as well: “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom” (Proverbs 9:10a). The first item is the way the workers were paid—each one received the same amount, although their hours of work differed. As the article title indicates, it compares tothe gift of eternal life and how it comes to those who believe and receive it. No one gets more eternal life than anyone else. That seems to be a simple answer, but does anyone have difficulty with the realization that someone who receives the gift of eternallife through Christ at an early age and spends his life in service to the Lord, while someone on his deathbed accepts Christ and has no life left to live for the Lord, yet he also has eternal life? Perhaps not so much, but that is a reasonable comparison withthe details of the parable. That old Adam nature each believer spars with all day long, every day and night, has a way of crying out, “That’s not fair!” Remember how the disciples, James and John,wanted to sit on each side of Jesus when He was seated on His throne in heaven? Who doesn’t want special privileges to satisfy his self-centered soul? The passage that sheds light on this is found in 1 Corinthians 3:11-15: “For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood,hay, straw, each one’s work will become clear; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one’s work, of what sort it is. If anyone’s work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward. If anyone’swork is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.” There is only one foundation for eternal life, and that is Jesus Christ. Likewise, there is only one full and complete eternal life. It is not handed out in pieces, dependingon how well we have served. Notice in that passage how well one has served results in rewards that are not burned up by the test of fire. Yet, the foundation remains firm and sure. That is the assurance of salvation, as so stated in 1 John 5:11-12: “And this is the testimony that God has given to us eternal life, and this life is in His Son; he who has the Son has life, and he who does not have the Son does not havelife.” That thief on the cross who believed did not have time for any good works; his only one was his recognition of Jesus as the Savior. Yet, his salvation was as assured asanyone else’s. As an example, a man who accepts Christ on his deathbed might say, as his wife, perhaps, tells him of the Jesus he has avoided all his life, “I love you more now than Iever did before you helped me find Jesus to save me.” That comment of love may be the only “good work” he would be able to do, but it would be in the gold, silver or precious stones category and not burned up. As Jesus said to Peter when he asked about the purpose Jesus had for that other disciple, “If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me” (John21:22). Believers are saved one by one and not in groups as a whole. Believers are individually responsible to God for their own service. It is spelled out in 2 Corinthians 5:10, the reference that speaks of the judgment seat of Christ: “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.” Now, what does the phrase, “the last shall be first and the first shall be last” mean in respect to this parable? It is possible that it is an idiom, a saying, that meansall entrants will be equally together at the end of the day. That seems to be the picture painted by the parable, at least. But here is another way to look at it: In short, “the first shall be last and the last first” means that being first has no meaningin the kingdom of heaven, for everyone arriving there is totally on the same level. The difference comes in what a person’s calling for service is, as Romans 12:3-4 tells us that God does measure out our gift of faith to perform that calling: “For I say, through the grace given to me, to everyone who is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think soberly, as God has dealtto each one a measure of faith. For as we have many members in one body, but all the members do not have the same function….” Then, the phrase, “many are called, but few are chosen” — how does it fit into this parable? It is a phrase repeated in another parable, the one of a king who prepared awedding feast for his son; invitations were sent out but none came who were expected. Instead, his servants were sent out to invite anyone to come, and many did. That parable is found at Matthew 22:1-14. In that parable, it is clear how the statement fitsthe passage. But in this one, when the owner of the vineyard came each time during the day, he found men standing around, waiting—as they said—for someone to hire them. Those who respondedto his invitation to go to work ended up being his chosen, while it was an open invitation for anyone to go to work. That is comparable to our sharing the gospel—the Great Commission. Some respond favorably, but many do not, then or even later. The Scriptures are clear, in spite of beliefs to the contrary, that God does not charge into a person’s life uninvited. He honors a person’s freedom of choice, just as Hedid with Adam and Eve in the Garden so long ago. It can be no better explained than is done in Revelation 3:20, as Jesus pictures His approach to a person: “Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come intohim and live with him, and he with Me.” It is also evident in the constantly repeated challenge in the Scriptures and by evangelists that “you must believe in Christ to be saved.” It is an act of the will. VISIT: PROPHECY WATCHER WEEKLY NEWS: HTTP://PROPHECY-WATCHER-WEEKLY-NEWS.BLOGSPOT.COM

Did God create over billions of years?

Often, people challenge biblical creationists with comments along the lines of, “I believe God created, and I don’t believe in evolution, but He could have taken billions of years, so what’s the big deal about the age of the earth?” Some claim that an emphasis on ‘6 literal days, 6,000 years ago’ even keeps people away from the faith, so “Why be so dogmatic? Why emphasize something so strongly that’s not a salvation issue?” It might come as a surprise that we agree—to a point. The timescale in and of itself is not the important issue. So why does CMI emphasize it? It’s important because the issue ultimately comes down to, “Does the Bible actually mean what it plainly says?” It therefore goes to the heart of the trustworthiness of Scripture. As such, compromising with long ages also severely undermines the whole Gospel message, thus creating crises of faith for many as well as huge problems with evangelism. The implications of a long-age timescale The idea of millions or billions of years simply is not found anywhere in Scripture; it is a concept derived from outside of the Bible. First, we need to understand where the concept of an old earth came from. The idea of millions or billions of years simply is not found anywhere in Scripture; it is a concept derived from outside of the Bible. In 1830, Charles Lyell, a Scottish lawyer, released his book Principles of Geology. He stated that one of his aims was “To free the science [of geology] from Moses.”1 He built his ideas upon those of another geologist, James Hutton, who advocated a uniformitarian interpretation of the world’s geology. Lyell argued that the thousands of feet of sedimentary layers (laid down by water or some other moving fluid) all over the earth were the result of long, slow, gradual processes over millions or billions of years (instead of the processes of Noah’s Flood). He believed that processes observed in the present must be used to explain the geological history of the earth. So, if we currently see rivers laying down sediment at an average rate of say 1 mm (4/100th of an inch) per year, then a layer of sedimentary rock such as sandstone which is 1,000 meters (3,300 feet) thick must have taken about a million years to form. This ‘present is the key to the past’ assumption (and its variants) is a cornerstone of modern geology. It involves a rejection of the biblical account of a global watery cataclysm. The millions of years assigned to the various layers in the ‘geological column’ were adopted long before the advent of radiometric dating methods—well before radioactivity was even discovered. But here’s the theological problem. Those rock layers don’t just have rocks or granules in them. They contain fossils. And these fossils are indisputable evidence of death—and not just of death, but carnivory, disease and suffering. There are remains that have tooth marks in them, and even animals fossilized in the process of eating other animals. There is evidence of disease, cancers, and infection; and general suffering from wounds, broken bones, etc. Biblically, we understand these things only began to happen after the Fall. But because of the Bible’s detailed genealogies, there’s no way for the biblical Adam to exist millions of years ago, before death and suffering started happening in the uniformitarian time scale. The implication of long-age belief is that God ordained death before the Fall of man, but the Bible clearly states that it was Adam’s actions that brought death into the world (Romans 5:12). The god of an old earth The idea that death was in creation before the Fall has major implications for the character of God. The same problem arises if one thinks that God used evolution to create. Evolution is a random and wasteful process that requires millions of ‘unfit’ organisms to die. Countless transitional forms would have arisen, only to fall as casualties in the great march ‘forward’. At some point, this allegedly ‘good’ God ordained a lottery of death that finally resulted in humans, and then God looked at His image-bearers, standing on top of layers upon layers of rocks filled with the remains of billions of dead things, and proclaimed His whole creation—along with the evidence of all the death and suffering that went into creating it—to be ‘very good’ (Genesis 1:31). So we can see that long ages don’t fit in the biblical view, whether or not someone believes in evolution along with it. To summarize, the age of the earth was derived from the rock layers, which have fossils in them, which puts death, suffering and disease before the Fall. The Bible is clear that there was no death before Adam (Romans 5:12). The Gospel of an old earth Some alleged ‘experts’ try to sidestep this ‘very good’ issue by saying that the Fall only caused human death and disease. This cannot be true. For one thing, Romans 8:19–22 clearly teaches that the curse of death and suffering following Adam’s Fall affected “the whole creation”, i.e. the entire physical universe. But even if we set that aside for the sake of argument, there is another problem, because we have human remains that are ‘dated’ as hundreds of thousands of years old. This is well before any possible biblical date for Adam, which places him in the Garden about 6,000 years ago. Many compromising positions see these remains as those of ‘pre-Adamites’—soulless non-human animals. But these skeletons fall within the normal range of human variation. And Neandertals, for example, show signs of art, culture and even religion. And recently, the sequencing of actual Neandertal DNA shows that many of us carry Neandertal genes—i.e. we are the same created kind. To call them ‘non-human animals’ seems entirely contrived to salvage the long-age belief system. Also, Romans 5:12 states that “sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned”. It gives no indication that the Fall caused only human death. To distort the interpretation of Romans 5 to say that death was limited to humans would mean that Adam’s sin only brought a partial Fall to God’s creation; yet Romans 8:19–20 tells us the whole creation groans under the weight of sin and is subjected to futility. And Genesis 3:17–19 tells us that the very ground was cursed so that it produced thorns and thistles.2 If only a partial Fall occurred, then why will God destroy all creation to bring about a new one instead of a partial restoration? Why not just restore humans if the rest of creation is still “very good”? Death the last enemy A central part of the Gospel is that death is the last enemy to be destroyed (1 Corinthians 15:26). Death intruded into a perfect world because of sin, and it is so serious that Jesus’ victory over death cannot be entirely manifested while there is a single believer in the grave. Are we expected to believe that something the Bible authors described as an enemy was used or overseen by God for millions of years and was called ”very good”? A major part of the Gospel is the hope we have in this Resurrection and restoration of the creation to its original perfect state. The Bible is clear about the New Heavens and Earth as a place where there is no carnivory, no death, no suffering, and no sin (Isaiah 65:17–25; Revelation 21:1–5). But how can this be called a restoration if such a state never existed? An evolutionist Anglican priest gave a good summary of what accepting death before the Fall means for Christian theology: “ … Fossils are the remains of creatures that lived and died for over a billion years before Homo Sapiens evolved. Death is as old as life itself by all but a split second. Can it therefore be God’s punishment for Sin? The fossil record demonstrates that some form of evil has existed throughout time. On the large scale it is evident in natural disasters. … On the individual scale there is ample evidence of painful, crippling disease and the activity of parasites. We see that living things have suffered in dying, with arthritis, a tumor, or simply being eaten by other creatures. From the dawn of time, the possibility of life and death, good and evil, have always existed. At no point is there any discontinuity; there was never a time when death appeared, or a moment when the evil [sic] changed the nature of the universe. God made the world as it is … evolution as the instrument of change and diversity. People try to tell us that Adam had a perfect relationship with God until he sinned, and all we need to do is repent and accept Jesus in order to restore that original relationship. But perfection like this never existed. There never was such a world. Trying to return to it, either in reality or spiritually, is a delusion. Unfortunately it is still central to much evangelical preaching.”3 So, one can now see the slippery slope that ensues if we allow for billions of years with or without evolution, because it puts death and suffering before the Fall. Its logical corollary is that it also places evil before the Fall (which no longer exists in his view, as such, since there was nowhere to fall from). And in the process it rules out the hope of a return to a perfect state, since there can be no return to what never was. The Gospel itself has been destroyed in the process. So what did Jesus come to save us from, if not death, suffering, sin, and separation from God? What do we do with passages like Hebrews 9:22, which says “ … the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness”, if death and bloodshed were occurring as ‘natural’ processes for millions of years before Adam? If that is the case, then the death of Christ becomes insignificant and unable to pay for our sins. And what is our hope if it is not in the Resurrection and the New Heavens and Earth? If death is natural, why do we mourn it so? Why can we not accept death as a ‘normal’ part of life? This view robs the Gospel of its power and Jesus’ sacrifice of its significance. Following the thought to its natural conclusion has led many people to abandon the Christian faith altogether. The effect on the church The widespread teaching of evolution has dire consequences for our youth, who are leaving the church in droves. Christians who ‘hang in there’ but accept a billions-of-years timescale will have a much harder time defending their faith, and thus, this affects church growth. One of the major stumbling blocks to faith is the question: “Why does a good God allow all the death and suffering in the world?” Such believers cannot adequately explain the origin of death and suffering as a reaction to human sin. Conversely, believers who have a biblical view of the world’s history have a logical platform for introducing God to people with no scriptural background. Incidentally, this was precisely the approach that Paul used when preaching to similar Gentile audiences (Acts 14:15–17; 17:23–31). In Lystra, he used creation as a key identifying factor that set God apart from mere men like himself and Barnabas. And in Athens he took the stoics and other philosophers of the day ‘back to Genesis’ to lay a foundation to introduce them to the true God in the hope that they would repent from their useless idolatry. If belief in the Bible as plainly written strengthens one’s ability to explain the Gospel, and compromise can have such damaging effects, why would anyone compromise? Practically every Christian leader and theologian who lays out his reasons for believing in long ages rather than the biblical timescale has to admit that Genesis—when read at face value, in the Hebrew as well as the English translations—teaches a straightforward creation in six normal-length days. And that this is powerfully backed up by Exodus 20:11, part of the Ten Commandments, which shows the Genesis days were understood as normal-length days, with no room for millions of years or gaps in the text to insert them. But they unfortunately accept that science has somehow ‘proved’ millions of years, which is actually not the case. Inconsistent Christianity? While it is possible to be a Christian and believe in an old earth, it would indicate that one has either not thought through the consequences, or that the Bible is not the ultimate authority for one’s faith. If Genesis is not real literal history, how can one know where the truth actually does begin in Scripture? Today’s ‘science’ also ‘proves’ that men don’t rise from the dead. So if we allow that same science to tell us that Jesus has not risen from the dead (which would be consistent in the compromiser’s worldview) then our “preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain,” as the Apostle Paul wrote (1 Corinthians 15:14). Placing our trust in man-made philosophies is reminiscent of the man that Jesus described in Matthew 7:26 when He said: “But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand.” Conversely, in verses 24–25 He stated: “everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock.” And because Jesus clearly believed in a literal historical Genesis, so should we.

CREATION MOMENTS: 5.11.2020

Wandering Stars:


The small, almost throwaway comment about the creation of the stars in Genesis 1:16 – “He made the stars also” – is well known. Other passages in the Bible allude to the vastness of the Universe and even to individual astronomical objects such as the constellations of Orion and the Bear, or Great Bear as we know it. So people in Bible times were not ignorant of the vastness of space, but the limited description of the creation of the stars in Genesis 1 emphasizes the greater importance God places on the creation of mankind. As we have often commented, the mention of stars in Genesis 1 includes not only what we would think of as stars today, those hot balls of glowing gases, but also all other astronomical objects, including planets, comets and much more.
The word planet is a word of Greek origin (πλανηται) and literally means “wandering star”. Before the discovery of the solar orbits of the planets, and well before the discovery of outer planets Uranus and Neptune, these wandering stars were so named because their position in the sky was not fixed night after night, but changed against the further “fixed” stars.
Planets were known in Bible times because Jude uses their wandering nature in verse 13 of his epistle to describe those who reject that “fixed universe” of the authority of God’s word and warns that their lack of fixity will result in their end if they do not repent.
strong Prayer: Father God, help us to have compassion for those who are wandering and lost in Your universe, and grant us the joy of pulling some from the fire. Amen.


The Singing Lake:


It's a quiet, cool, overcast morning at the lake. There's a hint of fog in the air and a fine, lightly falling drizzle. Then you notice the sound. It's almost a musical note, and it's coming from the lake. It's almost as if the lake were singing.
 Many people report hearing a lake sing, when there is a fine drizzle falling. Those who have never heard it are skeptical. However, now science has confirmed that lakes do indeed sing, in a fine drizzle. Scientists even know what causes it. And in this case, the scientific explanation doesn't decrease our wonder and awe at this amazing phenomenon.
Canadian scientists placed an underwater microphone at a depth of about 100 feet in a Vancouver Island lake. They placed the microphone almost 1000 feet from shore so they would be certain not to pick up any sounds from the shore. Then they waited for the weather to change. The scientists eventually recorded the sounds of rain, hail, drizzle, and even snow hitting the surface of the lake. Yes, even snow makes a sound when it strikes the water! Their findings show that the fine drops of water in drizzle strike the surface of the lake almost as if they were tiny explosive charges. When they burst on the water, they give off a ping. While you would never hear a few of these droplets ping, countless billions of them add their sound together to make the lake literally sing.
Scripture is correct in a literal sense when it tells us that everything in the creation sings praises to its Creator.


Just More Stories:


Timothy 4:3-4; For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.
Parables are a good way to teach. Jesus often used parables to teach a lesson. Parables can even be a good way to teach science. However, parables cannot be used to establish scientific fact.
Unfortunately, Charles Darwin frequently used parables as part of his scientific method. Many modern evolutionists continue that tradition. Let's look at an example. hose who believe in evolution have tried to find an explanation for why some birds have luxurious, bright plumage. Does the peacock really need those brilliant tail feathers? Well, say evolutionists, females prefer the males with the most beautiful plumage. So the brightest males had more babies. Evolutionists call this sexual selection.
However, that does the story prove? It doesn't prove anything in the scientific sense. It doesn't explain where the colors came from in the first place. It doesn't explain why females prefer showy males. Nor does it explain where peacocks originally came from. And it doesn't explain why some birds have very drab colors. However, the biggest problem with this explanation is that it begs the question. You see, many evolutionists admit that they have no good explanation for how sexual reproduction evolved in the first place.
So the evolutionists story for how the peacock came to have such bright feathers is just a story – not scientific proof. And when it comes to stories, we prefer the stories reported in the Bible because thy have our Creator's own personal guarantee of truth.


The Miracle Star:


Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men form the East came to Jerusalem, saying, Where is He who is born King of the Jews? For we have seen His star in the East and have come to worship Him.”
What was the star the wise men followed to find the infant Jesus? About this time of year, articles appear in magazines and newspapers offering many opinions. Some suggest that it was a comet. Others say it was the conjunction of two or more planets or stars. Do any of these theories offer possible explanations?
It's not a very complicated task to evaluate these explanations. All you need is a Bible and a map of the Holy Land. Matthew 2:1 tells us that the wise men came from east of the Holy Land. Verses 2 and 9 further tell us that these men had seen the star indicating His birth in the eastern sky. Despite the pictures on Christmas cards, they had not followed the star to Jerusalem. Once they arrived in Jerusalem, we learn in Matthew 2:9 that the star they had seen in the eastern sky moved to lead them to the Christ Child.
Matthew clearly tells us that the wise men went from Jerusalem to Bethlehem in their search for the child. Bethlehem is due south of Jerusalem. He also tells us that the star moved over where the child was. That movement is very unlike a star. In fact, the movement of the star was even more unstar-like in that it directed them to a specific house!
These wise men from the East were accustomed to the sights of the night sky. They could tell the difference between a conjunction and a comet or a miracle star. This star was clearly created by God to announce the birth of the Savior of the world to the world He came to save!


Not a Chance!:


Praise the LORD from the earth, You great sea creatures and all the depths; fire and hail, snow and clouds; stormy wind, fulfilling His word…Is there any such thing as chance or luck? Does anything ever happen randomly? Many people don't realize that the Bible speaks to these questions.
In late August 1992 a tornado swept through a small Wisconsin town and caused a great deal of destruction. That made it newsworthy enough. However, the destruction it wrought on one church in town received special notice on some national newscasts. Pictures showed the church in ruins. But the altar still stood, barely visible in the rubble. Most astonishing was the fact that the Bible still stood on its stand in its customary place on the altar. The undamaged Bible was open to where Psalm 77 reads, The clouds poured out water, the skies sent out a sound; your arrows also flashed about. The voice of your thunder was in the whirlwind; the lightnings lit up the world; the earth trembled and shook.
In Matthew 10 Jesus tells us that God is so involved in His creation that not one of the billions of sparrows in the world falls to the ground without His knowledge. Psalm 148 tells us that the entire creation praises God in everything that happens. God is so personally involved in the creation that He even instructs each wind about the speed and direction to takes. Was it simply luck that the altar was spared and the Bible was open to Psalm 77? God is involved in every detail of the creation. Let's praise God that there is no such thing as luck!


Chinese Giant Salamander:


In previous Creation Moments, we have seen how many amphibians can be very small. For example, there are frogs in Madagascar that are very little bigger than a large grain of rice.
But not all amphibians are so tiny. In various parts of China, there lives a giant salamander. The Chinese Giant Salamander is one of three species within the giant water salamander kind, or cryptobranchidae – the other two being the slightly smaller Japanese Giant Salamander and the smaller still North American hellbender.
This unusual giant salamander can grow up to 3 feet 9 inches in length and can weigh around 50 pounds. Yet, its tadpoles hatch at about an inch in length – though they do grow to nearly two feet before final metamorphosis.
Their feeding habits are also unusual. Although they eat a number of different animals – and they are nearly completely carnivorous – analysis of food contents showed that 23 percent of their food comes from freshwater crabs. This was their second biggest food source. The biggest source – 28 percent – was other giant salamanders. The animals are highly cannibalistic.
Pollution and loss of habitat has hit the numbers of this giant salamander hard. It is considered a delicacy in China. Its Japanese cousin is protected in Japan, but Chinese salamanders have been imported, and some have hybridized with the Chinese animal, demonstrating that this family of salamanders constitutes one biblical baramin.
God has made some unusual animals in His world, and the giant salamander is one of the strangest! Prayer: We stand amazed, Lord, at the variety of unusual animals that You have made, demonstrating Your creative power and majesty. Amen.


The King of the Universe:


That infant in the manger is God’s voice to mankind. And despite appearances, He is the King of the universe.
The world waited 4,000 years to see the fulfillment of God's promise to restore humanity to Himself. That promise was first given to our first parents, Adam and Eve, when their sin separated them and the creation from God. Through the next 4,000 years, the faithful never grew weary of their belief that God would keep His Word. Hundreds of times over those 4,000 years God repeated His promise of a Savior.
John's Gospel tells us that the same Word that became flesh for our salvation was the Word through Whom all things were created. This Word was the instrument Who created the incredible variety of living things that we see on Earth. He created the human brain and the petal of a rose. In but a day, before going on to greater things, He created the countless billions of stars and energized them with enough power to shine for thousands of years. And who are we, for we cannot even measure the energy those stars put out in only one second of their history!
Yet now we see Him, an infant clothed in our form. Here lies the King of the niverse unable even to ask for nourishment. Why? The answer is no mystery. He was the Instrument who made us. We are eternally lost without help. So He would be the Instrument of our salvation – at any cost! We can only stand in deep reverence at such love that would come among us to rescue us from our own sin.
I thank You, dear Lord Jesus Christ, that You spared nothing, not even the loss of heaven and giving up Your life so that You could rescue me. Help me to have a heart and mind like Yours so that more might know of the forgiveness of sins You have won for us. Amen.


Fossil Graveyards:


Genesis 7:21
“And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:”
News reports were majoring recently on a fossil graveyard found in North Dakota. Reports suggested that the graveyard must have been formed when a large wall of water threw hundreds of fish onto a sandbar in a river estuary, while those fish were pelted from above by little glass beads. These glass beads were supposedly formed by the dust thrown up as the meteor which killed the dinosaurs hit the Earth. The large numbers of fish are intermingled with tree trunks, mammals, insects, part of a triceratops and ammonites. It certainly seems clear that this graveyard was produced by a catastrophic event. But the only catastrophic event that evolutionists can think of is the supposed meteor strike at Chicxulub.
One report described the North Dakota graveyard as “unique”. While this graveyard had certain features not seen in others, there is nothing unique about a fossil graveyard. Although the process of fossilization is rare, it is still quite common to find many fossils in the same place – often from wildly different species. And each such fossil graveyard is a testimony to catastrophe.
For so many creatures to have been killed all at once in the same place, something unique must have happened. We have often suggested that different rock layers imply not different eras but different ecosystems. So the onset of the worldwide Flood would have caused local conditions similar to that which we observe. The graveyards point to the truth of Genesis, not to some deep-time process.
Prayer: Once again, Lord, we see how Your word tells the truth and makes sense of the world around us – and we thank You. Amen.


Horses:


There are few more majestic sights than a horse, galloping across the countryside with an expert rider on its back. A good rider knows his or her horse well and accommodates to their whims, while also maintaining control. Horses are so important to the history of humankind that evolutionists have been particularly interested in the alleged evolution of the horse. At first sight, it seems as if they have some facts going for them because they would look at modern horses and show that they have developed over time by selective breeding. Then they will look at other similar animals, such as the wild Przewalski’s horse, as well as donkeys, ponies, and zebras. Evolutionists would maintain that all of these have a common ancestor. And they would be right! They are all part of the horse family – equidae.
Evolutionists cannot leave well alone, though, it would seem. Insisting that horses are closely related to tapirs, they have found fossils of alleged ancestors of both horses and tapirs. I recall looking closely at reproductions of hyracotherium (which evolutionists like to call eohippus, or “dawn-horse”) in the Smithsonian in DC. The hyracotherium had been placed in a display with modern horses and tapirs. At immediate glance, the hyracotherium appeared very similar to a tapir and not at all similar to a horse.
Evolutionists will sometimes see what they want to see. But God made animals according to their kind, and they do not evolve into other kinds.
Prayer: The creatures that You have created, Lord, are magnificent. Thank You especially for those creatures which can be trained to work with people for our mutual benefit. Amen.


The Unicorn of the Ocean:


Britain’s towns are replete with their popular, independent fast food restaurants known as fish and chip shops. The fish served at my local fish and chip shop, when I was growing up, were mostly halibut, cod and shrimp. These are also among the favorite foods of the narwhal – that strange and wonderful whale, sometimes known as the unicorn of the ocean.
Narwhals are sociable animals, swimming around in groups of up to 20 individuals. In the summer, many groups come together, forming a larger group of up to 500 or so whales. They can dive deeply, often diving over 2,500 feet over 15 times a day. Baby narwhals are born after 14 months gestation and are usually born singly. They are long-lived – some adults can live up to 50 years.
The thing that makes narwhals so unique is its tusk. Looking like the curved, twisted horn of a unicorn, the tusk is really a long upper jaw tooth which bursts through the creature’s upper lip. Its appearance is so striking that one wants to imagine underwater sword fights, but the truth is that we have very little idea of what this tusk is for. It doesn’t seem to have a purpose in feeding, hunting or defense. And yet it clearly was not created by chance for no particular reason.
God, in His wisdom, knows why He put this peculiar twisted horn on the face of a narwhal. For now, we can only admire its strangeness.


The Unicorn:


“God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn.”
“You obviously can’t believe the Bible because it talks about unicorns. Unicorns are obviously mythical beasts – white horses, with a curly horn on its forehead, looking like a cross between a horse and a narwhal.”
Is this accusation fair? There are some of you at this moment using your electronic concordances, telling me that the word unicorn does not appear in your Bible.
Well, the word unicorn appears six times in the King James Version. But the animal described does not sound like the delicate white horse of mythology. For example, in Numbers 23:11, it tells us that God “hath the strength of an unicorn”. Since when was a fairy-tale unicorn a symbol of strength?
Unicorn is a Latin word, indicating one horn. The Hebrew word is reym, which can mean a wild ox, but can equally mean any large powerful grazing animal. The ESV translates it as wild ox, but I do not agree with this because the Greek found in the Septuagint is monokerotos, which also means single horn. So, is there any animal with a single horn that could be as strong as, or even stronger than, an ox?
The Indian Rhinoceros has only one horn. Indeed, its Latin name is Rhinoceros unicornis. It is highly possible that the reym or unicorn of the Bible could have been either this or some other extinct rhino. Whatever it was, the biblical descriptions suggest a real, powerful beast, not a Victorian fairy-tale.

Never Doubt the Resurrection Again

 

https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2017/april/why-you-can-believe-in-the-resurrection

 

The Eyewitness Testimony That'll Make You Never Doubt the Resurrection Again

Christianity's core belief is that the Son of God took on human form, died for our sins and then rose from the dead to give us eternal life. But if Jesus Christ didn't come back to life, it undoes His claim to be the all-powerful, eternal Son of God, Savior and Messiah.  So, Christianity hangs on the Resurrection.

To believe the events around that first Easter, you pretty much have to believe that Jesus did indeed exist and that the New Testament can be trusted.

At the Impact 360 school in Pine Mountain, Georgia, Prof. Jonathan Morrow preps college-bound Christians in how to fight with the facts of their faith.

Jesus Isn't Just in the Bible

He told CBN News, "Investigating the Resurrection is a historical question that you can do with eyes wide open; it's not a blind faith kind of thing, like believing in the Easter Bunny or a lucky rabbit's foot.  This is real world kind of stuff.  And you can investigate the data for it." 

Morrow added, "So when it comes to the Resurrection, we say 'Well, how do we know Jesus existed?' Some people even doubt that.  The fact is, we have far more sources for Jesus of Nazareth than we do for many historical figures in the first century.  We have at least 18. Twelve of those are non-Christian sources."

There's more evidence Jesus existed than Julius Caesar. Anyone doubt Caesar existed?

As for the Scriptures, Prof. Darrell Bock of the Dallas Theological Seminary explained that any piece of a surviving ancient work is called a manuscript. And more ancient pages or fragments of the Bible have survived by far than any other book from antiquity.

"It's exceptional," Bock said. "You're talking about over 5,800 Greek manuscripts, over 8,000 Latin manuscripts. Most books that we work with in the ancient world have maybe at best a dozen manuscripts." 

"It's exceptional," Bock said. "You're talking about over 5,800 Greek manuscripts, over 8,000 Latin manuscripts. Most books that we work with in the ancient world have maybe at best a dozen manuscripts." 

"It's exceptional," Bock said. "You're talking about over 5,800 Greek manuscripts, over 8,000 Latin manuscripts. Most books that we work with in the ancient world have maybe at best a dozen manuscripts." 

Jonathan Morrow is a defender of the faith, the literal meaning of "apologist."  But he says Christians shouldn't just defend the faith and the Resurrection. They should embrace it and let it change their lives just like it changed the ancient world.

Christians: If Jesus Is Dead, So Is Your Religion

For some people, they might be ready to believe the Bible is legitimate, but they have a hard time believing Jesus Christ could have actually risen from the dead.

The problem with that, as far as Morrow is concerned, is that everything hangs on that fact.

This author of Questioning the Bible explained, "Paul made the argument in I Corinthians 15, saying 'Look, you can test this: if the Resurrection didn't happen, Christianity is false. Whether you believe it or not, whether you're sincere about it, if the Resurrection didn't happen, Christianity's false - go to the next religion."

If He's Dead, Then They Lied

Some suggest that the apostles all lied in a vast conspiracy to turn the deficit of Jesus' death into the positive of a risen Lord. But biblical apologists insist when you examine it all the way through, it's actually easier to believe in the Resurrection than its alternatives.

Such Bible experts say that to dismiss the Resurrection, any theory you come up with to explain the historical happenings has to explain away three historical facts:

1. That there was an empty tomb three days after Jesus's body had been placed in it, though it had been constantly guarded by Roman soldiers;
2. Jesus appeared to hundreds of people in numerous places for almost seven weeks after His crucifixion;
3. And something huge did happen to suddenly and forever turn all the cowering, cowardly disciples into bold believers, proclaiming a risen Messiah they were willing to be tortured and die for.

Did Jesus Die, or Just Almost Die?

Still, alternative theories live on.

Some theorize that Jesus didn't die on the cross but just went into a death-like state that fooled everyone who checked His body. Then under this theory, He awoke in the tomb, got up and walked out.  Proponents say that explains His many appearances after His supposed death. 

What this doesn't explain is how in a near-death state and with exceedingly crippling wounds, He could work His way out of tightly-wrapped, glued-on burial garments and then roll away the massively heavy stone sealed onto the tomb by the Romans.  And it doesn't explain why He'd suddenly disappear after several weeks among His disciples, never to be seen again.  Nor does it explain how so many people saw Him ascending up into the heavens.

Oops, Wrong Tomb

Some suggest the female disciples who first found the empty tomb might have just had the wrong one, and the other disciples took advantage of that, concocting a Resurrection myth to explain the empty tomb. But surely the Jewish leaders who'd had Roman guards placed by Jesus' burial place, and Joseph of Arimathea who owned the tomb where Jesus' body had been laid, would have quickly displayed the body and corrected the mistake if indeed the women had gone to the wrong tomb.

"If you're going around preaching Jesus was physically raised from the dead and people knew where He was buried and knew where they could find His bones, that message wouldn't even get off the ground," insisted Bock, author of Truth Matters.

Not Smart to Lie Where Everyone Knows You're Lying

Josh McDowell, author of New Evidence That Demands a Verdict, said the disciples knew this well.

"In the Resurrection, where was the hardest place in the world to convince anyone it was true if it was false?  Jerusalem, where a 15-minute walk by anyone could confirm the emptiness of the tomb," McDowell said."

Matthew 28 points out the Jewish leaders bribed the tomb's guards to say they'd fallen asleep and the disciples then stole Jesus' body. But if these guards were asleep, how would they know it was the disciples?  And how could they have slept through the disciples rolling away the huge stone that covered the entrance to the tomb, a stone some have suggested was so heavy, it may have taken more than a dozen men to push it away?

Debunking this conspiracy idea, Morrow said, "Conspiracy theories unravel very quickly because people will eventually tell what they know. And the more people who are involved, and the more people who saw the event, you multiply your chances of the story getting out. So that's the first thing. The second thing is the Gospels, the earliest historical record we have, don't show the tales of being doctored to say the same thing, like they got their stories straight. They had the ring of truth to them."

Would You Die for a Lie You Made Up?

And if the disciples were making up Jesus' Resurrection, would they have lived and died for Him and a fiction they themselves made up?

McDowell explained, "They said after He was crucified and buried, He was raised from the dead and for 40 days — not 40 hours, not four days — for 40 days, they lived with Him and walked with Him, with overwhelming proof that He'd been raised from the dead."

McDowell concluded, "If the Resurrection was a lie, they had to know it. And if they knew it, then you'd have to say here were these men who not only died for a lie, but they knew it was a lie. I challenge you to find others in history who that's true of. It's not."

Morrow added, "The earliest disciples would have known - not just believed, but would have known - that either Jesus was who He claimed to be and was actually raised from the dead or they were making this thing up. And yet history tells us that we have good reason to think they all went to their death with the exception of one for that core belief: that Jesus was raised from the dead. They didn't recant that. Conspiracies break down under pressure.  And this conspiracy would have cost them their lives."

What Would Cause Such Radical Transformations?

These and other experts say that in truth, it would take something as radical as Jesus' Resurrection to completely transform the disciples like cowardly Peter, who was so scared just before the crucifixion, he swore he didn't even know Jesus. Watch below.

But just a few weeks later Morrow pointed out Peter went from hiding away, fearful the Jewish leaders might have him killed as well, to boldly preaching salvation through Christ before a crowd of thousands, including some who sought Jesus' death.

Morrow explained, "You see Peter with this radical transformation, going from coward to this courageous champion who's saying 'Look, here I stand, this is what I'm saying, this is what's true. You crucified this guy, but this is what He offered.' You've got that radical transformation right at the heart of what's going on around that earliest Christian movement." 

From Christ-Hater to Christian Martyr

Morrow pointed out Jesus' doubting brother James was also instantly changed. 

He said, "James – the brother of Jesus —didn't follow Jesus during His earthly ministry; thought He was crazy."

McDowell agreed, saying, "James despised his brother. Thought He was embarrassing the family. And then Jesus appeared to him in James' own word, and he became the leader of the church of Jerusalem."

Morrow added, "And after the fact, James becomes an early leader in the Church, and was persecuted and eventually killed for that belief."

And biblical apologists say it could only be a resurrected Jesus showing up forcefully and vividly two to three years later that could transform the church's worst persecutor into its main missionary.

Greatest Murderer Turned to Greatest Missionary

"Saul of Tarsus was anything but a follower who believed in Jesus," McDowell said. "He went from city to city casting his vote to have them imprisoned and executed. But in his own words, Christ appeared to him. Whether you believe that or not, something took.  One of the greatest murderers into one of the greatest missionaries.  A Christian-hater to a Christian-lover."

Morrow stated,  "What in the world would flip Paul - or actually, Saul of Tarsus - to Paul, the chief proclaimer in the early Church?  He was a smart guy. He was holding the coats when people were killing the first Christians.  He was adamantly opposed to this movement. And then he became a Christian. What accounts for that?" 

Short of the risen Jesus appearing to Paul, Bock believes it's an unfathomable transformation.

As he put it, "So the main thing is just explaining how someone like a Saul who becomes Paul even exists." 

McDowell concluded, "Something happened in Paul's life that I've never found any other explanation that even comes close to satisfying me intellectually except: 'And Jesus appeared to Paul after the Resurrection.'"

Liars Wouldn't Have Testified About the Female Disciples' Role 

Another crucial factor that debunks the idea all these disciples were trying to sell a false Resurrection to the world: the fact that they proclaimed it was females who found the empty tomb and let the male disciples know Jesus was missing.

The first century Jews believed women were second-class citizens.  So if the disciples were lying about the resurrection, they made their story all the harder to accept by putting women at the forefront.

"Matthew, Mark, Luke and John - they all recount Jesus' earliest women followers finding the empty tomb," Morrow said. "In the first century, where a woman's testimony would have been about the level just above a slave, that would not be your best foot forward."

Bock imagined being with the disciples plotting how they'll push a false Resurrection.

The Criterion of Embarrassment 

"'We're going to sell this difficult idea, and the people we're going to get to sell it are people that the culture doesn't believe have the right to be witnesses,'" Bock imagined them saying.

But he insisted, "You'd never make up a story that way.  This is what's called the Criterion of Embarrassment in historical Jesus studies: that you'd never make up the story this way.  So the reason the story is this way is because it must be grounded in what happened."

Morrow completely agreed, stating the Gospel writers testifying about the women's role has "the ring of truth."

Morrow said, "That would have been an embarrassing detail you would have never led with UNLESS it actually happened. And the fact that all four (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) say it happened just gives it that much stronger evidence that it actually did happen."

Hard to Simply Dismiss 500 Eyewitnesses

Saying the disciples lied about Jesus' resurrection doesn't explain His post-Resurrection appearance before 500 people. The Apostle Paul in I Corinthians 15 suggested doubters go talk to them.

Morrow said of that, "You've got living history. You've got the people who were there to cross-check whatever message is being put out there. So, it's not as though these things could have been invented and no one would have challenged it. You've got this idea that 'there are witnesses; go investigate them.'" 

He added about this call in I Corinthians to talk to witnesses, "Ancient historians loved eyewitness testimony. That's what they all wanted. Livy, Herodotus, Tacitus, Thucydides - they all wanted eyewitness testimony to get back to the original.  And that's what you have."

McDowell said of such eyewitness testimony, "I put a lot of weight on this.  You see, people today say, 'How do you know Jesus said that? How do you know He did that?' Well, they had the same question in the New Testament times. Even more so than today because they were dying for it. And they wanted to know: 'Is this true? Did Jesus really do this? Did He really say this?' "

'Can't Get Much Better Evidence'

McDowell pointed out, "In I John 1, how did John answer that? They said 'How do we know this is true?' John said , 'What our eyes have seen, what our eyes have heard, what our hands have handled is what we're declaring unto you.' In other words, 'We were eyewitnesses. We were there.'  And then with their opponents they would say, 'You were there, too. You saw Jesus do this; you heard Him do this.'  And you can't get much better evidence historically than that.  And we have that in the Scriptures."

Morrow returned to how Paul pushed his readers in I Corinthians 15 to gather proof that Jesus rose from the dead: "He says, 'It's not a matter of wishful thinking.  Investigate this.' That's why he mentions the eyewitnesses. He mentioned that Jesus appeared to more than 500, and as well as His disciples, and to Paul himself and to others. Because eyewitnesses authenticated that event. And it was central to Christianity."

Morrow concluded, "It has all the ring of truth and not the ring of that conspiracy theory where they just made this thing up to invent their own religion."

Could 500 People Have the Same Hallucination?

Some doubters try to do away with all the post-Resurrection appearances by saying those who thought they were seeing, talking to and touching Jesus were all hallucinating, even the 500 Paul discussed in I Corinthians.

McDowell told CBN News believing that takes more faith than simply accepting that Jesus really did rise from the dead.

The writer explained, "Here's the key: what is a hallucination? A hallucination is an internal experience, not triggered by anything externally.  This is why no two people ever have the same hallucination. Because it's all internal; subjective. Well, to have 500 people have the same hallucination would be 500 miracles equal to the Resurrection."

Speaking of miracles, Morrow called on people to not dismiss them as casually as most folks do these days.

If God Exists, so Can Miracles

"When historians investigate this, in our modern mindset, there's this idea that 'Look, miracles are out of bounds.' Well, why? Because if it's at least possible that God exists, then miracles become possible," he insisted.

But Morrow added, "We shouldn't believe just any and every miracle. We then investigate them on a case-by-case basis. And when you look at the Resurrection evidence, it's pretty remarkable how strong it is, and that's why it's at the core of Christianity. And so, I don't think it's intellectually credible to rule out miracles before you investigate the event, out of hand."

Bock insisted, "The faith is very, very defendable. That's why it's lasted for 2,000 years.  And not only that. There's a rationale that shows the uniqueness of what Jesus is that's important to appreciate as well. And so all the time that's often spent on the Resurrection makes sense because that really is the hub of the discussion."

Morrow added, "Christians don't believe that Jesus rose from the dead because the Bible says so. They believe He rose from the dead because that's what the earliest and best historical documents show, and that's what's the best explanation of the data." 

Early Is Important

Just like historians put great weight on eyewitness testimony, they also give more respect to early historical writings done close to the events they discuss.

With Peter, John, and James, you have both: They're eyewitnesses who wrote early.

"You can push the earliest core teaching of Jesus - His death, deity, and Resurrection - within months of the Resurrection. Because then it goes back to Peter, James, and John," Morrow said. "These people were eyewitnesses, they were there, and it was early."

Paul's encounter with Jesus came just two or three years after Christ's death and Resurrection, and not long after that, he interviewed Peter, James, and John. 

"Then 18 years later he cross-checked himself again," Morrow said of Paul. "In I Corinthians 15, he goes 'Look, I met with them again and they added nothing to my gospel. We're preaching the same exact thing.' This is the core message. And you can trace it back to the beginning, that there was never a Christianity without that at the heart of it."

Bock said that's crucial knowledge for those who might instead have believed these key Christian doctrines were dreamed up much later.

He explained, "The issue that's sometimes raised up: 'well, these books were written many decades later. And so they reflect a theological development coming down the road.'  All that shrinks back when you look at the person of Paul."

"He was writing within a few years of the time of Christ," McDowell added. "And this is why for many of the scholars will give I Corinthians incredible credence: because of its closeness."

The Resurrection Proves Jesus Was Who He Said He Was

Morrow said of Paul, "He understood why Jesus of Nazareth was different in the unique claims that He made, but that then those claims were authenticated through His Resurrection that said 'What I said is what is real. This is who I am.'"

Morrow summed up, "These claims to forgive sins sound crazy unless you're the Son of God, you're the Son of Man, you're the Messiah. And that's who He showed Himself to be. And Paul is probably our earliest and best witness to that. And our critical scholars will grant us Paul being that eyewitness." 

McDowell spoke of evidence that can help readers believe the words of Paul and other New Testament writers, like archaeological findings.

He explained, "Right now you can almost say every single reference in the Book of Acts has already been verified through archaeology: 600 some references to kings, people, places, everything. In Luke 3, in the first three verses, there are 17 historical references. Every single one now has been confirmed by archaeology."

'The Evidence Is Only Getting Better'

Biblical expert Bock flat-out stated, "These books are the best-attested pieces of ancient literature we possess."

Morrow added, "One of the fascinating things about New Testament manuscripts: We have over 5,700 Greek manuscripts alone. And more manuscripts are being discovered all the time."

He summed up, "I think what Christians need to know is that there's really good reason why we believe what we believe, and the evidence is only getting better. The more we discover and the more we find, the more confidence you can have that this is really true."