TBC What's New Feed

Dawkins concedes, “There are still gaps in our understanding. We don’t understand how the cosmos came into existence in the first place. . . . ” This is Dawkins’s standard escape hatch whenever he is confronted with the many questions for which atheism and evolution have no answer. Instead of admitting that science has nothing to say about what is good, what is evil, what is beautiful, what is ugly, where did we come from, where are we going, etc. (as many of the greatest scientists have frankly confessed), Dawkins sings the same worn-out song, “We’re working on that.”

"The Pope’s inauguration of a nativity scene that showed baby Jesus cradled in a Palestinian keffiyeh is an affront to Jesus, the Bible, and the 80% of Christians who have fled Bethlehem since the Palestinian Authority took over the city,” President of Proclaiming Justice to The Nations, Laurie Cardoza-Moore said on Wednesday.

“Let’s be clear. The Pope can’t rewrite the Bible - Jesus was a Jew from Judea, not a Palestinian. He was born to a Jewish mother in Bethlehem, in Judea – there was no Palestine," Cardoza-Moore continued.

Proclaiming Justice to The Nations is an organization “that educates, advocates, and moves to activate Christians, Jews and all people of conscience in building a global community of action and prayer in support of Israel and the Jewish people,” according to its website.  

A nativity scene featuring baby Jesus wrapped in a keffiyeh was unveiled at Pope Francis’ Nativity Scene and Christmas Tree inauguration on Saturday in St. Peter’s Square.

Instead of paying homage to this blasphemy, the Pope should be publicly supporting the State of Israel in her fight for survival,” she said.

Cardoza-Moore hosts a weekly television show titled “Focus on Israel,” which has an audience of two billion potential viewers worldwide. 

She then called on the Christian world to “open their bible and read.” She continued, “There is no mention of Arafat, Sinwar, or the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The Bible was written in Hebrew, not Arabic. It is time that we wake up and listen to the rhetoric coming out of Teheran and their proxies: first, they are coming for the Saturday People (the Jews) and then, the Sunday People (the Christians).”

She then highlighted the contrasting situations for Christians in Israel proper, compared to Christians in Bethlehem, in the West Bank. 

“Christians in Israel enjoy full rights under the law. Many Christians are currently fighting in the Israel Defense Forces, on the front lines. Meanwhile, Christians in Bethlehem are second-class citizens. The tiny minority which remains in the Holy City is forced to conform with the Palestinian revisionist narrative or else,” she said.

She concluded her statements by calling for a prayer for peace and “not do the bidding of the Palestinian Liberation Organization - a Christian-hating, Jew-hating National Socialist movement which has done nothing but bring pain and bloodshed to the people of the Middle East.”

https://www.jpost.com/christianworld/article-833048?utm_source=$publisher_id$&utm_medium=obbow&utm_campaign=009427f2a090a05a0c5f1fd5b04fbe48cf&utm_adtitle=%27Pope+can%27t+rewrite+Bible+-+Jesus+was+a+Jew+from+Judea%2C+not+Palestinian%2C%27+Christian+leader+says

The more we investigate, the clearer it becomes that the New Atheists are trying to force upon the entire world a rejection of God that is contrary to what the majority are willing to believe, at least at this point.

Originally published April 1, 2000

There are three closely related statements by Christ to His disciples which have created much controversy over their interpretation: 1) "And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matthew:16:19And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
See All..., 18:18); 2) "Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching [concerning] any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven" (Matthew:18:19Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.
See All...); and 3) "Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained" (John:20:23Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.
See All...).

In seeking to understand any passage in Scripture, one rule must govern: whatever the Bible declares, the Bible itself (not some outside authority) must interpret. It is from the Bible that we learn the gospel, about the church Christ established, about discipleship and the responsibilities, authority and power He has given to His own. Therefore, it is to the Bible that we must look to understand these things—and the Bible is understandable.

God's Word is presented to all mankind. Never does the Bible suggest that a special rank of spiritual leaders must explain it to the rest of mankind; and that without such help ordinary people could not understand it. In fact, the opposite is taught in Scripture. Consider a few examples: "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God" (Deuteronomy:8:3And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.
See All..., quoted by Jesus at Matthew:4:4But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
See All..., Luke:4:4And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
See All...); "Blessed is the man...[whose] delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night" (Psalms:1:1-2 [1] Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful. [2] But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
See All...); "Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word” (Psalms:119:9(BETH.) Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word.
See All...).

Notice that in each case an ordinary man (or woman), and even a young man/woman, meditates upon and obeys God's Word. There is no hint that the persons mentioned needed to consult any special teacher concerning the Scriptures. Therefore, we must conclude that to be the case for everyone.

The New Testament also supports this conclusion. Consider Christ's rebuke of the two on the road to Emmaus for not knowing and understanding the Scriptures. That neither of them was part of the inner circle of disciples is clear, because they hurried back to Jerusalem to tell the eleven (Judas was dead) of Christ's appearance (Luke:24:33-34 [33] And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, [34] Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.
See All...). Yet Jesus rebuked these ordinary people: "O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken" (Luke:24:25Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
See All...). He would not have used such harsh language, holding them personally accountable to know all that the prophets had said, unless the Scriptures were understandable to ordinary people.

Those in the city of Berea (both Jews and Gentiles) "searched the scriptures daily, [to see] whether those things [which Paul preached] were so" (Acts:17:11These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
See All...). These ordinary people were praised for not automatically accepting the great Apostle Paul's biblical interpretation, but for checking it out for themselves from the Scriptures. From these and many other examples that could be given, we can only conclude that it is the responsibility of each individual to know and understand God's Word based upon what it says, not upon what some religious authority claims it means.

This fact exposes as totally spurious the claim by the Roman Catholic Church that its magisterium (the hierarchy of bishops, in concert with its pope) alone can interpret the Bible. That Church did not even exist for the Bereans to consult, much less for the two on the road to Emmaus or for anyone in Old Testament times. Likewise, the claims of any other church or cult that its leaders alone can interpret the Bible are also exposed as contradictory to Scripture.

Three things are abundantly clear: 1) the Bible has been given by God as His Word to all who will receive it; 2) it is intended to be understood by ordinary people, even by youths, without special training or looking to religious leaders for interpretation; 3) everyone is accountable to know God's Word personally, and that responsibility cannot be passed off to pastor, priest, pope, or anyone else.

With this understanding, we may now consider the controversial passages mentioned above. To support the Catholic concept of a pope as Peter's successor, it is claimed that the promise in Matthew 16 of the keys of heaven and binding and loosing was addressed to Peter alone. Even if that were true, the promise of the keys is linked with the promise of binding and loosing, and in Matthew:18:18Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
See All... and John:20:23Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.
See All... Christ gives the power of binding and loosing, and remitting and retaining sins to all of His inner circle of disciples. That fact eliminates any special priority or authority to Peter and is of vital importance to our understanding of these scriptures. Why? Because whatever responsibility and authority Christ bestowed upon His original twelve was passed on to every true Christian.

That conclusion follows directly from Christ's command to His disciples to "Go into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature” (Mark:16:15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
See All...); “...Teaching them [who believe the gospel] to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you..." (Matthew:28:20Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
See All...). Thus all of the promises Christ made and all that He taught His original disciples and commanded them to do was to be passed on to every Christian throughout history, including to us today. Obviously, the "all things whatsoever I have commanded you," which every new disciple would be taught to observe, included the promises concerning the keys of heaven, binding and loosing, and remitting and retaining of sins—and the authority and power to do so.

New disciples were to make more disciples and to teach them also to observe all things Christ had commanded the original twelve—which included making more disciples. As a result, an unbroken chain of discipleship has come down through the centuries. Every Christian, being a disciple of a disciple of a disciple (all the way back to the first disciples), is a successor of the Apostles and is indwelt and empowered by the Holy Spirit to act accordingly.

Thus, the authority and power which Christ gave to the original disciples of using the keys in binding and loosing, and remitting and retaining of sins, does not belong to an elite class of leaders, but to each one who is born again of the Holy Spirit through faith in Christ. But "binding and loosing" what? Christ said, "whatsoever." That's broad indeed. Was He, at least in part, referring to demons? Surely one would not turn demons loose! Nor is there even one example in the Bible prior to the Millennium of demons (or "territorial spirits") being "bound." Even Christ allowed those He cast out of a man to go into a herd of swine (Mark:5:1-13 [1] And they came over unto the other side of the sea, into the country of the Gadarenes. [2] And when he was come out of the ship, immediately there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit, [3] Who had his dwelling among the tombs; and no man could bind him, no, not with chains: [4] Because that he had been often bound with fetters and chains, and the chains had been plucked asunder by him, and the fetters broken in pieces: neither could any man tame him. [5] And always, night and day, he was in the mountains, and in the tombs, crying, and cutting himself with stones. [6] But when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped him, [7] And cried with a loud voice, and said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of the most high God? I adjure thee by God, that thou torment me not. [8] For he said unto him, Come out of the man, thou unclean spirit. [9] And he asked him, What is thy name? And he answered, saying, My name is Legion: for we are many. [10] And he besought him much that he would not send them away out of the country. [11] Now there was there nigh unto the mountains a great herd of swine feeding. [12] And all the devils besought him, saying, Send us into the swine, that we may enter into them. [13] And forthwith Jesus gave them leave. And the unclean spirits went out, and entered into the swine: and the herd ran violently down a steep place into the sea, (they were about two thousand;) and were choked in the sea.
See All...). Then what is meant?

Christ gave all of the twelve the promise of binding and loosing (Matthew:18:18Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
See All...) and then He repeated the promise in different words in verse 19: "Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching [concerning] any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven." Verse 20 follows: "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." Here, at least, we understand that the binding or loosing of "whatsoever" is to be effected by asking the heavenly Father to bring to pass that which two or more Christians have agreed upon on earth, meeting in Christ's name with Him in their midst.

The promise of having from the Father what two or three agree upon echoes Christ's similar promises concerning prayer, such as, "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you" (Matthew:7:7Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
See All...). All of these promises—binding and loosing, agreeing upon a request, or simply believing—seem very much alike. But what is meant? Christ surely does not mean that no matter what we bind, loose, agree upon, or ask, God will grant it like an overly indulgent grandparent. It is axiomatic that God has not turned His universe or mankind over to us to do with as we will.

James declares that God, far from giving us a blank check, does not indulge our selfish desires: "Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts" (James:4:3Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.
See All...). John writes, "And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight…if we ask anything according to his will…we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him" (1 John:3:22And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
See All..., 5:14-15).

Clearly, prayer requests are granted for those who please God, and only according to His will. Who would want it otherwise? Similar limitations upon prayer must apply even to the broadest promises, such as, "And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive" (Matthew:21:22And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.
See All...); "Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them" (Mark:11:24Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them.
See All...); "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you" (John:16:23And in that day ye shall ask me nothing. Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you.
See All...).

Even these broad promises involve two conditions: believing (i.e., faith in God), and asking in Christ's name. These are limiting indeed. Faith is not a power of the mind so that by believing something will happen we bring it to pass. Faith must be, according to Christ, "in God" (Mark:11:22And Jesus answering saith unto them, Have faith in God.
See All...). Thus faith is not believing that prayer will be answered, but believing that God will answer it. Inasmuch as God "worketh all things after the counsel of his own will" (Ephesians:1:11In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:
See All...), genuine faith that comes from God could never believe God for anything contrary to His will.

As for asking "in Christ's name," that phrase, sadly, is tacked onto many prayers as though it were an "Open Sesame" magic formula. On the contrary, to ask in Jesus' name is to ask in His interest, to His glory, as He would ask—and His will is always conformed to the Father's. Prayer, then, is not a means of forcing one's will upon God. Instead, it is the gracious opportunity He allows us to have a part in furthering His will.

So it must be that in using the keys of the kingdom in binding or loosing, and remitting or retaining sins, Christ's followers act only as the agents of His power and only according to His will.

Can we be still more specific? Christ said, "whatsoever...whosoever." Inasmuch, however, as it can only be according to His will, He must reveal the specifics when the occasion arises. The important point is that this power and authority was not just to Peter or just to the original twelve, but has been passed to us today, along with everything else Christ taught and commanded them.

Additionally, when Jesus healed the woman "which had a spirit of infirmity eighteen years," He said to her, "Woman, thou art loosed from thine infirmity" (Luke:13:11-13 [11] And, behold, there was a woman which had a spirit of infirmity eighteen years, and was bowed together, and could in no wise lift up herself. [12] And when Jesus saw her, he called her to him, and said unto her, Woman, thou art loosed from thine infirmity. [13] And he laid his hands on her: and immediately she was made straight, and glorified God.
See All...). So by the gift of healing, the disciples could loose the sick from their bondage to illness; and by casting out demons they loosed souls from that form of bondage. Every Christian has the power, in the name of Jesus (as He would and to His glory), to do the same today.

How would one loose from and remit sins? Scripture is clear that all sin is against God, not just against another human. Therefore only God can forgive sins in the ultimate sense. Furthermore, forgiveness of sins and man's eternal destiny are a matter not only of God's love but of His justice. God Himself cannot (and would not) overrule His own justice. God can forgive sins only because Christ paid sin's penalty demanded by His infinite justice (Romans:3:23-28 [23] For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; [24] Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: [25] Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; [26] To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. [27] Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. [28] Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
See All...). And forgiveness is only for those who believe the gospel. Christ made that clear: "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him" (John:3:3-5 [3] Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. [4] Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? [5] Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
See All..., 36).

The scripture which Christ read in the synagogue in Nazareth and declared to be fulfilled through His ministry foretold the Messiah declaring, "...the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings [the gospel]...to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound" (Isaiah:61:1The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;
See All...; Luke:4:16-21 [16] And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read. [17] And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, [18] The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, [19] To preach the acceptable year of the Lord. [20] And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. [21] And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.
See All...). Isaiah and Christ are saying that the loosing of those bound by sin is only brought about through the preaching of the gospel. And what else but the gospel, which is "the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth" (Romans:1:16For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
See All...), could be the "keys of the kingdom"?

It is a delusion, then, to imagine that God has put in the hands of any man or church the power to decide who goes to heaven or hell. Indeed, how could he? In the cross of Christ alone "we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins" (Ephesians:1:7In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
See All...). No one, not even God Himself, can remit sins on any other basis. The gospel alone opens the door to heaven, the very gospel which Christ told His first disciples to "go into all the world, and preach" (Mark:16:15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
See All...). And, as we have seen, the responsibility and privilege of preaching it has been passed down to us today.

It is of the utmost importance to remember that every Christian has the power to release souls from sin's penalty through proclaiming the gospel to those who will believe. This is the good news of God's grace which looses from Satan's bondage those who believe.

The "keys" are not magic. Faith is still required. God desires "for all men to be saved" (1 Timothy:2:4Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
See All...) and He "is not willing that any should perish" (2 Peter:3:9The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
See All...). Yet many will indeed perish, because they persist in their rebellion and rejection of Christ. God Himself cannot force anyone to love Him, because the power of choice He gave us is essential for love.

It should be our passion, therefore, to persuade as many as we can to accept God's love and forgiveness and the gift of eternal life. How tragic that so many Christians who know the gospel so often fail to present it to those around them. As our Lord moves our hearts with love and compassion for the lost, may we respond in His love and use the keys of the kingdom ever more urgently and effectively to the salvation of many souls!

TBC

• Question: Did the constellations correspond with the tribes of Israel?
• Question: Why is Jesus called the Everlasting Father in Isaiah 9:6?
• Question: How could Jesus have paid for the sins of those who will go to hell anyway?
• TBC Notes: A Special Announcement
• NewsWatch
• Dave Hunt Classic/TBC Extra

Question: During the past Sunday evening Bible study, the following was presented: Some [astrological] constellations corresponded with the tribes of Israel: Judah—Leo; Dan—Scorpio; Benjamin—Gemini. Further, the tribes in the wilderness were arranged around the Tabernacle according to the “mirror reflection” of where their corresponding constellation was located in the heavens. How does one research whether or not these things are true?

Response: First of all, is this idea anywhere taught in Scripture? Certainly not! Secondly, it has been pointed out numerous times that the “Signs of the Zodiac correspond to the position of the sun relative to constellations as they appeared more than 2,200 years ago” (https://bit.ly/3CsoGxi). However, practitioners of Astrology, and in particular those who make their living on it, would say (without any evidence) that this makes no difference. Further, their argument is in direct conflict with verifiable science as much as it is with the Word of God.

Indeed, the Lord says in Jeremiah:10:2Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.
See All..., “Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.”

Regarding science, over the centuries the position of the “Zodiac” has changed, since “The first day of spring in the Northern Hemisphere was once marked by the zero point of the Zodiac. For instance, those born between March 21 and April 19 consider themselves to be Aries. Today, the sun is no longer within the constellation of Aries during much of that period. From March 11 to April 18, the sun is actually in the constellation of Pisces!” (https://bit.ly/3CsoGxi)

While some writers in the Talmud consider this to be a biblical use of “astronomy,” it is clear that other influences crept in. This has been a deviation from Scripture for many with even believers such as astronomers Sir Isaac Newton and Johannes Kepler having some regard for astrology and actually sought to reconcile it with the Bible. The Wise Men who came from the East who saw the star and came to see the newborn King still needed the Scriptures to learn where He was born. 

Question: Why is Jesus called the Everlasting Father in Isaiah:9:6For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
See All...?

Response: It is true that Isaiah:9:6For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
See All... says that Jesus’ name will be called “Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father,” etc. What it does not say is that Jesus is the Everlasting Father. As God, He obviously has the characteristics of God. Simply put, Jesus being part of the godhead has the attributes of God. This includes everlasting or “eternal life.”

Micah:5:2But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
See All... agrees with this: “But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.”

It has been asked why if Jesus’ name is “Everlasting Father,” then why don’t we call Jesus “Everlasting Father”?  Or why not call him “Wonderful Counselor” or “Mighty God” or “Prince of Peace”? Isaiah:9:6For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
See All... speaks of a “name,” and there are four characteristics associated with that name. Again, this reveals it is the characteristics of the coming Messiah that is in view here. The fact that the Messiah is God is shown in Hebrews:1:3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
See All... when it says, “Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high….” Why shouldn’t the Lord subsequently say, “…He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father” (Jn:14:9Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?
See All...)? Jesus is the “express image” of God the Father as His prophesied name establishes.

Question: Can you help me with this question: “If Jesus died for all and has legally purchased all through substitutionary atonement, then how can those people go to hell? That would be a ‘Double Jeopardy’ of the sins of those people being paid for twice.” This is my husband’s main question and I would really appreciate help with it based on Calvinism.

Response: The Bible says that God wants all to be saved: “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Pet:3:9The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
See All...). But the Bible also says that not all will be saved (Matt:7:21-23 [21] Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. [22] Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? [23] And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
See All...; Lk 13:22-27, etc). Nevertheless, the Bible also tells us that God is all powerful (Ps:147:5Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite.
See All...; Jer:32:17Ah Lord GOD! behold, thou hast made the heaven and the earth by thy great power and stretched out arm, and there is nothing too hard for thee:
See All...; Matt:19:26But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.
See All..., etc).

Calvinism has its own explanation. They strive to make things add up. “If God is all powerful,” the reasoning goes, “and God wants all people to be saved, then all people will be saved. Since not all people will be saved, Christ must have died only for some; God must not want all to be saved.”

This is unbiblical according to the much-explained John:3:16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
See All... (what “world” means), and the blunt statement of 1 John:2:1-2 [1] My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: [2] And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
See All...: “And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” But to some, it makes nice, theological sense. This is, however, putting one’s reason above God’s Word; believing what makes sense rather than believing all of what God has said. 

As Dave Hunt wrote in Calvin’s Dilemma: God’s Sovereignty vs. Man’s Free Will (pp 9-10), “William L. Pettingill wrote, ‘God insists upon His sovereignty and also upon man’s responsibility. Believe both and preach both, leaving the task of ‘harmonizing’ with Him.’ In a similar vein, A. T. Pierson, although a leading Presbyterian, declared that both ‘the sovereign will of God and the freedom of man’ are taught in Scripture and that ‘if we cannot reconcile these two, it is because the subject is so infinitely lifted up above us. Man is free.... Thus the last great invitation in God’s Book is an appeal to the will.’

“Unfortunately, neither John Calvin nor many of his followers today have been willing to accept both sides of this biblical teaching. The result has been devastating in its consequences for the gospel: that man can only reject Christ; he cannot accept and believe in Him unless he is sovereignly regenerated by God. Calvinism refuses to accept what so many great evangelists have recognized is vital. Edgar Mullins expresses very well the essential balance that is missing:

“‘Free will in man is as fundamental a truth as any other in the gospel and must never be canceled in our doctrinal statements. Man would not be man without it and God never robs us of our true moral manhood in saving us.... The decree of salvation must be looked at as a whole to understand it. Some have looked at God’s choice alone and ignored the means and the necessary choice on man’s part.’”

"Three Words"

As I look back over the decades since I started The Berean Call (TBC), there are three words that come to my mind: "Thank you, Jesus!"

Whoa! Hold on a moment. Many have mistakenly thought that Dave Hunt was the head of TBC because they misunderstood the ministry's major function. From the beginning, its purpose was to free Dave up to do research, write books, write articles, debate those opposed to the gospel, confront those changing the gospel, and expose those deceiving the body of Christ with "oppositions of science falsely so called" (such as psychotherapy) as indicated in 1 Timothy:6:20O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
See All.... That enablement and God's grace helped Dave lead the way in exposing some of the major deceptions of the last two centuries.

In fact, TBC started with someone who was a Hollywood screenwriter: me.

What follows are general remembrances of an 80-year-old, as well as some moments of the Lord's divine orchestration.

Soon after I gave my life to Jesus Christ, I saw a Christian-produced documentary at an evangelical church. Technically, it was one of the worst film productions I had ever seen. On the other hand, it had one of the most powerful messages I had ever experienced on screen. It had to do with men having their lives miraculously and completely changed in prison.

Being a "Hollywood guy," it immediately came to mind: These guys could use my help.

The producer of the film introduced me to a man who believed the Lord was encouraging him to write a story to be made into a feature film. After reading his brief outline of his story, I admitted to him—quite sadly—that I was sorry I couldn't help him. His story was exciting, but I had no clue as to what he was talking about. I thought it was going to be about Christianity, about which I only had a perspective as a former Roman Catholic. Instead, it had UFOs, psychic phenomena, Eastern mysticism and gurus, levitation, and yoga. The man's name was Dave Hunt, and he said he could explain to me what it had to do with Christianity, especially a "new age" false Christianity. What Dave wasn't able to do, however, was write a script for such a film. He then asked me if I'd consider working on it with him.

That was the start of nearly 40 years of assisting Dave Hunt, primarily through The Berean Call. THANK YOU, JESUS!

It all began in Southern California where Dave and I both lived. He was an established author and I was a documentary filmmaker (The Godmakers) and a novice book-writer. Dave nevertheless encouraged me to collaborate with him on The Seduction of Christianity, which became a best-seller published by Harvest House.

When Harvest House then moved to Oregon, Dave asked me to join him there to work with our publisher. When I mentioned that I heard that it snows there (my family and I were beach people), his ploy and sense of humor was classic Dave Hunt. He said it gets a light dusting of snow in the morning and usually melts sometime in the afternoon. He was correct...sort of. Our first winter in Bend started with a "dusting" of two-and-a-half feet one November morning, and finally melted one late afternoon in March. Again, Dave was only partially correct...and our kids loved it! They forever called him "Uncle Dave."

I mentioned that I turned 80 not too long ago, and it reminded me of what a TBC board member did when he entered his 80s. He was a godly man, as well as full of wisdom from the Holy Spirit. His name was William MacDonald, author of Believer's Bible Commentary. However, at my young age, I wasn't happy with a particular decision he made. He told me he would be stepping down from the TBC Board and retiring from ministry. His reasoning was thus: he was thankful for how the Lord had used his life as a prolific writer of spiritually edifying books, and he did not want anything he might say or do in his later years to bring disrepute on what the Lord had brought to pass through him.

Now that I'm 80, while I don't have the same concerns as Bill, I do have concerns. My health is certainly not what I would like it to be. My hope is that, before my health reaches a difficult stage, I can spend much of my time ministering to my family members as well as where the Lord guides, directs, and enables.

All of this has to do with a major transition now taking place for TBC, along with my retirement. It also involves making Rob Yardley (presently the head of The Berean Call Board of Directors) the new president of TBC.

Rob has known Dave and worked with him as a friend for nearly as long as I have known Dave, so there are few things Rob does not know about The Berean Call ministry. There's no one else (other than myself) about which I can say that. Extensive discussions with Rob and Mark Vander Ark (TBC's operations manager) give me assurance that the ministry will continue as it has been under my direction and Dave Hunt's teachings.

Although my title as President and TBC's authority will soon end, I've asked the leadership to give me a replacement title, a non-paid honorary one such as "Berean Emeritus," meaning simply, “Once a Berean, always a Berean." I believe that the Lord has given every true believer instruction in the practice of biblical discernment, as was the case in Acts:17:11These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
See All...: "In that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily [to know whether or not what they were being taught was true to the Word of God].” Additionally, I want to be available to assist the ministry in encouraging biblical discernment.

Also, to that end, TBC has had in the works an extensive digitizing program that has preserved the material produced by Dave Hunt, T. A. McMahon, and some of the major contributors to the ministry in a searchable format. Our goal is and has been to safeguard the biblical integrity of the ministry’s content and to keep it available for the church.

I covet your prayers that all this will be done in the Lord's will. Amen.

In His love, 

T. A. McMahon

Berean Emeritus

Why Stay Away From The Book of Enoch?

CoffeeandChristshop.com, 10/1/23, “Why Stay Away from the Book of Enoch?” [Excerpts]: The Book of Enoch is an ancient Hebrew religious text that is not part of the biblical canon. It is a pseudepigraphal work, which means that it is falsely attributed to a famous author. In this case, the book is attributed to Enoch, who was the grandfather of Noah in the Bible.

The Book of Enoch was not included in the biblical canon for a number of reasons. First, it was not written by a prophet. Second, it contains some questionable content, such as the claim that angels slept with human women and gave birth to giants. Third, it was not widely accepted by early Christians…. The earliest Christian writings do not mention the Book of Enoch.

The Bible does not explicitly forbid the reading of the Book of Enoch. However, it warns against false teachers and doctrine (Matt:7:15-20 [15] Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. [16] Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? [17] Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. [18] A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. [19] Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. [20] Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
See All...; 2 Pet:2:1-22 [1] But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. [2] And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. [3] And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. [4] For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; [5] And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; [6] And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly; [7] And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked: [8] (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their unlawful deeds;) [9] The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished: [10] But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities. [11] Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not railing accusation against them before the Lord. [12] But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption; [13] And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you; [14] Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children: [15] Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness; [16] But was rebuked for his iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man's voice forbad the madness of the prophet. [17] These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever. [18] For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error. [19] While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage. [20] For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. [21] For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. [22] But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.
See All...).

Ultimately, whether or not to read the Book of Enoch is up to each individual. If you are a Christian, you should weigh the arguments for and against reading the book and make a decision that aligns with your conscience.

https://bit.ly/427ynvN

Using Public Education to Transform America

MidwestOutreach.org, 10/3/24, “Using Public Education to Transform America” [Excerpts]: For a quarter of a century, we have been pointing out that the cultural transformation that was coming had begun in the 1930s with John Dewey. Dewey recognized that in order to transform America into a Marxist nation and embrace abortion and euthanasia, the public schools would have to be taken over and educate the students on these beliefs.

Now that it has effectively been accomplished, others are catching on to what has happened. In “America’s Current Schooling Catastrophes Were Set In Motion 100 Years Ago,” Tim Goeglein wrote:

“These radical changes also led to the dumbing down of the American populace, which is no longer equipped with the skills to determine truth from error or to be contributing members of society.”

The Marxism/Progressivism in our churches and public and private institutions is not by accident. It was engineered [by] those who rejected God and worked to replace Judeo/Christian ethics and morality. They have been pretty effective.

https://bit.ly/4gELAk1

Does Pauli Exclusion Rescue Dino Protein? 

ICR.org, 9/23/24, “Does Pauli Exclusion Rescue Dino Protein?” [Excerpts]:Perhaps no other fossil discoveries have rocked the world of paleontology more than original organics like proteins in old bones. ICR helps curate a list of mainstream science publications that describe what’s inside these fossils...The number exceeds 120, making the presence of proteins and similar finds an increasingly common occurrence.

Inevitable chemical reactions turn even the most resistant biological materials (or “biomaterials” for short) into dust in fewer than one million years under ideal conditions, whereas the fossils that contain them were supposedly deposited tens to hundreds of millions of years ago. Evolutionary workers strive to protect deep time from this chemistry. While the latest attempt describes how the front door to collagen longevity stands strong against destructive chemistry, it ignores a wide-open back door.

A key term in their report is the “Pauli Exclusion Principle.” This refers to the status of electrons in an atom or molecule. When more than one electron occupies the same orbital, or zone, one electron always differs from its partner in at least one aspect—usually its spin direction. When it comes to collagen, its collection of electrons comes pleasantly partnered, beautifully balanced, and, in short, too happy with themselves to want to react with outsiders.

Then came the conclusion, which far overstepped the worthy results. The study authors wrote, “This discovery has implications for the stability of collagen, which is replete with n→π* [contented electron] interactions and has remained intact for (at least) hundreds of millions of years, exceeding the half-life of a peptide bond by a millionfold or more.”

Two clear points surface from this report. First, when it comes to evolutionary time, circular reasoning once again substitutes for good science. Last, even with the Pauli Exclusion Principle to ensure that the middle of collagen molecules resists water chemistry, chemical reactions still take place at their measured rates—rates that exclude millions of years.

https://bit.ly/4agrU3t

In his book, God’s Undertaker, John Lennox says, “[Astrophysicist] Arno Penzias used the space platform of earth to make the brilliant discovery of the ‘echo of the beginning,’ the cosmic background of microwave radiation, for which he was awarded a Nobel Prize. In contrast to the increasingly belligerent New Atheists, Penzias has said, ‘Astronomy leads us to a unique event—a universe that was created out of nothing, one with the very delicate balance needed to provide the exact conditions to permit life and one which has an underlying (one might say) supernatural plan.’”

Within Judaism, the New Year, which occurs in the fall for them occurs in the fall of the year, is more than a turning of the calendar. It is a time of renewing their faith and focus on G-d. One of the prayers is, "May it be Your will, Eternal our God, that this be a good and sweet year for us." Not all who are of Jewish decent believe in God; some are agnostic or atheists, and yet, many of those participate in the celebrations as part of their family traditions and also hope for "a sweet year" for themselves and their families. But for those who are G-d fearing, there is more going on, as Menachem Posner points out in Shana Tova, Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur Greeting:

“The Jewish new year is not just a time to renew our resolve to lose another fifteen pounds. Rather, it’s the time when our fate stands in the balance as G‑d reviews our past year and decides whether or not to renew our lease on His planet. As such, Jewish greetings for this time of year (the Jewish New Year is in the fall) reflect our prayers for a good, sweet year up ahead.”

Their eternal fate is hopeful but somewhat unknown. After G-d's review, will they remain and be in the Book of Life? Posner explains and gives the full meaning of their greeting to one another, “A good inscription and sealing [in the Book of Life].” He also points out something additional:

“From noon on Rosh Hashanah, when our fates are already written, until Yom Kippur, when our fates for the coming year are to be sealed, we wish each other “Gemar chatimah tovah” (גמר חתימה טובה), “A good final sealing.”

It is different for those who are in Christ. In Ephesians 4 Paul talks about how we should live toward one another and includes two reasons, "And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption." (Ephesians:4:30And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.
See All...) Living badly toward other members of the Body of Christ grieves God, AND we are "sealed for the day of redemption." We are not up for an annual review to see if we are kept in the Book of Life for another year. Instead, we can praise and thank G-d that we have "a good final sealing" and pray for all of those who do not, whether they are Jews or Gentiles. "A good final sealing" is guaranteed to all who call on Yeshua for salvation. (Romans:10:9-13 [9] That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. [10] For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. [11] For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. [12] For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. [13] For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
See All...)

https://mailchi.mp/b0ef5c8210e5/the-week-of-new-year-tidings?e=169825fd77

One of the greatest astrophysicists of the twentieth century, Sir Arthur Eddington, frankly confessed, “We have learned that the exploration of the external world by the methods of the physical sciences leads not to a concrete reality but to a shadow world of symbols.”8 In agreement, great mathematician and astronomer Sir James Jeans declared, “The most outstanding achievement of twentieth-century physics is not the theory of relativity . . . or the “theory of quanta . . . or the dissection of the atom . . . it is the general recognition that we are not yet in contact with ultimate reality.” Sir Karl Popper, one of the most influential philosophers of science in the twentieth century, stated that the theory of evolution is not science but “a metaphysical research programme.”

British outlet The Telegraph reported that the Freedom From Religion Foundation pulled the article "Biology is not Bigotry" from its site following backlash from pro-trans individuals. In turn, Dawkins resigned.

In his resignation letter to the foundation, Dawkins called the removal of the piece "an act of unseemly panic" and accused the foundation of having "caved in to hysterical squeals from predictable quarters and retrospectively censored that excellent rebuttal."

Biologist and fellow FFRF member Jerry Coyne composed the "censored" article as a rebuttal to non-binary author and FFRF fellow Kat Grant’s November article titled, "What is a Woman?"

The biologist’s piece argued that "any attempt to define womanhood on biological terms is inadequate."

Coyne’s follow-up challenged Grant’s point directly, arguing "the biological definition of ‘woman’" is based on gamete type.

Shortly after FFRF published Coyne’s piece, board co-presidents Dan Barker and Annie Laurie Gaylor unpublished it and released a statement explaining their decision.

"Publishing this post was an error of judgment, and we have decided to remove it as it does not reflect our values and principles. We regret any distress caused by this post and are committed to ensuring it doesn’t happen again," they wrote.

Following the move, both Coyne and US-Canadian psychologist Prof. Steven Pinker resigned from the foundation. Pinker blasted the group, saying it’s "no longer a defender of freedom from religion but the imposer of a new religion, complete with dogma, blasphemy, and heretics."

In an email to FFRF leadership, Coyne wrote, "That is a censorious behavior I cannot abide. I was simply promoting a biological rather than a psychological definition of sex, and I do not understand why you would consider that ‘distressing’ and also an attempt to hurt LGBTQIA+ people, which I would never do."

He added, "The gender ideology which caused you to take down my article is itself quasi-religious, having many aspects of religions and cults, including dogma, blasphemy, belief in what is palpably untrue (‘a woman is whoever she says she is’), apostasy, and a tendency to ignore science when it contradicts a preferred ideology."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/richard-dawkins-leaves-atheist-foundation-185849168.html

After more than a year of pro-Palestinians telling Jews that their historical and biblical links to Israel were irrelevant (in an attempt to delegitimise the Jewish state) it turns out that historical and biblical links really are important, so long as they don’t involve Jews. Now Jesus is Palestinian, the theory goes, it’s completely fine to argue that “some” of those who inhabited the region 2,000 years ago do have a claim on the land after all. Placards at marches read “Jesus is Palestinian” or “Jesus, the most famous Palestinian”.

There is, of course, a deeper precedent for this, in that Jesus’ Jewishness has been played down since the third century, when “Christianity” proliferated into Roman society. Then, even more so when his death became an excuse for anti-Semitism in the Middle Ages. In that sense, this attempt to politicize him is nothing new. There was also a certain German group you may have heard of from the 1930s and 40s who were very keen to eliminate any link between Jesus and his Jewish identity. It’s in this long, troubled context that we should see the potential harm this idea possesses.

If you leave aside the theological and historical absurdity – equating a Jewish man from 2000 years ago with a political identity that didn’t exist – this is the nub of the problem. It promotes the idea that Jews are systematic baby killers. This is the sort of thing that is screamed at elderly people on the streets of London, Glasgow and Brighton. That’s not something Jesus would have approved of. He was Jewish, after all.

—George Chesteron (English writer, UK Telegraph, Senior Writer, noted for his stand against Anti-Semitism, and correcting the use of History against the Jews and Israel).

And when we come to the question of origins, the lips of science are tightly sealed. Science can’t explain the origin of either matter or life. We have merely substituted new words to cover our ignorance and pretend we’ve made an advance. As far as ultimate reality is concerned, however, we are still where primitive man was before “science” deluded us with false hope.

[Humanity has often put forth the idea that our current generation is far more intelligent than those of previous centuries. Yet, it seems that with every new discovery of something done by ancient man, it is greeted with comments such as, “We can’t even figure out how ancient people did a lot of the brilliant things they did, such as the Egyptians building the pyramids, and other monumental architecture scattered around the world.” And that’s not the end of the search to answer the “how” of what was accomplished without power equipment equal to the task.]

Human intelligence 'peaked thousands of years ago and we've been on an intellectual and emotional decline ever since'

Is the human species doomed to intellectual decline? Will our intelligence ebb away in centuries to come leaving our descendants incapable of using the technology their ancestors invented? In short: will Homo be left without his sapiens?

This is the controversial hypothesis of a leading geneticist who believes that the immense capacity of the human brain to learn new tricks is under attack from an array of genetic mutations that have accumulated since people started living in cities a few thousand years ago.

Professor Gerald Crabtree, who heads a genetics laboratory at Stanford University in California, has put forward the iconoclastic idea that rather than getting cleverer, human intelligence peaked several thousand years ago and from then on there has been a slow decline in our intellectual and emotional abilities.

Although we are now surrounded by the technological and medical benefits of a scientific revolution, these have masked an underlying decline in brain power which is set to continue into the future leading to the ultimate dumbing-down of the human species, Professor Crabtree said.

His argument is based on the fact that for more than 99 per cent of human evolutionary history, we have lived as hunter-gatherer communities surviving on our wits, leading to big-brained humans. Since the invention of agriculture and cities, however, natural selection on our intellect has effective stopped and mutations have accumulated in the critical “intelligence” genes.

“I would wager that if an average citizen from Athens of 1000BC were to appear suddenly among us, he or she would be among the brightest and most intellectually alive of our colleagues and companions, with a good memory, a broad range of ideas and a clear-sighted view of important issues,” Professor Crabtree says in a provocative paper published in the journal Trends in Genetics.

“Furthermore, I would guess that he or she would be among the most emotionally stable of our friends and colleagues. I would also make this wager for the ancient inhabitants of Africa, Asia, India or the Americas, of perhaps 2,000 to 6,000 years ago,” Professor Crabtree says.

“The basis for my wager comes from new developments in genetics, anthropology, and neurobiology that make a clear prediction that our intellectual and emotional abilities are genetically surprisingly fragile,” he says.

https://creation.com/why-christianity-not-atheism-is-the-only-rational-foundation-for-ethics

[TBC: It is instructive that Crabtree’s “wager” on those of “2,000 to 6,000 years ago” comes comfortably close to Scripture’s dating.]

In fact, the “spontaneous arising by chance of the first heredity molecule” is not just improbable but impossible. This is one of those ingredients lying in wait in the impassable swamps and impossible cliffs that must be conquered before even reaching the base of Mount Improbable. Evolutionists/atheists are now telling us that the law of biogenesis isn’t really a law. It has been violated not just once but millions of times all over the universe! To accept Darwinism is tantamount to rejecting the very foundations of science itself. Everything is up for grabs.

Nor can we be impressed with the reasons [Dawkins] has since accumulated in the name of science and offers to us now. Concerning the all-important question of the origin of life, he says,

“The major ingredient was heredity, either DNA or (more probably) something that copies like DNA but less accurately, perhaps the related molecule RNA. Once the vital ingredient—some kind of genetic molecule—is in place, true Darwinian natural selection can follow, and complex life emerges as the eventual consequence. But the spontaneous arising by chance of the first heredity molecule strikes many as improbable. Maybe it is—very, very improbable. . . . The origin of life is a flourishing, if speculative, subject for research. The expertise required for it is chemistry and it is not mine. [Emphasis added]”

A critic of the article “How to build a bomb in the public school stem” argued that a biblical foundation was unnecessary for ethics. Jonathan Sarfati’s response explains how Christian foundations underpin the prosperity and science of the West, and contrasts these with the atrocities of atheistic regimes. This needs to be revisited especially with the increasingly shrill atheistic attacks on Christianity in general and on Christian freedoms, pushing moral boundaries, and even a leading atheistic evolutionist saying that Hitler’s ideas should be reconsidered. Then the response explains the real problem for atheists trying to build an ethical system.

 “How to Build a Bomb.” You wrote that in order to create an explosive child all that was required was to educate that child to believe that we evolved from animals, life is an accident and that there are no absolutes.

“That belief system which is indoctrinated into kids provides the perfect basis for this.

“Well, I and many, many other people like me believe exactly those things, reaching our conclusions through trial and error and by asking questions of ourselves and the world we live in and not shying away from the answers whatever they appeared to be or mean. In doing so we feel we have a wider more stable foundation with which to tackle the problems of today’s MODERN society and MODERN man’s need for a combination of tangible truth and spiritual peace, two quarters in which the ancient indoctrination of organized religion has consistently failed to provide.”

Actually, biblical Christianity has provided the only basis for prosperous modern democracies, including:

• The rule of law, which binds all people, recognizing a higher source of the law. The alternative is rule by despots.
• Equality of all people under the law, neither favoring the rich nor the poor (Job 34:19).
• Property rights, presupposed in the command against theft (Exodus 20:15). Without them, the capital cannot be used as capital for investment loans, and there is no protection for what people have earned by productive work. Indeed, Hernando de Soto’s book The Mystery of Capital shows that if private property in poor countries were freed up from statist ownership, this would provide 90 times more wealth than all the foreign aid to all Third World countries over the past three decades.
• All these are biblical principles, and it is no accident that the most prosperous countries have adopted them, and that the poorest countries fail. Even now, prosperous countries in the west are still benefiting from these Christian-based foundations laid down in their past.
• Conversely, atheism has been tried as a basis for life in many countries in the 20th century. The results have been some of the biggest bloodbaths of all time under communist despots above the law, e.g., Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot. For example, the Inquisition killed 2000 people in three centuries; Stalin killed that many before breakfast. Neither could atheistic economies remotely compete with the West—e.g., it didn’t take long for the USA to outstrip the USSR in the space race when they put their minds to it.

[An atheist noted] “In short I am, to you, a walking time bomb. I am, in actual fact, a diligent, hardworking, caring, stable, compassionate, intelligent, kind, thoughtful and considerate individual…”

[And nice to your mother too, I’ve heard.]

“(as are many, many of my likeminded friends all around the world) we manage to live the lives your religion postulates without the need for the pomp and scripture, the fear and hatred and the presence of any kind of omnipresent deity to keep us in check. I wondered how you would explain this?”

Nothing to explain. The article explained that evolution provides the basis for the bomb-building, not that everyone would act consistently on this basis. We know that many atheists borrow a moral code from outside their belief system, since that can’t provide any. The rabid misotheist Richard Dawkins even claimed that he was a passionate Darwinist as to how we got here, but a passionate anti-Darwinist when it came to morality.

Rather, our argument is not that atheists cannot live ‘good’ lives, but that there is no objective basis for their goodness if we are just rearranged pond scum.

[For the full text of this article, please see:]

https://creation.com/why-christianity-not-atheism-is-the-only-rational-foundation-for-ethics

Most of our readers are at least aware of the problems that result from doctrinal heresy, but few are aware or have thought about relational heresy or even know what it might be. Almost 20 years ago, our friend and associate, Rich Poll from Apologia Report contributed the article, "The Ambush of Discernment." He deals with many of the aspects of discernment that can derail those involved due to false expectations, workload, and other things including our attitude toward others. In other words, our relationships. Bob from RPM Ministries just posted the article, "Beware of Relational Heresy While Addressing Perceived Doctrinal Heresy." The issue is an important one. A pastor and good friend, Fred Greening the mean-spiritedness which seemed to be part and parcel of those who engaged in apologetics/discernment ministry until he met Joy and me. He began talking about the issues of mindless evangelism and heartless apologetics:

We talk a lot about doctrinal heresy—and it is a vital issues that we must address.

Orthodoxy—right belief—is essential.

We seem to talk less about relational heresy.

Orthopraxy—right relationships, right living—is equally essential.

We talk even less about right relationships while talking about right doctrine. Our failure to address this runs counter to God’s all-sufficient Word. The Bible is replete with commands about how we treat one another while we address doctrinal disagreements. The Bible consistently commands us to guard our hearts against relational heresy.

The point in the article is that there seems to be an underlying assumption that it is normative for churches to talk about "Orthodoxy—right belief—is essential." Sadly, it isn't so. All we have to do is look around at how many churches embrace the occultism of the Enneagram, the New Apostolic Reformation, or Bill Gothard's teaching, to name but a few examples. In those settings, there seems to be the idea that niceness is the closest thing to godliness, and pointing out false doctrine is viewed as decidedly not nice and, therefore, ungodly. However, that being said, the article is an important one. There is a great deal in Scripture about defending the faith, exposing false doctrines, and teaching the essentials, and there is a great deal about our hearts and how we treat others in the process. Our goal is not to win arguments but to win over those in error.

https://mailchi.mp/36941ce94c68/the-gift?e=169825fd77