Poverty and Immoral Behavior: Are They Necessarily Linked?

Posted on June 13, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

It is true that poverty, like wealth, provides an avenue for certain temptations to come our way (Proverbs 30:8-9).  We are all tempted in various ways.  Poverty comes with its own circumstances which Satan uses in his desire to lead us away from God and righteousness.

But is there a necessary link between poverty and theft and other immoral behavior?  Some social scientists and liberal politicians proclaim in essence that such is the case (often in order to get more funding for some inner-city program or project).  But are the two, poverty and criminal or immoral behavior necessarily linked?

A professor of economics at George Mason University, Walter Williams, has written: “The fact that Washington and Harlem have 80% illegitimacy has nothing to do with racism in America.  It has to do with 13, 14, and 15-year-old girls having sexual intercourse without the benefit of marriage.  In 1925, blacks were far poorer and there was more discrimination” (William J. Bennett, The Devaluing of America: The Fight for Our Culture and Our Children, page 190).

Two other professors, James Q. Wilson and Richard Hernstein of the University of California, Los Angeles and Harvard University, have written in their book, Crime and Human Nature: “During the 1960’s, one neighborhood in San Francisco had the lowest income, the highest unemployment rate, the highest proportion of families with incomes under $4,000 a year, the least educational attainment, the highest tuberculosis rate, and the highest proportion of substandard housing.. that neighborhood was called Chinatown.  Yet, in 1965, there were only five persons of Chinese ancestry committed to prison in the entire state of California” (William J. Bennett, The Index of Leading Cultural indicators: Facts and Figures on the State of American Society, page 21).

Another has written, “The Great Depression caused a level of poverty unknown to exist in America today, and yet, I have been unable to find any accounts of crime waves sweeping our large cities.  In fact, I can’t find reliable information that even documents a noticeable increase in crime, period, during the Great Depression.”  (Rush Limbaugh, See, I Told You So, page 83).  Again, he said, “Let me posit two facts that prove conclusively that there is no direct causal connection between poverty and crime: (1) Most poor people never resort to crime; and (2) even some wealthy people commit evil acts to enrich themselves further… Let’s probe even more deeply into this poverty-equals-crime myth.  Where, do you suppose, is the poorest community in the United States?  Harlem?  East Los Angeles?  The South side of Chicago?  Surprise, Surprise.  None of these famous ‘bad neighborhoods’ is even on the top ten list.  In fact, the most financially strapped areas in the United States are not even urban areas.  According to the latest U.S. Census report, the poorest communities in the United States is Shannon County, South Dakota, followed by Starr, Texas and Tunica, Mississippi.  When was the last time you heard that the residents of one of these communities rioted to protest their living conditions?” (page 282, note this was written in 1993).

Folks, here are the facts: (1) Not all poor folks live a life of crime and immorality.  This is true in the inner-city as well.  (2) Poverty is an external circumstance which brings certain temptations.  But, one need not give in to temptation (1 Corinthians 10:13).  Paul wrote, “I have learned in whatever I am, to be content:  I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound. Everywhere and in all things I have learned both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need.  I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me” (Philippians 4:11-13).  (3) Even though men might have pity, emotionally speaking, upon the one who would steal food due to hunger, the old law did not exempt such a one (Proverbs 6:30-31).

Posted in Money, Proverbs, Sin, Stats, Temptation, Wealth | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Feud Over Credit

Posted on June 12, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

Morton/Jackson(1)

William Morton (1819-1868), was a dentist.  He was obsessed with one thing.  He said, “If only I could pull teeth painlessly, I would become the richest dentist in Boston, perhaps the entire world.”

Later, Morton studied medicine and chemistry under Dr. Charles Jackson (1805-1880).  Jackson was a brilliant man who seemed to know more than anyone about so many subjects. Morton learned a lot from Jackson.

Jackson also had a huge ego.  Jackson boasted many things.  He told folks that it was he was and not Samuel Morse that really deserved credit for inventing the telegraph.  He said he had shared such ideas with Morse years before and that Morse had gone on to get credit (of course there is some difference between having an idea, and developing the idea). Wikipedia lists five disputes he had with others over discoveries and inventions.

Morton began to tell Jackson of his dream to relieve pain.  Morton had already tried ether but was disappointed in the results.  Dr. Jackson said, “You must use the pure diethyl ether.  Buy it from Joseph Burnet.  His apothecary is the one that sells the pure grade.”  Morton experimented with diethyl either for many months.  He began to use the gas in removing teeth. Joseph Warren M.D. allowed Morton to demonstrate the gas in a full-blown surgery in 1846.  It worked well.  Morton was famous.  Morton patented his discovery.

Jackson then began to argue that he deserved the credit and not Morton.  England offered a generous prize to Morton for his work, but withdrew the offer when Jackson protested.  France offered a similar prize provided that both men would share it.  Morton refused  and neither received any money.  The Massachusetts General Hospital investigated and said that credit belonged to Morton, not Jackson.  But, the controversy didn’t go away.  In 1868, Morton read a newspaper article which gave credit to Jackson.  He got so angry  he immediately suffered a stroke and died a few days later.  Elizabeth, his wife, said, “The greatest personal tragedy in my husband’s life was his discovery of ether.”  Jackson also was so filled with hatred that when he saw Morton’s tombstone read, “William C. G. Morton – Inventor of anesthetic inhalation” he went totally and completely insane for the rest of his life.  He lived until 1880 in the McLean (insane) asylum.

Actually, it is now known that neither man was the true inventor.  That honor goes to Crawford W. Long, a Georgia doctor who used ether as early as 1842 in surgery.

Hall/Heroult(2)

In total contrast with the aforementioned story, consider these two men.

Charles Martin Hall of America (1863-1914), and Paul Heroult of France (1863-1914) both separately, and independently, discovered how to separate and refine aluminum inexpensively.  Their discoveries came close to the same time.  Hall was the first to patent the discovery, but Heroult actually was the first to discover the process about two months prior to Hall.  Hall had the American rights.  Heroult had the European rights.

Things could have gotten bogged down in arguing over credit.  International lawsuits could have followed.  But such did not happen.

The two became close friends.  They worked together and pooled their knowledge to improve the process even more.

Application

In the church, let us not fret about who gets credit.  What great things could be accomplished if we stopped worrying about such!  God knows what we do for Him (Proverbs 15:3; 1 Timothy 5:25; Hebrews 6:10;).   It is He that we ought to want to please( 2 Corinthians 5:9; Galatians 1:10; 1 Thessalonians 2:4; 2 Timothy 2:15).

The apostle Paul was not concerned about who did the preaching (Philippians 1:15-18).  He simply rejoiced in the fact Christ was preached.  He did not want to make disciples of self but of Christ (1 Corinthians 1:11-13; 2 Corinthians 3:3-7).

Brethren, it does not matter who is called on to lead singing, lead prayers, preach from the pulpit, or teach class, or serve at the table.  Let us not be envious over such.  Let us rejoice that songs of praise are sang, and prayers are addressed unto God, Christ is preached, the word of God is proclaimed, and the Lord’s Supper is observed.

 Notes:                                                                                                                                                      1. Exploring the History of Medicine, by John Hudson Tiner, p. 62-66.                                  2.  Exploring the History of Chemistry, by John Hudson Tiner, p. 120-123

 

 

Posted in Fellowship, science | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Deadly Ignorance

Posted on June 9, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

Tin is a very commonly used metal.  Tin is used to form many alloys.  Bronze is an alloy of copper and tin.  Pewter is an alloy of lead and tin.  Tin is used to make many different products from paper clips, staples, and safety pins to pistons in airplane engines.  Tin is used in solders, due to its low melting point.  It is used to make collapsible tubes, such as those used for toothpaste.  Tin plated steel cans, which we normally call “tin cans” are commonly used due to the fact that tin protects the steel from rusting, and is non-toxic, and does not discolor food.  (Peter Durand, an Englishman, patented the tin can in 1810).  Tin is used in wrapping candy.  Tin foil was once common but aluminum has now replaced tin in the making of foil because aluminum is far cheaper than tin, economically speaking.

Tin, however, has one great weakness.  Extreme cold weather turns tin gray and brittle.  John Hudson Tiner has written “one of the great tragedies of Antarctic exploration came about because of tin used to solder the seams of kerosene cans.  Captain Robert Scott, a British explorer, organized an expedition to try to be the first to reach the South Pole.  He led his party across 1,800 miles of ice and snow.  At regular intervals they stored fuel and food for their return.  They reached the South Pole on January 18, 1912.  Standing on the spot was a marker left there one month earlier by Roald Amundsen, a Norwegian explorer. Disheartened, the men began their return journey into the face of a blizzard.  When the weary men arrived at food and fuel, the tin had turned to powder.  The Kerosene leaked through the seams.  The desperate men raced to the next cache.  The cans there were empty too.  The entire Scott party perished in the frozen wilderness, partly because of the little-known fact that tin becomes brittle at cold temperatures.” (Exploring the World of Chemistry, p.9).

Here’s the point.  God created physical laws that we live under and ignorance is no excuse.  Why should we think things will be different when it comes to God’s spiritual laws?  They won’t.  2 Thessalonians 1:8 tells us that Jesus will return “taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel..” Matthew 15:14 warns, “if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a ditch.” 2 Timothy 2 :15 admonishes, “Be diligent to present yourselves approved to God…rightly dividing the word of truth.”  1 Thessalonians 5:21 instructs, “test all things …” Hear this: to be ignorant of God’s spiritual laws is of far greater consequence, than to be ignorant of physical laws.

Posted in Bible Study, Doctrine, Plan of salvation, science | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Mystery

Posted on June 6, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

The word “mystery” appears, in some form, 27 times in the KJV New Testament.  Some might wonder, if the Bible is a “mystery” can anyone understand it?  I believe this misses how this word is commonly used in the New Testament.  Let us notice…

1.  The word is used to refer to something(s) in God’s scheme of redemption and plan for man, which was once unknown to man in times past, or at least not clearly or fully revealed to man.  However, now God has revealed such through inspiration.  Romans 16:25-26: “Now to Him who is able to establish you according to My gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the word began but now made manifest, by the prophetic scriptures made known to all nations…”  Ephesians 2:18, 20; 3:3-5: “For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father… having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone… by revelation He made known to me the mystery… by which when you read, you may understand… which in other ages was now made known to the sons of men, as it is now revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets.”  Colossians 1:26: “The mystery which has been hidden from ages and from generations… now has been revealed to His saints.”  They mystery was revealed in the first century by inspired men.  Thus, the “mystery” is no longer a “mystery.”

2.   The mystery concerns the redemptive work of Christ.  1 Timothy 3:16: “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit,  seen by angels, preached among the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.”

It is true that there were hints of God coming in the flesh (Isaiah 9:6-7; 40:3; Micah 5:2) and hints of the Messiah’s death and resurrection (Psalm 22; Isaiah 53, etc.).  however, such was not clearly revealed or understood (Isaiah 53 cf. Acts 8:30-35).

3.  The mystery concerns the location of salvation.  Ephesians 1:7-10: “In Him, we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins… having made known to us the mystery of His will… that in the dispensation of the fullness of the times, He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth – in Him.”  The words “gather together” literally means, “to head up.”  The words “in one” are supplied.  Christ has received “all authority… in heaven and on earth” (Matthew 28:18), and “in Him” is redemption.

4.  The mystery concerns the inclusion of the Gentiles.  Ephesians 3:3-6: “How that by revelation He made known to me the mystery… that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ through the Gospel.”

It is true that there were hints (Genesis 12:3; Isaiah 2:2; 62:1-2).  However, this was not clearly understood by either the Jews or the Gentiles.  It took Divine intervention to bring Jew and Gentile together (Acts 10-11).

 5.  The mystery concerns the relationship between Christ and the church.  Ephesians 5:22-32: “Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord.  For the husband is the head of the wife, as also Christ is the head of the church… Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her… ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh.’  This is a great mystery, but a speak concerning Christ and the church.”

Think of these parallels: (a) Both Adam and Jesus had their sides opened to receive their brides (Genesis 2:21-22 cf. John 19:34).  (b) Both received only one bride [Genesis 2 cf. Ephesians 4:4 (one body) cf. Ephesians 1:22-23 (the body is the church)].  (c) There is closeness (Genesis 2:23-24 cf. Ephesians 5:30-32).  (d) There is to be fidelity (Hebrews 13:4 cf. 2 Corinthians 11:2; James 4:4).  (e) The wife is to be submissive (Ephesians 5:22-23).  (f) The husband is to love his wife (Ephesians 5:25).  Christ “loved the church and gave Himself for her.”

The mystery has been revealed.  It is according to God “will,” “purpose,” “eternal purpose” (Ephesians 1:9; 1:11; 3:11).  It has always been God’s plan, and now His plan is revealed.

 

Posted in Chruch, Plan of salvation, Word Study | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Fish and Spontaneous Generation

Posted on June 4, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

A land-owner digs a pond on his land.  He does not stock the pond with fish.  Yet, somehow, fish appear.  Is this spontaneous generation?

The answer is no.  Fish eggs are carried on the bodies of aquatic birds and other animals that move between bodies of water.  Yahoo Answers says, “Think about the feathers on a duck (or any of dozens of different species of aquatic birds like geese, osprey, kingfishers, herons, loons, etc.).  These birds spend most of their days swimming and diving in the murky shallows of lakes and ponds filled with fish eggs and frog eggs.  Their feathers will be laced with eggs.  If these birds then fly off and later take a dip in your pond (birds do like to preen themselves in clean water… which is why we build bird baths), you now have a pond seeded with frog or fish eggs.  It can take a couple of years of many birds doing this before the fish take hold.  But if there is enough food from the algae in the water, the fish with start to thrive.”  If the new water-hole were indoors, covered, or in some way kept completely separated from animal life, fish would not appear.

Here is a point to ponder – think of God’s amazing creation.  He created things in such a way that new bodies of water could soon be naturally stocked with fish and frogs.  “O LORD, our Lord, How excellent is Your name in all the earth!” (Psalm 8:1, 9).  “It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, but the glory of kings to search out a matter” (Proverbs 25:2).  The more we study His creation, the more in awe we should be.  “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows His handiwork” (Psalm 19:1).

Posted in Apologetics, Evidence, life, science | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Questions About Creation

Posted on June 2, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

“In six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them” (Exodus 20:11).

“Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them make and female,’ and said ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh’?” (Matthew 19:4-5).

“Man is not from woman, but woman from man.  Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man” (1 Corinthians 11:8-9). 

“Adam was formed first, then Eve.  And Adam was not deceived, but the woman deceived fell into transgression” (1 Timothy 2:13-14).

“Through one man sin entered the world” (Romans 5:12).

The book of Genesis is foundational to understanding the rest of the Bible.  Henry Morris remarked, “If the Bible were somehow expurgated of the book of Genesis… the rest of the Bible would be incomprehensible.  It would be like a building without a ground floor, or a bridge with no support” (The Genesis Record, p. 17).  He lists 77 important Biblical words which first appear in Genesis (ibid, p. 687).  Genesis tells us of the origin of man, woman, and the home (Genesis 1 2). Genesis tells us about sin and how God views sin (Genesis 3, 6).  It tells us of God’s preserving a seedline through Abram in order to bless humanity (Genesis 12:1-3).

There are common questions which are asked about the Genesis account of creation.  This writing will  provide concise answers to some of these common questions.

1.  Is Genesis Myth?

All of the New Testament writers quote or reference the book of Genesis.  There are 200 specific references to Genesis in the New Testament (for the list, see – creationstudies.org).  Half of the 200 references are from Genesis 1-11, and 63 are from Genesis 1-3.  All of the New Testament writers make reference to Genesis. All of the New Testament books contain allusions to Genesis except the books of Philemon, 2 John, and 3 John.  Only 7 of the 50 chapters of Genesis are not quoted in the New Testament (20, 24, 34, 36, 40, 43, 44).  There are 14 references to the flood in the New Testament (stats from Dave Miller, Fundamentals II Class Notes, Brown Trail School of Preaching).  Not one New Testament writer presents characters or events in Genesis as myths.

The Bible presents the people as historical characters.  Abel is presented as being as historically real as Zachariah (Matthew 23:35).  Noah and Job are presented as being as historically real as Daniel (Ezekiel 14:14, 20).  Never are the characters of Genesis depicted as myths by Biblical writers.

Certain teachings are based upon Genesis.  Jesus’ teaching about marriage is grounded in creation (Matthew 19:4-6).  Paul’s teaching about women’s roles is grounded in creation (1 Corinthians 11:8-9; 1 Timothy 2:13-14).  Israel’s work week was based on creation (Exodus 20:9-11).  There is no hint that these were taken as myths or fables.

2.  Is there a gap between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2?

Some have theorized that the heavens and the earth were created in Genesis 1:1, but that it became “without form and void” in Genesis 1:2.  Moreover, it is theorized that between these verses there lived plants, animals, and even a pre-Adamic race of men.  However, God destroyed all life and started over in Genesis 1:2.  This theory is popular with some because, it allows for an old earth.

Some common arguments to support this view are: (a) It is argued that the term “was” could be rendered “became.”  (b) It is argued that Adam and Eve were told to “replenish” the earth (Genesis 1:28 KJV).  (c) God did not create the earth in “vain” (Isaiah 45:18).  This is the same original word translated “without form.”  (d) A distinction between “created” (bara) and “made” (asah) is made.

Let us briefly answer these arguments.  (a) Should “was” be rendered “became”?  Henry Morris has written, “The verb is the regular Hebrew verb of being (hayetha), not the word normally used to denote a change of state (haphak).  Although hayetha can also, if the context warrants, be used to introduce a change of state, it simply means “was” in 98% of its occurrences” (The Genesis Record, p. 49).  Harold Stiger has commented, “When the verb ‘to be’ (hayah) is to be constructed as ‘became,’ the addition of the prepositional lamedh is required with the following word to provide this meaning, and this preposition is absent here” (Bert Thompson and Gary Workman, p. 6).  John Whitcomb remarked, “If it had to be translated ‘became,’ then we would have to say that Adam and Eve ‘became’ naked (Genesis 2:25)…” (The Early Earth, p. 146).  (b) What about the word “replenish”?  Henry Morris has written, “This does not suggest the idea of refilling… The Hebrew word is male, and means simply ‘fill’… of the more than three hundred times it is used, it is translated (in the KJV) by ‘replenish’ only seven times; and even these could have been rendered ‘fill'” (The Genesis Record, p. 76).  The NKJV, NASB, and ESV render it ‘fill.’  The New Brown-Drivers-Briggs-Gegenius Lexicon renders it “fill.”  Wayne Jackson commented, “The word, ‘replenish,’ at the time the King James Version was translated simply meant ‘fill'” (Notes From the Margin of My Bible, Vol. 1, p. 3).   (c) What about Isaiah 45:18?  “The immediate context… has to do with Israel and God’s promises to His people.  Isaiah reminds his listeners that just as God had a purpose in creating the Earth, so He had a purpose for Israel.  …God created the earth ‘to be inhabited'” (Bert Thompson, Popular Compromises of Creation – The Gap Theory).  Wayne Jackson commented, “The earth was not created to remain empty; rather it was designed to be inhabited” (God’s Prophet of Doom and Deliverance; Isaiah, p. 91).

What about Genesis 1:2?  John Whitcomb wrote, “It was simply empty of living things and without the features it later possessed, such as oceans, continents, hills and valleys – features that would be essential for man’s well-being” (Bert Thompson, Popular Compromises of Creation – The Gap Theory).

The words “without form” and “void” do not mean destruction.  A concordance will demonstrate this point. Furthermore, John Whitcomb has written, “To be sure the only passages besides Genesis 1:2 where tohu and bohu appear together – Isaiah 34:11 and Jeremiah 4:23 – are placed in context which emphasize divine judgment.  But even here the basic meaning of empty or uninhabited fits well” (The Early Earth, p. 148).  (d) What about “created” (bara) and “made” (asah)?  It is argued that God in Genesis 1:1 “created” (bara) the heavens and the earth.  However, the six days refers to what he “made” (asah) (Genesis 1:31).  The first word it is claimed refers to original creation, and the second to a remaking.  However, such distinction is not there.  The words are used interchangeably (Genesis 1:26 cf. 1:27).

The Biblical writers do not speak of a pre-Adamic human race.  Adam is called “the first man” (1 Corinthians 15:45).  Sin is said to have entered the world through Adam (Romans 5:12-ff).

3.  Are the days of creation long periods of time?

This theory is popular with many.  It allows for an old earth.

There are problems with this view.  (a) A “day” is defined in context as “an evening and a morning” (Genesis 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31).  (b) If a “day” refers to a long period of time, then what is an “evening” and a “morning”?  (c) If a “day” refers to a long period of time, then what are “seasons” and “years” (Genesis 1:14)?  (d) Bert Thompson has written, “Whenever the Hebrew word ‘yom’ (day – B.H.) is preceded by a numeral, it always carries the meaning of a 24-hour day” (Difficult Texts From Genesis, p. 8).  The record speaks of “the first day,” “the second day,” etc.  (e) Henry Morris has written, “When the words ‘days’ appears in the plural (Hebrew – yamin) as it does over 700 times in the Old Testament, it always refers to literal day” (Bert Thompson and Gary Workman, Difficult Texts From Genesis, p. 8).  Exodus 20:11 reads, “in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them.”  (f) “The  Hebrew phrase translated ‘evening and morning’ is used over 100 times in the Old Testament with the word ‘yom’.  Each time it refers to a literal 24-hour day” (ibid, pp. 8-9).  (g) If God had intended to covey a literal day, wouldn’t He had used the language He did?  (h) Jesus asked, “Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female'” (Matthew 19:4).  Does this sound like one can fit billions of years between day one and day six?  (i) Paul wrote, “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made… so that they are without excuse” (Romans 1:20).  Does this sound like man arrived billions of years after the creation of the world?

4.  Could there be gaps in genealogy after creation?

It is thought by some that billions of years can be fit into gaps in genealogy.  This allows them to believe in an old earth.

It is true that some of the genealogy lists do contain gaps.  For example: Ezra 7:3 lists Azariah as the son of Meraioth.  However, there are six descendants between them (1 Chronicles 6:7-9).  Also: Matthew 1:8 lists Uzziah as the son of Joram.  However, he was not the immediate son (2 Chronicles 21:1 cf. 22:1 cf. 22:11; 24:1 cf. 24:27 cf. 26:1).  The later record is often abbreviated.  Matthew groups his list of names into three sections of fourteen generations (Matthew 1:17).  The ESV Study Bible commented, “Perhaps for ease of memorization, or perhaps for literary or symbolic symmetry, Matthew structures the genealogy to count 14 generations from each major section.”

However, this argument is weak.  (a) The reason that we know of such gaps is because the Bible fills in details in other lists.  This does not suggest billions of years of history unlisted anywhere in the Bible.  (b) There is a great difference between gaps in names listed and gaps in chronology.  For example: The Bible lists 10 generations from Adam to Noah and 1056 years (Genesis 5).  Even if there were 50 generations there remains 1056 years of chronology.  (c) Can you fit billions of years into 13 generations?  Let me explain – How many years are there between us and Jesus?  A bit over 2,000 years.  How much time between Jesus and Abraham?  About 2,000 years.  The billions of years need to be fit into the time between Abraham and Adam.  How many generations existed according to the Bible between these two men?  The answer is twenty (Genesis 5 and Genesis 11).  Enoch is confirmed to be the seventh from Adam (Jude 14 cf. Genesis 5).  This leaves 13 generations in which to find these great gaps in genealogy into which one can insert billions of years.  However, remember that there is a huge difference between gaps in genealogy and gaps in chronology!  Chronologically there are 2,008 years between Adam and Abraham (this is based on Noah being 502 when Shem was born, and Terah being 130 when Abraham was born).

5.  How was there light on day one (Genesis 1:3), yet the sun, moon and stars were not created until day four (Genesis 1:14-18)?

Some have suggested that the sun, moon and stars were created on day one, but were not visible upon earth until day four, due to the shroud of thick vapor.  However, the words, “Let there be…” are the same words that appear throughout this chapter (1:3; 1:6; 1:14).  This sound like creation.

Bert Thompson and Gary Workman have written, “On the first day God said, ‘Let there be light’ (Hebrew or) whereas on the fourth day God said, ‘Let there be lights (ma-or, light-bearers).  Therefore, God’s first recorded statement created independent light without a light-bearer.  And since God instructed the light-darkness cycle on that day, we must conclude that the light came from a fixed direction and that the earth rotated on its axis.  In eternity there will again be light without the sun  – Revelation 21:23″ (Difficult Texts From Genesis, p. 14).

There are other examples of light without the light bearing of the sun and moon. God provided a “pillar of fire” by night for the children of Israel (Exodus 13:21-22; 14:24; Numbers 14:14; Nehemiah 9:12). One day the saints will live in a city illuminated by God and the lamb, but it will not have a sun or moon.

6.  What is the firmament (Genesis 1:6-8; 1:17)?

The original word (raqia) refers to an “expanse” or “something stretched, spread or beaten out” (Difficult Texts From Genesis, p. 15).  The ESV reads, “an expanse.” The firmament refers to the atmosphere (Genesis 1:6-8).  The firmament refers to outer space (Genesis 1:14-17).  God “stretches out the heavens like a curtain” (Isaiah 40:22).

7.  Why are there two different creation accounts (Genesis 1:1-2:4 and Genesis 2:4b – 2:25)?

There is a different emphasis the first present creation in a straight forward chronological order.  The second puts man’s role in the created order, man’s warning from God, and the creation of the first family unit as the focus.  Billy Bland has written, “One brother likened it to a ‘instant replay, isolated camera,’ where the cameraman allows the viewer to go back and see an event in greater detail” (The Memphis School of Preaching Lectureship, The Book of Genesis, p. 79.  Bland is quoting Bob Winton’s outlined Commentary on Genesis).

The book of Genesis is divided into nine sections: (1) The generations of the heavens and earth (Genesis 1:1-2:4).  (2) The generations of Adam (Genesis 2:4b-5:1).  (3) The generations of Noah (Genesis 5:1b-6:9).  (4) The generations of the sons of Noah (Genesis 6:9-10:1).  (5) The generations of Shem (Genesis 10:1b-11:10).  (6) The generations of Terah (Genesis 11:10b-11:27).  (7) The generations of Isaac (Genesis 11:27b-25:19).  (8) The generations of Jacob (Genesis 25:19b-37:2).  (9) The generations of the sons of Jacob (Genesis 37:2b-50:26).  The focus in each section is different.

8.  Isn’t there too much activity in Genesis 2:18-25 for a 24-hour day?

Eric Lyons has answered this point in an Apologetics Press article entitled, “Too Much Activity on Day Six?”  In this article he makes the following points: (a) Adam did not have to search for all of the creatures.  God brought them to him (Genesis 2:19).  (b) Adam did not name all of the animals on earth.  He named all cattle, birds of the air, and beasts of the field (Genesis 2:20).  Excluded are sea creatures, and creeping things.  (c) It is possible that the animals brought to him and name by him were limited to the animals which resided in Eden.  God was trying to send a message to Adam. There was no helper comparable to him to be found. He was unique, and he needed a mate. (d) It does not say that he named every species of animals that now exists (for example today there are hundreds of different varieties of dogs, cats, cattle, etc.), or might have then existed.  Likely, he was giving names to “kinds”.

Posted in Apologetics, Evidence, Stats | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Marrying “Only in the Lord”

Posted on May 31, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

These words are found in 1 Corinthians 7:39. In that passage; we are told:  (a) that a widow may marry again;  (b) that she may marry “whom she wishes”;  (c) But, if she marries, she should marry “only in the Lord.”

Now, I have heard brethren try to explain this passage in different ways. (a) Some have suggested that what is being taught in the restrictive phrase, “only in the Lord,” is that the widow must make sure that she is marrying consistent with God’s will – i.e. not violating passages such as Matthew 19:9, 1 Corinthians 7:11a, etc. (b) Others have repunctuated the sentence structure, putting the phrase with verse 40; Thus, making the words “only in the Lord” mean in essence – “As a Christian (only in the Lord) however, I believe (after my judgment) that she will have a happier existence if she remains unmarried (if she so abide) … due to the present distresses faced by the early church at this time” (cf. v. 26-27). But, (c) the most common explanation is that this passage teaches that a widow may, indeed, marry. However, if she does, she must marry a Christian.

Now, with all of those explanations it is easy to get confused; However, if we could soberly consider an Old Testament passage, and compare it to 1 Corinthians 7:39, I believe that the actual meaning will be clear. Consider Numbers 36:5-6.

Watch the parallel:

  1.   Numbers 36:5-6                daughters of Zelophehad                                                                 1 Corinthians 7:39                      widow
  2.  let them marry                                                                                                                              she is at liberty to be married
  3. to whom they think best                                                                                                                 to whom she wishes
  4. they may marry only within the family of the their father’s tribe                                     only in the Lord.

Watch the following facts: (1) The language of Numbers 36:6 and 1 Corinthians 7:39 are very similar in wording; (2) The restive clause of the Numbers 36:6 passage clearly concerns instruction as to whom one should marry. Doesn’t it make sense then, that must be what 1 Corinthians  7:39 is referring to as well?

The wording “In the Lord” may be used in different ways Biblically. However, it seems clear to me that 1 Corinthians 7:39 does teach that a Christian widow woman should marry an eligible Christian man, if she is going to marry.

Posted in Dating, Marriage, Phrase Study, Textual study | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments

Marry A Strong Christian

Posted on May 29, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

I firmly believe that who one marries is one of the most important decisions one will ever spiritually make, it may determine where you spend eternity.  Marry someone who will help you to heaven.  Do not marry anyone who would hinder you from making it to heaven.  It may determine where your children, and even grandchildren will spend eternity. Marry someone who will help them to heaven.  Do not marry anyone who would hinder them from making it to heaven.

1.  Old Testament

Israel was warned against entering into religiously mixed – marriages (Exodus 34:11-16; Dueteronomy 7:1-4).  They were told – “You shall not give your daughter to their son, nor make their daughter for your son.  For they will turn your sons away from following me, to serve other gods” (Deuteronomy 7:4).  They did not listen (cf. Judge 3:5-6).  “King Solomon loved many foreign women. . .  his wives turned his heart after other gods and his heart was not loyal to the Lord his God, as was the heart of his father David” (1 Kings 11:1-4).  “Ahab . . . sold himself to do wickedness in the sight of the Lord, because Jezebel his wife stirred him up“ (1 Kings 21:25).  “Ahab . . . took as wife Jezebel the daughter of Ethbaal, king of the Sidonians; and he went and served Baal and worshipped him” (1 Kings 16:29-31).

God-fearing parents of old were greatly concerned over whom their children married. Abraham was (Genesis 24:1-4).  Rebekah and Isaac were (Genesis 27:46-28:2; 26:34-35 cf 28:8-9).  Manoah and his wife were (Judges 14:2-3).

2. New Testament

Paul, if he married, would select a Christian for a wife.  He wrote, “Do we have no right to take along a believing wife, as do also the other apostles, the brothers of the Lord and Cephas?” (1 Corinthians 9:5).

It is true that one reads about Christians who were married to non-Christians (1 Corinthians 7:12-16; 1 Peter 3:1-6).  However, this does not mean that such was being encouraged. Johnny Ramsey commented on 1 Corinthians 7:12-16 “Marriages between Christians and unbelievers, a situation which arose, not from Christians marrying unbelievers, but from conversion of one out of an unbelieving (or pagan) couple” (Bruce Curd, Marry Only In The Lord, p.125).  This may be correct, never does one read about a Christian marrying or contemplating marrying and unbeliever.

3. Statistics

(a) “Divorce occurs three times as often in mixed marriages as in marriages between members of the same religious convictions” (Curd, p. 1).

(b)“Of every 100 Christians marrying, out of the church, it is estimated that 20 convert their companions, 24 live a divided life, and 56 quit the church” (ibid, p.103).

(c) A congregation in Oklahoma studied the lives of 143 of their young people.  79 of them married outside the church, of this number 57 left the church, only 22 were still faithful, just 14 had converted their mates (ibid, p.214).

4. Danger to Self

“Olivia Langdon was a believer who married Mark Twain, an unbeliever. She thought that her sweet spirit and devout faith would soon win her husband. During the first few months of their marriage they had thanks before each meal and read a chapter in the Bible every day. Such was soon stopped as Twain complained about the formality of it. They ceased going to worship . . .  Olivia gave up some of her religious conviction, having her faith in the providence and promises of God shaken through her husband’s philosophy. When she came to face the dark valley of the shadow of death, and knowing that her life was short Twain said to her ‘Livey, if it comforts you to lean on the Christian faith do so.’ She answered, ‘I can’t . . . I haven’t any’” (Warren, Your Marriage Can Be Great, p. 268).

Hugo McCord remarked “A wise Christian will offer a ring to no unconverted girl no matter how promising the union appears and an informed Christian girl will resolve to accept the ring of no unconverted man regardless of what he promises. If one cannot convert a person in the days of courtship, he deludes himself that it will be possible later.  If reforming of any kind is needed, religious or otherwise, experience has shown it had better be done before marriage” (Curd, p.105).

5. Danger to Children

Likely, children will come. Do you want a non-Christian teaching them and influencing them? What if you died young? Would you be comfortable with the non-Christian providing their religious training?

6. Illustration

“Imagine that a young man living in Atlanta is going to fly to Los Angeles. At the airport he meets an attractive young lady, and he gets into a conversation with her. He asks her where she going and she replies ‘to Chicago.’ ‘Well,’ he says, ‘that’s marvelous, I’m going to Los Angeles – let’s travel together so we can enjoy each other’s company!’ . . . They cannot travel together in opposite directions. What no intelligent man or woman would do in travel, many attempt to do in marriage.” (Curd, p. 28).

7. What if I am married to a non-Christian?

Do not compromise. Be faithful in attendance and in principles. Make it your practice to regularly read the Bible and pray. Never forsake the assembling of the saints to attend a denomination. If you are not serious about things, why should your spouse ever be? Live the Christian life and try to win them over by your conduct (1 Peter 3:1-6). It is important that you do not provide a reason for your spouse not to respect and take seriously Christianity.

Posted in Dating, Marriage, Stats | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Spontaneous Generation

Posted on May 27, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

At one point in the not too distant past, many intellectuals believed in a doctrine called “spontaneous generation” or “A-biogenesis.” That is, it was thought that life could spontaneously arise from non-living or inanimate matter. Prominent men believed this: Men such as William Harvey (English Physician), Francis Bacon (English Philosopher), Rene Descartes (French Mathematician/Philosopher), and Aristotle (Greek Philosopher/Educator/Scientist).

In the book, The History of Evolutionary Thought by Bert Thompson, this is told, “Jon Baptista van Helmont (1577-1644 A.D.) an outstanding Belgium scientist, physician and chemist brought forth experimental evidence to support his view that mice could develop from wheat kernels. He performed an experiment in which he wrapped some wheat kernels and cheese tidbits in a sweat-soaked shirt and stuffed the whole mass into an open container. He left the container, and when he examined it some 20 days later, he noted that due to some mysterious influence of human sweat, the kernels had ‘spontaneously generated’ into baby mice!” (Bert Thompson, The History of Evolutionary Thought, p. 95)

Let’s move now to some efforts against this ignorance. Louis Pasteur (1822-1895) was born in Dole, Jura, France on December 27, 1822. In 1854, Pasteur was appointed professor and Dean of Science at the University of Lille. He is sometimes called the “Father of bacteriology.” The word “pasteurize” comes down to us from his name and refers to the process of heating milk to kill off harmful microorganisms. But, let us begin in the 1850’s. The wine industry in France was troubled financially due to souring wine.  They thought “spontaneous generation” was to blame. Pasteur determined that these organisms had not “spontaneously generated” but were present in the air, and that as these organisms come in contact with the wine, souring occurred … He then showed how by heating the wine the organisms could be killed. Bert Thompson records Pasteur’s words, “Never will the doctrine of spontaneous generation recover from the mortal blow struck by this simple experiment … can matter organize itself? In other words, are there beings that can come into the world without parents, without ancestors? … No, today there is no circumstance known under which one could affirm that microscopial beings have come into the world without germs, without parents resembling them.” (ibid, p. 98)

Another, an Italian physician by the name of Francesco Redi also did experimentation in this area in the year 1668. He took three jars and placed in them meat and fish. One jar he left open. One jar he covered with a mesh net. The third jar he sealed airtight. Only in the open jar (where female flies could land to deposit her eggs on the meat and fish did maggot develop. Maggots did not “spontaneously generate.” In the book, A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom, Andrew White wrote, “by researches which could not be gainsaid, he showed that every one of these animals come from an egg …” (Andrew D. White,  A History Of The Warfare Of Science With Theology In Christendom, p. 42)

Two other men also contributed in understanding. John Needham (1713-1781) put some gravy in a corked sealed vessel. He left it for a period of time and returned, finding microorganisms. He concluded “spontaneous generation.” An Italian, Lazzaro Spallanzani (1729-1799) did the same experiment. He, however, boiled the contents for a long period, and sealed the vessel airtight. The results: no microorganism contamination.

Yes, people really did believe in such, and some do today. No one has ever demonstrated “spontaneous generation.” But, you see if one does not want to believe in God, one needs explain life in some way.

Conclusion

Folks, something does not come from nothing. Life does not come from non-life. Never is such seen today. “Spontaneous generation” has never been demonstrated, in fact the evidence speaks powerfully against it. Those who claim that life naturally can so arise from non-living matter should be put to the test, and pressed to prove it (1 Thessalonians. 5:21), or at least made to acknowledge that such a theory is beyond science. Dr. Paul Weisz, in his book, Elements of Biology, has well said, “All science begins with observation … something that cannot be observed cannot be investigated by science.”(Wayne Jackson and Bert Thompson, A Study Course In Christian Evidence, p. 50). Dr. F. J. Ayala said, “A hypothesis is … scientific only if it can be tested by experience … a hypothesis or theory which cannot be … does not belong to the realm of science” (ibid).

God says that things reproduce after their kind (Genesis 1). We know that this occurs.

Posted in Apologetics, Evidence, life, science | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

“When… Without Strength”

Posted on May 22, 2014 by Bryan Hodge

In Romans 4:12, 16-17a, we are told that we need to have the faith of Abraham.  Without such faith is impossible to please Him (Hebrews 11:6).

Paul, then provides an illustration of Abraham’s faith (Romans 4:17-22).  When Abraham’s having a child through Sarah, by strictly natural means was impossible (Genesis 17:17; 18:11) – when Sarah was barren, dead in the womb (Romans 4:19), ceased after the manner of women (Genesis 18:11) – he (after the initial shock) trusted God in this matter.  Moreover, ultimately he gave God the glory (For he knew that such was not possible without God).  M.C. Moser  remarked, “It is easy to miss the chief points in Abraham’s faith. His faith was the result of two factors, namely Abraham`s deep awareness of his and Sarah`s physical impotence, and the power of God to fulfill His promise to give them a son… If they had been blessed with normal bodies, having a son would have required neither divine intervention, nor such faith as Abraham had” ( The Gist Of Romans, p. 36).

Question: Since this child (Isaac) came miraculously as a gift, by the grace of God, does this mean that there was no human activity necessary to secure this promise?  No, it does not.  There is no evidence that Isaac was conceived without Abraham’s “knowing” his wife.  To the contrary, this child was of Abraham (Genesis 12:7; 15:3-4; 26:1-4; Romans 4:18; cf. Hebrews 11:12).  This was not a “virgin birth.”

What’s the point?  I believe that Paul wanted them (the saints to whom he wrote), and us to appreciate the fact that, though there may be human conditions to be met, the basis of salvation  – is like that of Abraham and Sarah’s having a child in old age – both rest as a possibility in God, not man.  Man is as much without strength to save himself without God’s help, as Abraham and Sarah were to bring forth a child!  K.C. Moser has written, “Now, note the sinner.  He too is ‘dead.’ But in sin.  He is as helpless and hopeless as Abraham was…This both happened and was written ‘for our sake'” ( The Gist Of Romans, pp.38-39).

Now turn to Romans 5:6.  We were without strength (helpless – NASB).  I believe this connects back with Romans 4:18-20.  but in due time (Galatians 4:4; Ephesians 1:10; cf. Romans 5:6) – Christ died for us!

Human conditions?  Certainly, there are human conditions for salvation.  However, such is not even under consideration here.  Instead, the point is to show us that without God’s intervention, our salvation would have been just as impossible as Abraham and Sarah having a child in the state in which they are described.

Posted in God's Providence, Plan of salvation, Textual study, Type/Antitype | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment