IS INERRANCY ENOUGH?

(A defense of the KJV)

Pastor F. William Darrow

Notes From The Adult Classes 2006 Evening Vacation Bible School

 

After serving some 42 years as a pastor I have learned that things are constantly changing in the realm of the church. Trends and fads, yes, even in churches, come and go. Some are good some are bad. Change is a way of life but not always good. Allow me to give you an example.

I have attended many ordination councils over the years. Even in those, the evidence of trends and issues become prevalent. Areas that were questioned heavily 25 years ago do not even draw a question today. I remember years ago that a candidate would be grilled heavily over "verbal plenary inspiration". The candidate had to know and be able to explain that "inspiration" is God breathing into man the very words He wanted him to write. "Verbal" meaning that the Holy Spirit guided the writers of the Bible in the very words that they used. "Plenary" means fully or completely as to the fact that every word was inspired by God from beginning to end.

I am not sure when it started, but it seems to me that in the late sixties or seventies a new word, or at least a more frequently used word, came on the scene. That word is "inerrancy". In many doctrinal statements of more recent days the word "inerrancy" appears but not the phrase "verbal plenary inspiration". I began to question in my mind why the term "inerrancy" had replaced "verbal plenary inspiration" even though it is a fine word but it does not say enough. Since new versions of the Bible keep coming on the scene and some have become preferred over the old, tried and proven KJV, I have sought to read for answers. It has been a learning experience. One of which has helped me to understand why the term "verbal plenary inspiration" is no longer being used.

I also was at a conference where a speaker made the statement, as he held up his Bible, "inerrancy, no, infallibility yes". He did not believe that the present Bibles we have are inerrant, just infallible. What he meant by that is since we do not have the original manuscripts, which are inerrant, our translations are not inerrant but we have enough evidence from different old texts so at least we can say they are infallible, or trustworthy. I do not agree with this at all.

There are three basic techniques in Bible translation work. Quoting the National Religious Broadcasters, January 1996 issue, an article by Harry Conay: "With regard to popular Bible translation, we frequently use terms like formal equivalency (‘this is how we write what they wrote), dynamic equivalency (‘this is how we would say what they meant’), and paraphrasing (‘this is how I think their intent can be more clearly stated’). (Printed in the Foundation magazine, January-February 1996 issue).

The three techniques are:

1. Formal Equivalency

2. Dynamic Equivalency

3. Paraphrasing

Let me start from the bottom up. Paraphrasing is simply taking what the text says and rewriting it to what you think it says.

The big problem with paraphrasing is that it simply becomes the opinion of the translator as to what a passage means. Once you enter this area of practice it is no longer the Words of God but some individual’s opinion of what it says. A paraphrase is not a Bible translation but a commentary. A paraphrase should not be called a translation or even the Bible.

Myron Houghton, a professor at Faith Baptist Bible College, Ankeny, IA, made an explanation that helps understand the difference between a paraphrase and literal translations.

"A literal translation is based upon the idea that the purpose of a translation is to let the reader know what the Bible says rather than what the Bible means. Yet many modern readers use meaning-for-meaning versions and paraphrases because they think the meaning of the Bible has been made clear. In reality, it is the meaning of the translators that has been made clear." (Faith Pulpit July/August by Myron J. Houghton)

Dynamic Equivalency is not following a word-for-word translation but changing, adding, or subtracting from the original to make it flow as the translator sees fit. It is a step up from paraphrasing. Dr. D.A.Waite defines it in his book on Defending the King James Version page 89, as " 'Dynamic' implies 'change' or 'movement.' These versions take a sort of idiomatic rendering from Hebrew or Greek into English. It is idiomatic in the sense that they didn't take a word-for-word method (even when it made good sense), trying to make the words in the Hebrew or Greek equal to the words in the English. Instead they added to what was there, changed what was there and/or subtracted from what was there." Robert J. Barnet in his book The Word of God on Trial, page 24, uses another name for it; calling it "concept inspiration". He said, "The author of a paraphrase is not trying to communicate word-level truth. He is giving us his own interpretation of what he thinks the Bible means. He is giving us concept-level communication." Dr. D.A.Waite has a study available of examples where the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION uses this method some 4,000 times, the NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION 6,653 times and the NEW KING JAMES VERSION over 2,000 times. (Page 105, Defending The King James Version).

The AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION of 1901 followed strict formal equivalency. However our issue with the 1901 ASV has to do with the text from which it was translated. The NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION translators followed dynamic equivalency so were much more loose in their translating. They utilized dynamic equivalency to the degree that their work is almost a running paraphrase and not a translation. Dynamic Equivalency, therefore, allows for a great deal of subjectivity on the part of the translators to interpret the biblical text. (Touch Not the Unclean Thing by David Sorenson – page 239)

The third method is Formal Equivalency, or sometimes called, Verbal Equivalency. This method of translation takes the Greek and Hebrew words and renders them as closely as possible into English. This is the method used by the King James translators and is certainly a superior method.

"In favor of using modern English, it should be noted that the Bible was written in the language of the day. The New Testament, for example, was written in koine, or common Greek. And we do not normally use thee, thou, and ye in our speech today. On the other hand, thee and thou distinguished you in the singular from ye which is you in the plural. Sometimes the correct interpretation of a passage is helped by knowing the difference between the plural or singular use of you." (Faith Pulpit – July/August 2006 by Myron J. Houghton)

The King James Bible is the only English translation today that follows this strict accurate literalness.

It should be understood that in any translation, there has to be some diversion from the literal to make the sentences flow.

"It is understood that all translating from one language to another is a mixture of literal rendering as well as allowance for cultural idioms and forms of syntax." (Touch Not the Unclean Thing by David Sorenson – page 121)

"Of course, no English translation can always adhere to this pattern and achieve understandable sentences. Sometimes words must be added to make a sentence clear in English. Nevertheless, a literal translation would identify those added words, usually by placing them in italics." (Faith Pulpit July/August 2006 by Myron J. Houghton)

However, one still must push for literalicy.

Perhaps here is the place to mention where Dynamic Equivalency came from. Eugene Nida has been associated with the American Bible Society and the United Bible Society since 1946. He was instrumental in the development of the first edition of the United Bible Society Greek Test. He was the Translation Research Coordinator of the United Bible Society from 1970 to 1980. It was Eugene Nida who widely popularized the notion of Dynamic Equivalency. Following are listed his views on religion and communication:

1. God’s revelation involved limitations.

2. Biblical revelation is not absolute and all divine revelation is essentially incarnational.

3. Even if a truth is given only in words, it has no real validity until it has been translated into life.

4. The words are in a sense nothing in and of themselves.

5. The word is void unless related to experience.

These quotations reflect a direct repudiation of the doctrine of verbal, plenary inspiration of the Scriptures. (Touch Not the Unclean Thing by David Sorenson – page 121)

Dr. D.A.Waite in his book, Defending The King James Version, page 98 says "If you take a DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCY approach to translation as a technique instead of verbal equivalency or formal equivalency--that is, the forms and the words being rendered from Hebrew or Greek into English as closely as possible--if you take the position that it really doesn't matter what the words are, what difference does it make which text you use? What difference does the Greek or Hebrew text make? You can change it any time you wish."

I refer again to the article in the National Religious Broadcasters by Harry Conay, printed in the Foundation magazine, "The more one descends on this scale from literalism to paraphrase, the more editorial interpretation takes place--and with it greater potential for human bias and error. It has been common practice for translators and editors to stress their truthfulness to the original language based on a study of extant manuscripts; few have had the hubris to inform readers they have deliberately altered, added to, and otherwise improved God's Word, until now." This is the evaluation of a man who at one time championed DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCY but now gives a clear warning concerning where it leads.

David Cloud in his book Myths About Modern Bible Versions indicates that there are six different names used for dynamic equivalency and we list them here.

1. THOUGHT OR IDEA TRANSLATIONS

This is the attempt to convey the general thoughts of the original text not the literal words spoken by God.

2. PARAPHRASING

The general thoughts of the Bible are to be rephrased in modern colloquial language. There is no significant difference between dynamic equivalency and paraphrasing.

3. IMPACT TRANSLATION

Dynamic equivalency attempts to understand exactly HOW THE ORIGINAL HEARERS of scripture were impressed and then create the same impression in modern hearers. An example of this is to translate certain statements as swear words when there are actually no swear words in the Bible.

4. IDIOMATIC TRANSLATION

This is an attempt to use the culture idioms of the language of the modern people instead of the culture to whom it was originally written.

5. FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENCY TRANSLATIONS

This is an idea-by-idea translating; arranging the Bible text in ways understandable to today’s readers of English. The order of the words and style are determined by today’s English usage by the literal Hebrew or Greek.

6. COMMON LANGUAGE TRANSLATION

This is an attempt by the translators to put the Bible into the range of the receptor language that is common both to the educated and to the uneducated. In some cases they tried to bring the translation down to a fourth-grade level. This is a drastic departure from the original text.

David Cloud also summarized the principles of dynamic equivalency into three principles.

1. It aims to translate thoughts rather than words.

2. It aims to use simple language and style.

3. It aims to make the Bible entirely understandable to non-Christians.

He then lists three reasons why this is dangerous.

1. GOD’S WORD IS NOT TO BE CHANGED BY ANYONE.

Revelation 22:18-19 "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."

Proverbs 30:5-6 "Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. 6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar."

Once man changes what God said it is no longer the Words of God. It is worthy to note William Tyndale’s statement:

"I will call God to record against the day we should appear before our Lord Jesus, to give a reckoning of our doings, that I never altered one syllable of God’s Word against my conscience nor would (I so alter it) this day, if all that is in the earth, whether it be pleasure, honor, or riches, might be given me."

2. MEN ARE BORN AGAIN THROUGH INCORRUPTIBLE SEED; AND PARAPHRASES ARE CORRUPT.

1 Peter 1:23 "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever."

It is the pure Word of God by which men experience a supernatural birth.

3. PARAPHRASES PRODUCE CONFUSION IN THE MINDS OF THOSE WHO READ THEM

1 Corinthians 14:33 "For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints."

When someone reads a Common Language version they can become very confused when it does not say the same thing as a literal translation.

David Cloud also points out that dynamic equivalency avoids common ecclesiastical terms. This is the principle which has resulted in Today’s English Version’s obliteration of such "churchy" terms as "justification," "sanctification," "saint," "redemption," "propitiation," "elder," "deacon," and "bishop". Terms such as those have been changed to ones the unsaved can understand, even when this has meant changing or weakening the meaning. Consider some examples of The Contemporary English Version:

Revelation 22:21

KJV: "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all"

CEV: "I pray that the Lord Jesus will be kind to all of you"

Ephesians 2:8

KJV: "For by grace are ye saved through faith".

CEV: "You were saved by faith by in God’s kindness"

Romans 3:24

KJV: "being justified freely"

CEV: "he freely accepts us"

Another point made by David Cloud is that dynamic equivalency adopts the wording of the translation to the culture of the receptor people. Dynamic equivalency translators believe that real communication is broken when the difference between Biblical and modern culture is not considered. Though dynamic equivalency advocates claim to honor the meaning of the Bible text, in practice they do not! In practice they change, twist, and pervert Scripture. A man working in northern India was translating and because the people did not know what a sacrificial lamb was he translated John 1:29 as "Behold the cock of God, which taketh away the sin of the world". These people had sacrificed roosters to their gods in the past. Another example is given where they did not know what snow was. Therefore they translated Isaiah 1:18, "Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as the inside of a coconut". In the United Bible Society’s translation in the Ulithian language of the South Pacific, "dove" was changed to a local bird called a "gigi".

It is not the job of the translators to become the evangelist and preacher in the process of his work as a translator. In any country the answer is to do what historically has always been done. Explanatory notes can be added, dictionaries made, commentaries written and other teaching tools produced. This is far wiser than changing the Word of God.

Let me finish with an illustration that contrasts the New International Version with the King James Bible.

KJV - 1 Corinthians 7:36 "But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry."

NIV – 1 Corinthians 7:36 "If any thinks he is acting improperly toward the virgin he is engaged to, and if she is getting along in years and he feels he ought to marry, he should do as he wants. He is not sinning. They should get married."

Green’s literal translation.

The problem here is that the NIV translators interpreted the word VIRGIN to mean someone to whom a man is engaged. Actually, I believe the term virgin is referring to a man’s virgin daughter. They have taken extreme license to the text in giving it their interpretation. When someone picks up the NIV and reads it he is going to assume he is reading the Word of God, when he is not. He is reading what some translator thought the text meant. That is an example of dynamic equivalency rather than formal equivalency. A translator has the responsibility to give the literal translation and let the readers determine what it means.

My conclusion is that if you use the DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCY method of translation, you can no longer believe in VERBAL PLENARY INSPIRATION. That is why there has been a quiet and subtle dissolving of the term and replacing it with INERRANCY. I believe the Bible is VERBAL PLENARY INSPIRED and that demands a VERBAL EQUIVALENCY translation. Are you using the WORD OF GOD or someone’s opinion of what God said?
 

INFANTICIDE

Pastor F. William Darrow

Notes From The Adult Classes 2006 Evening Vacation Bible School

Much of the material in this paper is taken from Vital Signs by Mark Blocher.

Webster’s definition of "infanticide": "The murder of an infant; one who murders an infant.

I remember when growing up that one day my mother kept a little baby girl through the day and maybe even overnight. Her name was Elaine. Her parents were active members of our little country church. The father also happened to be a brother to my older sister’s husband. I remember my mother saying to my father that something was wrong with little Elaine because her eyes did not seem to be functioning normally. I no longer remember the details of events and can only relate some of the outcome. It was eventually learned that little Elaine was born with a brain tumor. In time, she was taken to Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota where surgery was performed. At this point I cannot recall the success or failure of that surgery. What I do remember is this; she was not totally blind but had very little sight. She was never able to attend school even though she seemed to have a very unusual learning ability. She seemed to understand salvation at an extremely young age and did accept Christ at an early age. She memorized Scripture and would readily quote verses at church. In my memory right now I can hear her quoting Luke 19:10, "For the son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost." She was the most loved person in our church. At a very young age, however, she went home to be with the Lord.

If Elaine had been born in Nazi Germany, she probably would have been euthanized. If she had been born today, though brain surgery is much advanced, the doctors might have suggested that her parents have her euthanized because, in some people’s thinking, she could never have any quality of life. May I just say that Elaine was a happy little girl who enjoyed life and gave joy to those around her.

We live in a day when there is very little regard for human life. Richard Lamm, the former governor of Colorado, said he did not approve of giving intensive medical treatment and therapy to babies who could only roll over after a full year of treatment. He believed that the money budgeted for such children would be better spent on those of higher quality of life. He also suggested that the elderly who are chronically ill and require ongoing, expensive medical care should accept their "duty to die" and get out of the way.

Peter Singer, a bioethicist from Australia, suggests that some newborns be killed at birth because they do not meet his criteria of "personhood".

Francis Crick, the Nobel laureate for his discovery of DNA, suggests that we not declare a newborn a "person" until three days after birth, following a battery of tests. He also wants society to adopt a mandatory death law for people past the age of 80.

James Watson, the man who cracked the genetic code, said, "If a child were not declared alive until three days after birth, then all parents could be allowed the choice…the doctor could allow the child to die if the parent so chose and save a lot of misery and suffering". – Abortion Questions & Answers – Dr. & Mrs. Willke

Some doctors disagree and believe it should be 30 days after birth. The pro-abortionist, Joseph Fletcher, would use the I.Q. measurement and allow those with an I.Q. under 20, perhaps up to 40, to be declared non-human.

Miss Barbara Smoker, President of the National Secular Society and Vice-Chairman of the British Humanist Association, wrote: "The situation of a newborn baby is very different from that of the same baby, even a few weeks later…At birth the baby is only a potential human being and at that point it is surely the humane and sensible thing that the life of any baby with obvious severe defects, whether of body or brain, should be quietly snuffed out by the doctor or midwife. This should not be a decision referred to the family who are too emotionally involved; though in borderline cases the doctor’s knowledge of the family situation would be one of the factors taken into account."

Are there any examples of this? YES!

In 1982, Baby Doe of Bloomington, Indiana, was born with Down’s syndrome. His food pipe and windpipe were connected which could have been corrected with surgery. Because the baby had Down’s syndrome, the parents refused all treatment and the baby died. The Indiana Supreme Court upheld the parent’s decision.

Also in 1982, Baby Jane Doe was born in New York with spina bifida and a potential hydrocephalus. Normally, they would have closed the spinal defect and put a shunt in to prevent hydrocephalus. When the parents learned that the baby might be mentally retarded, they refused surgery. Miraculously, skin grew over the spinal defect, closing it. The parents then agreed to have a shunt put in. While the baby lived, a federal judge ruled that the parents had the right to let the baby die without treatment.

In both of these cases, the parents were granted the right to take the baby’s life by withholding treatment. The babies were refused treatment because of a handicap.

Information taken from Abortion Questions and Answers by Dr. And Mrs. Willke.

Is there such a thing as life so burdensome that death is better? Are some lives "not worthy of being lived"? A growing number of medical professionals question whether they should spend time and money for imperiled newborns. They are uncertain where we should continue to use the technology currently implemented to save newborns when such babies often require a lifetime of special medical care. Can a society with limited health care resources be committed to saving everybody, regardless of the kind of life the child will lead?

Is it reasonable to save a severely handicapped child from death only to give him a life of surgeries, dependence on others, and being tethered to machines? Is it fair to save that life when it places enormous financial and emotional hardships on the family?

Neonatalogists and pediatricians face serious dilemmas. Unlike older patients, who have a medical history and are usually able to communicate for themselves, newborns represent a "clean slate". There is no backdrop to which progress or regress can be compared. The infant cannot tell us where he hurts. Prognosis is difficult since basic motor skills, mental capacity, and so on will not appear for months, if at all. Consequently, caregivers often face the difficulty of determining the long-term outcome of certain treatments. A physician may have no way of knowing whether his, or her, tiny patient will be a miracle survivor or a medical "burden".

A number of studies have been conducted to determine the "quality of life" enjoyed by neonatal survivors. A study conducted at the Milton S. Hershey Medical Center in Pennsylvania researched a group of children born between 1973 and 1976 who had been born with serious impairments. The study followed them until they were forty months old. Thirty-five percent were handicapped, 17 percent severely. The severe handicaps included major visual impairments, hydrocephalus, and spastic quadriplegia, a form of cerebral palsy in which all four limbs are spastic. The study also revealed that those children who had been ventilated at birth (put on a respirator) had a 72 percent handicap rate, whereas those who had not been ventilated had a 19 percent handicap rate.

One might conclude that aggressive medical treatment of handicapped newborns is detrimental. In general, newborns less than 1000 grams(2.204 lbs.) birth weight who survive after aggressive neonatal care do have an increased likelihood of lifelong impairments or handicaps. However, many children survive with few or no impairments – children who would not have lived without aggressive care. What a tragedy if they were euthanized.

Children born at less than 650 grams (1.432 lbs.), generally have a 20 percent survival rate, with a 90 percent change of lifelong disability. That means 90 percent of those families will face continual medical treatment, surgeries, and so on if the child survives. However, there is a 10 percent chance that he will survive with no serious, lifelong disabilities.

Physicians attempt to inform parents of the facts of their baby’s condition and to present whatever relevant medical options are available; yet parents’ beliefs or biases may permit a broader or narrower range of options than are considered "standard medical judgment". The child’s parents may opt to proceed with aggressive care, citing a belief that human life is sacred. Or, where a baby’s medical condition requires no neonatal ICU but a fairly routine surgical procedure, his parents may choose to allow him to die. In both situations, physicians play the role not only of medical technologists, but also of ethicists.

Then there are the decisions made regarding the fate of handicapped babies before they are born. Genetic screening techniques, such as Alpha-Fetoprotein (AFP) or Chorion Villus sampling (CVS) are used to detect congenital defects pre-natally. Therefore, some obstetricians practice defensive medicine, advising patients about the availability of tests and abortion should a defect be found. That makes it difficult for a pro-life doctor to suggest having the tests, knowing he cannot recommend abortion. In a study of women’s attitudes regarding aborting "defective" pre-born children, only 71 out of 300 said they would not abort a child even if there were conclusive evidence that it would be handicapped.

Here is where the problem is. Our society has come to the belief that the quality of the human race can be improved by controlling human procreation and by excluding those who do not meet certain criteria. This philosophy was adopted by Nazi doctors and has even been practiced in Romania. To exclude babies that do not fit a particular design is no different than Hitler’s exterminative medicine practice against the Jews and other "undesirables".

Infanticide is made to look humane. Many in the medical field are willing to let babies die if they are uncertain about their future. Many would say the baby does not know what is going on and does not know the burden he brings upon a family. Such thinking holds very little respect for human life.

This side of eternity we do not know why God allows severely handicapped babies to be born; who will never live a normal life, but it is still wrong to kill what God allowed. We should never forget that because of the sin of the human race, we live in a society that is marred by that sin. This is not saying that it is the direct sin of the parents that causes these situations but the penalty of sin on the entire human race. God told Adam and Eve that if they sinned they would die. That dying process affects every human being at some stage of life, some even before birth.

A survey of pediatricians in Massachusetts revealed that 54 percent do not recommend surgery for infants. Sixty-six percent would not recommend surgery for infants born with spina bifida. One survey of Bay Area pediatricians found that 22 percent would recommend non-treatment for infants with Down’s syndrome, but no other complications and 50 percent would recommend non-treatment in cases where other complications were present. Only 1 percent of pediatricians and 3 percent of surgeons indicated that they could not accept a non-treatment decision in those situations.

Some would go a step further if the law would allow it. They would do something to end the baby’s life. Raymond Duff states, "Once a decision for non-treatment has been made, the means taken do not really matter. Euthanasia, either passive or active, can be a safe and human choice in dealing with selective tragedies". It basically comes down to this, once death has been chosen for an infant, the means of death is irrelevant. We are speaking of physician-administered death. Michael Tooley, professor of philosophy at the University of Western Australia, argues that in order to have a right to something, we must be capable of desiring that thing. He contends that the defective newborn does not have a right to life because he is incapable of wanting that.

Part of the trouble with this logic is that it affects any other handicapped individuals, particularly those with mental disabilities. This philosophy would even affect the elderly who become no longer able to take care of themselves. The sad thing is that many disabled people exhibit a greater desire to live than some who are considered physically healthy.

Infanticide is a denial of personhood. It is a matter of the weak destroyed by the powerful. The medical profession takes on the role of executioner. It is hard for a family to make these decisions when they are unprepared for the emotions and the blur of activity that characterize the neonatal intensive care unit, not to mention the bombardment of medical terminology and intensity of the therapies under consideration. Since most parents have no experience with the complexities of neonatal care, it is relatively easy for a physician to guide them to the decisions he deems best, rather than allowing them to decide for themselves after hearing the full range of options. It would be wise for parents to find out what their doctor’s position is toward sanctity of human life before they get into these decisions. In fact, it would be wise to know if a doctor is pro-life before you chose one.

Some neonatal units operate under a standard some call the "wait until near certainty" approach. This assumes that every member is viable and should receive treatment until it is certain that he will die. When that point is reached, parents may opt for non-treatment or the termination of treatment. Most believers would agree with this position.

It comes down to a debate between two concepts: 1. Are we willing to accept the babies God gives to us? and/or, 2. Should all babies be allowed to live? The moral integrity of the medical community should be such that we can trust them not to kill when unable to heal. Very often the thinking of a believer will be different from the unsaved world.

WHAT IS GOD’S VIEW OF LIFE

Exodus 21:22-24 - If someone caused a woman to miscarry, whether it was accidental or intentional, the law demanded a penalty. God, in the Law, demonstrated a high regard for the life of an unborn baby. It seems to indicate that if this was intentional, he might have to give his life in return.

Isaiah 49:1,5; 44:24 - Isaiah made it plain that from the womb he was called. Prenatal life is precious to God.

Jeremiah 1:5 - Before Jeremiah was completely formed in the womb he was ordained by God.

Psalm 139:13-16 – The Psalmist made it plain that he was covered by God in the womb. God knew his substance before he was ever born.

Exodus 23:7 – The Law says that the "innocent are not to be slain".

Luke 1:15,41 – John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit from his mother’s womb.

Our conclusion must be that God is the Creator of life from the moment of conception and therefore, man has no right to destroy that life, even if it seems imperfect. Infanticide is killing what God has created.

I want to conclude with this true story. On May 30, 2006, my wife and I were watching It’s a Miracle on Independent Television. The story centered on a lady expecting a baby girl. Before the baby was due the mother went into extreme pain with labor contractions. The grandmother of the baby rushed her daughter to the hospital. Upon arrival there was no heartbeat of the baby. The staff immediately induced labor and in a few minutes the baby girl was born. The staff worked for 65 minutes trying to revive the baby and finally gave up. The grandmother was allowed to hold the baby and finally the mother held the baby to say a final goodbye. Suddenly the baby began to move. Immediately the staff moved her into the ICU. The heartbeat grew stronger and stronger. Each day the doctor would say, "Now you must understand that she will never do…(this or that)." The very next day the baby would do what the doctor said she would never do. The doctor said she will never respond, she will never feel, she will never eat, she will be blind, she will never walk and she will have severe brain damage. At the showing that we were watching I believe the girl was around five or six years old. She was very healthy and very bright. Those who believe in the practice of infanticide would never have allowed this baby to live. The point is, man cannot always determine if all these possible disabilities will be true, so there can be no infanticide but every baby should be treated with hope.
 

EUTHANASIA

Pastor F. William Darrow

Notes From The Adult Classes 2006 Evening Vacation Bible School

WEBSTER’S DEFINITION: 1. An easy or painless death; 2. the method of affecting it; 3. the putting of a person to death painlessly, especially one in a hopeless condition.

The concept usually is related to those who are terminally ill and desire to die rather than continue suffering.

We live in a wonderful age. We can get into an airplane and in a few hours fly around the world. We can get into an automobile and drive in comfort with air conditioning or heat. Thus, we could go on and on about the amazing comforts in which we live. In the medical field we have learned to treat so many ailments and diseases that longevity of life has actually been extended a few years. While this seems wonderful, it has also created a lot of problems. Because we can treat ailments and diseases that used to be fatal we now have to decide when to continue to treat illnesses or to allow a person to die. Thus, with the high cost of medical treatment and the high cost of nursing homes it has caused some to think there is an easy way out. It is called Euthanasia and along with it is Assisted Suicide. In this paper we will attempt to address both, relating the problems and, hopefully, the Biblical answers. Many in the medical field have attempted to step into the shoes of God.

Much of the following information is taken from Vital Signs by Mark Blocher.

EUTHANAISA DEFINED

There are 2 distinct concepts involving euthanasia – passive and active. Doing nothing or withholding medical treatment so that the individual dies brings about passive euthanasia. Thus, the person is not killed by direct action but by deliberate neglect. Active euthanasia is when an individual is directly put to death in order to eliminate further suffering. Active euthanasia is also called MERCY KILLING. Therefore, euthanasia can be defined as withholding treatment for the purpose of bringing about or hastening death, or taking deliberate steps to end life when that person is not imminently dying.

THE RIGHT TO DIE

Some believe that every individual has the right to control his own life and that extends to the RIGHT TO END IT, or as some would say, the RIGHT TO DEATH UPON DEMAND. It used to be that the right to die meant the right to die a natural death without burdensome medical care, but not so anymore.

In modern day with the ability of medical equipment to sustain life, it is possible to overtreat. Therefore, the right to die is to withhold life support. The desire to die of "natural causes" rather than prolonging the process by technology is what most people mean when they talk about the right to die.

If the right to die upon demand does exist, one’s health or life expectancy has little to do with the decision. If this is true even a healthy individual could choose to take his own life if life to him did not seem tolerable. But the Judeo-Christian teaching holds that suicide is self-murder and is prohibited by "Thou shalt not kill". Exodus 20:13

Let us consider several Biblical arguments against the claim of a right to die.

God is sovereign, and He alone determines the length of our days.

I Samuel 2:6 Psalm 39:4

A believer does not own himself because we are purchased by God.

I Corinthians 6:19-10

Since we are owned by God, we have no right to dispose of ourselves.

To consider the right to die as an inalienable right enjoyed under the Constitution of the United States of America means that it should be self-evident and derived from a law higher than man’s law.

Inalienable rights come from God. This is why Christianity’s significant influence upon cultures causes them to outlaw suicide, murder, and mercy killings.

Physical life is intrinsically good, not merely a means to another good. Our bodies are an integral aspect of our being. If this were not true, God would not resurrect our body but just make new ones. Since this is true, we should not speak of continued body life as a burden.

If physical life is not inherently good, why do we attempt to extend this earthly life? Why go to a doctor, why eat nutritious food, and why exercise? We may not know our purpose on earth but that does not mean there is no purpose. We may not desire to live a life devoid of "quality", but the notion of quality of life is purely subjective and arbitrary.

Philippians 1:21 "For me to live is Christ, and to die is gain."

On the other hand, the right to die may be legitimate if it means the right to refuse burdensome medical treatment when terminally ill, if such treatment is of little or no benefit. Here is where in overtreatment the medical field tries to be God. We are rational, thinking beings to which God grants the power to make certain decisions.

Another factor involved here is that the individual, as approved by the state, has the right to determine how his or her death should be managed. The state should not be given the power to determine how and when its citizens die.

The ultimate claim to our lives belongs not to us, or to the state, but to God. Our problem is man’s acceptance of humanism, which holds that man is the center of all things.

Consider what modern technology has given us: Conception control to prevent wrongful conception. Failing that, abortion to prevent wrongful birth. Infanticide prevents wrongful life, and the "solution" to the wrongful burden of growing old is the right to die.

DEATH WITH DIGNITY

For the most part, there is no dignity to death. Death is the consequence of sin. Genesis 2:17 "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Every observance of death, whether it is a dead animal in middle of the road or a human corpse in a funeral home, it reminds us of the terrible price of rebellion against God. Any effort on man’s part to make death dignified attempts to hide the consequences of sin, thereby denying a need for salvation in Christ.

We must never forget that hell is a real place and is a place of eternal torment. It is a separation from God for all eternity for those who reject the Lord Jesus Christ. Revelation 20:15 "And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." What is dignified about that? Suppose someone does have a terminal disease and they are encouraged to "die with dignity". They will wake up in hell. Whether it is family or friends that encourage them to "die with dignity", they are sending that person to hell. Or if a doctor assists in the action they are sending that person to hell. As long as someone is alive there is always a chance that there may be a little window where they can get saved. On the other hand, if a believer lives out his life letting God make the decision when to take him home to be with Him, that is dying with dignity. 2 Corinthians 5:8 "We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord."

IMMINENT DEATH

The term "imminent death" refers to an individual’s impending death. It simply means that death could happen at any time judging from the medical conditions. Usually that means that death can be expected within hours or days. Some in the euthanasia movement want to apply the term "imminent death" to a person diagnosed as "terminally ill". Here is the problem, how certain is the prognosis? Many people have survived such dire predictions, which shows that the concept of imminent death is not definitive nor is it an absolute fact. Some have been told they had less than a year to live, only to survive for many more years. It still comes down to this; man is trying to play God. By redefining terms, those who want euthanasia will say a "terminally ill" person is facing "imminent death", thus he should be allowed to take a pill and die with "dignity". Not only is this not letting God be sovereign, but it could mean cheating a person out of several years on earth if man’s prognosis is wrong.

ARTIFICIAL LIFE SUPPORT

No amount of medical expertise or technology can keep a person alive indefinitely when there is no spontaneous major organ function. If all major organ systems cease functioning spontaneously and initial effort at resuscitation are unsuccessful, no amount of technology can keep that person alive. What we are talking about here is the major organs. We are not talking about food, water, and oxygen.

In recent years the courts have stepped in to define what is life support and have now defined life support to include fluids, food and oxygen. They are classifying these three basic functions now as artificial medical treatment. Medical therapies and procedures are usually applied to people with particular symptoms and pathologies. However, food and water have only one purpose – to physically sustain life, whether the person is sick or not. Without nutrition and fluids, anyone’s prognosis is death. Therefore, food and water are not medical treatment. Two different cases came into prominence where the courts allowed the food and water to be withheld, that of Nancy Cruzan and Terri Schiavo. Of course, that produced death.

The medicalizing of food and water represents a radical departure from previous standards of care. Before they were considered basic care, not medical. Basically to withhold food and water to hasten death is euthanasia.

Treatment with oxygen is similar. Also known as ventilators, respirators have become an important part of intensive care and emergency room medicine. Respirators are used to sustain a sufficient level of oxygen in the bloodstream in order to maintain the integrity of major organ systems. When a person’s medical condition deteriorates to the point where he is no longer able to breathe on his own and death appears imminent, respirator support becomes artificial life support. However, the issue of removing the respirator is determined by the overall condition of the patient, not the nature of the machine. The issue is not whether the means of providing oxygen is artificial, but whether the machine is a benefit to the patient. What is the individual’s condition? Is death imminent?

WITHHOLDING OR WITHDRAWING TREATMENT

Are we required to squeeze every possible moment out of life? Is it moral to take a person off a respirator, antibiotics, kidney dialysis, or insulin?

Death is a reality of life. Hebrews 9:27 "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment." That is not a principle of medical ethics but a fact of life. Death is not simply a technical matter involving the failure of the body to sustain life; it is a spiritual reality. God is ultimately in control. When medicine reaches its limit and can no longer sustain life, we must accept the fact that death will occur. Because of that, we may have to make a decision to withdraw a particular treatment or decide not to begin a new one.

Decisions concerning the withdrawal or withholding of treatment should be based primarily on the individual’s physical condition. For example, decisions regarding a mentally disabled patient’s treatment should not be affected by his disability. Medical benefit should be the primary goal. If a medical treatment would not benefit a patient, then it should be withheld or not instituted.

A decision might be made this way: Will this patient leave the hospital alive if this particular therapy is provided? If the answer is no, if death is unavoidable, then a decision to withhold the therapy would not be euthanasia. However, when treatment is withheld or withdrawn specifically to hasten or cause death, then the moral boundary of euthanasia has been crossed.

Here is where the problem comes in. A growing number of people believe there has to be a certain quality of life. A person must be able to communicate with people, have meaningful relationships, participate in the joys and struggles of life, and have the ability to be self-directed and independent. Therefore, when one is no longer capable of participating in that kind of life, the common response is that physical life should end. They would say that when a person reaches this point, he has lost his quality of life. Those who do not experience this quality of life are typically referred to as "vegetables" or "vegetating organisms".

The conclusion of this kind of thinking is that people in nursing homes or long-term care facilities are candidates for feeding tube removal. We are not talking about people who are facing imminent death. We are talking about those who are not dying fast enough. Although the proponents of euthanasia view such lives as useless, many caregivers are understandably wary of hastening anyone’s death.

It is not always wrong to withdraw or withhold a feeding tube. Here is a suggested list of when it may be acceptable to remove a feeding tube.

When a person is no longer capable of benefiting from continued feeding.

When continued feeding would increase the suffering of an imminently dying person.

When the purpose for withdrawing or withholding nutrition is to make the person comfortable, not to hasten or cause death.

When the person’s family or advocate agrees to the decision.

What about removing a respirator? When it is clear that death is near because other major organ systems are shutting down, to remove a respirator would not be euthanasia. When all brain function has ceased it will not be long before the other organ systems begin to deteriorate. The central issue concerning respirators is whether or not they provide the patient the benefit intended, which is a medical issue. If the respirator is not providing any benefit to the patient’s physical integrity and he will not survive even with support, then its removal would not be the cause of death. Respirators do not keep people alive.

DO NOT RESUSCITATE ORDERS

As believers, we do not endorse the practice of continuing futile medical treatment or multiple resuscitations just to extract a few more moments or days of earthly life. Generally speaking when a person suffers multiple cardiac arrests in succession, further resuscitative efforts may be withheld. Such an order should be indicated on medical charts. In the case of a terminally ill person who is at home, this information should be conveyed to any caregivers involved.

ASSISTED SUICIDE

We have entered a strange period in man’s thinking. Suicide itself has gone on since the creation of man. God in His sovereignty created us and it is His choice as to when and how we die. For a person to take his own life is self-murder. Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill". Basically anyone has the ability to take his own life no matter how wrong it may be.

Strangely enough with all the humanistic ideas that are being propagated today such as, "the right to die", "death with dignity", "imminent death", etc., people are rethinking suicide and are attempting to make it dignified by having a doctor administer a lethal shot or give lethal pills. This is not "mercy killing"; it is assisted suicide, which is homicide. Some would like to make it legal so that if a person has a terminal disease they would be spared painful treatments and pain in general connected with the terminal illness.

When killing is done to end suffering, it is frequently called mercy killing. Relief from suffering, not malice, is the principal motivation. Mercy killing implies that death is preferable to life. It also assumes that no other form of relief is available. Because of the advances in modern medicine most pain can be treated. Another problem surfaces here. A doctor may administer a drug for pain that can shorten life. That is not euthanasia but simple maintenance of a problem. This is not mercy killing. However, if a doctor increased those dosages more than needed to hasten death that is mercy killing.

Those who want assisted suicide to be legalized use circular reasoning. The people who want legal assisted suicide are competent patients. The assumption is that someone who wants to end his life is mentally competent, but existing law contradicts that claim. People who fail in their suicide attempts are generally admitted to hospital for psychiatric care, because society thinks a mentally healthy person would not want to die. Assisted suicide claims the opposite.

In 1991, voters in Washington State defeated an assisted suicide bill. During the campaign, supporters admitted that the right of a terminally ill, competent person to request physician assistance in dying would also apply to an incompetent person. If measures like that are adopted, physicians will be allowed, perhaps obligated, to administer lethal injections to patients who they believe would want to die if able to make that decision. In reality, why does a competent person have any more right to die than an incompetent person?

Just to show you how far reaching these things can go we note the Netherlands where physician-assisted and physician-administered death are already legal. One of every 6 deaths is the result of a doctor-administered lethal injection. Originally it was for terminally ill patients only who requested it. Now it is common for lethal injections to be administered to unconscious or incompetent patients. Ironically, those Dutch physicians are doing what their World War II counterparts refused to do during the Nazi occupation of the Netherlands. In his book, The Nazi Doctors, Robert J. Lifton describes how the Dutch medical community resisted Nazi orders to hand over patient records and participate in exterminative medicine. None cooperated. Many were sent to concentration camps for their refusal.

Now we have sympathizers in the USA. Suffering is common to mankind because we live in a fallen world. It is the physician’s role to eliminate suffering as best he can, but it is not his role to eliminate the sufferer. We must not give physicians the legal or moral authority to decide who live or dies.

OREGON’S PHYSICIAN ASSISTED SUIDICE

The following information is taken from Biblical Bioethics Advisor by Mark Blocher.

Oregon is the only state in the USA where physicians may legally provide patients with prescriptions for lethal medications for the purpose of suicide. It has been legal in Oregon since 1997. Since then 263 people have obtained and used legally prescribed lethal medications. Thirty-eight of those were in 2005. Since reporting by doctors is voluntary the figures are probably much higher. By law the doctor can only prescribe lethal medications to those patients who are terminally ill and mentally competent to make their own medical decisions. This is supposed to ensure that mentally unstable patients do not commit suicide with physician assistance. Is this followed?

On October 17, 2005 a story in The Oregonian told of Kate Cheney an 85 year-old woman with growing dementia. Her psychiatrists noted she could not remember recent events and people, including the names of her hospice nurses or her new doctor and her family appeared to be pressuring her. A lethal dose of medication was authorized for Cheney. This was requested by her daughter. While Cheney did not meet the state law requirements of being competent she died of a lethal dose of medication given for that purpose.

When a patient does not meet the requirements and their doctor turns them down, they search until they find a doctor who will disregard the law. Wesley Smith wrote, "Once the legal view of killing is shifted from automatically bad to possibly good it becomes virtually impossible to restrict physician-assisted suicide. It is the children of aging parents who pressure increasingly dependent parents to take this action.

The law only requires physicians to file a report and the DHS to periodically review death certificates. The state claims to conduct telephone interviews with prescribing physicians to ascertain whether details contained in the doctor’s report correspond with information accompanying the death certificate.

One of the problems is that sometimes there are complications when a person takes the drugs such as vomiting, seizures, etc. Physicians were present in only 19 percent of the cases. Why is this important? In nearly 20 percent of Dutch assisted suicides, complications were so severe that doctors intervened by administering lethal injections. So much for dying in peace. Is this death with dignity?

The Oregon law says that lethal prescriptions can only be given to patients whose life expectancy is six months or less. In one instance a patient was still alive 17 months after obtaining a prescription and another was still alive two years later. No one can really predict when a person will die. One cannot help but wonder how many family birthday parties, graduations and weddings that person who lived another two years took in.

The doctor is in control. He possesses the power to decide whether the patient is terminally ill and mentally competent and whether to issue the prescription. No matter what you call it, assisted suicide is killing a human being. This goes against the oath taken by a doctor for medical practice. Protecting human life has been among the highest duties of the physician and the central focus of medicine.

Let me finish by saying this, I have heard many people say after a friend or loved one died that they are now at peace and suffering is over. If they were saved that is certainly true but if that person was not saved he went to an early hell. If that person had been allowed to live a few more months, maybe God would have opened a window where that person could have gotten saved. Taking a life by euthanasia is playing God and not allowing a sovereign God to take life at His choosing.

CONCLUSION

Because many in the science and medical fields accept the false teaching of evolution they dream of a concept where man will preserve the earth forever and man will be so able to control his destiny to the point that he will live eternally. God, the Creator and Sustainer of the universe, is disbelieved and ignored. If man is going to be able to do that, he must kill everything that is imperfect and keep only the best. The more man has learned in the medical world the more complicated life has become. Man has not solved problems, but has created problems. Unsaved man will continue to push for greater longevity at any cost. Decision making at the exit gates of life will become more complex and ethically demanding. Believers need to take a stand for life.

TWO INTERESTING CLIPPINGS

Sword of the Lord, 5/19/06

POLL CLAIMS AMERICANS BACK ASSISTED SUICIDE; VOTES AND OTHERS SAY

A new poll conducted by CBS News claims that a majority of Americans favor assisted suicide. However, previous polls show the nation is at least split on the issue or opposed to the grisly practice. And what may matter most, actual ballot votes on the subject have Americans strongly opposed.

The CBS News poll asked respondents if they thought "a doctor (should) be allowed to assist the person in taking their own life" who "has a disease that will ultimately destroy their mind or body and they want to take their own life."

…56 percent of Americans said yes, and 37 percent said no…

Conducted by Angus Reid, the poll surveyed 1,229 American adults from January 20-25.

However, an August 2005 poll conducted by the Pew Research Center found Americans opposed assisted suicide by a 48-44 percentage margin….

But what may matter most is what Americans decide at the polls when asked to determine if assisted suicide should be legalized.

While voters in Oregon twice approved allowing assisted suicide there, other states have shown that assisted suicide is not popular.

In Michigan in 1998, voters overwhelmingly rejected a measure to legalize assisted suicide by a wide 71 to 29 percent margin. In 2000, Maine voters defeated an assisted suicide proposal by 51-49 percent. California voters rejected an assisted suicide proposal by a 54 to 46 percent margin in 1992.

GERMAN NURSE WHO EUTHANIZED TWENTY-NINE PATIENTS TO STAND TRIAL

A German nurse who is accused of killing…29 patients, many through involuntary euthanasia, is scheduled to go on trial soon. Stephan L., a 27-year-old who has been named the "Angel of Death" in the German media, has admitted to giving lethal injections to 16 elderly patients at a local hospital and is likely responsible for 13 more.

Herbert Pollert, the lead prosecutor, said autopsies have been performed on 42 former patients at a hospital in the Bavarian town of Sonthofen, and he has sufficient evidence to charge Stephan.

Stephan now faces 16 counts of murder and 12 counts of manslaughter as well as one count of assisted suicide.

The victims all died during the 17 months Stephen worked at the clinic, and most of the patients were above the age of 75, though one was as young as 40…

Stephan has told police he killed the people out of "compassion" for the elderly patients. But Wilhelm Seitz, an attorney for the victims’ families, told AFP (French Press Agency) they didn’t want to die.
 

"Christian" Gnosticism Examined

Pastor David L. Brown, Ph.D.

Early Corruption of The Word of God

Efforts to corrupt the New Testament began almost immediately after it was written. Turn to 2 Corinthians 2:17 "For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ." The word corrupt here is a translation of the Greek word kaphleuontev – kapeleuontes (kap-ale-yoo-entay) which means a huckster. One scholar said this about the word – The word speaks shady "wine-dealers playing tricks with their wines; mixing the new, harsh wines, so as to make them pass for old. These not only sold their wares in the market, but had wine-shops all over the town…" where they peddled their corrupt wine as genuine. They made a bundle.

So how is this word used in reference to the Word of God? Hucksters took the pure word of God and, like the shady wine dealers, mixed in their own philosophies, opinions and perversions and they peddled it all over as the real thing.

We also know that false gospels and false letters were written and circulated. Turn to 2 Thessalonians 2:2 "That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand." It is obvious that someone had written a letter and was circulating it, claiming that is was from the Apostle Paul and other disciples. Paul says the letter is a bogus, fake, a fraud."

Turn in your Bibles to 2 Peter 2:1-3 "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." These false prophets and teachers are said to "privily…bring in damnable heresies." That is, they secretly introduced spurious (unauthentic, counterfeit or bogus) teachings that were "damnable heresies" or perversion of the truth. They sought to peddle these heresies among believers. And how would they do that? Certainly by their slick teachings but likely also in their writings and corruptions of that what God had given in the New Testament.

AN OVERVIEW : TWO EARLY GNOSTIC HERESIES

Let’s look at some of the Early Heresies that developed in In the days of the Apostles, and shortly afterwards. The beginnings of these heresies are alluded to in the Epistles John, Paul and Jude. Let’s look at several of these places.

Galatians 1:6-8 "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."

Someone was promoting a false gospel and many in the church of Galatia were buying into the lie.

1 John 4:3 "And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world."

Jude 1:3-4 "Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. 4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ."

We are going to look at three early heresies - Docetism, Marcionism, and Gnosticism. There are others, but time will not allow us to consider them. But, know this; these and other false doctrines had an influence on the transmission of scripture and account for some of the differences in the line of manuscripts.

• DOCETISM

We will be looking specifically at Gnosticism further along in this study. Suffice it to say for now that Docetism is a one of many types of Gnosticism. It dates back to Apostolic times. The name comes from the Greek word dokesis, "appearance" or "semblance", because they taught that Christ only "appeared" or "seemed" to be a man, to have been born, to have lived and suffered. This particular type of Gnosticism taught that Christ's body was a phantom and that he did not have a real physical body. Some denied the reality of Christ’s human nature altogether, some only the reality of His human body or of His birth or death. The word Docetae which is best rendered by "Illusionists", first occurs in a letter of Serapion, Bishop of Antioch (190-203 A.D.) to the Church at Rhossos, where troubles had arisen about the public reading of the apocryphal Gospel of Peter. Serapion at first unsuspectingly allowed it to be read, but soon after forbade it, saying that he had borrowed a copy from the sect who used it, "whom we call Docetae."

Another variety of Docetism taught that the nature of Christ was two-fold, spiritual and physical. Jesus was the physical, Christ was the spiritual. The Christ departed Jesus at the crucifixion, and left him on the cross to suffer and die. There was no literal bodily resurrection, just a spiritual resurrection. This certainly differs from that the New Testament Teaches. Consider the following passages of Scripture –

Colossians 2:6-9 "As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him: 7 Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving. 8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. 9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."

Hebrews 10:5-12 "Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: 6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. 7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. 8 Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; 9 Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. 10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. 11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: 12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;"

Luke 24:39 "Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have."

The Docetic Gnostics wrote their own Gospels including The Acts of John and, as mentioned above, The Gospel of Peter. The Gospel of Peter was cited by Justin Martyr, Origen, and Eusebius, but was not discovered by scholars until 1886. While excavating the grave of a monk, a French archaeological team discovered this manuscript in Egypt. Only a small portion of it remains, but what does remain, gives a differing account of the crucifixion than the four Gospels. This separation of the Christ from Jesus is seen in the following quotation – "And many went about with lamps, supposing that is was night, and fell down. And the Lord cried out, saying, My power, my power, thou hast forsaken me. And when he had said it he was taken up. And in that hour the veil of the temple of Jerusalem was rent in twain. (Gospel of Peter, verse 5). Thus, according to the Docetics, the power of Jesus, the Christ, left him while he was on the cross.

The account of the resurrection in The Gospel of Peter is also Docetic. "And in the night in which the Lord's day was drawing on, as the soldiers kept guard two by two in a watch, there was a great voice in the heaven; and they saw the heavens opened, and two men descend from thence with great light and approach the tomb. And that stone which was put at the door rolled of itself and made way in part; and the tomb was opened, and both the young men entered in. When therefore those soldiers saw it, they awakened the centurion and the elders; for they too were hard by keeping guard. And as they declared what things they had seen, again they see three men come forth from the tomb, and two of them supporting one, and a cross following them: and of the two the head reached unto the heaven, but the head of him who was lead by them overpassed the heavens. And they heard a voice from the heavens saying, Thou has preached to them that sleep. And a response was heard from the cross, Yea. (Gospel of Peter, verses 9-10).

The Docetics used an altered version the Gospel of Mark as demonstrated by Irenaeus, "Those who separate Jesus from Christ and say that Christ remained impassible while Jesus suffered, and try to bring forward the Gospel According to Mark, can be corrected out of that, if they will read it with a love of the truth." (Ireaneus' Against Heresies, cited from Early Christian Fathers Vol 1; translated by Cyril C. Richardson and published by The Westminster Press, page 382).

The Latin manuscript k may reflect such tampering with the Gospel of Mark as Dr. Edward F. Hills notes. The altered version of Mark 16:4 reads as follows in k, "Suddenly, moreover, at the third hour of the day, darkness fell upon the whole world, and angels descended from heaven, and as the Son of God was rising in brightness, they ascended at the same time with him, and straightway it was light."

This verse from k matches the citation from the Gospel of Peter about the resurrection. It also contains the short ending to Mark and omits verses 9-20, as many modern translations and their Greek texts do. I suggest to you that the Mark used in many of the modern translations rely upon manuscripts that were tampered with by the Gnostics, especially the Docetic Gnostics.

We can conclude from this that the Docetics altered used a copy of Mark which would read like many contemporary translations.

• MARCIONISM

Marcion was born in between 85 to 110 A.D. No one knows for sure. He founded his own Gnostic oriented heretical sect in about 144 A.D. He taught that the God of the Old Testament could not have been the Father of Jesus Christ, because Christ speaks of His Father as a God of love, but the God of the Jews was a God of wrath. Marcion taught that Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament, created the world, but that all created flesh was evil. The soul/spirit of man was created by a greater god, one who was above Jehovah. This greater god created the spiritual realm and was the true Father of Jesus Christ. To release man's soul from his flesh, this greater god sent Christ. Christ appeared, in the form of a thirty-year-old man, in a spiritual body that appeared to be physical but was not a physical body. Salvation was gained by renouncing Jehovah and all things physical. Marcion rejected the Hebrew Scriptures, and the quotations of those Hebrew Scriptures in the New Testament. The followers of Marcion issued their own New Testament composed of Luke and Paul's letters revised to their liking. The followers of Maricon made their revisions to support and reflect their doctrines. Ultimately, these Marcionian revisions reflect their private interpretations, and these perversions have survived in some of the ancient Greek New Testament manuscripts and account for the differences between the eclectic Greek text and the Textus Receptus.

Let me explain. Irenaeus points out that "Marcion cut up that Gospel According to Luke" (Ireaneus' Against Heresies, p. 382). This would account for the large number of changes found in varying manuscripts of Luke and the large number of verses that are left out. It is, for example, understandable why the phrase "And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet." (Luke 24:40) would be omitted by Marcion, since he did not believe in the physical resurrection of Jesus but only in a spiritual resurrection. In fact, the apparatus of the United Bible Society's Greek text points out that this verse is omitted by both Marcion and Codex D (UBS, 2nd ed., p. 317). This verse is omitted from the text of the NEB and RSV. Thus we see that Codex D, which is a Western line of manuscripts in the Gospels, and the RSV reflect some of the tampering done by Marcion and his followers.

There were many other "Christian" Gnostic sects that existed between about 150-300 A.D. besides the two I have named above -- The Valentinians, Simonians, Ophites, Bsilidianians, Cainites, Nicolaites, Mandaeisites and many more.

• GNOSTICISM IN GENERAL

It is likely that Carpocrates was the founder of the "Christian" Gnostics in the first half of the second century A.D. The earliest and most vivid account of the Carpocratians can be found in Irenaeus (130-202 A.D.) work titled Against Heresy. They did not believe Jesus was divine. His followers did not believe they had to follow the Law of Moses or any morality. They were very licentious (immoral) in their behavior.

Gnosticism, in all of its varieties, was the most influential heresy faced by the early Church. Not only did the Gnostic corrupt many readings found in the New Testament, but offered their own writings as inspired scriptures, such as the The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Peter, The Gospel of Philip, The Gospel of Judas, The Gospel of the Ebionites, The Gospel of The Twelve, The Gospel According To The Hebrews (also called The Gospel According To Matthew, not to be confused with the real Gospel of Matthew), The Gospel According to the Egyptians, The Gospel of Mary (Magdalene), The Acts of Andrew, The Acts of Peter, The Acts of John, etc. Gnosticism had a variety of forms and sects which broadened its base and growth. Historian Will Durant calls Gnosticism "the quest of godlike knowledge (gnosis) through mystic means" (The Story Of Civilization Vol. III, p. 604). Durant is correct. Gnosticism is thinly veiled Pantheism. Pantheism is the doctrine that identifies God with the whole universe, every particle, tree, table, animal, and person being are part of Him. Or, to explain it in a very basic way, the Greek pan = all. The Greek word Theos = God). Therefore it literally means "God is All" and "All is God".

As in Docetism and Marcionism, the Gnostics taught that the physical (material) is evil and the spiritual (non-material) is good. Thus, a good god (spiritual) could not have created a physical world, because good can not create evil (that is the spiritual would not create the physical). So the Gnostic god created a being (or a line of beings called aeons) removing himself from direct creation. One of these aeons, or gods, created the world. The so-called Christian Gnostics believed that Jesus was one of these aeons who created the world. Some Gnostic taught that Jesus did not have a physical body. When he walked on the earth, he left not footprints because he never really touched the earth (he being spiritual and the world physical). Others taught that only our spiritual bodies were important, so the physical body could engage in whatever acts they desired because only the spiritual body would be saved. Still other Gnostics taught that the physical body was so evil that it must be denied in order for the spiritual body to gain salvation, thus shunning marriage and certain foods (1 Timothy 4:1-3).

The influence of Gnosticism can be seen in some of the heresies of today. For example, many of the teachings stated above are found, in revised form, in the teachings of the Jehovah's Witnesses. To the Jehovah's Witness, Jesus is a created god, not God manifest in the flesh. It is no wonder that the Watchtower's New World Translation omits "God was manifest in the flesh" in 1 Timothy 3:16 and replaces it with "He was made manifest in flesh." In the TR Greek which underlies our King James Bible reads it reads yeov (God) <2316> efanerwyh (was manifested/revealed) <5319> (5681) en (in) <1722> sarki (the flesh) <4561>. However, the Greek text which underlines the NWT has made the change, so it is natural for the Jehovah Witnesses to choose the reading which reflects their false doctrine.

The same is true of John 1:18 where the NWT reads, "the only-begotten god" (Gk. monogenes theos). Again, this is because the Greek text of the NWT reads differently from the Textus Receptus Greek text that the King James Bible was translated from – "only begotten Son" (Gk. monogenes heios). What is amazing is that in both of these examples, the NASV agrees with the NWT because they are both based on the same Greek text. Thus, false doctrine has influenced the various manuscripts, just as it influences translations today. The phrase "only begotten god" is supported by Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Jerome, papyrus 66 and the Alexandrian line of manuscripts. The phrase "only begotten Son" is quoted by Chrysostom, Tertullian, Basil, the Old Latin and Old Syrian translations and the majority of all Greek manuscripts.

• Beliefs of The Gnostic Heretics

Let’s look at some the specific beliefs of the Gnostic heretics. However, I must warn you as we begin that there is great multiplicity and divergence of Gnostic theories, and philosophies since Gnosticism never possessed a nucleus of stable doctrine, rather, their leaders borrowed ideas and terminologies from existing religions, defined them as they wanted to and made up their teaching as they went along.

What They Believe About God

God is an undefined infinite something. In Gnostic teachings God is called the Fulness of Being; the Not-Being God; the First Father, the Monad, the Man; the First Source, the unknown God; the Unknown God. God is NOT a personal being. Is Unknown God, however, was in the beginning pure spirituality; matter as yet was not. This source of all being causes to emanate from itself a number of pure spirit forces. In the different systems these emanations are differently named, classified, and described, but the emanation theory itself is common too all forms of Gnosticism.

This is completely different from the God of the Bible who has made Himself known to mankind. The reveals Himself to Jeremiah declaring himself to be "the God of all flesh…" Jeremiah 32:27. He reveals himself to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He reveals Himself to Moses and the prophets. And, he as revealed Himself us in His Son Jesus Christ. Further, man not only can know God, we all have a personal responsibility to fear him and keep his commandments (Colossians 2:6-9; Ecclesiastes 12:13).

Another example of some Gnostics teachings concerns the dual sexual nature of God. In her book, The Gnostic Gospels, Elaine Pagels points out that the some Gnostic taught that God was both Father and Mother. Pagels writes,

One group of gnostic (sic) sources claims to have received a secret tradition from Jesus through James and through Mary Magdalene. Members of this group prayed to both the divine Father and Mother. . .Since the Genesis account goes on to say that humanity was created male and female (1:27), some concluded that the God in whose image we are made must also be both masculine and feminine--both Father and Mother. (pp. 58-59).

Pagels also points out that Clement of Alexandria was influenced by this false doctrine of a masculo-feminine God. "Clement," writes Pagels, "characterized God in feminine as well as masculine terms" (p.81). She then cites Clement as writing, "The Word is everything to the child, both father and mother, teacher and nurse. . . .The nutriment is the milk of the Father. . .and the Word alone supplies us children with the milk of love, and only those who suck at this breast are truly happy. For this reason, seeking is called sucking; to those infants who seek the Word, the Father's loving breasts supply milk." (p. 81).

It would seem that both Clement and the Gnostics would be pleased with the modern politically correct Inclusive Version (published by Oxford Press). The Lord's prayer reads, "Our Father-Mother in heaven, hallowed be your name. Your dominion come, Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven." All references to God in this translation reflect the masculo-feminine doctrine of the Gnostics and Clement of Alexandria.

What They Believe About Salvation

Gnostics teach that the path of salvation or liberation is through the attainment of Gnosis (secret knowledge), the knowledge of the sacred truths of the spiritual universe. They believe that each human being has within himself a divine spark. Further, the Gnostic Savior does not save. Gnosticism lacks the idea of atonement. There is no sin to be atoned for. Ignorance of the Gnosis would be the only sin. The Gnostic Savior has no human nature, he is an AEon, not a man; he only seemed to be a man.

The Gnostic Discovery at Nag Hammadi Egypt

Nag Hammadi is a village in Egypt near the Nile River. In 1945 Six Bedouin camel drivers were digging for fertilizer when one of them uncovered a human skeleton. Next to the skeleton was an earthenware jar. Inside the jar, they found thirteen leather-bound volumes containing fifty-two treatises, hence they were called the Nag Hammadi codices. This library of ancient documents, dated around 350 AD contained texts relating to an early Christian Heresy called Gnostacism. Dan Brown’s book titled The Da Vinci Code falsely characterizes these writings

as "the earliest Christian records" and the "unaltered gospels."

These thirteen leather-bound volumes contained fifty-two treatises including - The Gospel of Thomas and Philip. They also found the Acts of Peter and the Twelve Apostles, A letter of Peter to Philip and the Apocalypse of Peter and Paul. In his book The Gnostic Discoveries, Marvin Meyer makes it clear all of the writings were Gnostic in nature, and they were all written in Coptic. Now, there is another important fact you need to know. The Nag Hammadi texts were all written in the second and third centuries AD. In The Da Vinci Code, Teabing claims that the Nag Hammadi texts are "the earliest Christian records DVC p.245. The truth is that every book in the New Testament was written in the first century AD! In fact, Gnostic beliefs did not begin to be mixed with Christianity until about 150 AD and so-called Christian Gnostic sects virtually disappeared by the 6th century. The only known exception was the Mandaean sect of Iran/Iraq.

There is also something further I should draw to your attention. Scholars disregard the Gnostic gospels as not genuine, spurious, counterfeit.

Here are some facts that you should know about Christian Gnosticism –

The name Gnostic comes from the Greek Word gnosis, meaning knowledge. Gnosticism was made up of elements taken from many syncretistic belief systems. They combined elements taken from Babylonian, Egyptian, Asian, Greek and Syrian pagan religions. Other elements came from astrology and Judaism and later Christianity. There is a broad range of beliefs among Gnostic systems.

Peter Jones, professor of New Testament at Westminster Seminary California and director of Christian Witness to a Pagan Planet says this about Gnosticism –

"Gnosticism is formed from the Greek term gnosis meaning knowledge, but it means here a particular form of knowledge, namely ‘spiritual experience." Like all pagan spirituality, so-called ‘Christian’ Gnosticism engages in ‘sacred technologies’ (occult meditations, chanting mantras, drumming, etc.) to access the higher, spiritual self, the self that is part of God. In this essentially out-of-body experience, all physical and this-worldly restraints, like rational thinking and a sense of specific gender, fall away. In a word, the experience of ‘enlightenment’ is both the rejection of the goodness of the physical creation and an acquisition of the knowledge of the divinity of the human soul."

Basically, Gnostics see the human soul as divine. You look within for God.

There was no consensus on a Gnostic canon of scriptures. Gnostic groups had no scruples about rewriting and adapting other religions sacred writings to fit their fancy. Many of their own works were circulated in different versions. Various sects had their own preferred rendition. Further, Gnostic groups had no unified doctrinal statement within Gnostic groups. In fact, the Nag Hummadi find revealed that a variety of different beliefs existed among different groups and individuals. For instance, some taught celibacy and others did not.

Let’s take a look at some of the generally held beliefs of Gnostic groups:

Salvation is by learning and understanding secret knowledge. Gnostics were exclusivists, teaching that they alone understood the teachings of Christ. They also taught that the Supreme God of Truth is unknowable.

Gnostics also taught that the Supreme God created a number of supernatural, but finite beings called Aeons. A virgin Aeon named Sophia, gave birth to the inferior Creator-God Demiurge who is know as Jehovah. Gnostics viewed Jehovah as evil, arrogant and incompetent. They believe that "the Serpent of Genesis spoke truth and the God of Genesis was a blind and evil liar. Thus Eve was a heroine and Adam a wimp who quickly converted to the ‘truth’" (Onward Gnostic Soldiers; May 20 World, Peter Jones)

These Gnostics believed that the physical world, matter and the human body were evil. However, trapped within people was a spark of divinity that needed to be released.

Jesus Christ was looked upon as a revealer of knowledge and a liberator telling them how they could be free of Demiurge’s control and return to their spiritual home with the Supreme God at death.

My point in telling you all of this is to make you aware that Dan Brown’s novel, The Da Vinci Code is a Gnostic novel. Gene Edward Veith correctly pointed this out in his article The Da Vinci Phenomenon in the May 20^th edition of World Magazine. He says, "The Da Vinci Code is at the forefront of a Gnostic revival….Mr. Brown and his modern-day bestseller-turned-blockbuster resurrect that ancient heresy. Religion here has to do with secret knowledge. Spirituality is unrelated to what one does with one’s body. Religion is a construction that exists primarily in one’s head."

It is clear; The Da Vinci Code preaches another Jesus and a false Gospel. The Apostle Paul in his letter to the Galatians had poignant words for those who advocate such lies – "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." Galatians 1:6-9

At this point, I want to insert two articles from World Magazine--

ONWARD GNOSTIC SOLDIERS

By Marvin Olasky

The following article is found in the May 20, 2006 copy of World magazine.

Gnosticism is probably hotter now than it has been since – well, over 1,500 years ago. As The Da Vinci Code hits movie theaters and probably extends its three-year run on the New York Times best-selling fiction list, Gnostic books like The Gospel of Judas and The Lost Gospel are also prominent on nonfiction bestseller charts.

Peter Jones, professor of New Testament at Westminster Seminary California and director of Christian Witness to a Pagan Planet (cwipp.org) is the author of The Gnostic Empire Strikes Back and other books that critique anti-Christian doctrines, including Cracking Da Vinci’s Code (Cook Communications) and the newly published Stolen Identity: The Conspiracy to Reinvent Jesus (Cook), a detailed comparison of the Gnostic and the biblical Jesus.

World: How do you define Gnosticism?

Jones: Gnosticism is formed from the Greek term gnosis meaning knowledge, but it means here a particular form of knowledge, namely "spiritual experience". Like all pagan spirituality, so-called "Christian" Gnosticism engages in "sacred technologies" to access the higher, spiritual self, the self that is part of God.

In this essentially out-of-body experience, all physical and this-worldly restraints, like rational thinking and a sense of specific gender, fall away. In a word, the experience of "enlightenment" is both the rejection of the goodness of the physical creation and an acquisition of the knowledge of the divinity of the human soul.

World: So Gnostics see the human soul as divine, but how do Gnostic texts typically depict God?

Jones: There are two kinds of God. There is the Father of the Totalities, the Great Spirit or the Force behind everything, the Source from which true Gnostics have emanated and from whom they have fallen into matter. To this God their divine spark or soul/spirit will eventually return at death.

Then there is the God of orthodox Christianity, the God of the Old Testament, the Creator of heaven and earth. For the Gnostics this God is a blind and evil fool for having created evil matter. This is the God who foolishly says, "I am God and there is no other beside me," not knowing that above and beyond him is the Great Spirit. The Gnostic knows that Yahweh is a fool for demonstrating such ignorance and for leading human beings into ignorance. Thus the Gnostic Goddess casts Yahweh into hell.

World: It doesn’t sound like Gnostics have much respect for the Bible. What is their view of biblical history?

Jones: The very early Gnostic, Marcion (ca. A.D. 150), rejected God the lawgiver and thus the entire Old Testament. Later Gnostics did the same with even more vigor. For example, the media have given great attention recently to The Gospel of Judas. Bart Ehrman [Bestselling Books, May 6] calls Judas one of "the greatest finds from Christian antiquity". Its official translators argue that Judas demonstrates "the rich diversity of perspectives within early Christianity … during [its] formative period". Actually, Judas contains some of the typical (and radical) notions of second-century "Sethian" Gnosticism. In this kind of Gnosticism, God the Creator is an evil demon; the reprobates of Old Testament history – Cain, Esau, Korah, and the Sodomites – are the true heroes; Adam, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the prophets are "a laughingstock". Clearly Judas fits the prototype for heroes.

World: Let me ask about something else that’s weird: Why did some early Gnostic texts depict Jesus passing through Mary as through a funnel?

Jones: Some readers will have read of Gnosticism under the term "Docetism" from the Greek verb, dokeo – "to seem". Christ only seemed to be physically human, but, as a matter of fact, Christ, from the realm of the spirit, could not be so closely associated with the work of the evil creator. In particular, the Sethian Gnostics (like Judas) laughed at the ignorance of those who thought they were crucifying Christ (since it was Simon of Cyrene on the cross).

In the same way, Jesus could not have been physically associated with Mary. Indeed, there are a number of exhortations in the Gnostic texts to "flee maternity" and the "works of femininity" because to be a woman and give birth is to enmesh oneself in the evil works of created flesh, and thus become a prisoner of the evil God, Yahweh.

World: Parts of Gnosticism remind me of Hindu teachings. Was Gnosticism an attempt to meld Eastern religions and Christianity?

Jones: There is some evidence that ancient Gnosticism took some of its inspiration from Hinduism, which is quite believable since Alexander went as far as India in the fourth century B.C. and created an international cosmopolitan, syncretistic culture. At least we can say that some of those steeped in the imperial mystery religions, and also majoring in trance and mysticism, were attracted to Christianity; they may well at some point have been tempted to blend pagan spirituality with Christian doctrine. In I Corinthians 14:23 Paul criticizes worship behavior that would make observers associate the church with the Dionysian cults’ practice of trance-like "madness".

World: Even though The Da Vinci Code invents a marriage between Jesus and Mary Magdalene, it seems that Gnostics have something against heterosexual activity…

Jones: The goal of Gnostic sexuality is androgyny, the blending of male and female in one human being. The distinction of male and female is the result of the Fall, and so to undo the effects of the Fall one must join the opposites and make the two one. The "Jesus" of the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas declares, "when you make the male and the female one and the same, so that the male not be male nor the female female…then you will enter the kingdom of heaven" (Saying 22). How interesting that this is happening in our own day, and that this is a definite developed theme in The Da Vinci Code.

World: Why does Gnosticism emphasize meditation, mantras, and extreme mysticism?

Jones: These are what modern pagans call "spiritual technologies" that allow one to escape the clutches of physical reality in order to pass into the world of pure spirit, outside of the body. In this world of pure spirit all is one, all distinctions are eliminated. The essential presupposition for the attainment of this state is stopping the mind from engaging in rational thought. This is necessary since thought is a great factory of distinctions, where each word has its own meaning, without which one cannot think or speak. Meditation "silences the mind" and ushers one into a world of "oneness".

World: Concerning one other weird element – what’s the relationship of serpent worship and Gnosticism?

Jones: I was lecturing in Bogotá, Colombia, last year, and at the break a doctor came to me and told me that, before his conversion, he was a member of the Gnostic Church of Colombia. He told me that in front of the church was a massive stone stature of a serpent. The reason is the Gnostics believed that the Serpent of Genesis spoke truth and the God of Genesis was a blind and evil liar. Thus Eve was a heroine and Adam a wimp who quickly converted to the "truth." One group of Gnostics actually called themselves the Naassenes, from the Hebrew, nass, "serpent". They worshipped the serpent and, according to the anti-Gnostic Church Father Hippolytus, worshipped at the temple of the goddess Isis, goddess of magic and the underworld.

RETURN OF THE CAINITES

By Gene Edward Veith, Cultural Editor

World, April 29, 2006

"The Gospel of Judas" is only one of many attempts to turn Christianity upside down.

"The Gospel of Judas" is a long-lost bit of Gnostic apocrypha. Now that archeologists have found a copy, the media is abuzz with speculation that this ancient document will shed new light on or even change Christianity.

According to "The Gospel of Judas", Jesus tells Judas to betray Him. This will enable Jesus’ spirit to escape from its fleshly container. Jesus also is said to call Judas the only disciple who truly understands His message. Much of the rest of the "gospel" is just disembodied dialogue about "spirit" as opposed to matter, in sharp contrast to the historically detailed Gospels of the New Testament.

No serious scholar, even the most liberal variety, believes this text – which is dated nearly 200 years after the death of Christ – has any connection to the historical Jesus or the historical Judas. It would be as if an American in the 1950;s wrote a book purporting to come from George Washington claiming that Benedict Arnold was really a double agent. And yet, "The Gospel of Judas" is being taken seriously, riding the wave of theological revisionism whose goal is to turn Christianity into a different religion.

The Gnostics were eastern mystics who taught that the physical realm is intrinsically evil and that the spirit can be freed from its bondage to physicality through the attainment of secret knowledge (or "gnosis"). They rejected the Christian doctrine of creation (saying that the material world is evil). They denied the incarnation (saying that Christ was a spiritual being who brought the secret knowledge and denying that He became "flesh"). And they denied the redemption (saying that sin is not a moral failure – since what we do in the flesh does not affect our spirits – but simply a lack of spiritual knowledge).

Many Gnostics went so far as to teach that the Creator portrayed in the Old Testament is really a demon. After all, only an evil being would create something so evil as the material world. The being who rebelled against this false deity and his physical creation is Satan, who is thus the "good guy". After all, in his manifestation as the serpent in the Garden, Satan offered Adam and Eve "knowledge".

One group of Gnostics went even further in their inversion of the Bible. The church father Irenaeus, in his book Against Heresies written in A.D. 180, tells about the Cainites. Members of this sect claim to trace themselves back to Cain, called in the Old Testament the first murderer, but whom they claim "derived his being from the Power above". The Cainites, said Irenaeus, also turn the other bad guys of the Bible – such as Korah, who rebelled against Moses, and the residents of Sodom – into the good guys. And they have even produced a "fictitious history", reports Irenaeus, "which they style the Gospel of Judas".

The Gnostics wrote a number of other "gospels" (e.g., "The Gospel of Thomas", "The Gospel of Philip", "The Gospel of Mary"), as well as epistles and apocalypses to garb their teachings in apostolic clothing and to compete with the Christian scriptures.

Today the Gnostics are back in vogue. Feminist theologian Elaine Pagels of Princeton argues that Gnosticism is more open to women, since the body makes no difference to the spirit. She maintains that the early church labeled Gnosticism a heresy as part of a patriarchal plot to oppress women.

And the Cainites have come back in pop literature. Philip Pullman, in the His Dark Materials fantasy novels for young people – currently being made into a motion picture – presents God as the villain and Satan as the hero. Dan Brown in the mega-seller The Da Vinci Code draws on Gnostic writings and continues their tradition by making up history to create the impression that Christ’s real message was feminism and sexual liberation.

Gnosticism lets you be "spiritual" – as an inner mysticism – without worrying about objective truth or what you do with your body. But, like Judas, it betrays Christ.

In summary, with the advent of the fictional book that claims to include truth, The Da Vinci Code, the National Geographic Special on that and The Gospel of Judas, there is a revival of interest in Gnosticism. Christian BE WARNED, Gnosticism is an old lie that should be rejected. Paul wrote to the Ephesians – "And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them." Ephesians 5:11

My thanks to Dr. Thomas Holland; The Encyclopedia Britannica 1911 edition; the works of the Early Church fathers, World Magazine, and numerous other sources that I used in putting this presentation together.
 

Pastor David L. Brown, Ph.D.

It’s been a little more than 33 years since the proverbial camel poked "his nose into the tent" and now nearly the whole camel has barged his way into the sanctity of human life tent, trampling the sanctity of life each step of the way. Here is what I mean. On January 22, 1973, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down the now infamous Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion. When I added up the abortion statistics over those 33 years I was horrified to see the total… about 49,000,000 pre-born children have been killed. But there is more. Regularly, partially born children, children that are ¾ delivered, are killed in the most heinous way. Infanticide is quietly practiced on imperfect babies or babies that are "accidentally" born when the abortion is botched. And embryonic stem cell research is widening. Christian friend, though some people are taken aback when I say this, it is none the less true: Our society is no better, and in fact is worse than Nazi Germany under Adolph Hitler. About six million Jews were killed in the Nazi Holocaust. Eight times that number have been killed so far in the American Abortion Holocaust to date with more being killed daily. I fear that many Bible believing Baptists either have become calloused, or when they are confronted with such big numbers, they have no perspective of the magnitude of the slaughter. Let me try to bring the numbers into some understandable framework for you. If terrorists or calamity were to kill every last person in Spain and Portugal, wipe out the entire population of both countries, this would be equivalent to the number of babies that have been killed by abortion since Roe v. Wade. The equivalence of two entire countries wiped out! We are beginning to see the ramifications of having 16% of the American population killed by abortion. The effects will worsen as the years go on, but that is a topic for another article.

So what are Christians to do? Many are tempted to throw up their hands and say, "the problem is too great for me to do anything that will help." That is not true. It was not that many years ago when a handful of Baptist pastors and laymen got together and started Baptists For Life of Wisconsin. To be sure we started small, but little is much when God is in it! Today there are three Crisis Pregnancy Centers and a fourth one in the works. Many babies have been saved and literally hundreds of people have come to the Lord through the witness of the workers at these centers. In fact, there are many things you can and should do. Below are just a few.

First, seek to win others to the Lord. This is the command of God (2 Corinthians 5:20). Those who trust Christ as Savior are less likely to get an abortion.

Second, know the biblical basis for the sanctity of human life and share it with others. We are "to shine as lights" in "the midst of a crooked and perverse nation." Genesis 9:6 says, "in the image of God made he man." Therefore one man is not to shed the blood of (kill) another, even the pre-born. The Bible also indicates that life begins before birth, at conception. We see this in Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations." Luke 1:15 says of John the Baptist "For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb." Dr. John Gill says, "he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb" means, "whilst in his mother's womb." To put it bluntly, it is not a blob of tissue, but a baby. We were fashioned by God in our mother’s womb (see Job 31:15 and Psalm 139:13-16).

Third, we must know and share with others what the Bible says about sexual morality. Premarital sexual relationships are sinful (1 Corinthians 6:18; 7:2; Ephesians 5:3). Adultery is sin (Romans 13:9; Galatians 5:19). Homosexual relationships are sin (Romans 1:26-27). While I do not know the exact percentage, I do know that many women get abortions because they have been immoral.

Fourth, know some basic facts about the development of a pre-born baby so that you can share them with others. Facts like these…

The unborn baby’s heart begins to form 18 days after conception.

There is a measurable heartbeat 21-24 days after conception.

The baby’s brain begins to form on day 23 -

brain waves are produced by 6 weeks.

At 8 weeks after conception, the stomach, liver, and kidneys of the baby are

functioning, and fingerprints have formed.

At 9 weeks, the unborn child can feel pain.

At 9 weeks the unborn child squints, swallows, moves tongue, and makes fist.

At 18 weeks the unborn child’s vocal cords work and the baby can cry.

At 20 weeks the unborn child has hair on head, weighs one pound, 12 inches long.

At 24 weeks, 56% of babies survive premature birth.

Finally, encourage your pastor and deacons to support our fundamental Baptist pro-life outreaches by inviting pro-life speakers, encouraging people to work in our crisis pregnancy centers, supporting them financially, and praying continually.
 

Looking At War From A Biblical Perspective

Pastor David L. Brown, Ph.D.
Sermon Delivered 11/20/05

The Definition of War

My dictionary says, war is open armed conflict between countries or between factions within the same country.

• 1. Pacifism

A pacifist believes that war is never right. Their reasoning is that there is nothing important enough to go to war over. All national and international disputes should be settled by peaceful means rather than by force. They are opposed to all military ideals, preparedness, war, etc. Further, many believe it is never right to kill anyone and they would not believe in capital punishment for that reason. There are those who label themselves as Christian pacifists, such as Quakers, Amish, and Mennonites. However, they vary in the application of the principle. In general they believe Christ’s teaching, such as that in Matthew 5:38-48, forbids believers from becoming involved in any form of violence, killing or warfare, even for the protection of their own property and country. One of the verses they use to support this position is Exodus 20:13 - "Thou shalt not kill." This is a clear misunderstanding of the commandment. The Hebrew word translated "kill" in Exodus 20:13, ratsach, which is translated "murder" 14 times (Nu. 35:16, 17,18,19,21,30,31; 1 Ki. 6:32; Job 24:14; Ps. 94:6; Is. 1:21; Je. 7:9; Ho. 6:9) and "slayer" 17 times (Nu. 35:11,25,26, 27,28; De. 4:42; 19:3,4,6; Jos. 20:3,5,6; 21:13,21, 27,32,38). As Clark says, this "commandment, which is general, prohibits murder of every kind." However, as Gill says, "killing of men in lawful war, or in defense of a man’s self, when his own life is in danger, or the execution of malefactors by the hands or order of the civil magistrate (capital punishment) , and killing a man at unawares (by accident), without any design, are not to be reckoned breaches of this law." This commandment has in view the taking away the life of another through private malice and revenge; cold blooded murder. There are at least four cases in the Bible when killing is not murder.

Accidental Death -- It is not murder to kill someone accidentally (Numbers 35:20-23).

Self Defense -- It is not murder to defend oneself or your loved ones and property (Exodus 22:2-3). In fact, our Lord instructed his disciples to buy a sword, no doubt for defensive purposes (Luke 22:36).

Capital punishment -- It is not murder to put criminals to death for heinous crimes. The Bible plainly says that the man who takes a life is to forfeit his own life (Genesis 9:6). The Law of Moses called for capital punishment in the case of murder (Leviticus 24:17; Deuteronomy 19:11-13), idolatry (Leviticus 20:2; Deuteronomy 17:2-7), witchcraft (Le. 20:27), adultery (Le. 20:10; Deuteronomy 22:21,22), homosexuality (Leviticus 20:13), bestiality (Leviticus 20:15,16), rape (Deuteronomy 22:25-27), incest (Leviticus 20:17), and blasphemy (Leviticus 24:11-16,23). The avenger of death in Old Testament times was a relative or friend who put the murderer to death (Deuteronomy 19:11-13). God allowed for this, and made provision for cities of refuge for those who had killed someone accidentally. In this dispensation, God has given civil government the authority to put offenders to death. In Romans 13 we see that God has given nations the authority to "bear the sword" against evil. This obviously refers to capital punishment.

Military service and Law enforcement -- It is not murder to kill a person in the line of duty in law enforcement and in the military (Romans 13:1-4). It is clear. God is not a pacifist. Turn to Exodus 15:3 which says, "The LORD is a man of war…"

Let’s move on the second view of war…

• 2. Activism

An activist, in this case, believes war is always right. Their reasoning is that war is a fact of life! It is always right to participate in a war that is called for by the government, because man owes absolute obedience to government because the government knows what is best for the people. However, there is a MAJOR problem with this view. The problem with this view is that total submission to the government would be a form of idolatry, because our first allegiance it to God. My German-American friend Dr. Manfred Kober put it this way: "Activism ignores the fact that while the government is divinely ordained, its commandments may not be divinely sanctioned." To illustrate his position he pointed to Adolf Hitler. Unlimited submission led to mind boggling atrocities against humanity. Millions of Jews were exterminated under Hitler’s plan.

Our first line of obedience is to the Lord. The words of Acts 5:29 should ring in out ears – "Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men."

Pacifism is a flawed position. Activism is a flawed position. Let’s consider a third position on war…

• 3. Selectivism

Those who hold the position of selectivism believe that war is sometimes right. Selectivism repudiates some wars as UNJUST and yet holds that some wars are JUST. Unjust wars would be genocidal wars (like killing all the Jews), predatory wars, or wars for the purpose of expansion. But, wars would be for self-defense, war on behalf of the helpless, war to inflict punishment for evil, and to secure reparations are among those wars that are deemed just.

There are two verses that are considered key in this view of war. The first is Romans 13:4 "For he (governmental leaders) is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil."

Government is charged with the responsibility…

Protecting Her Citizens

Punishing Evil and

Promoting Order (1 Timothy 2:2).

Tertullian (155-230 A.D.) one of the early Christian theologians wrote, "We pray for all the emperors, that God may grant them long life, a secure government, a prosperous family, vigorous troops, a faithful senate, an obedient people; that the whole world may be in peace; and that God may grant, both to Caesar and to every man, the accomplishment of their just desires."

The second passage that comes into play here is John 15:13 "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." To be sure this passage is not in war context, the principle is clear. Laying down you life for the benefit of others is an act of love.

I hold to the selectivism position relating to war. I would concur with Martin Luther who said, "War for the sake of war is sin, but war for the sake of defense is duty. The power of temporal rulers is to be turned only against the wicked, to hold them in check and keep them at peace, and to protect and save the righteous."
 

Instruments of Praise

Mother/Daughter Devotion written and given by Jorlyn Grasser on May 21, 2005 at First Baptist Church of Oak Creek.

Romans 4:13 "Neither yield ye you members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God."

We are all instruments created to honor God. We may think of ourselves as a tiny piccolo or booming tuba; a graceful harp or a multi-piped organ. Each instrument has a place of honor in God’s eyes. He wants to use us no matter what our size or ability. No instrument has more value than another in His eyes. Together as He conducts and we play, His glory spreads throughout a darken world to bring music and light.

Psalm 33:1 says, "Rejoice in the Lord, O ye righteous: for praise is comely for the upright."

Comely means pretty or attractive.

One Sunday morning before coming to church I was practicing my organ, feeling pretty confident that the music was ready for the day. I played the offertory piece using full volume and expression. My mind was completely focused on the music.

Outside our opened front door a bird started to sing so loudly it startled me.

I stopped playing the organ to go search for the bird. Looking at trees, and in bushes, high on the wires or near the mailbox, I search in vain. I called my husband and we both searched for the bird with the loud voice.

Abruptly from our vibertum bush near the front door, we saw the bird fluttering about. This mighty songster could be heard above all other birds.

This reminded me that even as I practice and prepare music each week, God has servants doing the same all over the world. He uses anyone that is willing to prepare faithfully. He even uses tiny birds to out sing a thundering organ.

Even as all our skills may be ready, we must always make sure our heart is one of a servant eager to serve our Master. God created music. He loves it best when it is played with a servant’s heart. Psalm 33: 3 says, "Sing unto the Lord a new song; play skillfully with a loud voice. For the word of the Lord is right; and all his works are done in truth."

God is a God of the five senses. He encourages us to taste and see that His Words are sweet. He speaks in a soft whisper that only a silently waiting heart can hear. With surging praise He encourages us to make a joyful noise so all creation can hear His glory proclaimed. He sends the spring rains to whet our scent of smell for the earth’s awakening. His presence wraps us in a tranquil blanket of peace as we lay our anxieties before Him.

To become an instrument God can use we need to accept the precious gift of salvation provided through His Son on the cross. Recognizing that we have all sinned in God’s sight, then surrendering to Him our lives, we can receive His power to live each day to be an instrument He can use.

Just as the organ has no power without electricity, even so we do not have any power in our life to serve God without salvation.

Practice is the key to learning how to play an instrument. Besides the hours put into each piece, we need to learn the right way to read and prepare the music.

Even so in our Christian lives we grow and learn by reading God’s Word each day, praying and fellowshipping with other believers.

When it is time to perform a musical piece, the best way I know how to do it is to prepare well, claim God’s calmness, and ask for clear thinking. If a piece is to glorify God, it must be played to point the listener to Him. Mistakes, stumbling, and playing wrong notes will only turn the listener to other things. They may become restless if it is too long, or the flow of the service is interrupted. Congregation worship is disrupted if there are too many errors.

Even so in the Christians’ life, as we live each day in front of others, it is important for them to see us striving to do our best. Bad attitudes, unkindness, finding fault and other examples do not honor God, and just turn others away from Him

As we come before God realizing we cannot play our instruments unless He works through us. We realize then that we will reach the ones who are ready to listen. Whether we are playing as an individual or in a group, singing alone or in a choir, we are part of a team. The members consist of God and those who are supporting you. The right sound occurs when believers work together.

My two and one/half year old grandson, Evan loves to get up on the seat of his mother’s large keyboard and play with abandon. His little fingers run all over the keys flying from the upper octaves to deep lower sounds. He is thrilled with the "music" he is making. We just smile at the discord, because he is just a child.

Many believers rush out immediately after receiving Christ and began to tell others about God using their own methods. Like a clanging hammer it turns unbelievers away.

As a young girl I took group piano lesson one semester. We had no pianos, but used a cardboard fold out of two octaves, like a placemat. We learned soundlessly the location of middle C, scales, what an octave is, and how to make chords.

Young believers begin their growth by reading God’s Word. Just as I learned about the piano keyboard as a young girl, God can use this time of studying His word to teach the new believer. God begins working in her life. There is a need to take these small steps first in a quiet time of learning. Gradually she grasps God’s greatness, and is prepared to reach out.

Several years after my cardboard piano lessons, my dad brought home a baby grand piano. We were all surprised; especially because there were many other things we needed more. Mom immediately signed my three brothers and I up for lessons. We only kept the piano a short time, before my dad decided we should move to Florida. Our baby grand was given to our church, and we packed our belongings into a large mobile home heading south. Within a few years we had lost everything including our family, which slowly disintegrated.

Mom and I prayed for a piano, but her dime store clerk job barely covered food and rent. One day Dad visited and brought a musty accordion. I used the keyboard side of it to make music squeezing it back and forth with one hand, pressing notes with the other. God put a desire within me to play for his glory at that time. I wanted to learn, but the way was not opened.

During our lives there will be times when are best efforts of service seem like we are playing a one-handed, musty accordion. When these are the only sounds our instruments can make, give it to God. Ask him to use it for His glory.

We may be home with small children, cleaning, caring, or cooking. With a thankful heart give your best effort to Him.

We may be learning a new job, feeling confused or alone. With a thankful heart, give your best effort to Him.

We may be caring for an elderly family member. This additional responsibility along with our job and church obligations may become overwhelming. With a thankful heart, give your best effort to Him.

The sound of your thankfulness is like sweet music to God.

Mom continued searching for a piano. When she found a $75.00 upright, with broken ivories on the keys and very much out of tune, we were thrilled. We made installment payments on it. When it had been paid in full, we brought it home.

We appreciated the beat-up, upright piano more than the baby grand piano. The one-fingered melodies we played on the baby grand piano were replaced by two-handed, choppy-sounding hymns. With no money for a piano teacher, there were frequent stops to replay sour-sounding notes.

In our lives as believers, we attempt to live each day at work, at home with children, as caregivers or retirees for His glory. Our Christian lives begin to grow; our desires become more focused. We yearn to please God as instruments to His glory. God honors our desires by placing opportunities in our lives. We know now to go before Him, to submit our hearts to Him, and practice to the best of our abilities. We know also that our longing to serve God must be consistent. Pride has no room in our presentation; only prayer, preparation and His peace.

This small organ was given to us many years ago. Just as this instrument is limited, it is not without ability to make joyful sounds. (Show) God can use this instrument as well as the large one on the platform. It just has to be willing.

Even so, God can use our small efforts and abilities, when presented to Him.

Fear can keep us from using the abilities God has given us. God desires that we put aside that fear, and let Him use us.

Because we had few funds for lessons, my own training was sporadic. I had one semester in college on the piano. It wasn’t until many years later that I began to play in our church nursery class. I practiced diligently those simple songs feeling God had finally answered the prayer I prayed back in the days of the musty accordion.

Later I accompanied the children’s programs, and helped during the Sunday night service.

My first attempt to play the organ came when Sandy Davis asked if I was interested in learning about it. A few weeks later she left to get married, and I have been playing ever since. (Almost twenty years)

I see the position of an organist as my ministry. This is how I can serve God at First Baptist Church. I know Nancy and I feel the same way. We want God to use us as long as He needs us here. We have become a team, reading each other, without looking up from the music. God has blessed our efforts.

But we are not the only ones God uses. Each Sunday as I finish my offertory, my greatest joy is to sit back and listen to the choir. The words of their songs are so uplifting.

To be an instrument that honors God, seek Him. Let Him use you where you are. Let Him use you with the gifts He has given you.

It is so important to maintain our instruments properly. Our organ and piano have a specialist we can consult for maintenance and repair problems.

Even so, it is important for us to maintain our physical being, as well as our spiritual being. What we put into our minds, feed our bodies, or how we exercise, all help us maintain healthy bodies. This requires effort and making good decision, just as practicing an instrument requires effort.

Respecting our bodies, and maintaining our spiritual growth also keep us ready at all times for His service. As we seek to perform music for Him or serve Him, we must make sure our hearts are mature, seeking only to honor Him.

As we listen to other believers share their talents, we gather ideas that stir our thinking. This may encourage us to try something new. As we grow and learn, God uses us to help others. We are to be encouragers.

We may have heard a phrase, message, or read an article years ago, and then put it aside. Then we came across it again. Wow! It really spoke to us causing life change. That’s why God needs all of us. To remind others of His greatness. To show how He works to accomplished His plan in our lives.

Psalm 40:1-3 "I waited patiently for the Lord; and he inclined unto me, and heard my cry. He brought me up also out of an horrible pit, out of the miry clay, and set my feet upon a rock, and established my goings. And he hath put a new song in my mouth, even praise unto our God: many shall see it, and fear, and shall trust in the Lord."

Often we see ourselves as fine instruments, like a shiny brass trumpet, or gleaming polished cello playing superbly music of great majesty and beauty. We smile thinking God really is impressed with this performance. He nudges us and reminds us He uses the battered, tarnished, even old broken instruments as well. Both can make sounds to glorify Him.

It is unlikely you can improve upon what God has given you by imaging it to be something else. Our abilities are only improved by hard work and practice.

A writer’s words come from the depth of her soul. The hymns we sing in worship were written with a message. To fathom that message, we must understand and dwell on each word. The right word opens the heart, changes a life, shapes thinking.

Words to get these results must be meditated upon, and a prayerful heart provides the seed of these words a place to grow.

An instrument God can use must be tuned in to God’s Word. His Word provides music for living; strong chords of strength; direction for the score of our lives, and songs for those deep struggling times.

His Word makes our lives a composition that can honor Him. Open your heart to His Word. Be an instrument in tune to God’s Word. Develop the instrument God has made you to be; use it to inspire others. Be an encourager.
 

SCIENCE STARTS WITH GOD AND THE BIBLE. This is written to expose the lie that there is no science in the Bible. Although the terms in the Bible are not in modern technical language, they are nevertheless presented accurately.

All scripture is from the King James Version of the Bible. I take credit for none of this work, nothing is original with me. I have gleaned information from several books* that I will list later.

Deane Schaub

• THE TRUTH

Gen. 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

This is the Beginning of Time, Space, and Matter.

Gen. 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.

2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

Heb. 4:3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.

Ps. 102:25 Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth: and the heavens are the work of thy hands.

The First Law of Thermodynamics (Law of Energy Conservation) states that energy can be converted from one form into another but it can be neither created or destroyed. This law teaches conclusively that the universe did not create itself.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics (Law of Energy Decay) states that every system left to its own devises tends to move from order to disorder. Isaac Asimov summarizes it this way "The universe is constantly getting more disorderly." Isaiah states it this way.

Isa. 51:6 Lift up your eyes to the heavens, and look upon the earth beneath: for the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment, and they that dwell therein shall die in like manner: but my salvation shall be for ever, and my righteousness shall not be abolished.

• BIOLOGY - Genetics, DNA

Gen. 1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

Gen. 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

1Cor. 15:39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.

"After their kind", dogs produce dogs - not reptiles. Reptiles produce reptiles - not birds. Birds produce birds - not fish. Fish produce fish - not humans, etc.

• Blood

In 1616 William Harvey discovered the circulation of the blood. In the 1800’s George Washington was "bled" to death ( the accepted medical procedure at the time.) But Leviticus says:

Lev. 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

• OCEANOGRAPHY

Ps 8:8 The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas.

Job 38:16 Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth?

These verses are a reference to water currents, the Gulf Stream etc.

The many fresh water springs on the ocean floor and the distinct channels and pathways in the ocean’s depths have been a surprising discovery of modern oceanography.

• HYDROLOGY-Science of Water

Job 28:24 For he looketh to the ends of the earth, and seeth under the whole heaven; 28:25 To make the weight for the winds; and he weigheth the waters by measure. 28:26 When he made a decree for the rain, and a way for the lightning of the thunder: 28:27 Then did he see it, and declare it; he prepared it, yea, and searched it out.

Job 36:27 For he maketh small the drops of water: they pour down rain according to the vapour thereof: 36:28 Which the clouds do drop and distil upon man abundantly. 36:29 Also can any understand the spreadings of the clouds, or the noise of his tabernacle?

The Jet Streams, Trade Winds etc. are stated in Eccl. 1:6 The wind goeth toward the south, and turneth about unto the north; it whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits. The Hydrologic Cycle is completed in verse 7.

Eccl. 1:7 All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again. ( Evaporation and rain)

These verses also recognize that air and wind have weight, a fact not confirmed scientifically until about 300 years ago.

• And in the field of ASTRONOMY are many many passages, here are two:

Jer. 33:22 As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured: so will I multiply the seed of David my servant, and the Levites that minister unto me.

Gen.15:5 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.

Astronomers estimate that there are at least 10 26^th stars (that is, a hundred - million - billion - billion stars) Scientists are finding out that there are many different types of stars, and no two stars are alike. Just like it says in 1Cor. 15:41

There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory.

• ASTROPHYSICS and GEOPHYSICS

Job 9:8 Which alone spreadeth out the heavens, and treadeth upon the waves of the sea.

Isa. 40:22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

Job 26:7 He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.

"Spreadeth or stretcheth out the heavens", this reference is to the expanding universe concept of twentieth-century astrophysics. The "circle of the earth" shows that Earth is a sphere and we know that the Earth hangs on nothing.

Gen. 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

Gen. 8:22 While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.

Ps. 104:19 He appointed the moon for seasons: the sun knoweth his going down.

This is our calendar system and how the moon sets our seasons.

• LIGHT

What do we know about light? When light stops traveling, there is darkness.

We have a visible light spectrum. Job stated as much thousands of years ago.

Job 38:19 Where is the way where light dwelleth? and as for darkness, where is the place thereof, Job 38:24 By what way is the light parted, which scattereth the east wind upon the earth?

There are RULES OF SANITATION that could have saved millions of lives over the centuries if they had been followed. See the following verses.

Num. 19:7-19 and Deut. 23:12-14

Num. 19:7 Then the priest shall wash his clothes, and he shall bathe his flesh in water, and afterward he shall come into the camp, and the priest shall be unclean until the even. 19:8 And he that burneth her shall wash his clothes in water, and bathe his flesh in water, and shall be unclean until the even. 19:9 And a man that is clean shall gather up the ashes of the heifer, and lay them up without the camp in a clean place, and it shall be kept for the congregation of the children of Israel for a water of separation: it is a purification for sin. 19:10 And he that gathereth the ashes of the heifer shall wash his clothes, and be unclean until the even: and it shall be unto the children of Israel, and unto the stranger that sojourneth among them, for a statute for ever 19:11 He that toucheth the dead body of any man shall be unclean seven days. 19:12 He shall purify himself with it on the third day, and on the seventh day he shall be clean: but if he purify not himself the third day, then the seventh day he shall not be clean. 19:13 Whosoever toucheth the dead body of any man that is dead, and purifieth not himself, defileth the tabernacle of the LORD; and that soul shall be cut off from Israel: because the water of separation was not sprinkled upon him, he shall be unclean; his uncleanness is yet upon him. 19:14 This is the law, when a man dieth in a tent: all that come into the tent, and all that is in the tent, shall be unclean seven days. 19:15 And every open vessel, which hath no covering bound upon it, is unclean. 19:16 And whosoever toucheth one that is slain with a sword in the open fields, or a dead body, or a bone of a man, or a grave, shall be unclean seven days. 19:17 And for an unclean person they shall take of the ashes of the burnt heifer of purification for sin, and running water shall be put thereto in a vessel: 19:18 And a clean person shall take hyssop, and dip it in the water, and sprinkle it upon the tent, and upon all the vessels, and upon the persons that were there, and upon him that touched a bone, or one slain, or one dead, or a grave: 19:19 And the clean person shall sprinkle upon the unclean on the third day, and on the seventh day: and on the seventh day he shall purify himself, and wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and shall be clean at even.

Deut. 23:12 Thou shalt have a place also without the camp, whither thou shalt go forth abroad: 23:13 And thou shalt have a paddle upon thy weapon; and it shall be, when thou wilt ease thyself abroad, thou shalt dig therewith, and shalt turn back and cover that which cometh from thee: 23:14 For the LORD thy God walketh in the midst of thy camp, to deliver thee, and to give up thine enemies before thee; therefore shall thy camp be holy: that he see no unclean thing in thee, and turn away from thee.

When did scientists find out about germs and washing?

• ANIMAL HUSBANDRY

Gen 30:35 And he removed that day the he goats that were ringstraked and spotted, and all the she goats that were speckled and spotted, and every one that had some white in it, and all the brown among the sheep, and gave them into the hand of his sons. 30:36 And he set three days' journey betwixt himself and Jacob: and Jacob fed the rest of Laban's flocks. 30:37 And Jacob took him rods of green poplar, and of the hazel and chestnut tree; and pilled white strakes in them, and made the white appear which was in the rods. 30:38 And he set the rods which he had pilled before the flocks in the gutters in the watering troughs when the flocks came to drink, that they should conceive when they came to drink. 30:39 And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled, and spotted. 30:40 And Jacob did separate the lambs, and set the faces of the flocks toward the ringstraked, and all the brown in the flock of Laban; and he put his own flocks by themselves, and put them not unto Laban's cattle. 30:41 And it came to pass, whensoever the stronger cattle did conceive, that Jacob laid the rods before the eyes of the cattle in the gutters, that they might conceive among the rods. 30:42 But when the cattle were feeble, he put them not in: so the feebler were Laban's, and the stronger Jacob's.

• DINOSAURS

Job 40:15 Behold now BEHEMOTH, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. 40:16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. 40:17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. 40:18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. 40:19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. 40:20 Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play. 40:21 He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the reed, and fens. 40:22 The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the willows of the brook compass him about. 40:23 Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth. 40:24 He taketh it with his eyes: his nose pierceth through snares.

Job 41:1 Canst thou draw out LEVIATHAN with an hook? or his tongue with a cord which thou lettest down? 41:2 Canst thou put an hook into his nose? or bore his jaw through with a thorn? 41:7 Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons? or his head with fish spears? 41:8 Lay thine hand upon him, remember the battle, do no more. 41:9 Behold, the hope of him is in vain: shall not one be cast down even at the sight of him? 41:10 None is so fierce that dare stir him up: who then is able to stand before me? 41:12 I will not conceal his parts, nor his power, nor his comely proportion. 41:13 Who can discover the face of his garment? or who can come to him with his double bridle? 41:14 Who can open the doors of his face? his teeth are terrible round about. 41:15 His scales are his pride, shut up together as with a close seal. 41:16 One is so near to another, that no air can come between them 41:7 They are joined one to another, they stick together, that they cannot be sundered. 41:18 By his neesings a light doth shine, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning. 41:19 Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out. 41:20 Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot or caldron. 41:21 His breath kindleth coals, and a flame goeth out of his mouth. 41:22 In his neck remaineth strength, and sorrow is turned into joy before him. 41:23 The flakes of his flesh are joined together: they are firm in themselves; they cannot be moved. 41:24 His heart is as firm as a stone; yea, as hard as a piece of the nether millstone. 41:25 When he raiseth up himself, the mighty are afraid: by reason of breakings they purify themselves. 41:26 The sword of him that layeth at him cannot hold: the spear, the dart, nor the habergeon. 41:27 He esteemeth iron as straw, and brass as rotten wood. 41:28 The arrow cannot make him flee: slingstones are turned with him into stubble. 41:29 Darts are counted as stubble: he laugheth at the shaking of a spear. 41:30 Sharp stones are under him: he spreadeth sharp pointed things upon the mire. 41:31 He maketh the deep to boil like a pot: he maketh the sea like a pot of ointment.

These are the descriptions of dinosaurs. Showing that they walked the earth with man, not millions of years ago.

There are many more examples of science in the Bible, go look. Having proven that true science is in the Bible and that history, archaeology, geography and other sciences are in the Bible, perhaps it is time to listen to what else it has to say.

John 14:6 "Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

Romans 3:23 "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God:" Romans 6:23a "For the wages of sin is death: Romans 6:23b "but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Romans 5:8 "But God Commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." Romans 10:13 "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."

References:

* "The KJ Bible "

"Science and the Bible" by Henry M. Morris

"The Answer Book" by Ken Ham

"The Remarkable Record of Job" by Henry M Morris

"Astronomy and the Bible" by Donald DeYoung

"Thermodynamics and the Development of Order" edited by Emmett L. Williams

"The Genesis Record" by Henry M. Morris

"The Collapse of Evolution" by Scott M. Huse

Links: www.icr.org

www.answersingenesis.org

www.drdino.com