Hear more from Things Unseen with Sinclair B. Ferguson: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL30acyfm60fWgA8zL6TjP3KtLhRFNHfxi
Source: The Reality of Hell: Things Unseen with Sinclair B. Ferguson
The sun shines, And the wind blows; These are mere signs Of the God who knows. Humans are not alone Though so small we are, Through Scripture it is known That God is not far. God did not leave us be As if we are lost causes; The Christ descended to free Those who are not flawless. Yes, flawless we all are To say the least; But Christ met the bar So His children could feast. Men continue to strive Men continue to fall; Only in Christ we will thrive Only in Christ we walk tall. Sin scarred us in the garden We have felt its pangs ever since; Christ, however, purchased our pardon Now we are able to not wince. Clothed in Christ’s righteousness We are free from condemnation; Sovereign grace we possess Unworthy recipients of salvation. Salvation belongs to the Lord That is certain; There is no better Word Than Christ tearing the curtain.
Source: Salvation Belongs to the Lord
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
1 JOHN 1:9
Only man was created in God’s own image, according to the Scriptures.
I know that I take a chance of being misunderstood when I state that man was more like God than any other creature ever created. Because of the nature of man’s creation, there is nothing in the universe so much like God as the human soul.
Even in the face of man’s sin and lost condition, there is still that basic potential in the soul and nature of man that through grace can become more like God than anything in the universe.
There is no question about man’s sin—therefore there is no question about his being lost. A man is lost if he is not converted—overwhelmed in the vast darkness of emptiness!
Man was created to know God but he chose the gutter. That is why he is like a bird shut away in a cage or like a fish taken from the water. That is the explanation of man’s disgraceful acts—war and hate, murder and greed, brother against brother!
Is there still a good word for man in his lost condition? Is there an answer for man in whom there is that instinctive groping and craving for the lost image and the knowledge of the Eternal Being?
Yes, the positive answer is in the Word of God, teaching the sinner-man that it is still possible for him to know God. It all has to do with forgiveness and grace and regeneration and justification in Jesus Christ!1
1 Tozer, A. W., & Smith, G. B. (2015). Evenings with Tozer: Daily Devotional Readings (p. 354). Moody Publishers.
Source: What Will Heaven Be Like?
Ver. 15.—Dost thou know when God disposed them; rather, disposes them—gives them their orders, arranges for their course and sequence? Or dost thou know when he caused (or rather, causes) the light of his cloud (either the lightning, or perhaps the rainbow, as Schultens suggests) to shine? Thou canst not pretend to any such knowledge.1
15 Dost thou know when God disposed them, and caused the light of his cloud to shine?
When God disposed them, to wit, the things before mentioned, the clouds, rain, snow, thunder and lightning, and other meteors. Did God ask counsel from thee to acquaint thee with his counsels in the producing and ordering of them, when, and where, and in what manner he should dispose them? God ordereth all these things not as it pleaseth thee, but as he thinks meet; and in like manner he disposeth of all human affairs, and of thine among the rest. Caused the light of his cloud to shine; which may be understood either, 1. Of the light of the sun breaking through the clouds, when it is most glorious and comfortable. But though this light break through the clouds, yet it is very improper to call it the light of the clouds. Or, 2. The lightning, which is properly so called, as being produced by and in a cloud. Or, 3. The rainbow, which is a lightsome and glorious work of God, and therefore not likely to be omitted in this place, and which is seated in a cloud, which also may well be called God’s cloud, because therein God puts his bow, as the rainbow is called, Gen. 9:13.2
1 Spence-Jones, H. D. M., ed. (1909). Job (p. 598). Funk & Wagnalls Company.
2 Poole, M. (1853). Annotations upon the Holy Bible (Vol. 1, p. 1016). Robert Carter and Brothers.
Source: The Reality of Hell
TODAY’S BIBLE READING CHALLENGE:
Ezekiel 47:1-48:35
1 Peter 2:11-3:7
Psalm 119:49-64
Proverbs 28:12-13
Ezekiel 47:1 — Jimmy DeYoung notes the similarities between this and “when water flows from the throne of God” in Revelation 22:1. Right now, the east side of the Temple Mount is fairly dry. Here’s some photo’s I took when I was in Israel: As you can see, it’s not quite “a river that could not be passed over” (Ezekiel 47:5). Nor has the Dead Sea been healed yet (Ezekiel 47:8). There’s no fishers at En Gedi yet (Ezekiel 47:10), but the LORD God is saying that it will happen!
Ezekiel 47:16 — Hamath is 240 kilometers north of the current northern Israelite border in Mount Hermon. This prophecy is still yet to be fulfilled.
Ezekiel 47:23 — The LORD God is allowing for immigration into the land of Israel, but this is not just immigration – He’s calling for adoption. The stranger will have an inheritance of the tribes of Israel? That’s what Paul talked about in Romans 9:4; adoption of non-Jews into the Israelites.
We read earlier about God’s Old Testament immigration policy in Ezekiel 44:9 – they must be circumcised in heart and flesh. But as Paul declared, we are circumcised by Jesus Christ in the flesh when He took away our sinful flesh (Colossians 2:11) and circumcised our heart (Romans 2:29). We are risen with Him (Colossians 2:12).
Ezekiel 48 — Here’s a map from 1729 depicting what they thought it would look like:
Ezekiel 48:35 — Ezekiel’s vision closes out similar to Revelation 21:2-3, noting that the LORD God is there. We have a different arrangement of the twelve tribes from Numbers 2, though. Also notice that the twelve gates match up to the twelve gates of the New Jerusalem in Revelation 21:12.
When we get to Revelation, we’ll read about the New Jerusalem. Both the New Jerusalem and Ezekiel’s city are perfect squares. Some compare the “camp of the saints and the beloved city” in Revelation 20:9 to the City of Ezekiel, but the New Jerusalem, measured like Ezekiel’s city was, is 1,000 times bigger, with walls 1,380 miles high (or almost 6x the height of the International Space Station). God is preparing a place for us (John 14:3)!
I Peter 2:13-14 — Peter echoes Paul’s message in Romans 13 – submission to human government. God ordained human government back in Genesis 9:6, authorizing mankind for the first time to execute capital punishment.
1 Peter 2:18 — Why does the Bible justify slavery? The Roman “servants” were not there of their own freewill. In spite of this, though, Peter tells the servants to submit to their masters, even the froward ones (those difficult to deal with) who may even punish those who are doing well (1 Peter 2:20). He calls for wives to submit to their husbands (1 Peter 3:1). Why?
Jesus had more rights than anyone. He had less sin than anyone. To be accurate, He had no sin (1 Peter 2:22). Yet He suffered (1 Peter 2:21), submitted himself to unjust human government, to cruel Roman masters, to Jewish taunts without retort (1 Peter 2:22), in order to bring us life through His death.
1 Peter 2:24 — Peter declares the fulfillment of Isaiah 53:5 – “… with his stripes we are healed!”
1 Peter 3:7 — Husbands, want God to listen to your prayers? Dwell with your wife according to knowledge! Honor her!
Psalm 119:49 — Are you discouraged? Hope in God’s Word! Need comfort in affliction? Go to the Word (Psalm 119:50). Need a song? Go to the statutes (Psalm 119:54). Can’t sleep in the night? Remember the LORD (Psalm 119:55). Be not discouraged!
Proverbs 28:13 — God already knows what sins you’ve committed. Just admit to Him what He already knows!
Share how reading through the Bible has been a blessing to you! E-mail us at 2018bible@vcyamerica.org or call and leave a message at 414-885-5370.
Can atheists explain the existence of “free will” from “inside the room” of the natural universe? I don’t think so, and in my new book, God’s Crime Scene: A Cold Case Detective Examines the Evidence for A Divinely Created Universe, I illustrate the problem naturalism has trying to account for human free agency. Many consistent atheists, like neurological philosopher Sam Harris, do not believe free agency exists in a deterministic, material universe. Harris denies any of us have the ability to choose freely: “Free will is an illusion. Our wills are simply not of our own making. Thoughts and intentions emerge from background causes of which we are unaware and over which we exert no conscious control. We do not have the freedom we think we have… You are not in control of your mind—because you, as a conscious agent, are only part of your mind, living at the mercy of other parts. You can do what you decide to do—but you cannot decide what you will decide to do.” (Sam Harris, Free Will, page 5 and pp. 37-38).
Harris points to historic neurological studies to make his point. In the 1980’s, Benjamin Libet fitted his subjects with EEG electrodes and provided them with scenarios in which they had to make a choice to respond by moving their wrist. He discovered activity in the brainwaves of his subjects prior to their own conscious report of a decision. While Libet’s subjects thought they were choosing freely, their brain activity seemed to give them away (a series of brain events began prior to their report of a decision). Libet concluded “positive” free will was an illusion. If the subject’s “decisions” occurred and physical responses began (as reported by the EEG), even prior to their realizing this was the case, they could hardly be said to have made free choices prior to the deterministic physical sequence.
In the years since Libet’s famous studies, many other scientists have conducted similar experiments. John-Dylan Haynes, professor at the Berlin School of Mind and Brain, conducted experiments using an MRI instead of an EEG. His discoveries seem even more astonishing. He gave his subjects two buttons (one for each hand) and told them to push one of the two buttons the instant they made a decision to do so. Haynes discovered unconscious brain activity preceding and predicting their movements. This activity (recorded by the MRI) began seven to ten seconds prior to the conscious decision and action. Once again, scientific research seemed to confirm the deterministic, physical nature of the universe. According to experiments such as these, our choices are not really our own but are instead the result of a deterministic series of purely physical events in our brains.
But do these studies truly prove we have no free agency? No. Although Libet and Haynes concluded a physical brain sequence preceded any non-physical “free” decision, their work fails to demonstrate our physical brains are really in charge and our conscious decisions are only illusory. In the years since these experiments were first conducted, their resulting conclusions have come into question. How do we know this brain activity isn’t simply a signal reporting the beginning of thought processes prior to a final decision? When choosing between two options, we often ponder the decision (even while we are unaware) prior to making a free choice. There are good reasons to believe this is what Libet and Haynes’ experiments recorded. Haynes’ experiments, for example, identified activity in the prefrontal cortex and the BA10 regions of the brain. Independent studies indicate these regions of the brain are not relevant to free decisions, but are instead involved in the formation and storage of plans and intentions.
Although Libet and Haynes concluded a physical brain sequence preceded any non-physical ‘free’ decision, their work fails to demonstrate our physical brains are really in charge and our conscious decisions are only illusory.
Share on X
This seems consistent with Haynes’ findings of a seven-to-ten-second gap between activity in these regions and the conscious decision to act. Given this delay of several seconds, it’s far more reasonable to believe activity in these two areas of the brain is related to the unconscious time it takes to form a plan prior to making a final decision, than the much shorter period of time we experience when actually making a decision.
Our unrestricted plan formation and our final choices would, therefore, result in the findings recorded by Libet and others. These experiments fail to disprove free will because free agency is, after all, required for us to form plans as well as to make choices. For a more extensive discussion of alternate interpretations of Libet and Haynes, refer to Mark Balaguer’s book, Free Will, (MIT Press), and for a more lengthy explanation of the role free agency plays in the case for God’s existence, please refer to God’s Crime Scene, Chapter Six – Free Will or Full Wiring: Are Real Choices Even Possible?
For more information about the scientific and philosophical evidence pointing to a Divine Creator, please read God’s Crime Scene: A Cold-Case Detective Examines the Evidence for a Divinely Created Universe. This book employs a simple crime scene strategy to investigate eight pieces of evidence in the universe to determine the most reasonable explanation. The book is accompanied by an eight-session God’s Crime Scene DVD Set (and Participant’s Guide) to help individuals or small groups examine the evidence and make the case.
The post Do Neurological Studies Prove Free Agency Is An Illusion? first appeared on Cold Case Christianity.
He looketh upon men, and if any say, I have sinned, and perverted that which was right, and it profited me not; he will deliver his soul from going into the pit, and his life shall see the light.Job 33:27-28
This is a word of truth, gathered from the experience of a man of God, and it is tantamount to a promise. What the Lord has done, and is doing, He will continue to do while the world standeth. The Lord will receive into His bosom all who come to Him with a sincere confession of their sin; in fact, He is always on the lookout to discover any that are in trouble because of their faults.
Can we not endorse the language here used? Have we not sinned, sinned personally so as to say, “I have sinned”? Sinned willfully, having perverted that which is right? Sinned so as to discover that there is no profit in it but an eternal loss? Let us, then, go to God with this honest acknowledgment. He asks no more. We can do no less.
Let us plead His promise in the name of Jesus. He will deliver us from the pit of hell which yawns for us; He will grant us life and light. Why should we despair? Why should we even doubt? The Lord does not mock humble souls. He means what He says. The guilty can be forgiven. Those who deserve execution can receive free pardon. Lord, we confess, and we pray Thee to forgive!
Twitter is an interesting place to share random musings. It seems that no matter what you post, regardless of how non-controversial or benign, it can potentially bring ridicule and scorn down upon you. I recently tweeted:
“If you have a good argument, why resort to personal attacks?”
Now, you might think that would be something all could agree on, but you, like me, would be wrong! However, among the various replies, one individual asserted:
“If your god really existed, you wouldn’t need arguments.”
And while I think I understand the general sentiment, from the perspective of a Christian theist, I find this objection less than compelling.
In this brief post, I will offer an argument that I believe successfully removes the teeth of such an objection.
The person who makes a claim like the one above is essentially arguing, “If God really existed, and He wanted us to know it, He would make it more obvious and arguments wouldn’t be needed.”1 Oddly enough, this type of objection reminds me of the late journalist, Christopher Hitchens. “The Hitch” was a master rhetorician and was well-known for his forceful attacks against his debate opponents. One such attack occurred when Hitchen’s opponent would make a claim about God and Hitchens would reply, “Do you claim to know the mind of God?” And the point was not lost on the audience – “How can this mere human claim to know why God did X?” But do you see the irony? When one claims that God, should He exist, should have created a universe in which arguments are unnecessary to demonstrate His existence, they are claiming to know the mind of God! Furthermore, on Christian theism, there is no inconsistency between God existing and Him ordaining arguments as one way people might seek after Him. As a matter of fact, this is entirely consistent with what Paul tells the philosophers in Athens about God! He states:
“The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. and he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel their way toward him and find him.”2
Here, we see Paul informing the philosophers that it is God’s desire that we seek Him.3 The further significance of these verses should not be missed. As the late Bible commentator Albert Barnes explains:
“The design of thus placing them on the earth…was, that they should contemplate his wisdom in his works, and thus come to a knowledge of his existence and character. All nations, though living in different regions and climates, have thus the opportunity of becoming acquainted with God…”4
Surely, we can all agree that when one sincerely considers some of the various arguments offered through the centuries for the existence of God, that they are, at the very least, contemplating “his wisdom in his works” in hopes they will “come to a knowledge of his existence and character.”5
Therefore, arguments for the existence of God are completely consistent with the God who Christians believe has revealed Himself in the Bible and assertions that claim otherwise, in my estimation, fail. And those who claim that God should have created the universe in a certain way, are claiming to know the mind of God (and His purposes) while lacking adequate justification.6
Courage and Godspeed,
Chad
Footnotes:
1. It should be noted that the Bible itself claims that God’s existence is obvious to those who are opened to Him. See Romans 1:18-23. However, for the sake of this post, I will take the position that arguments are a way to seek God and that this is completely consistent with the God revealed in the Bible.
2. Acts 17:24-27; ESV.
3. For numerous examples, see here.
4. Taken from “Barnes’ Notes on the Bible,” found here.
5. This is especially relevant when one considers some of the philosophical arguments offered for the existence of God aim to demonstrate that His moral perfection. In other words, arguments for the existence of God, if successful, demonstrate both His existence and His goodness (character).
6. Understandably, the skeptic may push back and say, “But you are claiming to know the mind of God!” Not exactly. We are claiming that God has revealed Himself through the Bible; therefore, we can know somethings about God, but this certainly does not give us access to all of God’s thoughts and intents. And if we are right about the Bible, then this claim to some knowledge is justified.
Related Posts
Review of J.L. Schellenberg, “Divine Hiddenness and Human Reason,” by Daniel Howard-Snyder
Video: Why Does God Seem So Hidden? by Sean McDowell
R. Douglas Geivett on the Hiddenness of God
http://truthbomb.blogspot.com/2021/07/common-objection-if-your-god-really.html
By Rev. Chad Werkhoven – Posted at Unfading Truth:
God’s grace comes even to those who doze off.
Direct Link: Acts 20:7-12 – Wake Up!
Source: Daily Bible Reading | Unfading Truth
https://rchstudies.christian-heritage-news.com/2024/11/unfading-truth-acts-207-12-wake-up.html
People—those who are far more ignorant of the Scriptures than they care to admit—love to claim that the Bible presents two contradictory images of God. They point to the loving Jesus who embraced sinners and then to the wrathful God who commanded Israel to wipe out entire nations in Canaan.
“How can these possibly be the same God?” they shriek, as though they’ve uncovered a theological inconsistency that has somehow eluded two thousand years of church history. But the issue isn’t with the God revealed in Scripture. The problem lies in the faulty, sentimental worldview they’re using to judge Him. […] The post appeared first on DISNTR – The Dissenter .
Are you holding on to some guilt that you can’t seem to let go of? Maybe that guilt has a grip on you and it simply won’t let you be.
I know many women whose hearts still ache today from a decision to abort their child years – sometimes decades—ago. Some women carry the shame and regret of adultery, wishing they could go back in time and undo the unfaithfulness that eventually unraveled their marriage. Some women still bear the guilt of destructive behavior in their own lives years ago that their children witnessed and are now imitating.
But you and I were not designed to wallow in regret from past sin and become hand-in-hand partners with guilt and shame. Whether you’re dealing with the aftereffects of sin from yesterday or years ago, here is how to relieve yourself of the shame from past sin and start anew.
Photo credit: ©GettyImages/Sneksy
In Scripture, we read of King David, who is described as a man after God’s own heart (Acts 13:22). He wrote many songs of love and praise to his God (see many of the Psalms in the Bible). Yet during a restless season in his life, he lusted after a woman who wasn’t his wife, committed adultery with her that caused her to conceive a child, then murdered her husband (who was one of his elite, trusted, and capable “mighty men”) to cover up his sin. Upon being confronted about his sin, he repented—grievously—and prayed for a new start, as recorded in Psalm 51:10-12: “Create in me a clean heart, O God, And renew a steadfast spirit within me…Restore to me the joy of Your salvation and uphold me by Your gracious Spirit.”
If such an upright God-pleaser as David could commit a horrible sin like that, any of us can. Romans 3:23 says “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” But 1 John 1:9 assures us “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” If you’re still dealing with guilt and shame, it’s possible you’ve never confessed it (see Psalm 32:1-5). Turn the subject of your guilt and shame over to God, admit you were wrong, and ask for His grace and forgiveness that He promises to give lavishly.
Photo credit: ©Thinkstock
If you have already confessed your sins—whether once or a million times—and are still feeling shame and guilt, those feelings are not from God. Romans 8:1 tells us “Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” The Spirit of God convicts our hearts of sin so we will confess it to God and turn away from it and seek to start anew in His power. But God will not continue to bring back to your mind what you did.
If you have sincerely asked for His forgiveness, you are forgiven and seen as brand new. Psalm 103:12 says “As far as the east is from the west, so far has He removed our transgressions from us.” That means God doesn’t define you by your sin. He doesn’t continue to see that sin hanging over your head every time you try to speak to Him. He doesn’t remember that sin or bring it back in front of you when you do something else that offends Him. He removes it. It is finished, wiped away, done. He lets it go forever. Can you?
Photo credit: ©Thinkstock/tommaso79
It’s a wonderful thing that God forgives and forgets. But you and I are not God and therefore we can still remember our sins, even though God, who is capable of anything, chooses to forget them.
Just because you remember that sin doesn’t mean God does. Just because you still feel badly about your sin, doesn’t mean God feels the same. Trust Him that He means it when He says He has removed your sins as far away as the east is from the west. Those two directions never meet—they just keep travelling apart from each other, infinitely. Your sins will never be retrieved or come back around to meet you. You will not see them flashed up on a big screen when you get to heaven one day. They’re gone. When you start to remember your regrettable actions, thank God that He has forgiven you and given you the ability to walk in a new direction, far from the sins of your past.
Photo credit: ©Unsplash/BenWhite
I know many women who believe in the forgiveness of God and the cleansing power of the cross of Christ—until it comes to their particular sin. As long as you continue to hold onto guilt and believe your sin is unforgivable, you are saying to God that His perfect plan to atone for the sins of mankind by sacrificing His Beloved Son Jesus, was not enough to cover your sin. Do you actually think you are the exception to the perfected finished work that Jesus did on the cross for all who believe and surrender their lives to Him?
Any of us can unknowingly undermine the healing power of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ when we believe that something we have done is outside the realm of God’s forgiveness. We are, in a sense, saying “That doesn’t apply to me.” When you have such thoughts, remove yourself from the equation and focus on the One who so adequately and sufficiently “heals the brokenhearted and binds up their wounds” (Psalm 147:3).
Photo credit: ©Thinkstock
Sometimes we remain in a state of hurt or shame because we think of Jesus’ death and resurrection in terms of how they rescued us from eternal condemnation, but we fail to realize the incredible significance His death and resurrection have for us as we continue life in the here and now! Christ’s death on the cross didn’t just provide for your eternal life, it provided healing for your everyday life.
In Isaiah 53:4-5, we read this prophesy of Jesus the Messiah:
Surely He has borne our griefs
And carried our sorrows;
Yet we esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten by God, and afflicted.
But He was wounded for our transgressions,
He was bruised for our iniquities;
The chastisement for our peace was upon Him,
And by His stripes we are healed (emphasis added).
The fact that each of those healing statements is given in the past tense, even though Isaiah proclaimed these prophetic words several hundreds of years before Jesus came to earth tells me God saw it as already done. Therefore, the grief you are suffering as a result of loss and shame has already been borne by Jesus. The sorrows you are feeling from a broken heart have already been carried by Him. The wounds you so want healed have already been taken care of. And just as this wounded Jesus came up out of the grave with glorious scars to show us that He could conquer sin and its devastating effect on our lives, you too can experience new life and a glorious testimony of what He has done through you.
Photo credit: ©Thinkstock/RomoloTavani
Sometimes we continue to feel guilty about our sins because we see God as a judge waiting to hammer us for what we’ve done in the past or will do again in the future. But God is not a judge to those who have surrendered their lives to Him and are in relationship with Him. To them, He is a loving Father, who is waiting for His prodigal child to come home.
Matthew 7:11 says “If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly father give what is good to those who ask Him!” If you’ve asked for forgiveness and a new heart, as David did in Psalm 51:10, trust God to be the good and loving Father He describes Himself as in Scripture, and one who will graciously give to us whatever we ask in His name (Matthew 21:22). He is also a God who wants to enable you to live victoriously—not as a victim or a violator.
Photo credit: ©Thinkstock/chaunpis
My friend, Christina, who was raised in the illicit drug business and exposed to a number of destructive and sinful behaviors, said she realized that true healing and freedom—from childhood hurts and the poor choices she made during her college years—came through her study of the Word of God, where she developed a true understanding of the message of the cross.
“I went through counseling,” Christina said. “I saw doctors, tried medication. None of that was effective for me. I needed the Word of God. A love and insatiable appetite for the Word of God began to grow in me, and that’s where I found victory … in the message of the cross.”
If you continue to feel shame for sin you have confessed and surrendered to Jesus Christ, stop listening to the voices of doubt, self-condemnation or the enemy’s accusations. Immerse yourself in the victorious, life-giving words of Scripture and begin living like a loved, forgiven child of God.
Cindi McMenamin is a pastor’s wife, mom, Bible teacher, and national speaker who helps women strengthen their relationships with God and others. She is the author of several books including the best-selling When Women Walk Alone (more than 130,000 copies sold), When a Woman Overcomes Life’s Hurts, and When God Sees Your Tears. For more on her speaking ministry, or books and resources to help you grow in your relationship with God, your marriage or your parenting, see her website: www.StrengthForTheSoul.com.
Photo credit: ©Thinkstock
https://www.crosswalk.com/faith/women/how-to-relieve-the-shame-from-past-sin-and-start-anew.html
FREE Download – A Special Thanksgiving Day Touch!: https://bit.ly/4fySaHV
Message Description:
Meteorologists can often predict when storms will arise on earth, but you can’t always know when the storms of life will appear. Even so, there’s hope! Dr. David Jeremiah examines four promises of reassurance God makes when you find yourself in a time of trouble.
New Thanksgiving gift book, “Season of Gratitude: A Celebration of Thanksgiving”: https://bit.ly/4fxiUII
A meaningful Christmas gift for everyone on your list: https://bit.ly/4fEk4lX
Source: Danger: The Fear of Sudden Trouble | Dr. David Jeremiah | Mark 4:35-41
Let anyone who has an ear listen to what the Spirit is saying to the churches” (Rev. 2:11). This passage from Scripture is frequently quoted to justify a so-called “synodal Church,” a concept that at least partially, if not completely, contradicts the Catholic understanding of the Church. Factions with ulterior motives have hijacked the traditional principle of synodality, meaning the collaboration between bishops (collegiality) and between all believers and shepherds of the Church (based on the common priesthood of all those baptized into the faith), to further their progressive agenda. By executing a 180-degree turn, the doctrine, liturgy, and morality of the Catholic Church is to be made compatible with a neo-gnostic woke ideology. Their tactics are remarkably similar to those of the ancient Gnostics, of whom Irenaeus of Lyon, who was elevated to Doctor of the Church by Pope Francis, wrote: “by means of their craftily-constructed plausibilities [they] draw away the minds of the inexperienced and take them captive. . . . These men falsify the oracles of God, and prove themselves evil interpreters of the good word of revelation. By means of specious and plausible words, they cunningly allure the simple-minded to inquire [into a more contemporary understanding]” until they are unable “to distinguish falsehood from truth” (Against Heresies, Book I, Preface). Direct divine revelation is weaponized to make the self-relativization of the Church of Christ acceptable (“all religions are paths to God”). The direct communication between the Holy Spirit and Synod participants is invoked to justify arbitrary doctrinal concessions (“marriage for all”; lay officials at the helm of ecclesiastical “power”; the ordination of female deacons as a trophy in the fight for women’s rights) as the result of a higher insight, which can overcome any objections from established Catholic doctrine.
But anyone who, by appealing to personal and collective inspiration from the Holy Spirit, seeks to reconcile the teaching of the Church with an ideology hostile to revelation and with the tyranny of relativism is guilty in various ways of a “sin against the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 12:31; Mark 3:29; Luke 12:10). This is, as will be explained below in seven different aspects, nothing other than a “resistance of the known truth” when “a man resists the truth which he has acknowledged, in order to sin more freely” (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae II-II, q. 14, a. 2).
1. Regarding the Holy Spirit as a divine person
It is a sin against the Holy Spirit if one does not confess him as the divine person who, in unity with the Father and the Son, is the one God, but confuses him with the anonymous numinous divinity of comparative religious studies, the collective folk spirit of the Romantics, the volonté générale of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the Weltgeist of Georg W. F. Hegel, or the historical dialectic of Karl Marx, and finally with political utopias, from communism to atheistic transhumanism.
2. Regarding Jesus Christ as the fullness of truth and grace
It is a sin against the Holy Spirit if one reinterprets the history of Christian dogma as an evolution of revelation, reflected in advancing levels of consciousness in the collective church, instead of confessing the unsurpassable fullness of grace and truth in Jesus Christ, the Word of God made flesh (John 1:14–18).
Irenaeus of Lyon, the Doctor Unitatis, established once and for all, against gnostics of all times, the criteria of Catholic hermeneutics (that is, theological epistemology): 1) Holy Scripture; 2) apostolic tradition; 3) the teaching authority of the bishops by virtue of apostolic succession.
In accordance with the analogy of being and faith, the revealed truths of faith can never contradict natural reason, but can (and do) clash with its ideological misuse. There are a priori no new scientific insights (which are always fallible in principle) that could override the truths of supernatural revelation and natural moral law (which are always infallible in their inner nature). The pope can thus neither fulfill nor disappoint the hopes for change in the revealed doctrines of faith, because “this teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on” (Dei Verbum, 10).
The only and eternal paradigm of our relationship with God always remains the Word made flesh, full of grace and truth (John 1:14–18). In contrast to the intellectual superiority delusion of the old and new gnostics with their belief in the self-creation and self-redemption of man, the Church maintains that the person of Jesus Christ is the full truth of God in an insurmountable “newness” for all people (Irenaeus of Lyon, Against Heresies, Book IV, 34, 1). Because: “There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among mortals by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).
3. Regarding the unity of the Church in Christ
It is a sin against the Holy Spirit when the unity of the Church in the teaching of the faith is handed over to the arbitrariness and ignorance of local bishops’ conferences (who allegedly develop doctrinally at different paces) under the pretext of so-called decentralization. Irenaeus of Lyon states against the Gnostics: “though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth . . . the Catholic Church possesses one and the same faith throughout the whole world” (Irenaeus of Lyon, Against Heresies, Book I, 10, 1–3).
The unity of the universal Church “in body and one Spirit” is christologically and sacramentally grounded. For: “one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all and through all and in all” (Eph. 4:5–6). And it is contrary to the same “unity of the Spirit” (Eph. 4:3) to enmesh the bearers of the Church’s overall mission (laity, religious, and clergy) in a struggle for “power” in the political sense, instead of grasping that the Holy Spirit effects their harmonious cooperation. For every one of us, “speaking the truth in love . . . must grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ” (Eph. 4:15).
4. Regarding the episcopate as an institution of divine right
It is a sin against the Holy Spirit, who, through the sacrament of Holy Orders, has appointed bishops and priests as pastors of the Church of God (Acts 20:28), to depose them, or even secularize them, purely at personal discretion, without a canonical process. Objective criteria for disciplinary measures against bishops and priests are apostasy, schism, heresy, moral misconduct, a grossly unspiritual lifestyle, and obvious incapacity for office. This is especially true for the selection of future bishops when the candidate, appointed without careful examination, does not “have a firm grasp of the word that is trustworthy in accordance with the teaching (sana doctrina)” (Titus 1:9).
5. Regarding the natural moral law and non-negotiable values
It is a sin against the Holy Spirit when bishops and theologians only opportunistically support the pope publicly when he supports their ideological preferences. No one can remain silent when defending the right to life of every single person from conception to natural death. For the pope is the highest authentic interpreter of the natural moral law on earth, in which God’s word and wisdom shine forth in the existence and being of creation (John 1:3). If the natural moral law, which is evident in the conscience of every human being (Rom. 2:14), does not form the source of and criterion against which to judge the (always fallible) laws of the state, then political power slides into totalitarianism, which tramples on those natural human rights that should form the basis of every democratic society and constitutional state. This is what Pope Pius XI declared in the encyclical Mit Brennender Sorge (1937) against the formally legally valid Nuremberg Race Laws of the German state: “It is in the light of the commands of this natural law, that all positive law, whoever be the lawgiver, can be gauged in its moral content, and hence, in the authority it wields over conscience. Human laws in flagrant contradiction with the natural law are vitiated with a taint which no force, no power can mend” (Mit Brennender Sorge, 30).
6. Regarding the Church as a sacrament of human unity
It is a sin against the Holy Spirit when the political and ideological division of society since the European Enlightenment and the French Revolution is incorporated into a restorative or revolutionary philosophy of history and when the one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church is thereby paralyzed by internally pitting “progressive” against “conservative” factions.
For the Church in Christ is not only the sacrament of the most intimate communion of mankind with God, but also a sign and instrument of the unity of humanity in its natural and supernatural purpose (Lumen Gentium, 1).
The discernment of spirits is not undertaken with a view to political goals, but theologically, regarding the truth of revelation, which is presented in the Church’s infallible doctrine of faith. Thus, the objective criterion of the Catholic faith is orthodoxy as opposed to heresy (and not the subjective will to preserve or change contingent cultural aspects).
With the upcoming 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea (325), we might bear the following motto in mind: Better to go into exile five times with St. Athanasius than to make the slightest concession to the Arians.
7. Regarding the supernatural nature of Christianity, which opposes its instrumentalization for worldly purposes
The most current sin against the Holy Spirit is when the supernatural origin and character of Christianity is denied in order to subordinate the Church of the Triune God to the goals and purposes of a worldly salvation project, be it eco-socialist climate neutrality or Agenda 2030 of the “globalist elite.”
Anyone who really wants to hear what the Spirit is saying to the Church will not rely on spiritualistic inspirations and woke-ideological platitudes, but will place all their trust, in life and death, solely in Jesus, the Son of the Father and the Anointed One of the Holy Spirit. He alone has promised his disciples the Holy Spirit of truth and love for all eternity: “Those who love me will keep my word, and my Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them. . . . But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything, and remind you of all that I have said to you” (John 14:23–26).
Gerhard Cardinal Müller is former prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
First Things depends on its subscribers and supporters. Join the conversation and make a contribution today.
Click here to make a donation.
Click here to subscribe to First Things.
Image in the public domain. Image cropped.
What is Hell? What does the Bible say about Hell, and how can I not go to Hell? Not going to Heaven and going to Hell is rightfully a scary thought! Along with that fear, many are confused about facts about Hell, like what is Hell like, who goes to Hell, and what happens in Hell. In this video about Hell and how to avoid going to Hell, Pastor Nelson answers your question: How can I not go to hell?
*** I have accepted Christ today:
https://www.gotquestions.org/now-what2.html
*** Source Article:
https://www.gotquestions.org/not-go-to-hell.html
“From The Patriot Post (patriotpost.us)”.
“The great principles of right and wrong are legible to every reader; to pursue them requires not the aid of many counselors. The whole art of government consists in the art of being honest.” —Thomas Jefferson (1775)
Douglas Andrews, Thomas Gallatin, & Jordan Candler
For the Executive Summary archive, click here.
Follow Thomas Gallatin and Jordan Candler on X/Twitter.
Mark Alexander
Let me preface this analysis by disclosing that I have never been a supporter of former Congressman Matt Gaetz (R-FL). But this week, we learned some great things about Donald Trump’s incoming leadership temperament. I first noticed these changes after the Butler, Pennsylvania, assassination attempt. This is shaping up to be a challenging but very good presidential term.
Until Trump’s nomination of Gaetz last week, I have only mentioned him once in the past four years — and then just a brief reference as a “showboat” member of the House.
Until Trump made his AG announcement, I was tracking with his nominations. “Trump needs to clean up the DOJ and its pockets of corrupt deep state actors,” I noted. “But that will take somebody with impeccable character and gravitas, and I believe Gaetz has substantial deficits on both counts.”
One of many reasons I think Gaetz was the wrong nominee: He has been under investigation by the REPUBLICAN House Ethics Committee since they took control of the House for a list of issues. Among the allegations is the case of a minor who may have been sexually trafficked by Gaetz. His close friend Joel Greenberg has already pleaded guilty in connection with that case.
As I wrote last week, “I do not know the facts, but Gaetz’s quick resignation from Congress closed the ethics investigation, preventing release of the House report on Gaetz two days before it was scheduled to drop.” That timing was, at best, suspect, given reports that the victim and witnesses spent days testifying before the Ethics Committee. The assumption is that the Senate would have requested the release of the report during its confirmation hearings, which then opened the prospect of a recess appointment.
Yesterday, Gaetz was on Capitol Hill knocking on Senate Republican doors for support, with the help of JD Vance dutifully supporting a Trump nominee. About 12 hours later, Gaetz suddenly withdrew his name from consideration.
This withdrawal came a day after the House Ethics Committee decided it would not release the Gaetz report, so that may have figured into Gaetz’s removing himself from consideration.
More likely, Gaetz’s clock ran out because more details are being released by the attorney of Gaetz’s alleged victim(s), now affirming their testimony of multiple accounts of underage girls being flown to New York and the Bahamas by Gaetz for sex parties (trafficking). There is currently a civil suit by an alleged victim, which is making those accounts public.
For his part, Gaetz said, “While the momentum was strong, it is clear that my confirmation was unfairly becoming a distraction to the critical work of the Trump/Vance Transition.” To be clear, the day after his nomination was announced, I wrote, “If Gaetz had an ounce of integrity and humility, he never would have allowed his name for consideration.”
According to Trump: “I greatly appreciate the recent efforts of Matt Gaetz in seeking approval to be Attorney General. He was doing very well but, at the same time, did not want to be a distraction for the Administration, for which he has much respect. Matt has a wonderful future, and I look forward to watching all of the great things he will do!”
That response is both conciliatory and necessary, especially for the Gaetz “true believers.” Notably, Trump didn’t pull out his first-term torch to go after Gaetz’s accusers.
Two points I would make in the wake of this unforced error by Trump.
First would be that Trump had a blind spot on this one, but I think letting Gaetz go says something VERY positive about Trump and those advising him: He is teachable this time around. He didn’t deploy his “everybody go to hell” scorched-earth strategy but instead let Gaetz go quietly.
Second, in multiple conversations with friends who are high-level Trump campaign supporters, there is concurrence that this is the BEST news we have heard since Trump won the election two weeks ago.
To be clear, I get why Trump appointed Gaetz. He wanted a bomb dropper at DOJ.
One of the things I like best about Trump: The day he arrived in DC, he dropped a bomb on the Beltway status quo in Congress and its special interests. He dropped a bomb on the regulatory behemoths and their bureaucratic bottlenecks. He dropped a bomb on the trade and national security institutions and alliances that had failed miserably over the previous eight years. And he dropped a bomb on all the pundits and mainstream media outlets.
This is what America needed then and needs again now. But Gaetz was not and never has been a bomb — he was and remains a dud.
So, where does Gaetz go from here?
At the moment, Trump, congressional Republicans, and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis are free of the Gaetz controversies. However, there is speculation that he might return to the House seat to which he was recently reelected. But in his resignation from the House, he declared, “I do not intend to take the oath of office for the same office in the 119th Congress.” He could return since no special election has been scheduled to replace him, though that would reactivate the House Ethics investigation. I would hope there was no deal cut with DeSantis to appoint Gaetz to the Senate seat being vacated by Marco Rubio.
Finally, as for who Trump would nominate next for AG, I was thinking maybe Josh Hawley (R-MO) or former federal prosecutor Trey Gowdy.
But within hours of shaking off Gaetz, he nominated former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, who is highly qualified in terms of experience, tenacity, character, and integrity.
Trump noted: “Pam was a prosecutor for nearly 20 years, where she was very tough on Violent Criminals, and made the streets safe for Florida Families. Then, as Florida’s first female Attorney General, she worked to stop the trafficking of deadly drugs, and reduce the tragedy of Fentanyl Overdose Deaths, which have destroyed many families across our Country. For too long, the partisan Department of Justice has been weaponized against me and other Republicans — Not anymore. Pam will refocus the DOJ to its intended purpose of fighting Crime, and Making America Safe Again. I have known Pam for many years — She is smart and tough, and is an AMERICA FIRST Fighter, who will do a terrific job as Attorney General!”
Follow Mark Alexander on X/Twitter.
For more of today’s columns, visit Right Opinion.
Non Compos Mentis
“It seems like unless you have a sexual misconduct allegation, you can’t be in the cabinet.” —”The View” co-host Whoopi Goldberg
“Elon Musk is the actual vice president. … JD Vance — you know, he’s kind of an interim.” —Whoopi Goldberg
“I literally just got out of meetings with members of Congress & used the bathroom on my way out. Trans women are women — full stop. We’re every bit as ‘biologically female’ as cis women & [Mike Johnson’s] statement doesn’t change the fact that women’s spaces include trans women.” —Montana State Rep. Zooey Zephyr
“They’re not doing this to protect people. They’re endangering women. They’re endangering girls of all kinds.” —Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez regarding sex-exclusive bathrooms
Non Sequitur
“We support gay marriage, and voted for the Respect for Marriage Act twice. However, if you think protecting women is discrimination, you are the problem. We don’t care if you’re trans, if you have balls we don’t want you in the women’s bathroom.” —Congresswoman Nancy Mace (“And this is where Mace demonstrates her limited understanding of the issue & how we got here. America decided men could become women because they first decided husbands could become wives. Men and women became interchangeable because husbands and wives became interchangeable. ‘Trans women are women’ only makes sense to people who first believed ‘love is love.’” —Allie Beth Stuckey)
For the Record
“The preamble of the United States Constitution uses the active verb ‘provide’ when it comes to the common defense. The more passive word ‘promote’ is used when it comes to our general welfare. However, successive governing regimes (and this is bipartisan) have deemed it more important to ‘provide’ for general welfare, and the result has been an exploding leviathan called the federal government.” —Allen West
“If vetting is important when it comes to people crossing our border — and it is — it is equally important when it comes to those who would have power and authority over us in some of our most important cabinet positions. … Yes, Washington is ripe for change and the bureaucracy needs to be shaken up, but it must be done the right way, for the right reasons and with the right people.” —Cal Thomas
And Last…
“I find it hard to believe Matt Gaetz dropped out because he’s worried about taking up too much attention…” —Ian Haworth
“Many of the troubles in public life over the past 30 years could have been avoided if these overage, overstimulated, undisciplined boys would just have kept their [genitals] in their pants.” —John Podhoretz
“For a misogynist Trump sure does pick a lot of strong women to serve in his cabinet.” —Kevin Sorbo
For more of today’s memes, visit the Memesters Union.
For more of today’s cartoons, visit the Cartoons archive.
“From The Patriot Post (patriotpost.us)”.
Two of Israel’s most famous leaders now face arrest if they go to almost any nation in the world. That’s after the International criminal court issued arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant. President- elect trump moving quickly to choose a new nominee for attorney general- after his first choice dropped out. Mental illness, depression, and suicidal behavior: these are just some of the dangers of using marijuana. Yet the federal government is considering a move that will make the drug even more accessible. the first college football 12-team playoff begins in less than one month, as teams make their final push to build their post-season resumes. Children in a Los Angeles community received a few surprises at an advance screening of the holiday film “red one”. It’s star Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson made a surprise appearance.
Want more news from a Christian Perspective? Choose to support CBN: https://go.cbn.com/ugWBn
CBN News. Because Truth Matters™
Source: Outrage over War Crime Charges Against Israel | CBN NewsWatch – November 22, 2024
This year’s gathering of the G20 reflected strikingly different world views. The West droned on about its Ukraine proxy war. The rest – the Global South – focused on international stability and economic prosperity.
CrossTalking with Palki Sharma, John Pang, and Carl Zha.
Source: CrossTalk: Challenging the West
Truth2Freedom's Blog 