Borden Church of Christ

Many people would say… “you don’t have to believe in God to be good.” As a matter of fact all of us know some folks who don’t believe in God and do, “good things.” People build hospitals, work at homeless shelters, teach language classes to the illiterate, help their neighbors, teach their children manners, only eat vegetables, and recycle. These are all “good things,” right? But is it possible that these good deeds are not indeed good.

I want to suggest to you that any deed done by the unbeliever is sinful. In fact everything that is done without a Savior Is Sin. God made us. He made us for himself. He created us to display His Glory, but more specifically He created us to bring Him Glory. Therefore if we do anything in the absence of God, if we do anything to bring glory to self rather than God, then we have sinned. Every good deed done toward man without the intention to bringing glory to God is in fact sinful.

By nature we are spiritually dead (Ephesians 2:1-4) and until we are made alive by our Savior, nothing we do apart from God is spiritual. Everything we do before Christ comes from the flesh (Ephesians 2:5-7) and therefore without a Savior all our so-called good deeds are nothing more than filthy rags.

A famous radio debate between the Jesuit philosopher and historian of philosophy Frederick Copleston and the anti-Christian mathematical logician Bertrand Russell, illustrates the difficulty of trying to define good in the absence of God. (www.bringyou.to/apologetics/p20.htm):

Bertrand Russell [BR]: You see, I feel that some things are good and that other things are bad. I love the things that are good, that I think are good, and I hate the things that I think are bad. I don’t say that these things are good because they participate in the Divine goodness.

Frederick Copleston [FC]: Yes, but what’s your justification for distinguishing between good and bad or how do you view the distinction between them?

BR: I don’t have any justification any more than I have when I distinguish between blue and yellow. What is my justification for distinguishing between blue and yellow? I can see they are different.

FC: Well, that is an excellent justification, I agree. You distinguish blue and yellow by seeing them, so you distinguish good and bad by what faculty?

BR: By my feelings.

Christian apologist Dr Ravi Zacharias said in The Atheists Challenge, if Copleston weren’t such a gentleman, he might have asked, “in some cultures they love their neighbors; in others they eat them, both on the basis of feeling. Do you have any preference?”

All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23; 1 Corinthians 10:31). For whatsoever is not from faith is sin (Romans 14:23).

Luke 18:19
19 So Jesus said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good but One, that is, God.

Ephesians 2:1–7
1 And you were dead in your trespasses and sins,
2 in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.
3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
7 so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.

An examination into the existence of morality and ethics provides yet another link in the chain of logical thought that establishes the case for the existence of God. The evidence often is discussed by means of what is referred to as the anthropological, or moral, argument for God’s existence. Morality is the character of being in accord with the principles or standards of right conduct. Ethics generally is viewed as the system or code by which attitudes and actions are determined to be either right or wrong. Ethics sometimes is defined as the justification of criteria by which one human life can be judged to be better or worse than another (see Henry, 1973, p. 220). Morality and ethics, then, assert that there exists a differentiation between right and wrong, and between good and evil. Moreover, by implication, there must be an appeal to some ultimate standard by which these character traits can be distinguished. The purpose of morality and ethics is inseparably connected with the purpose of life itself.

If there is no purpose in the Universe, as Simpson and others have asserted, then actually there is no purpose to morality or ethics. But the concept of a purposeless morality, or a purposeless ethic, does not make sense, and so men have sought to read some meaning, as far-fetched as it may be, into the natural human inclination to recognize the need for morality. Let us give brief attention to several of the theories that propose to explain the function of human ethics.

Hedonism

Hedonism is the philosophy which argues that the aim of moral conduct is the attainment of the greatest possible pleasure with the greatest possible avoidance of pain. That is to say, the single moral criterion is the preponderance of pleasure over pain. A phase of hedonism, known as psychological hedonism, contends that one can act only in this manner. But if that is the case, how could one’s actions be considered as “moral” in such circumstances? A man hardly can be viewed as moral for doing that which he cannot help doing.

Hedonism, however, is woefully inconsistent, and its advocates rarely, if ever, will stay with its logical conclusions. What if one, in the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain, must inflict pain upon others in order to achieve the goal? In other words, what if one must act immorally in order to practice his “morality”? What is there about hedonism that would motivate a person to forego his own pleasure in the interest of others? Absolutely nothing! Renowned British agnostic Bertrand Russell frustratingly wrote:

We feel that the man who brings widespread happiness at the expense of misery to himself is a better man than the man who brings unhappiness to others and happiness to himself. I do not know of any rational ground for this view, or, perhaps, for the somewhat more rational view that whatever the majority desires [called utilitarian hedonism—WJ] is preferable to what the minority desires. These are truly ethical problems but I do not know of any way in which they can be solved except by politics or war. All that I can find to say on this subject is that an ethical opinion can only be defended by an ethical axiom, but, if the axiom is not accepted, there is no way of reaching a rational conclusion (1969, 3:29, emp. added).
But what if a person is simply an egotistical hedonist and thus announces, “I care not at all for others; I intend to live my life solely for my own pleasure with no consideration for others, save when such is in my own interest.” But someone doubtlessly would be tempted to respond, “That is so selfish.” So, what is wrong with selfishness if it brings pleasure to the committed hedonist? Some are willing to actually go to that extreme. Atheistic philosopher Ayn Rand even authored a book titled The Virtue of Selfishness—A New Concept of Egoism, defending the concept of hedonistic selfishness. Yet who would want to live in such a society?

Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism, advocated by Jeremy Bentham, J.S. Mill, and others, is built upon the foundation of hedonism, and argues that “good” is that which gives pleasure to the greatest number of people. Again, however, the theory is seriously flawed for several reasons. First, it cannot answer the vital query: If pleasure to the greatest number of people prevents a man from achieving his own personal pleasure, what is there to motivate him toward the pleasure of the many? Second, utilitarianism provides no guideline to determine what the “pleasure” (genuine happiness) of the many actually is. Third, it is the philosophy that stands behind, and is perfectly consistent with, numerous atrocities perpetrated in the alleged interest of humanity. When Hitler slaughtered countless millions, and bred people like animals in behalf of evolving his master race, he felt he was operating in the genuine interest of mankind as a whole. The principle is: If some have to suffer in order for the ultimate good to be accomplished, so what? Of course, the leaders of such movements always are willing to step forward with their definition of what that “ultimate good” is!

Finally, however, this idea cannot provide any rational reason as to why it would be “wrong” to ignore what is in the interest of the many and, instead, simply pursue one’s personal pleasure. There is an amazing commentary on this point in an interesting book, My Father Bertrand Russell, written by Russell’s daughter, Katherine Tait. Mrs. Tait was born in London in 1923, and was educated at her parents’ innovative school, Beacon Hill, which was dedicated to the promotion of atheistic humanism. In her fascinating volume, Mrs. Tait explained what it was like being the famous philosopher’s only daughter.

For example, Bertrand Russell believed that a parent must teach his child “with its very first breath that it has entered into a moral world” (Tait, 1975, p. 59). Yet, as with all atheists and agnostics, he had a most difficult time explaining why, if man is merely the product of natural forces, children should be taught morality. Tait recalled that as a child she might say, in connection with some moral responsibility, “I don’t want to! Why should I?” A conventional parent, she observed, might reply, “Because I say so…, your father says so…, God says so….” Russell, however, would say to his children: “Because more people will be happy if you do than if you don’t.” “So what,” she would respond, “I don’t care about other people.” But her father would declare, “You should!” In her naive innocence, young Katherine would inquire, “But why?”—a question to which the redundant rejoinder would be, “Because more people will be happy if you do than if you don’t.” And, Tait noted, “We felt the heavy pressure of his rectitude and obeyed, but the reason was not convincing—neither to us nor to him” (Tait, 1975, pp. 184-185). Indeed, such specious reasoning will convince no one who thinks beyond the superficial level.

MORALS/ETHICS AND THE EXISTENCE OF GOD

The truth of the matter is that only the theocentric approach to morality can explain the purpose of life, and therefore provide adequate motivation for a genuinely ethical approach to life. Though proof of God’s existence is abundantly evident in the beautifully designed Universe, His character is made known only in His verbal communications (available to us in the biblical documents). Thus, the Bible declares that God is eternal (Psalm 90:2; 1 Timothy 1:17), and that He is morally perfect. Not only is God holy (Isaiah 6:3; Revelation 4:8), just and righteous (Psalm 89:14), and good (Psalms 100:6; 106:1), but in the ultimate sense, only God is good (Mark 10:18). Since the God of the Bible is perfect (Matthew 5:48), it is to be expected that all that proceeds from Him is initially good. Accordingly, that which He created was good (Genesis 1:31), and all that He does, commands, and approves is likewise good (Psalm 119:39,68).

The “good,” therefore, is what God is; what He has commanded results from Who He is, and thus is likewise good. In the Old Testament, the prophet Micah declared of God: “He showed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth Jehovah require of thee, but to do justly, and to love kindness, and walk humbly with thy God” (Micah 6:8). Similarly, in the New Testament Peter admonished: “As he who called you is holy, be ye yourselves also holy in all manner of living; because it is written, Ye shall be holy: for I am holy” (1 Peter 1:15).

Moral sensitivity (i.e., the awareness that right and wrong do exist) has been implanted in the soul of man by virtue of his creation in the image of the God Who is eternally good. Though created upright, man, as a being of free willpower, fell from his lofty estate. Accordingly, God, by means of divine revelation, seeks to bring man back into harmony with Himself—a process that entails both religious and moral obligations.

Biblical morality has several thrusts: (1) It is designed to develop within man right attitudes, or to state it another way, to instill a divine level of thinking; (2) Too, it is intended to help humanity translate spiritual attitudes into actions that will be helpful to all others; (3) Finally, the desired result is to guide man back into accord with the divine ideal, thus ensuring both his present and eternal happiness—to the glory of God.

Additionally, we may note that biblical revelation provides a sufficient motive for moral conduct. Those who have not foolishly thrust God from their minds (Psalm 14:1) acknowledge that the creation testifies of Jehovah’s existence (Romans 1:20-21), and that His orderly Universe is evidence of His good and loving nature (Acts 14:17; James 1:17; I John 4:8). The love of God in providing Christ (John 3:16) for sinful man, and the love of Jesus in offering Himself to redeem us (Revelation 1:5; Philippians 2:5ff.), are motive aplenty for leading a moral life. We love, hence, obey Him (John 14:15) because He first loved us (I John 4:10-11,19). The Scriptures provide both purpose and motive for their ethical base, whereas unbelief has neither.

OTHER CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHING ETHICS
All theories regarding morality assume some standard by which moral judgments are made. Whether that standard is “pleasure,” “majority opinion,” “survival,” etc., these theories all have one thing in common: they assume some sort of ethical “yardstick” by which conduct is measured. I now want to give brief attention to several of these proposed standards to see how they fare in the light of logical scrutiny.

Nihilism

Nihilism springs from the atheistic notion that since there is no God, there can be no rational justification for ethical norms. Advocates of this viewpoint have contended that nihilism is the condition which allows that “everything is permitted.” Russian novelist Fyodor Dostoyevsky, in his work, The Brothers Karamazov (1880), has one of his characters say that if God is dead, everything is allowed! French existential philosopher Jean Paul Sartre wrote:

Everything is indeed permitted if God does not exist, and man is in consequence forlorn, for he cannot find anything to depend upon either within or outside himself…. Nor, on the other hand, if God does not exist, are we provided with any values or commands that could legitimize our behavior (1961, p. 485).
Sartre contended that whatever one chooses to do is right; value is attached to the choice itself so that “…we can never choose evil” (1966, p. 279). These men are correct about one thing. If there is no God, “anything goes.”

The hypocrisy of this dogma, however, is revealed by the fact that the propagators of such an idea really mean that “everything is permitted” for them alone. They do not mean that the theft of their property, the rape of their wives, and the slitting of their throats is permitted!

Relativism

Moral relativism rejects the idea that there can be universal criteria for determining values. All value systems are thought to be culturally originated and conditioned, hence, all cultural ethical systems are equally valid. No moral system, it is claimed, can be said to be either true or false.

Again, though, relativism falls of its own weaknesses, and its proponents will not stay with it. What if a particular culture, e.g., that of the “Bible Belt,” believes that ethics is absolute? Would the relativists yield to that? Perish the thought! In some cultures, infanticide has been (or is being) deemed a proper form of population control. Is that then “right”? What about slavery, or the abuse of women? Where is the relativist that will declare openly and publicly the morality of such practices?

Situationism

Situationism (commonly known as “situation ethics”) also repudiates the concept of any absolute system of values. For our present purpose, we may divide situationists into two classes—atheists and theists.

The atheistic position perhaps is best expressed in the Humanist Manifestos I and II. Written in 1933 and 1973, respectively, and signed by such notables as John Dewey, Isaac Asimov, Francis Crick, Julian Huxley, Antony Flew, and others, they contain the following statements:

We affirm that moral values derive their source from human experience. Ethics is autonomous, and situational, needing no theological or ideological sanction. Ethics stems from human needs and interests. To deny this distorts the whole basis of life (Humanist Manifestos I and II, 1977, p. 17).
A more contradictory and absurd position would be difficult to conceive. If one argues that ethics is situational, he is suggesting that an act cannot be judged by an absolute standard, and that its rightness or wrongness is dependent upon the situation. For example, it would be wrong to lie if that falsehood was hurtful to others; however, if the lie could be helpful, it is said, then it would be right. However, as previously indicated, morality is alleged to be autonomous. That word means “self law,” suggesting that every man is his own law. If that is the case, how could there ever be a situation in which a person could do wrong? Human ethical autonomy and situational morality are mutually exclusive.

Then there is theistic situation ethics, most popularly expounded by Joseph Fletcher. Fletcher (1966, p. 55) claimed that situation ethics represents a sort of the middle-of-the-road position between the extremes of “antinomianism” (i.e., no ethical rules exist) and “legalism” (i.e., moral decisions may be made by appealing to a rule book, e.g., the Bible). For him, “love” was the sole factor in making moral judgments. It must be noted, though, that his “love” is purely subjective—each individual must decide for himself, in a given context, what the loving course is.

The theory is fraught with insuperable logical difficulties. First, it affirms, “There are absolutely no absolutes.” “Are you sure,” we would ask? “Absolutely!” claims the situationist. Situation ethics claims there are no rules save the rule to love, yet by their own rules the situationists would define love. Second, God is removed from the throne as the moral Sovereign of the Universe, and man is enthroned in His place. Man, then, with his own subjective sense of “love,” makes all final moral judgments. Situationism thus ignores the biblical view that man is lacking in sufficient wisdom to guide his earthly activities (Jeremiah 10:23). Third, Fletcher’s situationism assumes a sort of omniscience in the application of his “love” principle. For example, the theory contends that lying, adultery, murder, etc., could be “moral” if done within the context of love. Yet, who is able to predict the consequences of such acts and determine, in advance, what is the “loving” thing to do? Let us suggest the following case.

A young woman, jilted by her lover, is in a state of great depression. A married man, with whom she works, enters into an adulterous relationship with her in order to “comfort her.” Fletcher would argue that what he did might very well have been a noble deed, for the man acted out of concern for his friend. What a myopic viewpoint! Let us consider the rest of the story. The man’s wife learned of his adulterous adventure, could not cope with the situation, and eventually committed suicide. One of the man’s sons, disillusioned by the immorality of his father and the death of his mother, began a life of crime and finally was imprisoned for the murder of three people. Another son became a drunkard and was killed in an auto accident that also claimed the lives of a mother and two children. Now, was that initial act of adultery the “loving” thing to do? Hardly.

Fourth, situationism assumes that “love” is some sort of ambiguous, no-rule essence that is a cure-all for moral problems. That is like suggesting that two football teams play a game in which there will be no rules except the rule of “fairness.” Fairness according to whose judgment? Team A? Team B? The referees? The spectators? That is utter nonsense! Fifth, even when one suggests that “love” be the criterion for ethical decisions, he presupposes some standard for determining what love is. Situationists contradict themselves at every turn.

Determinism

Another false concept regarding human conduct is determinism. Determinism, whether it be social, biological, or theological, has a necessary logical consequence—it absolves man of personal responsibility for his conduct. Let us consider several facts of this general thesis.

Behaviorism, as developed by John Watson (1878-1958), a psychologist at Johns Hopkins University, argued that personality, hence conduct, is the end product of our habit system. Watson taught that man is merely an animal resulting from the evolutionary process. B.F. Skinner of Harvard became the leading proponent of behaviorism; he believed that man, as an animal, is the product of environment, and so even to speak of human responsibility was nonsense in his view. A practical example of these theories was seen in Clarence Darrow’s defense of murderers Leopold and Loeb, who killed 14-year-old Bobby Franks as an “experiment.” Darrow argued that they were in no way responsible for their act since brutal forces of their past had shaped their destinies (see Weinberg, 1957, pp. 16-88).

Sociobiology is a newer notion that attempts to synthesize the social sciences with biology. It sees man as a mere machine, somewhat analogous to a computer, which has been programmed by its genetic makeup. Human behavior is the result of physical and chemical forces, and, as we do not hold a machine accountable, so neither should we man.

A few comments concerning these ideas are in order. First, if determinism is true, there is no such thing as human responsibility. This is a necessary corollary of the theory. In spite of this, determinists frequently speak, write, and act as though human accountability existed. Consistency is a rare jewel among them. Second, if man is not responsible for his actions, such terms as “good” and “evil” are meaningless. Third, if man is not accountable, no one should ever be punished for robbery, rape, child abuse, murder, etc. Do we punish a machine that maims or kills a person? Fourth, how can we be expected to be persuaded by the doctrine of determinism, since the determinists were “programmed” to teach their ideas, and thus these ideas may not be true at all. Fifth, determinists won’t abide by their own doctrine. If I recopied Edward Wilson’s book, Sociobiology: The New Synthesis, and had it published in my name, I quickly would find out whether Wilson thought I was responsible for the action or if only my genetic background was!

IS THERE ULTIMATE MORAL RESPONSIBILITY?
A crucial question that must be addressed is this: “Is there any ultimate consequence to immorality?” Atheists are fond of saying that one should not be unethical because of social sanctions, i.e., society’s disapproval, legal punishment, etc. The implication is, unethical conduct is only “bad” because you might get caught! I once asked an atheist this question: “Paul, the apostle of Christ, and Adolf Hitler are two well-known historical characters. Both are dead. Now, so far as they are concerned, does it really make any difference that they lived their lives in such divergent directions?” He replied that it did not! If that is the case, human existence makes no sense whatsoever. But that is infidelity’s position, of course.

CONCLUSION
In this article, we have discussed human moral obligations. The fact that we have considered morality is something unique to our kind. No two apes ever sat down and said, “Let’s talk about ethical obligations today.” That ought to say something about our nature. In their book, Why Believe? God Exists!, Miethe and Habermas have observed:

At every turn in the discussion of moral values, the naturalistic position is weighted down with difficulties. It has the appearance of a drowning swimmer trying to keep its head above water. If it concedes something on the one hand, it is condemned on the other. But if it fails to admit the point, it appears to be in even more trouble. It is an understatement to say, at the very least, that naturalism is not even close to being the best explanation for the existence of our moral conscience (1993, p. 219, emp. in orig.).
As I draw this discussion to a close, there are some important summary observations that should be mentioned.

Human moral responsibility is based upon the fact that God is our Creator (Psalm 100:3), and that we have been made in His spiritual image (Genesis 1:26). Just as a potter has a right over the clay he is fashioning, so our Maker has the right to obligate us morally and spiritually to right living (see Romans 9:21).
Since morality is grounded in the unchanging nature of God (Malachi 3:6; 1 Peter 1:15), it is absolute—not cultural, not relative, not situational.
God’s will for human behavior is not a matter of subjective speculation that every man figures out for himself; rather, Jehovah has spoken (Hebrews 1:1), and His Mind is made known in objective, biblical revelation (1 Corinthians 2:11ff.; 2 Timothy 3:16-17).

Though the Lord possesses an unchanging nature, His revelatory process was progressive and adapted to man as he developed spiritually in those times of antiquity. Accordingly, in ages of the past Jehovah tolerated, and even regulated, certain acts that are not permissible in the Christian era. This, of course, does not mean that God vacillates in His morality; it simply means that He dealt with man as he was in that infantile state (Matthew 19:8; Acts 14:16; 17:30-31). Today, the New Testament stands as the Lord’s final and ultimate standard of morality.
Though the New Testament is the “law of Christ” (Romans 8:2; Galatians 6:2), it is not a “legal” system in that each aspect of human conduct is prescribed with a “thou shalt” or “thou shalt not.” Yes, there are both positive and negative commands in the New Testament, but they do not spell out every specific activity. The inspired document contains many rich principles that challenge us to develop a greater sense of spiritual maturity and to soar to heights that are God-honoring.

One must recognize also that New Testament ethics does not deal merely with actions, but addresses motives as well. For instance, what if one accidentally runs down with his automobile (and thereby kills) a careless pedestrian? He is not held accountable before God, for his act was unintentional. On the other hand, one can be guilty (in disposition) of both adultery and murder (cf. Matthew 5:28; 1 John 3:15).

It is imperative that men recognize that ethical activity (i.e., right relations with one’s fellows) is not the totality of a person’s obligation before God. The centurion Cornelius certainly learned this truth (Acts 10). There are spiritual responsibilities that the Lord has prescribed as a test of true faith, and yet men frequently ignore such divine obligations.
Finally, even though the Almighty has called His human creation to a high moral level, we must recognize that He is aware that we are but frail, dusty flesh (Psalms 78:39; 103:14). And so His marvelous grace has been revealed in the unspeakably wonderful gift of His Son. Those who in loving faith submit to Him (Hebrews 5:8-9) can know the pardon of their moral blunders (Acts 22:16), and are challenged to live righteous and godly lives in this present world (Titus 2:11-14).

REFERENCES
Darwin, Francis (1889), Life and Letters of Charles Darwin (London: Appleton).

Fletcher, Joseph (1966), Situation Ethics: The New Morality, (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press).

Geisler, Norman L. and Winfried Corduan (1988), Philosophy of Religion (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).

Henry, Carl F.H. (1973), Baker’s Dictionary of Christian Ethics (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).

Humanist Manifestos I and II (1977), (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus).

Miethe, Terry L. and Gary R. Habermas (1993), Why Believe? God Exists! (Joplin, MO: College Press).

Russell, Bertrand (1969), Autobiography (New York: Simon & Schuster).

Sartre, Jean Paul, (1961), “Existentialism and Humanism,” French Philosophers from Descartes to Sartre, ed. Leonard M. Marsak (New York: Meridian).

Sartre, Jean Paul (1966), “Existentialism,” Reprinted in A Casebook on Existentialism, ed. William V. Spanos (New York: Thomas Y. Crowell).

Simpson, George Gaylord (1951), The Meaning of Evolution (New York: Mentor).

Tait, Katherine (1975), My Father Bertrand Russell (New York: Harcourt, Brace, & Jovanovich).

Weinberg, Arthur (1957), Attorney for the Damned (New York: Simon & Schuster).

——————————————————————————–

Copyright © 1995 Apologetics Press, Inc. All rights reserved.

I was contemplating whether or not to pay any attention to the atheist group that put up the ‘Godless’ billboard on I-65 in downtown Louisville on August 2, 2010. Then after reading their belief statements I decided there were a few questions I just had to ask their director …

First is my initial email – questioning their belief statements.

Copied text of emails and replies follows the initial inquiry.

For purposes of distinguishing between our email exchanges…
theist – regular text / atheist – bold text

To: edwin.hensley@insightbb.com
Subject: A couple questions about your beliefs?
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010

Coalition of Reason Belief – We believe that people can live moral lives without believing in supernatural beings.
Question – What do you mean by “moral lives” what is morality in the absence of God? Who gets to decide what is moral vs. immoral?

Coalition of Reason Belief – We believe that government should not interfere with religion, and that religions should not interfere with government.
Question – Again if there is no God what gives anyone the right to suggest that interference between two groups of people is any more than what they desire to do?

Coalition of Reason Belief – We believe that ideas supported by evidence are worth investigating, and that ideas not supported by evidence are worthless.
Question – Does this include the possibility of a investigating that there is a supernatural God? What is the evidence that supports the idea there is no such thing as God?

Coalition of Reason Belief – We believe that people of all religious and non-religious beliefs should strive to live in tolerance and harmony.
Question – If there is no God as you profess, then why should there be any belief that we should be tolerant of each other or that we should strive to live in harmony? Would it not be best to conclude that every person is entitled to do what is right in his own eyes.

Coalition of Reason Belief – We believe in freedom of speech.
Question – What is the basis of the belief that people are free to do anything?

We believe that all ideas are open to investigation, examination, and criticism.
Question – Does that include the idea that there is a supernatural God, who created the heavens and earth and all of humankind?

Coalition of Reason Belief – We strive to criticize bad ideas and errant beliefs without criticizing individual people.
Question – What constitutes “bad ideas”? Who gets to decide what an “errant belief” is?

Coalition of Reason Belief – We believe in civil discourse between the religious and the non-religious.
Question – I suppose then you are open to discussing the possibility that God does exist?

You asked more than a couple of questions. It appears that you have a presupposition that the bible is the perfect word of an infallible god. Nothing could be further from the truth. I do not believe that we would come to some kind of understanding in a few simple email exchanges. In order to answer some of your questions, I will attach a file I presented to students of Christian Academy of Louisville.

Have a good day,

Ed Hensley

Ed,

Thank you for the quick reply. You are correct – my questions were more than a couple. I am a Christian theist and minister who does believe that the bible is the perfect word of God and that it is inspired, inerrant, infallible and all sufficient. As far as presuppositions – I have investigated, studied, and earned a degree at a local bible college. My studies helped me to investigate and further develop my deep held beliefs. But I suppose everyones reasoning is based on presuppositions, or at least the suppositions of those they learn from. No one concludes anything in a vacuum. We all develop our beliefs on things that we are taught, test, or assume to be true, even though we are often not able to prove them.

For the record I do not believe I can prove the existence of God. The evidence to me is overwhelming when I look to His invisible attributes, His eternal power, and His divine nature, but in the end I trust it by faith. My guess is that you also studied under persons and scholars who presupposed that God does not exist. But I would suggest that you also lack solid evidence for the non-existence of God. In the end we both believe what we believe by faith.

I am familiar with many, if not all, of the arguments which are presented in your presentation – the majority of which are easily refuted through Christian apologetics and proper theological understanding. Therefore I also agree with you that a few simple email exchanges would cause either of us to change our deep held beliefs.

I would like to suggest to you on the basis of the apostle Paul words in Romans 1:18-23 that there are no such persons which are called by the name atheists. What I believe is what Paul taught, that the existence of God is evident in the heart of all mankind, but that in unrighteousness men suppress that truth, and exchange it for a lie. The result is they worship things instead of God. The greatest thing they worship is self.

Romans 1:18-23 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.

As far as the billboard is concerned I suppose you have sparked some interest and raised some awareness. I’m sure you have had no shortage of email today. I would like to thank you for what I believe will be the unintended consequences of this billboard – the fact that people who never give much thought to whether or not God exits – will be prompted to investigate. I believe in the power of God and the sufficiency of His inspired, inerrant, infallible word, to convince the hearts and minds of many more that He is real.

Scott Reeder ><>

When someone claims that the Loch Ness monster (or any unknown being) exists, it is up to the person making that claim to provide evidence that it exists. It is not up to those who reject that claim to provide evidence that it does not exist.

Your claim that I do not have evidence for the non-existence of god is like claiming that I do not have evidence for the non-existence of the Loch Ness monster, fairies, unicorns, etc. It is up to you to provide evidence that god exists.

Ed Hensley
Louisville Coalition of Reason

I have a class in which I teach proofs for the existence of God – and many of the arguments are based on scientific observations and irrefutable evidence. There is plenty of evidence such as; The Cosmological argument (cause and effect), Teleological argument – design-designer (the “watch—watchmaker”), The Moral argument – (our universal sense of right and wrong, The Ontological argument – greatest / necessary being, The Historical argument – mighty acts of God, The principles of irreducible complexity, specified complexity, and intelligent design, Jesus Christ – His life, death and resurrection and many more valid and substantial arguments may be presented. There is sufficient scientific evidence to make a reasonable and rational conclusion that God exists.

The crux of the matter however is what I mentioned in my previous email – at the end of the day God cannot be proven absolutely; and neither can He be disproven absolutely. Those who will not be convinced – will not be convinced, and as i said, it is my belief they will simply suppress the truth.

I want you to know I do not hold any ill feelings toward you, I do respect your right to believe or not believe (suppress) God’s existence. I am a very busy person as I am sure you are too. I would be willing to read and respond to a book of scholarship that you would recommend – perhaps recent scholarship on the non-belief of God. If you likewise would be willing to read and investigate the claims of a book that I would recommend. I am not asking you to read the bible or scriptures specifically, but only to read the account of a skeptic such as yourself, who made a serious inquiry of the claims of the bible and the scientific community. The book I would ask you to read is, The Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel. As I said if you have a recommendation and would care to open this dialogue further I am willing. If time does not permit you to do so, I understand.

Again I am not under the suspicion that either one of us will change our deeply held beliefs. Yet perhaps in the future we could debate the existence / non-existence of God in an open forum. I guess I am testing your statement that, “We believe in civil discourse between the religious and the non-religious.”

Scott Reeder ><>

All of these arguments are nothing more than that, arguments. They are not evidence. Furthermore, they have all been thoroughly refuted. Irreducible complexity was thoroughly defeated in Dover vs. Kitzmiller. Your statement of “irrefutable evidence” is total nonsense.

Ed Hensley

Ed,
I noticed as I reviewed your Powerpoint you stated that you were raised Christian, baptized at 9, served in missions, and assisted in preaching. Most often when I meet some who was once a professed believer and then they take a hard turn to radical atheism, there is always a catalyst to their radical departure from the faith. I define a radical atheist as someone who does not just profess that God does not exist – but for some reason they seem to be very angry at the God they profess not to believe in. It is the kind of person for example who would become a leader to a local group of atheists in order to organize and publicly profess their unbelief in God.

My observation is, it is often more than just “rational inquiry and investigation,” that causes persons such as yourself to take a hard turn from belief to unbelief. I was wandering out of curiosity if some misfortune, disillusionment, disappointment, or outright tradgedy in your personal or family life caused you to commit your life to radical atheism. Perhaps you will feel as though my questioning is to personal, but trust me, I have often found it to be true. Just to balance the equation – likewise many will also turn to belief in God during these same tragic life circumstances.

Thanks for your honest reply to my inquiry, Scott Reeder ><>

No, I did not go through any trauma. I enjoyed church, considered the ministry and was offered the position of music and education minister at First Baptists Church, Ladonia, Tx, while I was working as a teacher at the local school. I decided that I could not teach something that I did not believe in 100%. It was not long after that that I was fully agnostic.

I recommend you read Godless by Dan Barker and Misquoting Jesus by Bart Ehrman to read stories similar to mine.

Thanks,

Ed Hensley

Hensley’s Bio available on his Facebook page.

I am married with 4 great kids. My oldest son is a senior at the University of KY majoring in exercise science. My second son is a junior at the University of Louisville and in an intern program with Exxon-Mobil in Baytown, TX, majoring in Chemical Engineering. They are the children of my first wife, whom I divorced in 1990. I have a daughter in 6th grade and a son in 5th grade from my second wife, who died in 2001. They are as brilliant as their older brothers. I married my wife on May 9, 2009. She is the most wonderful person in the world!

I was raised a fundamentalist Christian. In my search for the most correct Christian church, I read about early Christian manuscripts and read the bible completely multiple times. This resulted in my realization that the bible is not the word of god. The god of the old testament is an evil monster. There is no justification for his evil actions. Much of the old testament that is omitted by Sunday school teachers is bizarre and clearly not the work of a perfect god. Genesis is as reliable scientifically as Egyptian, Greek, and Roman mythology. The new testament is better, but there are over 100,000 discrepancies among early Christian texts; the new testament was edited first in 170 A.D. when Irenaeus limited the multitude of contradictory gospels to the 4 we know today; the new testament was edited again from 325 – 367 A.D. to; Martin Luther put books known today by Protestants as the Apocrypha in a separate section in 1534 A.D. because he did not like the Catholic doctrines justified by 2nd Maccabees; Luther also expressed doubt about Hebrews, James, Jude, and the Revelation, so he moved those books to the end of the Bible. What I have noted here are facts that nobody can deny! How can anybody claim the bible is the word of god?

Another important person to examine is Charles Templeton. He was a minister with Bily Graham who became a non-Christian and agnostic after studying the bible. You can see several displays on him at the Creation Museum.

http://creationmuseum.wordpress.com/2009/08/11/creation-museum-on-martin-luther-and-charles-templeton/

There are numerous people who became atheists or agnostics simply by studying the bible.

Ed Hensley

Ed,
I am familiar with Templeton, Barker, and Ehrman. I have read portions of Hitchens, Dawkins, Dennett, and Harris. As agreed I will purchase and read Misquoting Jesus by Ehrman. He is a respected theological scholar in comparison to many of the others who speak for your cause. Of course I disagree with him on most all of his positions, yet I do respect his scholarship and credentials. Barkers scholarship and theological background gives him little credibility in my mind. Attached are several pamphlets on Christian apologetics from scholars which I have studied, subscribe to, and teach.

Full disclosure – I am a 42 year old minister in Southern Indiana (former Southern Baptist), now serving in a small congregation (Church of Christ). Unlike yourself I did not grow up in a Christian home and did not become a baptized believer until I was 27. After a sense of calling to serve in full time ministry, I left my career (former database administrator) of 13 years, moved my wife and 3 children from south Georgia to Louisville, KY to earn a biblical undergraduate degree at the Southern Baptist Seminary. I worked nights at UPS to pay for my schooling.

I am not a scholar by any means, but do my best to thoroughly study the word of God in preparation for my weekly preaching and teaching. I did study under some respected scholars including Dr. Albert Mohler contemporary issues in theology and culture (regardless of what you think of his worldview and beliefs, like Ehrman, you must acknowledge his scholarship is impeccable). I did most of my worldviews studies under Dr. Ted Cabal, theology studies with Dr. Russell Moore and Dr. Chad Brand, philosophy, reason & logic, and great books under Dr. Jim Orrick. Watch this video for some philosophical fun – only 2.5 mins. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VT8ywDX3b0

Just my opinion – but I feel as though theocidy (the problem of evil and suffering and the goodness of God) is the biggest struggle the professed atheist simply cannot reconcile. This is why I conclude many once strong Christians abandon the faith after they experiece traumatic life struggle such as divorce, death of a child or loved one, cancer or terminal illness, handicap or paralysis, job loss, a son/daughter turning to a deviant lifestyle, ministry failures (regardless of who is at fault). At other times they simply cannot accept the reality of severe famine or poverty on the mission fields in which they serve or they cannot accept that unbelieving family members or those who never have a chance to hear the gospel, die as unbelievers, and therefore will not be in heaven.

As I have said, it is very common to find a catalyst under one of the categories I have mentioned that moves a believer toward atheism (suppression of God) in their lives. Rarely do I observe where someone moves from a position of strong belief to unbelief after an honest and educated study of the scriptures or the seemingly troubling doctrines.

http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/20
http://www.apologeticspress.org/allegeddiscrepancies/

Thanks for your time, Scott Reeder ><>

”

1 Corinthians 13 (NIV)

1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing. 4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. 8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. 11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. 12 Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known. 13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

On behalf of the family I want to thank everyone for coming this afternoon to express your love and support as we have this HOME GOING CELEBRATION for Sister Alta Bell.

I would like to start with a simple explanation about the church today – we are right in the middle of our Vacation Bible School Program we have a western theme this year and this is why our church is decorated this way.

Now you might be thinking surely they would take down the decorations and clear the sanctuary for Mrs. Alta’s funeral and the truth is your right, we would and were more than willing to take this all down to prepare for the funeral and set it back up again, it would have been no trouble at all.

And yet the family requested that we leave it this way – they reminded me that Mom loved her church and one of the things she loved most was Vacation Bible School and so we left it.

Upon arriving at Borden three years ago one of our elders Jim McKinley arranged for me stop in and meet with one of our most senior members @ the Providence Nursing Home.

What I learned in my first meeting with Mrs. Alta was reaffirmed every time I met with her… three things…

First and foremost – she loved the Lord.

Second – she loved her family, she loved them dearly.

Third – she loved her Church, she loved God’s people.

Key word here is LOVE – that is why I chose that scripture reading – honestly I’ve read it at a lot of weddings but never at a funeral – but you know what Sister Alta’s life is defined by that scripture – she lived that scripture – she lived a LIFE OF LOVE.

Love for God, Love for Family, and Love for Others and her Church.

I want to talk of these three things in reverse order…

First sister Alta loved her CHURCH…

All I had to do in Mrs. Alta’s presence was say Borden Church of Christ and her beautiful little smile would appear –  she had a beautiful smile didn’t she?

I remember the first chapel Mrs. Agnes had me to come preach – I have never been so honored to represent this Church for someone then when I spoke at chapel over at Providence.

Mrs. Alta sat there with the most glowing smile, it was like she was saying yeah that’s my preacher and he represents my church.

I remember being so blessed in the Lord one day after joining her afternoon bible study – I was so overwhelmingly blessed that I was brought to tears all the way back to Borden – tears of Joy.

If you would give her a moment she would tell you about her church – she would tell you stories of serving in the Kitchen, and coordinating and preparing meals and helping out at VBS.

I remember her perking up about this time last year when I told her we had close to 100 children one night at VBS, she said “that’s wonderful”, and she meant it.

She was so thankful for everyone at Providence and the opportunities she had to worship and go to bible study, and she loved Sister Agnes.

But she always told me, “I really miss my church,” I miss my church – I heard that a lot – Mrs. Alta loved her church.

Next more than her church – she loved her family…

Sister Alta loved her FAMILY…

Something she liked to talk about more than her church – her family – her girls – her son – her grandchildren – she loved to brag on her children.

She loved to hear her children tell stories about her grandchildren.

She never failed to tell me that each of you worked hard, you were expected to do your chores, milk the cows, you didn’t always get to play like other children, she would say.

She knew how to discipline, she was firm, but fair, you didn’t get to choose if you wanted to go to church… some parents say, “I can’t get them to go or behave,” I’m told mom never gave the option and had a special pew pinch if you misbehaved.

You worked hard, you were brought up well, with love and discipline, but also with forgiveness, she knew how to forgive.

You made her proud, yes she was so proud of each one of you.

I remember one visit I asked her Mrs. Alta tell me about all your children, and again that beautiful smile.

Then she began one by one – bragging telling me about each of you – and yes she told me of your mischief too – then she would quickly say they were good children though – she was proud of each of you – blessed by each of you.

You know – one of the greatest reflections of persons life is the children they raise – no one of us is ever perfect – we all make mistakes – big ones and small ones – and yet deep down we reflect the love that we were raised with.

Example the two of you I have come to know best –

June and Janet, when you volunteer to work here at the church and volunteer to serve the God’s church, coordinate and prepare a meal for a grieving family – when I observe that – I know where it comes from – I know where that began – I know you are simply following what you grew up observing.

You are just loving God and loving people like you were taught.

She loved to quilt, sew and made all the clothing for the children, she loved to cook and bake and being a wife, a mother, a homemaker, she knew how to do much with little.

Can I tell you something I did over the past 3 years, I brought all my children to meet your Mom – here’s what I would do.  I would get her to share how she got up several days a week and 5 am an volunteer to fold towels and bibs for the other residents of the home and then I would get her to share with them how old she was.

Mrs. Alta loved her church & she loved her family.

But now the most important of these three and foundational to the first two is this;

Sister Alta loved the LORD.

She loved God with her whole heart.

She loved the scriptures and memorized many passages.

She loved to read it when still able, hear it, study it, and to live it.

She talked often of how good God was to her over the years, how he took care of her, gave her good health, blessed her with a wonderful family.

She never hesitated to give God credit for all the blessings of her life.

She would say often, “God has been so good to me”.

You know what? I thought a lot about what I could really say to comfort and encourage the family and at the same time bring honor to a 96 year old precious saint who loved her church, loved her family and loved her Lord.

But what more could I say? I mean seriously what could you add to that – I mean her life was not perfect – she had many trials, she grew up in hard times, she raised over half a dozen children, and worked hard her whole life.

She lived a long and full, and productive, and faithful and loving life.

You say well she’s resting now – no I doubt that – she probably got to heaven and said, “my dear Lord what do you need me to do?”

What greater testimony could a person possess… than to say she loved the Lord, she loved her family, & she loved her church?

How could I honor her anymore that to say,  ”Do what she did, live how she lived, love like she loved.”

Well I want to say in closing to all who have gathered today; family, personal friend, or just a friend of this wonderful family.

Whatever brought you here today… your presence here is a tribute to Alta’s life.

Today we do grieve the loss of our Dear Sister. But we do not grieve as those who have no hope. Our hope is in the Lord.

Consider this… Because Sister ALTA was a Christian she closed her eyes to this world and this life – and at once she opened her eyes to the glories of heaven.

She was reunited with parents and family and loved ones who preceded her, no doubt there were many who awaited her arrival.

The bible states that to be absent from the body is to be present with the LORD.

Think about this Sister Alta is in the personal and powerful presence of her Lord and Savior – that’s right – FACE TO FACE with JESUS!

And for those who know, believe, and have trusted Christ. we too hold fast to the promise, that one day we will be reunited with HER – forever in the glories of heaven.

As we come to a close at a funeral, I like to remind folks of this, in a moment you will pass by and say your final respects, I hate goodbyes don’t you?

But if you’re a Christian you don’t have to say goodbye, you can just say, “I’ll see you soon, see ya later, see you again one day.”

When you place your faith in Christ you too will one day claim the promise that Mrs. Alta did – eternal life in heaven.

Not goodbye but see you later. Give your life to God have eternal life in Christ.

Obituary

Sister Alta Doris Lynch Callahan Bell, 96, of Borden, went home to be with the Lord on Sunday, July 18, 2010, she last resided at Mercy Providence Village, in New Albany, Indiana.

She was a homemaker who also worked in the fields with her husband and children in the truck farming business south of Borden.

From the 1960’s through the 1980’s, she was an office assistant for Drs. Rudolph and Maria Boha and other doctors in Borden.

She was a member of the Borden Church of Christ, and for many years volunteered in the kitchen for various church activities.

She was born Jan. 14, 1914, in Topsy, near Waynesboro, Tenn., and was the last survivor of ten children born to William N. and Dona A. Parnell Lynch.

Survivors include daughters,

Flora Childers, of Sellersburg,
June Trainor and her husband, Gordon, of Borden,
Janet Wright and her husband, Les, of Borden,
Ruth Ann Jackson and her husband, Charles, of Floyds Knobs,
Brenda Jacobi and her husband, James, of Borden,
Gay Fordice and her husband, Joseph, of Rushville;
and son, Daniel Callahan and his wife, Barbara, of Borden;
13 grandchildren; 17 great-grandchildren; several stepchildren, stepgrandchildren, and stepgreat-grandchildren; and numerous nieces and nephews.

She was preceded in death by

her first husband, Foster D. Callahan;
her second husband, Hubert C. Bell;
also two children, Patricia and Patrick Callahan.

Ok I am about to wade into some sensitive territory.   There are many good, fair minded, faithful Christians (mostly teenage girls, and yet a surprising number of middle aged mothers and wives) who for some reason have become fascinated if not obsessed with the love life of vampires and in particular the Stephanie Myer vampire-based fantasy romance series the Twilight saga.  Up front I admit, I have not read or watched a single book or movie from the series, nor have I watched a single new television series about vampires ( I did see Dracula and Lost Boys like 20 years ago).  IMPORTANT UPDATE BELOW

I normally hesitate to speak (critique) unless I actually read the book or watch the movie.  So full disclosure – I am breaking my don’t analyze or criticize if you haven’t watched or read that of which you speak policy. So I apologize in advance.  The problem for me here is, I simply am completely uninterested – completely!  I mean sometimes I even read heretical works or stuff I totally disagree with (DaVinci Code, Gospel of Judas) to insure I make an educated critique.  But I can’t even drum up enough interest to do that, evidenced by the fact that I haven’t even felt like critiquing the whole movement in the several years it has been exploding.

One reason I have not weighed into the criticism of this vampire romance hysteria, is because I understand that it is for the most part a classic fad.  And fads are just that, fads, and therefore left alone they will – fade.  Which is true of this vampire fad.  Trust me it will fade.

OK – I’m diving in deep now.  Please hold the ohhhhhh-pleeeeeease’s until you hear me out.  First, it is my belief the biggest reason for the success of this vampire love genre is without a doubt, “14 year old girls.”   The second biggest reason for the success of the Twilight saga is – wives, mothers, young and middle aged women who wish they were 14 again.  Now let me be perfectly honest and provide some balance.  The reason movies like Transformers and every shoot em’ up, blow em’ up, fast car, violent murder, pretty girl movie is so successful is “14 year old boys,”  and then husbands, fathers, young and middle aged men who wish they were 14 again.  The reason I use the age of 14 is that I once heard that all Hollywood movies are targeted at 14 year olds, apparently they are also the biggest readers of this series.

Now for the 14 year old girls it is this – forbidden love.

Forbidden Love.  The human heart is bent on doing that which is forbidden.  Often this is more than just a phenomenon, but we really see many seemingly “good girls,” who date the forbidden, “bad boys,” in order to rebel against what is expected, forbidden, or even taboo.  I’m not qualified to weigh in psychologically on this, but I know I occasionally desire to do what someone tells me I can’t or shouldn’t do.  In the world of teenage romance what could be more forbidden than falling in love with a vampire.

For the middle aged wives and mothers of those 14 year old girls it is – forgotten love.

Forgotten Love.  OK teenagers I get it.  Mom’s in there 20’s, 30’s, 40’s what is that all about?  Perhaps its, “Oh remember the days, remember when?  What could have been, what should have been?  But I dated, sacrificed my virtue, eventually married, and settled for Mr. Normal,”(at least in comparison to a young attractive vampire who is willing to love me for me and wait for sex until marriage).  Of course I think it is sad at a much greater level, to watch a middle aged married mom asking, Edward or Jacob?  Perhaps even some are asking, “did I make the right choice?”, “maybe I should not have played it so safe – wish I would have found a vampire instead of a business major.”

Well for what it is worth, good, bad, or indifferent, that is why I believe the genre has become so popular, 14 year old girls and women who wish they were 14 again, forbidden and forgotten love.  If you’re not convinced look at the cover of the first book a red apple which is nothing more than a reference to forbidden fruit in Genesis 2:17, which is apparently the quote at the beginning of the first book. Not only does it portray the forbidden love between a human and a vampire, but that which is forbidden in relationships period.

Now from a Christian perspective… there are several things I want to point out.

I think glorifying vampires is problematic.  One of the things that troubles me the most is just how little this whole phenomenon fails to cause any concern to faithful Christian parents.  Full disclosure ( I have allowed my youngest to read the books and watch the movies).  It’s not that I am a censorship guy, or a book burning preacher, but really folks have you checked the teen reading choices at the local bookstore lately.  Try it.  The top two shelves will be filled with these stories of vampires.  Then take a closer look and count how many times you see the words, dark, darkness, shadow, black, night, midnight, moonlight, dead, dim, eclipse, twilight.  There is also an explosion of television shows about vampires, magic, and anything dark.

Consider the characteristics of vampires in light of what we know scripturally.

First, characteristically vampires hate the light and love the darkness.  Christians love the light and hate the dark.  A couple of definitions are in order.  Twilight: that which comes just before total darkness.  Eclipse: to obscure, cut off light, or darken.

Second, vampires traditionally are enemies of the cross (they see it as their doom).  Vampires are enemies of the cross while Christians love the cross or at least what it brought.  The cross represents the sacrificial death of Christ which brings eternal life.  This brings me to a final characteristic to consider.

Third, vampires require a blood sacrifice in order to obtain eternal life.  Sound familiar?  The bible declares that life is in the blood.  Christ alone is the only blood sacrifice which accomplished eternal life for all who believe.  The series obviously is full of stories of blood, sacrifice, and eternal life / death issues. Though it is on the fringe, unfortunately some recent news stories have reported a disturbing trend of teens actually biting each other to the point of drawing blood.

Now admittedly these are apparently not your traditional Dracula type vampires, but good is good and evil is evil, and vampires are evil no matter how good we portray them. We must understand one of Satan’s oldest tricks is portray that which is evil as good and that which is good as evil.  No one can deny that is what is happening in this story.  Isaiah 5:20 gives this warning… “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness…”

Finally make no mistake – Stephanie Myer is a follower of the false destructive gospel of Mormonism…  and to go a little deeper theologically she intentionally weaves her beliefs into the Twilight series.  In his article Mormon Vampires in the Garden of Eden John Granger states, “Bella is Eve and Edward is the Adam-God of Mormon theology. Their “Fall”—when Bella/Eve/Man chooses the apple from the tray of Edward/Adam/God, although rife with dangers and difficulties, is the beginning of a spiritual transformation culminated by an alchemical wedding with the God-Man. The story is a romantic allegory depicting the roles and responsibilities of the divine and human lovers, but it has the specifically Mormon hermetic twist that sex within marriage is the endgame and the only means to personal salvation and immortal life.” To read more about Myer’s Mormon beliefs being weaved into the big story read John Grangers article here.

IMPORTANT UPDATE: OK I started this blog on Thursday night – it is now Friday PM.  I was feeling so guilty about writing a critique without actually having read or seen anything Twilight that I gave in, grabbed my sixteen year old daughter (much to her embarrassment), and off to the matinee showing of Eclipse we went.

I must say most of the movie was pretty much what I expected – chick flick to the core.  Lot’s of kissing, some boy competition, more kissing, some vampire/werewolf turf wars, more kissing, some good vampire / bad vampire battles, a little more kissing, and ohhh did I mention there was a lot of close up shots of – kissing.  For the most part it was a harmless movie no less dark, evil, or morally risky than the rest of what is offered up from Hollywood.

As a matter of fact I must at least make mention of one particularly positive scene in which Bella made an advance at Edward for premarital sex, and he refuses.  He stated that he was,“sorta old fashion like that,” I think she replied “more like ancient.”  I have since read where one research study conducted at the University of Missouri suggests that the reason teenage girls have actually fallen hard for the Twilight book and film series has to do with its portrayal of a traditional, abstinent romantic relationship.”  Let’s be honest that is a refreshingly positive moral stand coming out of Hollywood and being presented to 14 year old girls.

I should admit after watching the movie I didn’t feel so much that our young teen girls are going to be drawn to living the vampire life, or that they will necessarily take a hard turn into dark world.  But I did feel as though the movie was promoting the mentality that forbidden, secret, or bad choices are alright as long as you follow your heart and learn from your mistakes (that was actually what one of the graduation speeches stated, even suggesting making bad choices on purpose to learn).  About following our heart, that is not always the best policy.  Our hearts often leads us astray, the bible says the heart of man is desperately wicked who can understand it.  Sometimes we must reject what we feel like doing, to do what God would desire us to do.  As for learning from our mistakes, I’m all for it.  Life is messier if we do not.  But purposely making bad choices to understand what good ones are – not a good strategy – even for a vampire.

Oh yeah, as far as the crowd in attendance, with the exception of a few boyfriends/husbands who looked sort of dragged against their wills (seemingly ok with that as long as they got a good bucket of popcorn), it was a predominately all-girl audience as I predicted.  Oddly enough there were about four pregnant ladies there on a Friday afternoon.  Not sure if there was anything to that, just something me and Kaylan observed.

To put the movie experience in modern summation.

Dairy Queen for Lunch $12,

2 movie tickets to Eclipse $14,

A new bedroom comforter set and two gallons of matching paint for Kayla’s room $120,

An afternoon with my 16 year old daughter giggling about a girl torn between a vampire and a werewolf = PRICELESS.

Brother Scott ><>

Ephesians 1:7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace

Several good posts / articles I have read from people I trust on the Twilight saga.

http://www.pluggedin.com/videos/2008/q4/twilight.aspx

http://www.pluggedin.com/videos/2010/q1/twilightsaganewmoon.aspx

http://www.pluggedin.com/movies/intheaters/twilightsagaeclipse.aspx

http://www.russellmoore.com/2009/12/03/the-theology-of-the-twilight-series/

http://www.russellmoore.com/2009/12/09/lessons-for-girls-from-twilight/

http://www.worldmag.com/webextra/16157

http://www.worldmag.com/articles/14727

http://www.truewoman.com/?id=881

http://www.truewoman.com/?id=1176

This weekend Americans will celebrate our freedom.  We place tremendous value on what we call our freedoms.  We often equate freedom to things like speech and opinions.  We have freedom of movement from place to place.  We live where we want to live, and go where we want to go.  We have freedom of religion, we are free to worship, and we are free not to worship.  We have freedom to buy, sell, and acquire material goods and services. We are free to eat where and what we want to eat, we shop when and where we want to shop.

A common list of freedoms often includes things like…

Freedom of assembly

Freedom of association

Freedom to bear arms

Freedom of education

Freedom of movement

Freedom of the press

Freedom of religion

Freedom of expression

Freedom of speech

Freedom of thought

And yet we are all slaves – either we are slaves of sin or slaves of Christ, but we are owned by one or the other.

Many Americans celebrate their freedom and yet we are slaves to many sins.

We are slaves to the sin of materialism – some are owned by the things they own – ironically millions upon millions of Americans are slaves to the lender because the sin of greed has caused them to purchase more than they can afford.

We are slaves to the sin of freedom of sexuality – meaning many declare their sexual freedom through relationships, affairs, sex outside of marriage, sex with many partners – and yet they are slaves to the emotional damage, the abuse of the lifestyle, physically by sexually transmitted diseases, but much more than that the emotional pain that comes from being used sexually, the emotional pain that comes from the so called freedom of a woman to choose – abortion.

We are slaves to gambling.  We enjoy the so called freedom to gamble.  Yet many are slaves to the state lottery, the gambling boat, the bingo hall.  They literally work to serve the destructive habit of seeking something for nothing.  Quite simply gambling is a destructive system which does not express love of neighbor.  It creates many losers for very few winners.

We are slaves to beverage alcohol.  We are free to partake of  intoxicating beverage alcohol.  As a nation many are slaves to the sin of drunkenness.  Over 14 million suffer a destructive life of alcoholism.  This freedom so often leaves a path of destruction in the lives of those who are slaves to it.  Beverage alcohol is a marriage destroyer, home wrecker, career stealer, highway killer, and I could go on and on.  Millions and Millions are under the slave hood of drug and alcohol abuse.

Simply ask yourself; What is the wise thing to do?

So all who commit sin become slaves to their sins, and the sinner has as many masters as he does sins.

OH YEAH TIME OUT:  You do realize it’s not just about what you are free to do?

We do not live our lives to ourselves…  We are always leading others.

Your family, friends, coworkers, children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, students, believers, nonbelievers, does your freedom lead others to stumble?

1 Corinthians 8:9 But take care lest this liberty of yours somehow become a stumbling block to the weak.

SO WHERE DO WE FIND TRUE FREEDOM?

TRUE FREEDOM is not found in a government,

TRUE FREEDOM really has nothing to do with national freedom,

TRUE FREEDOM is not even really personal freedom,

TRUE FREEDOM is not the power to do whatever one wants,

TRUE FREEDOM  is never defined as freedom to do what one pleases,

TRUE FREEDOM is the power to do what is right.

Augustine – theologian of the early church said…  “The good man, though a slave, is free; the wicked, though he reigns, is a slave, and not the slave of a single man, but – what is worse – the slave of as many masters as he has vices.”

HERE’S THE THING… we as HUMANS will always be SLAVES.

EITHER we are SLAVES of SIN or SLAVES of RIGHTEOUSNESS.

TRUE FREEDOM is found when we submit to the right MASTER.

TRUE FREEDOM comes only through the Son of Man.

TRUE FREEDOM: IS FOUND ONLY IN CHRIST WHO DECLARES THAT IN HIM WE ARE FREE INDEED !

Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin…  “So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed. John 8:34,36

Two hundred thirty four years ago Americans understood the value of freedom and were willing to die to establish and protect it.

That is what we celebrate every July Fourth in America.

One hundred and fifty years ago a civil war would rage to free men from slavery.  All across the world in every generation people are searching for freedom.

In the future, possibly people in the Middle Eastern nations will emerge from the oppression of the past dictatorships and they too will experience a new form of government, a new hope, and a new faith in freedom.

But may we never forget that perfect provision for TRUE FREEDOM was accomplished over two thousand years ago, when there was a battle of different sorts that took place in defense of our ultimate freedom.

Jesus Christ battled the sin of humankind, and having defeated death, he won the ultimate victory.

In Christ alone, true freedom can be found.  The apostle Paul declared in Galatians 5:1 that, “It was for freedom that Christ set us free, therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject to the yoke of slavery.”

The entire human race, from the time of the first man and woman, has been born into slavery; born as slaves to sin.  Though we are born slaves, we are also born with the freedom to choose.

We are free to choose whom we will serve.  And choose we must.  Either we will serve the sin, which we were born into, or we will serve Christ.

Would you be free from the burden of sin ?

Turn to the power of the blood, that was shed to obtain your salvation, and experience TRUE FREEDOM while there is yet time.

John 8:31–38 (NAS)

31 So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, “If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine;

32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”

33 They answered Him, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never yet been enslaved to anyone; how is it that You say, ‘You will become free’?”

34 Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin.

35 “The slave does not remain in the house forever; the son does remain forever.

36 “So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.

37 “I know that you are Abraham’s descendants; yet you seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you.

38 “I speak the things which I have seen with My Father; therefore you also do the things which you heard from your father.”

Happy Fourth – Celebrate TRUE FREEDOM,

Brother Scott ><>

In recent weeks we have had several prayer requests concerning two difficult pregnancies in which there are developmental concerns, and then two more involving a stillbirth and early infant death.  Speaking from a Christian worldview what would the Lord have us to know about these troubled pregnancies, still births, and untimely deaths?  Our first confession must be that there are no easy answers, and that we don’t have all the answers.  At the same time I would like to provide some biblical thoughts on these difficult situations.  I want to address specifically the situations which result in early death, rather than births involving severe mental or physical handicaps which I will deal with in a separate post.

One of the most important things we must acknowledge is that loss of life, all life, is painful and unnatural.  For those who believe that life begins at inception, we must understand that if a life terminates at any point after conception, it is a real death. Failing to acknowledge that a life existed, and has been lost, neglects the grieving process that is critical for the parents and family who have experienced the loss.  Next, we should understand that problem pregnancies where fatal deformities are present and result in unplanned intrauterine death (miscarriage), stillborn death, or early life deaths, is by far the most difficult and tragic situation a couple will likely ever face in their lifetime.  Studies indicate that couples and mothers in particular often feel guilty about the death, which can produce within them intense feelings of depression and sadness.  And though this is one of the most difficult times in life to “understand God,” it is my belief that only God can bring the comfort, peace, understanding, and true healing that is needed for a grieving heart.

From a theological standpoint I think it is important that we affirm several things.  First we should understand that from the beginning, life is precious to God whom is the creator of life.  In the beginning, God created all of life without death.  In Genesis 1:26 -28, God charged the first man and woman, to be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth, and death was not present at that time.  But at the outset of human creation by free will, Adam and Eve chose to sin.  And yes, by that single act of rebellion death came into existence and it comes now to all people and it also comes to the unborn, infants, and children.  Sin is where death came from, in Romans 5:12 we read, “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned.”

So death was never God’s plan from the beginning and all death is as painful to God as it is to us.  God therefore grieves over the death of infants or all humans for that matter.  As a matter of fact, it grieved God so much that He decided to do something about it.  Though death came by one single act of unrighteousness, it would likewise be defeated by one single act of righteousness. Romans 5:18 states, “Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.”  Atonement for sin has been accomplished through the sacrificial shed blood of Christ.  It is certain that Christ gave His life to redeem ours.  Ephesians 1:7  states, “In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace and so there is “no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus,”  Romans 8:1.

So how then do we deal with this doctrine of original sin?   This doctrine states that all persons are born in a state of sin and in need of repentance and faith to be saved from eternal judgement.  In Acts 2:38 Peter declared in order to be saved one must repent, and that each one who would then be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.  Repent means to make a decision to turn from sin and make a conscious decision to follow Christ.  Therefore each of us has inherited the sin of Adam, yet we are all individually guilty and responsible for our own sinful deeds and Scriptures clearly teaches that every person will be judged “according to their deeds.” Revelation 20:11-12, and has a personal responsibility to repent of their willingly sinful acts.

Two questions, do babies who die in the womb, in infancy, or in early childhood commit such deeds?  Second question is, is a child capable of making a conscious informed decision to repent or even understanding that they are sinful and need to repent?  Certainly not !   Truth is they never have the chance to develop the capacity to know good from evil, nor understand their sinful state.  So, though we are all under the power and condemnation of sin, what I want to affirm, is that when closely examined, the whole counsel of scripture clearly indicates to me that human infants are incapable of repentance.  Yet the scriptures never once speaks of a child in hell, never!  Certainly that includes the unborn, and those who die early in life.  I would conclude that by God’s act of special grace these children are safe in heaven.  They are forgiven based on their inability (not unwillingness) to understand their sinful condition and certainly their inability to make a decision for Christ.  They are therefore upon their death instantly, safely, in the presence of God.

Infant salvation is not a teaching contradictory to the idea that all persons are personally responsible for a decision to repent and believe on Christ in order to receive eternal life.  We clearly understand that the unborn, infants, and even the small child are sinners.  But we also acknowledge they have never had the opportunity to come to the knowledge of their personal sin, or their need to repent and place their faith in Christ.  In other words, they have not had opportunity to understand God’s revelation and therefore are incapable of making a decision to accept or reject it.

I would add that Christ often expressed his great affection for infants and children, and in Matthew 19:13–15 we read that about how the, “little children were brought to Him that He might put His hands on them and pray, but the disciples rebuked them.   And then he stated, “Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven.”  Jesus affirmed that many children would be in heaven.  So to me when a baby dies it is instant heaven, no question about it.

Finally what I would like to say to these grieving couples is not that I can completely understand how hard it is for you to deal with your loss.  Truly each situation is different.  I and my wife did suffer a miscarriage between our second and third child.  Rather what I would like to tell you is that God understands your loss.  He knows what it means to lose a child, His only child.  He understands your grief, your pain, and your inability to understand it all.

I want to assure you that He has lovingly received your child and awaits that appointed time to bring you back together with them, in a wonderful and eternal place where there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away and all things are new.  He awaits that great reunion day!

Have you lost a precious loved one?  Only because I consciously repented of my sin, and received God’s gift of forgiveness, do I have confidence that I will one day meet our unborn child.  Won’t you do the same and someday receive that same promise?

May the Lord’s grace and tender mercy rest on these little ones,

Brother Scott ><>

Below is a passage often used to support the belief that infants who have died go to heaven.

2 Samuel 12:18–23

18 Then it happened on the seventh day that the child died. And the servants of David were afraid to tell him that the child was dead, for they said, “Behold, while the child was still alive, we spoke to him and he did not listen to our voice. How then can we tell him that the child is dead, since he might do himself harm!”  19 But when David saw that his servants were whispering together, David perceived that the child was dead; so David said to his servants, “Is the child dead?” And they said, “He is dead.”  20 So David arose from the ground, washed, anointed himself, and changed his clothes; and he came into the house of the Lord and worshiped. Then he came to his own house, and when he requested, they set food before him and he ate.  21 Then his servants said to him, “What is this thing that you have done? While the child was alive, you fasted and wept; but when the child died, you arose and ate food.”  22 He said, “While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, ‘Who knows, the Lord may be gracious to me, that the child may live.’  23 “But now he has died; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.”

Each week I script out my sermon in entirety.  I do my best to have it done about Wednesday of the week so I can reread, review, and allow God to use life to speak to me about the weeks scripture.  This week I finished preaching the book of Ruth and focused in on one verse.  Verse 4:14 which states, “Blessed is the Lord who has not left you without a redeemer today, and may his name become famous in Israel.”

God’s spirit moved me to emphasize in my sermon the fact that, as beautiful of a Love story as Ruth is, truth is, it is really our story, and every bible story is really just ONE STORY, the story of, “A LOVING GOD WHO HAS REDEEMED A NEEDY PEOPLE.”

In my preparation I thumbed through the entire bible over a period of several early mornings.  As I studied, I tried to key in on the words, redeem/redeemed/redemption, rescue/rescued, restore/restored, save/saved.

Several times early in the week, as I contemplated the beautiful historical narratives, the stories of people, places, events, and parables,   I had to stop, stop and close my bible and worship.  Through tears of joy inexpresible moved by the spirit, I had to stop and thank God.  Thank him for redeeming me, rescuing me, restoring me, saving me.  A sinner deserving to die, yet God shed His grace on me.

My former preacher used to call this, “having a spell in the Lord.”  It fills you up, it empties you out, and then fills you up again.  I am so thankful that God has called me to preach His word.  I am so thankful he permits me to daily study His word.  I am so thankful for His Word.  Finally I am eternally grateful for redemption through his blood the forgivness of sins.

Following is something I hesitate to do, since my preaching notes are often not decipherable to anyone but myself… but here they are for Sunday June 13^th,2010.  The sermon can be heard in it’s entirety here http://sreeder.podbean.com/2010/06/13/ruth-chapter-four-june-13-2010/

MANY STORIES – ONE STORY

June 13, 2010 Borden Church of Christ – Ruth Chapter Four.

I said to begin with we are going to finish this morning “the most beautiful love story in the bible.”

That seems somewhat pretentious of me to suggest that this one story is the “most beautiful” love story of all the stories in the bible.

Truth is we sometimes tend to approach the bible as a series of stories –we divide them up into two basic catagories we have…

Historical accounts stories of people…

We have Historical accounts and then we have the parables.

All these stories of people, places, things…and events,

SO Is the bible just a big collection of stories or is it just ONE STORY?

What I want to suggest to you is that the bible from COVER TO COVER is really JUST ONE STORY….

And here is what that story is…

“A LOVING GOD WHO HAS REDEEMED A NEEDY PEOPLE”

That’s it , Repeat, repeat, repeat

It’s the story of the first man and women… disobeying thier creator establishing a needy people, a sinful people in need of redemption.

It is the story of Noah…

A upright man among a corrupt and wicked people… a mere man whom God would use to redeem humankind to save all of humanity… the story of an ark – (an ark which is Christ) whom if anyone would enter would be saved … Noah a redeemer, a rescuer…

It’s an ark, a flood, a dove, a raven, an olive branch, a rainbow…

It is the story of Abraham…

Chosen to father a race of people, God promised him – I am going to make you a great nation, And I will bless you, And I will make your name great; and you will be a blessing;

It is a promise to Sarah…

God says, I will give her a son and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples will come from her.”

It is the story of Abraham and Sarah’s son Isaac…

Issiac offered up as a sacrifice… Yet when Abraham stretched out his hand to take his life… God sent an angel of the Lord, stoping him and provided a substitute to redeem Issaic – to save his life….

It is the story of Isaacs’s son Jacob…

Jacob his name changed to Israel who along with Leah and Rachel would become the father of 12 sons who would form the 12 tribes of Israel from who would come Joseph.

Joseph – it’s the story of Joseph…

Joseph a type of Christ – a boy rejected by his very own people… left for dead in a hole in the ground, saved, restored, and then used to redeem the very people who rejected him… telling them “Do not be afraid, for am I in God’s place? And, “what you meant evil against me, God meant for good: in order to bring about this present result, to preserve to redeem many people alive.

It’s a coat of many colors, wheat bowing down in a field, a pharoh, potiphar, a seductress wife, a dropped cloak, a prince of eygpt.

It is the story of Moses…

God promises to rescue you from him and his people from the oppression in Egypt. A promise to save them out of, the house of slavery. to lead them to a land flowing with milk and honey…

It’s Joshua and Caleb and Rahab the Harlot…

It’s Eli the priest and Hannah… who ask a favor of God, “Give me a son and will give him back to you… and the God of Israel granted her that wish and she then sang out… “There is no one holy like the Lord, who rescues us (redeems us) from the ash heap…

It is the story of King David… who was promised…

If you call upon Me in the day of trouble; I shall rescue you… I will raise you up out of the pit of the miry clay and set your feet upon a rock.

It is the story of the crippled condemned beggar like Mephibosheth

Spared by king David – asks “Why does the Lord show kindness to me? -  a dead dog such as I…And David replies… “you have been shown kindness for the sake of your father.”

It is the story of Isaiah who was told by God …

I am the Lord your Savior, your Redeemer…

It’s a burning bush, a potter and a lump of clay, a valley of dry bones, a river parted, 12 stones, 2 tablets, 10 commandments, a chariot to heaven,  - proverbs, psalms, and spirutal songs.

It is for Jeremiah a promise…

“For I am with you-  to deliver you… and I will certainly rescue you… because you have trusted in Me… declares the Lord”

It’s the prophet Hosea, who’s name is translated salvation or deliverer, for he would redeem a harlot Gomer (wife) who symbolizes our harlotry.

It’s a Daniel and den of lions, it’s 3 men and a fire…

It’s a disobedient preacher and a whale.

A backslidden runaway preacher Jonah… who found

Rescue, Redemption, Salvation, Resurrection after 3 days in a whale’s belly.

Into the NT… many stories – but REALLY JUST ONE STORY…

It is apostles,  and parables, prodigals, and peddlers – pastors, and publicans,and paupers, prisoners, pagans, and paralytics, princes and prostitutes.

It’s the story Simon Peter… bringing  the message of salvation to the  house of a centurion named Cornelious.

It is the story of the Apostle Paul…

told at his conversion..  I will rescue (save) you from your own people and then I’m sending you to the Gentiles to bring them salvation.

It’s Paul and Silas with a Philippian Jailer…

Sir’s what must I do to be saved… believe in the Lord Jesus Christ…

It’s a storm at sea, a shipwreck, a thorn in the side. a body of amor, running a race to win, taking off self, putting on Christ.

It’s Phillip meeting an Ethiopian …

Tell me sir what are you reading? What hinders me from being baptized?

It’s a Mustard seed, and Olive tree, A Grape Vine, A Fruitless Fig, good salt, new wine, a river of life, a planted tree by that river.

It’s a Women at the Well…

But sir where can I find everlasting water so I will not thrist?  He who drinks of the water I provide will never thirst again…and many Samaritans of that city believed (they were redeemed) because of her testimony of him.

It’s a leper, a withered hand, an issue of blood, a demon possed man, a mute…

It’s a blind man… cleansed restored,

Jesus lays his hands on his eyes, his sight is restored, he’s redeemed, he was blind and yet now he sees,

It’s Lazarus… tho he were dead –  yet shall he live.

It’s the story of a paralytic – lying by the pool…

Helpless, hopeless, 38 years, crippled, lame, unable to do anything for himself…  (that’s me and you born crippled, helpless, that’s our story) get up and walk…. at once healed, restored, redeemed.

It’s a rich young ruler, a farmer storing up treasures on earth, a bad builder, a good Samaritan, a bragging businesmen who does not understand that life is but a vapor.

It’s a woman caught in adultery…

He who has not sinned then cast the first stone at her… look lady none accuse you and neither do I,  saved – redeemed – from the stones of death about to be hurled at her…

It’s a lost sheep, a lost coin and lost Son (a prodigal son) …

A wayward son who says “Dad I wish you were dead… give me my inheritance…” give me what I deserve… death that’s what he deserved, He runs off into a far country, squander his inheritence, ends up feeding pigs, helpless, hopeless, nowhere to turn decides to humble himself and go home ready to be a slave.But His Father says… give a robe, a ring, some sandals, He was lost but now he is saved, redeemed, he’s restored…

It’s treasure in a jar of clay, treasure hidden in a field, a pearl of great price, a mustard seed, it’s a catch of fish breaking a net, 10 virgins, 5 talents, 2 fish, 5 loaves, 5 thousand fed.

It the story of Mary a young Jewish girl…

“Mary you will bear a son, he will be called Jesus… and he will save the people from their sins.”  Her reply – “according to your will God.”

It’s the day of the lord, the word of truth, walking in the light, testing the spirits, living a new commandment, reaching a lost world,

It’s Loving God and Loving People.

It’s a promised return, a final judgement, a new heaven and earth, streets of gold, no more death, the eternal presence of Christ.

It’s many stories… it’s one story… it’s our story…

It is the story of Ruth, and Naomi,

Naomoi who strayed from God

Ruth – a moabitess who never knew him…

And yet both will be rescued, delivered, redeemed and blessed by Him.

It is the story of Boaz… A prefigure of CHRIST

- Come if your hungry – Eat…glean in my field.

- Come if your thirsty – Drink…drink from my well…

- Come all who are weary and heavy laden… My yoke is easy my burden is light…

- Come, I will forgive your sins, I will rescue you from the despair, and sorrow, and the trials of this life,

- I have overcome the world, come and I and I will give you rest for your weary souls …

I’ve got nothing more to say… I’m empty and at the same time I’m filled up…if you missed the beauty of this story today… there it is v. 14…

Ruth 4:14 “Blessed is the Lord who has not left you without a redeemer today, and may his name become famous in Israel.”

If you’ve missed it then you’ve missed the whole thing. The most beautiful love story in the all the world!

Don’t miss it…  Let’s Pray.

Why brother Scott?  why has he done it? I don’t know why…?  But I know whom I have believed!!!

CLOSING HYMN.

I know not why

God’s wondrous grace

To me He hath made known,

Nor why, unworthy,

Christ in love,

Redeemed me for His own.

But “ I know whom

I have believed,

And am persuaded

that He is able,

To keep that which

I’ve committed,

Unto Him against that day.”

Instead of asking, “Lord, why ME?”   Let’s ask, “Lord, WHY me?”

Why God ?  Why me?  I don’t understand why!  I am not worthy!

Noah – For behold, I will bring a flood of waters upon the earth to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life under heaven. Everything that is on the earth shall die.  But I will establish my covenant with you, and you shall come into the ark, you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you. Genesis 6:17–18

Abraham – “I am going to make you a great nation, And I will bless you, And I will make your name great; and you will be a blessing;”  Genesis 12:2

Moses - Moses said to the Lord, “O Lord, I have never been eloquent, neither in the past nor since you have spoken to your servant. I am slow of speech and tongue.”  Moses returned to the Lord and said,… Why did You ever send me?   Exodus 4:10, 5:22.

Jacob – I am unworthy of all the kindness and faithfulness you have shown your servant. Genesis 32:10

Joseph - The Lord was with Joseph, and he became a successful man, and he was in the house of his Egyptian master. So Joseph said to his brothers, “Come near to me, please.” And they came near. And he said, “I am your brother, Joseph, whom you sold into Egypt.  And now do not be distressed or angry with yourselves because you sold me here, for God sent me before you to preserve life. Genesis 39:2, 45:4–5

Gideon - “But Lord,” Gideon asked, “how can I save Israel? My clan is the weakest in Manasseh, and I am the least in my family.” Judges 6:15

Isaiah - Woe to me!” I cried. “I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the Lord Almighty.” Isaiah 6:5

Ruth - “Why have I found favor in your eyes, that you should take notice of me, since I am a foreigner?” Ruth 2:10

Ethsher - Then Queen Esther answered, “If I have found favor in your sight, O king, and if it please the king, let my life be granted me for my wish, and my people for my request. Esther 7:3

David – As for me, I said, “O Lord, be gracious to me; heal me, for I have sinned against you!” Psalm 41:4

Johah - Now the word of the Lord came to Jonah the son of Amittai, saying,  “Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and call out against it, for their evil has come up before me.” Jonah 1:1–2 (ESV)

Mephibosheth - And he paid homage and said, “What is your servant, that you should show regard for a dead dog such as I?” 2 Samuel 9:8

John the Baptist - “I baptize you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. Matthew 3:11

Paul - For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, 1 Corinthians 15:9–10

Simon Peter, his brother Andrew - While walking by the Sea of Galilee, he saw two brothers, Simon (who is called Peter) and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea, for they were fishermen. And he said to them, “Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.” Matthew 4:18–19

But when Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, “Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord.”

The Prodigal – I will arise and go to my father, and I will say to him, “Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son. Treat me as one of your hired servants.” ’ Luke 15:18–19 (ESV)

Tax Collector - But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to heaven, but beat his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, a sinner!’ Luke 18:13

The Cetnturion - But the centurion replied, “Lord, I am not worthy to have you come under my roof, but only say the word, and my servant will be healed. Matthew 8:8

Bartimaeus -… a blind beggar, the son of Timaeus, was sitting by the roadside. And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” Mark 10:46b–47

Mary - And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, Luke 1:30–32

I know not why God’s wondrous grace
To me He hath made known,
Nor why, unworthy, Christ in love
Redeemed me for His own.

Refrain

But I know Whom I have believèd,
And am persuaded that He is able
To keep that which I’ve committed
Unto Him against that day.

I know not how this saving faith
To me He did impart,
Nor how believing in His Word
Wrought peace within my heart.

Refrain

I know not how the Spirit moves,
Convincing us of sin,
Revealing Jesus through the Word,
Creating faith in Him.

Refrain

I know not what of good or ill
May be reserved for me,
Of weary ways or golden days,
Before His face I see.

Refrain

I know not when my Lord may come,
At night or noonday fair,
Nor if I walk the vale with Him,
Or meet Him in the air.

Refrain

Words: Dan i el W. Whittle,

Gospel Hymns No. 4, 1883.

Music: James McGranahan