"A thorough examination revealed that the coins bore the year in which they were minted and their value, or effigies of the pharaohs [who ruled] at the time of their minting. Some of the coins are from the time when Joseph lived in Egypt, and bear his name and portrait," said the report."
More than 350 schools in 43 states have implemented courses on the Bible for the 2009-2010 academic year, a new report reveals.
Click here for the Shorter Catechism in Modern EnglishWe have the following bit of experience from a general officer of the United States Army. He was in a great western city at a time of intense excitement and violent rioting. The streets were over-run daily by a dangerous crowd. One day he observed approaching him a man of singularly combined calmness and firmness of mien [bearing], whose very demeanor inspired confidence. So impressed was he with his bearing amid the surrounding uproar that when he had passed he turned to look back at him, only to find that the stranger had done the same. On observing his turning the stranger at once came back to him, and touching his chest with his forefinger, demanded without preface: "What is the chief end of man?" On receiving the countersign, "Man's chief end is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever"--"Ah!" said he, "I knew you were a Shorter Catechism boy by your looks!" "Why that is just what I was thinking of you," was the rejoinder.
It is worthwhile to be a Shorter Catechism boy. They grow up to be men. And better than that, they are exceedingly apt to grow to be men of God."
B. B. Warfield, "Is the Shorter Catechism Worth While?" in Selected Shorter Writings of Benjamin B. Warfield, Vol. 1, ed., John E. Meeter (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1980), pp. 383-84.
It would be nice to think that hell does not exist, or that men and women may avoid it even if they do not have faith in Jesus Christ. But such thoughts are a delusion and, as J. I. Packer writes: "It is really a mercy to mankind that God in Scripture is so explicit about hell."
McDermott added, “The underlying issue is really the authority of Scripture. [Rejecting Scripture means] you have to come up with a different God, a different Jesus, a different gospel and a different salvation,” he said. “Homosexuality is simply the surface manifestation right now of that basic rejection. It will be different in the future.”
"Unless question one [which overturns the movement to legalize gay marriage] passes, there could be real consequences for Mainers," he said in the advertisement. "Legal experts predict a flood of lawsuits against individuals, small business, and religious groups. Church organizations could lose their tax exemption [and] homosexual marriage would be taught in public schools, whether their parents like it or not."
Arminianism (drawn from Wikipedia) is a school of soteriological thought within Protestant Christianity based on the theological ideas of the Dutch Reformed theologian Jacobus Arminius (1560-1609) and his historic followers, the Remonstrants. The doctrines' acceptance stretches through much of mainstream Christianity, including evangelical Protestantism.
Arminianism holds to the following tenets:
- Humans are naturally unable to make any effort towards salvation (see also prevenient grace).
- Salvation is possible only by God's grace, which cannot be merited.
- No works of human effort can cause or contribute to salvation.
- God's election is conditional on faith in the sacrifice and Lordship of Jesus Christ.
- Christ's atonement was made on behalf of all people.
- God allows his grace to be resisted by those who freely reject Christ.
- Believers are able to resist sin but are not beyond the possibility of falling from grace through persistent, unrepented-of sin.
Calvinism (drawn from Wikipedia) is a theological system and an approach to the Christian life. The Reformed tradition was advanced by several theologians such as Martin Bucer, Heinrich Bullinger, Peter Martyr Vermigli, and Huldrych Zwingli, but it often bears the name of the French reformer John Calvin
because of his prominent influence on it and because of his role in the
confessional and ecclesiastical debates throughout the 16th century.
Today, this term also refers to the doctrines and practices of the Reformed churches of which Calvin was an early leader. Less commonly, it can refer to the individual teaching of Calvin himself.[2] The system is best known for its doctrines of predestination and total depravity, stressing the absolute sovereignty of God.
Calvinist theology is sometimes identified with the five points of
Calvinism, also called the doctrines of grace, which are a
point-by-point response to the five points of the Arminian Remonstrance (see History of Calvinist-Arminian debate) and which serve as a summation of the judgments rendered by the Synod of Dort in 1619. Calvin himself never used such a model and never combated Arminianism directly.
The five points therefore function as a summary of the differences
between Calvinism and Arminianism, but not as a complete summation of
Calvin's writings or of the theology of the Reformed churches in
general. In English, they are sometimes referred to by the acronym TULIP.
The central assertion of these canons is that God is able to save
every person upon whom he has mercy and that his efforts are not
frustrated by the unrighteousness or the inability of humans.Total depravity
Main article: Total depravityThe doctrine of total depravity (also called "total inability") asserts that, as a consequence of the fall of humanity into sin, every person born into the world is enslaved to the service of sin.
People are not by nature inclined to love God with their whole heart,
mind, or strength, but rather all are inclined to serve their own
interests over those of their neighbor and to reject the rule of God.
Thus, all people by their own faculties are morally unable to choose to
follow God and be saved because they are unwilling to do so out of the
necessity of their own natures. (The term "total" in this context
refers to sin affecting every part of a person, not that every person
is as evil as possible.)
Jacob Arminius himself and some of his later followers, such as John Wesley, also affirmed total depravity.Unconditional election
Main article: Unconditional election
The doctrine of unconditional election asserts that God's choice from eternity
of those whom he will bring to himself is not based on foreseen virtue,
merit, or faith in those people. Rather, it is unconditionally grounded
in God's mercy alone.
The doctrine of unconditional election is sometimes made to stand
for all Reformed doctrine, sometimes even by its adherents, as the
chief article of Reformed Christianity.
However, according to the
doctrinal statements of these churches, it is not a balanced view to
single out this doctrine to stand on its own as representative of all
that is taught. Unconditional election and its corollary in the
doctrine of predestination
are never properly taught, according to Calvinists, except as an
assurance to those who seek forgiveness and salvation through Christ,
that their faith is not in vain, because God is able to bring to
completion all whom He intends to save. Nevertheless, non-Calvinists
object that these doctrines discourage the world from seeking salvation.Limited atonement
Main article: Limited atonement
Also called "particular redemption" or "definite atonement", the doctrine of limited atonement is the teaching that Jesus' substitutionary atonement
was definite and certain in its design and accomplishment. The doctrine
is driven by the concept of the sovereignty of God in salvation and the
Calvinistic understanding of the nature of the atonement. Namely,
Calvinists view the atonement as a penal substitution
(that is, Jesus was punished in the place of sinners), and since,
Calvinists argue, it would be unjust for God to pay the penalty for
some people's sins and then still condemn them for those sins, all
those whose sins were atoned for must necessarily be saved.
Moreover, since in this scheme God knows precisely who the elect are
and since only the elect will be saved, there is no requirement that
Christ atone for sins in general, only for those of the elect.
Calvinists do not believe, however, that the atonement is limited in
its value or power (in other words, God could have elected everyone and
used it to atone for them all), but rather that the atonement is
limited in the sense that it is designed for some and not all. Hence,
Calvinists hold that the atonement is sufficient for all and efficient
for the elect.Irresistible grace
Main article: Irresistible graceThe doctrine of irresistible grace (also called "efficacious grace")
asserts that the saving grace of God is effectually applied to those
whom he has determined to save (that is, the elect) and, in God's
timing, overcomes their resistance to obeying the call of the gospel,
bringing them to a saving faith.
The doctrine does not hold that every influence of God's Holy Spirit
cannot be resisted, but that the Holy Spirit is able to overcome all
resistance and make his influence irresistible and effective. Thus,
when God sovereignly purposes to save someone, that individual
certainly will be saved.Perseverance of the saints
Main article: Perseverance of the saintsPerseverance (or preservation) of the saints is also known as "eternal security." The word saints is used in the Biblical sense to refer to all who are set apart by God, not in the technical sense of one who is exceptionally holy, canonized, or in heaven (see Saint).
The doctrine asserts that, since God is sovereign and his will cannot
be frustrated by humans or anything else, those whom God has called
into communion with himself will continue in faith until the end. Those
who apparently fall away either never had true faith to begin with or
will return.
This doctrine is slightly different from the Free Grace or "once saved, always saved" view advocated by some evangelicals in which, despite apostasy
or unrepentant and habitual sin, the individual is truly saved if they
accepted Christ at any point in the past; in traditional Calvinist
teaching, apostasy by such a person may prove that they were never
saved.
In The Devil’s Delusion, Berlinski turns the scientific community’s cherished skepticism back on itself, daring to ask (and answer) some rather embarrassing questions:
Has anyone provided a proof of God’s inexistence?
Have the sciences explained why our universe seems to be fine-tuned to allow for the existence of life?
Are physicists and biologists willing to believe in anything so long as it is not religious thought?
Has secularism in the terrible twentieth century been a force for good?
Is there a narrow and oppressive orthodoxy of thought and opinion within the sciences?
Does anything in the sciences or in their philosophy justify the claim that religious belief is irrational?
And that’s what DNA does. It contains and transmits the extraordinarily complex, precisely sequenced chemical code of life—a code that atheist Richard Dawkins has likened to computer code. Indeed, Bill Gates has said that “DNA is like a computer program, but far, far more advanced than any software ever created.”
Could such an “advanced” code, or “software for life,” have happened by chance? Well, as Dr. Meyer shows, given the vast complexity of information required to create the 250 proteins necessary to sustain the simplest living cell, the probability that life originated in the primordial soup by chance is beyond astronomically slim—only 1 in 10 to the 41 thousandth power!
But here is your takeaway, and I’ll let Dr. Meyer do the talking: “Our uniform experience affirms that specified information—whether inscribed in hieroglyphics, written in a book, encoded in a radio signal, or produced in a simulation experiment—always arises from an intelligent source, from a mind and not a strictly material process.”
“Indeed,” Dr. Meyer concludes, “it follows that the best, most causally adequate explanation for the origin of the specified, digitally encoded information in DNA is that it too had an intelligent source.”
Two thousand and eight was a banner year for the assisted-suicide/euthanasia movement. It’s likely that no new states will legalize assisted suicide this year. But if the last 20 years prove anything, it is that euthanasia advocates are passionately committed, work hard, and feel that time is on their side. Are their opponents equally committed?
Thirty years later, the myth of the good divorce has not stood up well in the face of sustained social scientific inquiry — especially when one considers the welfare of children exposed to their parents' divorces.
Taking into account both divorce and non-marital childbearing, sociologist Paul Amato estimates that if the United States enjoyed the same level of family stability today as it did in 1960, the nation would have 750,000 fewer children repeating grades, 1.2 million fewer school suspensions, approximately 500,000 fewer acts of teenage delinquency, about 600,000 fewer kids receiving therapy, and approximately 70,000 fewer suicide attempts every year (correction appended). As Amato concludes, turning back the family-stability clock just a few decades could significantly improve the lives of many children.
In June 2009, President Obama declared the month of June to be LGBT month and he bragged about his intention to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. Obama told the crowd at the White House, “I have called on Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act to help end discrimination against same sex couples in this country.”
If Hart is correct that "Christianity has been the single most creative cultural, ethical, aesthetic, social, political, or spiritual force in the history of the West," then we must ask ourselves: Why? Christian hands are by no means free of blood and wrongdoing. As Hart writes repeatedly, "human beings frequently disappoint." We are corrupt and callous, and the temptations of power and conquest have snuffed out the holiness of many. But through the darkness, a glimmer of hope shines, for unlike atheism, Christianity offers hope—a hope of transformation from beyond ourselves.
As we survey modernity's rewriting of history, we must remember this hope as we look to shape the future. For it is the life and death of Jesus Christ that has transcended the ages: for Christians, faith is not merely "a cultural logic but a cosmic truth."
10 As each has received a gift, use it to serve one another, as good stewards of God’s varied grace: 11whoever
speaks, as one who speaks oracles of God; whoever serves, as one who
serves by the strength that God supplies—in order that in everything
God may be glorified through Jesus Christ. To him belong glory and
dominion forever and ever. Amen.
notes
).).Words like "wise" and "magisterial" appear of the front covers of his books, so don't even think about whispering: "Are you sure the emperor's wearing clothes?"
There are, after all, so many other great intellectual disciplines: literature, music, art, philosophy and even – dare I say it – theology. But you often get the feeling scientists secretly put themselves at the top.
The point is not whether he's right or not. The point is he assumed he was right. It's exactly the kind of reasoning he criticises in religious people.
The evidence doesn't square with his theory that nothing is beyond the rational – so he discards the evidence and jumps to conclusions.
A belief in a supernatural being that he has no specific evidence for and no absolute proof of? If you didn't know better, you might almost accuse him of a leap of faith
I suspect there are probably intelligences not only greater than ours but greater than anything anybody has ever imagined. I believe they probably exist."
Evolution, he goes on to explain, shows that what looks designed is not designed at all but came about gradually, therefore the existence of a creator is unlikely.
The Wall Street Journal may be an unusual venue for theological debate, but this past weekend's edition featured just that -- a theological debate of sorts. The "of sorts" is a necessary qualifier in this instance, because The Wall Street Journal's debate was not, as advertised, a debate between an atheist and a believer. Instead, it was a debate between two different species of atheists.full article here
The paper's "Weekend Journal" section front page for the September 12-13, 2009 edition featured articles by Richard Dawkins and Karen Armstrong set in opposing columns. The paper headlined the feature as "Man vs. God: Two Prominent Thinkers Debate Evolution, Science, and the Role of Religion." Well, the feature at least looked interesting.
"People have been saying this is the best film they've seen all year, yet nobody in the U.S. has picked it up,” he added. "It is unbelievable to us that this is still a really hot potato in America...It's quite difficult for we in the U.K. to imagine religion in America,” Thomas stated. “We live in a country which is no longer so religious. But in the U.S., outside of New York and LA, religion rules."
Could it be that their opposition to religious faith has more to do with passion than
reason? What if, in the end, evidence has little to do with how atheists arrive at their
anti-faith? That is precisely the claim in this book. Atheism is not at all a
consequence of intellectual doubts. These are mere symptoms of the root cause-
moral rebellion. For the atheist, the missing ingredient is not evidence but obedience.
