The Wisdom of Solomon

Posted on August 31, 2010 by Kris
Filed Under OT History, What I'm Studying... | 1 Comment | Share

In 1 Kings 3:5-15, Solomon was given the opportunity to ask God for anything that he wanted. Most men would have requested some selfish thing: long life, exorbitant amounts of money, women, fame, etc. But, as we all know, Solomon asked for wisdom. The thought struck me as I was studying this passage today, that Solomon must have already had a modicum of wisdom to ask for such a gift from God. Even this request was completely unselfish in that he asked for wisdom to be able judge the people of God and to discern between good and evil (1 Kings 3:9). This shows that Solomon already had a strong desire to serve God faithfully. He would strive to use this God given talent in service to Jehovah!

In James 1:5, James tells us that if we lack wisdom, we should ask God for it. Which of us would be so bold and arrogant as to declare that we have enough wisdom? When we ask God for wisdom, we must be like Solomon. We must be dedicated to faithful service, devoted to using our talents for the Lord. We should already be working to show our dedication to Him before we ask for anything! We also must ask out of selfless reasons, rather than from selfishness. God promised to give Solomon many blessings that he did not ask for because He was pleased with Solomon’s choice (1 Kings 3:12-14). Surely if Solomon had been acting out of selfishness God would not have so graciously rewarded him. Nor will God reward people today who ask for His blessings from their own selfish desires. Finally, we need to have some amount of wisdom to be able to ask God for wisdom. Like Solomon, we all have room for improvement, but we need to be working on a solid foundation on which God can build. We often focus on the miraculous and/or providential aspect of Solomon’s wisdom, but we should not overlook the foundation that had already been laid! Through his training, by his father David no doubt, Solomon had the wisdom to know what he lacked, and the wisdom to know who could help him fill that void. Are we wise enough to see our own failures? Are we wise enough to ask God for His help?

Solomon serves as a great object lesson for us. We learn what wisdom is, and learn what it means to apply that wisdom in our lives. It is a wonderful blessing for us that God has recorded so much of Solomon’s wisdom for us, so that we can benefit from his endeavors.

Popularity: 10% [?]

Evolution’s Unscientific Language

Posted on July 15, 2010 by Kris
Filed Under Evolution/Creation, What I'm Studying... | 2 Comments | Share

Today I have been working on some class material that my dad, David Brewer, is going to be putting out soon.  It has to do with Evolution, and helps to expose some of the doctrine that is taught to almost every child in the public school system today. One thing in particular is standing out to me:  the unscientific language that is used to “prove” evolution!  Science is supposed to be about facts. Facts can be expressed in definite language.  However, when the truth is told about evolution, very indefinite language must be used. Interestingly enough, this indefinite language is still presented as proof for the theory of evolution.  Consider one quote from Paul Gastonguay in his book Evolution for Everyone:

Man has produced in the lab NEARLY all the chemical substances found in living cells, learned, TO SOME EXTENT, how cells are put together, but only with parts from already living cells; and devised a scheme to describe how simple chemical substances COULD have progressively adapted to become so complex as to be called alive, and has PROVED in the lab… that this scheme is not impossible.  (As quoted in the the soon to be published This is My Father’s World by David Brewer.)

Notice the words in all capital letters in the quote!  His point is that they have almost been able to do (which is ambiguous at best) what they think might possibly produce life, and therefore they have solidified some proof for evolutionary theory!  Unfortunately, when this type of doctrine is being taught to school children (and often even when it is read by adults) it is presented in a very convincing way, so that the indefinite language is never even challenged.  In reality, the way in which this is presented tells the honest reader that they have not proven anything.

Evolution is the most unscientific of the scientific arenas.  It is an unprovable science and always will be.  How can it be replicated?  Even scientists who believe in the theory of evolution admit that it had to occur against astronomical odds.  Since no one can prove that life came from non-life (a necessary tenet of the theory of evolution) and no one can prove the long periods of time necessary, and no one can prove even one link between two distinct species, one must admit that belief in the theory of evolution is a faith.  And that, my friends, is what the evolutionist mocks the religionist for!  But, until the scientist can produce evidence through the scientific method to support his theory of evolution, he will remain in the same boat.  Until that proof can be put forth, the indefinite language of Evolution is simply not good enough!

Popularity: 18% [?]

The Need for Evangelism

Posted on May 25, 2010 by Kris
Filed Under Evangelism, Exhortation | Leave a Comment | Share

When the idea of evangelism is introduced, many people think about religious organizations such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses or the Mormons.   These religious bodies are very zealous in spreading the message of their belief system.  Unfortunately, those with truth (the actual teaching of scripture) are not nearly as zealous in teaching.  This leads to many people never having the opportunity to hear the true, unadulterated gospel message.  There is an obvious need for evangelism today, even though there are many people who claim to be religious!  Jesus, in His day was able to say:

“Do you not say, ‘There are still four months and then comes the harvest’? Behold, I say to you, lift up your eyes and look at the fields, for they are already white for harvest!” (John 4:35).

Certainly the same sentiment is true today.  There are many who need to hear God’s word, not the convoluted mess that is often presented as His word.  There are at least three good reasons that evangelism is needed today.

First, evangelism is commanded. Jesus told His disciples in Mark 16:15 to “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature.”  There are far too many people who look upon their religion as nothing more than a social organization.  They are content to “go to church” and let everyone else decide for themselves what they will do.  How often do people go so far as to hide their religion from others, simply because they don’t want to be offensive?  Jesus thought the message of the true gospel was important enough for all people to hear it.  If a religious body has some message other than the unchanging gospel (the case for most religions today) then they have no reason to be evangelizing.  There is power in the true gospel message (Romans 1:16), but there is nothing but unfounded comfort in most religions today.

Secondly, there are many people who have never heard the gospel. In Romans 1:16, the apostle Paul said that the gospel is the “power of God unto salvation.”  Later in the same book, Paul said:

“How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, Who bring glad tidings of good things!” But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our report?” So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Romans 10:14-17).

If those who have the gospel message are not busy about spreading it throughout the world, then those who are spiritually lost will never have the opportunity to choose to be obedient to God’s commands.  1 Corinthians 1:21 tells us that God determined to save men through the foolishness of the message preached.  Without the preaching of the message, one cannot come to believe in God’s will, and they cannot be obedient to Him.

Thirdly, there are many false gospels that have gone out into the world. Paul wrote about this problem:

“I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed” (Galatians 1:6-9).

Even in the first century, there were many who were corrupting the gospel message.  Paul warned that these false gospel would cause men to be “accursed.”  Surely, the same consequence comes today as well!  The few who have the true gospel message have a responsibility to be busy about the spreading of that message so that men and women can hear the truth.  While it is not politically correct to speak of truth as being singular in nature, that is exactly what Paul did, and it is exactly what we must do today.  It is our responsibility to seek out the one truth, so that we can enjoy God’s salvation, and not be deceived by the perverted gospels that are so prevalent today.

Is evangelism important today?  Absolutely!  Just as in the first century, the preaching of the gospel message is what will bring people to salvation.  Without it, people may claim to be religious, but that religion is based upon something other than the word of God.  While people may feel good about such religions, they do not reflect the unity that Jesus prayed for in John 17, and they are not the “one church” that He promised to build in Matthew 16:18.

Popularity: 8% [?]

The Moral Consequence of the Theory of Evolution

Posted on May 18, 2010 by Kris
Filed Under Evolution/Creation, What I'm Studying... | Leave a Comment | Share

The debate about human origins has raged since before the time of Charles Darwin.  In modern times, the battle lines have been drawn between evolution and creationism.  Much can certainly be written on those subjects, but this article will focus on the moral consequences of accepting the theory of evolution to be true.

While many may come to the conclusion that evolution is true based on an examination of the evidence, there are many others that come to believe in evolution because they like the moral implications of the theory. There are only two possibilities for the origin of our universe, and consequently the origin of mankind.  Either evolution is correct, and all that we see came from non-living sources, or creation is correct and there is an all powerful being that brought what we see into being.  The moral consequences of these two theories are drastically different.  If there is a creative being, then there is an obligation placed upon the creation to seek out His will and be obedient to Him.  His will defines a standard of morality for us.  If there is no creative being, then there is no standard of morality.

Many people probably have never thought about the moral consequences of the theory of evolution.  The theory has been taught as fact for many years, and has been taught as a solely scientific theory, without concern for how the theory affects the lives of people.  But, if we consider the decline of morality in the world around us, it is not a great leap to conclude that there is a connection with the prevalence of the teaching of evolution.  If mankind came from nothing, then he answers to no one.  This conclusion has been acknowledged by some evolutionists.  Aldous Huxley, in his book Confessions of a Professed Atheist, wrote:

“I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning; consequently, assumed it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find reasons for this assumption…The philosopher who finds no meaning in the world is not concerned exclusively with a problem in pure metaphysics; he is also concerned to prove there is no valid reason why he personally should not do as he wants to do…for myself, as no doubt for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation.  The liberation we desired was simultaneously liberation from a certain political and economic system and liberation from a certain system of morality.  We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom.” (1966, as quoted in Creation Compromises, 2nd Edition, by Bert Thompson, Ph.D.)

The point, made by Huxley, is that a world that has evolved is a world without meaning.  It is a world of chance, of happenstance.  If that be the case, then there is no one who can impose a standard of morality upon anyone else.  In fact, if evolution is true, then most of the laws governing morality today are completely contrary to the theory itself!  How did mankind come to the point of instituting any form of morality, especially one that contradicts the very method of preservation according to evolution?

On the other hand, society is constantly moving toward developing laws that reflect a belief that there is no absolute standard of morality.  These laws seem to coincide with the acceptance evolution as factual, rather than as a theory.  The acceptance of sexual promiscuity, abortion, homosexuality and many other practices show an acceptance of the concept that there is no standard of morality.  If it is taught that all men came from the evolutionary process, then why should it be surprising that society has begun the process of codifying the belief system into the penal code?

Considering the fact that evolution is taught in school systems from the time children are very young, it is not surprising to see that there is a moral decline among school age children.  The number of violent atrocities enacted by young people today is most distressing.  Why do students now seem to strike out against others so much more frequently than 40 or 50 years ago?  Most likely, it is because they have learned the lesson that has been taught so often:  there is no God, and therefore no morality.  If they believe that they are a cosmic accident, then what is the problem with either harming others or harming one’s self?  This is the foundation of the humanistic belief that one can (and perhaps should) do whatever pleases himself.  If man is only the end result of an evolutionary process, then why should any one individual care about the welfare of another?

Darwin’s “survival of the fittest” would lead men to compete for superiority, and reject any concept of “care” for another person.  Power and might are the most important characteristics, and exercising them proves that superiority.  Add to that the teaching that procreation is vital to the strength of the most fit of the species, and sexual promiscuity runs rampant.  Is it any wonder that teen pregnancy is out of control?

Darwin’s evolutionary theory bears far more significance than just the scientific doctrine would imply.  There are most definitely moral implications to the theory.  It removes any moral responsibility, and sense of obligation to others.  It makes it so that a person answers to no one except others in the society, and forces the general populace towards a “situation ethics” mentality.  As long as society approves of a practice, that is all that matters.  There is no absolute truth, no definite right or wrong.  If there is no God, there can be no absolute standard of morality, and if evolution is true, there is no God.  The propagation of the theory of evolution has succeeded in removing not only God from most of our society, but has removed morality!

Popularity: 8% [?]

Actions Speak Louder than Words

Posted on May 14, 2010 by Kris
Filed Under For Further Thought... | 1 Comment | Share

When I logged on to Facebook today, a friend of mine had a very interesting post.  He said:

The “Jesus,” “Church,” & “Bible” in your
Likes & Interests are undermined by the spaghetti-strap you wear in
your profile pic

I have to give a hearty “Amen” to that!  This got me thinking about how we as Christians try to teach others about what it means to be a Christian, only to put forth an image of hypocrisy.  Far too often, we want to talk the talk, but not walk the walk.  We want to tell people just how righteous we are, but in reality we want to live life according to our own selfish desires.

How often do Christians give lip service to the concept of “modesty” but in application we see absolutely no difference between them and the world?  The same principle is true for things like anger, jealousy, profanity and the like.  What does the rest of the world see in us?  Whatever they see in us will certainly stick with them a whole lot longer than what they hear from us.  If I tell my neighbor that being a Christian is about reforming my life, giving up sinful practices, and then he sees me participating in them, what desire will he have to make changes?  If I condemn another person’s use of profanity, and then they hear me using euphemisms that mean the exact same thing (and draw the same language to mind) then why would they think they need to make any change?  If I teach another that anger is wrong, and then my children hear me angrily yelling at someone in a near by car because they did something I didn’t like, what lesson have I taught them?

Let’s face it:  we can talk continually about how righteous we are, but if we don’t live the life, people will see us for what we are, which is a phony, a hypocrite.  This is so very important in “real life” but it is also important in cyberspace.  I think that people forget that when they put something on Facebook or Twitter that it is there for everyone to see.  A person’s reputation can be destroyed by one post, or one picture.  Consider what the apostle Paul wrote to the young evangelist, Timothy:

Let no one despise your youth, but be an example to the believers in word, in conduct, in love, in spirit, in faith, in purity. (1 Timothy 4:12)

We will certainly be an example, the only question is:  What kind of example?  If we are being immodest, using profane language, showing fits of temper, acting jealously or any other such thing, then we are putting forth a bad example.  It does not matter how much we might preach against those things, if we don’t put them out of our lives.  And yes, you do undermine your claim of Christianity if you are putting pictures of yourself on Facebook in which you are dressed in spaghetti straps, or any other immodest garb.  No matter how much you protest, those who see your pictures get the point.

If you haven’t yet, be sure to read the previous post on Dressing to Profess Godliness.

Popularity: 24% [?]

older posts »