Posts from the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

The Complete  Incompatibility of Islamic Theocracy with Democracy – Islam’s 1400 Year Quest to Fulfill Muhammad’s Prophecy to Dominate the World 

John Quincy Adams, President of the United Sta...

John Quincy Adams, President of the United States, served on the Board of Trustees in 1832. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

6th President of the United States of America John Quincy Adams on Islam: 1824-1829

“In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar [i.e., Muhammad], the Egyptian, […..] Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST.- TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE…. Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant … While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men.”   

Winston Churchill, Prime Minister of the Unite...

Winston Churchill, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1940 to 1945 and from 1951 to 1955. Deutsch: Winston Churchill, 1940 bis 1945 sowie 1951 bis 1955 Premier des Vereinigten Königreichs und Literaturnobelpreisträger des Jahres 1953. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Winston Churchill on Islam:

“How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live.”

“A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.”

“Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it.”

“No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.”

— Sir Winston Spencer Churchill (The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages 248-50 (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1899)

These were not uneducated men who knew nothing of their subject and had simply spoken recklessly. 

Rather, both of these great leaders of the free countries of Great Britton and of the United States of America spoke the real truth.

The word Islam means ,”Submit”. (Choice is ultimately not respected, and force is doctrine).

Qur’an (3:151) “We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve”

In America we do not understand that Islamic doctrine demands NO SEPARATION between church and state. All Muslims believe Islam must advance until all the world submits to Allah, that apostates must be killed, and what the Quran says must be followed. Unlike old Testament violence in the Bible only in a couple of special circumstances, the Quranic verses that call for violence in the name of Allah do so under all circumstances, even today.
There is no new testament in the Quran.

But in the Bible Jesus said, 

“So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.”(John 8:36)

“He,(Jesus), stood up to read, and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:

“The Spirit of the Lord is on me,
    because he has anointed me
    to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
    and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free,
 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”

Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. 

The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him. 

He began by saying to them, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.”

(Luke 4:17-21)

One religion will bind you, the other resonates, defines, and inspires freedom.

filled in your hearing.”

(Luke 4:17-21)

One religion will bind you, the other resonates, defines, and inspires freedom.

One rules by fear, the other by faith and love.

These representations are based on the central tenets of the religions compared here and not the misrepresentations of said core beliefs. In short, it is when Christianity is misrepresented that violence is perpetrated. Islam is genuine when violence is perpetrated. The confusion comes when we mistake the natural tendancy for evil in human nature with religion in general. Islam is specifically designed to appeal to the darkness in men’s hearts. Genuine Christianity displaces the darkness.

One rules by fear, the other by faith and love. 

http://www.salon.com/2015/11/14/it_was_probably_not_the_amish_bill_maher_urges_liberals_to_wake_up_about_islam_after_paris_attacks
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/The_Story_of_Umm_Qirfa

80+ dead’ after truck crashes into crowd at Bastille Day celebrations in Nice ‘terror attack’. http://tiny.iavian.net/b8cx

The Most Important Answer to the Most Important Question,”Why?” Serve Christ?

Image 1

The Key to Successful Discipleship in Christ is to Answer the Question “Why?”

       I believe that most of the shortcomings and failings of the church stem from the failure to successfully answer the question “Why should I give my all to Christ?”

       The answer is in the Gospel, and by Gospel I mean the cross and the resurrection of Christ.

       Because of His love, we can have a personal and intimate life in Christ, and we can confidently confront the brokenness of this world.

       When we have come to love Christ as He loved us, we will together with Christ and by His indwelling Spirit, yearn to give our all to Him because He first gave His all for us.

       Our faith is strongest when our love for God is stronger than any fear, desire, or potential loss we could know because it is anchored in a confidence rooted in His love for us, fully expressed by the cross.

       I like to say, When we love God with all our heart and soul and strength, then there is no room left to love anything contrary to God.

Why?

We love Him because He first loved us.”

(1 John 4:19, NKJV)

 

Dear Readers, Do You Agree With Suzanne ? Should I Continue to Post Anonymously or not ?

image

The following comment is from a reader in Bavaria.

“I really saw that your site IS completely Christ-centered. Hats off! Such a thing is rarely to find.

“Every sermon should ultimately be about Jesus.” Tim Keller

This is absolutely true. I appreciate Tim Keller as well and I’d like to say that the Gospel Coalition “triumvirate” 😉 – often represented by Tim Keller, Don Carson, AND John Piper – consists of three Christ-centered preachers and teachers. They are all different, yet they complement each other perfectly.

Indeed, I loved reading this post. The only thing that makes me somehow sad is the fact that I do not know with whom I am talking here [OK OK, from your “About” I know that you are a man 🙂 ]. I abstained from saying, “Hello Christ Centered Teaching” since it sounds a bit strange in my ears. Do you not agree?
Just flipping through Scripture, reading for example the introduction of Romans, a man introduces himself by writing,

“Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God.” Rom 1:1)

You, too, are a faithful (!) servant of Him who has called you by your name, didn’t He? He chose you and you are precious in His eyes. God, your Father in Heaven, knew your name before you were born and He loves like His only son Jesus.
Just imagine all the prophets of the Old Testament had not been given any names or we could only read gospel 1, gospel 2, gospel 3, gospel 4, and anonymous letters.

“You, too, my dear brother, have a prophetic voice which must be heard!”

I assume you may wonder why I insist on it that much. Who am I to do so?
Honestly, the Lord urged me…
Also, it grieved me a lot to read about your painful loss when you were only eleven years old. In fact, it was the same for my hubby Paul who was born in Chicago/Illinois. When he was about 9 years old [“about” because he can’t remember it], he was forced to return to Germany with his mother and his younger brother because their father had died in the 1970’s. Just in case they would have stayed in the USA, their mother as a German – unlike their American sons – would have had difficulties with retaining custody.

Well, that’s it for now, my brother in Christ.

Every blessing to you,
your sister
Susanne from Bavaria 🙂

I appreciate each and every comment I recieve.
But this comment really has me thinking.

Some of you already know that I occasionally post expanded views of the works of Tim Keller, Viktor Frankl,  and others.

Tim Keller did a sermon series titled,”Public Faith”, in which he states that we live in a culture that encourages us to be open about everything except our religious beliefs.
We are told that it is good to say what we believe about sexual preferences and everything else, but we are told to keep our views about religion, particularly Christian religious views, to ourselves.

And Viktor Frankl, the Austrian Phyciastrist who survived Auschwitz, who wrote one of the New York Times top ten most influential books of all time, “Man’s Search for Meaning”, would have published it anonymously if not for the urging of a close friend.

Frankl later realized that many more opportunities arose for him to help others because he published his book with his real name.

In contrast, I risk very little by being anonymous and my humility is not pumped up so much as to make me tempted to forget my first love, namely Jesus Christ.

I consider these men to be a few of my most admired and most Christ Centered Teachers.

So what do you think?

Would my name help the cause of Christ, or only serve to hurt it ?

Please prayerfully consider these things with me and share your thoughts in this forum with me.

Because He first loved us,
C.C.T.

Life, Creation and Wisdom – We See So Little of All That Really Is

image

Men look up into the sky at night and marvel in wonder at the sheer number of stars and the vastness of the universe.

Yet with our most sophisticated telescopes today we can see that far more is actually there  than the unaided eye can see.

The voids of blackness begin to fill in with the light of discoveries previously unknown.

You may then realize that in a similar way that you can never know it all.

But rest assured you CAN know the one who does know it all, and He calls each of the heavenly host by name.

He is God, and has also promised;

as it is written:

“Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,

Nor have entered into the heart of man

The things which God has prepared for those who love Him.”

(I Corinthians 2:9)

Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed;

blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” 

(John 20:29)

Biblical Content in the Context of Biblical Emphasis is Our Biblical Imperative

Christ's Resurection from Death

Most of what Christians communicate has Biblical content. Subjects like predestination, grace,love,unity, God’s sovereignty are all typical examples of Biblical Content.

But any time we communicate Biblical Content but neglect Biblical Emphasis, we violate Biblical imperative.

What is Biblical Imperative?

“That in all things, Christ might be preeminent.”

“I am determined to know nothing except Christ and Him crucified.”

To put it another way,

Jesus said,”I am the way, the truth, and the life, no man comes to the Father but by Me.”

The entirety of Christianity begins with the redemption of mankind.
Jesus is the only way to the Father, He is the only truth that leads us to the Father, He is the only life we can obtain with the Father, for we are all already dead in trespasses and sins.

Even discipleship means nothing without Christ.

“I am the Vine and you are the branches, without Me you can do nothing.”

“I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me.”

Preacher.
What could you possibly have to say that would have more meaning or relevance aside from Jesus Christ ?

Born the Way God Intended – A Scientific Examination of Homosexuality and the Futile Search for a Biological Cause

Immanuel

“He created them male and female and blessed them. And he named them “Mankind” when they were created.”
(Genesis 5:2)
Dear friends,
No claim clearly stated in the Bible has ever been disproved, or ever will be. The science that supports God as Creator is always right, solid , and withstands testing.
The Theory of evolution,”Darwinism”, is erroding as the result of research centering on DNA ,”genetics”, archeological research, and more.
The same latest research is eroding the false assumption that Homosexuality is biological in origin.
Oddly enough, most articles that claim evidence for a developmental stage hormonal link will also rely heavily on evolutionary theory, and natural instincts of  animal species as evidence.
Bad science coupled to more bad science does not make good science.
Most articles on this subject will not provide credible resources to support their claims.
Most will not provide any support for their claims beyond vague references.
Don’t let public schools teach your children that being gay is natural.
 I believe society has many issues that will only become worse as we continue to mis-diagnose the sexual and psychological roots of homosexual behavior.
There is definitely a phycological issue, but also a growing sexual issue as more people see sex purely as a means of pleasure and escape, much as with a substance addiction.
Society is not even considering what we could become if we are wrong about homosexuality, and society is wrong.
What nature truly makes obvious about the difference between boys and girls is also supported by science,
and the Bible.
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
(John 8:32)

The following article is written from the scientific standpoint. All claims are heavily supported by

solid,credible scientific research.

Any suppositions are stated as such.

A complete List of supporting references are provided at the end of this reprint.

——————————-

“This Is The Way God Made Me”

A Scientific Examination of Homosexuality 
and the “Gay Gene”

Brad Harrub, Ph.D. and Bert Thompson, Ph.D. and Dave Miller, Ph.D.
© 2003  Apologetics Press, Inc.  All Rights Reserved.
Reproduced by Permission from Apologetics Press, Inc.

he trumpets were left at home and the parades were canceled.  The press releases and campaign signs were quietly forgotten.  The news was big, but it did not contain what some had hoped for.  On April 14, 2003, the International Human Genome Consortium announced the successful completion of the Human Genome Project—two years ahead of schedule.  The press report read: “The human genome is complete and the Human Genome Project is over” (see “Human Genome Report…,” 2003, emp. added).  Most of the major science journals reported on the progress in the field of genetics, but also speculated on how the information would now be used.  The one piece of information that never materialized from the Human Genome Project was the identification of the so-called “gay gene.”Homosexuality has been practiced for thousands of years.  Simply put, homosexuality is defined as sexual relations between like genders (i.e., two males or two females).  It was Sigmund Freud who first postulated that parental relationships with a child ultimately determine the youngster’s sexual orientation.  But this “nurturing” aspect has effectively given way to the “nature” side of the equation.  Can some behaviors (e.g., alcoholism, homosexuality, schizophrenia) be explained by genetics?  Are these and other behaviors influenced by nature or by nurture?  Are they inborn or learned?  Some individuals believed that the answer would be found hiding amidst the chromosomes analyzed in the Human Genome Project.The human X and Y chromosomes (the two “sex” chromosomes) have been completely sequenced.  Thanks to work carried out by labs all across the globe, we know that the X chromosome contains 153 million base pairs, and harbors a total of 1168 genes (see NCBI, 2004).  The National Center for Biotechnology Information reports that the Y chromosome—which is much smaller—contains “only” 50 million base pairs, and is estimated to contain a mere 251 genes.  Educational institutions such as Baylor University, the Max Planck Institute, the Sanger Institute, Washington University in St. Louis, and others have spent countless hours and millions of research dollars analyzing these unique chromosomes.  As the data began to pour in, they allowed scientists to construct gene maps—using actual sequences from the Human Genome Project.  And yet, neither the map for the X nor the Y chromosome contains any “gay gene.”What is the truth regarding homosexuality?  Too often, speculation, emotions, and politics play a major role in its assessment.  The following is a scientific investigation of human homosexuality. 

Behavioral Genetics and Civil Rights

In an effort to affect public policy and gain acceptance, the assertion often is made that homosexuals deserve equal rights just as other minority groups—and should not be punished for, or forbidden from, expressing their homosexuality.  The fight for the acceptance of homosexuality often is compared to “civil rights” movements of racial minorities.  Due to America’s failure to settle fully the civil rights issue (i.e., full and equal citizenship of racial minorities), social liberals, feminists, and homosexual activists were provided with the perfect “coat tail” to ride to advance their agenda.  Using this camouflage of innate civil liberties, homosexual activists were able to divert attention away from the behavior, and focus it on the “rights.”

The argument goes like this: “Just as a person cannot help being black, female, or Asian, I cannot help being homosexual.  We were all born this way, and as such we should be treated equally.” However, this argument fails to comprehend the true “civil rights” movements.  The law already protects the civil rights of everyone—black, white, male, female, homosexual, or heterosexual.  Homosexuals enjoy the same civil rights everyone else does.  The contention arises when specific laws deprive all citizens of certain behaviors (e.g., sodomy, etc.). We should keep in mind that these laws are the same for all members of society.  Because of certain deprivations, homosexuals feel as though “equal” rights have been taken away (i.e., marriage, tax breaks, etc.).

Skin color and other genetic traits can be traced through inheritance patterns and simple Mendelian genetics.  Homosexuals are identified not by a trait or a gene, but rather by their actions.  Without the action, they would be indistinguishable from all other people.  It is only when they alter their behavior that they become a group that is recognized as being different.  If we were to assume momentarily that homosexuality was genetic, then the most one could conclude is that those individuals were not morally responsible for being homosexual.  However, that does not mean that they are not morally responsible for homosexual actions! Merely having the gene would not force one to carry out the behavior.  For instance, if scientists were able to document that a “rape gene” existed, we certainly would not blame an individual for possessing this gene, but neither would we allow him to act upon that rape disposition.  Neil Risch and his coworkers admitted:

 

There is little disagreement that male homosexual orientation is not a Mendelian trait.  In fact, a priori, one would expect the role of a major gene in male homosexual orientation to be limited because of the strong selective pressures against such a gene.  It is unlikely that a major gene underlying such a common trait could persist over time without an extraordinary counterbalancing mechanism (1993, 262:2064).

Evan S. Balaban, a neurobiologist at the Neurosciences Institute in San Diego, noted that

 

the search for the biological underpinnings of complex human traits has a sorry history of late.  In recent years, researchers and the media have proclaimed the “discovery” of genes linked to alcoholism and mental illness as well as to homosexuality.  None of the claims…has been confirmed (as quoted in Horgan, 1995).

Charles Mann agreed, stating: “Time and time again, scientists have claimed that particular genes or chromosomal regions are associated with behavioral traits, only to withdraw their findings when they were not replicated” (1994, 264:1687).  It appears that the gay gene will be added to this category of unreplicated claims.

The real issue here is homosexual actions that society has deemed immoral and, in many instances, illegal.  Since no study has firmly established an underlying genetic cause for homosexuality, arguments suggesting “equal rights” are both baseless and illogical.

 

Real Statistics

Anyone who has tuned into prime-time television within the past few years has observed an increasing trend of shows featuring characters who are homosexual—and proud of it.  It seems as though modern sitcoms require “token” homosexuals in order to be politically correct.  The perception is that these individuals share the same apartment buildings, offices, clubs, etc., with heterosexual people, and that we need to realize just how prevalent homosexuality is.  So, exactly what fraction of the population do homosexuals actually represent?

The famous Kinsey Institute report often is cited as evidence that 10% of the population is homosexual.  In his book, Is It a Choice?: Answers to 300 of the Most Frequently Asked Questions About Gays and Lesbians, Eric Marcus used the Kinsey studies to demonstrate that one in ten people is homosexual (1993).  In truth, Kinsey never reported figures that high.  The Kinsey Report clearly stated that: “Only about 4 percent of the men [evaluated] were exclusively homosexual throughout their entire lives….  Only 2 or 3 percent of these women were exclusively homosexual their entire lives” (see Reinisch and Beasley, 1990, p. 140).  However, there is good reason to believe that the real percentage is not even this high.

While no one has carried out a door-to-door census, we do have a fairly accurate estimate.  Interestingly, these statistics came to light in an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court on March 26, 2003, in the Lawrence vs. Texas case (commonly known as the Texas sodomy case).  On page 16 of this legal brief, footnote 42 revealed that 31 homosexual and pro-homosexual groups admitted the following:

 

The most widely accepted study of sexual practices in the United States is the National Health and Social Life Survey (NHSLS).  The NHSLS found that 2.8% of the male, and 1.4% of the female population identify themselves as gay, lesbian, or bisexual (Laumann, et al., 1994).

The study also found that only 0.9% of men and 0.4% of women reported having only same-sex partners since age 18—a figure that would represent a total of only 1.4 million Americans as homosexual (based on the last census report, showing roughly 292 million people living in America).  The resulting accurate figures demonstrate that significantly less than one percent of the American population claims to be homosexual.  The NHSLS results are similar to a survey conducted by the Minnesota Adolescent Health Survey (1986) of public school students.  The survey showed that only 0.6% of the boys and 0.2% of the girls identified themselves as “mostly or 100% homosexual.”

The 2000 census sheds even more light on the subject.  The overall statistics from the 2000 Census Bureau revealed:

  • The total population of the U.S. is 285,230,516.
  • The total number of households in the U.S. is 106,741,426.
  • The total number of unmarried same-sex households is 601,209.

Thus, out of a population of 106,741,426 households, homosexuals represent 0.42% of those households.  That is less than one half of one percent!

But since most people are not mathematicians, we would like to make this point in a way that most individuals will be able to better comprehend.  If we were to start a new television sitcom, and wanted to accurately portray homosexual ratios in society, we would need 199 heterosexual actors before we finally introduced one homosexual actor.

And yet modern television casts of three or four often include one or more homosexual actor(s).  The statistics from the 2000 census are not figures grabbed from the air and placed on a political sign or Web site to promote a particular agenda.  These were census data that were carefully collected from the entireUnited States population, contrary to the limited scope of studies designed to show a genetic cause for homosexuality.

 

Is Homosexuality Genetic?

It is one of the most explosive topics in society today.  The social and political ramifications affect the very roots of this country.  But is the country being told the truth concerning homosexuality?  Is there really a genetic basis for homosexuality?

Former democratic presidential candidate and Vermont Governor Howard Dean signed a bill legalizing civil unions for homosexuals in Vermont.  In defending his actions, he commented: “The overwhelming evidence is that there is a very significant, substantial genetic component to it.  From a religious point of view, if God had thought homosexuality is a sin, he would not have created gay people” (as quoted in VandeHei, 2004).  Dean is not alone in such thinking.

Homosexual Population Pie ChartMost people are familiar with the idea that research has been performed that allegedly supports the existence of a gay gene.  However, that idea has been a long time in the making.  Almost fifty years ago, the landmark Kinsey report was produced using the sexual histories of thousands of Americans.  While that report consisted of a diverse sample, it was not a representative sample of the general population (Kinsey, et al., 1948, 1953).  In 1994, Richard Friedman and Jennifer Downey published a review on homosexuality in The New England Journal of Medicine.  In reviewing Kinsey’s work, they noted:

 

Kinsey reported that 8 percent of men and 4 percent of women were exclusively homosexual for a period of at least three years during adulthood.  Four percent of men and 2 percent of women were exclusively homosexual after adolescence (1994, 331:923).

With this “statistical information” in hand, some sought to change the way homosexuality was viewed by both the public and the medical community.  Prior to 1973, homosexuality appeared in theDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the official reference book used by the American Psychiatric Association for diagnosing mental disorders in America and throughout much of the rest of the world.  Homosexuality was considered a sickness that doctors routinely treated.  In 1973, however, it was removed as a sexual disorder, based on the claim that it did not fulfill the “distress and social disability” criteria that were used to define a disorder.  Today, there is no mention of homosexuality in the DSM-IV (aside from a section describing gender identity disorder), indicating that individuals with this condition are not suitable candidates for therapy (see American Psychiatric Association, 2000).

Physicians treating patients for homosexuality (to bring about a change in sexual orientation) frequently are reported to ethics committees in an attempt to have them cease.  Robert Spitzer lamented:

 

Several authors have argued that clinicians who attempt to help their clients change their homosexual orientation are violating professional ethical codes by providing a “treatment” that is ineffective, often harmful, and reinforces in their clients the false belief that homosexuality is a disorder and needs treatment (2003, 32:403).

Thus, the stage was set for the appearance of a “gay gene.”

 

Simon LeVay—Brain Differences

The first “significant” published study that indicated a possible biological role for homosexuality came from Simon LeVay, who was then at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in San Diego, California.  In 1991, Dr. LeVay reported subtle differences between the brains of homosexual and heterosexual men (1991).  LeVay measured a particular region of the brain (the interstitial nuclei of the anterior hypothalamus—INAH) in postmortem tissue of three distinct groups: (1) women; (2) men who were presumed to be heterosexual; (3) and homosexual men.

 

LeVay’s Reported Findings

LeVay reported that clusters of these neurons (INAH) in homosexual men were the same size as clusters in women, both of which were significantly smaller than clusters in heterosexual men.  LeVay reported that the nuclei in INAH 3 were “more than twice as large in the heterosexual men as in the women.  It was also, however, more than twice as large in the heterosexual men as in the homosexual men” (1991, 253:1034).  This difference was interpreted as strong evidence of a biological link to homosexuality.  LeVay’s assumption was that homosexual urges can be biologically based—so long as cluster size is accepted as being genetically determined.

 

Diagram showing INAH area
Diagram showing INAHarea.  LifeART images copyright © 2004 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.  All rights reserved.  Used by permission.

Problems with LeVay’s Study

When looking at the methodology of the LeVay study, one of the key problems is that the study has never been reproduced.  As William Byne noted, LeVay’s work

 

has not been replicated, and human neuroanatomical studies of this kind have a very poor track record for reproducibility.  Indeed, procedures similar to those LeVay used to identify nuclei have previously led researchers astray (1994, 270[5]:53, emp. added).

Additionally, of nineteen homosexual subjects used in the study, all had died of complications of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS).  AIDS has been shown to decrease testosterone levels, so it should be expected that those who suffered from that condition would have smaller INAH.  Byne continued his comments on LeVay’s work.

 

His inclusion of a few brains from heterosexual men with AIDS did not adequately address the fact that at the time of death, virtually all men with AIDS have decreased testosterone levels as the result of the disease itself or the side effects of particular treatments.  To date, LeVay has examined the brain of only one gay man who did not die of AIDS (270:53).

Furthermore, in a scientific environment where controls and standards are a necessity, LeVay did not possess a complete medical history of the individuals included in his study.  He therefore was forced toassume the sexual orientation of the non-AIDS victims as being heterosexual, when some may not have been.  In addition, bear in mind that he had no evidence regarding the sexual orientation of the women whose brains he examined.  LeVay has admitted:

 

It’s important to stress what I didn’t find.  I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay.  I didn’t show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work.  Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain (as quoted in Byrd, et al., 2001, emp. added).

Many have argued that what LeVay discovered in the brains of those he examined was only a result of prior behavior, not the cause of it.  Mark Breedlove, a researcher at the University of California at Berkeley, has demonstrated that sexual behavior has an effect on the brain.  In referring to his own research, Breedlove commented: “These findings give us proof for what we theoretically know to be the case—that sexual experience can alter the structure of the brain, just as genes can alter it….  [I]t is possible that differences in sexual behavior cause (rather than are caused by) differences in the brain” (as quoted in Byrd, et al., parenthetical item in orig.).  Considering this type of research, it makes sense that a homosexual lifestyle (and/or the AIDS condition) could alter the size of the nuclei LeVay was measuring.

What exactly did LeVay find?  In actuality, not much.  He did observe slight differences between the groups—if you accept the method he used for measuring the size of the neuron clusters (and some researchers do not).  When each individual was considered by himself, there was not a significant difference; only when the individuals involved in the study were considered in groups of homosexuals vs. heterosexuals did differences result.  Hubbard and Wald commented on this lack of difference:

 

Though, on average, the size of the hypothalamic nucleus LeVay considered significant was indeed smaller in the men he identified as homosexual, his published data show that the range of sizes of the individual samples was virtually the same as for the heterosexual men.  That is, the area was larger in some of the homosexuals than in many of the heterosexual men, and smaller in some of the heterosexual men than in many of the homosexuals.  This means that, though the groups showed some difference as groups, there was no way to tell anything about an individual’s sexual orientation by looking at his hypothalamus(1997, pp. 95-96, emp. added).

Being homosexual himself, it is no surprise that LeVay observed: “…[P]eople who think that gays and lesbians are born that way are more likely to support gay rights.” In a Newsweek article, LeVay was quoted as saying, “I felt if I didn’t find any [difference in the hypothalamuses], I would give up a scientific career altogether” (as quoted in Gelman, et al., 1992, p. 49).  Given how (poorly) twisted LeVay’s data are, and his own personal bias, his abandonment of science may have ultimately been of greater service.

 

Brain Plasticity—A Fact Acknowledged by All Neuroscientists

Today, scientists are keenly aware of the fact that the brain is not as “hard-wired” or permanently fixed as once thought—an important factor that LeVay failed to acknowledge.  One of the properties of plastic is flexibility—many containers are made out of plastic so that they will not shatter when dropped.  In a similar manner, the brain was once considered to be rigid, like Ball® jars used for canning—but we now know the brain is “plastic” and flexible, and able to reorganize itself.  Research has shown that the brain is able to remodel its connections and grow larger, according to the specific areas that are most frequently utilized.  Given that we know today that the brain exhibits plasticity, one must ask if the act of living a homosexual lifestyle itself might be responsible for the difference LeVay noted?  Commenting on brain plasticity, Shepherd noted:

 

The inability to generate new neurons might imply that the adult nervous system is a static, “hard-wired” machine.  This is far from the truth.  Although new neurons cannot be generated, each neuron retains the ability to form new processes and new synaptic connections (1994).

Interestingly, since Shepherd’s textbook was published, additional research has even documented the ability of neurons to be generated within certain areas of the brain.  This information must be considered when examining comparative anatomical experiments such as LeVay’s.  These cortical rearrangements that occur are not as simple as unplugging a lamp and plugging it into another socket.  The changes observed by researchers indicate that if the brain were represented by a home electrical system, then many of the wires within the walls would be pulled out, rewired to different connections in different rooms, new outlets would appear, and some would even carry different voltages.  Due to the colossal connectivity that takes place within the brain, any “rewiring” is, by its very nature, going to have an effect on several areas—such as INAH3.  Scientists understand these things, yet LeVay’s work is still mentioned as alleged support for the so-called gay gene.

 

Bailey and Pillard—
The Famous “Twins” Study

One of the most frequently cited studies used in promoting the genetics of sexual orientation is a 1952 study by Kallmann.  In this famous work, he reported a concordance rate (or genetic association) of 100% for sexual orientation among monozygotic (identical) twins (1952, 115:283).  This result, if true, would prove nearly insurmountable for those people who doubt the biological causation of homosexuality.  However, Kallmann subsequently conjectured that this perfect concordance was an artifact, possibly due to the fact that his sample was drawn largely from mentally ill and institutionalized men (see Rainer, et al., 1960, 22:259).  But Kallmann’s research opened the door to twin studies in regard to sexual orientation.

Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard, researchers at Northwestern University and the Boston University School of Medicine, carried out a similar experiment, examining 56 pairs of identical twins, 54 pairs of fraternal twins, 142 non-twin brothers of twins, and 57 pairs of adoptive brothers (1991, 48:1089-1096).  Bailey and Pillard were looking to see if homosexuality was passed on through familial lines, or if one could point to environmental factors as the cause.  Their hypothesis: if homosexuality is an inherited trait, then more twin brothers would be expected to have the same orientation than non-twin or non-biological brothers.

 

Their Reported Findings

  • 52% of identical (monozygotic) twins of homosexual men were homosexual
  • 22% of fraternal (dizygotic) twins were likewise homosexual
  • 11% of adoptive brothers of homosexual men were homosexual
  • 9.2% of non-twin biological siblings reported homosexual orientations (Bailey and Pillard, 1991, “A Genetic Study of Male Sexual Orientation”)
  • 48% of identical twins of homosexual women were likewise homosexual
  • 16% of fraternal (dizygotic) twins were likewise homosexual
  • 6% of adoptive sisters of homosexual women were likewise homosexual (Bailey and Benishay, 1993, “Familial Aggregation of Female Sexual Orientation”)

 

Problems with Bailey and Pillard’s Study

While the authors acknowledged some of the flaws with their research, they still were quoted in Science News as saying: “Our research shows that male sexual orientation is substantially genetic” (as quoted in Bower, 1992, 141:6).  However, the most glaring observation is that clearly not 100% of the identical twins “inherited” homosexuality.  If there was, in fact, a “gay gene,” then all of the identical twins should have reported a homosexual orientation.  And yet, in nearly half of the twins studied, one brother was not homosexual.  In a technical-comment letter in Science, Neil Risch and colleagues pointed out: “The biological brothers and adoptive brothers showed approximately the same rates.  This latter observation suggests that there is no genetic component, but rather an environmental component shared in families” (1993, 262:2063).  In fact, more adoptive brothers shared homosexuality than non-twin biological brothers.  If there was a genetic factor, this result would be counter to the expected trend.  Byne and Parsons noted:

 

However, the concordance rate for homosexuality in nontwin biologic brothers was only 9.2—significantly lower than that required by simple genetic hypothesis, which, on the basis of shared genetic material, would predict similar concordance rates for DZ [dizygotic] twins and nontwin biologic brothers.  Furthermore, the fact that the concordance rates were similar for nontwin biologic brothers (9.2%) and genetically unrelated adoptive brothers (11.0%) is at odds with a simple genetic hypothesis, which would predict a higher concordance rate for biological siblings (1993, 50:229).

A more recently published twin study failed to find similar concordance rates.  King and McDonald studied 46 homosexual men and women who were twins.  The concordance rates that they reported were 10%, or 25% with monozygotic twins—depending on whether or not the bisexuals were included along with the homosexuals.  The rates for dizygotic twins were 8% or 12%, again, depending on whether bisexuals were included (King and McDonald, 1992).  Byne and Parsons commented: “These rates are significantly lower than those reported by Bailey and Pillard; in comparison of the MZ[monozygotic] concordance rate, including bisexuals (25%), with the comparable figure from Bailey and Pillard (52%)” (p. 230).  They went on to observe: “Furthermore, if the concordance rate is similar forMZ and DZ twins, the importance of genetic factors would be considerably less than that suggested by Bailey and Pillard” (p. 230, emp. added).

Another factor that may have had a drastic affect on the results of this study (and other similar studies) centers on methodology.  Bailey and Pillard did not study a random sample of homosexuals.  Instead, the subjects were recruited through advertisements placed in homosexual publications.  This method can be deemed questionable because it is highly dependent on the readership of those publications and on the motives of those who respond.  Thus, it may lead to skewed results—for example, inflated rates of concordance in identical twins owing to preferential participation (see Baron, 1993).  Hubbard and Wald observed:

 

The fact that fraternal twins of gay men were roughly twice as likely to be gay as other biological brothers shows that environmental factors are involved, since fraternal twins are no more similar biologically than are other biological brothers.  If being a fraternal twin exerts an environmental influence, it does not seem surprising that this should be even truer for identical twins, who the world thinks of as “the same” and treats accordingly, and who often share those feelings of sameness (1997, p. 97).

In summarizing their findings, Byne and Parsons stated: “Critical review shows the evidence favoring a biologic theory to be lacking” (50:228).  Commenting on Bailey and Pillard’s report, researchers Billings and Beckwith wrote:

 

While the authors interpreted their findings as evidence for a genetic basis for homosexuality, we think that the data in fact provide strong evidence for the influence of the environment (1993, p. 60).

When evaluated scientifically, twin studies fail to provide any valid support for the longed-for “gay gene.”

 

Dean Hamer—The Gay Gene
on the X Chromosone

Two years after Simon LeVay’s report, a group led by Dean H. Hamer of the National Cancer Institute allegedly linked male homosexuality to a gene on the X chromosome.  His team investigated 114 families of homosexual men.  Hamer and his colleagues collected family history information from 76 gay male individuals and 40 gay brother pairs as they searched for incidences of homosexuality among relatives of gay men.

In many families, gay men had gay relatives through maternal lines.  Thus, they concluded that a gene for homosexuality might be found on the X chromosome, which is passed from the mother alone.  They then used DNA linkage analysis in an effort to find a correlation between inheritance and homosexual orientation.

 

Their Reported Findings

Because many of the families with a prevalence of homosexual relatives had a common set of DNAmarkers on the X chromosome, Hamer’s group assumed a genetic etiology.  Of the 40 pairs of homosexual brothers he analyzed, Hamer found that 33 exhibited a matching DNA region called q28—a gene located at the tip of the long arm of the X chromosome.  In summarizing their findings, Hamer and colleagues noted: “Our experiments suggest that a locus (or loci) related to sexual orientation lies within approximately 4 million base pairs of DNA on the tip of the long arm of the X chromosome” (1993, 261:326, parenthetical item in orig.).  This discovery prompted Hamer and his colleagues to speculate:

 

The linkage to markers on Xq28, the subtelomeric region of the long arm of the sex chromosome, had a multipoint lod score of 4.0, indicating a statistical confidence level of more than 99 percent that at least one subtype of male sexual orientation is genetically influenced (261:321, emp. added).

It is important to note that Hamer did not claim to have found a “gay gene,” or even the set of genes, that might contribute to a propensity for homosexuality.  According to Chicago Tribune staff writer, John Crewdson, what Hamer claimed to have found was “statistical evidence that such genes exist” (1995).

 

Problems with Hamer’s Study

One of the most significant problems with Hamer’s approach is that he and his colleagues did not feel that it was necessary to check whether any of the heterosexual men in these families shared the marker in question!  Would it not be useful to know whether or not this “gay gene” is found in heterosexuals?  Even if only a few of them possess the gene, it calls into question what the gene or the self-identification signifies.  Additionally, Hamer never explained why the other seven pairs of brothers did not display the same genetic marker.  If this is “the gene” for homosexuality, then one must assume all homosexual individuals would possess that particular marker—and yet that was not the case in Hamer’s study.

In a letter to Science, Anne Fausto-Sterling and Evan Balaban pointed out some of the additional problems with Hamer’s study.  They noted:

 

Despite our praise for aspects of Hamer, et al.’s work, we feel it is also important to recognize some of its weaknesses.  The most obvious of these is the lack of an adequate control group.  Their study demonstrates cosegregation of a trait (which Hamer, et al.  have labeled “homosexuality”) with X chromosome markers and the trait’s concordance in homosexual brothers.  This cosegregation is potentially meaningful if the mother is heterozygous for the trait.  In this case, segregating chromosomes without the markers should show up in nonhomosexual brothers, but Hamer, et al present no data to that effect (1993, 261:1257, emp. added).

Fausto-Sterling and Balaban continued:

 

This sensitivity to assumptions about background levels makes Hamer, et al.’s data less robust than the summary in their abstract indicates….  Finally we wish to emphasize a point with which we are sure Hamer, et al would agree: correlation does not necessarily indicate causation (261:1257).

In other words, Hamer’s methodology leaves something to be desired.  One also should keep in mind that Hamer’s sampling was not random, and, as a result, his data may not reflect the real population.

George Rice and his colleagues from Canada looked intently at the gene Xq28.  They then observed: “Allele and halotype sharing for these markers was not increased over expectation.  These results do not support an X-linked gene underlying male homosexuality” (1999, 284:665, emp. added).  Rice, et al., included 182 families in their study.  They noted:

 

It is unclear why our results are so discrepant from Hamer’s original study.  Because our study was larger than that of Hamer et al., we certainly had adequate power to detect a genetic effect as large as was reported in that study.  Nonetheless, our data do not support the presence of a gene of large effect influencing sexual orientation at position Xq28 (284:667).

That is a tactful way of saying that any claims of having found a “gay gene” were overblown, if not outright false, and that Hamer’s results are dubious at best.  Commenting on the study of Rice and his colleagues, Ingrid Wickelgren remarked: “…the Ontario team found that gay brothers were no more likely to share the Xq28 markers than would be expected by chance….  Ebers interprets all these results to mean that the X linkage is all but dead” (1999, 284:571, emp. added).

In June of 1998, University of Chicago psychiatrist Alan Sanders reported at the meeting of the American Psychiatric Association that he, too, had been unable to verify Hamer’s results.  Looking for an increase in Xq28 linkage, Sanders’ team studied 54 pairs of gay brothers.  As Wickelgren indicated, Sanders’ team had found “only a weak hint—that wasn’t statistically significant—of an Xq28 linkage among 54 gay brother pairs” (284:571).  Commenting on the validity of Hamer’s study, Wickelgren quoted George Rice: “Taken together, Rice says, the results ‘suggest that if there is a linkage it’s so weak it’s not important’” (1999, emp. added).  Two independent labs failed to reproduce anything even remotely resembling Hamer’s results.

 

Changeability of Homosexuals—
Evidence Against Genetics

An individual born with diabetes has no hope of changing that condition.  Likewise, a child born with Down’s syndrome will carry that chromosomal abnormality throughout his or her life.  These individuals are a product of the genes they inherited from their parents.  Homosexuality appears to be vastly different.  Many people have been able to successfully change their sexual orientation.  [Truth be told, some individuals experiment with a variety of sexual partners—male/female—often, going back and forth.  One might inquire if the bisexuality denotes the existence of a “bisexual gene?”] Ironically, however, the removal of homosexuality as a designation from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Psychiatric Disorders by the American Psychiatric Association has kept many physicians from attempting to provide reparative therapy to homosexuals.

Robert Spitzer conducted a study on 200 self-selected individuals (143 males, 57 females) in an effort to see if participants could change their sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual (2003, 32:403-417).  He reported some minimal change from homosexual to heterosexual orientation that lasted at least five years (p. 403).  Spitzer observed:

 

The majority of participants gave reports of change from a predominantly or exclusively homosexual orientation before therapy to a predominantly or exclusively heterosexual orientation in the past year (p. 403).

In summarizing his findings, Spitzer declared: “Thus, there is evidence that change in sexual orientation following some form of reparative therapy does occur in some gay men and lesbians.” He thus concluded: “This study provides evidence that some gay men and lesbians are able to also change the core features of sexual orientation” (p. 415).

Six years earlier, the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) released the results of a two-year study stating:

 

Before treatment, 68 percent of the respondents perceived themselves as exclusively or almost entirely homosexual, with another 22 percent stating that they were more homosexual than heterosexual.  After treatment, only 13 percent perceived themselves as exclusively or almost entirely homosexual, while 33 percent described themselves as either exclusively or almost entirely heterosexual (see Nicolosi, 2000, 86:1071).

The study also reported:

 

Although 83 percent of respondents indicated that they entered therapy primarily because of homosexuality, 99 percent of those who participated in the survey said they now believe treatment to change homosexuality can be effective and valuable (p. 1071).

These data are consistent with the ongoing research project of Rob Goetze, who has identified 84 articles or books that contain some relevance to the possibility of sexual orientation change (2004).  Of the data reported, 31 of the 84 studies showed a quantitative outcome of individuals able to change sexual orientation.  These are not studies that merely speculate on the ability to change; they actually have the numbers to back it up!  All of these data come on the heels of warnings from the Surgeon General, The American Academy of Pediatrics, and all of the major mental health associations, which have issued position statements warning of possible harm from such therapy, and have asserted that there is no evidence that such therapy can change a person’s sexual orientation.  For instance, the 1998 American Psychiatric Association Position Statement on Psychiatric Treatment and Sexual Orientation noted:

 

…there is no published scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of reparative therapy as a treatment to change one’s sexual orientation….  The potential risks of reparative therapy are great, including depression, anxiety, and self-destructive behavior (see American Psychiatric Association, 1999, p. 1131).

Thus, physicians are caught in a quandary of a double standard.  On the one hand, they are told that it is “unethical” for a clinician to provide reparative therapy because homosexuality is not a diagnosable disorder, and thus one should not seek to change.  Yet, they contend that not enough studies have been conducted to determine the effectiveness of reparative therapy.  The message is loud and clear: “Do not do this because it is unethical to ask a homosexual person to change.  However, truth be told, we have not collected enough data to know if a person can safely change his or her sexual orientation.”

In situations where sexual orientation is being measured, studies face serious methodological problems (i.e., follow-up assessment, possible bias, no detailed sexual history, random sampling, etc.).  But even given these serious shortcomings from behavioral studies such as these, there are sufficient data to indicate that an individual can change his or her sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual—something that would be an impossibility if homosexuality were caused by genetics.

 

Conclusion

Consider the obvious problem of survival for individuals who allegedly possess a gay gene: individuals who have partners of the same sex are biologically unable to reproduce (without resorting to artificial means).  Therefore, if an alleged “gay gene” did exist, the homosexual population eventually would disappear altogether.  We now know that it is not scientifically accurate to refer to a “gay gene” as the causative agent in homosexuality.  The available evidence clearly establishes that no such gene has been identified.  Additionally, evidence exists which documents that homosexuals can change their sexual orientation.  Future decisions regarding policies about, and/or treatment of, homosexuals should reflect this knowledge.

 

References

American Psychiatric Association (2000), Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,(Washington D.C.: American Psychiatric Association), fourth edition, text revision.

Bailey, Michael J., and Richard C. Pillard (1991), “A Genetic Study of Male Sexual Orientation,”Archives of General Psychiatry, 48:1089-1096, December.

Bailey, Michael J. and D.S. Benishay (1993), “Familial Aggregation of Female Sexual Orientation,”American Journal of Psychiatry, 150[2]:272-277.

Baron M. (1993), “Genetics and Human Sexual Orientation [Editorial],” Biological Psychiatry, 33:759-761.

Billings, P. and J. Beckwith (1993), Technology Review, July, p. 60.

Bower, B. (1992), “Gene Influence Tied to Sexual Orientation,” Science News, 141[1]:6, January 4.

Byne, William (1994), “The Biological Evidence Challenged,” Scientific American, 270[5]:50-55, May.

Byne, William and Bruce Parsons (1993), “Human Sexual Orientation,” Archives of General Psychiatry, 50:228-239, March.

Byrd, A. Dean, Shirley E. Cox, and Jeffrey W. Robinson (2001), “Homosexuality: The Innate-Immutability Argument Finds No Basis in Science,” The Salt Lake Tribune, [On-line] URL: http://www.sltrib.com/2001/may/05272001/commenta/100523.htm.

Crewdson, John (1995), “Dean Hamer’s Argument for the Existence of ‘Gay Genes,’ ” Chicago Tribune, News Section, p. 11, June 25.

Fausto-Sterling, Anne and Evan Balaban (1993), “Genetics and Male Sexual Orientation,” [technical-comment letter to the editor], Science, 261:1257, September 3.

Friedman, Richard C. and Jennifer I. Downey (1994), “Homosexuality,” The New England Journal of Medicine, 331[14]:923-930, October 6.

Gelman, David, with Donna Foote, Todd Barrett, and Mary Talbot (1992), “Born or Bred?,”Newsweek, pp. 46-53, February 24.

Goetze, Rob (2004), “Homosexuality and the Possibility of Change: An Ongoing Research Project,” [On-line], URL: http://www.newdirection.ca/research/index.html.

Hamer, Dean H., Stella Hu, Victoria L. Magnuson, Nan Hu, and Angela M.L. Pattatucci (1993), “A Linkage Between DNA Markers on the X Chromosome and Male Sexual Orientation,” Science, 261:321-327, July 16.

Horgan, John (1995), “Gay Genes, Revisited,” Scientific American, 273[5]:26, November.

Howe, Richard (1994), “Homosexuality in America: Exposing the Myths,” American Family Association, [On-line], URL: http://www.afa.net/homosexual_agenda/homosexuality.pdf.

Hubbard, Ruth and Elijah Wald (1997), Exploding the Gene Myth (Boston: Beacon Press).

“Human Genome Report Press Release” (2003), International Consortium Completes Human Genome Project, [On-line], URL: http://www.ornl.gov/TechResources/Human_Genome/project/50yr.html.

Kallmann, F.J. (1952), “Comparative Twin Study on the Genetic Aspects of Male Homosexuality,”Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases, 115:283-298.

King, M. and E. McDonald (1992), “Homosexuals Who are Twins: A Study of 46 Probands,” The British Journal of Psychiatry, 160: 407-409.

Kinsey, A.C. W.B. Pomeroy, C.E. Martin (1948), Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders).

Kinsey, A.C. W.B. Pomeroy, C.E. Martin, P. H. Gebhard (1953), Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders).

Laumann, Edward O., John H. Gagnon, Robert T. Michael, and Stuart Michaels (1994), The Social Organization of Sexuality: Sexual Practices in the United States (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press).

LeVay, Simon (1991), “A Difference in Hypothalamic Structure Between Heterosexual and Homosexual Men,” Science, 253:1034-1037, August 30.

Mann, Charles (1994), “Behavioral Genetics in Transition,” Science, 264:1686-1689, June 17.

Marcus, Eric (1993), Is It a Choice? (San Francisco, CA: Harper).

NCBI (2004), “Human Genome Resources,” [On-line], URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genome/guide/human/.

Nicolosi, Joseph, A. Dean Byrd, and Richard Potts (2000), “Retrospective Self-reports of Changes in Homosexual Orientation: A Consumer Survey of Conversion Therapy Clients,” Psychological Reports, 86:1071-1088, June.

Rainer, J.D., A. Mesnikoff, LC. Kolb, and A. Carr (1960), “Homosexuality and Heterosexuality in Identical Twins,” Psychosomatic Medicine, 22:251-259.

Reinisch, June M. and Ruth Beasley (1990) The Kinsey Institute New Report on Sex (New York: St. Martin’s Press).

Rice, George, Carol Anderson, Neil Risch, and George Ebers (1999), “Male Homosexuality: Absence of Linkage to Microsatellite Markers at Xq28,” Science, 284:665-667, April 23.

Risch, Neil, Elizabeth Squires-Wheeler, and Bronya J.B. Keats (1993), “Male Sexual Orientation and Genetic Evidence,” Science, 262:2063-2064, December 24.

Shepherd, Gordon M. (1994) Neurobiology (Oxford: Oxford University Press), third edition.

Spitzer, Robert L. (2003), “Can Some Gay Men and Lesbians Change Their Sexual Orientation?,”Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32[5]:403-417, October 5.

VandeHei, Jim (2004), “Dean Says Faith Swayed Decision on Gay Unions,” The Washington Post, p. A-1, January 8.

Wickelgren, Ingrid (1999), “Discovery of ‘Gay Gene’ Questioned,” Science, 284:571, April 23.

 


This document may be copied, on the condition that it will not be republished in print, on line (including reposting on other Web sites), or on computer media, and will not be used for any commercial purpose. Further, it may not be copied without source statements (title, author, journal title), this paragraph granting limited rights for copying, and the address of the publisher and owner of rights, as listed below.

For catalog, samples, or further information, contact:

Apologetics Press
230 Landmark Drive
Montgomery, Alabama 36117
U.S.A.
Phone (334) 272-8558
http://www.apologeticspress.org

Related Reading – https://www.facebook.com/purepassiontv

The Deconstruction of Absolute Truth and the Foundation of a Free Society

800px-All_men_are_created_equal

“It has been said that when human beings stop believing in God they believe in nothing. The truth is much worse: they believe in anything.”

Malcolm Muggeridge

 

Our Declaration of independence reads,”We hold these truths to be self-evident”…

So what happens when a previously free society no longer accepts Absolute Truth?

If; “You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free,” then to deny the truth means you will loose your freedom.

Government becomes a kind of god because selfish people no longer behave responsibly with their freedoms.

Government gets big.

Government takes more and more.

The people stop providing for themselves and become slaves to the government.

Totalitarianism is inevitable to those who deny truth and the personal responsibility that comes with knowledge of the Truth.

Freedom cannot survive as our one and only truth.
Freedom is the result of acceptance and application of Truth.

Truth sets us free.
Without it we are slaves.

“And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed.”
(John 8:32 ; 36)

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.” (John 14:6)

The Deconstruction of Absolute Truth and the Arts

image

“Then Jesus spoke to them again, saying, “I am the light of the world. He who follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life.” (John 8:12)

Imagine a painter throwing away half of his or her color palette.

Or imagine a black and white photograph without white, only shades of dark gray.

Whether the subject is painting,photography,theater, or literature, all the above involve using contrasts to make images or tell stories.

Painters use colors ranging from light to dark.

image

Photographers use bright sunlight to dark shadows.

Theater and literature use contrasts in good and evil, peace and conflict, justice and injustice, love and hatred,truth and falsehood.

Now imagine a World that no longer accepts or believes in Absolute Truth, where the contrasts between right and wrong are no longer clear, and men stumble in the darkness because they cannot see.

God of Truth – He is the Rock of Absolute Truth

An Absolute Firm Foundation

An Absolute Firm Foundation

 

“He is the Rock, His work is perfect;
For all His ways are justice,
A God of truth and without injustice;
Righteous and upright is He.
For I proclaim the name of the Lord:
Ascribe greatness to our God.”

Deuteronomy 32:4,5

 

The Deconstruction of Absolute Truth and Creativity – The Loss of Inspiration and Innovation

Demolition

Demolition (Photo credit: hoskarsson)

“In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” 
― George Orwell

“Truth is so obscure in these times, and falsehood so established, that, unless we love the truth, we cannot know it.”
― Blaise Pascal

Deconstructionism of truth is prevalent in today’s society.

“There are no absolutes”, is the theme of Deconstructionism.

(also known as Relativism,Existentialism and Postmodernism)

The negative effects are broad and damaging to society, industry, and politics.

No facet of society is left unharmed by the denial of truth.

Until we believe there are truths that we can believe in, we will have nothing in which we can invest belief, for truth is the subject,and belief is the action.

Conversely, to the degree that we are sure of that which we believe, to that same degree we will have confidence, courage, and willingness to take risk.

Truth gives solid ground for the activation of belief, and belief attempts things that doubt ignores.

Belief is as essential to innovation as water is to life.

Truth, belief and innovative creativity are interdependent.

Truth inspires us to believe we can achieve new possibilities.
Truth is called,”light”, in the Bible, enabling us to see possibilities.

Without belief that something came be done that has never previously been done, nothing new would become reality,

because we would not believe it can be done, and would therefore not attempt to do it.

That is how truth fosters belief ,creativity and innovation.

“And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” (John 8:32)

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.” (John 14:6)

Related articles

The Deconstruction of Absolute Truth and Unity – The Reason Society Can No Longer Reason

 

Brumidi, Constantino - Apotheosis of Washingto...

Brumidi, Constantino – Apotheosis of Washington, detail E Pluribus Unum – 1865 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

“Jesus knew their thoughts, and said to them:

“Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand.”

(Matthew 12:25)

 

E pluribus unum

E Pluribus Unum, (Out of  Many ,One), is part of the history that made us a great nation and that made the world a better place for many.

We need an anthem of basic truths that inspires us to live in unity again.

These basic truths once formed a general basis for consensus,unity, and resolve for improving our society.

Without a clear definition of right and wrong, truth and error, everything will be a blend of gray without clear meaning.

~Reasoning is based on what is known, such as truth and facts~

To solve problems, reach solutions, make a diagnosis,theory, hypothesis, create, and improve anything, we need known truths to build upon.

(Educated guesses if you will, things we can say we are confident we know).

And the more sure we are, the bolder we will be in our attempts to make solutions to problems.

And the more of us who agree on basic truths, the more frequent and soon we will come to consensus on issues that demand our solution.

But without basic fundamental truths to unite us, we will remain divided, and will fall.

Without a basic assumption that anything can be known, we cannot hope to begin to reason solutions to our problems

by building educated guesses upon known fact and truth

because we deny that truth even exists!

 (such as presuppositions, ideological underpinnings, hierarchical values, and frames of reference)

Truth activates belief, and belief attempts things that doubt ignores.

This is the heart of realizing new realities and achievement.

Related terms are postmodernism, existentialism, and deconstructionism, but what all of these terms have in common is the abandonment of surety in truth.

Without the ability to say with can be confident of anything, we will likely lack the confidence to do or achieve anything.

This is also true in our attempts to create art or theater, be it novel or feature-length movie.

Is it any wonder that good theater seems more miss than hit?

Is it any wonder that the great art, theater and literature is in the past, or is based upon older literature or re-made movies ?

Is it any wonder that the overall approval ratings of government and officials is at an all time low?

Is it any wonder that the greater portion of change our politicians bring is for the worse?

Is it any wonder that political parties almost always make decisions down party lines ?

Is it any wonder that scientific and political debate quickly degrades into personal attacks?

Is it any wonder that thoughtless and absurd political dealings threaten the fabric and integrity of our American government ?

(These men and women are supposed to represent our finest leaders and patriots).

Is it any wonder that ,”we the people”, are often called,” we the sheeple”?

(If we deny the ability to absolutely believe anything we will likely fall for anything).

Is it any wonder that the best days of American ingenuity seem to be behind us?

Yet,we can rediscover truth as a nation and a people.

We can build the basic absolute truths that serve as a basis for consensus.

“Jesus said to him, I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father except through Me.”

(John 14:6)

Jesus is the truth.

If we reject Jesus, we reject the truth, we lose the way, and we forfeit life as a people, and a nation.

If we know Him we know truth.

Jesus is the way. If we know Him we know the way.

Jesus is life. If we know Him we know life.

This is where you can start.

“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”

(John 3:16)

Jesus Falls Beneath the Cross

Jesus Falls Beneath the Cross (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

(Yes. It is that simple. Jesus did all the heavy lifting on the cross).

Just believe and receive Him and His love gift of life that He bought with His blood for you.

Pray ,and He will hear you.

Write me, and I will rejoice with you.

And I pray  that we all can one day soon, rejoice in unity as a nation.

Out of many, one.

Discovering that God is Love While in a Nazi Concentration Camp – Viktor Frankl “Man’s Search for Meaning”

Deutsch: Viktor Frankl

Deutsch: Viktor Frankl (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Vitor Frankl was a psychologist who was trained in Vienna.  and was imprisoned in Auschwitz, and other Nazi Germany death camps, as well as his wife and family.

Even though the Nazi prison camp meant facing death, and surrounded by constant threat and hatred, Victor Frankl found the meaning of life there.

From  “Man’s Search for Meaning”- Experiences in a Concentration Camp”

“A thought transfixed me: for the first time in my life I saw the truth as it is set into song by so many poets, proclaimed as the final wisdom by so many thinkers. The truth — that love is the ultimate and the highest goal to which man can aspire. Then I grasped the meaning of the greatest secret that human poetry and human thought and belief have to impart: The salvation of man is through love and in love. I understood how a man who has nothing left in this world still may know bliss, be it only for a brief moment, in the contemplation of his beloved. In a position of utter desolation, when man cannot express himself in positive action, when his only achievement may consist in enduring his sufferings in the right way — an honorable way — in such a position man can, through loving contemplation of the image he carries of his beloved, achieve fulfillment. For the first time in my life I was able to understand the meaning of the words,

“The angels are lost in perpetual contemplation of an infinite glory.”

Viktor Frankl

1 John 4:10

“This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.” (1 John 4:10)

Where the Battle Rages, there the Loyalty of the Soldier is Proved

 

Battle Map

Battle Map (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

“If I proclaim in the loudest voice and clearest exposition every portion of the truth of God except precisely that little point which the world and the devil are at the moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be professing Christ. Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the soldier is proved and to be steady on all the battle front besides, is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point.”

Martin Luther

DNA is Evidence of God – “order with content,” is proof of Intelligence Based Origin -Lee Stroeble

 Our genetic code is language, and is but a record of what,”God said.”

Lee Stroeble , former Court Journalist for the Chicago Sun Times, presents the overwhelming scientific evidence found in our DNA to support the Biblical God as our Creator.

Using the Story line from the movie,”Contact”, Stroeble makes his case.

Stroeble points out that Carl Sagan said that if we ever received an ordered message with content from outer space, then we could reasonably conclude that the message originated from intelligent life.

Though Sagan denied God as creator, his claim for ,”order with content,”as proof of Intelligence would come years after his death in modern Genetic scientific discoveries in DNA.

The Bible record of creation in the book of Genesis repeats the words,”God said”,11 times during the creation of the world and all living things.

The correlation between Genesis and the language of DNA at the core of all living things means our genetic code is but a record of what,”God said.”

DNA is a ,”message with content,” far more sophisticated than our greatest minds can fully grasp.

DNA is a coded language so sophisticated that our greatest minds still can’t fathom it fully, and those most familiar with the ongoing work say we will be deciphering it for the next 100 years. (Genetic Encyclopedia Project,ENCODE, 2012)

Appendix

The 3% of our DNA that is “STRUCTURAL” meaning that it defines our biological characteristics, has been mapped.

The rest of our DNA appears to work as a series of switches comprising a communicational network for our structural information, and was previously considered random ,”junk”.

It is this apparent communication network that we know least about.

This is the part of our DNA that is subject to discovery.

JUNK DNA- May Not Be Junk After All

(Quoted from Gene exchange no 2, 1996)In another reminder that we may not understand the full ramifications of genetic engineering, Science magazine recently reported new work on the function of genetic material*. Scientists have long been puzzled by the fact that fully 97% of the DNA in human cells does not code for proteins and appears to consist of meaningless sequences. The possibility that this apparently useless DNA has some as yet unknown function continues to tantalize scientists.The Science article reports on a paper suggesting that the non-coding 97% of the DNA, commonly referred to as junk DNA, might have a function.

The authors of the paper employed linguistic tests to analyze junk DNA and discovered striking similarities to ordinary language. The scientists interpret those similarities as suggestions that there might be messages in the junk sequences, although its anyone s guess as to how the language might work. (* F. Flam, Hints of a language in junk DNA, Science 266:1320, 1994)

“Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth. So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.” (Genesis 1:26,27)

The Rescue – What A Heroine’s Quest Tells Us About Jesus Christ

Susana Trimarco Hero

(Photo: Victor R. Caivano)

http://news.yahoo.com/argentine-mom-rescues-hundreds-sex-slaves-221110530.html

The Gospel story begins with the fall of mankind into sin and death and being cast from God’s presence, and God personally coming down to us to rescue us.

The whole idea of God becoming a man in order ,”to seek and to save that which was lost,” has long been a main sticking point for many.

But the story of a parent of a child who was,”lost”, into the sex trade in Argentina gives validation to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

The love this parent shows is not unlike the love that God our father has for all of us.

Her name is Susana Trimarco.

Her daughter was taken from her.

She so loved her daughter, Marita, that she would do anything to rescue her. She disguised herself as one of them and went where they are. She rescued many, sadly her daughter is not among the hundreds she has rescued. She has started a campaign that has changed the face of Argentina and sex trafficking in the world, an army of people rising up to set the captives free.

Today, thousands have been set free.Still her daughter is not among them.

In her quest to find her daughter I am reminded of a loving God who became one of us in order to save us.

“The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” —which means, “God with us.” (Matthew 1:23)

Sex trafficking is a worldwide problem.

(It is likely that there is no country on Earth that has felt impact this crime.)

So it is with our relationship to God. We are all born lost. We are all in need of saving.

“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but everlasting life.” John 3:16

Madam, I pray to God in the name of Jesus Christ his Son, that your love is rewarded by the rescue of your daughter who you so love,…in Jesus name. Amen

–UPDATES AND RELATED STORIES —

SexTrafficking

http://humantraffickingawareness.com/faqs-mainmenu-34.html    “80% of the victims are women and 50% are children.”

 

BUENOS AIRES, Dec 12 2012 (IPS) – The courtroom broke out in angry shouts and cries when judges in Argentina unexpectedly acquitted 13 defendants accused of kidnapping a young woman and forcing her into prostitution in 2002.
The high-profile trial for the kidnapping of María de los Ángeles “Marita” Verón, who is still missing, ended late Tuesday after a four-hour delay by the three-judge panel in the courtroom in the northwest province of Tucumán.
The judges said there was no evidence that the seven men and six women kidnapped Verón.
Susana Trimarco, Verón’s mother, said she would try to get the three judges impeached, and accused them of receiving bribes. “We aren’t going to stop until these crooks are dismissed from their posts,” she said after the verdict was read out.
Trimarco later told a local TV station about a conversation she had after the trial with President Cristina Fernández, who gave her a human rights award on Sunday Nov. 9. “Cristina was shouting; she couldn’t believe it,” the activist said.
Also, here in the Land of the Free this week:
“Colorado’s attorney general said Tuesday that child sex trafficking has become a serious problem throughout the state.”
“WECT has learned that North Carolina is 8th in the country for sex trafficking, and Wilmington is also high on that list.”
“The scenario is all too common, Philadelphia Assistant District Attorney Shea Rhodes told the City Council on Tuesday in describing how “modern-day slavery” ensnares women and children into forced labor and commercial sex.”
Forbes magazine:
“The sex-trafficking of U.S. children is America’s dirty, little secret.
According to the U.S. Department of Justice, human trafficking is the second fastest growing criminal industry — just behind drug trafficking.Approximately half of all victims are children.
The National Human Trafficking Resource Center estimates it’s a $32 billion industry, with about 50% of this revenue coming from industrialized countries. This surpasses the sale of illegal arms.”
Check out this report by Shared Hope International showing the worst U.S,Cities for Child Sex Trafficking,…You may be surprised.
Here is an excerpt:

1. Dallas,TX

2. San Antonio, TX

3. Fort Worth, TX

4. Salt Lake City, UT

5. Buffalo,NY

6. Baton Rouge and New Orleans, LA

7. Independence,MO

8. Las Vegas, NV

9. Clearwater,FL

10. The Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (U.S. Territory)

The Truth Spoken in Love Leads Us to the Compassion of Christ

“Christians are in themselves no wiser than are other men. What they have, they have by grace. They must be ‘all things to all men.’ But it is not kindness to tell patients that need strong medicine that nothing serious is wrong with them. Christians are bound to tell men the truth about themselves; that is the only way of bringing them to recognize the mercy, the compassion, of Christ. For if men are told the truth about themselves, and if they are warned against the false remedies that establish men in their wickedness, then, by the power of the Spirit of God, they will flee to the Christ through whom alone they must be saved” (The Intellectual Challenge of the Gospel).

“Only Jesus Christ and His death on the cross can wash away all our sins. Jesus died and rose again. No one else has done that for you. Van Til asserts: “If God was to continue communication with His creature, it was either to be by condemnation or by atonement.” God, through His mercy, provided a perfect and effectual atonement through the death of Jesus Christ on the cross. Believe in Him and you will be saved.”

Corneilus Van Til

Memorial Day- Thanks Dad

image

“That All The World May Know That There is a God In Isreal”

David VS.Goliath 

I Samuel 17:1 Now the Philistines gathered their armies together to battle, and were gathered at Sochoh, which belongs to Judah; they encamped between Sochoh and Azekah, in Ephes Dammim. 17:2 And Saul and the men of Israel were gathered together, and they encamped in the Valley of Elah, and drew up in battle array against the Philistines. 17:3 The Philistines stood on a mountain on one side, and Israel stood on a mountain on the other side, with a valley between them. 17:5 He  had a bronze helmet on his head, and he was armed with a coat of mail, and the weight of the coat was five thousand shekels of bronze. 17:6 And he  had bronze armor on his legs and a bronze javelin between his shoulders. 17:7 Now the staff of his spear was like a weaver’s beam, and his iron spearhead weighed six hundred shekels; and a shield-bearer went before him. 17:8 Then he stood and cried out to the armies of Israel, and said to them, “Why have you come out to line up for battle? Am I not a Philistine, and you the servants of Saul? Choose a man for yourselves, and let him come down to me. 17:9 If he is able to fight with me and kill me, then we will be your servants. But if I prevail against him and kill him, then you shall be our servants and serve us.” 17:10 And the Philistine said, “I defy the armies of Israel this day; give me a man, that we may fight together.” 17:11 When Saul and all Israel heard these words of the Philistine, they were dismayed and greatly afraid. 17:12 Now David was the son of that Ephrathite of Bethlehem Judah, whose name was Jesse, and who had eight sons. And the man was old, advanced in  years, in the days of Saul. 17:13 The three oldest sons of Jesse had gone to follow Saul to the battle. The names of his three sons who went to the battle were Eliab the firstborn, next to him Abinadab, and the third Shammah. 17:14 David was the youngest. And the three oldest followed Saul. 17:15 But David occasionally went and returned from Saul to feed his father’s sheep at Bethlehem. 17:16 And the Philistine drew near and presented himself forty days, morning and evening. 17:17 Then Jesse said to his son David, “Take now for your brothers an ephah of this dried grain and these ten loaves, and run to your brothers at the camp. 17:18 And carry these ten cheeses to the captain of their thousand, and see how your brothers fare, and bring back news of them.” 17:19 Now Saul and they and all the men of Israel were in the Valley of Elah, fighting with the Philistines. 17:20 So David rose early in the morning, left the sheep with a keeper, and took the  things and went as Jesse had commanded him. And he came to the camp as the army was going out to the fight and shouting for the battle. 17:21 For Israel and the Philistines had drawn up in battle array, army against army. 17:22 And David left his supplies in the hand of the supply keeper, ran to the army, and came and greeted his brothers. 17:23 Then as he talked with them, there was the champion, the Philistine of Gath, Goliath by name, coming up from the armies of the Philistines; and he spoke according to the same words. So David heard them. 17:24 And all the men of Israel, when they saw the man, fled from him and were dreadfully afraid. 17:25 So the men of Israel said, “Have you seen this man who has come up? Surely he has come up to defy Israel; and it shall be that the man who kills him the king will enrich with great riches, will give him his daughter, and give his father’s house exemption from  taxes in Israel.” 17:26 Then David spoke to the men who stood by him, saying, “What shall be done for the man who kills this Philistine and takes away the reproach from Israel? For who is this uncircumcised Philistine, that he should defy the armies of the living God?” 17:27 And the people answered him in this manner, saying, “So shall it be done for the man who kills him.” 17:28 Now Eliab his oldest brother heard when he spoke to the men; and Eliab’s anger was aroused against David, and he said, “Why did you come down here? And with whom have you left those few sheep in the wilderness? I know your pride and the insolence of your heart, for you have come down to see the battle.” 17:29 And David said, “What have I done now? Is  there not a cause?” 17:30 Then he turned from him toward another and said the same thing; and these people answered him as the first ones did. 17:31 Now when the words which David spoke were heard, they reported them to Saul; and he sent for him. 17:32 Then David said to Saul, “Let no man’s heart fail because of him; your servant will go and fight with this Philistine.” 17:33 And Saul said to David, “You are not able to go against this Philistine to fight with him; for you are a youth, and he a man of war from his youth.” 17:34 But David said to Saul, “Your servant used to keep his father’s sheep, and when a lion or a bear came and took a lamb out of the flock, 17:35 I went out after it and struck it, and delivered the  lamb from its mouth; and when it arose against me, I caught it by its beard, and struck and killed it. 17:36 Your servant has killed both lion and bear; and this uncircumcised Philistine will be like one of them, seeing he has defied the armies of the living God.” 17:37 Moreover David said, “The Lord, who delivered me from the paw of the lion and from the paw of the bear, He will deliver me from the hand of this Philistine.” And Saul said to David, “Go, and the Lord be with you!” 17:38 So Saul clothed David with his armor, and he put a bronze helmet on his head; he also clothed him with a coat of mail. 17:39 David fastened his sword to his armor and tried to walk, for he had not tested them. And David said to Saul, “I cannot walk with these, for I have not tested them.” So David took them off. 17:40 Then he took his staff in his hand; and he chose for himself five smooth stones from the brook, and put them in a shepherd’s bag, in a pouch which he had, and his sling was in his hand. And he drew near to the Philistine. 17:41 So the Philistine came, and began drawing near to David, and the man who bore the shield went before him. 17:42 And when the Philistine looked about and saw David, he disdained him; for he was only a youth, ruddy and good-looking. 17:43 So the Philistine said to David, “Am I a dog, that you come to me with sticks?” And the Philistine cursed David by his gods. 17:44 And the Philistine said to David, “Come to me, and I will give your flesh to the birds of the air and the beasts of the field!” 17:45 Then David said to the Philistine, “You come to me with a sword, with a spear, and with a javelin. But I come to you in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have defied. 17:46 This day the Lord will deliver you into my hand, and I will strike you and take your head from you. And this day I will give the carcasses of the camp of the Philistines to the birds of the air and the wild beasts of the earth, that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel. 17:47 Then all this assembly shall know that the Lord does not save with sword and spear; for the battle is the Lord’s, and He will give you into our hands.” 17:48 So it was, when the Philistine arose and came and drew near to meet David, that David hurried and ran toward the army to meet the Philistine. 17:49 Then David put his hand in his bag and took out a stone; and he slung it and struck the Philistine in his forehead, so that the stone sank into his forehead, and he fell on his face to the earth. 17:50 So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and a stone, and struck the Philistine and killed him. But there  was no sword in the hand of David. 17:51 Therefore David ran and stood over the Philistine, took his sword and drew it out of its sheath and killed him, and cut off his head with it. And when the Philistines saw that their champion was dead, they fled. 17:52 Now the men of Israel and Judah arose and shouted, and pursued the Philistines as far as the entrance of the valley and to the gates of Ekron. And the wounded of the Philistines fell along the road to Shaaraim, even as far as Gath and Ekron. 17:53 Then the children of Israel returned from chasing the Philistines, and they plundered their tents. 17:54 And David took the head of the Philistine and brought it to Jerusalem, but he put his armor in his tent. 17:55 When Saul saw David going out against the Philistine, he said to Abner, the commander of the army, “Abner, whose son is this youth?” And Abner said, “As your soul lives, O king, I do not know.” 17:56 So the king said, “Inquire whose son this young man is.” 17:57 Then, as David returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, Abner took him and brought him before Saul with the head of the Philistine in his hand. 17:58 And Saul said to him, “Whose son are you, young man?” So David answered, “I  am the son of your servant Jesse the Bethlehemite.” (NKJV)

In God’s Image – What All Religions Have In Common – What is Unique About Christianity

People wonder why the world has so many religions. 

Could it be that all religions have beliefs that reflect the inner longing we all share?

That we all were created for a common purpose and all have a common desire born from that purpose?

Could it be that our longing is to know and worship our creator God?

Some say that man created the idea of a god in order to explain what men could not understand.

These similarities have been dismissed by many as ,”wishful thinking,”in an effort to give hope and meaning to what would otherwise be a meaningless existence.

But that theory does not explain universal longing.

This is a longing that drives us to seek satisfaction in power or pleasure and only leaves us even more empty inside as it destroys us and our world in the process.

Some religions are similar because they are outward expressions of what all of us have at our core. We were created in God’s image, and we all know whom we seek, though we have not personally encountered Him, and that is God. Our Heavenly Father created us for Himself and we are hard-wired to need Him.

When God gave life to the first man, Adam, He did so by breathing life into Adam.

Sin separated man from God and death took hold of men. This was the result of God’s absence in relation to mankind.

The very nature of how mankind thinks and feels was changed when Adam and Eve disobeyed God resulting in mankind knowing the difference between right and wrong, thus our conscience became subject to guilt and shame.

Satan’s purpose in causing mankind to fall , just as he did by being overcome by the allure of selfish pride, was to bring the same eternal punishment on us as he brought on himself, and to grieve the heart of God.
Even then God promised to make a way for us tp escape Satan’s judgement in Hell’s flame and for us to be restored to God.
For this simple reason, we are ever longing for a home we’ve never been to, a love that will complete us, and a presence that will finally give ultimate hope and meaning to our lives.
We all need God to once again breathe life into our inmost being.

This is why all religions have basic similarities.  All are born out of a need to worship a supreme entity as God designed.Still, that a person must merit favor with its god is common to all the world’s religions except one.

Only Christianity is unique in that one belief in particular.God has merited favor for us Himself in the personage of Jesus Christ, and offers such favor to us as a gift because He knows that none of our best works are good enough to do so.

The reason for Him to bestow this favor upon His creation is simply because He loves us.

The root of all other religions, both pagan and all others, goes down to what God created us to be, similar to Him in some way that reflects Him and is only ever completely satisfied when in close relationship with Him.

We were made to love and worship God, not to be our own god.
The root of all religion comes from inside man. We all have longing that seeks to be fulfilled and can only be found outside our being through faith in Christ as our Saviour.
Christ breathed this new life into the disciples after He rose from the grave. (John 20).

Christ is our way to the Father.
He is the answer to our universal longing.

We were all blind to the truth at one time.

We need to follow Christ’s example. He asked them.

“What do you want me to do for you?” Jesus asked him. The blind man said, “Rabbi, I want to see.”

Mark 10:51

“Jesus stopped and called them. “What do you want me to do for you?” he asked.”

 “Lord,” they answered, “we want our sight.”

Jesus had compassion on them and touched their eyes. Immediately they received their sight and followed him.”:

Matthew 20:32-34

Chief of the least

‘Do not answer a fool according to his folly, lest you also be like him. Answer a fool according to his folly, Lest he be wise in his own eyes.’ Proverbs 26:4-5

(Note: Hebrew terms of “fool” and “foolish” describe a person who does not believe in God and is ignorant of wisdom based on God’s moral standard.)

Some modern critics assume the ancients were flat-out stupid. Case in point, after a brief glance at Proverbs 26:4-5 an objection may be raised along the lines of: “Look! An obvious contradiction in the very next verse! The Bible cannot be trusted…” And so a superficial argument has been framed.

But the ancients were not stupid.

The author of Proverbs actually intended to pair these seemingly contradictory verses together. And what these verses propose is not a logical contradiction, but a dilemma for the reader. It is a proposal of two choices. Proverbs 26:4-5 reveals two wise and…

View original post 719 more words

The Secret To Revival Found In Christ’s High Priestly Prayer-“that the love you have for Me may be in them and that I myself may be in them.”

~The Secret To Revival~

Salvation, Sanctification, Revival, and Renewal of The Church are Not Dependent on Eliminating Evil ,But rather on Embracing God Through Christ.

This misconception is the most common mistake we make in our efforts to change ourselves and  in seeking renewal in the Church.

The most troubling condition is present in many or most churches across America today.

I was troubled as I read a devotional by a man of God whom I greatly respect who wrote a critique using John 17:26 in an effort to identify and correct our disunity in the church.

As he listed the issues to correct he omitted Christ as the answer.

His focus was on the illness and he ignored the cure.

I find no error in his comments, only in who he did not embrace as the answer.

Our answer is a who not a what, personal not mere intellectual assent, the One who Rules the hearts of men, not simply rules themselves, involving both the risen Christ and His truth, not one or the other.

All our problems represent an absence of God’s love through Jesus Christ in us, a void within each of us who claim to comprise the Church in our age.

I have read a series of book reviews on the Gospel Coalition site about Renewal of The Church in America,

and so far each book talks all about the problems we face and almost never mentions the only real solution, who is Christ in us!

I assure you I’m nobody, but I know who my God and Father is

and I know He has loved me with an everlasting love

and I need to tell everyone I can how much He loves them and how much they need to know His love personally.

Omission of sin comes after Christ comes in.

He alone has the power to transform.

Embrace Christ to displace death, and be saved, for He alone can save.

Embrace Christ to displace sin, because He alone, by His indwelling Spirit, can empower you overcome.

Embrace Christ to displace self,and become Christ like, for He has loved us before we knew Him.

Embrace Christ to displace your desires, for He alone is the most beautiful entity in the universe to be desired and you will trade everything for more of Him.

Embrace Christ to displace all the things that entice the Church away from It’s first love, for Christ alone is worthy of all glory, power and praise!

Embrace Christ to change the world, for if any man is in Christ he is a new creation, old things are passes away, behold all have become new, and that is the only real social reform.

Christ’s High Priestly Prayer ends with the following summary of His desire for all who believe.

 “I have made you known to them, and will continue to make you known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them.”

(John 17:26)

His love is the context for all our theology and that context must be given preeminence .

When the early Church Fathers made the Nicene Creed they  did not clearly set the context for all truth

which is God’s love in us through  Jesus Christ.

Christ is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.


If Christ is no longer supreme in my heart and daily living, then I have lost the Way, neglected the Truth, and turned away from Life.
A very simple theology in the context of God’s love, for he indwells the true believer and love grows and shows.

We must be one IN Christ, or we will become like the church in Ephesus.

 “Nevertheless I have this against you, that you have left your first love. Remember therefore from where you have fallen;

repent and do the first works, or else I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place—unless you repent.”

(Revelation 2:4,5)

Christ is our first love, and His arms are ever wide open to embrace us.

https://christcenteredteaching.wordpress.com/2012/05/05/the-simplicity-that-is-in-christ/

http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2012/05/04/an-agenda-for-recovering-christianity-in-america/?comments#comments#comment-29950

9-27-2012 Update- Dr. Tim Keller of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Manhattan New York has released a new book called,”Center Church”, a road map for renewal for the church in which the focus is The Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Keller has also called for renewed emphasis on the Gospel of Jesus Christ in all our theology in a 54 minute video you can watch here. http://wp.me/p1Lr49-MG

Tim Keller is an awesome Christ Centered teacher. I highly recommend him.

Free Sermons

http://sermons2.redeemer.com

Tim Keller delivered this challenge to church leaders to be ,”Gospel Shaped”, in all our ministry.

“Every sermon should ultimately be about Jesus.” Tim Keller

The Simplicity That Is In Christ – What The Church Needs

wpid-IMG_20120101_123110.jpg

God in Christ made a way for us to Him and made the way simple and easy.

Too often we assume that since our problem seems complex that our answer must also be complex.

“But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.”

(NKJV) II Corinthians 11:3

It’s ALL about Jesus.

It’s that simple.

Jesus paid it all

“For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith —and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—  not by works, so that no one can boast.” (Ephesians 2:8-9)

Love God and Love People

“Then one of them, a lawyer, asked Him  a  question, testing Him, and saying,“Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?”

 Jesus said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’
 On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”  Matthew 22:35 -40

Just Jesus

 “For I determined not to know anything among you accept Jesus Christ and Him crucified.” (NKJV) I Corinthians 2:2

Jesus rules over all things everywhere

“For it pleased the  Father  that in Him all the fullness should dwell, 1:20 and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross. (NKJV) Colossians 1:19 

“And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. 1:18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence. (NKJV) Colossians 1:17 

Pretty simple.

Thank God for loving us so much and for making the way to Him simple.

https://christcenteredteaching.wordpress.com/2012/05/06/the-secret-to-revival-found-in-christs-high-priestly-prayer-that-the-love-you-have-for-me-may-be-in-them-and-that-i-myself-may-be-in-them/

Christ – The Power and Wisdom From God

1 Corinthians 1:18 “For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 1:19 For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.” 1:20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 1:21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 1:22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 1:23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 1:24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 1:25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength. 1:26 Brothers and sisters, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. 1:27 But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. 1:28 God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, 1:29 so that no one may boast before him. 1:30 It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God—that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. 1:31 Therefore, as it is written: “Let the one who boasts boast in the Lord.” (NIV)

The Awe and Wonder of Nature – Reflections of Our Creator

Nature (2417029180)

Nature (2417029180) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The link below is to a time lapse video of the northern lights.

Magnificent to behold.

Click on this link below.

http://vimeo.com/m/40555466

Have you ever asked yourself why we marvel at the natural beauty we see around us?


The Bible says that nature reflects the attributes of God who is our Creator.


Could it be that awe and wonder are actually our own deep sense of longing for connection with the One who made us?

The Bible calls this longing for connection to something to which we feel cut off from,”groaning”.

 “We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 8:23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies. 8:24 For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what they already have? 8:25 But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently.” (NIV) Romans 8:22-25

Natural Wonder – An Atheist’s Inditement

 

“It seems to me that Richard Dawkins constantly overlooks the fact that Darwin himself, in the fourteenth chapter of The Origin of Species, pointed out that his whole argument began with a being which already possessed reproductive powers. This is the creature the evolution of which a truly comprehensive theory of evolution must give some account. Darwin himself was well aware that he had not produced such an account. It now seems to me that the findings of more than fifty years of DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design.” The Late Anthony Flew- Atheist turned Theist

“For God’s wrath is revealed from heaven against all godlessness and unrighteousness of people who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth,  since what can be known about God is evident among them, because God has shown it to them.  For His invisible attributes, that is, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen since the creation of the world, being understood through what He has made. As a result, people are without excuse.  For though they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God or show gratitude. Instead, their thinking became nonsense, and their senseless minds were darkened.  Claiming to be wise, they became fools.(Romans 1:18-22)

The One and Only God Anywhere and Forever

“You are My witnesses,” says the Lord,
“And My servant whom I have chosen,
That you may know and believe Me,
And understand that I am He.
Before Me there was no God formed,
Nor shall there be after Me.

The Bible – Isaiah 43:10

The Centrality of The Gospel – Bible Study Outline by Dr. Tim Keller – Redeemer Presbyterian Church – Manhattan New York

Three crosses mountain. Szydłowiec near Radom,...

Three crosses mountain. Szydłowiec near Radom, Poland. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The truth of the Gospel does not fit in any category that preexisted in the human mind.

We think in general terms to varying degrees of God’s provision for our redemption or our own works to hopefully merit our own redemption or some kind of blend of each.

Malcolm Muggerage  said that if God be not God then mankind will worship either power or pleasure, Hitler or Hugh Hefner.

Tertullian said that even as Christ was crucified between two thieves, the Gospel is subject to two world-views that are each born out of mankind’s self-centered tendencies toward power or pleasure.

We call them Legalism and License.

Both are similar in that they are self-centered instead of Christ Centered.

(Tertullian was one of the earliest post Apostle Christian theologians, (160 – 225 A.D.)

This Bible study outline is from one of Keller’s sermons ,and is created by Keller for his church in New York.

The following are excerpts from the full outline.

(The entire outline is available free online at the link at the bottom of the page.)

“The gospel is not the first “step” in a “stairway” of truths, rather, it is more like the “hub” in a “wheel” of truth. The gospel is not just the A-B-C’s but the A to Z of Christianity. The gospel is not just the minimum required doctrine necessary to enter the kingdom, but the way we make all progress in the kingdom.” Tim Keller

“We are not justified by the gospel and then sanctified by obedience, but the gospel is the way we grow (Gal.3:1-3) and are renewed (Col.1:6). It is the solution to each problem, the key to each closed-door, the power through every barrier (Rom.1:16-17). It is very common in the church to think as follows. “The gospel is for non-Christians. One needs it to be saved. But once saved, you grow through hard work and obedience.” But Col.1:6 shows that this is a mistake. Both confession and “hard work” that is not arising from and “in line” with the gospel will not sanctify you–it will strangle you. All our problems come from a failure to apply the gospel. Thus when Paul left the Ephesians he committed them “to the word of his grace, which can build you up” (Acts 20:32)”

“The main problem, then, in the Christian life is that we have not thought out the deep implications of the gospel, we have not “used” the gospel in and on all parts of our life. Richard Lovelace says that most people’s problems are just a failure to be oriented to the gospel–a failure to grasp and believe it through and through. Luther says, “The truth of the Gospel is the principle article of all Christian doctrine….Most necessary is it that we know this article well, teach it to others, and beat it into their heads continually.” (on Gal.2:14f)

“The gospel is not easily comprehended. Paul says that the gospel only does its renewing work in us as we understand it in all its truth.

“All of us, to some degree live around the truth of the gospel but do not “get” it. So the key to continual and deeper spiritual renewal and revival is the continual re-discovery of the gospel. A stage of renewal is always the discovery of a new implication or application of the gospel–seeing more of its truth. This is true for either an individual or a church.”

The two “thieves” of the gospel.

Since Paul uses a metaphor for being “in line” with the gospel, we can consider that gospel renewal occurs when we keep from walking “off-line” either to the right or to the left. The key for thinking out the implications of the gospel is to consider the gospel a “third” way between two mistaken opposites. However, before we start we must realize that the gospel is not a half-way compromise between the two poles–it does not produce “something in the middle”, but something different from both. The gospel critiques both religion and irreligion (Matt.21:31; 22:10).

“Tertullian said, “Just as Christ was crucified between two thieves, so this doctrine of justification is ever crucified between two opposite errors.” Tertullian meant that there were two basic false ways of thinking, each of which “steals” the power and the distinctiveness of the gospel from us by pulling us “off the gospel line” to one side or the other. These two errors are very powerful, because they represent the natural tendency of the human heart and mind. (The gospel is “revealed” by God (Rom.1:17)– the unaided human mind cannot conceive it.) These “thieves” can be called moralism or legalism on the one hand, and hedonism or relativism on the other hand. Another way to put it is: the gospel opposes both religion and irreligion. On the one hand, “moralism/religion” stresses truth without grace, for it says that we must obey the truth in order to be saved. On the other hand, “relativists/irreligion” stresses grace without truth, for they say that we are all accepted by God (if there is a God) and we have to decide what is true for us. But “truth” without grace is not really truth, and “grace” without truth is not really grace. Jesus was “full of grace and truth”. Any religion or philosophy of life that de-emphasizes or lose one or the other of these truths, falls into legalism or into license and either way, the joy and power and “release” of the gospel is stolen by one thief or the other.”

“They are both based on distorted views of the real God.

“The irreligious person loses sight of the law and holiness of God and the religious person loses sight of the love and grace of God, in the end they both lose the gospel entirely. For the gospel is that on the cross Jesus fulfilled the law of God out of love for us. Without a full understanding of the work of Christ, the reality of God’s holiness will make his grace unreal, or the reality of his love will make his holiness unreal. Only the gospel–that we are so sinful that we need to be saved utterly by grace–allows a person to see God as he really is. The gospel shows us a God far more holy than the legalist can bear (he had to die because we could not satisfy his holy demands) and yet far more merciful than a humanist can conceive (he had to die because he loved us)”

They both deny our sin–so lose the joy and power of grace.”

 

Related articles

Jesus and Love

Jesus and Love.

Contrasts help us achieve relational definition.
The law helps us understand Grace for instance.
This short blog contains profound contrasts worth dwelling upon.

This is from a Pastor friend.
Enjoy.

Our First Love -God – Whom We All Remember Though We Never Knew Him

“I still haven’t found what I’m looking for.”

Bono-U2

“Our longing to be reunited with something in the universe from which we now feel cut off , to be on the inside of some door which we have always seen from the outside, is no mere neurotic fancy, but the truest index of our real situation.”

“If I find in myself a desire which no experience in this world can satisfy, the most probable explanation is that I was made for another world.”

C.S.Lewis

God-Our First Love.

Mankind was created by God for fellowship with Him and only a relationship with God will complete us.

We were created in the image of God, and we have a part of us that remains un-satiated by anything but God.

Our problem was that God’s perfection is called Holiness, and His Holiness requires holiness from us as a condition to be in His presence.

But all men were imperfect and none could save us, until God came down and inhabited flesh and bone to live a perfect life and be our Savior.

So God came to personally came to make a way for us back to Him, through His sacrifice for our sins.

And three days after allowing His crucifixion , Christ rose from the died and defeated death to show that He can give life to as many as receive Him.

Our ultimate hope can be fulfilled in a promise that cannot be broken , lost or taken away ;God.

God initiated this event because He loved us.

God offers eternal life as a gift because we could not be the perfect sacrifice.

You need only receive it by faith, just ask with your heart and believe.

 “That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.  For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.” (Romans 10:9,10)

Christians and seekers take note at what God’s word says,“believe in your heart,” and , ‘It is with your heart that you believe and are justified.

It all starts with the heart.

But don’t make the mistake that after that the honeymoon is over.

The fact is that you can know God’s love in an ever-increasing way for the rest of your life.

He is our first love who reunited us to himself by the single most incredible sacrifice in all of history; One man died for all the world.

The God who became fully man while remaining fully God ,(Nothing is too hard for God).

God’s has always love us and desired for us to know Him. 

“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.”(Deuteronomy 6:4,5)

Then God gave us the ultimate reason to love Him with all our heart, mind and strength.

He became one of us and sacrificed Himself for us, releasing us from eternal death and separation from Him.

 “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” John 3:16

You can know Him, Just pray to Him to save you and to live in your heart as the scripture says, “with the heart you believe and are justified.”

Christ is our first love.

We really were made for each other.


God is so good

This is a wonderful Song of Praise by fellow Christian Blogger David Bibee.

Powerful Praise indeed.

click on the highlighted link below.

God is so good.

Legalism, License, and The Love of God

Rembrant's "The Three Crosses"Rembrandt’s “The Three Crosses” Courtesy of British Museum

Just as Christ was crucified between two thieves, Legalism and license oppose the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

The two thieves rob power from the message of Christ’s complete and finished work on the cross.

I’m in awe with the thought that God himself came down to save us and gave Himself on the cross for you and I.

God Himself is the Gospel. Such an incredible thought!

And even more, I think this truth holds a key to something that is holding the church back from revival.

Here’s what I mean…

Legalism and license oppose the true Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Self righteousness, moralism, legalism, at various levels and degrees in the hearts of Christians robs the church of power and keeps those who would enter from doing so.

I know license is present in the world, but legalism is the Christian man’s primary problem.

Christianity ascribes all truth to the Bible and the keys to renewal are contained therein.

License is pleasure based and legalism is power based.

Both are self-centered.

Both devastate our world by misrepresenting the truth of the Good News of the Gospel.

We need to distinguish between license and legalism in order to recognize them.

License is based on the idea that God is only love, that Jesus died for us, and now we can take grace for granted and sin willfully by doing whatever we want.

License is also known as relativism because absolute truth is usually denied  in this belief.

Legalism takes undo pride in works of righteousness and in pride looks down on others, thinking that works merit favor with God.

 “The Pharisee stood up and prayed about himself: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’ 

    “But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’

   “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”(Luke 18:11-14)

Legalism is also known as moralism.

The best example from the Bible was written by the Apostle Paul .

He wrote the letter to the Galatians addressing Christians to defend them and the Gospel from legalism, the idea that we attach our own works to Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.

Legalistic religious leaders were the primary enemies of Christ and orchestrated the crucifixion as prophesied in the old testament of the Bible.

Legalistic religious leaders also tormented Paul his entire ministry.

I believe legalism is still the primary threat to the purity of the Gospel today.

Pastor Tim Keller seems to believe this as well.

Keller thinks that a moralistic view of the Gospel is the norm today.

What do you think?

Do you agree that a moralistic view of Christianity is the norm today?

Far too often we Christians try to honor God by emphasizing His Holiness or His Sovereignty or His Justice, as if to cull favor with God by associating with these attributes of God, while ignoring His love, His mercy and Jesus Christ who loved us and gave Himself for us on the cross.

The writers of the new testament centered their claims on Christ,relating their claims back to Christ 27% or more of the total words they wrote on average.

Almost one-third of everything in the New Testament is specifically about Jesus or centers on His personage. The point is it is all about Jesus. If you have the Son you have the Father, if you don’t have the Son then you don’t have the Father.

Do we even come close to giving Christ preeminence today?

I fear not.

God’s great love is the only one of God’s attributes that makes us worthy subjects to honor all His other attributes. His love is His Grace by which we are saved.

Only His great love which He personally expressed on our behalf on the Cross of Christ can save us.

We Christians make the mistake of thinking the primary reason God sent Jesus to die for our sins was because He is Holy and Righteous and His justice had to satisfied.

God is all those things but that is not why Jesus came to save us.

God’s word tells us why.

It says God so loved! (John 3:16)

GOD SO LOVED!

God so loved that He became man.

God so loved that He paid for our sins, the just for the unjust.

His motive was to save you because He loved you.

I have found that most people and perhaps most Christians too, do not have a heart that is awakened to the love of God and its full meaning to them.

Fellow Christians often take issue with those of us who emphasize God’s love as, “The Greatest of These.”

Time and time again I have heard angry responses such as, “God is not just love, He is Righteous and Holy too!”

That was when I finally understood why one of the greatest sermons ever was titled.”Sinners in the Hand of an Angry God.”

(This sermon was preached by Jonathan Edwards.)

In that sermon, the hand of God is the only thing keeping us from falling into eternal fire.

I personally know God is love, because it is written and portrayed throughout the Holy Bible.

If all God wanted was to satisfy His Holiness, Righteousness and His Justice; then God would just send everyone to Hell.

The verdict was already given and only death prevents that sentence from being carried out on all who have not received Christ as Savior.

The only thing that can prevent what had already been determined to happen was provided to us because God so loved.

Legalism, license and the Love of God.

We need to know the difference because only one of them can save us and the others are apostasy,( they deny the fullness of faith in Christ alone to save).

Only the true Gospel that starts and ends with, “God so loved”, will save.

Any other gospel is not the one true, pure work, because they deny Christ’s finished work by adding to it or by watering it down.

Both views of the Gospel, moralistic legalism and relativistic license, rob the true meaning of Christ’s sacrifice and make it null and void to save and change us.

 “For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.” (Romans 10:10)

We have nothing else like God’s gift of love and must create a new category in our hearts and minds where Christ’s gospel resides uniquely.

If you need to settle that in your own heart, just tell God you believe Christ died for your sin.

Ask Him to save you, and He will. Because He loves you so.

“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16)

Related articles –

Barna Research – Majority of People who call themselves Christian are more like Pharisees than Christ like.

http://www.barna.org/faith-spirituality/619-are-christians-more-like-jesus-or-more-like-the-pharisees

If Bell’s Hell Has No Flame

ChristBetweenTwoThieves

If Bell’s Hell Has No Flame

Then why did Jesus warn us about hell more than He talked about heaven?

Then why did Jesus warn about hell more than any person recorded in the Bible?

Then why did Lazarus ask for a drop of water for the tip of his tongue to cool his torment from the flames?

Then why did Jesus warn there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth?

(If you are not familiar with the issue, two fairly well-known pastors have rejected the Biblical meaning of the “lake of fire”, as Hell . One has written a book that states that a loving God would not send people to eternal torment in flames).

My Take on why this happened

I fear that many Christians have left their first love, Jesus Christ, and Rob Bell and Brian McLaren have had occasion to occupy that which we abdicated, namely, the emphasis of the Love of God as clearly portrayed in the cross of Christ.

All of God’s attributes of Holiness and Justice were satisfied for us by God himself in the personage of Jesus Christ.

Why do we Christians have such a difficult time reconciling God’s love and God’s Holiness and justice when it was God himself who personally settled that issue on the cross and the reason He did so is because He loved us?

John 3:16 states – “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”

Choice is valued in our culture.

People like it when they can choose on their own.

Before Christ’s sacrifice people had nothing but death to choose from.

God gave us a choice.

Hell is real and people who reject Christ will go there.

And the following is a summary of what is written in the Bible and why that is the case.

Satan desired to ,”be like the Most High”, and his pride became sin.

One third of heaven’s angels sided with Satan and suffered the same fate as him.

They were condemned and Hell, the lake of fire, was created for them.

They are awaiting that sentence to be carried out.

Then Satan tempted mankind to do that which had been forbid by God, to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

He tempted mankind by saying to them the same thing that he was condemned for,”you will be like the Most High”.

Satan no doubt knew that if mankind sinned the same sin as him, mankind would suffer the same fate as him, the lake of fire for all eternity.

That is why a Loving God would send people to Hell, because He is also a just God.

Satan’s sin was our sin also.

Satan’s fate became our fate as well.

It is just.

But consider this.

We owed God for our sin.

Then God came down to personally pay the debt that we owed Him.

Our debtor paid our debt for us!

God came down to mankind and was born of a virgin , grew up as a boy, worked as a carpenter, and never sinned.

Our God did this for us to become what we could not be, sinless and perfect, so He could then sacrifice Himself for our sins and pay the price for us.

The just for the unjust.

How can we then say condemnation to Hell is unjust if the one we were indebted to personally paid our debt himself ?

The explanations that are common in the lake of fire debate are foolish at best.

The lake of fire ,(Hell ),that Christ warned about extensively was not mere symbolism or a smoldering trash heap outside the city walls of Jerusalem.

Reconsider your stance Brian McLaren and Rob Bell , for you risk  causing many to miss the seriousness of what is at stake, and you diminish the sacrifice of Christ.

We are saved from infinitely more than mere regrets.

Our Savior is infinitely more worthy of being called Savior than you imply by what you call Hell.

“And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.” 

“Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death.  If anyone’s name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.”
Revelation 20:10,14-15
“But he was pierced for our transgressions, 
   he was crushed for our iniquities; 
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, 
   and by his wounds we are healed. 
We all, like sheep, have gone astray, 
   each of us has turned to his own way; 
and the LORD has laid on him 
   the iniquity of us all.”
Isaiah 53:5,6

“Nothing that is God’s is obtainable by money.”- Tertullian

“Nothing that is God’s is obtainable by money.”- Tertullian

“For you were bought at a price; therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God’s”. ( 1 Corinthians 6:20)

The Greatest of These is Love

And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.” 

1Cor13.13 

St. Francis Of Assisi’s Radical Love For Jesus – The Huffington Post ?

Saint Francis in the Parish church of St. Ulri...

Image via Wikipedia

I am commending The Huffington Post on a great article about the radical reformer St.Francis of Assisi.

(who says miracles never happen?)

St. Francis engaged his culture in a way that we could all learn from.

He reflected the love of God in order to,”overcome evil with good.” ( Romans 12:21)

It worked back then and it still works today.

God’s love is supreme in power and influence to change our hearts.

Click on the link below.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/jamie-arpinricci/st-francis-of-assisi-religious-radical_b_1332912.html

Enjoy!

About The Author of Christ Centered Teaching – www.godcamedown.com

About The Author of Christ Centered Teaching – www.godcamedown.com.  A little about me and a lot about God’s love!

Richard Dawkins: I can’t be sure God does not exist – Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9102740/Richard-Dawkins-I-cant-be-sure-God-does-not-exist.html

“I Will Draw All Men To Myself”

What God most desires from men is heartfelt love and worship for Him to the full measure of all of our capacities. ( The Bible,Deuteronomy 6)

God desires love that does not hold anything back.

Our plight is that hate is easy and love is most often difficult.

Many of us are not even sure what love is. That is because love is caught and not taught. We have to experience it for the light to go on inside.

God showed mankind what it means to be loved fully by coming to die for mankind in the personage of Jesus Christ on the cross.

Are you drawn to Him by His act of love?

” But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself.” John 12:32

Sanctity of Life Sunday – God is Not Deaf! – Cornerstone EPC – Brighton Mi. – By Dr. Richard Alberta

The anniversary of Roe vs. Wade is marked as a day to increase awareness of the issue of abortion among Christians at Cornerstone Evangelical Presbyterian Church in Brighton Michigan.

Dr. Richard Alberta  delivers a profound sermon on this issue in light of the attribute of an all knowing God.

As the blood of the first martyr, Able the son of Adam, cried out from the soil on which it was spilt by his brother Cain who murdered him, so does the blood of the innocent unborn cry out in ever astounding volume to God.

We are reminded that God is not Deaf to their cries.

We are also challenged to ask ourselves , Are we deaf to the cry of the unborn?

Pastor Alberta describes visual images that he uses to illustrate meaning during this sermon.

To listen to this sermon, click on the link below.

http://www.cornerstoneforlife.com/clientimages/24970/sermons/godisnotdeaf.mp3

Email Cornerstone at: information@cornerstoneforlife.com  with any questions or comments.

Or contact here:

Cornerstone Evangelical Presbyterian Church

9455 Hilton Rd., Brighton, MI   48114

810-227-9411

God Loves Us More Than We Love Ourselves-An Anchor For Hope

A Sure Anchor for Hope

A Sure Anchor for Hope

We may give up on ourselves.

God loves us more than we love ourselves because He never gives up on us.

Life can be tough and sometimes people give trying.

Hope is the basis for much of this life and also for our eternity.

When people lose hope they stop believing in themselves and those around them.

The outcomes of hopelessness can be devastating to families and relationships, and even end in tragedy.

But if hopelessness leads to disillusionment and disbelief, then hope leads to faith and belief and life.

God, who spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all will not forsake us.

“if we are faithless, he will remain faithful, for he cannot disown himself.” ( 2 Timothy 2:13)

“He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?”(Romans 8:32)

“Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid or terrified because of them, for the LORD your God goes with you; he will never leave you nor forsake you.”(Deuteronomy 31:6)

Place your faith in the anchor of your soul, and nothing in this life can touch your hope for eternity.

“while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,”(Titus 2:13)

 “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16)

Believe in Christ as your Savior.He will come into your heart and will never leave you or forsake you. (Hebrews 13:5)

And if He will never leave you then you will never loose all hope.

No matter what happens in this life, even death will only hasten your reward of your eternal hope.

Jesus in you will become Jesus with you.You will be in His presence forever.

 

%d bloggers like this: