Let’s just be clear from the beginning, a human baby is worth more and is more important than any single gorilla or all the gorillas in the world. However, if you have listened to the news or paid attention to social media lately, you might not get that impression. Everyone is concerned about the gorilla that was killed by zookeepers when it had taken possession of a young child who had fallen into an exhibit at the Cincinnati zoo. However, I have heard very few people express similar concern over the young child’s safety.

People have been in a frenzy over the death of this animal. They have put up a memorial for the gorilla. I have seen photos of young children putting flowers at the memorial to mark the death of this animal. There have been death threats against the parents of this young child. A petition has been created at one website asking for “Justice for Harambe,” which was what this gorilla was named. The petition calls for the “Cincinnati Zoo, Hamilton County Child Protection Services, and [the] Cincinnati Police Department” to “hold the parents responsible” because of their “lack of supervision and negligence that caused Harambe to lose his life.” Amazingly, at the time of this writing, 457,310 people have signed the petition.

We all like animals. Many have animals as pets and we often become attached to them. We like to feed the cute squirrels and birds and few can resist the cuteness of a puppy. The dog, as they say, is man’s best friend. Everyone in their right mind opposes the senseless killing of animals. But in the end, they are just animals. The reason so many people have a misplaced concern about the value of animals is that their view of the world is skewed by the influence of evolution which says that we are all related animals, and the so-called “higher primates” are most closely related to us. The most fanatical even prefer the animal over the human.

The Biblical world view, however, places man far above the animals. God created man in His own image and likeness and gave him “dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth” (Gen. 1:26-28). After the flood, every–mark that word, “every”–non-human, living thing was to be meat for mankind (Gen. 9:1-3). Every beast may be and has been tamed by mankind (James. 3:7). By inspiration of the Almighty, David wrote:

What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him? For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour. Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet: All sheep and oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field; The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas (Psalm 8:4-8).

Man is over and above all of God’s physical creation. Even over gorillas. To be sure, we must be good stewards of the things with which God has entrusted us (I Cor. 4:2). There can be no question that the life of this child was to be preferred over the life of the gorilla. As zoo director Thane Maynard observed, this is an animal that he had seen crush a coconut with one hand. This animal had the child and dragged him around the exhibit, banging his head against concrete walls. Those who ascribe to this gorilla human values are simply misguided and misinformed.

Some have said the gorilla looked like it was trying to protect the child. This is falsely ascribing human intent to an animal. The gorilla may have been trying to protect the child, in the same way a dog protects it’s play thing. There was no sense of the worth of the child to the gorilla. It was merely something to possess. If the gorilla understood the value of the child, it would have climbed the wall and given the child back to it’s mother. But it didn’t because it couldn’t because it was only an animal.

The question of whether the parents were negligent is a different question, altogether. However, law enforcement has decided against bringing any charges against the parents. Eyewitnesses to the events say the parents did nothing wrong. Every parent, I am sure has experienced an incident when their child did something they could not control that could have potentially been dangerous. We were not there and so we cannot know for certain, but even if the parents were negligent, the child was still more important. The parents alleged negligence would not have mitigated against the child’s priority over the animal.

This incident and people’s reaction to it reveals how far America has removed from a theocentric world view. It is sad, indeed, when people are more concerned about an animal’s life than they are about a innocent human’s life. The reason the world is in such dire condition is because they reject the authority, God’s revealed will, that places man in a place of prominence over the beasts of he field.

Eric L. Padgett

Will God accept as worship anything we offer to Him? May I play my instrument, light a candle, hum and meditate, or commune with nature in the woods, and call it worship? Will God accept just anything that I call worship and throw His way?

When Cain and Abel offered their gifts, one was accepted and one was not. Being a “tiller of the ground,” Cain offered unto the Lord “the fruit of the ground” (Gen. 4:3). Abel, being a “keeper of sheep,” brought of the “firstlings of his flock and the fat thereof” unto the Lord. The Lord had respect unto Abel’s offering, but unto Cain’s gift, he had not respect (4:4,5). Why?

Some have postulated that Cain’s error was his bad attitude. Cain’s gift was described as simply “the fruit of the ground” but Abel’s offering was the “firstlings of his flock and the fat thereof,” or the best he had to offer. There probably was an element of a sour attitude on Cain’s part. It certainly showed in his dealings with his brother (Gen. 4:8). But is this the only reason the Lord was dissatisfied with Cain’s offering?

The New Testament tells us that Abel offered his sacrifice by faith. “By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain” (Hebrews 11:4). What does that mean? The Bible is clear that biblical faith does not exceed God’s revelation. Paul wrote that faith comes by hearing the word of God (Rom. 10:17; cf. John 20:30,31). If I believe something and act on that belief which is not supported by God’s word, then I believe too much.

If Abel’s offering was by faith, and the Bible says that it was, then Abel offered only that which God had authorized by revelation. We do not have that specific revelation recorded for us in God’s word, but we know that it consisted of just exactly what Abel offered, otherwise it could not be said to have been offered in faith.

John said that Cain’s works were “evil” and Abel’s “righteous” (I John 3:12). The Psalmists describes the righteous as those who walk and meditate upon the law of the Lord, or His word (Psalm 1). It is in His word that righteousness is revealed, particularly, now, in the gospel (Psalm 119:138; Rom. 1:16). To be evil is to act contrary to the will of God. The reason Cain’s offering was evil was because he did not offer what God had commanded him to offer, perhaps even in a way that was not commanded. But in any case he violated God’s commands.

Sin is the violation of God’s commands. John said, “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law” (I John 3:4). No one can come before God and throw something in His face and say in effect, “This is my worship and you must accept it.” On the contrary, God tells us what is acceptable worship and we must offer that and nothing else. All your good intentions will avail nothing if it is not in harmony with God’s expressed will. Otherwise, sin lieth at the door.
Eric L. Padgett

I offer the following as an alliterative outline of the Book of Galatians. The reason Paul wrote this epistle was twofold. First, Paul was defending his apostleship. Everywhere he went he had to deal with those who questioned his apostolic bona fides in Christ. The second reason was to argue against the view propagated by those Judaizers who taught that the Gentiles had to obey the law of Moses and be circumcised in order to be saved.

PREACHING OF THE GOSPEL (1,2)
Introduction of the Gospel (1:1-5)
Key Verse: Galatians 1:4 – Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:
Observation: This concise statement of the basics of the Gospel is a fitting introduction to the Gospel in Galatians.
Imprecation of the Gospel (1:6-9)
Key Verse: Galatians 1:8 – But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Observation: A curse rests on all who would dare alter the word of God (Prov. 30:5,6)
Inspiration of the Gospel (1:11-24)
Key Verse: Galatians 1:11-12 – But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
Observation: The Gospel which Paul preached is a certified Gospel, certifiably from heaven and not from men (II Tim. 3:16,17; II Pet. 1:16-21).
Impartiality of the Gospel (2:1-14)
Key Verse: Galatians 2:8 – (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)
Observation: The Gospel is not just for the Jews, but also for the Gentiles. Peter had forgotten the lesson he had previously learned (Acts 10:34,35).
Independence of the Gospel (2:15-21)
Key Verse: Galatians 2:21 – I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
Observation: If one could be saved by the law of Moses, then Christ did not need to die. God’s grace was frustrated by going back to that law that would not save.

PROMISE OF THE GOSPEL (3,4)
Perfection of the Gospel (3:1-7)
Key Verse: Galatians 3:3 – Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
Observation: The “flesh” represented the law of Moses; the Spirit, the New Covenant. Going back to the old law would not bring them to perfection, or bring about their salvation.
Promise of the Gospel (3:8-14)
Key Verse: Galatians 3:14 – That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.
Observation: The blessings promised to Abraham (Gen. 12-17) can be ours through Jesus Christ by faithful obedience to God’s will (James 2:21-24).
Person of the Gospel (3:15-29)
Key Verse: Galatians 3:16 – Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
Observation: The Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, is the story of man’s fall and redemption through Jesus Christ. Jesus is the seed promised in the Fall (Gen. 3:15), to Abraham (Gen. 12:3; 17:8), and to David (II Sam. 7:13,14; Rom. 1:3).
Parentage of the Gospel (4:1-11)
Key Verse: Galatians 4:3-5 – Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
Observation: Two figures are used in Scripture for our being added to the family of God. One is the new birth (John 3:1-8) and the other is adoption (Rom. 8:14,15).
Portrayal of the Gospel (4:12-31)
Key Verse: Galatians 4:30-31 – Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.
Observation: Paul uses Sarah and Hagar, Isaac and Ishmael, to demonstrate the difference between the Old and New Covenants. The New Covenant having been God’s plan from the beginning (Rev. 13:8), we are the children of promise as was Isaac.

PRACTICE OF THE GOSPEL (4,5)
Liberty of the Gospel (5:1-12)
Key Verse: Galatians 5:1 – Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
Observation: For the Jews to go back to a system never intended to provide salvation, would only bring them again into spiritual bondage. To do this, would be to fall from Grace (v. 4).
Love of the Gospel (5:13-16)
Key Verse: Galatians 5:13 – For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another.
Observation: Being free is not a license to sin. Love should govern our actions.
Lead of the Gospel (5:17-26)
Key Verse: Galatians 5:24 – And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
Observation: Following the teaching of the Holy Spirit, we will have purged from our lives all works of the flesh and will have begun producing the fruit of the Spirit
Law of the Gospel (6:1-10)
Key Verse: Galatians 6:2 – Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.
Observation: The law of Christ is to love one another (John 13:34) and in so doing we will help each other bear the burdens of life.
Laud of the Gospel (6:11-18)
Key Verse: Galatians 6:14 – But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.
Observation: Those who would glory in some material connection or accomplishment are misguided. They are brought to nought (I Cor. 1:28). While the world views the cross as foolishness, the true glory is in the cross and in our Lord (I Cor. 1:31).

Eric L. Padgett

Many people have attempted to show that the Bible is a fallible, human product and not the divinely inspired volume it claims to be (II Sam. 23:2; II Tim. 3:16,17). Just one of many examples of this kind is Philip Kitcher’s book Living With Darwin. In the last chapter of that volume Kitcher attempts to argue that a traditional belief in supernatural revelation is outmoded, outdated, faulty and wrong. Thus, Kitcher advances the idea that the Bible is full of contradictions and problematic historical references.

Kitcher’s approach to the Biblical Text is usual for those who advance that agenda. He apparently is quite comfortable with arguing that any omission of a fact in a narrative is evidence that the author did not believe the event ever happened. For instance, Kitcher states that “Matthew has wise men, but no shepherds. Luke has shepherds but no wise men.” In another quote he states that “only John picks out an individual disciple, Thomas, who refuses to believe in the resurrection without seeing and touching.” Yet another is the observations that Mark does not provide details of the beginnings of Jesus’ life. Matthew and Luke tell elaborate stories, however.

Does the fact that Luke does not mention some specifics that Matthew does, and vice versa, mean that either one or both of the records are in error? Does the fact that John is the only one to mention Thomas’ incredulity mean he fabricated this story whole cloth? Surely Mr. Kitcher would not want to make these arguments. But this is what in fact he is arguing. This is a very dishonest hermeneutic. There are many things about Darwin that Kitcher does not cover in his book, but is that reason enough to reject Kitcher out of hand?  By his own standard, that would be the case.

There are many examples that could be given where authors chose the material they want to emphasize. This does not mean that they do not know about other events, but those other events do not come under the rubric of their specific purpose. In his autobiography, Ronald Reagan spends several paragraphs discussing the Achille Lauro hijacking. Dinesh D’souza, Reagan’s official biographer, does not so much as mention this event at all. Does this mean that D’souza did not know about this event? Does it mean Reagan made it up? Is there some discrepancy? Obviously, D’souza had a different purpose in writing about Reagan than did Reagan in writing about himself. Likewise, Reagan and D’souza both deal with the Air Traffic Controllers strike, but Reagan includes different details than does D’Souza. Is this another mistake? Does the fact that they were writing for different purposes mean that their respective writings are somehow flawed? These questions, of course, are rhetorical.

Selected works of Abraham Lincoln were compiled and recorded by Michael P. Johnson in his volume, Abraham Lincoln, Slavery and the Civil War. In a letter to Jesse W. Fell, a Bloomington, Illinois newspaper man and an old friend, Lincoln wrote a brief sketch of his life. In it he noted that he was born on February 12, 1809 and that his mother died in his tenth year. Yet six months later when he wrote an extended autobiography written for the 1860 presidential campaign, he wrote that he was born on February 12, 1809 and that his mother died in the autumn of 1818. This is a real discrepancy involving dates, but do we conclude from this that there was no Lincoln or that he was not president or that his writings are wrong?

It seems that Lincoln was using a device often employed in the Bible and by the average writer of rounding off numbers. The autumn of 1818, specifically October 5, 1818–the date of her death, would have been only weeks away from Abraham Lincoln’s being ten years old. Would Mr. Kitcher make the same argument here that he made for the Text of the Bible? I think not.

Mr. Kitcher knows the answers to the alleged discrepancies of the Bible. He even observes on page 136 that the Christianity with which he grew up “solved the problem in the obvious way by combining everything.” Kitcher knows full well–or at least he should know–that the Gospel accounts harmonize together in this way and that Bible scholars have, since the early centuries of Christianity, produced “fourfold gospels.” But Kitcher, and other liberal critics like him, must have mistakes in the Bible in order to hold to their anti-supernatural view of the world.

He states specifically that “not all of these conflicting reports can be literally true.” This is simply dishonesty or ignorance. It is not wise to be so driven by a desire to disprove something to the point one would engage in a dishonest treatment of a text. It is not wise to forsake sound hermeneutics in favor of an eclectic hermeneutical approach to achieve a personally preferred outcome. Mr. Kitcher, I hope, does not approach other subjects with such unchecked bias.

Eric L. Padgett

The word “satan” means “accuser” or “adversary.” This word indicates not only his opposition to mankind in general, but to the child of God in particular. He is called “the accuser of our brethren” by John and is said to accuse the saints “before our God day and night” (Rev. 12:10). While satan does not work directly on the human heart, he nevertheless relentlessly attacks us on various levels and on divers fronts with sundry machinations. Because of this constant and wicked assault on our spiritual well-being, Paul admonishes us in the Ephesian epistle to put on the whole armor of God that we may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil (Eph. 6:11).

Paul’s call to protect ourselves by putting on the armour of God shows that satan’s attacks are both real and vicious. Nothing less than the armour of God will suffice to protect us. They also show that the enemies’ attacks are of a spiritual nature since only the spiritual panoply of God can quench the fiery darts of the wicked (Eph. 6:16). We do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but spiritual wickedness in high places (Eph. 6:12). In other words, our real enemies are not necessarily individuals, but the hell-spawned lies being propagated by those individuals.

The word “wiles” used in Ephesians 6:11 is translated from the word “methodeia.” In other words, he has his methods. Regarding this word, the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament states: “The reference is to machinations or (in military terms) attacks against which one must be armed. The nature of the attacks (the plur. suggests that they are constantly repeated or are of incalculable variety) constitutes their great danger, against which the armour of God is the only defence. They are distinguished not so much by technique or strategy as by refinement and insidiousness (Vulgate translates insidiae, Luther “cunning attacks,” A.V. “wiles”).” There is a madness to his method.

While the attacks of our enemy are often varied, there is one key element he employs when attacking us and that is to obfuscate the truth. The devil’s goal is to blind the mortal mind to truth, to cloud the thought and judgement (II Cor. 4:4). The business of the devil is deception (Rev. 12:9). The one thing the devil cannot afford to do is to let the word of truth be clearly spoken without attack or without distortions. Since satan is the father of lies, truth is inimical to him (John 8:44) and to those who follow him (John 3:19-21).

The devil has always tried to blind the minds of people to the truth. He did this in the garden with Eve when he told her “Thou shalt not surely die” (Gen. 3:4). This was a blatant lie. When the Lord began to show that He was going to go to Jerusalem and there be killed, satan, through Peter, said, “This shall not be unto Thee” (Matt. 16:23). Another lie of satan, couched in the language of false devotion. Down through the ages the understanding of countless millions has been darkened through the ignorance–and I underscore that word “ignorance”–and vanity that is in them relative to the truth (Eph. 4:17-20). Biblical knowledge and sound reasoning frighten satan. Against them he cannot stand.

Sometimes satan deceives the unguarded by transforming himself into an angel of light (II Cor. 11:14,15). No false teacher ever came forward and said “Follow me and I will lead you into the flames of Perdition!” He would be rejected outright. No, as Jesus said, they outwardly appear as harmless and adorable sheep, but inwardly are ravening wolves (Matt. 7:15). Thus, the influence of satan is often felt through the errors propagated by false teachers who preach peace when there is no peace (Jer. 6:14). The counsel of well-meaning but misguided friends can also be used by satan (Matt. 16:23). Sometimes satan influences us by sowing tares among the wheat (Matt. 13:24-30,36-43).

Another area satan uses to attack us is our fleshly desires. Jesus said, “Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation. The spirit truly is ready, but the flesh is weak” (Mark 14:38). Notice that it is we who enter into temptation. Observe the difference in the response to temptation between David when he saw Bathsheba and Joseph when Potiphar’s wife made her advances (II Sam. 11:2,3; Gen. 39:9,12). Joseph fled the temptation while David did not. We need to learn not to make provision for the flesh, to fulfill the lusts thereof (Rom. 13:14).

Our adversary the devil goeth about as a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour (I Pet. 5:8). Unless we are always ready to recognize his attacks, unless we are always wearing the whole armor of God, we are susceptible to his attacks.

Eric L. Padgett

Some people have a lot of friends, others have but a few. On Facebook, you can have thousands of so-called “friends” that you never speak to or even know anything about. The Bible actually has a few things to say about friends and friendship. At least a couple of these define our relationship with God.

First of all, you make friends by being friendly. “A man that hath friends must shew himself friendly” (Proverbs 18:24). A person who is angry all the time, complaining, argumentative, hurtful in his comments, rude in his actions, etc., is not going to make a lot of friends. When Job’s friends came to visit, the best thing they did for him was to sit with him quietly (Job 2:11-13). It would have helped if they had had empathy for his condition, but instead, when they presumed to speak, they began to affirm that he must have done something wrong to deserve this distress (e.g., Job 4:9). They are not too far from those who visit you in the hospital and tell you all their troubles. A friend, by definition, is friendly.

Second, a friend is a friend no matter what. “A friend loveth at all times, and a brother is born for adversity” (Proverbs 17:17). Fair-weather friends are the worst kind. When you are doing well, when you are respected, when you have money to spend on them, then they will go along for the ride. But as soon as you have difficulties, they disappear. “Wealth maketh many friends,” says the wise man (Proverbs 19:4). On one occasion, my family was going to a family reunion. Several wanted to ride along to the event. But when the car broke down, everyone left and found another way to the reunion. Not one stayed to help. Farewell fair-weather friends!

A third principle of friendship is that a true friend seeks your well-being even though it brings pain. “Faithful are the wounds of a friend,” says Proverbs 27:6. A friend doesn’t hurt you on purpose unless it is to help. If you are engaging in bad, unhealthy behavior, a real friend will try to intervene and assist you. On one occasion, Jesus’ family and friends went out to protect Him, mistakenly thinking He was neglecting His own health (Mark 3:20,21). While they were wrong in their assessment, they were well-intentioned. It is a truism that “iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend” (Proverbs 27:17).

While it may be nice to have a large cadre of friends, better than that is to have God as your friend, even if all other friends fail. It was said of Abraham, “And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God” (James 2:23). “Art not thou our God, who didst drive out the inhabitants of this land before thy people Israel, and gavest it to the seed of Abraham thy friend for ever? (II Chronicles 20:7). Again, “But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham my friend” (Isaiah 41:8). To be called a friend by God certainly surpasses all human friendships. Abraham was the friend of God because he believed and obeyed Him.

Jesus was friendly with everyone who let Him be their friend. He was even criticized for being the friends “of publicans and sinners” (Matthew 11:19). His particular friendship with Mary, Martha and Lazarus was especially noted (John 11:11). Jesus said we, too, can be His friend in the same way. “Ye are my friends,” He said, “if ye do whatsoever I command you” (John 15:14). Jesus proved His love for us when He was willing to lay down His life for us (John 15:13). Surely, we can obey His commands to prove our love for Him.

Sadly, it was His “own familiar friend” who betrayed Him. During the rebellion of his son Absalom, one of David’s close advisors, Ahithophel, sided with David’s enemies (II Samuel 15:12). It was about Ahithophel that David wrote, “Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me” (Psalm 41:9). Jesus, Himself, applied this passage to Judas. “I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me” (John 13:18). Zechariah had prophetically described this situation. “And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.” (Zechariah 13:6). Jesus had considered Judas a close friend, even though He knew what Judas would ultimately do. The wounds of this friend were certainly not faithful.

But the Lord puts some limits on His friendship. We cannot expect to remain friends with God, if we continue to be friends with the world. James wrote, “Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God” (James 4:4). God says, “Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you” (II Corinthians 6:17). Jesus said we will either “hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other” (Matthew 6:24).

To be blessed with a multitude of friends, real friends, is a wonderful thing. Better yet is to have God as your friend. He shows Himself friendly, is my friend even in the difficult times and always seeks my good. There is no better friend than God.

Eric L. Padgett

We should always be thankful to God for all the blessings He has bestowed upon us (I Tim. 5:18). Too often, we neglect to give thanks for God’s bounty. I want to remind us of a few things for which God’s word tells us we should be thankful.

First, let us be thankful for His Holiness. “Rejoice in the Lord, ye righteous; and give thanks at the remembrance of his holiness” (Psalms 97:12). Holiness is separateness; set apart. God is truly the only Holy One. We can only try to be like Him, whereas He is Holy by virtue of His nature. Consider:

• There is no one like Him: Exodus 15:11 – Who is like unto thee, O Lord, among the gods? who is like thee, glorious in holiness, fearful in praises, doing wonders?
• His name is Holy: Psalm 99:3 – Let them praise thy great and terrible name; for it is holy.
• He is holy in all His works: Psalm 145:17 – The Lord is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works.
• His throne is Holy: Psalm 47:8 – God reigneth over the heathen: God sitteth upon the throne of his holiness.
• His temple is holy and demands a response of respect and awe: Habakkuk 2:20 – But the Lord is in his holy temple: let all the earth keep silence before him. Again in Exodus 3:5 – And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.

His holiness demands a response from us: I Peter 1:15-16 – But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; [16] Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.”

Second, let us be thankful for His Mercy. “O give thanks unto the Lord; for he is good; for his mercy endureth for ever” (I Chron. 16:34). Mercy is “compassion: kindness or forgiveness shown especially to somebody a person has power over.” God does not have to be merciful to us. But God is the Father of mercies (II Cor. 1:3). He gives mercy, as He gives grace and peace: “Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord” (I Tim. 1:2). I am thankful for His mercy because He saves us by it: “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost” (Tit. 3:5). Therefore, “Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need” (Heb. 4:16).

Third, I am thankful for His Unspeakable Gift (II Cor. 9:15). Paul explained, “But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. [16] And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. [17] For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ” (Rom. 5:15-17). I am thankful that while the wages of sin is death, the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ (Rom. 6:23).

Fourth, I am thankful for the Victory He affords us. “But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ” (I Cor. 15:57). “O sing unto the Lord a new song; for he hath done marvellous things: his right hand, and his holy arm, hath gotten him the victory” (Psalm 98:1). Not even death can ultimately gain the victory over us because of Christ. “So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. [55] O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? (I Cor. 15:54-55). We obtain that victory ultimately by being faithful to Him. “ For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith” (I John 5:4).

Finally, I am thankful for the reward of an Inheritance He has promised us for faithfulness. “Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light” (Col. 1:12). We should have confidence, and be thankful, because we know the Lord will reward us with a great inheritance because we serve Him (Col. 3:24). We know that he that overcomes will inherit all things the Father hath promised to those follow Him regardless of the consequences (Rev. 21:7). Christ has become the Mediator of the New Covenant so that we might receive the promise of this eternal inheritance (Heb. 9:15). We will not receive a laurel wreath that fades and decays over time, but we will receive “an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven” for us (I Pet. 1:4).

For these and many other blessings, both spiritual and material, I am indeed thankful both now and always.

Eric L. Padgett

One of two destinies await all men: Heaven or Hell. Why? Why are these the only two options? Why can’t there be something else? Why can’t we “live forever in a paradise on earth”? Why does there have to be a hell at all? Why not just annihilate those that are evil?

First, it is logical. In logic there is something that is called a “strong disjunction.” A strong disjunction is a precisely stated proposition in which there are only two possibilities, one of which is the negation of the other. Logically it is represented as either “A” or not “A” and in symbols as (A v ~A). Jesus essentially asserted a strong disjunction when He said, “He that is not with me is against Me” (Matt. 12:30). There are only two options in life, the straight gate and narrow path which leads to life or the wide gate and broad way which leads to destruction (Matt. 7:13,14). If you take away all that is associated with heaven, God’s Presence, His Love, His Power, His Goodness, etc., then you have not God’s Presence, not God’s Love, not God’s Power, not God’s Goodness, etc. and that is hell!

Second, it is just. God’s Nature is pure, uncontaminated and uncontaminatable. He is of purer eyes than to behold evil (Hab. 1:13). Evil shall not sojourn with God (Psalm 5:4). He is the Just One (Acts 22:14). But when men violate that holiness by rejecting His equally holy will (Rom. 7:12), there is no other option for a just God but to commit the offender to a just punishment (Heb. 2:2). It is not the hearers of the law that are just before God, but those that do it (Rom. 2:13). God’s will is so pure and perfect, that disobedience to it demands eternal damnation (Matt. 25:46). Obedience to it also requires a just reward and nothing short of abiding in the presence of God satisfies it (Rom. 8:18).

Third, it is moral. As noted above, God is holy and that holiness cannot be contaminated. The separation of the wicked from the righteous is something that God demands of us even in this life. Paul clearly taught this is II Cor. 6:14-18:

“Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.”

There can be no mingling of the righteous with the unrighteous. Heaven and Hell preserves that moral separation throughout eternity.

Fourth, hell is deterrent to wickedness. Jesus warned that eternal punishment, that is, hell fire, awaits all those who do not obey his will (Matt. 18:8,9). A 2012 study by University of Oregon professor Azim F. Shariff examined “26 years of data involving 143,197 people from 67 countries” and concluded that “a nation’s rate of belief in hell predicts lower crime rates.” It also showed that people who have a distorted view of God’s forgiveness are more likely to commit crimes. The study also showed there was no correlation between poverty and crime. It is not poverty that causes a person to commit a crime, but a lack of a moral standard. The realization of the possibility of hell, encourages obedience. Peter wrote, “Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness” (II Peter 3:11).

Finally, heaven is an incentive to do right. Immediately after writing about judgement and hell, Peter wrote about heaven: “Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless” (II Peter 3:13,14). Jesus said, “Come unto Me…and I will give you rest” (Matt. 11:28). “And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as He is pure” (I John 3:3). Heaven is the only place pure enough for a soul without spot or blemish or any such thing to live (Eph. 5:27).

Eric L. Padgett

Pew Research released its 2014 Religious Landscape Study recently. This survey was “based on telephone interviews with more than 35,000 Americans from all 50 states.” This is the second study of its kind, the first being conducted in 2007 with the same number of respondents. As with many of these kinds of surveys, this most recent study has some warning signs for those interested in the future of the Lord’s church in America and even the future of America itself.

According to this survey, the muslim population in this country is less than 1 percent while the number of “Christians” make up over 70 percent of the U.S. population. The term “Christian” here includes, of course, not just New Testament Christians but all those who profess Christianity, including Protestants, Catholics, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses and other groups. Nevertheless, isn’t it strange that while muslims make up less than one percent of the population–a very tiny minority–they have succeeded in pushing their agenda on the rest of society, even after the tragedy of 9-11 and after news of the terror ISIS is spreading around the world! This speaks to the lack of militancy in those professing to follow Christ.

Overall, according to the Pew study, America has become slightly less religious since 2007. In 2007, 92% believed in God, while in 2014 only 89% believed in God. Daily prayer decreased from 58% in 2007 to 55% in 2014. In 2007 56% held religion as very important to them while that number was only 53% in 2014. Attending a religious service at least once a month declined four percent, from 54 to 50 percent. The number of those who are religiously unaffiliated grew from 16% in 2007 to23% in 2014. The number of those professing Christianity fell from 78% in 2007 to just under 71% in 2014. Those two final statistics are particularly troubling.

The good news is that the number of those professing New Testament Christianity, along with those in the “evangelical Protestant tradition,” has either increased or stayed the same, except for those in the 30 to 49 year age bracket. This is different from the Barna study conducted in 2014 but which used a far smaller sample. In that study, the Millennials, those from age 18-29 were the ones causing a decline in the number of Christians in America. But both surveys bear out that the younger you are in modern America, the less likely you are to be a Christian.

This is disturbing. As the younger generation ages, the more the population will leave Christ behind. This must mean God’s people are not doing enough to instill in the younger generation the knowledge of God’s word and how to defend it. And perhaps the reason for this is the older generation doesn’t have that knowledge themselves. It also means the Lord’s people are not doing enough to defeat erroneous religious systems being advocated by the small but vocal minorities.

Another disturbing finding of this survey is that people no longer have a clear sense of right and wrong, or the standard by which to determine right from wrong. When asked about whether there were absolute standards for right and wrong, only 33% affirmed that there were “clear standards for what is right and wrong” while 64% affirm that right and wrong depend on the situation. When belief in God is present, there is a firm belief in right and wrong. According to the survey, ninety percent of those who believe in God affirm there are clear standards for what is right and wrong. But the further our society moves away from God, the weaker the belief in absolute standards becomes and the greater moral confusion prevails.

The Lord’s people need to work harder at teaching the truth, work harder at understanding the issues and be less timid and afraid to take a stand. We need to work harder at drawing people back to the Bible as the standard for right and wrong. Maybe there is nothing we can do to stem the tide away from the truth of the gospel or the traditional moral values that have guided this nation. Paul said evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse (II Tim. 3:13). But as Christians we have the obligation to fearlessly take the gospel to the world and to be lights in the darkness (Matt. 5:23). We need to be able to give a sound defense for the hope that lies within us, and maybe in the process we can influence our culture at the same time.

Eric L. Padgett