Scott's Blog - 8/31/06

That's Entertainment?

They call it "Pushing the envelope". In a desire to make an artistic statement, stir controversy or even just to put people in theater seats, movie makers will attempt to take the medium where it has never gone before. 

But how far is too far?

SHOCK: PRESIDENT BUSH ASSASSINATED IN NEW MOVIE

http://www.drudgereport.com/

The art form here has become a familiar one. Through the wonders of computer generated graphics, fictional characters can be added to historical footage (as in the Tom Hanks movie "Forrest Gump"). But director Gabriel Range has taken this format into the future, taking current footage of actual people and manipulating them to stage a fictional assassination.

The producers go out of their way to emphasize the movie is not intended to bash the president or wish him ill.

The film is never a personal attack on Bush; Range simply seeks to explore the potential consequences that might follow from the President’s policies and actions. Toronto International Film Festival

Far be it from me to question a film maker's intentions, but perhaps lost in the blinding light of state of the art computer graphics is the fact we are dealing with real people here, real people whose lives (and even deaths) are now subject to the whims of a director. This seems like an almost creepy invasion not only of privacy, but of personal autonomy.

I had the same reaction when I saw a similar case of artistic license run amok in Martin Scorsese's controversial film "The Last Temptation of Christ". Following the book by Nikos Kazantzakis, it portrays Jesus as a reluctant Messiah. The Jesus of "Temptation" goes as far as to makes crosses for the Romans so that God will leave him alone. 

Why make such a distorted portrait of Jesus? As Martin Scorsese explained, "What I've tried to create is a Jesus who, in a sense, is just like any other guy on the street. In his struggle to reach God and find God, he reflects all our struggles. I thought it would give us all hope."

But there is a fatal flaw in this thinking. Can we "create" our own version of Jesus without sacrificing truth? Can we find real hope in an edited, revamped Messiah who is, at the end of the day, someone less than Christ? To give the starving a picture of food, rather than the real meal, hardly seems an act of mercy and compassion.

Christians rightly objected to this film because it was untrue to the historical reality of the life of Jesus. Those who love Jesus would no more want to see his character assassinated on the big screen than they would want to see their parents portrayed as kleptomaniacs. When we are dealing with real people, with real lives, and real people who love them, perhaps their needs to be a measure of restraint.  All rights of free expression arguments aside, I wonder if Gabriel Range ever thought, "What would Laura Bush think if she saw her husband gunned down on the screen? Just because we can create a scene like this, does it mean we really should?"

It is the odd melding of speculative fiction with a docu-drama style format that I find especially troubling here. Manipulating the real lives of people to make an artistic point is essentially an attempt to re-write reality. It carries the strange sense of someone trying to play God. There is an old saying that goes, "We should not play God until we have learned to be genuine human beings. And once we become genuine human beings we will not want to play God."

The shocking picture of a simulated assassination reminded me of a constructive answer to this controversy.

1 Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, 2 for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. (I Timothy 2:1-4)

Have you prayed for George W. Bush lately?

Scott's Blog - 8/30/06

AWOL On The Home Front?

Let's open up the SRL mailbag and take on one of the most practically important spiritual issues of our day!

Hello Scott, Thanks for your program.  My question is, I have 4 children ages 14, 13, 5, and 6 plus a full time job.  Busy busy.  But I wanted to know if my husband who is a Christian is not leading us in Bible study or Devotions or prayer. Should I step up and teach our children or should I wait for my husband to take the leadership in our home?

DeLaRouchfoucald once said, "True love is like ghosts, which many talk about but few have seen." I'm beginning to believe that same principle applies to the idea of men actually being the spiritual leaders within their homes! 

To be fair, there would be few men who would disagree with the idea that they should be the chief one responsible before God for what happens on the home front. Almost instinctively men know they should be setting the pace for the rest of the family in their collective walk with the Lord. 

The big question is, how do you do that exactly?

Many born again Christian men will share that they were the first in their own families of origin to be saved. That tells us that there was no positive example of a spiritual leader that they could pattern themselves after.  There are also those who were raised in a home that had a Christian reputation among outsiders, but no reality behind closed doors. The old adage that the doctor's kid's are always the sickest on the block seemed to apply. Perhaps Dad had a position of prominence in the church, but was so invested in others in the fellowship there was no energy left for his own family. The vast majority of Christian family men today likely either had no example, or a bad example of spiritual leadership in the home.

It is almost a cliché to point out that most men hate to stop and ask for directions. Imagine how much tougher it is to stop and ask for directions on being a man of God around the house? 

So what does the Bible say on this crucial subject? I believe there are three crucial principles from God's Word that can free men to enter in to the place of blessing that God intended their role as spiritual leaders in the home to be.

The Position of A Spiritual Leader In The Home

The first question we have to answer in our quest for true spiritual leadership is not "What do I do?", but "Who am I to be?"

1 The elders who are among you I exhort, I who am a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that will be revealed: 2 Shepherd the flock of God which is among you, serving as overseers, not by compulsion but willingly, not for dishonest gain but eagerly; 3 nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock; 4 and when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that does not fade away. (I Peter 5:1-3)

Notice what the primary job description of a true spiritual leader is in this passage. It is to be an example. Now here is an eye opening thought - Each of us is already an example! People will tend to look at our lives rather than listen to our words. We may be a good example of someone who has a growing love relationship with God, or a bad example. Each day it is a choice. And the choice begins in our own hearts before the Lord. If I want my family to have a strong relationship with the Lord, is it obvious that relationship is alive and kicking in me? If I want my children to fall in love with God's Word, do I take the time to read it daily for my own edification? A true spiritual leader knows that a real relationship with God, like a good infection, is better caught than taught. Men need to realize that for better or for worse, we are an example. We are spiritual leaders. We are leading our family by example whether we realize it or not.

The Priority of a Spiritual Leader In the Home

The second question we have to answer in our quest for true spiritual leadership is, "What kind of a spiritual leader would I have liked to have had in my home growing up?"

4 And you, fathers, do not provoke your children to wrath, but bring them up in the training and admonition of the Lord." (Ephesians 6:4)

Stop and remember back to when you were growing up. What one thing bugged you more than anything else in your relationship with your Dad? More often than not, it was when we had a sense that he were not being fair with us. Or that he expected things out of us he was not willing to do himself. If you want to provoke your children to wrath, the surest way is to be a hypocrite. But conversely, what made you look at your Dad and say, "I hope I can be a man like him some day!"? Wasn't it the times you saw him act with integrity and consistency, sticking to principle even when it cost him personally? This is the compass heading of every true spiritual leader. We need to remember that one day our children will be asked to share what meant most about their relationship with us. What will they say on that day? Seeking a consistent, unhypocritical love for God and others will set a worthy path for our children to follow.

The Practice of a Spiritual Leader in the Home

So how should a spiritual leader actually function around the house? Should they lead in times of family devotions? Initiate group prayer times? Conduct a home Bible study? Actually there is a lot more freedom here than some of our traditional ideas on the subject.

4 For as we have many members in one body, but all the members do not have the same function, 5 so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and individually members of one another. 6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, let us prophesy in proportion to our faith; 7 or ministry, let us use it in our ministering; he who teaches, in teaching; 8 he who exhorts, in exhortation; he who gives, with liberality; he who leads, with diligence; he who shows mercy, with cheerfulness. (Romans 12:4-7)

Paul's point here is interesting. Not everyone will have a cookie cutter endowment of spiritual gifts. God gives each of different abilities and gifts. The secret of fruitful ministry is not to strive to imitate a gift we don't have, but to identify and impart to others the gifts that God has given to us. In the home, some men will feel very comfortable leading a home study. Others will distinguish themselves through selfless service. Others will have a gift of wisdom in problem solving, or providing for needs financially. This is just as much a form of genuine spiritual leadership as leading a prayer, or doing family devotions.

I do believe that it is a strength for the family to have a spiritual rallying point somewhere in the day. Perhaps it could take place a few minutes before you hit the ground running in the morning. Get a hold of a good daily devotional that includes a Scripture and a few comments that can be read in a moment or two. Involve the whole family in the process by asking the children to read the Scripture, or to pray for the family that day. It can start with a small, no stress, no strain part of the morning routine. But coupled with an understanding of what real spiritual leadership is all about, a revolution can take place in the home!

Scott's Blog - 8/29/06

Lessons From An Open Mike

Have you ever been reading through the Word and come across a passage that just stops you dead in your tracks? The kind of Scripture that makes you think, "I hope this isn't saying what I think it's saying?" Try this one on for size!

35 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good things, and an evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth evil things. 36 But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment. 37 For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned." (Matthew 12:35-37)

I couldn't help but be reminded of Jesus' words when I read about an almost nightmarish technical meltdown that happened today on CNN.

Oops! CNN Airs Anchor's Girl talk Over Bush Speech

I have to confess that as a pastor who uses a wireless microphone on a regular basis, I felt great compassion for Kyra Phillips. We have all heard the stories about inadvertant broadcasts from the bathroom made when someone forgets to flip the good old off switch! I always get the sneaky feeling that my day will come. It isn't a question of "if" but "when"!

But maybe the idea of the "off switch" has lead us a little bit astray. If Jesus is not being figurative in Matthew 12 (and there is no reason to think He is) we are all on mike, all the time, with "every idle word" being broadcast before a heavenly audience!

Sort of makes us want to reconsider some of our speech patterns, doesn't it?

Like the ones that begin with,

"I know this doesn't sound spiritual, but.."

"You know, I'd die if this got out, but.."

" Just between you and me, I think so and so is..."

James tells us "No man can tame the tongue." (James 3:8) 

But God can change our hearts through the power of His Holy Spirit. 

If the notion of seeing your whole life as an open mike experience makes you a little uneasy, apply the Psalm 139:23-24 solution to your soul.

23 Search me, O God, and know my heart;
         Try me, and know my anxieties;
 24 And see if there is any wicked way in me,
         And lead me in the way everlasting.

When our speech is less than what we would like to hear repeated when we stand before the Lord, ask His forgiveness. (I John 1:9) Go to the people who have been damaged by your remarks and ask their forgiveness. (Matthew 5:23-24) Ask the Lord to give you the same heart He has for people. (Ephesians 5:1-2)

Never say anything about anyone that you wouldn't want repeated in God's presence.

The mike is open!

Scott's Blog - 8/28/06

To Die For?

The famous Nazi concentration camp survivor Corrie Ten Boom told the story of a group of believers who met in an underground church in the former Soviet Union. During one of their gatherings the door burst open. A group of KGB soldiers rushed in to the room. Their commander said, "This meeting is illegal. Any of you who wish to renounce Christ may leave with no questions asked. If any of you stay you will be executed. You have five minutes to make your decision." 

Some in the group lost their nerve, got up and left. The majority stayed and prayed for strength to face their moment of death. 

After five minutes had gone by, the commander ordered the doors closed and locked.

He then turned to the frightened believers and said, "Brothers and sisters. We are Christians too. We did not want to fellowship with anyone unwilling to die for our Savior."

I couldn't help but hearken back to that account when I read of the release of Fox News correspondent Steve Centanni.

Fox News Journalists Free After Declaring Conversion

Abid Katib/Getty Images

Olaf Wiig, a cameraman for Fox News, was greeted with a hug after he and the reporter Steve Centanni, behind him to the right, were released by the Holy Jihad Brigades. They had been held for 13 days in Gaza.

By STEVEN ERLANGER

Published: August 28, 2006

JERUSALEM, Aug. 27 — Two journalists kidnapped in Gaza were released unharmed on Sunday after being forced at gunpoint to say on a videotape that they had converted to Islam.

The two journalists for Fox News — Steve Centanni, 60, an American correspondent, and Olaf Wiig, 36, a freelance cameraman from New Zealand — were held for 13 days in an abandoned garage in the Gaza Strip as hostages of a previously unknown group calling itself the Holy Jihad Brigades.

“I’m really fine, healthy in good shape and so happy to be free,” Mr. Centanni told Fox News. He said the two had been forced at gunpoint to say that they were converting to Islam and had taken Muslim names. “I have the highest respect for Islam,” he said. “But it was something we felt we had to do because they had the guns, and we didn’t know what ... was going on.”

Earlier on Sunday, their captors delivered a video showing the two men in Arab robes reading from the Koran to indicate their conversion.

Certainly desperate men make desperate moves. I have no idea where Steve Centanni or Olaf Wiig stand spiritually. But their experience certainly can be an interesting diagnostic tool concerning where we stand spiritually.

Imagine being kidnapped by Islamic extremists. They take you to a werehouse filled with loud mechanical equipment, perfect for covering the sound of gun shots. They bring out their automatic rifles and a video camera. In broken English they tell you that you must convert to Islam or die. 

You realize that converting to Islam means denying that Jesus is God, or even the Son of God. It means affirming that there is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his prophet.

The red light of the video camera comes on. Your captors beckon to you. Say the words.

What do you do?

Say the right thing to survive? Maybe tell people you weren't serious, or had your fingers crossed? Sin now, and seek forgiveness later?

Or make a stand?

You might be saying, "Whew! I'm glad I live in the land of the free. I will never have to worry about that!"

A  young woman named Rachel Scott probably thought the same thing.

Rachel Joy Scott was a beautiful 17 year old girl who wanted to make an impact on the world through kindness and compassion. Her life ended on April 20, 1999 when she was shot and killed at Columbine High School, but her legacy has now reached around the world. Her story has impacted millions of people through a series of books, television documentaries, and live events where people heard her family speak about her. Rachel left behind 6 diaries that were full of amazing predictions through poetry, pictures, and statements. She wrote that she would die at a young age. She wrote that she would be a homicide victim. She referred to the halls of Columbine as the "halls of a tragedy" in one of her last poems. But she also wrote about impacting the world. She shared with her friends that she would have an impact on the world, but that she would not live to be 20 years old! At age 13 she wrote on the back of an old dresser: "These hands belong to Rachel Joy Scott, and will someday touch millions of people's hearts". Her final drawing inspired a book, written by her parents, called "Rachel's Tears". That drawing was a picture of her eyes shedding 13 tears that touch a rose and turn to blood drops. The rose is growing out of a Columbine plant and is connected to a verse from the Bible that says, "Greater love has no man than this, that a man would lay his life down for his friends". Within 2 hours of Rachel drawing that picture 13 people had been killed at Columbine: A teacher and 12 students. That week was Easter, or Passover Week, and just 2,000 years earlier another teacher and 12 students had impacted the world.

Rachel was ready for her defining moment. Will we be?

Scott's Blog - 8/25/06

Is The Stem Cell Debate Over?

One of the most emotionally wrenching debates in the pro-life/pro-choice controversy has centered around embryonic stem cell research. Brought into the spot light by the courageous struggles of high profile celebrities like Michael J. Fox and Christopher Reeve, the process was hailed as the potential key to cures for cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and even paralysis. The problem? In order to harvest these cells, an embryo has to be destroyed. If one believes life begins at conception, this means that such potential cures come to us at the cost of non consenting human life.

As we have detailed in this space, not only Scripture (Psalm 139), but even science confirm that your life and mine began at the moment of conception. We have also seen that stem cells harvested from even the fat cells of adults have been far more effective in obtaining cures and therapies than the often uncontrollable stem cells obtained from embryos.

But the debate goes on. Although the current score is around 88-0 in terms of actual therapies and cures in favor of adult stem cells over embryonic stem cells, there is still the big "What if?" question looming. What if we could fully develop the potential of embryonic stem cells? What if the cure for paralysis or Parkinson's lies in this line of research? Should the Biblical convictions of some keep these potential benefits from others who don't share that world view?

A pitched, emotional battle? You bet. But a recent breakthrough might render the issue moot.

Stem cell breakthrough to challenge Bush objections

By Nigel Hawkes, Health Editor of The Times

A stem cell breakthrough by American scientists is set to overturn ethical objections to potentially live-saving research.

They have found how to make stem cells from embryos without destroying the embryo in the process - an advance that could open the door to billions of dollars in research funding.

Stem-cell research, which specialists believe holds the key to treating many diseases, has been crippled in the US by the religious Right, backed by the Bush Administration. Federal support for such research has been banned because it involves the destruction of embryos.

Now a team at Advanced Cell Technology - a private company - has found that it is possible to create human stem cells using one or two cells from an early embryo, without doing any damage to the embryo.

In theory, the technique could be used to create both a baby and a set of immortal stem cells unique to that baby that might be used decades later to cure the baby - now adult - of diseases such as Parkinson’s or heart disease.

Much more likely, however, is that it will be used as a research technique to advance stem-cell science.

Is the debate over? There are still questions that remain about the need for "support cells" that can only be obtained by killing another embryo that shadow this technique. But there is a very important principle that this development illustrates. Principle is not an impediment to real progress. If the pro life perspective hadn't been brought to this debate, chances are this potentially promising research would have never been pursued. 

We also need to realize that the end, no matter how noble, never justifies the means. Simply drawing a line of time ("Oh, the embryo is only a few hours old! "), development ("Oh, the embryo will never know what happened to it") or appearance ("Oh, the embryo not a person, it's just a clump of cells!") doesn't change the fact that we are dealing with a living entity. An entity that has the same genetic endowment as you or I do. An entity that is only different than you or me on the basis of time and nurture.

There is a marvelously simple, yet applicable Scripture that can give us perspective on these kind of issues.

10 Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, especially to those who are of the household of faith. (Galatians 6:10)

Believers should welcome potentially life saving developments in science and medicine. But we should also continue to stand as a voice of conscience and God's truth to make sure these breakthroughs do not come at the expense of the innocent and defenseless.

Scott's Blog - 8/24/06

When Is a Planet Not a Planet?

When I went to bed last night, my college education assured me of three indisputable facts. There were seven continents, seven seas and nine planets in our solar system (Trust me! I had to memorize them in order for my final!)

When I woke up this morning, the universe had changed. The seas and continents were still in good working order. But as of today there are only eight planets in our solar system.

What happened? Was there a collision? An explosion? Did a black hole gobble up part of our solar family like Pac Man?

No. An even more catastrophic force was at work. A committee held a meeting!

Capping years of intense debate, astronomers resolved today to demote Pluto in a wholesale redefinition of planethood that is being billed as a victory of scientific reasoning over historic and cultural influences. But already the decision is being hotly debated.

Officially, Pluto is no longer a planet.

"Pluto is dead," said Caltech researcher Mike Brown, who spoke with reporters via a teleconference while monitoring the vote. The decision also means a Pluto-sized object that Brown discovered will not be called a planet.

"Pluto is not a planet," Brown said. "There are finally, officially, eight planets in the solar system."

The vote involved just 424 astronomers who remained for the last day of a meeting of the International Astronomical Union (IAU) in Prague.

"I'm embarrassed for astronomy," said Alan Stern, leader of NASA's New Horizon's mission to Pluto and a scientist at the Southwest Research Institute. "Less than 5 percent of the world's astronomers voted."

"This definition stinks, for technical reasons," Stern told SPACE.com. He expects the astronomy community to overturn the decision. Other astronomers criticized the definition as ambiguous.

The resolution

The decision establishes three main categories of objects in our solar system.

• Planets: The eight worlds from Mercury to Neptune.

• Dwarf Planets: Pluto and any other round object that "has not cleared the neighborhood around its orbit, and is not a satellite."

• Small Solar System Bodies: All other objects orbiting the Sun.

Pluto and its moon Charon, which would both have been planets under the initial definition proposed Aug. 16, now get demoted because they are part of a sea of other objects that occupy the same region of space. Earth and the other eight large planets have, on the other hand, cleared broad swaths of space of any other large objects.

So with one committee vote, the indisputable facts concerning our solar system, are, well...not so indisputable any more. In fact, Alan Stern of NASA went on to say the language of the resolution was flawed;

 It requires that a planet "has cleared the neighborhood around its orbit." But Earth, Mars, Jupiter and Neptune all have asteroids as neighbors.

"It's patently clear that Earth's zone is not cleared," Stern told SPACE.com. "Jupiter has 50,000 trojan asteroids," which orbit in lockstep with the planet.

Stern called it "absurd" that only 424 astronomers were allowed to vote, out of some 10,000 professional astronomers around the globe.

"It won't stand," he said. "It's a farce."

Stern said astronomers are already circulating a petition that would try to overturn the IAU decision.

So what can we learn from this "Is you is, or is you ain't a planet?" controversy?

The "assured results of scientific inquiry" may not be as assured as we have been lead to believe. Scientific inquiry is in a constant state of flux. The "settled issues" of today may very well be a'moulderin' in the dust bin of obsolescence tomorrow.

For instance in the famous Scopes Monkey Trial of 1925, two of the main pieces of evidence to support the theory of evolution were the remains of the Piltdown Man , and a series of drawings by the German scientist Ernst Haeckel that purported to show man's evolutionary history replayed in the development of the human embryo. In the movie "Inherit the Wind", we watched as poor, ignorant William Jennings Bryan was slam dunked by the overwhelming scientific certainty of evolution. But as Dr. John Morris observes,

Defense attorney Clarence Darrow hoped to introduce much scientific evidence against creation, and had assembled an impressive array of professors. When the judge ruled scientific testimony irrelevant to the case, their testimony was read into the transcripts without the jury present.

As we look back, we see that each one of the arguments for evolution are now known to be wrong. Featured prominently were supposed vestigial organs, like the appendix or tonsils, once touted as leftovers from an evolutionary past, but now recognized as functioning. Embryonic recapitulation, the idea that the human fetus goes through various evolutionary stages in the mother's womb, surfaced, but this whole idea was disproved decades ago.

Most memorable were the fossil ape-men, but consider the list of evidences: Neanderthal man, known to be fully human; Piltdown man, later discovered to have been due to a fraudulent combination of human skullcap with an ape's jaw; Java man, consisting of an ape skull and a human femur, found separated by many meters, and later disavowed by its discoverer; and Australopithicus africanus, the skull of an infant ape which typically bore a slight resemblance to a human child's skull. Not entered into the trial, but aired in the press, was Nebraska man, America's own ape-man and thus very popular. This fossil consisted of only one tooth, later discovered to be that of a pig.

Often times we as Christians can find ourselves intimidated by the latest finding of "science" splashed across the front page of the newspaper. Two things to remember - First, science is done by scientists. Scientists by definition are human beings. Human beings have prejudices, blind spots and philosophical biases that color the way they look at the world. One man's planet is another man's "dwarf". Did Pluto change at all between yesterday and today? No. But a vote by 400 plus scientists changed the "facts" we will find in next year's text books. It all comes down to definition and interpretation.

One of the silliest arguments I have heard against a Biblical view of origins states, "We will put our facts up against yours any time!" Time out! We are all dealing with the same facts. The difference is how we interpret them.

The second thing we need to remember is that although man's perspective is subject to change without notice, God's perspective never changes.

 89 Forever, O LORD,
         Your word is settled in heaven.
 90 Your faithfulness endures to all generations;
         You established the earth, and it abides.

The ever changing speculations of man, or the timeless perspective of God who made all things. Which perspective will we trust?

Scott's Blog - 8/23/06

Prophet or Loss?

Does God still speak today? If so, how can we discern His voice from a clever counterfeit? What does God have to say about a prophet for hire? All these questions and more will be answered as we open the SRL mailbag!

Scott,
 I really enjoy your radio show & especially your blogs.
 Would you please tell me if this is Biblical or not....
 There are churches that you can stand in line in the lobby or wherever, & request "a word" or "a prophecy" for yourself.  Some charge a minimal fee for this & some do not.
 I do not feel in my Spirit this is right; that it is fortune telling.  But I cannot find where the Bible talks about this.  I know in the Old Testament the Kings requested this, but I don't believe it was done in the New Testament.
 Can you please help me understand this?
 Thank you.
 Sincerely,
 Peggy

Thanks, Peggy for a very intriguing question! To get a good grip on this issue we have to answer three very important questions.

Does God still speak to people individually, supernaturally today?  

The Bible tells us this is possible.

In the book of Acts we see God speaking a specific message to believers gathered in a group setting.

 1 Now in the church that was at Antioch there were certain prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Locus of Cymene, Manage who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. 2 As they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, “Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” 3 Then, having fasted and prayed, and laid hands on them, they sent them away. (Acts 13:1-3)

We also see examples of the Lord speaking to people individually.

9 Now the Lord spoke to Paul in the night by a vision, “Do not be afraid, but speak, and do not keep silent; 10 for I am with you, and no one will attack you to hurt you; for I have many people in this city." (Acts 18:9-10)

This ministry of the Holy Spirit providing guidance in specific life situations is listed as part of the gifts of the Spirit in I Corinthians 12:7-8.

7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all: 8 for to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, to another the word of knowledge through the same Spirit

There is no evidence within the New Testament that such gifts of the Spirit will cease until the Lord comes again. (See I Corinthians 13:8-10)

How can we know the Lord has really spoken to us?

The good news is that God does speak to his children in wonderfully specific ways in our day and age. The sobering news is that we will also encounter clever counterfeits of the real deal. The Bible tells us we have to be critical spiritual consumers!

 1 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world. (I John 4:1)

19 Do not quench the Spirit. 20 Do not despise prophecies. 21 Test all things; hold fast what is good. 22 Abstain from every form of evil. (I Thessalonians 5:19-22)

Here we see a real challenge. How can we avoid quenching the Spirit on the one hand, without becoming gullibly vulnerable to deception on the other?

The key word is "discernment".

The Bible gives us three key ways to evaluate any spiritual message that comes our way.

Does It Come To Pass?

21 And if you say in your heart, ‘How shall we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?’— 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not happen or come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him. (Deuteronomy 18:21-22)

The test of a true prophet is accuracy. If a person is really in touch with the Lord they will be right on 100% of the time. Close may count in horseshoes and hand grenades, but not when someone says, "I have a message from God for you."

Does It Connect Us to Christ?

 1 “If there arises among you a prophet or a dreamer of dreams, and he gives you a sign or a wonder, 2 and the sign or the wonder comes to pass, of which he spoke to you, saying, ‘Let us go after other gods’—which you have not known—‘and let us serve them,’ 3 you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams, for the LORD your God is testing you to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. (Deuteronomy 13:1-3)

Another test of a true word from God is detailed here. Does the experience  foster deeper dependency not on signs and wonders, but the Savior? A real danger of being in a situation where the Lord speaks personally today, is the all too human tendency to demand another sign tomorrow. Suddenly, simply spending time in with the Lord and His Word, just isn't as exciting as being at that meeting where miracles happen. People will say, "But people were really healed!" or "This person really told me what was happening in my life!" But we need to remember that a sign is only valuable if it points us in the right direction. A true word from the Lord will cause us to draw closer to Him, not to base our relationship with God on an over the top spiritual experience.

Does It Conform To The Word?

A true message from God will perfectly line up with what God has already told us in His Word, the Bible.

19 And when they say to you, “Seek those who are mediums and wizards, who whisper and mutter,” should not a people seek their God? Should they seek the dead on behalf of the living? 20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. (Isaiah 8:19-20)

But a true message from the Lord will not only conform to the truth of God's Word, but also to the character that a true minister of the Word is called to demonstrate.

3 If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which accords with godliness, 4 he is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions, 5 useless wranglings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. From such withdraw yourself. (I Timothy 6:3-5)

In the situation you describe, Peggy, it seems that there are two unbiblical practices afoot. First, to say that you can come up to a person and they will automatically have a word from the Lord for you, seems a bit presumptuous. What if the Lord had decided that we really don't need a supernatural word from Him at this time? Secondly, to associate such a gift with a donation is contrary to one of the most basic principles of ministry Jesus laid out for His disciples - "Freely you have received. Freely give." (Matthew 10:8)

Keep these principles of discernment at the forefront of your mind and you won't be led astray!

Scott's Blog - 8/22/06

The Mahdi Was Supposed To Come And All I Got Was This Stupid Oil Rig

Remember those t-shirts that were big a few years ago?

"My Parents Went To Hawaii And All I Got Was This Stupid T-Shirt"

I wonder if there were shirts with our headline selling in Tehran today?

As many of you who follow Scott's Blog are aware, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejhad had postponed issuing a response to demands to abandon their nuclear weapons program until today. August 22nd had been identified as the commemoration of the supposed flight of Mohammad on a half man/half winged horse from Mecca, to Heaven with a short stop at "Al Quds" which has been speculated to be Jerusalem.

 There have been rumors that Ahmadinejhad, a devout believer in the soon arrival of the Imam Mahdi, had selected this date as the time for Iran's "answer to the world" because he believed his messiah would arrive today. (See Scott's Blog 8/8/06)

The worry has been that an unhinged fanatic like Ahmadinejhad might seize this day as the chance to initiate the prophesized global war that would usher in the return of the Mahdi. As Princeton University's Bernard Lewis commented in the Wall Street Journal-

"In Islam as in Judaism and Christianity, there are certain beliefs concerning the cosmic struggle at the end of time -- Gog and Magog, anti-Christ, Armageddon, and for Shiite Muslims, the long awaited return of the Hidden Imam, ending in the final victory of the forces of good over evil, however these may be defined."

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad "and his followers clearly believe that this time is now, and that the terminal struggle has already begun and is indeed well advanced. It may even have a date, indicated by several references by the Iranian president to giving his final answer to the US about nuclear development by Aug. 22," which this year corresponds "to the 27th day of the month of Rajab of the year 1427. This, by tradition, is the night when many Muslims commemorate the night flight of the prophet Muhammad on the winged horse Buraq, first to 'the farthest mosque,' usually identified with Jerusalem, and then to heaven and back (c.f., Koran XVII.1).

"This might well be deemed an appropriate date for the apocalyptic ending of Israel and if necessary of the world. It is far from certain that Mr. Ahmadinejad plans any such cataclysmic events precisely for Aug. 22. But it would be wise to bear the possibility in mind."

So what did the Iranians do on this fateful day?

Iranian Troops Fire on Romanian Oil Rig

The Associated Press
Tuesday, August 22, 2006; 12:05 PM

That's it? An overheated commercial dispute? We were expecting the apocalypse!

I guess the whole world can take a bit of a breather. 

Or can we? 

Iran shows absolutely no signs of backing down from their nuclear ambitions. Through their Hezbollah proxies they have achieved a high status stalemate with Israel, with the world community showing absolutely no willingness to enforce a UN resolution calling for Hezbollah to disarm. The discovery that the most effective blows against Israel were accomplished by Russian made weapons sold to Syria and Iran and smuggled to Hezbollah merited a yawn in the UN Security council.

All told, Mr. Ahmadinejhad has had a very successful year. And time is on his side. The longer the world blusters, dithers and sees meaningless sanctions tied up in committees, the longer the Iranians have to realize their nuclear ambitions.

August 22nd has come and gone in Tehran. But the spiritually motivated hatred of Israel hasn't seen more promising days since 1938.

More and more we are seeing the stage set for a fateful prophecy found in the book of Zechariah to be fulfilled.

2 “Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of drunkenness to all the surrounding peoples, when they lay siege against Judah and Jerusalem. 3 And it shall happen in that day that I will make Jerusalem a very heavy stone for all peoples; all who would heave it away will surely be cut in pieces, though all nations of the earth are gathered against it. (Zechariah 12:2-3)

Scott's Blog - 8/21/06

We Hold These Opinions To Be Self Evident?

It started out so innocently. There in 9th grade Civics Class, our teacher uttered the immortal words -

"Nothing is really right or wrong. It all depends on your point of view."

In 1972, that seemed like a breath of fresh air. Who needed all the pointless traditions of the past? Didn't all that "Leave It to Beaver" mentality get us knee deep in a pointless war in Viet Nam? We need a new set of ethics for a new world. If something seems right to you, and you are really not hurting anybody, go for it! I mean, why not?

Without realizing it, our young teachers still reeling from "Sacred '67" and "The Summer of Love", were downloading to a new impressionable generation the seemingly harmless, tolerance based world view called Relativism. 

You go your way. I'll go mine. If we meet in the middle it's groovy, man.

What could possibly be wrong with that?

A scratch under the tie-dyed veneer of that pop philosophy reveals some pretty dangerous things lurking underneath.

Like - If truth is in the eye of the beholder, and all points of view are equally valid, does that mean I am required to honor the beliefs of the KKK member next door, as long as he doesn't act on his hatred?

Like- If there really is no such thing as right and wrong, why should I consider hurting others as wrong?

Like - If we are to tolerate all points of view, does that include intolerance?

The dark secret underlying the "Age of Aquarius" is not hard to spot. Man, not God, is the measure of all things. There either is no God, or He hasn't spoken to us, so ask the man in your heart for the answer and hope it will all work out in the end.

The reason I have invited you to this philosophical "flashback" is because we are discovering today that ideas really do have consequences. Relativistic thinking is still doing quite well, but may be about to negatively impact our lives in some of the most basic and practical ways imaginable.

Consider the future of one of the most taken for granted aspects of our society - human rights.

This troubling observation was made by NY Times writer Christopher Caldwell today.

Just hours before the police arrested 24 British-born Muslims suspected of plotting to blow up as many as 10 airliners over the Atlantic, the British home secretary, John Reid, gave a comprehensive description of how Tony Blair’s government saw the war on terror. Reid, who probably knew the raids were coming, called international terrorism the gravest threat to Britain since World War II and attacked civil libertarians as people who “just don’t get it.” He highlighted a speech that Blair had made little more than a week earlier. Global terrorism, Blair said then, “means traditional civil liberty arguments are not so much wrong as just made for another age.”

Jeff J. Mitchell/Getty Images

 If you wanted to figure out how the airline plot will change the West, Blair’s words would be a good place to start. Fiery speeches have abounded in the five years since Sept. 11 2001, but this is a radical departure. Blair was not trying to buck us up and steel our resolve by saying that we’re at war and that we’ll have to pitch in and sacrifice our liberties for a while. He was saying that war has shown many of our liberties to be illusory. The “civil liberties” we know do not bubble up from natural law or from something timeless and universal in the human character. They may be significant accomplishments, but they are temporal ones, bound to certain stages of technology or to certain styles of social organization. Maybe there was something like an Age of Civil Liberties, Blair was telling us, but it is over.

A brief time out for an important question. Where did our concept of civil liberties come from?

The Declaration of Independence is a good place to find an answer.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Notice the source of our civil liberties. They are not granted by a government. They are not granted by a majority vote. They are given to us by our Creator. No man or human agency can take them away.

So what happens when we deny that there is a Creator, and He has spoken?

Civil rights become something that government, the next election, or even the results of a Gallup Poll can grant or take away. 

CS Lewis used to have great fun with people who argued "by the clock on the wall." You've probably heard people say, "You don't mean to tell me you believe that sort of thing in these modern days, do you?"  He would point out that if something is genuinely true, it would be equally true at 10 in the morning as it would be at 10 at night. It would equally be true this year, as last year. It would equally be true five hundred years ago and five hundred years from now. He would preface his answer by saying, "I don't know what the time on the clock has to do with this, but..."

If we deny that there is a God and that he has spoken to us, then even our most basic rights are no longer "endowed by our Creator". They are only a quaint artifact of a time before weapons of mass destruction and the global war on terror. Inalienable rights have become "outdated".

This moral relativism and arguing by the clock can even make an impact inside the church these days. Consider the headline making decision of a Baptist church in upstate New York.

WATERTOWN, N.Y. - The minister of a church that dismissed a female Sunday School teacher after adopting what it called a literal interpretation of the Bible says a woman can perform any job — outside of the church.

The First Baptist Church dismissed Mary Lambert on Aug. 9 with a letter explaining that the church had adopted an interpretation that prohibits women from teaching men. She had taught there for 54 years.

The letter quoted the first epistle to Timothy: "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent."

The Rev. Timothy LaBouf, who also serves on the Watertown City Council, issued a statement saying his stance against women teaching men in Sunday school would not affect his decisions as a city leader in Watertown, where all five members of the council are men but the city manager who runs the city's day-to-day operations is a woman.

"I believe that a woman can perform any job and fulfill any responsibility that she desires to" outside of the church, LaBouf wrote Saturday.

Mayor Jeffrey Graham, however, was bothered by the reasons given Lambert's dismissal.

"If what's said in that letter reflects the councilman's views, those are disturbing remarks in this day and age," Graham said. "Maybe they wouldn't have been disturbing 500 years ago, but they are now."

Lambert has publicly criticized the decision, but the church did not publicly address the matter until Saturday, a day after its board met.

In a statement, the board said other issues were behind Lambert's dismissal, but it did not say what they were.

Did you catch the Mayor's logic? 500 years ago this Scripture could be taken seriously. But certainly not now. We are arguing by the clock again. And this time, the clock and moral relativism have declared that taking God's Word seriously, even inside the church, is "disturbing."

In all this confusion, what a clarifying and comforting thing it is to simply allow the Bible to speak.

1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds (Hebrews 1:1-2)

 1 That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life— 2 the life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to you that eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us— 3 that which we have seen and heard we declare to you, that you also may have fellowship with us; and truly our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ. (I John 1:1-3)

18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. (Matthew 5:18)

Inside the church and out, the notion that God is there and He is not silent is under attack. The consequences of this battle will be far reaching for all of us. Now, more than ever, the words of Jesus' half brother Jude are incredibly relevant.

Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. (Jude 1:3)

Do you know why you believe the Bible is God's Word? Even your rights may depend on it!

Scott's Blog - 8/18/06

The Deal On Denominations

A question that often gets asked by nonbelievers goes something like this -

"If you Christians have the truth about God, why are there so many denominations?"

Even believers seem to have a hard time understanding all the divisions that denominations seem to represent.

Calvary Christian Fellowship of Tucson, where I pastor, is a part of the Calvary Chapel movement. We take the following stand on the issue of denominationalism.

The Calvary Chapel Church has been formed as a fellowship of believers in the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Our supreme desire is to know Christ and be conformed into His image by the power of the Holy Spirit. We are not a denominational church, nor are we opposed to denominations as such, only their over-emphasis of doctrinal differences that have led to the division of the body of Christ. We believe that the only true basis of Christian fellowship is His (Agape) love, which is greater than any differences we possess and without which we have no right to claim ourselves Christians.

In short, when it comes to denominational squabbling, we'd just as soon sit the battles out.

Some might reply, "But you Calvary Chapels believe the same doctrine. You have Pastors Conferences and youth camps. You work together on outreach projects. You have an 'Outreach Fellowships Office' where there is accountability, and where necessary, even discipline. What's the difference between your 'fellowship of believers' and a denomination?"

The simplest answer would be the word "autonomy".

Each Calvary Chapel is a separate non profit organization. Each owns its own property. Each has its own board of directors and bylaws. Each decides on a given week what they will be teaching, although one distinctive we share is our commitment to teach through the Bible book by book, chapter by chapter and verse by verse. 

What holds us together is not an organizational structure, but love for the Lord, His Word, and each other.

Denominations have arisen because of the passionate commitment believers have had toward certain aspects of God's truth. Others have developed as a result of a particular unique work that God has done that some want to emphasize. Others have followed out of the ministry of a particularly gifted man of God. 

In the sense that denominations can provide an environment for like minded or like hearted individuals to worship God in an undistracted way they can be a blessing. We must be careful to avoid a sense of elitism and divisiveness based on a group we belong to. As Paul emphasized in I Corinthians 1:10-13:

10 Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. 11 For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe’s household, that there are contentions among you. 12 Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

Denominations can be a source of strength, but are no substitute for simple faith in God, a commitment to His Word, and a love for His people. If a denomination ceases to stand for these non negotiables, it loses its value.

A classic example of this is a controversy that has arisen out of a book just issued by the publishing arm of The Presbyterian Church USA. Author and talk show host Hugh Hewitt, a member of a PCUSA church details a heartbreaking turn of events for this fellowship.

The Presbyterians Did What?

Posted by Hugh Hewitt  | 7:05 AM

The Presbyterian Church, USA has a publishing house.  That house has published a conspiracy book about 9/11.  Now the head of the publishing house wants to distance himself and the PCUSA from the book.  From the Washington Times:

"Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11: A Call to Reflection and Action" is already in its second printing after having sold 5,000 copies in its first month. It accuses the Bush administration -- in power only eight months at the time of the 2001 terrorist attacks -- of plotting September 11 to justify war with Afghanistan and Iraq, and to expand an "American empire." The book has attracted volumes of criticism, boycott threats and attempted clarifications by various church officials.
"The views expressed in the book are Griffin's alone," says Presbyterian Publishing Corp. (PPC) Board Chairman Kenneth Godshall, referring to the author, David Ray Griffin, 67, a retired professor at the Claremont School of Theology in Claremont, Calif.
"PPC provides a variety of viewpoints in the books we publish. A few of them from time to time are controversial. This particular book is the work of an independent author and in no way represents the views of the denomination or PPC itself."
His statement was posted on the Presbyterian Church (USA) Web site (www.pcusa.org) directly under an ad for Presbyterian Publishing Corp. and the slogan, "All Things Presbyterian, All in One Place."

As one who has been ordained as an Elder in the PCUSA, I am again obliged to apologize for having failed during my time on a Session to work to reform the denominational "leadership."  Serious Presbyterians have to demand a wholesale housecleaning of the Louisville bureaucracy, and invest the time in the often painfully slow and convoluted governing process to make it happen.  If that cannot happen, then the next General Assembly should at least outline the process of divorce so the rational congregations can go their own way.  In the meantime, the local churches have simply got to stop sending money to Louisville. Subsidizing this foolishness is irresponsible. And the presbyteries across the country owe a sharp and public rebuke to this slander which extends far beyond the president and his Cabinet.

I admire the commitment of sincere believers like Hugh Hewitt to not only point out an outrageous decision by their denomination, but also to work as best they can for a return to Biblical standards in the PCUSA leadership. 

But we also see here one of the real dangers of denominationalism. The decisions of a bureaucracy far removed from the hearts of local congregations are nonetheless supported financially and by reputation by believers who find their decisions repugnant.

It is interesting that there is a real possibility that individual PCUSA churches will "divorce" themselves from an unbiblically based leadership. 

It is sad when we experience such parting of the ways. But it is possible that God can work even in these circumstances. Nowhere in the New Testament do we see even a hint of such massive and unwieldy organizational structures. Perhaps the Lord will cause these churches to return to a simple commitment to love the Lord, teach His Word, and love one another, and so make a greater impact on this lost and dying world. 

The Value of Holding Your Horses

There is nothing like doing a live, phone in talk show like Scott Richards Live to improve your prayer life!

 Talk about "working without a net"! 

As we say on the program, we don't script or decide beforehand what kind of subjects we will get into each day. And after awhile, expecting the unexpected becomes a lifestyle.

This was especially the case on the August 15th edition of the broadcast. We had a caller who was absolutely convinced that George W. Bush was the mastermind behind the 9/11 destruction of the World Trade Center.

Asked for my take on the idea, I shared that I had looked at a few web sites that advocated that position and felt that the arguments were speculative at best. They were certainly not supported by incontrovertible evidence that would pass muster in a court of law. Popular Mechanics Magazine has put out both a book and a web site devoted to debunking the claims of the 9/11 conspiracy theorists whose views are gaining some traction in opinion polls.

But there was a deeper issue that surfaced in the conversation. I pointed out that those who buy into the idea that George W. Bush either orchestrated or was complicit in the 9/11 tragedy are making a horrendously serious accusation. They believe the President of the United States, a man who has professed to being a Born Again Christian, is in essence a mass murderer with the blood of 3,000 innocent victims on his hands.

Is the case for this point of view so overwhelming, so unanswerable beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the conspiracy theory believers are ready to make that accusation?

Some people certainly would.

But before they do, perhaps it would be good to take a brief refresher course on Christianity 101. It's called Jesus' Sermon On the Mount.

1"Do not judge so that you will not be judged.

 2"For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you.

 3"Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye?

 4"Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' and behold, the log is in your own eye?

 5"You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye. (Matthew 7:1-5)

Sitting in judgment of others is a dangerous temptation in our media saturated culture. Now, that is not to say we shouldn't exercise discernment and learn to look at the issues of the day from a solidly Biblical framework. But when we cross the line from evaluating policy and positions to condemning people themselves we are on shaky ground spiritually.

A classic example of the danger of jumping to conclusions is to be found in the shocking developments in the investigation into the murder of JonBenet Ramsey. 

For the better part of the last 10 years John and Patsy Ramsey not only endured the grief of losing their child, but also carried with them a cloud of suspicion that they had a hand in her death.

With the confession of John Mark Karr, that cloud appears to have lifted.

Tragically, Patsy Ramsey didn't live long enough to see this happen. But now, in the aftermath, a very different picture of JonBenet's mother is appearing.

Patsy Ramsey never lost faith

She died knowing suspect was sought, arrest was coming

By Lisa Ryckman, Rocky Mountain News
August 17, 2006

She survived cancer. She survived murder. She survived constant suspicion and public attack.

Patsy Ramsey survived it all, her friends say, because of her deep faith and unwavering belief that her daughter's killer would be found.

And she died knowing that an arrest was coming.

"Doesn't that just break your heart? That they were persecuted for 10 years?" said Mary Justice, a longtime friend of Patsy's from Atlanta. "I think she had such a strong faith in God, that kept her going and kept the whole family going."

"It's been a long time coming," said Jayne Kloster, another family friend in Atlanta. "It's shocking - but not surprising. We always knew she was innocent. Never doubted it."

Both John and Patsy Ramsey were under suspicion shortly after JonBenet's murder, but most of the public attention - and hostility - was directed at Patsy Ramsey.

The focus frustrated them both because they believed it pushed the investigation off track and kept it there.

"The Boulder police knew from January 1997 on that it wasn't the Ramseys because the DNA did not match," said family friend Susan Stine, of Boulder.

"They couldn't stand up and admit they were wrong. And that's just a sad commentary on the Boulder police and on some people who just want to think the worst about others."

The Ramseys vented in television interviews and in a book, but Boulder police treated them as suspects - except for a moment during two days of interviews four years after JonBenet's death when she was being questioned by Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner.

"It was the first time anyone in authority in the police department spoke to me as the mother of a murdered child," Patsy told the Rocky Mountain News after the interviews.

"I was happy to be there. I thought it was going to be something about other leads. But it was just apparent pretty soon that it was all about me."

Patsy Ramsey may have been victimized, but she was never a victim, say people who knew her. Outgoing, outspoken, strong, smart and funny - those are the words they use to describe her. She had to be all those things to cope with the loss of her daughter.

"Every day, you open your eyes for the first time, and the pain starts all over again. I don't ever expect to not feel that," Patsy told the News during an interview at the Ramsey's Atlanta home in 2000. "I live for the day when I will run to her, and she will run into my arms."

She took solace in the people who supported them, strangers who recognized them and took the time to tell them that they believed in their innocence.

"I'll tell you, when you're down, and things are going bad, God will just throw an angel into your life," Patsy told the News.

In 1993, she was diagnosed with stage 4 ovarian cancer. Aggressive chemotherapy brought the disease into remission, but in recent years, it returned. Patsy Ramsey died on June 24.

"Everything she did she did with a tremendous amount of passion and commitment and love," Justice said. "She had such a strong faith and knew God would take care of her and show in the end that they were not involved, and they loved their daughter like other parents do.

"Why couldn't this have happened while she was alive?"

Authorities indicated that Patsy was told before her death that a suspect was being pursued.

Her sister, Pam Paugh, said in an interview on the Fox network Wednesday night that Patsy did not reveal that knowledge to her, although both Patsy and John were kept up to date on the investigation.

"Patsy was secure in the knowledge that they were very, very close," she said. "All she kept saying was, 'I know that someday it will come to fruition,' and here we are."

"God sees the big picture," Patsy told the News in 2000. "Why is it that JonBenet's name is known around this world?

"You can darn well guarantee that the minute I walk through the pearly gates, I'm going to say, 'Why did this happen? Please tell me now.'

"You have to step out of it and look at it from an eternal perspective. Or you can't stand it."

It is clear there was a classic "rush to judgment" in the case of the Ramsey family. Who knows? There may be a rush to judgment over John Mark Karr. The judicial process will have to play itself out.  

But one thing is for certain. It is one thing to speculate about a current event. It is another thing to look at a sister in the faith and say, "Murderer!"

Just as it is to point at a man of faith, who happens to be the President of the United States, and say, "Murderer!"

How to avoid this pitfall? Jesus' words hold the key. Whether we are watching the news, listening to the radio, surfing the internet or having lunch with a friend, keep one guiding principle in mind. Judge others as you would want to be judged. Treat and even talk about others as if they were there for the conversation personally. Try to imagine how you would want people to speak about you if the shoe was on the other foot.

One of the most liberating days of my entire Christian life was when I was praying about a situation where I had been deeply hurt. I felt the Lord speak a word to my heart I will never forget. "It's my job to judge them Scott. It's your job to love them."

Maybe the reason we end up feeling so exhausted and wrung out in this life is that we are wasting our energy on something that God has never called us to do. God is very good at judging. Will we become very good at loving?

Scott's Blog - 8/16/06

The Most Controversial Woman In the Bible

No. Despite all The DaVinci Code hubbub, it is not Mary Magdalene.

She was a centerpiece of the debate at the famous Scopes Monkey Trial.

She wrecked the faith of  lead character Ellie Arroway in the 1997 movie "Contact".

You may have wondered about her yourself the last time you read through the book of Genesis.

And we don't even know her name.

We know her only as Cain's wife.

She has appeared again, this time in the SRL mailbag.

Hello, thank you for taking my question. It is for my daughter who is 11.
We were reading Bible stories last night and saw how
Cain killed Abel and how God sent Cain away.  She wondered how people multiplied if there was only Adam, Eve and Cain left. I hope you can answer our question. Thank you. 

Hope

Thank you Hope, for sharing God's Word with your daughter and taking the time to write! This is a crucial question, because it goes right to the issue of the trustworthiness of the Bible. In John 3:12 Jesus said, "If I tell you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you about heavenly things?" If we can't trust what the Bible tells us about the first Adam, we really can't trust it when it speaks about the "last Adam", Jesus Christ. (I Corinthians 15:45)

The question, "Where did Cain get his wife?" is a common one. Skeptics consider it unanswerable, proof positive that the Bible is an incoherent collection of myths. In fact, on the excellent web site Answers in Genesis it is the number one most frequently brought up issue in their "Get Answers" section.

To properly deal with this issue there are a few Biblical truths we must keep in mind. Don Batten, Ken Ham, Jonathan Sarfati and Carl Weiland provide an excellent summary of the facts that can clear up the controversy.

There was only one man at the beginning—made from the dust of the Earth (Genesis 2:7).

This also means that Cain’s wife was a descendant of Adam. She could not have come from another ‘race’ of people and must be one of Adam’s descendants.

The first woman

In Genesis 3:20 we read, ‘And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.’¹⁰ In other words, all people are descendants of Adam and Eve—she was the first woman.

Eve was made from Adam’s rib (or side, Hebrew tsela, Genesis 2:21–24)—this was a unique event. Jesus (Matthew 19:4–6) and Paul (Ephesians 5:31) use this historical and one-time event as the doctrinal foundation for the marriage of one man to one woman.

Also, in Genesis 2:20, we are told that when Adam looked at the animals, he could not find a mate—there was no one of his kind.

All this makes it obvious that there was only one woman, Adam’s wife, at the beginning. There were never any other women around who were not Eve’s descendants.

If Christians cannot defend that all humans (including Cain’s wife) can trace their ancestry ultimately to Adam and Eve, then how can they understand and explain the gospel? How can they justify sending missionaries to every tribe and nation? Therefore, one needs to be able to answer the question about Cain’s wife, to illustrate that Christians can defend the gospel and all that it teaches.

Cain’s brothers and sisters

Cain was the first child of Adam and Eve recorded in Scripture (Genesis 4:1). His brothers, Abel (Genesis 4:2) and Seth (Genesis 4:25), were part of the first generation of children ever born on this Earth.

Even though only these three males are mentioned by name, Adam and Eve had other children. In Genesis 5:4 a statement sums up the life of Adam and Eve—‘And the days of Adam after he had fathered Seth were eight hundred years. And he fathered sons and daughters.’ This does not say when they were born. Many could have been born in the 130 years (Genesis 5:3) before Seth was born.

During their lives, Adam and Eve had a number of male and female children. The Jewish historian Josephus wrote that, ‘The number of Adam’s children, as says the old tradition, was thirty-three sons and twenty-three daughters.’¹¹

The Bible does not tell us how many children were born to Adam and Eve. However, considering their long life spans (Adam lived for 930 years—Genesis 5:5), it would seem reasonable to suggest there were many! Remember, they were commanded to ‘Be fruitful, and multiply’ (Genesis 1:28).

The wife

If we now work totally from Scripture, without any personal prejudices or other extra-Biblical ideas, then back at the beginning, when there was only the first generation, brothers would have had to have married sisters or there would be no more generations!

We are not told when Cain married or any of the details of other marriages and children, but we can say for certain that some brothers had to marry their sisters at the beginning of human history.

Objections

God’s laws

Many people immediately reject the conclusion that Adam and Eve’s sons and daughters married each other by appealing to the law against brother-sister intermarriage. Some say that you cannot marry your relation. Actually, if you don’t marry your relation, you don’t marry a human! A wife is related to her husband even before they marry because all people are descendants of Adam and Eve—all are of ‘one blood.’ The law forbidding marriage between close relatives was not given until the time of Moses (Leviticus 18–20). Provided marriage was one man to one woman for life (based on Genesis 1 and 2), there was no disobedience to God’s law originally when close relatives (even brothers and sisters) married each other.

Remember that Abraham married his half-sister (Genesis 20:12). God blessed this union to produce the Hebrew people through Isaac and Jacob. It was not until some 400 years later that God gave Moses laws that forbade such marriages.

Biological deformities

Today, brothers and sisters (and half-brothers and half-sisters, etc.) are not permitted by law to marry because their children have an unacceptably high risk of being deformed. The more closely the parents are related, the more likely it is that any offspring will be deformed.

There is a very sound genetic reason for such laws that is easy to understand. Every person has two sets of genes that specify how a person is put together and functions. Each person inherits one gene of each pair from each parent. Unfortunately, genes today contain many mistakes (because of sin and the Curse), and these mistakes show up in a variety of ways. For instance, some people let their hair grow over their ears to hide the fact that one ear is lower than the other—or perhaps someone’s nose is not quite in the middle of his or her face, or someone’s jaw is a little out of shape—and so on. Let’s face it, the main reason we call each other normal is because of our common agreement to do so!

The more distantly related