Posted in encouragement, rock of ages

Creation Grace: Fragility

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. (Luke 21:33).

We think of the earth as something solid, firm, lasting forever. Some believe it has been here for billions of years and will remain for billions more. In truth, the earth is passing away as we speak, and it is no more firm than the bubbles children at a festival were trying to burst.

The fragility of life is seen in the gossamer web spoken of in Jonathan Edwards’ Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God sermon:

“Your wickedness makes you as it were heavy as lead, and to tend downwards with great weight and pressure towards hell; and if God should let you go, you would immediately sink and swiftly descend and plunge into the bottomless gulf, and your healthy constitution, and your own care and prudence, and best contrivance, and all your righteousness, would have no more influence to uphold you and keep you out of hell, than a spider’s web would have to stop a falling rock.”

The fragility of our lives, of our deeds, of the very earth is no more solid than the walls of Jericho which fell without warning, (Joshua 6:20)  and the Tower of Siloam, which fell without warning. (Luke 13:4). So it will be for the Great Wall of China, which seems so strong and sturdy,

CC photo, use w/attribution, Fabien Dany – www.fabiendany.com

Even now, it is crumbling-

CC photo, by Bill Price III

The earth is fragile, cracked and quaking even as we speak-

USGS

The earth staggers like a drunken man; it sways like a hut; its transgression lies heavy upon it, and it falls, and will not rise again. (Isaiah 24:20)

Our lives, our deeds, the very earth is fragile. The breath we draw is fleeting. No more substantial than the silk of a gossamer web, no more sturdy than a butterfly wing, no more lasting than a bubble ascending to some height, only to vanish in its evanescence and be no more.

Jesus lasts forever. He is the eternal, the substantial, the durably secure shelter in which we cling.

The Rock, his work is perfect, for all his ways are justice. A God of faithfulness and without iniquity, just and upright is he.” (Deuteronomy 32:4)

Hide thy fragile self in Him, the Rock of Ages!

Posted in theology

Can We De-Extinct Animals? The Science and Ethics Explained

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

To answer the question in the title, no. The Dire Wolf was not brought back from extinction.

Even CNN Science wrote, The result is essentially a hybrid species similar in appearance to its extinct forerunner.

As usual, the ministry Answers in Genesis (AiG) explains very well in this 5 minute video. Corinne Altman who is Zoo Content Manager tells why the dire wolf is not really brought back from extinction.

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/12HoNhZPSCV

In 1993 when the first movie of Jurassic Park was released, people became intrigued with the idea presented in the movie that science could extract dinosaur DNA from petrified amber (tree resin) and de-extinct the dinosaur.

Jurassic Park made it seem like amber – fossilized tree resin – was a surefire way to preserve ancient DNA. Just stick a needle in, suck the blood out of a trapped mosquito or tick, and bingo – dino DNA. Source.

Of course, it is not so. Scientists are currently trying to determine how far back they can stretch the limits of defunct DNA. They have revived insects from amber, but only as far back as 2014. IS it a good idea to mess around with bringing back hybrids and genetically modified animals and insects?

Colossal Laboratories & Biosciences, the company behind the revived dire wolf and based in Dallas, … is even trying to bring back the extinct woolly mammoth by 2028… (Source).

Really? Like we need woolly mammoths walking around. Just google ‘yellowstone bison idiots’ and you will see that people who lack common sense do not need to mess with a woolly mammoth unless they think they can outrun one. Ahem…to wit-

More people have been caught being stupid around bison at Yellowstone

There are many considerations for the ramifications of genetically modifying the DNA of animals, of creating hybrids, cloning, and the like. In 2014 the BBC presented an article which raised some concerns about animal ethics-

Human problems: Newspaper articles about the ethical problems of genetically engineered animals are usually concerned about the danger these animals may pose to human beings (usually to human health), rather than any implications for the animals themselves.

Animal rights: Genetic engineering and selective breeding appear to violate animal rights, because they involve manipulating animals for human ends as if the animals were nothing more than human property, rather than treating the animals as being of value in themselves. –end BBC article

Can the genetically modified animal sustain itself in the wild? If not, will there be appropriate care for the animal? Will breeding this modified animal raise issues for future generations of this animal? Will this animal have health complications due to the fundamental change in its DNA?

The modifications of the Beltsville pigs led to many health and welfare problems in the pigs, such as arthritis and lung problems which led the researchers to terminate the experiment. Yet, some say that such unintended consequences do not present a moral dilemma since animals do not have eternal souls and are just animals.

I am not a PETA person by any means, but consequences, unintended, intended, physical, or spiritual, are, well, consequences. And consequences must be thought through.

We do have a dominion mandate as God commanded Adam to shepherd the garden and to keep it. God made man the highest living thing on the earth. Genesis 1:28b says,

fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.

While there may be pros and cons to genetically modified plants and especially animals, using technology to better humankind’s life, there are downsides as well. A Pew Center survey conducted in 2018 found that “Americans neither indiscriminately accept nor reject genetic engineering experiments on animals“, and depending on the type of genetic modification pursuits, research into human health and longevity received positive replies in the Pew poll. However, one surprising result did emerge:

Perhaps the biggest surprise of this survey was that over 2/3 of people did not view using genetic engineering to bring back extinct animals as positive.

Yeah, no.

When thinking about God as creator and about man as having dominion, there is a limit as to how far to go. The problem is, even Christian scientists debate about where that line is. AiG notes that man used the technological tools that were available to him in several instances in the Bible.

In Genesis 30:37 we read that Jacob employed some type of DNA separation method to improve his flocks. In the New Testament, Paul repeatedly referred to grafting, which is in fact mixing DNA.

We are using the technological tools available to us now, as well. But do we go so far as to de-extinct an animal? And to what end? For merely cosmetic purposes like glowing fish? Or for more allegedly vaunted purposes such as enhanced biodiversity on the earth for animals or enhancing scientific understanding for humans?

Bob Blasdel, PhD Bioscience Engineering, Bacteriophage Biology said of the current push to revive the woolly mammoth,

An Asian elephant with a handful of Woolley mammoth genes would not be a Woolley mammoth, nor could one plausibly fulfil the same ecological role. At the same time, the breeding cycle of Asian elephants is just profoundly incompatible with the experiments that would be needed. We would be talking about thousands of miscarriages on the path to getting viable offspring, there would be years between each attempt for every reproductive elephant making these potential offspring, and there wouldn’t be enough elephants in the whole world to make meaningful progress over the course of centuries.

To which a commenter asked if it was actually technologically possible at present to de-extinct the prehistoric animal, he thought it was just an ethical dilemma? Blasdel replied,

It is usually presented that way because the ethical dilemma is more interesting and accessible. Besides, who wants to do algebra with elephant menstrual cycles, or consider the challenges of appropriating all of the reproductive age female elephants in Thailand…?

Which brings us back to the moral dilemma of putting all those female elephants through all those miscarriages, so why? In order to allegedly restore the tundra to its original climate?

Remember “killer bees”? scientifically known as the Africanized honey bee, is a hybrid created by crossing African honey bees (Apis mellifera scutellata) with European honey bee subspecies like the Italian honey bee (A. m. ligustica). The hybrid, developed in Brazil, was intended to combine the European bees’ honey production with the African bees’ adaptability to warmer climates. However, the resulting hybrid also inherited a highly defensive and aggressive nature from the African bees. Source. That particular hybridization process didn’t really work out as intended.

When we use our technologies on animals, we should do so cautiously and thoughtfully. We must reflect on what these modifications mean for our relationship to animals and nature, and importantly, what this means in our relationship to God.

We are not the creator, He is the Creator. There’s no known process that can create brand-new genetic information. Natural selection and mutations don’t create new information—they work on information that already exists, writes Ken Ham.

Bless the LORD, my soul!
LORD my God, You are very great;
You are clothed with splendor and majesty,
2Covering Yourself with light as with a cloak,
Stretching out heaven like a tent curtain.
3He lays the beams of His upper chambers in the waters;
He makes the clouds His chariot;
He walks on the wings of the wind;
4He makes the winds His messengers,
Flaming fire His ministers.
Psalm 104:1-4

Further Resources

Is it Possible to Bring Back Extinct Animals?

A study reveals whether or not it’s possible to bring back extinct animals. Everything scientists currently know lead to one conclusion. In this Answers News broadcast, our hosts (Patricia Engler, Tim Chaffey, and Rob Webb) share their perspective on this subject as Bible believing Christians. 2:21-5:37. Answers in Genesis video

What should Christians think about artificial selection and genetic modification? Where are the ethical boundaries? Creation Ministries International

Posted in theology

An often overlooked command for wives is explained

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

What are many Christian wives failing at?

Susan Heck has been teaching, worshiping, and mentoring for a long time. She travels the country teaching on various theological topics, and one of her topics is on women and the Bible’s standards for wives.

Recently she presented information at Crossway Bible Church in Kansas. The topic was Forming Faithful Friendships in Christ. The 4 sessions plus Q&A are here: Forming Faithful Friendships in Christ.

Mrs. Heck said something in one of the sessions to which my ears perked up. She said she had been married almost 46 years before her husband passed away. Her husband wanted Susan to show respect for him almost more than her submission to him. She further said that she travels all around and sees that as Christian women we may be failing at the respect mandate.

I know my husband wanted my respect almost more than my submission. ~Susan Heck, Forming Faithful Friendships in Christ, session 3

What does ‘respect’ mean?

We focus quite a bit on Titus 2 instructions because there are different demographics in the verses which apply to any number of women who read it. But Ephesians 5:33 also plainly sets out a biblical behavior standard, this time, for wives.

Nevertheless, as for you individually, each husband is to love his own wife the same as himself, and the wife must see to it that she respects her husband. (Ephesians 5:33).

It’s a command. Respect the husband.

5:22 wives While the cultural model for marriage in the Graeco-Roman world emphasized male patriarchal leadership, Paul’s model is based mutual love and respect (Eph 5:28, 33) and grounded in the OT creation story (v. 31 cites Gen 2:24). Faithlife Study Bible (Eph 5:22).

So what IS this respect?

v. 33. Reverence [respect] consists of love and esteem, which produce a care to please, and of fear, which awakens a caution lest just offence be given. Henry, M. (1994). Matthew Henry’s commentary on the whole Bible.

What does this word ‘respect’ mean in context? The word is used 95 times in the New Testament. The word in Greek in the Ephesians verse is phobeomai and it means fear, dread, reverence, am afraid, terrified.

You might notice the similarity to the word phobos, from which we get the English word phobia. Phobos in Greek means “fear” or “terror.”

WHAT?! Are we supposed to be afraid of our husbands!? No, see the usage explained from the Lexicon–

Usage: The Greek verb “phobeó” primarily means to fear or be afraid. It can denote a range of emotions from terror and dread to reverence and awe. In the New Testament, “phobeó” is used both in the context of fear of danger or harm and in the sense of reverential awe towards God. The term can imply a healthy respect or acknowledgment of God’s power and authority, as well as a warning against disobedience or sin.

So the word is used in different ways. We are not to fear the husband as we submit to him. We are to reverence him.

WHAT?! Like Sarah did when she called her husband ‘lord’?

Tissot, Abram counsels Sarai, c. 1896-1902. Source

Well…yes. As Peter instructed in 1 Peter 3:5-6, not to adorn themselves with outward treasures such as gold or braided hair, but inwardly with a pure conscience and respect toward the husband-

For in this way the holy women of former times, who hoped in God, also used to adorn themselves, being subject to their own husbands, just as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord; and you have proved to be her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear.

Again, the word respect has many nuances and different meanings when studied. In the Ephesians verse it means a proper fear wrapped in reverence. As Christ is the head of the church we fear Him in reverent awe and respect, and since the husband is the stand-in for Christ in the home, leading with a sacrificial love that would lay down his life for his family, wives are to respect that, and fear him in the sense that Matthew Henry explained above and also below- with a reverential fear of offending.

Wives should be subject to their husbands, not from dread and amazement, but from desire to do well, and please God. ~MHenry

Lexicon again-

Paul shifted from submits (vv 22, 24) to respects (phobeomai, which means “reverence,” “fear offending”), implying that submission is the showing of respect. When a husband and wife fulfill their biblical roles, their marriage will function the way God intended. Bond, J. B. (2010). The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Ephesians. The Grace New Testament Commentary.

Aren’t respect and submission the same thing?

Now it must be said that submitting to and respecting the husband are two different things. Of submission and respect, a wife can do one without the other. See Wendy Alsup here-

Surprisingly enough, I did not personally have that much of a problem with the concept of submitting to my husband. But respect was much harder. I could submit and still harbor anger and bitterness. I could still put out the vibe that says, “I am disappointed in your decision-making skills.” In fact, submission without respect let me live in a delusion of self-righteousness. “I am submitting, but I do not think you know what you are doing, and I am going to continue to let you know that I do not trust you with my attitude, even though, technically, I am submitting on this issue.” Submission does not equal respect. And submission without respect brings NO honor to God. Why would God command the combination of the two?” Alsup, W. H. (2010). By His wounds you are healed: How the message of Ephesians transforms a woman’s identity (pp. 133–134).

Wives, and I’ve been a wife before salvation, we know how to seemingly acquiesce but passively aggressively disrespect him, don’t we?

So, how do we respect our husbands?

Susan Heck in her lesson on What does a Spirit Filled Marriage look Like? (and there is also a similarly titled booklet at her web store you can buy) lists 6 ways we can respect the husband. In the video she explains them but I won’t steal her thunder here, I’ll just list them.

1.Respect your husband’s work. Show an interest in your husband’s work whatever he does,
2. Respect his speech,
3. Respect his privacy,
4. Respect his eats (don’t nag him about what he eats),
5. Respect his convictions -some of you I know have unbelieving husbands but you still can graciously listen and reason with him,
6. Respect his time.

For practical resources on respecting the husband I turned to the Puritans. This is from Ligonier’s TableTalk Magazine, How did the Puritans understand marriage?

The Puritan view of marital love was overwhelmingly positive because it was informed by the Bible, the written Word of the God who instituted marriage at the time of our creation and regulated it by His commandments. As Packer says, “They went to Genesis for its institution, to Ephesians for its full meaning, to Leviticus for its hygiene, to Proverbs for its management, to several New Testament books for its ethic, and to Esther, Ruth and the Song of Songs for illustrations and exhibitions of the ideal.” They let the practices, duties, and ethics of marriage flow out of Scripture.

Ultimately the love of both husband and wife must be guided and energized by the fear of the Lord, and scripture contains all we need to use as the model and guide for marital life.

Further Resources

Susan Heck: What does a Spirit Filled Marriage look Like? (in this 1-hour teaching, Susan focuses for a bit on respecting the husband)

Puritan Wives: Margaret Tyndal Winthrop and her extraordinary love letters
Posted in theology

Reader Q&A: Can Wolves in Christianity Truly Be Saved? (Part 2)

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

Yesterday I wrote about a Q&A I’d had from a reader and promised to post the other questions and answers today. Here is yesterday’s part 1- Decoding False Teachers: Types of Wolves in Christianity- Reader Questions & Answers part 1

I love when I receive questions. It encourages me because the queries show me that there are women out there who care about discernment, about Jesus, and about the purity of their walk with Him. That’s all discernment is: a process of training one’s self to have an ever more pure walk with Jesus. To learn who and what to go toward and who and what to stay away from in order to attain a more clear view of Him.

Here are the other two questions and my answers. I certainly do not have a monopoly on answers or final knowledge of the Bible. How would you have replied? What is your stance on some of these things?

Can a wolf be saved? Is there a hope for them in terms of genuine repentance, and saving faith?

I’ve often wondered this. Quite a bit, actually. Not knowing the answer and only surmising as to some notions as you’ll see below, I still do pray for the false teachers the Lord burdens my heart with.

Now, God CAN save anyone. He saved Saul the persecutor and turned him into the most productive evangelist and missionary in the history of the world. Jesus pronounced woes and invectives upon the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Scribes (so did John the Baptist). But Sadducee Joseph of Arimathea and Pharisee Nicodemus were more than likely genuine believers by the end.

However … my personal feeling of the actual false teachers, the ones embedded in Christianity and profess to love Jesus, is no, they will not be saved. Here are my reasons:

First- Jude 1:4 seems to indicate that at least some of these false teachers were deliberately raised up for God’s reasons, and were always marked for condemnation. After all, “There must be heresies among you so that those who are approved might be made manifest” (1 Corinthians 11:19). 2 Peter 2:1 seems to indicate the same. 1 Timothy 4:1-2 says these hypocrites have a seared conscience.

At some point, Jesus turns the rebels over to their sin. (Romans 1:21). Of course, we do not know the point if and when it occurs in various individuals.

Secondly, as to the seared conscience and also remembering Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, these false teachers, if they actually had the Holy Spirit in them, they would not persist in their evil teaching ways. The Holy Spirit always points us toward truth. It might take weeks, months, or in some rare cases a year or so, but someone cannot and does not persist for 40 years as a false teacher and then suddenly repent.

Romans 1:25 says they know God, but they exchanged the truth of God for falsehood, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

I’ve never seen a long-term, false professing Christian teacher repenting, and I’ve never heard of it. It is more likely that they are seared in conscience, hardened in heart, and being used by God as a judgment. Here is Paul Washer on false teachers. clip is 5 min, here is the beginning of it-

Washer transcript: “False teachers are God’s judgment on people who don’t want God, but in the name of religion plan on getting everything their carnal heart desires. That’s why a Joel Osteen is raised up. Those people who sit under him are not victims of him. He is the judgment of God upon them because they want exactly what he wants and it’s not God.”

God allows false teachers so that it may be manifest those who are true. There must be heresies among you so that those who are approved might be made manifest. (1 Corinthians 11:19).

Can a person truly be a wolf if they believe in and teach sound doctrine?

Let’s look at the word “believe”. The demons believed in Jesus. In fact in Mark it was demons who assigned to Jesus the highest praise name of all- the Holy One of God. Judas believed sound doctrine. The issue is, they did not submit to it. They are rebels. So we need to be careful using the term ‘believe in Jesus’.

Let’s look at the word “doctrine”: All false teachers mix truth with the false. They all twist doctrine in some way, some more skillfully and hidden and others more easily detected (Example, Beth Moore- skillfully twisting her doctrine to make it seem sound, Todd Bentley- false doctrine easily detected). So it depends on what is meant by ‘sound doctrine’. Also, new converts might believe Louie Giglio is sound or a Beth Moore but as they grow they realize their doctrine is not sound. So while soundness is soundness, our perception of it is a continuum.

No doubt, false teachers may be difficult to recognize in the moment. If we don’t have access to their personal lives, or their doctrinal compromises haven’t yet been manifest publicly in their behavior, we may find it difficult to know whether they are true. But time will tell. They will be known by their fruit — not the fruit of ministry quantity and numbers, but quality and endurance — and ultimately the quality of their own lives. ~Dave Mathis, The Surprising Truth about False Teachers

Rick Warren appeared to teach sound doctrine. So did David Platt. For a while. Billy Graham appeared to teach soundly for a long time but secretly held heretical beliefs. Ravi Zacharias appeared to teach sound doctrine, in fact was noted for it, but was living a grossly immoral secret life. Look at lifestyle as part of any assessment of a teacher of the Bible.

Apollos was a diligent student of scripture and knowledgeable, and he taught, but he did not have the full story of the new covenant, only John’s Baptism. Did his lack mean he was false? No, because his teachableness and humility when approached by Priscilla and Aquila were also indicators of his status as true teacher. He did not reject the fuller knowledge, in fact, he hastily absorbed it and went on in humility to become a noted true teacher of the Gospel.

Beth Moore knows the full story of the Bible but chooses NOT to teach it even when urged, reminded, alerted, and corrected. Romans 1:25 applies to her.

All in all, false teachers are bad. They should not be tolerated, even a little bit.

And in the Scripture they are never tolerated. They’re never tolerated as sort of partially right and needing to be helped along to the fullness of the truth, they are totally denounced, condemned to eternal damnation. ~John MacArthur, Portrait of False Teachers part 1

Conclusion

The best thing to do is to train in discernment and to:
–stay in the word frequently if not daily
–appeal to the Holy Spirit daily for help in interpreting it rightly
–pray for growth in discernment

The Lord will give these good gifts to His children, because they are aligned with HIS will.

Further Resources

Portrait of False Teachers part 1, MacArthur sermon

Lessons I’ve learned from False Teachers, Tim Challies, essay

How to Identify False Teachers if you Don’t Know the Truth, For the Gospel, Costi Hinn essay

False teachers, Just Thinking Podcast

Decoding False Teachers: Types of Wolves in Christianity- Reader Questions & Answers part 1 The End Time

Posted in theology

Decoding False Teachers: Types of Wolves in Christianity- Reader Questions & Answers

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

I love when I receive questions. It encourages me because the queries show me that there are women out there who care about discernment, about Jesus, and about the purity of their walk with Him. That’s all discernment is: a process of training one’s self to have an ever more pure walk with Jesus. To learn who and what to go toward and who and what to stay away from in order to attain a more clear view of Him.

The other day I received some questions and after mulling for a day or so, I answered. I certainly do not have a monopoly in answers or final knowledge of the Bible. How would you have replied? What is your stance on some of these things?

There were 4 questions. I’ll answer 2 today and 2 tomorrow.

Are wolves pastor-teachers only or can they be lay people within the congregation?

We read of wolves in Matthew 7:15, Acts 20:29-30, and Luke 10:3 where that term is used.

The word wolf is used in reference to and sometimes synonymously with the terms false prophets, false teachers, deceitful workers, deceitful spirits… The Bible seems to emphasize that such people frequently appear in leadership roles – likely because that is where they can do the most damage – but they do not appear exclusively in that role. Galatians 2:4 indicates that false brothers were brought in further, the reason they came in- to spy and to enslave-

Yet it was a concern because of the false brothers secretly brought in, who had sneaked in to spy on our freedom which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to enslave us. (Galatians 2:4).

Paul recounted that one of his many dangers was from from false brothers, 2 Corinthians 11:26.

Paul said in Acts 20:29-30 “Even from your own number, men will rise up and distort the truth to draw away disciples after them.”

Jude 1:4 notes, For certain men have crept in among you unnoticed—ungodly ones…

As to the term used “false brothers” – quoted from the Greek Lexicon, “The term “pseudadelphos” refers to someone who pretends to be a brother in faith but is not genuine. It is used to describe individuals who infiltrate Christian communities with ulterior motives, often causing division or spreading false teachings. The term highlights the danger of deceit within the church and the need for discernment among believers.”

So while the wolves who appear as pastors present false doctrine to lead astray, the false brothers cause division and lead astray. Wolves have various roles and can and do appear anywhere.

Every New Testament book except Philemon warns of false teachers who appear in some form or another.

Matthew 13 describes the parable of the weeds (tares). “and the weeds are the sons of the evil one”; Satan sows deceitful workers. ALL hypocrites and unbelievers in the church are the work of Satan, whether they are called a wolf or any of the other names noted above. Thus, a wolf can describe any person, not just a teacher, seeking to undermine Jesus’ teaching, and we know from 2 Peter 2:3 their main motivation is greed or personal gain.

Do wolves come in varying degrees of “badness”? Are there are certain wolves that are worse than others?

In Matthew 7:15, the Greek term “harpax” is used in the verse when speaking of ravenous in ‘ravenous wolves’.

Quoting the Lexicon, “It’s used in the New Testament to describe individuals who are greedy, grasping, or who take by force. It conveys the idea of someone who is not only eager to possess more than they have but is willing to do so through unjust or violent means. This word is often used to characterize those who exploit others for personal gain.”

In Acts 20:29 Paul used the term “savage wolves”. In the Greek Lexicon savage “is used to describe something that is heavy or burdensome, both in a literal and metaphorical sense. It can refer to physical weight or to something that is difficult to bear, such as a severe trial or a grievous situation. In the New Testament, it often conveys the idea of something oppressive or hard to endure.”

Wolves are bad, we know this. But then the Apostles specifically warned that the wolves who come in are especially bad. Through and through. There is no such thing as a gentle wolf, a kind wolf, or a baby wolf cub so cute we don’t need a warning about handling them. Even in Song of Solomon 2:15 we read that even little foxes can ruin vineyards. (Commentary here).

cub fox, AI. Cute, eh? They’ll ruin your vineyard!

Some false teachers expose all their badness earlier while other false teachers hide it longer, but while outside they are whitewashed, inside they are all tombs. Professing false brothers, hypocrites, wolves, false teachers- which are all synonyms- are an abomination to Jesus. They are all bad all the time, no matter how ‘good’ they appear. They produce evil and garbage.

If you were presented with three casseroles at a potluck; one perfectly cooked, one with a little fecal matter in it, or one totally full of fecal matter, which would you eat? ALL wolves are bad and are bad for you. Their character is all the same, no matter what version they appear in (teacher, helper, student, disciple, etc). They are arrogant, immoral, promote immorality, and are propelled by greed. We read this characterization in both 2 Peter and Jude.

Remember, they MASQUERADE as sincere, helpful, kind people. (2 Corinthians 11:13-15). The undiscerning sometimes can’t see through that, OR they have helped in the heaping up of these wolves and don’t wish to see how bad the false teachers really are. (2 Timothy 4:3).

For some people it is hard for them to reconcile the vivid descriptions of false teachers in the Bible to the smiling, toothy visage of a Joel Osteen, or the excited energy of a seemingly friendly Beth Moore, or the longevity of a Charismatic Benny Hinn, but indeed, inside they are ravenous wolves. Remember the term “masquerade”.

Cultural and Historical Background: In the Greco-Roman world, the concept of changing one’s form or appearance was not uncommon, often associated with theatrical performances or philosophical ideas about the nature of reality and perception. The New Testament usage of ‘disguise’ reflects a deeper spiritual reality, emphasizing the contrast between genuine transformation in Christ and superficial or deceptive changes.

masks.

We are always at risk. We are sheep. False teacher wolves have been hunting believing sheep for millennia. They know how to trick, deceive, disguise, and play the cunning helper. It’s why we need the strength, wisdom, and word of God to protect us. Discernment is important.

Posted in theology

Jesus’ Oracles: Woes on Cities

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

Recently I wrote about what oracles are. Oracles are mentioned in both the Old Testament and the New. These are divine communications from God to man, usually sought by man in answer to a specific question. Many Old Testament oracles involved political type queries to God from a King asking if he will win a battle, and the like.

Quite often in the discernment world, if I call out a false doctrine or a false teacher, replies pour in charging me with being mean, and I “should be more like Jesus.” These commenters do not seem to know or to remember that Jesus is God, and He is love, yes, but He is also wrath for sin.

In the New Testament, Jesus pronounced oracular woes. He pronounced doom for peoples, individuals, nations, kings. He also predicted doom for entire cities!

NYC.jpg
NYC as seeen from the East River. Photo by EPrata

Of those cities that reject Him, He said-

be sure of this: The kingdom of God is near. I tell you, it will be more bearable on that day for Sodom than for that town. (Luke 10:11b-12).

Jude wrote that the destruction of Sodom was for sin but also for an example to the ungodly. (Jude 1:7).

Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. (Luke 10:13).

In both verses, the Jude and the Luke verse, we read that the ‘mean Old Testament God’ destroyed cities but that the ‘nice New Testament Jesus’ will also destroy cities. They are the same God, in character and in holiness.

And the sense of the whole is, that though the iniquities of Sodom and Gomorrah were very great, and their punishment very exemplary; yet, as there will be degrees of torment in hell, the case of such a city, which has been favoured with the Gospel, and has despised and rejected it, will be much worse than the case of those cities, which were devoured by fire from heaven; and than that of the inhabitants of them in the future judgment, and to all eternity; See Gill on Matthew 10:15. Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Scoffers set a city aflame,
but the wise turn away wrath.
(Proverbs 29:8)

And what IS wisdom? Fear of the LORD. Nineveh was wise:

Then the people of Nineveh believed in God; and they called a fast and put on sackcloth from the greatest to the least of them. When the word reached the king of Nineveh, he arose from his throne, laid aside his robe from him, covered himself with sackcloth and sat on the ashes. He issued a proclamation and it said, “In Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles: Do not let man, beast, herd, or flock taste a thing. Do not let them eat or drink water. But both man and beast must be covered with sackcloth; and let men call on God earnestly that each may turn from his wicked way and from the violence which is in his hands. Who knows, God may turn and relent and withdraw His burning anger so that we will not perish.” (Jonah 3:5-9)

Bethsaida and Corazin were not wise, they were scoffers at the Gospel presented to them. Therefore, whole cities will come under judgment!

The oracles of Jesus are also interesting to me for the sake of the false notion that the OT God and the NT God are different. People often point to a meek and gentle Jesus speaking softly to the woman at the well about her adulteries, or mournfully but silently pitying the Rich Young Ruler who rejected Him because he wanted his own lands and wealth more than eternal life. But Jesus pronounced DOOM for entire cities, that means populations of thousands if not millions. The five Cities of the Plain were a connected, sprawling metropolis with enormous populations. When Sodom and Gomorrah were smote for their sin the doom also included the cities of Admah and Zeboiim. (Deuteronomy 29:23). Four of the Five Cities of the Plain gone. Zoar was also meant to be destroyed but Lot begged to take haven there so the angel relented.

Jesus came in humility the first time, as a servant offering the Gospel and warning about rejecting it. He will come in wrath the second time. He is Jesus, and He hates sin.

nyc1
NYC on 9/11/2001

Posted in theology

Exploring Divine Communication: What are Oracles?

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

Lately online the most disagreements among the women I engage with involve the fact that they believe God is speaking to them directly.

He isn’t.

But crickey, is this truth resisted. Friends, the canon is closed and all scripture as given is sufficient for our life and growth in sanctification. All moral guidance, spiritual guidance, and wisdom is in the Bible. For anything we need to know or do that isn’t in the Good Book, we just decide. Yes, decide. I’ll be writing an essay about deciding later this week.

For now, let’s see about oracles.

The Lexham Bible Dictionary defines oracle as

A divine message communicated through a human mediator to one or more human recipients. Wells, S. (2016). Oracle. In The Lexham Bible Dictionary.

And Balaam lifted up his eyes and saw Israel camping tribe by tribe. And the Spirit of God came upon him, and he took up his discourse and said, “The oracle of Balaam the son of Beor, the oracle of the man whose eye is opened.” (Numbers 24:2 ESV).

So how is an oracle different from a prophecy? Technically they both are divine messages delivered from God to man.

However, oracles were usually something that humans sought from God, instead of Him delivering a message to and through a Prophet, unprompted by human inquiry, as usually happened with prophecy. These oracles were specific, someone was seeking an answer to a specific question.

Photo by vasim kt on Unsplash

Many oracles were sought by kings and leaders for political purposes (“Will I win this battle?”) but the lay-people could ask God in an oracle too. (e.g. 1 Kings 22:1-7)

Some prophets or seers received compensation for oracles, like Balaam, but sadly the tendency was then to deliver favorable oracles so the money would keep flowing.

“Anyone who has read about ancient Greece and Rome has heard about the “oracles.” Two famous oracles were the oracles of Apollos at Delphi and Zeus at Dodona. The Greeks and Romans believed that the gods took a personal interest in their lives, so they would go to these places to seek advice from the gods about their lives. The gods were supposed to answer them through these oracles. But the oracles were often very difficult to interpret, even for the priests of the temples. The expression “oracle of God” shares some of the same denotations, with one major exception: it is the one and only God who speaks—and He does so clearly”. In Holman treasury of key Bible words.

Delphi: A Greek city and sanctuary famous throughout the Graeco-Roman period for its temple of Apollo, which housed the oracle of Apollo. Photo by Sergio García on Unsplash

Are there oracles in the New Testament? Yes, oracles are mentioned.

When we come back to the New Testament, we see that Christian teachers, functioning as prophets, also spoke the “oracles” of God. Peter said, “Whoever speaks, let him speak, as it were, the oracles of God” (1 Pet. 4:11 ESV). The author of Hebrews also used the word oracles to describe the words of God that had originally been communicated to the believers (Hebrews 5:12 ESV). Source: In Holman treasury of key Bible words

You might remember the Magic 8 Ball. It was a black ball made of hard plastic that a child could hold in two hands. It had a clear window at the top and you asked it a question, shook the ball, and waited until an icosahedron floated to the window with a message in it. The answers always disappointed me as a kid. “Try again later,” or “Maybe.”

Wikipedia says “Oracles were thought to be portals through which the gods spoke directly to people“. Frustratingly, when seekers arrived and asked the oracle a question, answers that came were often vague. So if you were frustrated as a kid receiving vague answers from the Magic 8 Ball, imagine the seekers at Delphi or Dodona!  Yet still, many thousands still came to seek answers from the ‘gods.’

“To look at it simply, a Magic 8 ball online is a fortune telling tool that has made its way into popular culture as a game or novelty item.” source https://magic-8ball.com/

“Preserved Assyrian oracles from Nineveh include the deity’s name, the recipient’s name, and the name and gender of the prophetic mediator. Most oracles are uttered on behalf of the goddess Ishtar.” The Lexham Bible Dictionary. Lexham Press.

Wow, the Assyrians were dedicated to their oracles, weren’t they! Well preserved, each and every one, to this day. Yet as Christianity took hold, the other ‘oracles’ fell silent.

In the New Testament, the Apostles sought God’s direction, of course. Earlier on, they might hear back in an audible voice or a tangible way (dream, vision, angel…). But as time went on the Apostles’ questions were answered through God using other people, such as Ananias to Saul/Paul, or when Cornelius (at an angel’s prompting) sent for Peter via his men.

In these days, Jesus said that He knows we need food and clothes and financial support. It pleases Him when we ask Him in trust and do not doubt. It pleases Him so much more when we ask for wisdom, discernment, the meaning of a passage, or a growth in sanctification, because tangible things are needed, but temporary. Our spiritual life is permanent. But do not expect a visible, audible reply back. His oracle is now the Bible, and everything in it is sufficient for us.

Of course, there is only one God. Only God knows the future, because He is the creator of the universe, the originator of time, and the architect of history. Seek answers from His word and trust that He hears your questions and concerns in prayer.

Posted in theology

Prata Potpourri: Staying ‘Resolute’, Easter planning, Forming Friendships in Christ, the Nicest Show on TV, Busy-ness; More

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

The Answers for Women conference at Ken Ham’s Ark Encounter concluded. I’ve seen the photos and videos of the fellowship among the leaders, and I was much encouraged. I see the crowd of hungry women who traveled far to attend in order to receive great teaching, and I’m encouraged.

I see the crowd and I wonder if Lori Alexander The Transformed Wife, who is against women ‘learning theology’ and against women ‘teaching theology’ and against women being out in the world, would see this many women being taught by other women and would say “They are all wrong and I am right” and “Ken Ham is wrong and I am right”. I muse on the deception of sin and the spiritual harm of pride.

Stay teachable, ladies.

Lori Alexander could have written this book…

Most false teachers like Lori quote scripture, but so did the devil – and to Jesus’ face no less. Sin is so deceptive. Lori could have written this book… Meanwhile I encourage you to go to Answers in Genesis TV when the video sessions are posted and view them. The topic was staying Resolute for Christ, and many sessions taught about discernment and false movements that destroy.

Virgil Walker wrote an essay titled Don’t Mistake Activity for Obedience: Why the Kingdom Isn’t Built on Busyness.

I remember years ago, a woman who was busy at church. She was busy-busy. She was on many committees, volunteered for everything, was there every time the doors opened (this was back when we had 2 Sunday services and Wednesday night prayer meeting). She was working full time and a married mom of two, but was so busy her second job seemed like it was church. She got tired, complaining, and burned out. She later separated from her husband, divorced for no biblical reason, resisted counseling, avoided church discipline, and was eventually excommunicated. Not that busy-ness necessarily leads to apostasy, but sometimes busy-ness covers for a lack of spiritual core that true repentance gives a person when they are saved. Read Virgil’s piece…

I listened to the first session of Susan Heck’s conference at Crossway Bible Church in Kansas. The topic was Forming Faithful Friendships in Christ. Her first session focused on what it means for US to be friends with Jesus, a great first session. Mrs. Heck laid a solid foundation. The sessions, all 4 plus a Q&A, are at the church’s website. It is listed on the Sermons page, which over time the Friendship sessions will get squashed down, so you may have to scroll a bit if you are reading this months from now.

Forming Faithful Friendships in Christ by Susan Heck.

Tim Challies wrote about “The most pleasant show on television”. If you’re wondering, it’s All Creatures Great and Small, the modern reboot. Usually when I see ‘modern reboot’ it means crassness, wokeness, sexual immorality, and other pollutions. Not this time. I saw the original show in the 1970s when it first came out and I think this reboot is even better. I agree with Challies, it’s just plain nice.

Challies concludes his essay saying, “I hope the show’s success helps the studios understand that if they keep out the raunch, hold back the politics, and simply tell good stories in a compelling way, they’ll have an audience eager to watch.”

The Most Pleasant Show on Television

Owen Strachan said the same thing a few months ago with his essay, The Enchanted Realism of “All Creatures Great and Small” : An Essay on Television’s Best Show.

A few short weeks ago I recommended the CBS show Elsbeth. But this week, I became very disappointed. I love the show and Carrie Preston’s skill at bringing the character to life. The episode ‘Tiny Town’ was so good! However, the latest episode featured lesbian kissing, a throuple, homosexual kissing. AND emphasis on ‘no judgment’. One person in a polyamory ‘marriage’ had been suspected of killing another in the threesome. The police captain said he could not get his head around the notion of a threesome in marriage. “I get all I need from my one love, Claudia. Maybe people would actually be happy if they focused on one person.” That was the comment he felt he needed to apologize for, since it was “insensitive” according to the show’s script.

Sad. I do JUDGE. Tekel: You, Elsbeth, have been weighed on the scales and found wanting.

Christian friends, there may be little on TV we care to consume, but there ARE a few here and there that allow for safe viewing and a pleasurable media experience. I hope All Creatures stays the course.

Mrs. Sharon Lareau at Chapter 3 Ministries has a good essay about Worry Less About Which Bible Reading Plan to Use and More About Which Bible, and she explains the Bible translations. Occasionally I see people on Twitter/X discussing their choice of translation, or a chat about their decision to change translations. I started with the NKJV because that was the Bible a friend gave me. Then I used the ESV for years, until I changed to the NASB. I use NASB and Legacy Standard Bible (LSB) interchangeably. My pastor preaches from the ESV.

The translation does matter and we should make an informed decision about which translation we read and study from. Sharon makes a recommendation and then explains the basis for her choice.

Post-Its and Bible study go together like Mac & cheese. EPrata photo

Marci Ferrell / Thankful Homemaker has some good resources ahead of Easter. She writes,

Easter is almost here, and as Christian women, we want to make sure our celebration is focused on Jesus.⁣ In today’s video, I’m sharing simple, heartfelt, and practical ways to plan a Christ-centered Easter at home—without feeling overwhelmed.⁣
⁣
Whether you have little ones, teens, or an all-adult household, I pray this episode encourages you to reflect on the beauty of the resurrection and gives you tools to point your family to Christ in meaningful ways.⁣
⁣
💌 Download My Free Christ-Focused Easter Planning Guide⁣
Includes meal prep timelines, Holy Week Scripture readings, discussion questions, and simple celebration ideas.⁣
⁣
📺 Watch Marci’s Easter video on YouTube

⁣It’s the weekend here as I write this. Green leaves are budding, birds are singing, and I have the next week off for Spring Break from school. Time to go outside and enjoy God’s green creation.

Posted in discernment, theology

The Importance of Spiritual Discernment for Believers

Posted on by elizabethprata

By Elizabeth Prata

Discernment is important.

Let me rephrase that.

Discernment is important.

Discernment is:

Discernment is the skill of understanding and applying God’s Word with the purpose of separating truth from error and right from wrong. ~Tim Challies

Charles Spurgeon drills down even further:

Discernment is not knowing the difference between right and wrong. It is knowing the difference between right and almost right.

Though ALL believers must train in discernment (Hebrews 5:14), some believers are given a heightened ability to discern by virtue of possessing a gift from the Spirit.

and to another the effecting of miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another the distinguishing of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, and to another the interpretation of tongues. (1 Corinthians 12:10, underline mine).

For spirit-gifted discerning believers AND all others, we must practice discernment in our walk. (1 John 4:1, Philippians 1:9-10, Romans 12:2). That means both identifying it AND acting on it. It’s non-negotiable.

Sheep, or Wolf? A Call to Discern
by Dr. Colin Eakin
Discernment: The Neglected Imperative

Where does God command believers to exercise spiritual discernment? Perhaps a better question is, where doesn’t He? The answer is Philemon. Of all the books in the New Testament, this letter of twenty-five verses is the only one in which there is no instruction for the believer to be on guard against falsehood. All remaining twenty-six books of the New Testament (and many of the Old Testament) exhort the believer, to a greater or lesser degree, to discern truth from falsehood and to act upon it.

Satan downplays the importance of discernment. How? He twists scriptures such as the ones under discussion today, two of the most abused scriptures in the Bible, plus one more-

Judge not, that ye be not judged. (Matthew 7:1)

And this one:

If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. (Matthew 18:15).

And this admonition based on nothing in the Bible but bandied about as if it was:

Be nice. Jesus ate with sinners, you know.

Sadly, when I write an essay discerning a false teacher, or speaking against a false doctrine, inevitably I receive a slew of comments from women who insist I perform one or the other of the verses above. This makes me sad, because I know from such comments these women are not operating at peak Christian condition. Their insistence that I employ one or both of these verses usually reveals two things about them:

— they hold to an errant understanding of the verses above
— they hypocritically have failed to follow their own advice and ‘come to me privately’, and to ‘judge not’.

Wise people treasure knowledge, but the babbling of a fool invites disaster. (Proverbs 10:14).

Here is my rebuttal to the commenters lobbing the most abused discernment verses:

Judge not, that ye be not judged. (Matthew 7:1).

‘Do not judge’ cannot mean ‘do not discern.’ There are calls to discern in every book of the New Testament except Philemon, and many of the Old. (1 John 4:1, Philippians 1:9-10, Hebrews 5:14, Romans 12:2, 1 Corinthians 2:14, 1 Kings 3:9, & etc.)

So, ‘Judge not’ can’t mean do not judge, because in John 7:24 we’re told to judge. Wisdom would suggest that rather than there being an inconsistency in the Bible, there is an inconsistency in our understanding.

So if Matthew 7:1 doesn’t mean not to discern and it doesn’t mean judge not, what does it actually mean? Well, first, read the verse in context. Here is Matthew 7:1-5,

Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. 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? 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? 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.

It means when we do have to judge something, as in test, discern, check, etc, do not do so hypocritically, harshly, or wrongly.

Resource here: GotQuestions- What does the Bible mean that we are not to judge others?

2. Have you gone to her privately?

In this one, commenters are referring to a section in Matthew 18, where the Bible outlines procedures for church discipline. Here is the passage:

If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. (Matthew 18:15-17 NASB)

This verse is about church discipline, when one member of a local body has sinned against another person in the local body. It is a local, internal procedure. It is not referring to our response to book reviews or other public statements false teachers have made in public.

Phil Johnson explained here, in a 2006 blog essay:

It would be a serious mistake to imagine that a private meeting is always a mandatory prerequisite before any Christian can legitimately express public criticism of another believer’s published work or public behavior. On the contrary, sometimes—especially when we’re dealing with a public and scandalous transgression—open rebuke may be warranted as a first response (cf. Galatians 2:11-14). Matthew 18:15-17 outlines instructions for dealing with private sins and personal offenses. These are not guidelines for dealing with false teaching or public behavior that might cloud the truth of the gospel or besmirch the reputation of the whole church.

Here is a link to a pdf “Editorial on Abusing Matthew 18” by Don Carson

Here is Tim Challies with an easy button version of Don Carson’s essay on Matthew 18 abuse.

3. Jesus ate with Sinners

Strangely, in a third most abused verse in the discernment world, many of them say ‘Be nice. Don’t condemn. Jesus ate with sinners.’ What they are referring to is Mark 2:16.

And the scribes of the Pharisees, when they saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors, said to his disciples, “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?”

If you think about it, you realize how massively ridiculous their statement that one should not cry out against false teachers or false doctrine is.

The only sinless person who ever lived was Jesus. Of COURSE He ate with sinners. He ate with sinners every time He ate. Jesus eating with sinners verse was about the Pharisees complaining that Jesus was eating with tax collectors and prostitutes whom the Pharisees believed were “sinners”, outcasts unworthy to be in polite society, while at the same time believing that they themselves were NOT sinners and thus worthy to grace Jesus with their presence.

Jesus ate with sinners, having compassion on them, because they were lost sheep. However, He never expected them to remain in their sin. He told the adulteress to ‘go and sin no more,’ for example. He also was very harsh with many other sinners. He whipped up a fury against the merchant greed-mongers in the temple. He called the Pharisees blind guides, fools, wicked, and greedy.

Of course we (forgiven) sinners will eat with (unforgiven) sinners because we are to be in the world. But if we see a friend involved in a false doctrine, do we eat their food but leave them with a poison in their soul? No.

Jesus, Friend of Sinners: But How?
By Kevin DeYoung

As precious as this truth is—that Jesus is a friend of sinners—it, like every other precious truth in the Bible, needs to be safeguarded against doctrinal and ethical error. It is all too easy, and amazingly common, for Christians (or non-Christians) to take the general truth that Jesus was a friend of sinners and twist it all out of biblical recognition.

Jesus was a friend of sinners not because he winked at sin, ignored sin, or enjoyed light-hearted revelry with those engaged in immorality. Jesus was a friend of sinners in that he came to save sinners and was very pleased to welcome sinners who were open to the gospel, sorry for their sins, and on their way to putting their faith in Him.

More:

Why is it significant that Jesus ate with sinners?

It’s the biggest problem.

People ask me this all the time, “What is the greatest need in the church today? What is the most compelling need? What do you see as the biggest problem in Christianity? The biggest problem in the church?

It’s simple for me to answer that. The biggest problem in the church today is the absence of discernment. It’s a lack of discernment. It’s the biggest problem with Christian people, they make bad choices. They accept the wrong thing. They accept the wrong theology. The are prone to the wrong teaching. They’re unwise in who they follow, what they listen to and what they read. ~John MacArthur, Principles for Discernment 2002.

You can enhance your discernment through constant training, (Hebrews 5:14), prayers for wisdom, (James 1:5) and staying in the word (Psalm 119:11). Then perhaps at some point you can help advise a sister and encourage her in her discernment walk. 🙂