The first chapter of the first book of the Bible, Genesis 1, tells the story of the creation of the heavens and the earth, culminating with the creation of the human race. Due to its content and its prominent place in the Scriptures, it is one of the best-known chapters in the Bible.
It is also one of the most controversial chapters, leading to the obvious question: Should Genesis 1 be interpreted literally?
If so, does it point to the earth being young, in existence less than 10,000 years? Or does it point to an old earth, perhaps many millions of years old? Is it in harmony with the findings of modern science? Or are these questions unrelated to the purpose of Genesis 1?
For those who have studied this chapter in depth, there are many questions that arise.
Should the opening verse be translated as a self-contained statement, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth”? Or should it be translated, “When God began to create the heavens and the earth,” serving as an opening clause for the verses that follow?
The next verses describe the earth as a shapeless mass, but we’re not told how the earth got into that condition. Did something cataclysmic take place between verses 1 and 2?
We’re also told the darkness covered the deep waters, but again, we’re not told where the darkness came from. How should this be explained?
Then, on the first day of creation, God calls forth light, yet the sun is not made until the fourth day. How can there be light without sun? Does this point to scientific ignorance on the part of the author? Or could it be Genesis 1 is not about science at all?
But are we asking the right questions? Could it be we are misunderstand the very purpose of Genesis 1?
Let’s first consider the question of the Bible and science.
Let’s say the Bible rightly taught that the earth rotated around the sun rather than the sun rotated around the earth. If that were the case, then everyone would have thought the Bible was wrong until Copernicus in the 15th century!
People would have said, “It’s clear the Bible is not the Word of God, since it wrongly teaches that the earth goes around the sun, whereas science tells us the sun goes around the earth.”
That is something we rarely think about when it come to Genesis 1. If it were here to teach us about science, then past generations would have rejected it as the Word of God because it was out of sync with the science of the day.
Does the Bible use observational language, speaking of the sun rising and sun setting? Yes it does. We use those expressions too.
But did the biblical writers believe the sun went around the earth and literally rose and set? Probably so, since they were people of their times, and when they talked about the sun rising and setting, they were describing what they saw.
But that was not the point of their message. The point was to teach us about God and how He wanted us to live. And that’s why we read the Bible to this day, not to learn whether the earth goes around the sun but to learn about the Lord.
Returning to Genesis 1, scholars have pointed out how carefully crafted the text is, containing an elaborate sequence of sevens, all of them framed in the seven-day creation story. For example, as noted by Catholic theologian Jeff Morrow (and summarized <a href="https://smile.amazon.com/Mis-interpreting-Genesis-Creation-Misunderstands-ebook/dp/B08R35P84H/ref=sr_1_1?crid=26Q9ADZZ9XIJ3&amp;keywords=ben+stanhope&amp;qid=1663641534&amp;sprefix=ben+stanhope%2Caps%2C90&amp;sr=8-1">here</a>), “Gen 1:1 contains seven words; 1:2 has fourteen words (2&#215;7), and ‘God’ occurs thirty-five times (5&#215;7) in the seven-day account. The term ‘earth’ occurs twenty-one times (3&#215;7); ‘heavens/firmament’ twenty-one times (3&#215;7); the phrase ‘and it was so’ appears seven times, as well as the phrase, ‘God saw it was good.’”
This is just the tip of the iceberg, reminding us that there is more going on here than just a scientific summary of creation. Instead, an important story is being told, described in a 7 day sequence.
And this brings us to the crux of the matter.
In the midst of endless debate about Genesis 1, what is the one message we all recognize? What can every reader tell you after reading the chapter? They can tell you that, according to Genesis 1, God created the universe. And that is the whole point of the chapter.
Contrary to all the other ancient accounts of creation, multiple gods were not involved, only one God, the eternal God who reigned supreme.
And what can we learn about this God through Genesis 1?
After all, the reason that people in the ancient world wrote their creation accounts was not to teach science as much as it was to speak about their gods. What can we learn about the one true God by reading Genesis 1?
We learn He has no rivals or equals. We learn He brings light out of darkness and order out of chaos. We learn that He speaks, and it is done. We learn that He puts the seeds of re-creation within His creation, with everything producing after its own kind. And we learn human beings are uniquely created in His image and likeness, with a unique responsibility on the earth.
In short, we learn He is a God of redemption, of order, of power, of authority, and of purpose. That is just some of the message of Genesis 1.
To be sure, there are scientists like <a href="https://smile.amazon.com/Genesis-Account-theological-historical-scientific/dp/1921643919/ref=sr_1_1?crid=32OX9ZZ97KTX1&amp;keywords=jonathan+sarfati&amp;qid=1663642411&amp;sprefix=jonathan+sarfati%2Caps%2C85&amp;sr=8-1">Jonathan Sarfati</a>, with a Ph.D. in chemistry, who are convinced Genesis supports a young earth, as well as scientists like <a href="https://smile.amazon.com/Why-Universe-Way-Hugh-Ross-ebook/dp/B00CFKX6H2/ref=sr_1_5?crid=9HWOERE330BV&amp;keywords=hugh+ross&amp;qid=1663642460&amp;sprefix=hugh+ross%2Caps%2C83&amp;sr=8-5">Hugh Ross</a>, with a Ph.D. in astronomy, who are convinced it supports an old earth. And there are other top scholars, like Oxford professor and mathematician <a href="https://smile.amazon.com/Seven-Days-That-Divide-World/dp/0310492173/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3B8Y0U9TABWFK&amp;keywords=lennox+seven+days&amp;qid=1663642318&amp;sprefix=lennox+seven+days%2Caps%2C91&amp;sr=8-1">John Lennox</a> or the late MIT nuclear physicist <a href="https://smile.amazon.com/Science-God-Convergence-Scientific-Biblical/dp/1439129584/ref=sr_1_2?crid=1JNOJOUS39FIS&amp;keywords=gerald+schroder&amp;qid=1663642342&amp;sprefix=gerald+schroder%2Caps%2C80&amp;sr=8-2">Gerald Schroder</a>, who believe Genesis 1, rightly understood, is in full harmony with science.
That is for the scientists to debate.
For me, as a biblical scholar trained in ancient Near Eastern languages, my focus is on why Genesis 1 is in the Bible. 
The answer is, it intends to teach us about the nature and character of God. And that it does, exceedingly well.
Dr. Michael Brown (<a href="http://www.askdrbrown.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.askdrbrown.org</a>) is the host of the nationally syndicated <a href="http://www.lineoffireradio.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Line of Fire</a> radio program. He holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and has served as a professor at a number of seminaries and is the author of 40 books. Connect with him on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/AskDrBrown" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Facebook</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/DrMichaelLBrown" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Twitter</a>, or <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbINn3x-intLp88Zrf8acpg" target="_blank" rel="noopener">YouTube</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Holy Bible on a Wooden Table Under Dusk Sun Light

‘In The Beginning’: The Real Purpose Of The First Chapter Of Genesis

Bible

Christianity

Readers Pass

Science

Theology

Is it true that shortly before his arrest in the Garden of Gethsemane Jesus told his disciples to buy swords? Was He warning them to be ready to defend themselves or preparing them for an armed assault against Rome? There may be another way to interpret this command found in Luke’s Gospel.
In the Gospel of Luke, Jesus <a href="https://www.bible.com/bible/59/LUK.22.ESV">reminded His disciples</a> that, in the past, when He sent them out on missions without any provisions, all their needs were supplied. “But now,” He said, “let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one.”
I believe Jesus was alluding to a well-known prophecy found in <a href="https://www.bible.com/bible/12/ISA.53.ASV">Isaiah 53</a>, which states that He, the Messiah, would be &#8220;numbered with the transgressors,&#8221; meaning counted among the criminals. Since it was illegal for a Jew to carry a sword under Roman rule, if Jesus was caught with sword-bearing disciples, the prophecy would be fulfilled.
In response, His disciples said, “Look, Lord, here are two swords.” He replied, “It is enough.”
What, exactly, did He mean?
First, there is nothing in the Bible forbidding self-defense, and, so, it could be argued here that Jesus was simply being practical. Dark days were ahead, and things were going to become increasingly difficult. Best to have some protection!
The problem with this interpretation in this specific context is that it’s contrary to everything else Jesus has been saying. He’s been telling His disciples that they will suffer for their faith. He has repeated to them that they will be treated just as He was treated. He has even told some of them that they will die as He did. Why, then, would they need swords?
Not only so, but in the Book of Acts, which records what happened in the decades following the Lord’s death and resurrection, the disciples are documented as having suffered intense persecution. They were arrested. They were whipped. Some were beheaded. They had to flee to other locations. Nowhere, though, does it say that they took up swords against their persecutors. Nowhere did they form militias to fight back.
Again, this does not address the general question of self-defense, such as fighting off a kidnapper who attempts to take your child. As stated, this is not prohibited in the Bible, and a good parent would be expected to fight off that attacker. (For the real meaning of “turn the other cheek,” see <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-real-meaning-of-turn-the-other-cheek">here</a>.)
But that is far different from taking up swords against our persecutors. In fact, in this very chapter, when Peter fought back against the soldiers who came to arrest Jesus, using his sword to cut off a man’s ear, Jesus rebuked him strongly, <a href="https://www.bible.com/bible/59/LUK.22.ESV">saying</a>, “No more of this!”
Obviously, Jesus did not tell His disciples to prepare swords, only to rebuke Peter for using the sword.
As for the idea that Jesus was preparing His followers for an armed revolt against Rome, that notion is completely contrary to everything the Gospels say &#8211; and the exact opposite of His mission. He came to die for our sins, not to lead a bloody revolt, and He made abundantly clear that, if desired, He could ask His Father to send <a href="https://www.bible.com/bible/59/mat.26.53">thousands of angels</a> to fight for Him at that very moment &#8211; but that was not His intent.
And does anyone imagine Jesus thought 11 men with two swords could start a rebellion against the armies of Rome? Is this what He meant when He said two swords were “enough”? The very idea is laughable.
What, then, was going on here? The Message Bible paraphrase <a href="https://www.bible.com/bible/97/LUK.22.MSG">captures</a> the probable meaning, namely, that the Lord was making an ironic point. In other words, since the Scriptures prophesied He would be numbered with criminals, they had better look the part. 
“Pawn your coat and get a sword,” He said to them, “What was written in Scripture, ‘He was lumped in with the criminals,’ gets its final meaning in me. Everything written about me is now coming to a conclusion.”
But they failed to grasp His irony, replying, “Look, Master, two swords!”
He answered, “Enough of that; no more sword talk!”
They took Him literally, thinking He was giving them practical advice, as if to say, “Boys, the old way of living by faith will no longer work. You better get some weaponry!”
When He saw how they responded, He said, “That is enough,” meaning, “Enough talking about swords. You’re missing my point.”
The other way of reading the text is that He was saying, “Since I’m going to be counted among the criminals, if you have two swords on hand, that’s enough. This will make us look like the bad guys, the sinners.”
What is clear is that He didn’t mean, “Two swords are enough to keep you safe in the future.”
And it is beyond ludicrous to think He was saying, “Perfect! Two swords will suffice to launch a revolt against Rome.”
Though, He was saying either, “Enough! You don’t get it. I’m not literally talking about buying swords,” or, “Two swords in your possession are enough to fulfill the prophecy in Isaiah that I will be numbered among the criminals.”
What seems clear is that you can’t use this portion of Scripture to argue for armed security guards in your church. It might be a great idea, even a fine Christian idea, but it is not supported by the Lord’s words in Luke.
Dr. Michael Brown (<a href="http://www.askdrbrown.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.askdrbrown.org</a>) is the host of the nationally syndicated <a href="http://www.lineoffireradio.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Line of Fire</a> radio program. He holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and has served as a professor at a number of seminaries and is the author of 40 books. Connect with him on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/AskDrBrown" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Facebook</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/DrMichaelLBrown" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Twitter</a>, or <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbINn3x-intLp88Zrf8acpg" target="_blank" rel="noopener">YouTube</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Old Bible With Sword

Did Jesus Really Tell His Disciples To Take Up Swords?

Jesus Christ

American evangelicalism experienced a seismic shift toward theological and social progressivism over the past two years.
As revealed by Ligonier Ministries and LifeWay Research’s most recent <a href="https://thestateoftheology.com/">State of Theology Survey</a> — a biennial poll that tracks the beliefs of professing evangelicals and the overall adult population — the winds of the social justice movement appeared to sweep through the pews equally as strongly as the culture at large.
&#8220;The frightening results only reveal the fact that many who claim to be evangelical in America are not, indeed, truly evangelical,” G3 Ministries Executive Vice President Scott Aniol told The Daily Wire. “At the very least, this should cause us to think twice when we read statements in the media about what &#8216;evangelicals&#8217; do or believe, and above all, the results should motivate pastors to be sure to faithfully teach their people core biblical doctrine.&#8221;
Two years ago, for instance, only 22% of evangelicals agreed that “gender identity is a matter of choice” — a figure that has since increased to 37%. Only 11% affirmed that “the Bible’s condemnation of homosexual behavior doesn’t apply today” — a figure that has risen to 28%.
The results correspond with a rising tolerance of homosexuality and transgenderism in the broader American culture. Toward the beginning of 2021, a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/majority-of-gop-voters-support-same-sex-marriage-for-the-first-time-poll">majority of Republican voters</a> for the first time indicated that they support same-sex marriage. As officials consider the Respect for Marriage Act, a bill that would codify homosexual marriage into federal law, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/gop-establishment-leaders-call-on-senate-to-enshrine-same-sex-marriage">several high-profile Republicans</a> publicly endorsed the legislation.
For a handful of issues, however, evangelicals became more conservative. 
The share of evangelicals affirming the statement “sex outside of marriage is a sin” increased from 90% to 94%. On the sanctity of life — “abortion is a sin” — evangelical support also rose from 88% to 91%. “While the reasons for this positive trend are unknown, it is encouraging to see more evangelicals affirming the personhood of human beings in the womb,” Ligonier remarked.
Cultural battle over wokeness <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/how-the-battle-over-wokeness-has-infiltrated-the-church">cascaded into evangelicalism</a> after the death of George Floyd and the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement. 
Many pastors and high-profile evangelicals spoke in favor of critical race theory and posited that the United States is systemically racist, requiring patently unbiblical responses such as <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/warnock-america-must-repent-for-its-worship-of-whiteness">repenting of whiteness</a>. As Ibram X. Kendi and Robin DiAngelo became household names, evangelical volumes such as “Woke Church” by Eric Mason and “How to Fight Racism” by Jemar Tisby began circulating in many church circles.
Perhaps most concerning of all is an apparent rise in postmodern tendencies among evangelicals; agreement with the notion that “religious belief is a matter of personal opinion” rather than “objective truth” soared from 23% to 38%.
Professing evangelicals likewise folded on historic Christian teaching with respect to matters of doctrine. Two years ago, 15% said that “the Bible, like all sacred writings, contains helpful accounts of ancient myths but is not literally true” — a figure that increased to 26% in the most recent survey. “A rising disbelief in the Bible’s literal truth may help us understand why American evangelicals also increasingly believe that religious faith is a subjective experience rather than an objective reality,” Ligonier continued.
Rather than affirming that salvation is available through Jesus Christ alone, the share of evangelicals claiming that “God accepts the worship of all religions, including Christianity, Judaism, and Islam” rose from 42% to 56%. Meanwhile, the proportion of evangelicals agreeing that “Jesus was a great teacher, but he was not God” rose from 30% to 43%.
The <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/how-the-federal-government-used-evangelical-leaders-to-spread-covid-propaganda-to-churches">closure of churches</a> as a result of government lockdowns is a possible explanation for declining affirmation of orthodox Christianity — especially since many former attendees stayed at home on Sunday mornings even after the lockdowns ended. For the first time in American history, church membership <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/341963/church-membership-falls-below-majority-first-time.aspx">fell below half of the population</a> in 2020 — an overall decline of nearly 30% since the end of World War II.
Although evangelicals in the United States have <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/more-dangerous-than-the-crude-tyrannies-of-the-past-a-profound-theologians-prophetic-warnings-about-government-education">long faced the temptation</a> to prioritize social activism and capitulate to theological liberalism, the turmoil of the past two years appears to have accelerated such a shift — and manifested that the sons of the present age are alive and well within the four walls of the church.
“These results convey the ongoing need for the church to be engaged in apologetics, helping unbelievers by providing a well-reasoned defense of the Christian faith, and helping believers by strengthening their clarity and conviction regarding why they believe what they do,” Ligonier concluded. “The need is great, but the power and promises of God can equip the church to bring truth and light to a deceived and dark world.”

The Del Ray Baptist church in the aftermath of the SCOTUS Roe draft leak, on May 08 in Alexandria, VA.

From The Inspiration Of Scripture To Gender Identity, Evangelicalism Sees A Massive Leftward Shift

Church

Evangelicals

Leftism

Pastor

Southern Baptists

As followers of Jesus, should we emulate His example of rebuking our adversaries in the strongest of terms? Should we call them a “brood of vipers?” Should we pronounce them “children of hell,” as Jesus did?
I recently <a href="https://twitter.com/DrMichaelLBrown/status/1566843112554725378">tweeted</a>, “I have a radical proposal to make: In the midst of our profound differences, within America on many fronts, and worldwide, based on our different religions and ideologies, can we at least seek to maintain a spirit of decency in our interactions? Is this too much to ask?”
Then, as a discussion around this tweet unfolded, I <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=col+4%3A6&amp;version=NIV">added</a>, “For followers of Jesus, here&#8217;s a divine mandate: ‘Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person.’
But not everyone agreed. Some pointed to the strong, piercing words of Jesus, especially in <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matt+23&amp;version=NIV">Matthew 23</a>. In that verse, He pronounced 7 woes on certain religious leaders, calling them hypocrites, “blind guides,” “blind fools,” “whitewashed tombs,” “snakes,” and a “brood of vipers.” He certainly pulled no punches!
Does this give us the right, then, to rebuke others in the same way?
After all, didn’t Jesus set an example for us in all that He did? Why just follow the Jesus who prayed for forgiveness for His enemies while hanging on the cross? Why not follow the angry Jesus too?
The simple answer is that we are not Jesus. We are not the perfect, sinless Son of God, who only spoke by the Spirit. We are imperfect and sinful and often speak by the flesh. There is a huge contrast between Him and us, to put it mildly.
Jesus spoke out of love. He genuinely cared for the people He was rebuking. 
We often speak out of frustration, anger, and even hatred, sometimes loathing those whom we blast with our words.
In contrast, Jesus loved these leaders so much that, in the end, He died for them, shedding the same blood for them on the cross that He shed for Peter and John and for you and for me. Would we do that for our enemies? Would we sacrifice ourselves so they could live?
Jesus also rebuked these men because He wanted to help them. He wanted to wake them up. He told them of coming judgment so that they would repent. 
We often rebuke others because we are lashing out. You offended me so I’m going to mock you. You insulted me so I’m going to lambast you. I think your ideas are asinine, so I’m going to ridicule you, exposing you to the full range of my vitriol.
This is the opposite of who Jesus was and why He did what He did.
In the book of John, the Lord also <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john+5%3A19&amp;version=NIV">said</a> that He could only do what He saw His Father doing. He always followed the heavenly pattern. He even <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john+7%3A16&amp;version=NIV">said</a> that the words He spoke were the <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john+14%3A24&amp;version=NIV">words</a> the Father gave Him.
So, when Jesus spoke His searing words of rebuke, He did so as a prophet,  a messenger, a divine spokesman rather than as an agitated, angry, social media commentator.
Could we say the same things about our volatile posts or our verbal outbursts? Could we really claim divine inspiration? Would we be so arrogant?
Interestingly, it is in the context of loving our neighbor that we are called to speak the truth and rebuke. As it is <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=lev+19%3A17-18&amp;version=NIV">written</a> in Leviticus, “Do not hate a fellow Israelite in your heart. Rebuke your neighbor frankly so you will not share in their guilt. Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD.”
If we see our neighbor doing something that is wrong and harmful and we fail to call them to account, then we share in their guilt. Love compels us to speak.
Proverbs also speaks of the positive value of rebuke, <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=prov+28%3A23&amp;version=NIV">stating</a>, “Whoever rebukes a person will in the end gain favor rather than one who has a flattering tongue.”
Jesus instructed His disciples to issue rebukes as well, <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke+17&amp;version=NIV">saying</a>, “If your brother or sister sins against you, rebuke them; and if they repent, forgive them. Even if they sin against you seven times in a day and seven times come back to you saying ‘I repent,’ you must forgive them.”
And Paul <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+tim+4%3A2&amp;version=NIV">urged</a> his spiritual son Timothy to, “Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage — with great patience and careful instruction.”
But in all this, we are to be motivated by love. Our goal is to help those whom we rebuke, not hurt them. As Thomas Sowell brilliantly said, “When you want to help people, you tell them the truth. When you want to help yourself, you tell them what they want to hear.”
So, we do not speak out of personal frustration. We do not retaliate. And at all times, we are under control – meaning, self-disciplined and under the Spirit’s <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gal+5%3A22-24&amp;version=NIV">control</a>.
We can be strong without being harsh, direct without being insulting, clear without being demeaning.
So, rather than trying to justify our carnal anger or agitation, letting fly a litany of choice words, how about we seek to love people the way Jesus did? Then, when we speak, with maturity and self-control, it will be for their good, even if our words are strong and direct.
As Paul <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=eph+4%3A29&amp;version=NIV">wrote</a>, “Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.”
If we all put our words through that filter, the world would be a much better place.
Dr. Michael Brown (<a href="http://www.askdrbrown.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.askdrbrown.org</a>) is the host of the nationally syndicated <a href="http://www.lineoffireradio.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Line of Fire</a> radio program. He holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and has served as a professor at a number of seminaries and is the author of 40 books. Connect with him on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/AskDrBrown" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Facebook</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/DrMichaelLBrown" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Twitter</a>, or <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbINn3x-intLp88Zrf8acpg" target="_blank" rel="noopener">YouTube</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Open Holy Bible on Altar inside illuminated church

‘Brood Of Vipers’: Let’s Not Equate The Sharp Words Of Jesus With Today’s Angry Rants

Does the practice of tithing, instituted in the Torah for ancient Israel, still apply to Christians today? Is it a divine command from God for this hour, that you are “required to give 10% of your income to the Church? Should it be discarded as vestige from the past?
It is true that tithing is mentioned twice in the book of Genesis centuries before the Torah was given to Israel (see Genesis <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen+14%3A17-20&amp;version=NIV" target="_blank" rel="noopener">14</a> and <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen+28%3A20-22&amp;version=NIV" target="_blank" rel="noopener">28</a>). But the practice is not prescribed there, only described.
Within the Torah itself, there was more than one tithe required, as reflected in <a href="https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/4266406/jewish/Maaser-Tithing-in-Torah-and-Jewish-Law.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">later Jewish law</a>, meaning that an ancient Israelite would be expected to give more than one-tenth of his income to support the Levites (the ministers of that day) and to care for the poor.
That’s why God challenged Israel in the book of <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=malachi+3%3A6-12&amp;version=NIV" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Malachi </a> to bring the full tithe into His storehouse so the nation would be blessed. To withhold it would be to steal from God and come under His curse.
The Old Testament also taught the principle of giving to God from the <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=prov+3%3A9-10&amp;version=NIV">first and the best of one’s produce</a>, thereby giving Him honor and demonstrating faith. The Old Testament also contrasted generosity with stinginess, commending the former and critiquing the latter.
But what about the New Testament? Are Christians also under the law of tithing?
As much as I believe in the practice of tithing (and beyond), I do not believe that Christians are “under the law of tithing,” meaning, required by God to give one-tenth of their income to His work. And I certainly don’t believe that they will be cursed by God if they fail to tithe.
It is true that Jesus encouraged the Jewish religious leaders of His day <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matt+23%3A23&amp;version=NIV" target="_blank" rel="noopener">to continue to tithe</a> in the most scrupulous way while not neglecting the more important issues of justice and mercy and faithfulness. And any local church can say, “If you would like to be a member of our congregation, we expect you to tithe.” But that would be their own requirement for official membership as opposed to a divine requirement.
This does not mean that all Christians are obligated by the Law to tithe. No verse that I find in the New Testament makes any such claim. 
That being said, in many ways, the New Testament calls us to an even higher ethic, to greater faith, and to extravagant generosity beyond tithing.
First, Jesus <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke+6%3A38&amp;version=NIV" target="_blank" rel="noopener">taught</a> that as we gave to others, it would be given to us, both in natural and spiritual terms. This strongly encourages a spirit of generosity. He also <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mark+10%3A28-31&amp;version=NIV" target="_blank" rel="noopener">taught</a> that those who left everything to follow Him would inherit eternal life in the world to come, and would be rewarded many times over in this world – along with suffering persecution. 
Second, on two occasions in the book of Acts, many believers sold their possessions to help those in need, going way beyond what the law required. (See Acts <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts+2%3A44-45&amp;version=NIV">2</a> and <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts+4%3A32-37&amp;version=NIV">4</a>.)
Third, Paul laid out a number of important principles when it came to giving.
In <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+cor+9%3A1-14&amp;version=NIV" target="_blank" rel="noopener">1 Corinthians 9</a>, Paul explained that those who preached the gospel should make their living by the gospel, meaning that vocational ministers should be supported by those they ministered to. This would require consistent and systematic giving.
In <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+cor+16%3A1-4&amp;version=NIV" target="_blank" rel="noopener">1 Corinthians 16</a>, he instructed the believers to put aside money for a special offering at the beginning of every week. This points to the principle of giving to God first before money is spent on other things. It also points to the principle of systematic, regular giving.
Then, in <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Corinthians+8%3A2+&amp;version=NIV" target="_blank" rel="noopener">2 Corinthians 8</a>, he pointed to the example of the believers in Macedonia who out of “their extreme poverty have overflowed in a wealth of generosity,” urging the believers in Corinth to follow their example. For the record, Paul was not requesting funds for himself. He was collecting funds to help the poor believers in Jerusalem.
In the <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Corinthians+8%3A13-15&amp;version=NIV" target="_blank" rel="noopener">same chapter</a>, Paul taught the principle of proportional giving. Those who had much should give more; those who had less could give less. As he wrote, “Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality.”
When it came to rich Christians, Paul didn’t lay a guilt trip on them. But he did <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+tim+6%3A17-18&amp;version=NIV" target="_blank" rel="noopener">command</a> them “not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain,” And he urged them “to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share.”
As for the example we were to follow, Paul <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+cor+8%3A9&amp;version=NIV" target="_blank" rel="noopener">pointed</a> to Jesus, who “though he was rich, yet for our sake became poor, so that we through His poverty might become rich.” To be clear, Paul was saying that we have been enriched spiritually by the Lord’s sacrificial love, not that we will all become millionaires because He died for us.
Paul also had this <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Corinthians%209:10-12&amp;version=NIV" target="_blank" rel="noopener">word of encouragement</a> for the Corinthian believers in expectation of their sacrificial generosity: “You will be enriched in every way so that you can be generous on every occasion, and through us your generosity will result in thanksgiving to God.”
To sum it up, the New Testament teaches systematic, proportional, generous, and faith-filled giving, and first-fruits giving (meaning, giving to God first). This brings us well beyond the tithe, not under legal compulsion but under the spirit of grace.
Our giving should support those who minister the gospel to us and care for our souls, provide for those in need and help bring the gospel to the unreached.
It is a sacred privilege to give, and as we do, we store up treasure in heaven.
Dr. Michael Brown (<a href="http://www.askdrbrown.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.askdrbrown.org</a>) is the host of the nationally syndicated <a href="http://www.lineoffireradio.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Line of Fire</a> radio program. He holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and has served as a professor at a number of seminaries and is the author of 40 books. Connect with him on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/AskDrBrown" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Facebook</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/DrMichaelLBrown" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Twitter</a>, or <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbINn3x-intLp88Zrf8acpg" target="_blank" rel="noopener">YouTube</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

USA, New Jersey, View of Bible and cross

What The Bible Really Says About Tithing

Charity

Deputies in an <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/arizona">Arizona</a> county were flagged down in the middle of the night last week by a man who confessed to murdering his stepfather.
According to the <a class="editor-rtfLink" href="https://www.facebook.com/CochiseSO/posts/pfbid02xJd6vpGGkB2btCSduAC8iGXTCK1LPm2nNDBpeaqXkczxNuSdm1xQ7VRHapHQ4L7El" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Cochise County Sheriff&#8217;s Department</a>, deputies charged Jay Albert Stevens, 52, with first-degree murder and booked him into the Cochise County Jail after allegedly murdering a 61-year-old man at approximately 1:00 a.m. on Thursday.
Authorities initially reported that Stevens &#8220;indicated that he did not have the address of where the incident occurred, but he was able to lead Deputies to a residence,&#8221; where they found a man deceased.
My Herald/Review Media later <a class="editor-rtfLink" href="https://www.myheraldreview.com/news/cochise_county/mcneal-man-says-he-killed-stepfather-over-bible-dispute-other-issues/article_54f1bb5c-3078-11ed-a8a5-6f40446b50ed.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reported</a> that Stevens eventually told sheriff&#8217;s investigators he shot his stepfather in the chest twice with a .40 caliber handgun because the victim accused him of never reading the Bible, among other reasons.
&#8220;I was gonna bury him, but I&#8217;m too lazy to dig a hole that big,&#8221; Stevens told authorities, adding he thought about chaining his stepfather&#8217;s body to his truck where he would &#8220;drag him out into the desert.&#8221;
Instead, however, authorities discovered the dead man&#8217;s body between the house and the garage.
According to the investigator&#8217;s report observed by local media, Stevens moved to Arizona approximately four years ago to care for his ailing mother. He claimed no one in the family &#8220;liked his stepfather,&#8221; adding he was an alcoholic who &#8220;brainwashed&#8221; Steven&#8217;s mother into becoming one, too.
&#8220;This has been building in me for a long time,&#8221; Stevens said. &#8220;What I did today was just probably 20 years of (expletive).&#8221;
Before killing his stepfather, Stevens told investigators that the two had spent most of the day drinking beer until they began discussing the Bible in the garage. The situation escalated when his stepfather said he did not understand the book because he didn&#8217;t read it enough.
Stevens then went into his bedroom and &#8220;stewed&#8221; over the argument for several hours until he built up the &#8220;gumption&#8221; to grab a gun and confront his stepfather in the living room.
The report reads Stevens walked up to the man, pointed the gun &#8220;right up to his face,&#8221; and told him to &#8220;(expletive) off.&#8221;
Stevens fired the first round into his stepfather&#8217;s chest.
When he realized his stepfather was still alive, he fired another round in his chest and then began to repeatedly punch the victim in the face out of &#8220;anger and rage.&#8221;
At that point, Stevens removed his stepfather&#8217;s &#8220;bloody (expletive) out of the house,&#8221; took his dogs to his sister&#8217;s house nearby, admitted to shooting their mother&#8217;s husband, and told her to call the sheriff&#8217;s office.
He left her house and began walking on a local avenue until spotting authorities to confess his crime.
Stevens is being held at the county jail on a $1 million bond.

Cochise County Sheriff’s Office – Mark J. Dannels Sheriff

Arizona Man Confesses He Killed Stepfather Over Bible Dispute: Report

Arizona

Murder

My previous article on pot, “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/what-the-bible-really-says-about-cannabis">What the Bible Really Says About Cannabis</a>,” sparked quite an online discussion. The article itself focused on one question: Did Torah law prescribe the burning of cannabis incense in Tabernacle/Temple? The answer was simple and straightforward: Absolutely not.
Some, however, were not convinced, claiming I did not properly understand the Hebrew words in question. Others pointed to Genesis 1:29, where God gave every plant to the human race. 
Still others discussed the pros and cons of legalizing pot, something that was not under discussion in this article, although it was the topic of an earlier article on <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/joint-session-questioning-the-senates-debate-on-the-decriminalization-of-marijuana">The Daily Wire</a>.
So, in light of the lively discussion surrounding the Bible and cannabis, I offer this third article on the subject.
But I do not write this to pass judgment on others or to play God in their lives. I simply offer an examination of the relevant biblical texts and then explain how, in my view, they relate to cannabis use today.
Let’s start with Genesis 1:29, where <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=gen+1%3A29&amp;version=NIV">God said to Adam</a> (representing the human race): “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food.”
The first human beings, then, were not meat eaters but rather vegetable and fruit eaters. Every seed-bearing plant was theirs to eat – not to smoke.
This doesn’t mean that it was forbidden to smoke these plants. It simply means that this verse is totally irrelevant to our discussion, since it speaks only of eating these plants, not smoking them.
Or do we really think that the Creator said to His creation, “All these plants are yours to eat. You will find them nourishing and healthy. And be sure to try smoking some of them. You will feel groovy!”
Let’s also remember that Genesis 1 speaks of a pristine time on the planet, a time before human sin had entered the world and the earth had been cursed. Since then, we have had poisonous plants to deal with, some of them deadly, which means that not every plant is good for us today.
This doesn’t mean that the Bible prohibits pot. It simply means that Genesis 1:29 cannot be used to support the use of pot, since all plants at the creation were healthy and all of them were given for food, not for getting high.
As for the Hebrew words qaneh-bosem, meaning “fragrant reed” and discussed in the previous article, we should remember that no Semitic scholar in the world is on record as endorsing it with any etymological association to the word cannabis, and no scholarly Hebrew dictionary in the world supports such an association. (The scholar who proposed this etymology decades ago was an anthropologist, not a Semitist.)
Not only so, but the Greek language already had the word kannabis, hemp, hundreds of years before the time of Jesus, yet when the Greek Jewish scholars translated the Torah into Greek in the third century BC (called the Septuagint), they did not render qaneh-bosem with kannabis. Instead, they translated it with “sweet smelling calamus.”
Had the words qaneh-bosem, which, again, simply meant a fragrant reed, actually meant cannabis, then the Septuagint translators would have translated with kannabis, hemp. But that is not what qaneh-bosem means, which is why they rendered it with “sweet smelling calamus.”
Finally, note that in Exodus 30:23, where qaneh-bosem is found, the Heb. word qinnaman is also found. It is the word from which we get “cinnamon.” But as you can see, the Hebrew word qinnaman has two n’s, as does the English cinnamon.
In contrast, the Hebrew word qaneh has only one n, whereas Greek kannabis and English cannabis have two n’s. That’s because qaneh, reed, has nothing to do with cannabis. (There are other phonetic inconsistencies I could cite between qaneh-bosem and cannabis, but enough has been said.)
That’s why, to my knowledge, no respected Bible translation in any language in history has associated qaneh-bosem with pot. This is simply a one-off suggestion by an anthropologist which has now become an internet myth. (For the totally separate claim that traces of pot were found on an ancient Israelite altar, which also permeates the internet, though unrelated to the subject of qaneh-bosem, see <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/.premium-ancient-israelites-used-cannabis-as-temple-offering-study-finds-1.8871347">here</a>.)
But if the Bible doesn’t have anything positive to say about hemp, does it have anything negative to say?
The subject of this article is not prescribed medical marijuana, which falls into a separate category. My focus here is on recreational pot smoking. What does Scripture have to say?
Again, I’m not here to pronounce judgment on others or to impose my personal convictions. God is our judge, and we give account to Him. And we can probably all agree that there are more pressing issues today than the question of marijuana use.
That being said, having smoked pot and used other drugs <a href="https://askdrbrown.org/personal-testimony/">from 1969-1971</a>, I gave them up entirely when I came to faith.
This was not just because they were illegal and an expression of my rebellion as a teenager. I also understood that drug use was unscriptural.
After all, how can we follow the biblical admonitions to be sober, vigilant and clear headed while getting high? That’s why the priests were not allowed to drink alcohol when serving in the Tabernacle/Temple. Sobriety and reverence go hand in hand.
Again, I’m not judging others here, nor am I pretending to be holier than thou. I’m just explaining, in short, why I live as I do, based on the Bible.
On a purely pragmatic level, I’m also concerned that pot can still serve as the gateway to other, more destructive drugs. 
But that is another conversation for another day.
Dr. Michael Brown (<a href="http://www.askdrbrown.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.askdrbrown.org</a>) is the host of the nationally syndicated <a href="http://www.lineoffireradio.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Line of Fire</a> radio program. He holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and has served as a professor at a number of seminaries and is the author of 40 books. Connect with him on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/AskDrBrown" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Facebook</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/DrMichaelLBrown" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Twitter</a>, or <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbINn3x-intLp88Zrf8acpg" target="_blank" rel="noopener">YouTube</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

a dried cannabis leaf sitting on an old book

The Bible, Cannabis, And You

Marijuana

The differences between the contemporary American gospel and the biblical gospel are vast, deep, and profound. They represent the distance between heaven and hell and are as stark as the differences between life and death.
The biblical gospel starts with God.
The American gospel starts with me.
The biblical gospel focuses on the cross.
The American gospel bypasses the cross.
The biblical gospel calls for repentance and transformation.
The American gospel offers enhancement and self-improvement.
The biblical gospel points to our need for a Savior.
The American gospel portrays Jesus as a glorified life coach. 
The biblical gospel calls us to crucify our flesh.
The American gospel caters to the flesh.
The biblical gospel says that as fallen human beings, we are wretches in need of God’s amazing grace.
The American gospel says that we are amazing and that God would be honored to get to know us.
The biblical gospel holds us accountable to God.
The American gospel holds God accountable to us.
The biblical gospel says, “This is who God is. This is how He feels. And we are here to please Him.”
The American gospel says, “This is who I am. This is how I feel. And God is here to please me.”
As I <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/why-are-so-many-christians-leaving-the-faith">noted</a> previously, “Over 70 years ago, A. W. Tozer wrote his famous <a href="http://www.ldolphin.org/oldcross.html">article</a> on ‘The Old Cross and the New.’ In it, he explains, ‘The new cross does not slay the sinner, it redirects him. It gears him into a cleaner and jollier way of living and saves his self-respect.’”
The modern cross goes beyond that. It does not redirect the sinner. It empowers the sinner. “Come to Jesus and become a bigger and better you!”
The biblical gospel pronounces us guilty before God, worthy of eternal judgment.
The American gospel rejects such talk as “religious” and condemning. “One must never make the sinner feel bad” is the unspoken rule.
John Newton (1725-1807), a former slave trader and author of the hymn “Amazing Grace,” also wrote these words, describing his conversion experience: “My conscience felt and owned its guilt, And plunged me in despair; I saw my sins His blood had spilt And helped to nail Him there.”
The American gospel cannot relate to any of this.
According to the American gospel, the lost sinner should not feel guilty, only affirmed. There should be no despair, only encouragement. And it was not our sins that nailed Jesus to the cross as much as the affirmation of our worth.
With preaching like this, no wonder we have had so many shallow, false conversions in recent decades. The contemporary American Jesus doesn’t save. He enhances.
He is the convenient, pain free, always available additive that makes life go better.
As for a Savior, who needs one? We are simply good people who have been hurt by others and have lost our way. 
But we ourselves are not lost. We need understanding, not saving.
This mentality offers pretty band-aids to people with heart disease.
This is why the American gospel cannot cure the patient. It fails to recognize he is terminally ill.
All this stands in stark contrast with the true gospel, especially as it is preached during seasons of revival and spiritual awakening. 
As the British author Arthur Wallis (1922-1988) wrote in his book “In the Day of Thy Power,” “This overwhelming sense of God, bringing deep conviction of sin, is perhaps the outstanding feature of true revival. … To cleansed hearts it is heaven, to convicted hearts it is hell, when God is in the midst.”
The arrows strike deep. The recognition of sin and guilt is intense. The cries for mercy are loud.
But the revelation of God’s love that follows is overwhelming. The discovery of His mercy is indescribable. The experience of His forgiveness is absolutely liberating.
As for the conversions, they are real and they are lasting. Bondages are broken. Lives are transformed. Sinners are redeemed. Jesus is glorified!
This is the biblical gospel.
This is the reason for the cross.
This is the expression of God’s infinite love.
As Paul <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=rom+5%3A8&amp;version=NIV">wrote</a>, “God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.”
Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892), the greatest preacher of his day, once said, “A spiritual experience which is thoroughly flavored with a deep and bitter sense of sin is of great value to him that hath it. It is terrible in the drinking, but it is most wholesome in the bowels, and in the whole of the after life.”
He added, “Too many think lightly of sin, and therefore think lightly of the Savior. He who has stood before His God, convicted and condemned, and with the rope about his neck, is the man to weep for joy when he is pardoned, to hate the evil which has been forgiven him, and to live to the honour of the Redeemer by whose blood he has been cleansed.”
Enough with the contemporary American gospel which saves no one and misplaces the faith of multitudes.
May it be spoken of no more, except in the annals of identified false doctrines and heretical teachings, and may the counterfeit be replaced by the truth.
To <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+cor+1%3A18&amp;version=NIV">quote</a> Paul again, “For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.”
It is high time we get back to the biblical gospel.
Dr. Michael Brown (<a href="http://www.askdrbrown.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.askdrbrown.org</a>) is the host of the nationally syndicated <a href="http://www.lineoffireradio.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Line of Fire</a> radio program. He holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and has served as a professor at a number of seminaries and is the author of 40 books. Connect with him on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/AskDrBrown" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Facebook</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/DrMichaelLBrown" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Twitter</a>, or <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbINn3x-intLp88Zrf8acpg" target="_blank" rel="noopener">YouTube</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Two identical red doors in Dublin, Ireland

The American Gospel Vs. The Biblical Gospel

Thirteen centuries ago, an Anglo-Saxon missionary named Boniface destroyed an oak tree in Germania considered sacred to Thor, leading many locals to redirect their worship toward the Triune God. Today, pastors from around the world are likewise converging upon Germany to do battle with the idols of our age.
Last week, the <a href="https://frankfurtdeclaration.com/">Frankfurt Declaration of Christian and Civil Liberties</a> was published in response to the authoritarian spirit gripping many Western governments. In a series of interviews with The Daily Wire, several of the signatories — many of whom have already gained international attention for their righteous resistance to unlawful totalitarianism — explained how Christianity is the only basis by which mankind may reject the abuse of power.
<h3>God The Creator</h3>
In the Western world, materialism — the argument that matter and motion are the full extent of reality — has led to a denial of God as sovereign Creator. The Frankfurt Declaration affirms the role of God as the ultimate source of truth and ethics.
<blockquote>We believe that He has revealed in the Holy Scriptures and the conscience of men an unchangeable morality which is rooted in His own character, and which defines the nature of good and evil conduct for all people at all times. As the Lawgiver, God has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by a man, the risen Lord Jesus Christ. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen.</blockquote>
The statement therefore denies the notion that any earthly authority is able to define morality or mandate disobedience to what God has prescribed — especially as many governments embrace postmodernism, which is incapable of providing a coherent basis for morality.
Dr. Joe Boot — founder of the Ezra Institute for Contemporary Christianity in Ontario, Canada — told The Daily Wire that the Christian notion of a “cosmos that is distinct from, yet governed by an infinite personal God who is always true and faithful” marked a radical departure from previous paganism.
“Western civilization became prosperous, wealthy, advanced, and globally dominant with a worldview that allowed for the development of science and technology because of belief in an ordered cosmos of law-spheres, and similarly governed by deep moral conviction about objective standards of right and wrong,” he remarked. “This led to learning, literacy, social stability, and civilization-building on a scale never seen before in the history of mankind.”
However, the fruit of the West rejecting Christianity in favor of various ideologies — including secular humanism and Marxism — has been progressive cultural decay.
“When as a culture we no longer believe in creation and judgment in terms of the laws of God for His universe, we are steadily deconstructed downward into a void of meaninglessness,” Boot added. “The Christian idea of a universe — unity in diversity — becomes a pagan pluralistic multiverse without ultimate order, structure, or design, and a growing nihilism is the result. In reaction, the modern State will try to invent pseudo-religious beliefs for the masses to keep people under control. Hence the new religion of climate, planetary salvation, and impending doom unless we are saved by the central planning and control of the new god of State.”
<h3>God And Science</h3>
As secular governments struggle to remain coherent on the most basic tenets of human life — such as the definition of man and woman — the Frankfurt Declaration affirms that creation is ordered by objective truth, which mankind can learn through scientific observation. 
<blockquote>We endorse science which seeks to discover, through the scientific method and debate, the truths that God has built into the natural world. We also affirm the limitations of science, including its inability to speak authoritatively on areas outside its purview and its propensity to err when data is lacking. Since man has fallen into sin, we further affirm that all his thoughts, deductions, and institutions contain degrees of corruption which tend to distort, manipulate, or suppress the truth.</blockquote>
The statement, however, rejects the weaponization of science for fearmongering or propaganda, notes that science is not sufficient to answer questions of ethics, and refutes the notion that man can be ideologically neutral.
Dr. James White — a pastor at Apologia Church in Mesa, Arizona — told The Daily Wire that “the myth of neutrality” has hobbled Western evangelicalism and allowed for the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/how-the-federal-government-used-evangelical-leaders-to-spread-covid-propaganda-to-churches">cooperation of faith-based institutions</a> with the lockdown regime.
“A consistent Christian understanding of the world begins with a recognition of God’s creatorship and the fact that all of existence, universally, is defined by His purposes, His law, His final glory,” White noted. “There is no neutral fact, for if it is a fact, God made it to be such.”
White added that removing God from the picture leads to men filling the vacuum where only God should be.
“This likewise means that all of human inquiry, including scientific investigation, is an inquiry into the works of God, first and foremost, and hence cannot pretend neutrality,” he continued. “If God has defined all things in creation, we will most certainly miss the true importance of creation if we pretend God can be made a side-issue rather than the central, defining reality.”
<h3>Mankind As The Image Of God</h3>
The tradition of individual rights, equal justice under the law, and limited government in the Western world is rooted in the recognition of men as image-bearers of God. The Frankfurt Declaration affirms that such inalienable rights prevent the State from dehumanizing its people.
<blockquote>These rights and liberties include the right to corporate worship, personal and in-person relationships, vocational employments, and participation in the important events of human life such as the right to comfort the sick and the dying… to attend funerals, to witness the birth of one’s child, to marry in a public gathering, to fellowship and eat together with others, and to engage in honorable work. We also affirm that governments should recognize that each individual is responsible for their own bodily well-being and should protect the right to personal medical self-determination.</blockquote>
The statement notes that lockdowns and mandates usurp the innate value of mankind by subjecting them to manipulation, enforced segregation, and other unjust deprivations of liberty.
Tobias Riemenschneider — the pastor of Evangelical Reformed Baptist Church in Frankfurt, Germany — told The Daily Wire that the modern Darwinian conception of mankind offers “no protection against the abuse of power by the stronger.”
“We believe that we are now seeing the effects of the view of human beings that the States of the Western world have been promoting for many decades — namely, that human beings are nothing more than the product of an impersonal and ultimately purposeless evolutionary process without any transcendental meaning or value,” Riemenschneider said. “According to the biblical worldview, on the other hand, God created man in His image and likeness, whereby all human beings have an inherent dignity and worth from which derive God-given, inalienable rights and liberties, that the State must respect and protect.”
“When the State deprives a person of these rights and liberties or makes them contingent on the compliance with certain mandates, it dehumanizes them and makes them a mere object of State tyranny,” he added. “For a lasting safeguard of our liberties, it is therefore necessary for the State to return to the Judeo-Christian view of God as the Creator of man, since only this provides the basis for the inalienable worth of each individual human being.”
<h3>Limits Of Authority</h3>
Legitimate earthly powers draw their authority — their right to be obeyed — from the God to whom all must give an account. Accordingly, the Frankfurt Declaration notes that the Church and the State are granted limited authority only over their respective spheres.
<blockquote>God has delegated authority to civil governments for the purpose of rewarding good and punishing evil, and to protect the God-given rights and freedoms granted to all people. He has also delegated authority to the Church in its various expressions, particularly to make disciples of all nations by preaching the Word of God, and to establish and administer redeemed communities of faith living under the authority of Christ.</blockquote>
The statement therefore rejects the tendency of governments to centralize beliefs or attempt to redefine good and evil — power grabs that disallow diversity of thought and conviction while conforming all citizens, particularly children, to approved State viewpoints.
Tim Stephens — the pastor of Fairview Baptist Church in Alberta, Canada — told The Daily Wire that secular governments view their decrees as “encompassing all of life.”
“Worse than usurping their authority to carry out justice under the Lordship of Christ, they assume the place of God as Lawgiver, provider, and savior,” he explained. “Trouble is, the government is a lousy savior with its interventions taking both responsibility and freedom from households and businesses to the detriment of all.”
Stephens, who was <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-jailed-canadian-pastor-tim-stephens-released-after-international-attention">jailed in a maximum-security facility</a> last summer for resisting a lockdown order and opening his church, added that civil governments attract men who desire to use power for their own advantage.
“Without a knowledge of God, men seek to bring healing to the world apart from God&#8217;s Savior, Jesus Christ. Today, men seek to control the climate, change human identity, and bring global peace through the power of human governments,” Stephens observed. “However, these initiatives are leading to economic ruin, mutilated children, and increasing tyranny, along with conflict and division. The city of men failed at Babel, and it will fail again today.”
<h3>Christ As The Head Of The Church</h3>
Christians recognize that Jesus Christ purchased His Church and saved them from their sins through His substitutionary atonement on the cross. The Frankfurt Declaration therefore affirms that the Church has the right — as defined by Jesus Himself — to worship in Spirit and Truth without unnecessary interference from the State.
<blockquote>We believe that Christ, who is Lord over all, calls all without distinction of any kind to freely and regularly gather together in His Name in local congregations to seek and serve Him in truth and love. We further affirm that the activities of the local church insofar as they are essential acts of worship are to be regulated by Christ alone.</blockquote>
The statement thus denies that secular governments are able to regulate the affairs of the Church in matters of faith and practice.
Dr. John MacArthur — the senior pastor of Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, California — told The Daily Wire that earthly authorities have “always tended to view Christ as an adversary and an inconvenience.”
“From Herod and Pontius Pilate until today, earthly governments have always sought to exert control over Christ and His kingdom,” MacArthur explained. “Caesar is not content with the things that are Caesar’s; he also wants control over the things that belong to God. So earthly rulers invariably try to seize as much dominance over the Church as they can possibly appropriate.”
MacArthur, whose church <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/l-a-county-to-pay-400000-to-john-macarthurs-grace-community-church">won a legal battle</a> against California after officials attempted to mandate the cancellation of services, noted that unjust edicts — including those which support abortion, same-sex marriage, and the “barbaric, pagan mutilation of children” —  represent a “formal, parliamentary declaration of war against God.”
“The Church’s mission is not a partisan political one. There is no political solution to what ails our culture. The Church’s mission is to preach the gospel, recover souls from the domain of darkness, and train them to be Christ’s disciples,” MacArthur continued. “On the other hand, the more Caesar intrudes into matters that belong to Christ, the more the Church must speak out on eternal and spiritual matters.”
“We will continue to speak on such issues, and when government tries to silence the message or punish the messenger, we will not bow.”

500 Years Since The Reformation: Germany Prepares For Celebrations And Events

‘Christians Against The Abuse Of Power’: Theologians Around The World Sign Statement Rejecting Government Lockdowns

Germany

John MacArthur

Marxism

Propaganda

What the Bible says about gender is what most of us always took for granted — namely, that there are only two genders, male and female, and those two genders are directly related to our biological sex. It’s as simple as that. In the beginning, God created the human race as male and female, starting with Adam and Eve. Ever since then, those are the only two categories that have existed, right until the present day.
That’s why, throughout the Scriptures, reference is made to men and women, fathers and mothers, boys and girls, and grooms and brides. A biological exception to the norm (such as someone with ambiguous genitalia) did not change the norm, nor did it create a new gender or sex. Male and female were the only available categories, always.
In fact, in all the languages of the Bible — Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek — every word must have a gender, from people to animals to inanimate objects.
In Hebrew and Aramaic, there are only two choices: male and female. In Greek, there are three choices: male, female, and neuter (the last category is often reserved for physical objects).
But when it comes down to people or animals, there are only two possible choices: male or female. That’s it.
So, in Hebrew, a male dog is kelev; a female dog is kalbah. A male child is yeled; a female child is yaldah. A king is melekh; a queen is malkah.
If an adjective is used to modify the noun, then it must be male or female to agree with the noun. The same with a verb.
A good boy is a yeled tov. A good girl is a yaldah tovah.
Everything in the grammatical structures and vocabularies of these biblical languages requires a male-female distinction. Even when it comes to words like “you” or “they,” there are masculine and feminine forms.
Accordingly, gender and sex distinctions are presupposed on every page of every book of the Bible. That’s just the way the languages and cultures operated.
That’s also why the only sexual unions approved in the Bible are those of a male and a female. As Paul <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+7%3A2&amp;version=ESV">wrote to the Corinthians</a> in terms of whether or not to marry, “Because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.&#8221; There were no other options available. A man married a woman; a woman married a man.
Even in the case of <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/what-the-bible-really-says-about-polygamy">polygamous unions</a>, the formula was the same: only males and females could marry.
As for eunuchs, mentioned a number of times in the Bible and referring to castrated men — except in Matthew 19, where Jesus also spoke of people born as eunuchs, meaning, born without sexual capacity — there is not a syllable about another gender or sex. Not even close.
The idea that a person’s gender is whatever they perceive it to be is as foreign to the Bible as the idea that Elvis Presley is the Messiah. Being male or female is a matter of biology, not perception, without exception. (For my article on alleged multiple genders in the Talmud, see <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/does-the-talmud-teach-that-abraham-and-sarah-were-non-binary">here</a>.)
You can read the Bible cover to cover multiple times in the original languages and you will not ever find reference to an additional gender or sex. Not a single one.
That’s why <a href="https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy+22%3A5&amp;version=ESV">Deuteronomy carried this prohibition</a>: “A woman shall not wear a man’s garment, nor shall a man put on a woman’s cloak, for whoever does these things is an abomination to the LORD your God.&#8221;
Gender distinctions were not only real, but they were also important to maintain. Cross-dressing was considered abhorrent in God’s sight.
As for categories such as MTF (male to female) or FTM (female to male), they no more existed than did categories such as MTR (male to rock) or FTH (female to horse).
Today, however, holding to these biological and theological realities is a sign of being close-minded and even backward, as illustrated in a Washington Post <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/07/11/mercy-culture-church/">article</a> that disparagingly refers to the worldview of conservative Christians as “one with two genders, no abortion, a free-market economy, Bible-based education, church-based social programs and laws such as the ones curtailing LGBTQ rights now moving through statehouses around the country.”
Oh, a world with two genders. Imagine that.
Dr. Michael Brown (<a href="http://www.askdrbrown.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.askdrbrown.org</a>) is the host of the nationally syndicated <a href="http://www.lineoffireradio.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Line of Fire</a> radio program. He holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and has served as a professor at a number of seminaries and is the author of 40 books. Connect with him on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/AskDrBrown" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Facebook</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/DrMichaelLBrown" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Twitter</a>, or <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbINn3x-intLp88Zrf8acpg" target="_blank" rel="noopener">YouTube</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Old Bibles In A Shelf

What The Bible Really Says About Gender

Gender

language

Transgender

Did you know that the Nazis created a non-Jewish, Aryan Jesus? As Susannah Heschel <a href="https://smile.amazon.com/Aryan-Jesus-Christian-Theologians-Germany-ebook/dp/B09JJNHXM7/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1SD1N2DFLJGGB&amp;keywords=the+aryan+jesus&amp;qid=1661488640&amp;sprefix=the+aryan+%2Caps%2C92&amp;sr=8-1">explained</a>, Nazi theologians “redefined Christianity as a Germanic religion whose founder, Jesus, was no Jew but rather had fought valiantly to destroy Judaism, falling as victim to that struggle. Germans were now called upon to be the victors in Jesus’s own struggle against the Jews, who were said to be seeking Germany’s destruction.”
Talk about rewriting the Bible and creating a savior in our own image.
But that’s what many of us also do. We make a god who is like us — affirming, agreeing, confirming, empowering — rather than acknowledge the one true God, the God who transforms us, the God to whom we give account, the God who often makes us uncomfortable. We create a God who is here to serve us rather than us being here to serve Him.
Let me give you a few striking examples, some of which you’ve seen on TV.
A boxer lays prone on the ground in a corner of the ring, surrounded by concerned doctors and trainers. On the other side of the ring, his triumphant opponent says to the interviewer, “First, I want to give all the glory to my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Without Him, I could not have done this.” 
In other words, without Jesus, I could not have landed such a vicious knockout punch, a punch that has endangered the health of my opponent. Is there something wrong with this picture?
I’m always glad to hear an athlete acknowledge the Lord. And it’s good to recognize that, without Him, we can do nothing (meaning, nothing truly good).
But thanking God for a violent victory? Really? Isn’t this another way that we create a god in our own image, a god who helps us win our every preference and desire, and defeat those whom we see as our enemies? God is always with the winner (that is, as long as we’re the ones winning).
I recently saw a boxer praying with his team before a fight. He was passionate, crying out like someone who truly knew the Lord. He sounded like the real deal.
Then he said, “And Lord, help me to show no mercy tonight.”
Seriously? He asked the God of mercy to help him show no mercy to his opponent in the boxing ring?
To paraphrase the prayer, “Merciful Savior, You who shower me with mercy every day, You who said, ‘Blessed are the merciful,’ help me to show no mercy in the ring. In Your name, amen!”
This same boxer is known for his free use of expletives during his interviews, adding another curious touch to his open and unashamed proclamation of Jesus as Lord. It looks like he has some growing to do.
I’ve seen this in other violent sports, too, where an injury leaves an opponent quivering on the mat, blood gushing from his head, while the victor points to the sky with gratitude, mouthing the words, “Thank You Jesus!” To paraphrase, “You were the one who put that special power in my kick. I could not be so violent on my own!”
Again, I’m all for athletes thanking God for His protection. Or saying that it’s only by His grace they made it to where they are. Or acknowledging His help in being a successful athlete.
And I recognize that there are many boxers and mixed martial artists who are known to have strong Christian testimonies, some of them sharing their stories about how their sport got them out of a life of crime. For them, while it is a tough sport, a combat sport, it is also a sport of honor, discipline, and hard work, and they wish no harm to their fellow combatants.
But does that mean that they should thank God for the skill to pulverize their opponents, leaving some of them brain damaged for life?
Yet this kind of thinking is all too common here in America, where the Lord exists to make us bigger and better, to empower us rather than change us.
This reminds me of an old friend of the family who used to give 10% of her gambling winnings to two of her favorite TV preachers. It was the Lord, she reasoned, who enabled her to beat the casinos, and so she owed him her tithe. 
I’ve heard of a “Christian” strip club owner who was a regular at his local gospel church, giving from his earnings to support the ministry. 
I’m familiar with a “Christian” abortion doctor in North Carolina who tithed out of her income to her local church. (In this case, the doctor actually believed she was doing God’s will. I’m not so sure even the strip club owner is quite that deceived.)
I saw another boxer give an interview after his victory, and he too was quick to glorify the Lord before he said anything else.
He then proceeded to rail on the other champions in his division, saying that he was the only self-made man among them. He alone was responsible for getting to the top, whereas these others had all kinds of help. And he too is known to let the profanity fly.
Is there nothing incongruous here? In one breath, you’re saying that you’re only here with the help of the Lord. In the next breath, you’re boasting about being a self-made man. Huh?
For some, God is the implicit, spiritual head of a political party. 
For others, He is the one who backs a particular denomination or Christian branch, also frowning on those other groups that are not as beloved (or faithful) as we are.
Some believe the Lord is the one who is obligated to get us out of trouble, no matter how we got into trouble. After all, isn’t that what the deity is supposed to do? Isn’t His primary function to answer our prayers and give us a get out of jail card?
This is what happens when we create a god in our own image, projecting on him our own proclivities and passions. It is easier to do than we realize.
We would be wise, then, to get on our knees, take out our Bibles, and pray, “Lord God who created the universe, show me who You really are. No other gods are worthy of worship. No other gods are really gods at all. Only You are God!”
May He give us eyes to see.
Dr. Michael Brown (<a href="http://www.askdrbrown.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">www.askdrbrown.org</a>) is the host of the nationally syndicated <a href="http://www.lineoffireradio.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Line of Fire</a> radio program. He holds a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University and has served as a professor at a number of seminaries and is the author of 40 books. Connect with him on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/AskDrBrown" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Facebook</a>, <a href="https://twitter.com/DrMichaelLBrown" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Twitter</a>, or <a href="https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbINn3x-intLp88Zrf8acpg" target="_blank" rel="noopener">YouTube</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Digital composite of flock of identical sheep, full frame

Creating A God In Our Own Image

Boxing

Amid the chaos of the past two years, American evangelical Christianity has been infiltrated by social justice ideology, the worldview assumptions of cultural Marxism, and other philosophical flotsam that poses a threat to a simple adherence to the biblical doctrines that the Church has confessed through the ages.
Yet American Christians forget that the early part of the twentieth century likewise had a “Great Awokening” that came with its own skirmishes in the public square.
J. Gresham Machen — a New Testament scholar who helped to launch the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and Westminster Theological Seminary — wrote his magnum opus, “<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Christianity-Liberalism-J-Gresham-Machen/dp/1948648539/ref=asc_df_1948648539/?tag=hyprod-20&amp;linkCode=df0&amp;hvadid=333503577727&amp;hvpos=&amp;hvnetw=g&amp;hvrand=10433733961213316485&amp;hvpone=&amp;hvptwo=&amp;hvqmt=&amp;hvdev=c&amp;hvdvcmdl=&amp;hvlocint=&amp;hvlocphy=9007284&amp;hvtargid=pla-669822699745&amp;psc=1">Christianity and Liberalism</a>,” almost exactly one hundred years ago. The treatise profoundly dismantles the secularism that eroded many ministers’ profession of truths such as the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ, the depravity of man, and the inspiration of the Bible.
Although most believers continue to read “Christianity and Liberalism” for wisdom on dealing with those who would syncretize evangelicalism with secularism, American Christians would benefit from considering Machen’s words on the education system — which he clearly treated as the front lines for the battles of his day.
Machen recognized that government education is the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/expressive-individualism-theologian-carl-trueman-explains-why-public-high-schools-keep-hosting-drag-shows">ideal mechanism</a> to separate children from their families and disrupt an upbringing rooted in the fear of God. As many parental rights activists are now discovering for the first time, American children are still <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-admin-downplays-parents-rights-promises-to-fight-for-lgbtqi-youth-after-desantis-signs-bill">receiving indoctrination</a> rather than education.
<blockquote>“Place the lives of children in their formative years, despite the convictions of their parents, under the intimate control of experts appointed by the state, force them then to attend schools where the higher aspirations of humanity are crushed out, and where the mind is filled with the materialism of the day, and it is difficult to see how even the remnants of liberty can subsist. Such a tyranny, supported as it is by a perverse technique used as the instrument in destroying human souls, is certainly far more dangerous than the crude tyrannies of the past, which despite their weapons of fire and sword permitted thought at least to be free.”</blockquote>
Machen’s era followed the work of utilitarian social philosophers such as John Stuart Mill, who <a href="https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mill/">theorized</a> that education — as a democratic endeavor — ought to be a tool for the creation of “an enlightened public” knowledgeable enough to “discern who are those that know them better.” The education system of the twenty-first century, in the name of transmitting methods and processes rather than information, leaves students with nothing save the tools necessary to interpret and obey the authoritative knowledge handed down by experts.
<blockquote>“The object of education, it is now assumed, is the production of the greatest happiness for the greatest number. But the greatest happiness for the greatest number, it is assumed further, can be defined only by the will of the majority. Idiosyncrasies in education, therefore, it is said, must be avoided, and the choice of schools must be taken away from the individual parent and placed in the hands of the state.”</blockquote>
Once removed from the watchful eye of their parents, bureaucrats are free to manipulate children through methodologies like social-emotional learning so that they can absorb Critical Race Theory or transgender ideology — even to the extent that they wholly <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/parent-group-sues-iowa-school-district-for-allegedly-hiding-childrens-gender-transitions">reject</a> their maleness or femaleness.
<blockquote>“The state then exercises its authority through the instruments that are ready to hand, and at once, therefore, the child is placed under the control of psychological experts, themselves without the slightest acquaintance with the higher realms of human life, who proceed to prevent any such acquaintance being gained by those who come under their care &#8230; The dominant tendency, even in a country like America, which formerly prided itself on its freedom from bureaucratic regulation of the details of life, is toward a drab utilitarianism in which all higher aspirations are to be lost.”</blockquote>
Robert Bortins — the CEO of Classical Conversations, a provider of homeschooling curriculum for Christian parents — explained to The Daily Wire that Machen was correct when he identified “an unparalleled impoverishment of human life” as the result of an education system stifled by secular government.
“When the public is free to be educated as they see fit, as opposed to government-funded education that controls institutions directly or indirectly, then the public can choose and pursue education that is best for the individual,” Bortins commented. “This will lead to freedom, and all the benefits and struggles related to choice and consequences.”
Rejecting the fact that the world was created — and indelibly bears the marks of its Creator — therefore produces chaos. 
“As Christians, we believe that Truth is a person, and that person is Jesus Christ. True education is the pursuit of knowing and making known truth, beauty, and goodness,” he said. “A rejection of orderliness for chaos is causing the record amount of depression and other impoverishment of human life we see in young people today. If we all have our own truth, then that leads to chaos.”
With the path to reformation in mind, Bortins rejects education savings accounts and other policies that allow conservatives to “win battles on the way to losing the war.”
“A faster and more sustainable way would be for private enterprise, the church, and families to work together to educate and leave the government doing what God designed the government to do,” he explained. “The good news is there are plenty of entities working towards this already, and all we must do is join in on their work.”
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Papers on desks by window in classroom

‘More Dangerous Than The Crude Tyrannies Of The Past’: A Profound Theologian’s Prophetic Warnings About Government Education

Education

Menu