Judah's Glory and other Sites

The hacking and rewriting have become so bad here that for a short season we are taking JG down to correct and repair.
Please visit our prior site at Judahsglory.webs.com or visit our bible studies blogs at:

Healingofchrist.blogspot.com
Promiseofmessiah.blogspot.com
Propheteuo.blogspot.com
Housethatwillnotdie.blogspot.com
Mysteryofthejews.blogspot.com
Spicesinthesongofsongs.blogspot.com
Teachingandpreachingthegospel.blogspot.com
Passoverblogs.blogspot.com

And others.

In Christ.
Elizabeth Kirkley Best
Judahsglory@gmail.com or elizabeth.best@gmail.com

Thanks for your patience.Free offerings and publications continue on our Facebook page.

The High Calling of a Missionary

What does it take to be a missionary today?   The answer is a very simple one: a calling.  So far away in years from the first time the Gospel was preached, though,  if one were to ask the average church goer in America, "what does it take to be a missionary?" ; they would probably respond with such answers as, "courage", "funding", "training and know-how", a "love for people", or some other generalized rhetoric.

What does it take to be a missionary?  Above all, it takes a calling from God.   Too often in today's clime,  people look at offices in the church, and decide, by singular will or group vote, who should be a missionary, a pastor, a deacon, a teacher or the countless other offices and positions in the church.  They ask God only afterward, to bless their decisions, which are made almost entirely on human rational and preferences.  They like 'Bob' because he is a nice guy and goes along with the flow; they like 'Steve' because he is a successful businessman who will bring others to church;  they prefer 'susan' because she dresses her children well and is soft spoken;  but very few churches truly seek out whether or not a missionary is called.

'Called' people do not all look, act and think the same:  even among the disciples of Christ, one saw the tender spirited John, and the boisterous, 'thundering' sons of Boanerges;  the questioning Peter and Barnabas and the serious Levy.   'Called' is not a personality test and cannot be assessed by a psychological inventory. 'Called' is a selection that God has made,  with the church at hand to discern and anoint a calling.

'Called' is not a preference nor a career choice.  Many people go into missions today as a career option, and why not?  Some mission boards have benefits and salaries as good as large corporations: once I even overheard missionaries discussing about not choosing a mission board because they didn't offer college tuition benefits for their children:  the idea that missionaries should even have the expectations of corporate level benefits shows a new 'lukewarm' attitude towards the Gospel.  While it is not wrong to want or be grateful for a liveable salary nor great health care benefits, nonetheless the 'expectation' that we would not go out into the world to evangelize without OUR requirements being met, shows a faulty understanding of the Gospel, and too often a lack of a true calling.

The Character of a Missionary

Beyond being called by God to do the work of an evangelist or missionary, the character of a missionary comes into play.  Character is not 'Personality'.  Personality and temperament can greatly differ as mentioned above: different people are good at different things:  a studious person may may a good researcher, helper, theologian etc, but a pastor, evangelist or the like one would expect not to be too introverted, or unable to speak before crowds. 

A missionary travelling into different cultures, radically different cultures from their own, cannot be intolerant: cannot shudder (openly) at pagan practices, even if faith in God demands that we have nothing to do with idolatry;  a missionary in a foreign field will encounter even brutal and suggestive practices,  which while they should never receive nor endorse, nonetheless are not even understood as wrong in the other culture:   patience and a lack of condemnation are required of a missionary.

There are basic values and disciplines though, which have to be regarded as fundamental to missionary work.  We know of a couple of missionaries,  who claimed to go to a foreign field, who spent most of their time in the US,  living off contributions, and doing no more than volunteer church work, as any church member might do.   Additionally (a true scenario); they involved themselves in copyright fraud, theft, illegal entries and burglaries, and even in severe beatings of a person who used to contribute to them, who suspecting fraud, committed no more crime, than stopping, and switching their contributions to another missionary.  Another designated missionary to children, from a large church, was found to be under a restraining order to stay away from his former wife and child, and yet was entrusted weekly with the 'children's church' :   my point is that somewhere, even under grace, there have to be limits in Christian conduct for those who represent the church.

A missionary, above all, must be HONEST.  A missionary should love people, even when they are frustrated and angry (you can do both),  and preach and teach in a non-condemnatory way.  A missionary should be expected to be sober, vigilant as to circumstances, knowledgeable about the Bible, and in love with the Lord.  A missionary should stay at least daily in prayer and praise: the spiritual warfare in non-Christian countries is so great,  that today in intolerant countries one can be killed without staying daily in the Word, Prayer, and Praise. 

A missionary like pastors should never willfully strike another human being.   Some people one runs into today make us all understand why and how one would feel like striking another, such as a dirty mouthed, lewd person making suggestive comments about a wife daughter, or these days even a son. Missionaries are to show continence and restraint:  our aim is not to hold up our own righteous indignation regarding our reputations, but the ensign of the Savior.   More than most, I know what it is like to be 'pressed out of measure' and I have fallen apart at times and even outright (at home only) cussed out some people who did outrageous things: not proud of it, but I really understand how evil some folks can get, but when I did, I lost opportunity for ministry and caused distrust more in my reputation than theirs, though their crimes were far greater.  Restraint may be the thing that wins the horrible person to Christ.   I only say this with three fingers pointing backward, and am quite forgiving when a dedicated Christian 'loses it' for a moment or two out of life:  we are up against murder, rape, sodomy, and cruelties which people take time to plan out; against bitter humiliations, career ruin etc.  We cannot confront these in our own strength, but Jesus can.

Among ourselves though (I have a ministry but am not an appointed missionary), we are called to the highest conduct: not just legal and civilized, but to love, to counting one another better than ourselves, to 'going the extra mile', 'dying to self',  the like.  No Christian, must less a missionary should every be caught in a crime or 'busibodyness' which hurts another person.  Grateful that we are saved, that Christ died for us, how could we consider any of such horrid behaviors as getting into someone's back account,  gossiping in a ruinous way,  stealing another person's work or reputation, or ruining another's place in the church.  Jealous?  deal with it: don't hurt someone Christ died for.  Think you are better for a position or promotion?  Take a long look at why the Lord allowed it to happen:  the idea that we are 'better' is carnal and does not show an understanding of God's ways.  Even when we are highly skilled, it may be a heart issue, an issue of unforgiveness that causes one to move forward and one to stay behind: in other words, our great failing in the church today is that we have lost God's way in favor of push and shove.

A missionary should then, be called, full of grace, understanding, temperate and self-controlled, sober and serious, love people , the Gospel and the Lord, and walk in the ways of God.  God's missionaries, walking in his ways accomplish great miracles.  Selfish, carnal people, who merely wanted an interesting job abroad, often cause trouble and make it impossible for real missionaries to reach the field and do a great work.

When Missionaries Should Be Removed

A tough topic, all things considered though, is when a missionary should be removed by a church, from service.   We do not want to remove missionaries because they always where the same blue tie, or because they didn't attend one or two events, etc.  There are however serious reasons when missionaries or any church officer needs to be removed.  I strongly believe, based upon Bible commands, that a missionary, evangelist, teacher, or pastor has to be removed for one of the following:
1. Unbelief and a consistent, long term pattern of false doctrine
2. Immoral conduct, punishable by law or not, including adultery, sodomy, seduction or consistent inappropriate touching or comments.
3. Commission of crime, justly judged.
4. Unrepented criminal slander.
5. Known, ongoing child or spousal abuse:  if it is a difficult time for the pastor, there may be a period of probation, to get help and composure, but failing that, a dismissal.
6. Large scale embezzlement or misuse of church funds for personal gain.
7. Intense violence against a congregate or even against an unbeliever, out of a carnal reaction, especially if repeated.  A minor slap is not what I am speaking of.
8. A serious violation of Civil Rights, particularly of a congregation member.
9. Demonstration, in speeches and sermons of a long standing hatred against any 'type' of person.
10. Theft, theft of work or sermons that is long term and unrepented.

The Church and Missions cannot go on nor accomplish the love of the Gospel and salvation of Christ unless we show, through Christ's power, the effect of the Resurrection:  that Christ, his death, and rising again are real and have an effect in our lives on a daily basis.  Though of another faith, I always like what Francis of Assissi said: "Preach the Gospel in season and out, if necessary, use words."  The point is not that we should ever avoid the verbal out loud preaching of the Gospel, that is essential, but that our lives must show that what we are saying is true.   Church discipline is not a dirty word: terrorizing another Christian or his or her family though should never be heard of in the Church.

Why I Left the Baptist Church

I have tried in my 30 years of being a Christian to stay away from divisive statement and arguments which divide without a critical cause.   I have however recently, decided to explicate the reasons why I left the Baptist church some 19 years ago,  and why I do not intend to go back.  My beliefs are determined entirely by the Word of God:  this is not a diatribe or trick about 'the Journey Home', as I began life as a Catholic, but left that denomination also very early.  When I became a born again Christian, in 1985,  I knew very little of differences in Protestantism, Evangelicalism, Fundamentalism, or Pentecostal/Charismatica:   though I had a doctorate in a secular field,  my knowledge of Christianity was limited,  so I first attended a Methodist church, only to find out they believed very little and not in being 'born again',  and then a Charismatic church,  and for 6 months, a small country Catholic Church before settling on Baptist and occasionally Evangelical churches, which were essentially baptistic.   It was a learning process,  based partly on growing in Christ, partly on misinformation which was prevalent in the teaching at that time to 'go back to the denomination you came from' and partly a 'stumbling around' to find a right church.   I liked Charismatic churches but found too little bible and too much variation and doctrinal error.  I wasn't crazy about the Baptists because I found too much 'fun and games' and no talk of walking in the Spirit,  Because of the Bible based teaching,  we first tried a Christian Union church,  but they believed you could lose your salvation every time you turned sideways,  and eventually, we settled on Grace Brethren then the Baptists because I wanted my children grounded in the Word of God before moving on and growing in to the things of the Spirit.  The problem is,  that needs to be a synthesis, almost impossible to find these days in a denomination-heavy, carnal, and problem-bound American church.

We stayed in the Baptist Church until 1997.   During the time we were in, we said very little out loud in church,  knowing how they felt about women.   Much of the time we were in Independent Fundamental Baptist Churches,  but we ran into so much unhappiness,  that our only choice, for them and for us, was to leave, rather than stay and cause division.   We made no grand pronouncements, I have rarely written on the reasons we left,  but the problems are so great for the true Christians within the Baptist camp, that it has to be addressed.  This is not a broad sweep of all Baptists:  some we met were in love with the Lord, and diligently lived out their faith.  Those however were the small minority.

I am still an 'eternal security' believer.  I believe that Jesus Christ is sent by God, is God, is the Word Incarnate,  paid a ransom of his own blood for an atonement for our sins, and that we are saved from wrath and the curse of the Fall of Man by his blood, death and resurrection.  On this central teaching, no Christian could possible disagree.   We are bought with a price: we are his, and the Cross is where we come, surrender, repent, and give our life to him, as he gives His life to us in the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.  He is about love, mercy, peace, grace and the reconciliation of mankind to God.  The Cross affords redemption, sanctification, and renewal, new life in Him, through the power of the Resurrection.  I do not believe we can add or subtract from the Word of God nor from his Salvation. "It is Finished' 'Teleos' meant it is finished, continues to be finished and will always be finished: the thing is irrevocably done, and by Christ who is one with the Father.

That being said though, my reasons for leaving were the following:

1. From many pulpits, we heard the false doctrine,  that the gifts of the Holy Spirit were not for today; that God was some how finished with those gifts in the first weeks or so after Pentecost, and that all we got after that was religion and edicts.  The fallacy comes in the Baptist acceptance of doctrines such as Dispensationalism (first instituted by early Jesuits, and reintroduced by Jesuit trained persons such as Darby around the time of the 'new finds' in Bible texts) and from the acceptance of the Catholic (Roman) Canon of Scriptures as the rendering of 'that which is perfect is come.    The gifts have continued on through the centuries, buried by the PR of the Roman Church.

2. In alliance with that issue is the Jesuit origin of a main Baptist doctrine of 'Dispensationalism'.  While Darby is considered the father of modern Dispensationalism, favored by Plymouth Brethren in the 1890s and since,  his Jesuit training betrayed doctrinal purity.  The early history of Dispensationalism is clearly Jesuit as noted in "Regal-Network.com/Dispensationalism:"

"The origin of this theory can be traced to three Jesuit priests; (1) Francisco Ribera (1537-1591), (2) Cardinal Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621) one of the best known Jesuit apologists, who promoted similar theories to Ribera in his published work between 1581 and 1593 entitled Polemic Lectures Concerning the Disputed Points of the Christian Belief Against the Heretics of This Time, and (3) Manuel Lacunza (1731–1801).  The writings of Ribera and Bellarmine, which contain the precedence upon which the theory of Dispensationalism is founded, were originally written to counteract the Protestant reformers' interpretation of the Book of the Revelation which, according to the reformers, exposed the Pope as Antichrist and the Roman Catholic Church as the whore of Babylon.

Ribera's theory lay dormant until it was revisited by Lacunza, and Lacunza's work the Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty (Vol.I, Vol.II.), was translated into English by Edward Irving (1792–1834) in 1827. However, Irving was not aware that the author of this work was not the converted Jewish Rabbi he pretended to be, but a Roman Catholic imposter, and a Jesuit at that! Irving was duped into believing that Lacunza was a converted Jewish Rabbi named Juan Josafat Ben-Ezra, and he was taken in by his anti-Protestant writings. It should be noted that J. N. Darby was also vehemently opposed to Protestantism and at one time, like his friend John Henry Newman, considered converting from Anglicanism to the Roman Church. Having been led astray by this Jesuit work, Irving completely rejected the historical orthodox Christian belief concerning the return of Jesus Christ; as the following extract from his introduction to his translation of Lacunza's work clearly shows.

"...having, by God’s especial providence, been brought to the knowledge of a book, written in the Spanish tongue, which clearly sets forth, and demonstrates from Holy Scripture, the erroneousness of the opinion, almost universally entertained amongst us, that He is not to come till the end of the millennium, and what you call the last day, meaning thereby the instant or very small period preceding the conflagration and annihilation of this earth; I have thought it my duty to translate the same into the English tongue for your sake, that you may be able to disabuse yourselves of that great error, which hath become the inlet to many false hopes, and will, I fear, if not speedily corrected, prove the inlet to many worldly principles and confederacies, and hasten the ruin and downfall of the present churches."

Another Roman Catholic counter-interpretation to that held by Protestants is that of Luis De Alcazar (1554-1613), a Spanish Jesuit. Alcazar also wrote a commentary on the book of the Revelation entitled An Investigation into the Hidden Meaning of the Apocalypse. In which he suggests that the entire Revelation applies to pagan Rome and the first six centuries of Christianity. Perhaps the Roman Catholic origin of the dispensationalist view is best described by Le Roy Edwin Froom.

It was Irving's own interest in prophecy which led him to the works of Manuel Lacunza, (who wrote using the false Jewish name of Juan Josafat Ben-Ezra). Lacunza's ideas were similar and probably based on the writings of the sixteenth century Jesuit, Francesco Ribera. Ribera was one of the Jesuits commissioned by the Pope to write a commentary on the book of Revelation that would hopefully counteract the anti-Catholic Protestant interpretation held at that time.

In 1590, Ribera published a commentary on the Revelation as a counter-interpretation to the prevailing view among Protestants which identified the Papacy with the Antichrist. Ribera applied all of Revelation but the earliest chapters to the end time rather than to the history of the Church. Antichrist would be a single evil person who would be received by the Jews and would rebuild Jerusalem.

George Eldon Ladd. The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of the Second Advent and the Rapture. 1956. pp. 37-38.

Ribera denied the Protestant Scriptural Antichrist (II Thessalonians 2) as seated in the church of God—asserted by Augustine, Jerome, Luther and many reformers. He set on an infidel Antichrist, outside the church of God.”

Ralph Thompson. Champions of Christianity in Search of Truth. p. 89.

The result of his work [Ribera’s] was a twisting and maligning of prophetic truth.

The Word of God is a whole, start to finish, telling one story and history.  I do not believe that God ever dealt with Salvation differently in a period of time. Many have debated the issue over time, but the same website, Regal-Network  includes three other quotes by Pink, Mueller, and G. Campbell Morgan:

"My brother, I am a constant reader of my Bible, and I soon found that what I was taught to believe did not always agree with what my Bible said. I came to see that I must either part company with John Darby, or my precious Bible, and I chose to cling to my Bible and part from Mr. Darby." George Müeller (1805–1898)

I am quite convinced that all the promises to Israél are found, are finding and will find their perfect fulfilment in the Church. It is true that in time past, in my expositions, I gave a definite place to Israél in the purposes of God. I have now come to the conviction, as I have just said, that it is, the new and spiritual Israél that is intended. G. Campbell Morgan (1863-1945)

Dispensationalism is a device of the enemy, designed to rob the children of no small part of that bread which their heavenly Father has provided for their souls; a device wherein the wily serpent appears as an angel of light, feigning to "make the Bible a new book" by simplifying much in it which perplexes the spiritually unlearned. It is sad to see how widely successful the devil has been by means of this subtle innovation. A. W. Pink (1886-1952)

These men are among the most respected of Baptist doctrine: surely it must be given thought.

3. Beyond Dispensationalism, I could no longer stay in the Baptist Church because of the often encountered anti-Semitic doctrines and ideas including:

A. God is finished with the Jews. They are cut off, and we are the replacement.  This is error, as noted in Romans 11.
B. The Jews in the end, if they are to be saved, cannot come by Christ alone, but have to obey also the entirity of the law.  This is betrayed by the scripture, "Jesus Christ, the Same, Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow."  The idea that the Jews must either not be able to be saved, or must come through even in part their own efforts betrays the teachings of the New Testament and Old, in which Salvation is always taught as given by God.. (See all passages on Salvation in Psalms)

C. That the Jews cannot be saved in this 'Dispensation'.  Nonsense.  The blindness of Israel is misunderstood by most today.  It is "in part"  and refers to spiritual blindness, addressed equally in the Old Testament, and has to do with what moderns call a 'slumber' but which Tyndale translated as a 'disquietness':   a time of restless semi-blindness,  to serve the purpose of grafting on the Gentiles to fulfill prophecy, which is resolved in the re-grafting of the Jews to headship, in their chosen status, in an everlasting covenant.  "Hath God cast off those he foreknew? God forbid."  Paul writes.  It is serious error and affront to God and his Word, God and his covenants to believe that God is in any way finished with Israel.  The blindness is to some Baptists who cannot see, though the Jews have returned to Israel after 2000 years.

D. Blasphemy Against the Holy Spirit.
Some Baptist pastors are very careful with this issue:  even though they may personally believe that the gifts are not extant, they nonetheless do not believe they should teach about it, taking very seriously the one sin which can disavow the 'new covenant': blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.  This includes according to the Scriptures:

Matthew 12:31-32King James Version (KJV)31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.  from Bible Gateway: KJV

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit includes attributing the work of God to Satan:  e.g. the Pharisees attribute the power of Christ to 'Beelzebub'.  But Christ responds that Satan cannot cast out Satan,  and in another passage:

Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men  mt 12:31

We cannot attribute the works of the Holy Spirit to the Devil: this is done over and over from Baptist pulpits, and they throw the baby out with the bathwater, endangering their own souls.  The Holy Spirit still works today, and they that are of the Holy Spirit, know the work of God.

The result in the Baptist Church, by denying the power of God in this century, and accepting Roman teachings simply on convention,  has been lukewarmness, religiousity,  and lack of a true dedication to Christ.  Instead,  we see a kingdom of men,  teaching part of the truth, denying the rest.   Because of this, the Baptist Church's fences are down,  they have become a wealthy and worldly church,  politicized, believing like Catholics and Protestants that going to church, nodding in acquiescence and being 'Republican' is atonement enough.  Nationalism enters in: they cannot imagine that Christ would not favor and be partial more to America than any other nation.   The horrible result is that many unChristian and anti-Christian influences have plied their way into the Baptist Church as well as others, ranging from false religions, to cults and political groups, and even groups with alternative 'lifestyles' and theories, which in the end undermine and destroy Christian faith.

There are more reasons I left than these, but this writing is becoming lengthy.  The celebration of worldly holidays, Christmas trees on the altar, Halloween parties,  Superbowl sundays, and the myriad of 'cool ' worldly things, betray Christ.  They seem minor,  and we give liberty to each other on issues such as these, or issues of dress, food, tvs,  etc,  but the main issue is that we have lost the great and high calling,  of placing our entire allegiance to God: over nations, issues,  favored doctrines, etc.  We have settled down in the world,  and we are beginning to reap what we sow. Attitudes towards women have become not those of surrender but of domination over women, or conversely, 'anything goes' mentalities, erasing godly boundaries and rank which are there for a purpose.  Baptist churches have become havens of disruptive behavior, division, and even violence.  Prayers should take eminence over field trips and potlucks.  We can enjoy social events and fellowships, but in the end, it is all Christ, or not Christ.   I left, and 'came out from among them' not because 75% of their doctrine was not true, not because they did not carry on the work of Christ and the Gospel, but because they have failed to see Christ as King and Lord.

Elizabeth Kirkley Best

Judah's Glory

Founded in 1987, originally called "Hope to Heaven" for a year or so, Judah's Glory first became "O Israel", and then changed in name to Judah's Glory.   While the intent is still to develop weekly on site Bible Studies, we continue with audio studies, published studies, blogs and website studies, downloadable in pdf format.   The site at judahsglory.com, currently under revision contains several hundred published studies, all free, which are Bible Based with KJV references and notes. 

The series ongoing are Promise of Messiah,  House that Will Not Die, Propheteuo, (Gifts ), Healing of Christ (Mind of Christ), The Glory of God, Judah's Glory Bible Helps, Judah's Glory General Studies (hard questions); Wars of Israel (Outlines of Bible Wars), Preaching and Teaching the Gospel, and several others.  Many Children's studies are available, including 30 Coloring books Bible Studies, Armor of God for Kids, How to Study Your Bible, and others.

Judah's Glory remains an independent, unincorporated free Ministry, for free and fair use in Christian homes, Schools, Sunday Schools and individual use.   The studies, tracts, and other materials are authored by Dr. Elizabeth Kirkley Best, a former psychology professor, Writer, and Web Director.  The one exception is the tract "A Deaf Messiah" co-written by Dr. Best and Sarah Rose Ebster.  Dr. Best is also the author of Shoaheducation.com,  and several books and booklets on various titles. Sarah, her daughter, continues in a graduate program in Theology in the Bay area.

Judah's Glory is not affiliated with any other ministry, including Jews for Jesus, Chosen People, Billy Graham Evangelistic Assn, or others:  we are a small independent work seeking heart education in the Scriptures and the teaching and preaching of the Gospel, and of the rightful doctrine regarding the Chosen nation of Israel.   While we accept small donations,  we do not ask for funds for any portion of the site or published materials:  since we are not a 5013c corporation,  we legally cannot receive donations over a certain limit.  We have held from the beginning 'freely given, freely give' as a main principle in ministry.

Questions regarding the ministry (we are also on FACEBOOK) may be directed ONLY to Elizabeth K. Best, at judahsglory@gmail.com or elizabethkirkleybest@gmail.com .   Our statement of faith may be found on the site:  we are traditional in our doctrine in views of the trinity, blood atonement, virgin birth, deity of Christ, and other essential doctrines: we are NOT and have never been affiliated with JWs, Catholicism, Mormonism, Unity or even Methodist or Baptist churches or theology, or such entities as Armstrongism.  Our views on the Jews are that of a people who are direct descendants of the 'Children of Israel',  a Chosen nation in everlasting covenant with God, held in slumber until the appointed time in which they will attain their rightful place as first and not last in the reflection of God's Glory.  It is Israel to whom belongs first, Salvation, the Messiah ,the Word, the Oracles of God, the covenant and promises.  We also hold that there is one, blood bought Salvation by the Messiah of Israel.

Slavery & the Bible

Recently on "Answers in Genesis",  the question of slavery and the Bible was brought up.  We have already briefly alluded to Slavery in the Bible when dealing with the question of morality, God, and wars in the Old Testament, dealing with such difficult issues as why God would command the Israelites marching to Canaan to fight against and destroy whole cities of Philistines and others who inhabited the wilderness terrain on their way to the promised land. (See Questions About the Violent Old Testament: warsofisrael.BlogSpot.com/.wordpress.com).

Slavery proves to be just as difficult a topic for the modern mind when confronting the Old Testament as does the idea of a God-commanded war.   The AIG site,  while dealing with the differences between bondservants and slaves,  fails to address one critical factor:  the difference between the prescription of God and the description of the Word.   AIG explores the fundamental issues of the cultural difference of the economy of Israel back then vs. now, but there are several points that need to be made additionally.   The same Bible, as they point out,  decries to the point of capital punishment 'menstealers', 'kidnappers' and those who buy and sell human beings.  The Bible also gave rise to the beliefs and actions of Abolitionists against the slave trade in the 17 and 1800s,  yet at the same time, the bible PRESCRIBES the right treatment or sometimes very severe treatment of those taken in actual slavery in war.

Agreeing with AIG that the great majority of instances regarding the words 'bondservant, servant, maid, slave etc' have to do with a voluntary arrangement of debt payment  (we still have some forms of that today), the nitty-gritty of dealing with the times in Scripture when God commanded roles, designated punishments and sometimes even cruel dealings still must be addressed.   As a former college professor,  I used to use this argument against believers, and heard many of my colleagues and students do the same:  how could the God of Love in I John,  command the taking of young unmarried women in war but killing their families,  and still stay true to his nature?  Consider the following passages:

[Deu 20:14-16 KJV] 14 But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, [even] all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies, which the LORD thy God hath given thee. 15 Thus shalt thou do unto all the cities [which are] very far off from thee, which [are] not of the cities of these nations. 16 But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee [for] an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth: [blb-kjv]

In the instructions to the men of Israel who war against the nations far off, they are to keep the spoil and the women and children, but kill the men, but of  the local, and very brutal nations which threaten Israel, they were to literally decimate the city.  Because we are taught first and foremost in the Old and New Testament to love God first, and others second, and that better than ourselves, the notion of totally annihilating villages, cities and towns by people who name God's name, and then to hear that it is commanded by the God of love seems utterly contradictory:  it becomes impossible for natural reasoning to reconcile.   The reasoning of the Lord though differs from our insufficient minds, and the Bible more than adequately states that the ways of God are not our ways:

more to follow....

New Booklet for a New Year

DOWNLOAD AT:

 https://archive.org/details/WhatDidJesusSayAboutHimselfInTheGospelOfJohn

Just a little gift for the new year of 2015 from Judah's Glory:  A small help/guide when smart alecs tell you Jesus never claimed to be the Messiah!

Judah's Glory 2014

Judah's Glory is about to enter its 30th year.   Beginning in 1987 (actually 2 years before with some minor tracts and cards),  our small effort has in some ways stayed very small, but in other ways, providing materials for free God's way, we have influenced belief in the past three decades with his help.   We are offline except for this blog, some bible helps and ongoing bible studies on blogspot.com and wordpress.com  but hope this coming year will see the entire site back online.

Our temporary site, judahsglory.webs.com continues to offer a sample of materials for the larger site of judahsglory.com.    Please pray for this little ministry, as many larger interests have attempted to take over the materials for no other purpose than to slightly rewrite them and sell them, defeating the purpose of providing quality free materials to homeschools and christian churches and schools.  

What the World Needs Now.....Is Prayer

While it has been a bit since posting to this column,  I am writing to encourage national prayer,  for the world and the nations in the light of the troubles in Venezuela, Crimea,  the Mideast and around the world.  For some time,  the world has been held in a precarious perch of peace among protest,  but since 2012,  there has been a decided shift toward violent protests,  and large groups of persons clashing using techniques of modern warfare rather than simple civil disobedience and police restraint.  The introduction in Syria of Sarin gas,  and the recent invasion of the Crimean Pennisula point to the volatile environment of a world which is also facing a soon coming series of natural disasters,  the fact of which is well known, though the timing of which is not.

The complexity of issues does not allow for an immediate rendering of simplistic 'good guy-bad guy' delineations:  many are in good conscience pouring into mass protests and city squares to combat what are being termed 'fascist' government tactics, and in many, but not all cases this is so.   Many though are deceived into thinking that organizations such as the EU,  and other 'global citizenry' organizations provide the facil alternative:  for now, the EU  holds to civil rights and more democratic values but careful students of the Word know this does not last, and even rank unbelievers must eventually acknowledge that in a one world government,  while the outset may be beneficent, the end may not.  Years from now, when any global government becomes oppressive, as many of our originally democratic nations have,  it is a 'last stop':  when all laws conform,  there will be no appeal, and no refuge in other nations or their laws.  Therefore,  when such incidents arise which involve national feeling and interest in the Ukraine, or the wish to unify in Russia,  or military show in the Crimea,  the issues are complex and are not resolved by naive rebellion nor by acquiescing to totalitarian states which leave their citizenry in misery.

Since our human wisdom is limited and must always be tempered by God's holy wisdom,  we can be assured of the urgent need for one thing which can never be wrong:  prayer and praise, and the seeking of God's wisdom to know what to do.  

We have forgotten in the modern world, even in the church,  that prayer really does change things,  even at the international level.  Prayer saves lives, heals nations, changes the mind and heart of national leaders, and creates peace where there is none.  Prayer and praise can bring about 'exceeding abundant' solutions that none of us would normally consider.  We need to pray very specifically and sincerely,  for guidance and direction,  peaceful solutions, but also for particular needs to the God who knows 'every hair on our head' and names every star in the sky.

The Bible teaches clearly that God inhabits the praises of his people,  of the people he loves, and God is Love.   Our aim and goal is to pray for healing in nations who see no solution but violence, for it is likewise at our doorstep,  as governments in efforts to keep an equilibrium against terrorism, overstep the boundaries of civil liberties and basic freedoms.  We can in some instances circle troubled areas in prayer, praise and the Word,  taking authority which has been granted to us by the Lord over spirits of division:  we can,  without power or position, through the great gift of prayer, effect peaceful solutions that armies and weaponry have never wrought.

Judah's Glory is asking every church that encounters this blog or our materials,  to make a concerted effort to set apart a day, night or part of a day,  for intense, meaningful, and penitent prayer,  asking God in our Savior's name for the speedy and peaceful resolution of conflict,  the wisdom of legislatures,  and the powerful encouragement of nations which wish to remain or attain freedom and identity as a people,  without compromising in a way which will hurt the church and our free practice of our faith.   We know many fine churches will respond with more than we can do.

In the name of the Prince of Peace, Sar Shalom,
Elizabeth K. Best
Director, Judah's Glory

Note:

Over the past two years,  there has been an attempt by a number of unkind folks to disparage my testimony in order to takeover and sell materials offered for free on Judah's Glory.   One of the worst offenses has been the very illegal effort to use my name or versions of my name or my now grown children's names in order to make it appear that they are the people mentioned on the sites.   While we are working to bring this to an end,  I wish to make very clear that I am not affiliated with the following:

A woman named "Libby Anne" who claims to be a former Christian and homeschooled child, and now is an atheist.

"Rosaria Butterfield Champagne" who has hit the Christian talk circuit and claims to be a former gay activist and english professor who 'found Christ' .

I have lived my life in all honesty and dignity with discipline:  I am 59 going on 60 and was a former college professor but have never been gay and have lived a disciplined life in the full sight of family and friends for 29 years of belief.   Many of the people who are using versions of my name are from a gay background,  and i suspect it is because of my ardent stand against the lifestyle as an aberration.  I would like to let this go and not bring it forward, but at this point I felt it essential to clear this point up that it not disparage my work.  ekbest

Who Is This Man, that the Winds and the Waves Obey Him?

Who is this man, that the winds and waves obey him?  was the question asked by the apostles after watching Jesus calm a storm with a word:  no ordinary man, they were certain, and they thought they knew,  but one thing was certain in Israel: everyone had an opinion.   Jesus even remarks himself on who the 'Son of Man' was and is,  and contrary to popular secular opinion he made it clear on numerous occasions that he was the Messiah, the ensign of God towards which Israel and the rest of the world would turn and believe, or would turn away from and die.   The speech available below is a look at Jesus, and what he and others said of him.  First in a series,  we look at 'what manner of man' it was that held sovereign power even over the winds and waves out on Galilee, and later over death.  Speaker/teacher: Elizabeth K. Best

Judah's Glory in 2013

Except for this blog and a temporary site, at judahsglory.webs.com,  judahsglory.com has been down for a couple of years.  This is not a move that was entirely in my will,  as I have built this little ministry over the years in order to provide a resource for free bible study materials for churches and homeschools as well as the general public who cannot afford the more expensive packages,  in the interest of fulfilling the commission of Christ of 'freely given, freely give'.

When I began Judah's Glory in my home in 1987,  it was originally called "Hope to Heaven" and was directed toward mourning families in providing a few small bible resources and coloring books and story books on heaven for dying and/or mourning children and their families, based upon my many years as a university professor and intervention person with families experiencing stillbirth, as well as other types of losses.  Upon becoming a Christian,  I sought to adapt my ministry to my former work, but God led in a different direction.  After an early altercation I was made to see the need for materials for Christians of all ages on Christian duties, biblical responsibilities and correct doctrine regarding the chosen people of God. By 1989 the name was changed to "O Israel" and by the early 90s to "Judah's Glory".  The materials are the same under all the names,  and included music, coloring books, adult and children's bible studies, helps, audio tapes and artwork.   To date,  several hundred bible studies are now available for free downloads online or upon request, though most of the work has gone out by downloads.

The work went on up to 1992 with only occasional interruption of some less than scrupulous persons which too often abound in the church, who even back then tried to take over some of my material, and falsely copyright it in their name to bluntly, flip it for a buck.   These folks are destroying the house of God in this country and the problem has become so great as to lead to serious and occasionally even violent consequences to my family as well as interference with business online and off, physical injury, injury to property, illegal entries, burglaries and has even spread into our private lives with slander, constant innuendo, and attempting to waylay funds, opportunities etc.   I know we are not the only ones who have experienced the dire consequences to home and family life and finances,  but at the point of physical injuries by persons we do not even know, and faced with constant attempts of plagiarism and copyright fraud,  I have finally decided to bring forward some of what has happened.

I am not going to give up on Judah's Glory ever.  It is not only some christian groups which have tried to waylay the site and others, but also JWs, Mormons, Catholics, Islamics and unbelievers, as many disagree with the Lord's admonition of keeping the work for free, and basically see us as an 'easy mark'.  I am emphatically stating with the Lord Jesus as my witness, that nothing has gone out under my name, that I did not write, though several so-called ministries which have acted more like theft rings have ruined the writing, timbre and quality of many of the studies, though through God's grace and the good will of blogging services and others, the originals have often been restored.  The site came down when the hacking became so great, and the ruin to equipment, heart , house and home that I felt until we moved out of Wisconsin it was better to keep a lower profile.

No ministry, small or large in a free country should ever have experienced what we have been put through over the past 16 years, particularly.  False accusations, ID fraud, false sales by unauthorized people, physical assaults, interference with the workplace, career ruin, slander, and even ghosting of my drives, frying of my drives, and some things that if I wrote of, one might not believe.   The police often shrug or even smirk and act like it is a 'computer problem' but it is much more.

While I cannot correct all of the issues on my own,  my ability to write in my own home has grown so hindered that the work while not gone has grown to a snail's pace.  There are a few points that are critical though:

1. I have never worked with any other ministry on my materials, except for one time only for a few months, when I tried to work with IBJM in Chattanooga in 1997 on one coloring book: Jesus was Jewish,  but they would not meet my terms of no changes in the text,  and after 8 or 9 months, the offer was rescinded.  We left the independent fundamental Baptist Church in 1997,  and except for a rare visit or two have never gone back.  Part of the problem has been from persons at that time embittered by our leaving who tried to take over what was and still is entirely my work.  We have to be free to make choices.

2. I do not work nor have ever worked for or with Jews for Jesus:  they are not the only Messianic endeavor in the world,  they do not have any moral, biblical or legal authority in my work, and I do not agree with their 'covenants' for their employees.

3. I have also not worked ever for the following as I am sure they will agree:  Billy Graham Association, Bob Jones U., Moody Press, Copeland ministries,Ron Philip's , World Harvest,  or for more than cleaning and welcome center work at Tennessee Temple.  I have never worked with anyone from these places or been paid by them for anything.  In short, I have worked entirely ALONE and with a doctorate and 32 years of experience at the university level, I am fully capable of producing my own work.

Though lengthy, a few more points are critical:

4. I hold a real doctorate which I have never lost in any fashion, from UF, and it is a disgrace to have church people with little or no education constantly harp on or spread slander about my education or professional career:  we go to church to worship God not for career ruin.  I left my career to obey Christ, even in this late point in history.   Still happens.  I did not have to leave for any reason,  and I could go back tomorrow if I wanted to betray the Lord.

5. I was raised Catholic and even taught in a Catholic Seminary after becoming a born again Christian, but I have not , save for about 6months attended a Catholic church in 28 years, and have even sought to have my name removed from their records,  but it is a lengthy process.  I have taught a correct view of the Catholic church for the whole 28 years I have been a believer, that it is 'another Gospel' with the inventions of man made doctrine and even ancient mystery religions mixed in.  I have had to deal also with their disdain and that of family members because I left not only the Church but also teaching at one of their Vatican sponsored seminaries in 1987 after being hired as an Associate Professor.  I did not leave because of any mental breakdown but because of doctrinal differences in how to teach a course, and over an unwillingness to attend daily mass for faculty at the seminary.  My problem is with the church, not with the people.

6. The materials are all of a Gospel believing stance.  I hold a doctorate in Personality Psychology, not Theology, and I only attended a Methodist Seminary in 1987 for a few months, hoping for an MDiv in Hospital Chaplaincy but God directed in another path.  I did not obtain the degree, which would not have prepared me in any case for what I write now:  28 years of daily Bible study and intensive independent study plus a few short courses in Hebrew , Holocaust poetry, and Early Christianity and Judaism have been more influential, but the studies were started in '87.

7. My church background I will send upon request to scrupulous persons, but not to have all on the list called to start up conflict.   It looks a bit inconsistent because of many moves and a learning process, but I was in church from birth till 16 in the Catholic Church, was not a believer at all from 16 till 29, and became a believer in 1985.  From 85-88 I was Methodist,  then for a short while in a '43c' church which is basically a gospel believing but works oriented church, for a short time in Grace Brethren, then for 12 years in either Southern or Independent Fundamental Baptist churches,  though even then we believed in the gifts of God, contrary to their teaching.  I was also involved with a two Messianic fellowships, and continued a messianic bent in doctrine and teaching though we have not been active in a congregation for some time, but I have planned to begin one.  For now,  the ministry has turned to mostly a publications ministry.

8. The site(s) have been online since 1997,  with free downloads which followed after.  The sites emanating out of Judah's Glory ministry have been Shoah Education Project Web, Shoah Rose, Wars of Israel, House that Will Not Die, The Healing of Christ Series, Propheteuo (on gift of Prophecy), Mystery of the Jews, Promise of Messiah and others.   We also had on for a time a series of teaching tapes at sermon.net, as well as gabcast and other servers, and a number of the tapes are available through internet archives.

9. I am a single parent, dedicated to the Lord and the Word,  and I have lived a very disciplined life for 28 years.  I am not of ANY alternative lifestyle,  and I am fed up a bit with insinuations because I live alone or with a family member.   I have been an outspoken critic of sexual sin in the pulpit and church,  though careful not to throw people out with the criticism.   I have cussed on occasion in a totally unchristlike manner, repented for it, and prayed for victory over it.  I also once in a while leave my dishes in the sink till morning.  It is all wrong. (James 5:16)  There have been some massive slander campaigns emanating from 3 christian universities who have tried to take over my work illegally,  and the judgment of it I leave to the Lord.

10.  I write my own music: it is me on the tape, I know it is not of a professional quality.

11.  No sales of my material have been legal or with my permission.

That should hold for now.   I recognize that most people just let even such things as mentioned above go by, but the rumor mill has become so great, threatening almost 30 years of work,  that at some point, I had to make available these responses to protect other ministries as well as mine.  We should all have this foremost thought in mind: that if we hear rumors about a person or ministry we are required in love to first confront the person, before broadcasting what even dozens of people say, because too many fine people with hearts of gold are being ruined in addition to myself.   If only the ones who went state to state with rumors and thefts and even court fraud are left, what kind of church is it that we have?  Are we about sales or the Lord?
Pride, or Perserverence?

We all have a choice to make.

Many blessings in the love of the Lord, Christ Jesus
Elizabeth (Libbie) Kirkley Best

P.s. Please attend to my name and photo online as many persons have used my name falsely,  some so young they were not even born when Judah's Glory was begun.

Adam and Eve vs. ... contd

[last paragraph]Given however that the world was created,  a perfectly possible event, [though congressmen do not believe in six day creation because they know they could never do anything in six days] the question turns to whether the human race could indeed trace back to two original ancestors.  Oddly,  in the interview I mentioned on PBS today, the professor began to talk about that quite remarkable reality as though he had said nothing worth noting!  Now if a Creationist speaks of Adam and Eve,  Adam named for the red clay he was formed from, and Eve called the mother of all living, they are accused of dealing with fable, but the Paleontologist is merely referring to scientific theory.]

Two Original Parents

The notion of two original parents though is not at all far afield from current scientific thinking.  In 2003, Time Magazine discussed investigations which trace DNA all the way back to an original pair.  Now whether the success of such an investigation will ever be reached is doubtful due to the state of our methods,  but the fact that at least theoretical the pair could be traced back is under active and open discussion.   The only way there would not be two original parents with human DNA (which is implausible) would be with a strong case for a transitional type,  but that case has all but died:  every transitional type that has been found, has within two decades been discovered as deliberate hoaxes, presumably because even evolutionists know that it is the one string running through their darwinian tapestry that if pulled causes the whole thing to unravel.  If there had been true transitional types,  there would have been countless pieces of evidence by now, as almost 150 years of targeting that main research has been conducted with no results!

Isn't it odd also, that expeditions to find the beginning of human life,  focus on the area of the world where the Bible accounts Eden once was!!!  Genesis tells us both the borders of the place called Eden (the 'Gan' in Hebrew), and yet also makes it clear that without Christ we will not be finding our way back:

10 And a river went out of Edento water the garden; and from thence it was parted , and became into four heads. 11 The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; 12And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone. 13 And the name of thesecond river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia. 14 And the nameof the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river isEuphrates.                                                 and 3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken . 24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way , to keep the way of the tree of life.  In the days when I considered the story of Adam and Eve only a fable,  my reasoning was primarily that of most:  that since we do not see talking serpents and flaming angels, that we must put aside the story to 'allegory' instead of history : this is the legacy of Bultmann's  Higher Criticism from Tubingen in which if something does not make sense to us in the Scriptures, it must bow to us instead of vice versa: in other words human reason determines truth in God's Word instead of God's Word forming and making human reason: it is the substance of the classical debate between Sola Scriptura!  and Fides Et Ratio,  the great divide of the authority of the Word vs. the authority of man.  This was the thesis and antithesis of the Garden: begun in Eden, it continues till today about precisely who is sovereign in life, the world and the universe. We have a problem with a speaking serpent in the Garden because as noted, we have never seen one.  We see serpents all the time, but they are often small, quiet save for a rattle or rasp, and they slither away with most of us standing in fear or revulsion, and we certainly do not take a great deal of time to know them.  The Serpent in the garden though is mentioned as  obviously of a different nature than the ones we see today, even the biggest, because he knows in the most sinister way how to reason away God's Word.  He also seems to know, though he deceitfully twists it to his line of reasoning, a little bit more about God and heaven than one would think,  and one can surmise that even though he was 'cast down from heaven' and Jesus reports seeing him fall,  that his war against God is not over: he wishes to take the heart and soul of the ones God created to love.   . 4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die : 5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened , and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
He is calling God a liar, because God said they would die if they ate,  and he is trying to  inculcate his own motives against God: to become as God.   The serpent elswhere is described not as a revulsive thing, but as ornate:     12 Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, andsay unto him, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty. 13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering,the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created . 14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth ; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. 15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created , till iniquity was found in thee. 16 By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned : therefore I will cast thee a sprofane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. 17 Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee. Ezekiel 28: 12-17 The serpent then was of a different KIND than modern serpents, and yet at the same time the forerunner, as God promised he would be distinctly abased:  And the LORD God said unto theserpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go , and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: Gen 3:14 The remnant form of the serpent in most creates revulsion and we have an innate fear unless we overcome it, to stay away from snakes, even when they are harmless.  The fallen angel, the devil or Satan (shatan in Hebrew) continues to war in the divine, but the form, whether it is the current species or not still serves a reminder to the cost to all of the Fall of man. This study is not particularly though about the Fall or the meaning of it, since most Christians are aware of its implications and our need for redemption because of it.  The question is whether it is plausible and can be easily received as HISTORY and not mythology, and I am quite certain that it can.   The issue at hand is whether we can accept as reality something we have not seen before and that is the central issue of faith:  that faith is "the substance of things not seen".   When I first became a Christian, I had heard of 'faith healings' but I did not believe in them.  I was a psychologist, a professor, and we liked to throw around words like 'empirical evidence' and 'operational definitions'. We tested what we could see and verify and argued even about that.  i have seen since both true and false healings:  but when I first saw a real healing, i was dumbfounded and overjoyed.  The first thought a doubting person has is that the event is 'rigged' or set up to look true, and one cannot say that does not occur,even too often.  Real healings though do absolutely occur by spoken word in the Holy Spirit or the laying on of hands, and once I saw the thing,  I never doubted the true again, though it was not the highest point in faith for me nor doubting Thomas.    I saw what I believed could not possibly be.  It just could not, but there it was in front of me, and not just that once but many times later because Jesus, the healer has never ceased to exist via the indwelling Holy Spirit of God. likewise, we cannot imagine nor fathom except in Hollywood or storybook fantasies, that such things could be as 'talking serpents'  but this one before all form was erased was a wonder to look at,  and had a divine persona:  he was jealous, vain, proud, deceitful and cruel and heartless:  he began immediately to try vindictively to take the human race with him.  This is sheer speculation and i will not make doctrine of it, but I wonder, since he was cursed losing his form and beauty,  whether that is not the reason he tries to align himself with earthly power and royalty, 'borrowing' their countenance because his own is no more, or whether part of the unknown interchange between God and Satan about the Messiah required a 'visage so marred'  that he was not desired:  again, don't make doctrine of it, but it would make sense. So the problem then with our belief, is not callous denial,  but that something is reported in Scripture which we cannot imagine and did not see in this world, but that does not mean that it was not the case.   The great deceiver,  the anti-christ or the 'against-Christ' like man though moreso lost his beateous form and countenance because of sin and separation. Adam and Eve as real People To me the most telling evidence that Adam and Eve were real people and not archetypes or myths, is that they had the most extensive genealogy ever kept,  and that to some extent from dates we do know, we can even closely estimate when they were on earth by flood dates by going backwards with the information in the Scriptures.  We know their children and thier lineage. We know the descent to Noah, and the descent afterwards:  myths do not carry extremely dateable genealogies. more to follow....

Adam and Eve, vs. the Speculated Possibility of a Big Bang or Something Else, Caused by Something Nobody Knows, by Random Chance which Resulted in the Entire Universe as We Know it Part II

I always thought the word 'apologist' in the theological sense was rather arrogant, and while the definition may be encased in jargon and jaundice, the notion that one must make an argument to defend God's word or doctrine has always seemed to me superfluous. Faith does not depend on human reason, although that appears to be the prevailing position of the 20th and 21st centuries. Kierkegaard and others well exercized in 'apologetics' reached the point of divine reasoning that most intellectuals and theologians reach who come to believe in God and His Word: they reach a point where reason fails, and one must make what Kierkegaard called a "Leap of Faith". Faith, as we are taught, is the substance of things not see....and there are many things on a natural level we invest faith in: things that have not yet occurred, or things that cannot be sensed, touched, smelled, seen or heard. We have faith that the sun will come up tomorrow morning, even though we have not seen tomorrow's sunrise. We have seen many sunrises that occur though. We have faith that the world exists outside the wall that surrounds my desk: though I do not see it, it has always been there. Science tells us there is air, and our lungs confirm it with every breath, but we can not touch or see air, and can experience only changes in the way it rests. {e.g. wind}

One of the closer ideas though to faith in God, is our faith in history and historical events. It takes faith to believe in George Washington: we have evidences such as letters and artifacts, we have reports and documents, and we believe them, but there are no longer eyewitness accounts, and the man has been dead for about two centuries. We see traces and read reports and listen to others, but we cannot encounter the reality of the person in the past. Few though, have any doubt that George Washington existed and assumed the office of President first, but our BELIEF is based upon evidence and remnants and accounts.

The very clear evidence that BELIEF in Jesus Christ is a divine battle, is that with far more eyewitness accounts and documents, we have scholars and even theologians today who argue that he did not even exist: they know about the Synoptic Gospels, the 'eyewitness' accounts reported over and over, they know about
number of significant people throughout history who have attested to his reality, they know about the historical accounts in secular history which verified his presence in the first century, but they do not accept it as credible. However, they accept far less as evidence for such events as the creation of the Septuagint, the death of Julius Caesar, or Hadrian crossing the Alps. The question always gets down to BELIEF.

Such is the case with origins: the news is currently replete with interviews of Stephen Hawking and others promoting the godless 'Big Bang' or 'spontaneous creation' theory, considering it sort of 'cosmic physics' or in the truest sense 'Meta-Physics', regarding where we come from or for what reason. They posit God is not necessary as 'First Cause'. They do not even attend to what they consider the 'myth' of Adam and Eve, post initial creation by God, and they without thought point to the 'countless creation myths in all cultures, nations and religions' which have existed since the beginning of time. They cannot come to terms with 'kinds' being created at once (it does note them coming out of the sea) Gen 1:20,
or a first man and woman from whom all descend. They ascribe to its comparison to the earth balancing on the back of a turtle, or minerva crawling out of the forehead of Mars.

Adam and Eve though, are not a fable according to Scripture, but are centrally counted in the genealogy of Israel and all others. So the issue becomes whether it is the history of mankind, or whether it is not. For the believer, it is true, because God has said so. That is an issue of trust and not IQ level. For the unbeliever, it will seem ever a metaphor or fable. That also is an issue of choice and faith: faith in an unreasoned and unobserved creation as opposed to an ancient account, with at least a later observable genealogy and history.

Adam and Eve:  

After years of unbelief, I have to admit, that Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden was a difficult point of belief. I believed, because I found everything else in God's Word true. Years though of public school and university training, colored my thinking, especially coming out of a discipline [psychology] that is wholly based upon Evolutionary thought and theory.   When I came to Christ though, I understood trust, and surrender,  and I very clearly understood, that what the Word of God taught was true, even if it was not with ease understood by the natural mind.   I was able readily to understand the idea of laying on of hands and healing,  of the Sermon on the Mount, of faith, forgiveness, the atonement, mercy and so many other aspects of belief.   The many years though of rigorous training in unbelief,  had left their indelible marks, and some points of doctrine were very difficult for me, though I held to them in faith, saying that while I did not understand,  I trusted God that they were true.

Perhaps the most imminent was that of the history of Adam and Eve.  It is difficult to comprehend the number of Christians today who believe that one can accept and walk in Christ, and yet hold Adam and Eve as allegorical.  Raised in the Roman Catholic church,  we were read stories of Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden, with pictures and apples and serpents,  but later,  we heard other 'versions' such as that Adam and Eve 'represented' mankind and God,  or that it was a myth or allegory used to tell a truth.   The problem with that line of thinking is that Adam and Eve, if mythology,  would lead to the Fall of Man being mythology, and if the fall of man were mythological, then there would be no need for Christ to have gone to the Cross to redeem mankind, in short either the entire account is true, or false,  but there is no mix and match as so many try today.

Long Days of Unbelief

My solution then with lapses in faith was what my solution now is: prayer for more faith and belief.   I have never prayed that prayer without a remarkable answer,  and most christians would have far fewer battles with belief, if when they ran up against certain stone walls of doubt, instead of morosely musing about whether there is a God or whether they have been wrong,  would take the entire matter to the Lord in prayer: never fails.  One of the first things that happened after I prayed, was that the church we were attending offered an unusual bible study based upon materials from ICR, Institute for Creation Research, and the one I chose was on the after events of the mount St. Helen' s volcanic eruption.   The film or films we saw showed the resulting landscape and ecosystem changes in the few weeks following the explosion.   The particular issue I struggled with back then was a six day creation:   I was ready to sort of compromise and settle on a 'long day' theory, or a 'gap theory' which I had heard,  wherein one day in the creation account represented a thousand or thousands of years.   That argument though is merely an attempt to assimilate the creation account into a 'politically (in)correct' mode of thinking so that we do not stand so far away from worldly scientific thinking.  Aside from scripture though, 'long day' theories are rather ridiculous, since it would have intimated that in order to be correct, only one part of the earth's ecosystem would have to exist for thousands of years before the next came about, e.g. grass and herb yielding seed would have to have existed for thousands of years before birds and fish and foul,  which often carry the seed, and or in the case of insects pollinate the flowers and fruit trees:  ecosystems work in unison to produce and provide for all in a continuous, divine loop.   The idea of 'long days' is great if you never think at the next level,  a common malady in the American mind today, but the logical inconsistency declares it false.

Creation and Mythology

This leaves only two real options:  either evolution or some other version of secular thought is true, or the account int the bible is true.   The biggest lie that Satan has promoted since 'Hath God said' in the Garden, is the notion that there is no such thing as sin, followed by the notion that the Edenic story is a fable.  One may have a hard time convincing people that Christ is not real when they experience his presence, love and power,  but faith is more easily taken apart at the  end of a long train on the garment of belief: at something that is supposed to have happened  thousands of years ago.   This particular blog is not an attempt to debate intelligent design vs. the big bang theory,  but to look at the very real plausibility of a literal creation, with a literal Adam and Eve.

Today as I was driving in my car listening to public radio, an interview came on of a Paleontology professor discussing dinosaurs, Oh, way back 65 million years ago.  Wow.  Imagine bones that do not decay after that amount of time, even fossilized!  Even fossilization is suspect,  since a hat thrown in a well was found fossilized fifty years later, and if we believe Creation accounts of a young earth of around 6 or seven thousand years, fossils lasting that long are even remarkable:  what we do know is that they exist.  What we don't know is how old they are:  ICR has materials showing the fallacious reasoning of carbon dating which holds whether or not one believes in Creation accounts.  In any event, six days of creation,  is entirely possible depending on what mode God used for Creation.  One thing which was very convincing, was the environmental changes mentioned above in the aftermath of the eruption of Mt. St. Helens:  the physical features of the landscape and ecosystems changed so dramatically in three weeks that  one would think they were looking at some prehistoric scene:  a fossilized forest appears,  though it was not a forest in one sense at all:  it was trees which fossilized immediately,  driven into hard soil by the enormous blast, of which many were upside down!   We know this because we were able to document the events as they occurred, and we knew the pre-existing condition:  it was weird  odd, fascinating and surreal, but it was not a mystery because we could watch the process.  Many more formations speak to the same question.

Given however that the world was created,  a perfectly possible event, [congressmen do not believe in six day creation because they know they could never do anything in six days] the question turns to whether the human race could indeed trace back to two original ancestors.  Oddly,  in the interview I mentioned on PBS today, the professor began to talk about that quite remarkable reality as though he had said nothing worth noting!  Now if a Creationist speaks of Adam and Eve,  Adam named for the red clay he was formed from, and Eve called the mother of all living, they are accused of dealing with fable, but the Paleontologist is merely referring to scientific theory.
to be continued