The Total Blindness of Unbelief (Believing is Seeing, Not the Reverse)

By Ed Cardwell

Jesus said to Martha, “Did I not say to you, if you believe, you will see the glory of God?” (John 11:40, NASB).

*     *     *     *     *

In the Gospel of John, chapter 11, we find that while Jesus was ministering on the eastern side of the Jordan, word was sent to Him from Bethany near Jerusalem that his friends Mary and Martha needed His assistance because their brother Lazarus was sick.

Rather than return promptly to come to their aid Jesus purposefully delayed his stay two days longer, as He knew what He was intending to do.

Lazarus died in the meantime and when Jesus and His disciples finally arrived near the village of Bethany, He found that Lazarus had already been in the tomb four days.

Martha, naturally grieving over the loss of her brother, when she heard that Jesus was approaching the village, went out to meet Him:

“Lord, if You had been here, my brother would not have died. Even now I know that whatever You ask of God, God will give You” (verses 21-22). 

When Jesus told her that her brother would rise again, she said,

“I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day” (verse 24).

Jesus responded:

“I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me shall live even if he dies, and everyone who lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?” (verses 25-26).

Martha replied:

“Yes, Lord. I have believed that You are the Christ, the Son of God, even He who comes into the world” (verse 27).

Mary coming out later to greet Jesus also expressed her faith and in a similar tone:

“Lord, if You had been here, my brother would not have died” (verse 25).

Both Mary and Martha, because of their belief in Him, were about to witness the greatest miracle that Jesus performed prior to His crucifixion, and they were given to understand even more through their eyes of faith His divine nature, His eternal power, and His infinite love. 

*     *     *     *     *

It was a highly emotional scene:  bitter weeping and mourning over the death of this beloved brother and friend. We are told that even Jesus Himself, being moved and troubled in spirit, wept. But as the great healer Who could calm even the mighty elements and could open the eyes of a man born blind would not be shedding the same kind of tears as these other mourners. Might He have viewed His friend’s body as a hideous testimony of sin’s consequence upon His perfect creation? Could He have in view His final victory and yet with all the agony in between?

Finally Jesus was led to the tomb where they had laid Lazarus.

Against Martha’s protest that the body was already decaying after four days and there would be a stench, Jesus commanded that the stone lying against the tomb be removed.

And Jesus turned to Martha and said, "Did I not say to you, if you believe, you will see the glory of God?" (verse 40).

“And so they removed the stone. And Jesus raised His eyes, and said, ‘Father, I thank Thee that Thou heardest Me. And I knew that Thou hearest Me always; but because of the people standing around I said it, that they may believe that Thou didst send Me.’ And when He had said these things, He cried out with a loud voice, ‘Lazarus, come forth.’ [literally, ‘Lazarus, here!  Outside!’] He who had died came forth, bound hand and foot with wrappings; and his face was wrapped around with a cloth. Jesus said to them, ‘Unbind him, and let him go’” (verses 41-44).

*     *     *     *     *

It is crucial for our benefit to focus attention on the results of this miracle as to its effect on the witnesses. We notice that the multitude in attendance at this scene was quickly divided into two very different camps.

The first is described in verse 45:

“Many therefore of the Jews, who had come to Mary and beheld what He had done, believed in Him.” 

They “beheld” what Jesus had done. The Greek word is qea,omai (theaomai); it means to “gaze upon,” “view attentively,” “contemplate.” They could not but believe what their eyes told them and they interpreted the miracle correctly. They were compelled to conclude that this man was indeed THE MESSIAH.

They must have reasoned in their hearts the obvious: “If He has the power to raise Lazarus, He can raise the dead; then He can raise me! Hallelujah, praise God! Here is our Redeemer, come to us in the flesh!” We can almost hear them shouting out praises to God at this unrivaled and majestic display of supernatural power.

And the results were as Heaven had intended:  “THEY BELIEVED IN HIM” – And that He was sent to them from God (cf: verse 42).

We can only rejoice at the eternal significance of this great sign which Jesus performed and be humbled by His demonstration of great power and glory. Yes, He raised Lazarus; He can raise me!

*     *     *     *     *

Alas, there was an entirely different group present at this event. They saw the same thing that the first group saw. And their eyes had not deceived them. They saw a dead man come out of the tomb at Jesus’ command. They saw him bound from head to toe, and they saw him walking. They believed what their eyes told them. But they had a different interpretation and reaction to what they saw.

They did not see the glory of God displayed. They did not understand nor could they interpret the sign of the miracle. As amazing as it was, they were totally blind to the glorious significance of this event. To them it was an obvious threat, a monumental challenge to the universal status quo of governmental and religious authority. Why, this would definitely change the balance of power forever. And what if He raised everyone from the tombs?  Might it be that some of them had been responsible for the deaths of countless souls targeted by the council of selfish religionists? Oh, the manifold wickedness of unbelief!

So, their response was quite different from that of the first group. Verse 46 tells us what action they took:

“But some of them went away to the Pharisees, and told them the things which Jesus had done.” 

They ran back to those who held their trust to report the event and its potential dangers.

The chief priests and Pharisees did not delay in convening a high level cabinet meeting to deliberate on how to respond. They did not deny that what they were told was true. They believed what their minions had related and did not waver as to their certainty of all that was told. This Jesus, the bane of their “righteous” rulership, had indeed raised the dead!  And they could not cope nor endure it.

The council came to order with Caiaphas addressing the Sanhedrin :  

“What are we doing?  For this man is performing many signs. If we let Him go on like this, all men will believe in Him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation." (verses 47-48).

The arrogance, the avarice and self-preservation that had always dominated this assembly quickly emerged to set the tone.

Jealousy and fear gripped the members. The high priest stood to calm his colleagues and to offer a “final” solution to this dangerous archenemy. His plan was not to be misunderstood:

“You know nothing at all, nor do you take into account that it is expedient for you that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation should not perish" (verses 49-50).

There is no record of dissension among the council. The die was cast. 

“So from that day on they planned together to kill Him.” (verse 53).

*     *     *     *     *

What was the difference between the two groups who witnessed the resurrection of Lazarus? What is the difference between any two such groups who look at the stars, the mountains, or a sunset? Both groups see the same thing; they believe what their eyes tell them. So there is a certain commonality to their fundamental belief. But beyond that, there is an infinite dissimilarity between the two as to what the mind and heart perceives.

The one group had an active faith in the one true God of Israel, and they believed in the prophets He sent who testified in the Old Testament concerning the promise of the coming One, He who was to restore all things. The other group had no such preparatory faith. Their “religion” was a dead orthodoxy.

To this second group their unbelief resulted in suspicion, hatred, fear, even conspiracy to commit murder. They were stone-blind to the fact that the sign was for their benefit as well. The hardness of unbelief had so clouded their eyes that they could not see, and this truth was totally lost on them.

But to the first group the showers of manifold blessings descended as they were the privileged to have been eyewitnesses as the Son of God performed this miraculous feat in their very presence. It was their faith in God that had given them eyes to see, to behold this demonstration of His divine power and glory.

One must now ask the question, “To which group do YOU belong?”

Knowing the Creator and trusting in Him allows one to see His handprint in places and circumstances that the faithless cannot see. Faith equips one to view beyond the veil, as it were, and to see the guiding hand of the Almighty in things that to the unbeliever are invisible. And the stronger the faith, the clearer is God’s hand seen. It can be compared to a dark room with lights controlled by a rheostat. The higher we turn the control of faith, the brighter the light and the clearer we will be able to see His loving touch.

Regardless of the hardships, heartaches, and disappointments experienced in this life, and even in the face of the sadness of death, the believer is able to rejoice with total confidence that the Redeemer is able, just as He was able to call Lazarus out of the tomb, to bring every afflicted one through the veil of tears and into a quiet rest safely and eternally in the Savior’s loving arms. 

One does not have to have witnessed this miracle in person to receive all its benefits. Jesus told Thomas, one of His closest disciples,

"Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed.”  (John 20:29, NASB).

*     *     *     *     *

"Scripture taken from the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE®,

Copyright © 1960,1962,1963,1968,1971,1972,1973,1975,1977,1995
by The Lockman Foundation. Used by permission."

Abundant Evidence

If something is true, there is abundant evidence for that fact. If something is false, there can be no evidence. It is not possible to prove or even to produce legitimate evidence for something that is not true.

Ben Stein asked Richard Dawkins what he would say if he died and ran into God. Dawkins responded, “Bertrand Russell had that point put top him, and he said something like, ‘Sir, why did you take such pains to hide yourself?’”  (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlZtEjtlirc

That question makes no sense, because God is not hidden. There is evidence everywhere, from the microscopic world to the immensity of the universe, from the smallest life form to the largest animal and human beings. The evidence for His existence cannot be missed unless people simply choose to ignore it (2 Peter 3:5). On the other hand, there is NO EVIDENCE that would indicate the non-existence of God.

"…the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse…” (Romans 1:18-20, NKJV).

Does God Approve of Sin?

Does God approve of sin? At first, this may seem like an absurd question, but when we consider that much modern day thinking redefines right and wrong and also redefines the very nature of God, the question becomes quite clear. The thinking is something like this:  "God is love, and He wants us to be happy, so He would never hate or even disapprove of the things we want to do if those things make us happy. Maybe God has even changed His mind about certain things as society has changed, and He has moved on into the twenty-first century. Maybe things that used to be called sin are not sin any longer." Such foolishness is contrary to Scripture, violates every level of common sense, and is dangerous to the human soul and to society as a whole.

 

There are several problems with such thinking:

 

First:  There is the assumption that the statement, “God is love,” is a definition of God. Nothing could be further from the truth. Love is not by any means a complete definition of God. Love is merely one of His many attributes. It is important to note that “hate” is also one of His attributes. He has many attributes, including righteousness, holiness, purity, omniscience, omnipresence, omnipotence, etc. “Love” is most certainly not all there is to the nature of God.

 

Second:  There is the assumption that it’s all about us rather than about God. Our alleged “happiness” seems to trump everything else, including doing what is right and bringing glory to God. God has created us for Himself, for His pleasure and for His glory.

 

“You are worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power; for You created all things, and by Your will they exist and were created.” (Revelation 4:11, NKJV). 

 

"For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him" Colossians 1:16, NKJV).

 

“Everyone who is called by My name, whom I have created for My glory; I have formed him, yes, I have made him” (Isaiah 43:7, NKJV).

 

Third:  There is the assumption that sin brings true happiness. Regardless of how counterintuitive this may be, there are many who fall into the trap of believing that self-gratification is the pathway to happiness. However, both the Scriptures and secular history are filled with examples of people who destroyed themselves in the pursuit of sinful pleasure. Think of King David and his great sin of taking a man’s wife and having the man killed so he could cover up what he had done. This sin led to much grief over the rest of his life. His son, King Solomon, because of his lust for many women, went from being the wisest of men to being one of the greatest fools who ever lived. Sin does not bring happiness.

 

Fourth:  There is the assumption that the things we humans desire are good for us. Clearly, this is in error. Many things we desire are anything but good for us and are in some cases very detrimental and even fatal. For God to approve of things that would hurt us is not love in any way. No parent who loves his children would send them out to play in the back yard if he knew there was a rattlesnake out there, even if his children had an interest in snakes from reading books on the subject. That would not be love.

 

Fifth:  There is the assumption that God never hates. That is an assumption based on human, touchy-feely reasoning, not on the Scriptures. The Bible tells us of many things God hates. Seven of the things He hates are listed in one passage:

 

“These six things the Lord hates, yes, seven are an abomination to Him: a proud look, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that are swift in running to evil, a false witness who speaks lies, and one who sows discord among brethren” (Proverbs 6:16-19, NKJV).  God also hates idolatry (Deuteronomy 12:31; 16:22), those who do evil (Psalm 5:4-6; 11:5), and a number of other things that can easily be found with a quick search of the Scriptures.

 

Some may say, “Well, those things are from the Old Testament. The New Testament God is more loving than the Old Testament God.” Is this a true statement? In reality, the New Testament God, in the Person of His Son the Lord Jesus Christ, is the Creator-God of the Universe, and is the same God as the Old Testament God. He is the eternal, all-powerful God who never changes. “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever” (Hebrews 13:8, NKJV).  There are specific references in the New Testament to God hating. Probably the most well-know is found in Romans 9:13. “As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated’” (NKJV).

 

Yes, God IS love, and he DOES love us and want the best for us. If He loved our sin and rebellion, He would not in any way be wanting what is best for us. Just like parents who want the best for their children and set boundaries on their behavior for their safety and well-being, God sets boundaries on our behavior because of His great love for us. His hatred of evil is proof of His love and concern for us. God is not Someone with whom anyone should be foolish enough to trifle. “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Hebrews 10:31, NKJV).

 

Conclusion:  It is not safe ground to believe that God somehow approves of, and maybe even likes, our sin. He has not changed. Sin is still sin and is an abomination in His sight. No matter what society may say about God being an old-fashioned idea and the Bible being out-of-date, God is still on the throne, and He will judge sin. No amount of rationalization and legalizing of sinful acts can make those things good and right. This is the truth, and truth always triumphs over falsehood.

 

Laws have been passed legalizing many things that God calls sin, thereby illustrating the truth that “just because something is legal doesn’t make it right.” Our culture has not only practiced those things which God hates, but government has given official “hearty approval” to many of those things. “…who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them” (Romans 1:32, NKJV) or “…give hearty approval to those who practice them” (NASB).

 

Regardless of the insanity of our present-day culture, God is still doing what He pleased to do. He saves those who come to Him in faith. The Gospel message is just as relevant as it has ever been. Sin is a reality, and unbelievers are condemned without the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

“…for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23, NKJV).

 

“...the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23, NKJV).

 

“…that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation” (Romans 10:9-10, NKJV).

 

“Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved…that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:1-4, NKJV).

IF THIS MAN WERE A PROPHET . . .

Luke 7:39 NAS

by Ed Cardwell

The word ‘IF’, though one of the smallest in our English language, has often been acclaimed the biggest word in the dictionary. That may very well be true in a practical sense, because even the simplest of decisions, contingencies, and eventualities often hang precariously upon the uncertainty implied by this single two-lettered word. As we have all become painfully aware, much in life pivots on this one-syllable instrument of communication.

 

Throughout the Scriptures this one word introduces an almost limitless parade of intrigue and fascination. In Luke 7:36-50, for example, we read the fascinating story of our Lord’s acceptance of an unlikely invitation to dine at a Pharisee’s house. While there He was attended by a woman of ill repute who had found in Him her living Messiah. He had lifted her burden of sin and guilt, and had thereby filled her heart with unspeakable joy and gladness. As He reclined at table she came in behind Him, as was permitted by custom, and attended Him in reverent service while pouring out her soul with tears of thanksgiving.

 

The Pharisee, reclining at table across from Jesus, observed her intimate actions, and knowing who she was, said to himself:

 

“IF this man were a prophet He would know who and what sort of person this woman is who is touching Him, that she is a sinner.”  ^{LUKE 7:39 NAS}

 

On the surface of it one may wonder whether this Pharisee named Simon is on the threshold of a great discovery. Is he searching out this man wondering whether or not He is a prophet? Or is he giving Him the benefit of the doubt waiting to see the outcome?

 

Our key to the penetration of the Pharisee’s thoughts lies in the exactness in the Greek of that smallest of words ‘IF’. We are unable to feel its force in the English, but in the original it speaks volumes!  Let us examine the word more closely so that we might gain added insight into what the Holy Spirit has preserved for us.

*                    *                    *                    *                    *

There are primarily three different classes of ‘IF’s in Greek, each one introducing a conditional clause. Each has its respective form and carries its particular power and weight to the meaning of the statement:

 

CLASS I – The ASSUMED-TRUE Condition. This condition was used when the speaker assumed, or wished to assume, that his premise was TRUE. The grammatical construction is simply the introduction of the Greek word ‘if’ (eiv) at the beginning of the conditional clause followed by a verb in the indicative mood (in the same clause).

As an illustration we have the case of the Temptation of our Lord in Matthew 4. In verses 3 and 6 the Class I condition of ‘IF’ is used both cases:

 

“IF You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread.” ^{vs 3 NAS}

 

“IF You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down.” ^{vs 6 NAS}

 

Satan’s objective was the nullification of the plan of salvation. His strategy was to lure Jesus out of His self-imposed human character as an obedient servant of God and into His rightful character as Lord over nature, but without first going to the Cross. The leverage the Tempter uses on this occasion is the assumed fact of Jesus’ deity. Satan insisted that the Lord make His rightful demands upon the ‘IF’, or better interpreted, ‘since’, or ‘it being true that’ He was the Son of God.

 

How this passage comes alive to us today with all the intensity of a great drama!  How we can more readily see the infinite pathos of our Lord’s suffering in order that His work FOR US might be fully accomplished.

 

CLASS II – The CONTRARY-TO-FACT Condition. This condition was used when the speaker assumed, or wished to assume, that his premise was UNTRUE. Let us look at three illustrations:

 

a.       A simple example would be the declaration made by both Mary and Martha in John 11. In addressing Jesus upon His arrival, each said in turn:

“Lord, IF You had been here, my brother would not have died.” ^{Joh 11:32 NAS}

 

The condition is Class II, contrary-to-fact. We can, of course, surmise this by the context of the narrative. We know that Jesus was not there when Lazarus died; He tarried beyond the Jordan. But had we been unaware of these added circumstances we could have made the matter certain by reading the passage in the original. There we find the special Class II grammatical construction (eiv [ei] + past tense of a verb in the indicative mood + a;n [an]).

 

b.   Another illustration can be found in our Lord’s declaration in John 15:22 and 24. This statement concerns the meaning and result of His coming to earth – to bring the glorious light of Truth and thus to expose sin in all its hideousness, so that men might see their desperate need and thus be drawn to Him, the True Light.

 

“IF I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin.” ^{vs 22 NAS}

 

“IF I had not done among them the works which no one else did, they would not have sin.”  ^{vs 24 NAS}

 

But our Lord DID come and He DID speak to them; and He DID work among them the works which no one else did. So the condition presented is stated contrary-to-fact; and the net result of the unreality is revealed by our Lord in verse 22:

 

“But now they have no excuse for their sin.” ^NAS

 

In this case, as well as in example ‘a’ above, the meaning is plain from the whole context. But again the Greek grammatical construction of the sentence (eiv [ei] + verb + a;n [an]) confirms the conclusion with certainty.

 

c.   A slightly less obvious example is found in John 5:46. Jesus says, in addressing His skeptical Jewish audience:

 

“For IF you believed Moses, you would believe me .” ^NAS

 

Our Lord is not leaving anything open to conjecture here; the simple Greek grammatical construction (eiv [ei] + verb + a;n [an]) proves the existence of a conditional clause the negative reality of which is assumed. They didn’t believe Moses. They were idolaters. They were a self-initiated elite who had long since lost the true meaning of being the children of Abraham. They flatly rejected Moses. OTHERWISE, Jesus was saying, “you would believe me.”

 

CLASS III – The UNDETERMINED-FULFILLMENT POSSIBLE Condition. In this condition uncertainty is implied, with the possibility of fulfillment. In Scripture the use of the Class III is far more frequent than any of the other conditions, but two examples will suffice:

 

a.   In the story of the Temptation in Matthew 4, referred to above, we have an illustration of the Class III condition in verse 9 where the Tempter says:

 

“All these thing will I give You, IF You fall down and worship me.” ^NAS

 

Satan was hoping for fulfillment, but doubt encompassed the issue. The premise was neither a question of being True (Class I) nor Untrue (Class II), but remained, at least to him, a possibility of fulfillment. The uncertainty in such cases is often clear, but should the context leave us in doubt, the original once again comes to the rescue with the Class III construction in Greek:  eva.n [ean] + subjunctive mood of the verb.

 

b.      Another interesting example of the Class III condition is found in Acts 5:38 where it is contrasted with a Class I condition in verse 39.

 

The wise Gamaliel seeks to restrain the Council’s murderous intentions against the apostles. He challenges his colleagues to keep their heads cool in this matter:

 

“And so in the present case, I say to you, stay away from these men and let them alone, For IF this plan or action should be of men, it will be overthrown.”

 

“But IF it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them; or else you may even be found fighting against God.”

 

In the conditional clause in verse 38 we find the Class III construction – Doubt, but Possibility. But in verse 39 we find Class I – Assumed True.

 

Gamaliel assumes the validity of Christianity, at least for the sake of his argument, and he puts the alternative (that these activities under discussion are only from men) in the realm of uncertainty. We cannot conclude absolutely that Gamaliel was a Christian nor that he was leaning in that direction; he may merely have wanted, as some suggest, to score a further point against the Sadducee contingent of the Council, whose opposing political and religious influence was suffering embarrassment at the hands of the apostles. On the other hand, neither can we rule out his leaning toward the apostles’ faith at this time, for we read in Acts 6:7 that “A great many of the priests were becoming obedient to the faith.” ^NAS  Also early tradition includes Gamaliel by name in that innumerable company of saints. If so, it would be this contrast in conditions of Class III (verse 38) and Class I (verse 39) that gives us the first hopeful hint at such an eventuality.

*                    *                    *                    *                    *

 

Now, having examined the three possible conditions, let us return to our story in Luke 7.

 

The woman who is attending Jesus is a woman who has been deeply shattered by a new and keen awareness of her sinful state; she is now, however, rejoicing in reverent jubilation that He, her Messiah, has brought to her a new life and a lasting hope, and that without measure. By her presence and by her attendant adoration she is a living testimony to all those reclining at that table that this great Personage has a special attraction for those in great need. Sinners whose lives have become hopelessly shackled to the bonds of sin and degradation need only appeal to Him. And this woman! How animated is her intense display of thanksgiving! What a message to all who are witnesses!

But does the Pharisee hear her testimony?  Does he accept her witness?

By no means! He has a closed mind. He welcomes any shred of evidence that might point to Jesus as a fraud. How revealing is the statement by Simon – to himself:  “IF this man were a prophet…!” How intimately we are able to peer into the abyss of his darkened heart and at once learn of his sad condition (and that from his own thoughts!) - that he is a man ruled by pride and overcome by spiritual blindness.

(His ‘if’ statement in Luke 7:39 is found in the original to be Class II – his premise is assumed UNTRUE!  He has, to his own peril, already concluded in his heart that this man IS NOT a prophet. To give evidence and weight to this conviction he reasons to himself further that:  “Otherwise, this man would know who and what sort of woman this is who is touching Him, that she is a sinner.” ^NAS)

Why do such men reject this Jesus? Why do they deny Him? How can they ignore all the evidence that points to His deity?

This Pharisee has judged Jesus through the eyes of one who is confined to his fallen nature, devoid of all spiritual insight. He imagines that his Guest must conform to the contrived and futile standards of spiritually impoverished men, who compare themselves to one another to establish their goodness. He is the ‘natural’ man (1 Cor 2:14) who finds nothing worthy of adoration in Him, but only contempt, and he is, therefore, utterly repulsed by what he observes.

The Pharisee’s mind had been prejudiced by the sundry doctrines of humanism of his day (as is true in our day).  As examples:  We exist by the chance occurrence of ‘favorable’ mutations, ie, we are brothers of the boulders and we are cousins of the stars [evolution]; there is no God outside of ourselves; there is no life after death nor is there a day of judgment awaiting us; and, for the ‘religious’, there are many ways to God. The list is almost endless.

Salvation had come to Simon’s house – in Person!  Oh, how many would have given anything to trade places with Simon! But our Lord chose to visit him. Because it was at Simon’s house that a great sermon was to be preached. But Simon didn’t think that the message was for him. There is no grand reception, no hint of appreciation. He is thankless, cynical, and proud. For he was blinded by his pride and trapped in unbelief, and thus did not recognize this great hour of his visitation – that the full embodiment of the Love and Mercy of the great God of the Universe had left His home in glory to come down to dine before Simon at his very table.

*                    *                    *                    *                    *

FOR FURTHER STUDY:

Additional Scriptural passages which contain the conditional ‘IF’ are given according to Class:

CLASS I:  Mat 5:29, 30; Mar 3:26; Luk 12:26; Joh 8:46; Act 4:9; Rom 7:16, 20; 1Co 7:9; 2Co 3:7; Gal 2:14; Col 2:20; 3:1; 1Th 4:14; 2Th 3:14; 1Ti 3:5; Phm 17, 18; Heb 2:2; Jms 1:5; 1Pe 1:17; 2Pe 2:4; 1Jo 3:13.

CLASS II:  Mat 11:21, 23; 12:7; 23:30; 24:43; Luke 7:39; 10:13; 19:42; Joh 4:10; 5:46; 8:19, 42; 9:41; 15:19; 18:36; Act 18:14; 26:32; Rom 7:7; 1Co 11:31; Gal 1:10; 3:21; Heb 4:8; 8:4; 11:15; 1Jo 2:19.

CLASS III:  Mat 6:14, 15; Mar 1:40; Luk 17:3(2), 4; Joh 11:25; Act 9:2; Rom 2:25(2), 26; 1Co 5:11; 2Co 5:1; Gal 5:2; Col 4:10; 1Ti 1:8; Heb 13:23; Jms 2:2; 1Pe 3:13; 1Jo 1:6, 7, 8, 9. 10; 2:1; 3Jo 10; Rev 3:3; 22:18, 19.

*                    *                    *                    *                    *

NOTES:

1. Some scholars identify four Classes of conditions, the fourth being a further division of Class III. This further distinction is most often hazy, is never found in its full form, and has been characterized as a highly ornamental and little used construction. It is therefore omitted here from discussion.

2. Because thought is not always expressed in the most clearly defined forms, the student of the New Testament is met throughout with sundry mixed, implied, and elliptical conditions and grammatical exceptions. All of theses insure that one will never master the language entirely and that he will never exhaust the innumerable challenges presented by these variations.

3. It must be emphasized that the condition itself of Class I and II is concerned only with the statement, not with the actual reality or unreality of the matter.

ecardwells6@gmail.com
 

THE FOOLISHNESS OF MAN’S THINKING

Woe to those who seek deep to hide their counsel far from the LORD, And their works are in the dark; They say, "Who sees us?" and, "Who knows us?" Surely you have things turned around! Shall the potter be esteemed as the clay; For shall the thing made say of him who made it, "He did not make me"? Or shall the thing formed say of him who formed it, "He has no understanding"? (Isaiah 29:15-16, NKJV).

These two verses from Isaiah certainly address the philosophy of many men today. It is amazing how much such a short passage can say. This is certainly not an attempt to exhaust the meaning but only to briefly give attention to a few significant points.

1.)  Woe to those who seek deep to hide their counsel far from the LORD…  It is absurd for man to think He can hide from or deceive the Lord, the omniscient, omnipotent One. The eyes of the Lord are in every place, keeping watch on the evil and the good (Proverbs 15:3, NKJV).

2.)  …their works are in the dark… Men tend to dwell “in the dark” so as to attempt to accomplish their foolish aim of hiding their evil works from God. …the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil (John 3:19, NKJV).

3.)  They say, "Who sees us?" and, "Who knows us?"  As men walk in darkness in their futile attempt to hide from the One who knows all and sees all, they deceive themselves into believing they can actually accomplish such a thing. David recognized that there was no possible way to get away and hide from God. Where can I go from Your Spirit? Or where can I flee from Your presence? (Psalm 139:7, NKJV). The answer to David's question is obvious. The all-knowing, all-powerful, present everywhere God ...knows what is in the darkness, and light dwells with Him (Daniel 2:22, NKJV).

4.)  Surely you have things turned around! If this does not describe the state of man's thinking today, I don’t know what does. Man seems to have just about everything turned around. “Man created God in his own image.”  “Truth is relative.”  “There are no absolutes.”  “Man evolved from lower life forms.”  “The universe is billions of years old.”  “It took millions of years for life to evolve.”  “All living things have a common ancestor.”  “There is no evidence of a global flood.”  “The appearance of design does not mean a design actually exists, so it does not mean there is a designer.”  “Man is getting better and better.”  “Man is basically good.”  “There is no such thing as sin.”  “There is no resurrection from the dead.”  “There is nothing beyond the grave.”

 

These are only a relative handful of the foolish statements based on wishful thinking made today by alleged “scientists” and other supposedly “educated” people. It is all summed up on one brief statement from Scripture:  … because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man — and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things (Romans 1:21-23, NKJV).

5.)  Shall the potter be esteemed as the clay…?  Much of humanity today sees itself as the ultimate end, the “measure of all things,” as stated by Protagoras, a Greek philosopher who lived over 400 years before Christ. Even though his statement is very old, it is certainly adopted today by many who hold to a humanist philosophy of life. William Ernest Henley (1849–1903) wrote the poem “Invictus,” in which he states, in part,  “…I thank whatever gods may be for my unconquerable soul…It matters not how strait the gate, How charged with punishments the scroll, I am the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul.” This is the same philosophy that elevates man to the status of equality with God and makes the true and living God powerless, and therefore, non-existent. No amount of flawed human reasoning can make God go away. He is real. He is there. He will not put up with nonsense. The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord and against His Anointed, saying, “Let us break Their bonds in pieces and cast away Their cords from us.” He who sits in the heavens shall laugh; The Lord shall hold them in derision (Psalm 2:2-4, NKJV).

6.)  …shall the thing made say of him who made it, "He did not make me"? Such an idea relative to a potter and his clay is, at best, absurd. However, it is no more absurd than the idea of weak little man, who views a fallen world through the sinful eyes of a fallen nature, saying, “There is no creator. Everything came into being by natural processes.”

 

Consider this – there are four faces of U.S. Presidents on Mount Rushmore. No one is his or her right mind would say, “Those four faces got there by the forces of nature – wind, rain, lightning, etc.” Such a thought is ridiculous. For even one such face to form by natural processes is clearly impossible and certainly would cast doubt on the intelligence and common sense of anyone propagating such a far-out idea. And what are the chances that the one face that formed by natural processes would be a U.S. President? But wait – there are four such faces, all representing presidents, which multiplies the impossible odds against such a thing happening. 

 

All people with any measure of common sense would readily admit that the faces on Mount Rushmore were designed and formed by intelligence. However, many of those who recognize that George Washington’s face could not appear by accident on Mount Rushmore would say that the actual man George Washington was a product of evolution through natural selection. This borders on the insane when one considers that a real person is literally billions of times more complex than any rock formation, which makes belief in evolution billions of times more absurd than believing in the clear impossibility of Mount Rushmore forming by natural processes.

7.)  …shall the thing formed say of him who formed it, "He has no understanding"? Humanity thinks far too highly of itself. We all have far too much of that humanistic thing we call “self-esteem,” which very quickly degenerates into extreme arrogance. It is hard to imagine anything more arrogant than for men to say that God “has no understanding.” That is basically atheism, because if God has no understanding, He is not God, and if He is not God, then there is no God.  The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.” (Psalm 14:1, NKJV). This can also be translated, "NO, God!"  Either way, failure to believe in the obvious existence of God and/or rebellion against the sovereign rule of God over His creation identifies an individual as a fool.

Even though the book of Isaiah was written more than 700 years before Christ, this passage has great relevance for today. This illustrates the unchanging nature of Scripture. God, through the prophet Isaiah, has communicated a statement about the foolishness of man’s thinking. It all boils down to the arrogance of man as he pretends to know better than God about everything, when in reality, man does not know better than God about anything. The tongue of the wise uses knowledge rightly, but the mouth of fools pours forth foolishness (Proverbs 15:2, NKJV). The heart of him who has understanding seeks knowledge, but the mouth of fools feeds on foolishness (Proverbs 15:14, NKJV).  …the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men (1 Corinthians 1:25, NKJV).

 

Evolution is a Lie

I recently posted the following on Facebook as a response to someone’s post about the Ken Ham / Bill Nye debate.

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

Bill Nye the alleged "science guy" has bought into the ridiculous idea of evolution, which immediately casts doubt on his “science.” There can be nothing scientific about evolution. The truth is that the data is the same for everyone, and those who believe in evolution approach the data with no less bias than those who believe in the creation model. Of course, the evolution model is absurd on many levels, and it requires a great leap of faith in the power of natural processes to produce new information as new species come into being over millions of years. Information cannot come from non-information, and intelligence cannot come from non-intelligence. The creation model requires faith in a miracle working God, while the evolution model requires faith in the ability of nothing and no one to do millions of accidental miracles in the right order and at the right time to produce all we see in the universe today.

If one just looks at reality – such as the complexity of the human body and all living things – the only sensible conclusion is that there is a Creator. Even if one doubts the Bible, which is not a wise position to take, good sense needs to come to the forefront. Several years ago, I wrote an article entitled “Some Common Sense Reasons to Believe in Creation and Reject Evolution,” which is found here.

Evolution is nothing more or less than a lie spoken by the father of lies, Satan himself, to turn people away from the true and living God. “But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them” (2 Corinthians 4:3-4, NKJV).

Satan (Lucifer) first spoke this lie when he said, “I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God; I will also sit on the mount of the congregation on the farthest sides of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High” (Isaiah 14:13-14, NKJV). In other words, “I, a created being, will EVOLVE into God.” He has been telling this lie ever since, trying to convince mankind that becoming like God is a real possibility. The idea of evolution has “evolved” from his lie. Even though he has deceived many with his lie, he ultimately cannot even deceive himself, because God’s response to Lucifer’s rant is, “Yet you shall be brought down to Sheol (Hell), to the lowest depths of the Pit.” Satan hates the human race, at least partially because God has provided redemption for humans but not for fallen angels, and he wants to drag as many humans as possible to Hell with him.

Not everyone who teaches evolution is intentionally lying. I believe many, if not most, have simply been deceived. Either way, the impact of this lie is devastating to the human soul.

TRUTH or "FALTH" (Heresy in the Upper Rooms)

by Ed Cardwell

Unbelief in the pulpit is something few of us can understand or even imagine. Men (or women) in powerful and influential positions who pretend to hold forth the Word of God but secretly deny the fundamental and sacred doctrines of the faith, are a most serious threat to the entire community of believers. To illustrate one extraordinary example of such leadership I would like to share the actual transcript of a radio conversation I had some time ago with the leader of the then 2 million member organization called ‘the Baptist World Alliance’:

*                    *                    *                    *                    *

‘POINT OF VIEW’ BROADCAST - 4/4/79

WBRI - INDIANAPOLIS, IN

PRINCIPALS INVOLVED IN THE RADIO CONVERSATION:

BOB TODD - WBRI INTERVIEWER/ANNOUNCER

DR. ROBERT DENNY - (GUEST) - GENERAL SECRETARY, BAPTIST WORLD ALLIANCE  (circa 2 million members in 1979)

DR. GREG DIXSON - (CALLER) - PASTOR, BAPTIST TEMPLE, INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA

ED CARDWELL - (NEXT CALLER)

UNKOWN LADY - (LAST CALLER)

The context of this broadcast is the following:  The Baptist World Alliance, headed by Dr. Robert Denny, was holding a world convention in Indianapolis, Indiana, for a few days in April 1979. The Bible radio station WBRI had a daily call-in program, often with a special guest, and this up-coming convention had been advertised for weeks. The station had heralded Dr. Denny’s personal appearance on the show as a leading headline for the week’s activities, both for the radio station and for the BWA.

A prominent local pastor of a large Baptist church in Indianapolis, Dr. Greg Dixon, who had at the time great political influence and had even been invited to speak at the Congressional Prayer Breakfast in Washington, D.C., had called into the radio station several times during the previous Point Of View broadcasts to warn the Christian community about this Dr. Denny. Dr. Dixon alleged that Dr. Denny was nothing more than a Communist sympathizer, a wolf in sheep’s clothing, who had managed to maneuver himself into a powerful religious position whereby he could influence world opinion that the Soviet brand of religious tolerance was genuine and that Soviet leadership was favorable to full religious expression. Dr. Dixon warned that it was all a lie, adding that Dr. Denny traveled around the world with 2 known Soviet KGB agents (Bichkof and Zitkof) posing as clerics who made sure that Dr. Denny proclaimed the ‘right’ message.

When Dr. Denny finally made his scheduled appearance on WBRI, Dr. Greg Dixon called into the ‘Point Of View’ program to challenge Dr. Denny as a fraud. I listened to the sparring confrontation while traveling and became exasperated because Dr. Dixon kept attacking in areas that were clearly secondary and Dr. Denny could easily elude discovery. When I finally arrived home I called WBRI and flipped on the station on my combination tape recorder/am-fm radio and waited my turn. The conversation begins where I turned on the radio and caught the two men in some rather heated discussion.

*                    *                    *                    *                    *

DR DENNY:   …what is religious freedom is a relative term depending upon the way somebody defines it, so…

DR DIXON:  They say that in these articles that they know of no violation of human rights in Russia.

DR. DENNY:  Well, we discussed this just a moment ago with another caller. The definition of a violation of religious freedom by their terminology is a violation of a law pertaining to religion.

DR DIXON:  Do you believe these men when they come here to America and say that there is full religious freedom for Baptists in Russia – that there are no violations of human rights in Russia? Do you believe what these men are saying?

DR. DENNY:  I think that there are different standards for…

DR. DIXON:  Do you believe what these men are saying?

DR. DENNY:  Do you want me to answer the question?

DR. DIXON:  I don’t want you to give me the runaround. I’d like for you to answer my question.

DR. DENNY:  Well, I wish that life was just a simple black and white. But the definition of religious liberty is a matter of what you and I think by our terms. They do not have in the Soviet Union the amount of freedom that you and I have in the United States and many other parts. Liberty and freedom are defined by autonomous governments. I do not like and would not like to have to be restricted as much as people are in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, maybe Cuba, maybe Burma, and some other places. I like the freedom in the United States. These people have to operate within the confines of the law of their country. And then that way, you see, the definition of a violation of freedom is a violation of the law as it is on the books in that particular country. I don’t like some of those laws, no sir.

DR. DIXON:  Then what you’re saying is that Bichkof and Zitkof are not liars?

DR. DENNY:  I don’t think they’re liars, sir. I’ve known them a long time.

DR. DIXON:  Do you believe they’re liars when they say there’s full religious freedom for Baptists in Russia? Do you believe they’re telling the truth or telling a lie?

DR. DENNY:  I think they’re trying to tell the truth by the standards that I just tried to explain a few moments ago…

DR. DIXON:  In other words, by Communist propaganda standards?

DR. DENNY:  No, I’d like to say, I’d like to repeat, and I was trained in law, sir, a violation of law is a violation of the law in that particular place.

DR. DIXON:  They didn’t say anything in these articles about violation of law. They said there are no violations of human rights in Russia. That’s a flat statement. Do you believe they’re telling the truth?

DR. DENNY:  Well, uh, I don’t know, sir. Uh, it would be pretty hard to define that ‘full religious freedom’. I don’t know. I’d have to ask them particularly that. I have not heard them say that specifically, and I do not say they did not say it, sir. I just didn’t hear it.

ANNOUNCER:  And we have run past our time on that particular call. I am going to move to our next phone call. Line 2, you are on the air. Go ahead, please.

CARDWELL:  Well, I’ve listened to your guest, and I don’t believe I’ve ever heard anyone who calls himself a believer, or a Christian, so conveniently disarm himself in almost every argument for the faith. I believe the Lord wants us to contend for the faith, not to disarm ourselves, and it seems like he does this so conveniently in almost every area.

I would like to ask three questions of your guest – 3 questions and they’re all related:  First of all, does he believe in the total infallible inspiration of the Scriptures – that it was God-breathed and that it is the authoritative and final rule of faith? I’m not talking about interpretation. Does he believe that the Scriptures are inspired by God? Number two:  Does he believe in the bodily resurrection of Christ as described in the Scriptures?  And number three:  Has he personally received the Lord Jesus Christ, as defined in Scripture, as his personal Lord and Savior?

DR. DENNY:  May I answer the question now?

ANNOUNCER:  Yes, and thank you for calling.

DR. DENNY:  Number one:  the answer to that is yes, I do believe in the infallible Word of God. Number two:  Uh, not being a trained theologian, uh, I do not know about the bodily resurrection of the Lord Jesus. Uh, I wish I could do this, could believe one way or the other, but I don’t know how to answer that question, sir. On the third one:  I have had an experience of salvation with the Lord Jesus Christ and I believe that He is my Savior and my best friend and look forward to meeting Him.

ANNOUNCER:  We have another call waiting…and we’ll try to get this next call in…  Good afternoon, Point of View, you’re on the air, and I’m going to give you about 30 seconds to ask your question so that Dr. Denny has time to respond before we go off.

UNKOWN LADY:  Well, I have a document here called ‘Soviet Justice – Showplace – Prisons versus Real Slave Labor Camps’ and this is from the Committee on Un-American Activities from the United States Government, and I believe you can trust a Communist to be a Communist. And when you are associating with them and cloaking yourself with these Communists, I don’t know how you feel that this is the right thing to do. And IF CHRIST DID NOT RISE BODILY THEN WE HAVE NO FAITH AND OUR FAITH IS DEAD. Thank you.

ANNOUNCER:  Thank you. Dr Denny? Any comments?

DR. DENNY:  No, I just respect the lady’s statement there, and I simply said that I don’t know. It’s not a case of not believing. It’s just a matter of I do not know about the bodily resurrection. I think only the future will reveal that and I would respect anybody’s opinion on that, sir.

ANNOUNCER:  (Closes the broadcast, thanking Dr. Denny for his appearance on the program.)

*                    *                    *                    *                    *

Dr. Denny’s answers pose some interesting questions. How difficult is it to answer this question:  ‘Do you believe in the bodily resurrection of Christ as described in the Scriptures?’? Since his answer to the first question about his belief in the total inspiration of Scripture was in the affirmative, and since question #1 is probably a more difficult question, why does he not know about the bodily resurrection of Christ, as described in the Scriptures? In actuality, his denial (or ignorance, or both) of the Scriptural account of the bodily resurrection of Christ (Question #2) contradicts his affirmation of Question #1. If he believes that the Word is God-breathed and totally infallible, how can he not accept the Biblical account of the resurrection of Jesus? It is a simple question requiring a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer. He wasn’t asked to give a scientific explanation of the resurrection. He was only asked about his belief in its reality – as described in the Scriptures. So, he has denied the Scriptures that he claimed to believe and uphold.

Saying that ‘not knowing’ and ‘wishing he could believe’ does not equate to ‘not disbelieving’. His answer is simply and plainly one of unbelief.

Furthermore, if someone says he has had an experience of salvation with the Lord Jesus Christ, and yet he is unable to believe what the Scriptures clearly teach - that He has risen from the dead - is that a valid experience of salvation? And could that experience be with the Jesus of the Bible? Solemn questions indeed arise.

It is possible that Dr. Denny had been thoroughly trained to answer mundane questions often posed by religious media and reporters, but he obviously was caught off guard by questions that target more penetrating and fundamental doctrinal issues. If he had been coached by Bichkof and Zitkof, he obviously missed some serious areas of doctrine in his repertoire.

It is possible also that Dr. Denny was simply not a Bible student. Perhaps he had never read the many accounts of the physical/bodily resurrection of Jesus recorded by New Testament authors. At any rate, as a ‘trained lawyer’ he should have discovered that the evidence is incontrovertible - the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ is an undeniable fact. One marvels at how such a person, so ignorant of the most fundamental doctrine of Christianity, could become the leader of an organization of two million Christians

One cannot teach what one does not know, and one cannot lead the church who does not have the faith of the Church. No one can judge Dr. Denny’s true spiritual condition. That is not our purpose. But unbelief here is a problem, not of the intellect, but of the will. One who professes faith in the infallibility of Scripture yet cannot bring himself to accept what that infallible Word says is trapped in his own inconsistency and his choice to disbelieve leads to a serious spiritual dilemma. And there are many such Dr. Dennys in very important positions of leadership throughout Christendom – churches, missions, schools, and universities. And because of such the church has become weak and impotent, with few notable exceptions, in the face of our archenemy who seeks to create doubt, deny truth, and destroy faith.

It is no wonder that Satan in these latter days is tightening his stranglehold on the Church as he seeks to diminish its power and influence in the world. One very effective means to accomplish this is by denying that Jesus rose bodily from the grave. The authority of Christ is predicated on His resurrection as a fact of history. And the power of that resurrection, God’s great power on display, is available to all true believers whose hearts have been enlightened to the knowledge of its surpassing greatness:

“I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward us who believe. These are in accordance with the working of the strength of His might which He brought about in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead, and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places.” ^{Eph 1:18 (NAS)}

*                    *                    *                    *                    *

The convention was thrown into disarray as members were surprised and bewildered by Dr. Denny’s weak appearance on the program, especially his denial of the Biblical account of Jesus’ resurrection. But his surrogates calmed the uproar by assuring them he had been misunderstood - a common, but useful political strategy. Nevertheless Dr. Denny’s position was tainted and his tenure as General Secretary of the BWA ended shortly thereafter. A leader more adept at handling doctrinal scrutiny would be needed for future growth of the BWA.

Today the Baptist World Alliance boasts of 42 million members in 177,000 churches in 121 countries. 60 percent of the BWA is associated with the World Council of Churches. We can be confident that the Devil is more determined today than when the BWA membership was limited to 2 million.

How do men of heretical theology arise to such prominence? Are they not thoroughly vetted by trustworthy elders or brethren of the church?  Or are they just cunning enough to steal their way into the hearts of the faithful through subtlety and subterfuge?

“But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. And many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned; and in their greed they will exploit you with false words; their judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.” ^{2 Pe 2:1-3(NAS)}

The call for vigilance is more compelling today than ever. Under the Mosaic law the enticement to apostasy was a capital crime^{(Dt 13:1-5)}- most certainly because the corrupting influence of false teaching is incalculable, interminable, and always progressive. Paul warns Timothy to “examine everything carefully”^{1Th 5:20(NAS)}/”prove all things”^(KJV), “Abhor what is evil; cling to what is good.”^{Rom 12:9(NAS)}  

The exhortation of John the Apostle seems more urgent and relevant to us now than in any time in our recent history:

“Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God; and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; and this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.” ^{1 Jo 4:1-3(NAS)}

ecardwells6@gmail.com

*                    *                    *                    *                    *

Ed Cardwell is my friend and long-time co-worker in the ministry of Christian school education. He spent several years as principal while I was head administrator. He was an excellent and very popular Bible and foreign language teacher. We were of one mind, and it was very natural to work together since we thought so much alike.