“The Shack” the Movie

I have read a few reviews of “The Shack.” Some were positive, and some were negative. I did go and see it, because I wanted to see how close the movie would be to the book and if there would be a reason to write a review. This will not be an extensive review. Anything I could say about the movie is already in my review of the book, which can be found here. The book has now sold over twenty million copies.

Not very far into the movie, it became obvious that it was going in the same direction as the book in that it contained much of the same unbiblical nonsense. The only good thing I have to say about the movie is that it did not contain as much heresy as the book, primarily because it is never possible to include as much in a movie as in a book. It would make the movie oppressively long to do so.

That having been said, I must point out that the movie is, in reality, much more dangerous than the book. I say this because a movie can be used very effectively to manipulate the emotions. Some people believe that anything that elicits emotion is effective in bringing people to God. This is, of course, nonsense. A skilled moviemaker or playwright could produce something that could play with the emotions and make the viewer feel good about pretty much anything. Warm fuzzy feelings do not determine truth. Truth stands on its own, regardless of what someone “feels” about it. Since “The Shack” is about the “great sadness” of losing a little daughter to a kidnapper and murderer, it certainly tugs at the heartstrings.

Regardless of the skill of a writer or moviemaker, truth cannot be manufactured from falsehood. William Paul Young (author of The Shack) has written a new book, Lies We Believe about God. If anyone had any doubt about the unbiblical positions he implied strongly in The Shack, this book removes all doubt, in that he comes right out and admits to those positions. A short review of this book is found here.

I would not advise anyone to see the movie who does not know the Scriptures well enough to discern truth from error. My wife Janet made a very short statement that pretty much summarizes the movie:  "God is love, and sin doesn't matter." It would be difficult to be much more profound than that.

When Truth Has Perished - by Ed Cardwell

Jer 7:28 ^NAS

More than 25 centuries ago the Lord God spoke through the prophet Jeremiah to a nation that was collapsing under the weight of its moral and spiritual depravity.

Anyone should be able to read Jeremiah and make the comparison with the cultural climate of our own time.  Even now one can witness firsthand from the comforts of his own living room what happens to a nation after only 2 or 3 generations of denigrating God and even evicting Him from every aspect of society.

*          *         *          *          *          *          *

Here are a few of his characterizations of a people who had lost their source of strength and their crown of glory:

To begin, the Divine indictment:

“For My people have committed two evils:

They have forsaken Me, The fountain of living waters,
To hew for themselves cisterns, Broken cisterns,
That can hold no water.” ^{Jer 2:13 NAS}

1.  They left their God, the One who set them high above all the nations of the earth and who showered them with untold riches and blessed their land beyond compare.  His commandments became tedious and boring, and in time they removed His law from their public institutions, from their seats of learning, from their courts, from their daily activities and amusements – and ultimately from their hearts!

2.  They substituted a moral code more suited to their passions.  They devised fanciful doctrines that appealed to their fallen nature, and they taught them throughout their culture.  They turned to sensuality and sought to become like the heathen nations around them.   

“And they bend their tongue like their bow; Lies and not truth prevail in the land; For they proceed from evil to evil, And they do not know Me.” ^{Jer 9:3}

In order to sustain this philosophical perversion that has crept into their once great nation, they must create a culture of corruption of the truth.  In time lies become the mainstay of government, education, and the media.  To prevent their demagoguery from assault, they attack all opposition viciously, and at the same time show themselves benefactors of the populace with mountains of largesse from the national treasury.  To sustain their power they promise lifelong prosperity to all citizenry and by deception mortgage their futures with staggering debt.  Lies are the keystone to their hold on power, and they even brag about their cunning.

“For from the least of them even to the greatest of them, Everyone is greedy for gain, And from the prophet even to the priest Everyone deals falsely.” ^{Jer 6:13}

Materialism is rampant and has become the true motive behind every thought, act, and judgment at all levels of  society.  Theft, fraud, and embezzlement are rationalized, even celebrated.

“The wise men are put to shame, They are dismayed and caught; Behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, And what kind of wisdom do they have?” ^{Jer 8:9}

The ignorance and incompetence of national leaders has become truly daunting.  They speak as if they have the answers for everything, but they have the solutions to nothing.  They are the blind guides leading their constituencies to national ruin.  They offer words of hope, but their words are seductive and devoid of truth.

“And they heal the brokenness of the daughter of My people superficially, Saying, 'Peace, peace,' But there is no peace.” ^{Jer 8:11}

Mental disorders, frustration, and despair continue to rise as the ‘good’ life of godlessness remains deceptive and the answers to the problems of the soul illusory.  Enemies sense the resulting weakness and grow ever bolder in their threats to conquer and destroy.

“This is the city to be punished, In whose midst there is only oppression. As a well keeps its waters fresh, So she keeps fresh her wickedness. Violence and destruction are heard in her; Sickness and wounds are ever before Me.”  ^{Jer 6:6,7}

 Ignoring the severe consequences of their secular society and refusing to believe that the God of their fathers is even relevant, the spiritual vacuum that has been created invites the Adversary to run amok throughout the land in helping to destroy the very citadels of culture and civilization.  Violence and bloodshed, terror and despair, and confusion and ruination now rule on the streets and in the hearts of men.

“An appalling and horrible thing Has happened in the land: 
The prophets prophesy falsely,
And the priests rule on their own authority;
And My people love it so!
But what will you do at the end of it?  ^{Jer 5:30-31}

As long as the illusion of benefits continues flowing and there are ample amusements for distraction, the lies are tolerated and the consequences of the extermination of Truth are ignored. Annihilation and oblivion will soon follow as night follows day, and there shall be no remedy.

*          *         *          *          *          *          *

I have forsaken My house, I have abandoned My inheritance; I have given the beloved of My soul Into the hand of her enemies. ^{Jer 12:7}

After their callous refusals of the Lord’s steady appeals to return to Him, the Source of their national strength and majesty, He finally leaves this perpetually stubborn and stiff-necked people to their own evil devices. And as the curtain falls on their collective ruin, this sad commentary concludes their precipitous descent from supreme greatness and national independence.

There has always been an antidote, a cure from this paralyzing decay of the national soul.

God pleaded with this people time and again to turn back from their reckless obstinacy.  Through the prophet Ezekiel, Jeremiah’s contemporary, He pleads:

“As I live!' declares the Lord God, ‘I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn back, turn back from your evil ways! Why then will you die, O house of Israel?” ^{Ezekiel 33:11}

It is not imperative that we persist in this same path to destruction.  It is not a universal law that the citizens can have no say in their ultimate destiny.  But the volumes of history are strewn with empires ravaged by the natural consequences of their own destructive godlessness.  As the Psalmist wrote millennia ago: 

"The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God. ^{Psalm 9:17 KJV}

But there remains hope still, and God’s faithful among us hold the key.

“By mercy and truth iniquity is purged: and by the fear of the LORD men depart from evil.” ^{Pro 16:6 KJV}

A Little Leaven

“Error is like leaven, of which we read, ‘A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.’ Truth mixed with error is equivalent to all error, except that it is more innocent looking and, therefore, more dangerous. God hates such a mixture! Any error, or any truth-and-error mixture, calls for definite exposure and repudiation. To condone such is to be unfaithful to God and His Word and treacherous to imperiled souls for whom Christ died.”  (Exposing Error:  Is it Worthwhile? by Dr. Harry Ironside)

 

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.

The Global Flood

Our pastor has been preaching through the book of Genesis on Sunday nights, and last night he was in Genesis 7, which is the account of the flood. I appreciate very much the fact that he believes and teaches the Scriptures as literal instead of trying to discover something other than the clear and obvious meaning of a passage. This includes the book of Genesis.

Too many today want to make the Scriptures mean something other than what they say. One truth that is constantly attacked is the global flood of Noah. Why is this important? Why is it a big deal if someone says the flood was local as opposed to global? It is important because we need to believe what God has told us. If He has deceived us about the extent of the judgment He brought by the flood, how can we believe Him about anything else, such as the reality of sin, the necessity of salvation, the virgin birth, the sacrifice of Christ, the resurrection, the coming judgment, etc.?

There is no doubt that the flood was God's judgment on the sin and evil of mankind at that time. Many hate the very concept of God judging sin, but the truth of the matter is that God judged the world once, and He will judge it again. This truth is denied because man does not want to face the reality that God will hold the human race accountable for sin.

If one reads Genesis literally, it is really difficult to come up with anything but a global flood. The only way to conclude that the flood was local is to come to the Scriptures with a preconceived idea and interpret the events described according to that bias. Even many Hebrew scholars who do not believe that Genesis is true will admit that a literal reading of the text indicates actual 24-hour days for the creation week and a worldwide flood rather than a local flood. Reading anything else into the text requires some interesting mental gymnastics. It is in no way realistic and objective to read Genesis and come to the conclusion, using the Scripture alone, that the days of creation were millions of years and the flood was only local. Having one’s mind already influenced by someone’s agenda is the only way this can happen.

Following is an excerpt from an article about Progressive Creationism and some of its assumptions. The entire article is found here. Much of what is in the article is parallel to last night's message, which is found here on "Sermon Audio."

One of the Major Assumptions of Progressive Creationism:  The flood was “universal” (meaning “local”) but not global.

The claim is that Noah built an ark that carried him, his family, and the animals on an inland lake that was big enough to drown all of the humans who lived at that time. This is what is meant by a “universal” flood – it was just as widespread as humanity had migrated by that time, and there was no necessity for it to be any larger, since its purpose was to wipe out the human race other than Noah and his family.

There are several flaws in this thinking. I will address those with a series of questions and brief answers.

If the flood was local, why did Noah need to build an ark? Could he not have just moved elsewhere? God is neither stupid nor is He inefficient. He knows what He is doing. There would have been no reason for God to tell Noah to spend 120 years building an ark when he could have simply taken his family to another area of the earth away from the flood.

Why take animals on the ark when there would have been large numbers of most, if not all, of the same species of animals outside the area of the flood? But God had said He was going to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life. Are we to believe that not only all humans but also all animals lived in the area where this supposed local flood took place?

“And all flesh died that moved on the earth: birds and cattle and beasts and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, and every man. All in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, all that was on the dry land, died. So He destroyed all living things which were on the face of the ground: both man and cattle, creeping thing and bird of the air. They were destroyed from the earth. Only Noah and those who were with him in the ark remained alive.” (Genesis 7:21-23, NKJV).

How could a local flood cover the tops of all the mountains? Even though it appears that the mountains were not as high before the flood as they are now (Psalm 104), it would still be impossible for a local flood to cover all of the mountains by 15 cubits (22½ feet, assuming an 18-inch cubit). “And the waters prevailed exceedingly on the earth, and all the high hills under the whole heaven were covered. The waters prevailed fifteen cubits upward, and the mountains were covered” (Genesis 7:19-20, NKJV).

Would not a local flood make God a liar when He said he would never again flood the entire earth as He had done? There have been many local floods since Noah’s time, and each and every one of them would underscore God’s dishonesty if they were like Noah’s flood.

“Then the Lord said in His heart, ‘I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake, although the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done. While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer, and day and night shall not cease’” (Genesis 8:21-22, NKJV).

"And God said: ‘This is the sign of the covenant which I make between Me and you, and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations:  I set My rainbow in the cloud, and it shall be for the sign of the covenant between Me and the earth. It shall be, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the rainbow shall be seen in the cloud; and I will remember My covenant which is between Me and you and every living creature of all flesh; the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy all flesh. The rainbow shall be in the cloud, and I will look on it to remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth.’ And God said to Noah, ‘This is the sign of the covenant which I have established between Me and all flesh that is on the earth’” (Genesis 9:12-17, NKJV).

“For this is like the waters of Noah to Me; For as I have sworn that the waters of Noah would no longer cover the earth, so have I sworn that I would not be angry with you, nor rebuke you” (Isaiah 54:9, NKJV).

If Noah’s flood was only a local flood, every time we see a rainbow, we should consider that to be a sign of God’s dishonesty. Clearly, that is absurd. God gave that sign to humans and to the animals as a token of His promise that He would never again destroy the world in the same way He already did, and that promise is just as valid today as it was in the days of Noah.

“God is not a man, that He should lie, nor a son of man, that He should repent. Has He said, and will He not do? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good?” (Numbers 23:19, NKJV).

“…it is impossible for God to lie…” (Hebrews 6:18, NKJV).

“…in hope of eternal life which God, who cannot lie, promised before time began…” (Titus 1:2, NKJV).

The bottom line is that both evolutionists and progressive creationists need a local flood, because a truly global flood explains the many fossil-containing rock layers without any need for millions or billions of years. A global flood would certainly change the topography of the earth. It is interesting to note that some scientists who have observed Mars have concluded that the only possible cause of its topography would be a global flood. Of course, the fact that Mars has little or no water does not seem to be an issue for them. On the other hand, when the topography of the earth is observed, there is immediate rejection of a global flood and the question, “If there was a global flood, where did all the water go?” Why do they ask this? The answer is obvious – a global flood would make the Bible true, and we obviously can’t have that because it would destroy evolution and progressive creationism. So “scientists” who are willing to accept a global flood on a planet with little or no water are not willing to accept the possibility of a global flood on a planet that is covered 70% by water.

Christian Answers.net in an article entitled "Where did the Flood Waters Go?" offers the following: 

“If the waters are still here, why are the highest mountains not still covered with water, as they were in Noah’s day? Psalm 104 suggests an answer. After the waters covered the mountains (verse 6), God rebuked them and they fled (verse 7); the mountains rose, the valleys sank down (verse 8) and God set a boundary so that they will never again cover the Earth (verse 9). They are the same waters!”

“Isaiah gives this same statement that the waters of Noah would never again cover the Earth (Isaiah 54:9). Clearly, what the Bible is telling us is that God acted to alter the Earth's topography. New continental landmasses bearing new mountain chains of folded rock strata were uplifted from below the globe-encircling waters that had eroded and leveled the pre-Flood topography, while large deep ocean basins were formed to receive and accommodate the Flood waters that then drained off the emerging continents.”

“That is why the oceans are so deep, and why there are folded mountain ranges. Indeed, if the entire Earth's surface were leveled by smoothing out the topography of not only the land surface but also the rock surface on the ocean floor, the waters of the ocean would cover the Earth's surface to a depth of 1.7 miles (2.7 kilometers). We need to remember that nearly 70 percent of the Earth's surface is still covered by water. Quite clearly, then, the waters of Noah's Flood are in today's ocean basins.” 

 

"Love" Does Not Mean "Compromise."

Someone posted an article on Facebook about the Christian Bed and Breakfast owners in England who lost in court after they stood up for their convictions. They ended up having to sell their business.

 

The Facebook post brought a number of comments, and there was a very interesting one that criticized the Christian couple by using the text of 1 Corinthians 13, basically implying  that if we operate by love, we will be accepting of others, no matter what. Below is a combination of two comments I made to the post.

 

1 Corinthians 13 is generally considered "The Love Chapter," and it makes some great statements about love in general, but if that is all we see there, we are isolating it, using it out of context, and are missing the point. Chapter 13 is in the middle of a longer passage (Chapters 12-14) dealing with spiritual gifts within the Body of Christ. Chapter 13 teaches us that the use of spiritual gifts is only profitable and beneficial to the body if they are used in a context of love.

 

It is not possible to find anything in this chapter, or anywhere else in Scripture, that justifies giving tacit approval to things that God says are wrong. “Love” does not mean compromising with the world’s philosophies, lifestyles, or standards. There is a great deal said today about "tolerance" in our culture, and it is usually Christians who are told they need to be tolerant. We rarely hear about any necessity for people to be tolerant of Christians. In reality, the majority of Christians are the most tolerant of people.

 

The meaning of the word “tolerance” has been changed by many to mean "approval." In reality, the actual meaning of the word implies that we only tolerate that with which we disagree. I can tolerate people with whom I disagree without giving my approval of their lifestyle, doctrine, etc.  I can be tolerant of a person but be utterly in disagreement with their lifestyle or beliefs. If I approve of everything someone does, I am no longer tolerating them, I am agreeing with them.

 

To truly tolerate someone with whom we disagree means we do not try to destroy their property or to hurt or kill them. Instead, we recognize their freedom to do what they are doing, but we do not have to agree with them. If someone says, “You have to be tolerant and accept what I do,” that individual has no comprehension of the meaning of “tolerance.” If a believer accepts someone’s sinful lifestyle, then that believer is not loving the other individual in any way. That is no more a way to show love than an overindulgent parent is showing love when he allows his children to do things that are harmful to themselves. Overindulgence is not love. Approving of sin is not love. Real love is tied to the truth.

 

There are things taking place that I can do nothing about other than stand faithfully for the truth of the Gospel. I can tolerate people, who were made in God's image, without agreeing with their behavior. When government gives “hearty approval” to evil, it has stepped over a line. “...they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them” (Romans 1:32, NASB). I cannot put a stop to behavior with which I disagree, but I do not have to give it my approval by allowing it in my house. Those who wish to do those things can go elsewhere.

 

From what I have read on the subject, the people involved in this situation did what they needed to do in order to be consistent with their convictions. That is a basic tenet of freedom. There used to be, and maybe there still are a few, signs displayed in places of business that say “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.” In reality, that is consistent with biblical truth. In Matthew 20, Jesus told the Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard. The owner of the vineyard made equal payments to all who worked that day, from those who had worked all day to those who had only worked one hour. Some of those he hired were saying things very similar to what people would be saying today. “Not fair! Not fair! I’ll call the union,” etc. “But he answered and said to one of them, ‘Friend, I am doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what is yours and go, but I wish to give to this last man the same as to you. Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with what is my own? Or is your eye envious because I am generous?’” (Matthew 20, 13-15, NASB). From the narrative, it is clear the Jesus approved of this man doing what he wished with what was his own. Private property, and the use of private property, is a biblical principle. “Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with what is my own?” is a biblical way to express “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.”

 

It is not the responsibility of every business to provide services to everyone. For example, I don't go into shops that sell incense, candles, and other New Age paraphernalia, but I also don't try to deny their right to have a store just because they don't meet my needs. I go to other stores. The lawsuits that are allowed these days border on insanity. It is up to the customers to find a store or business that suits them rather than trying to force every business to change to meet their individual needs. We need to allow the free market to take care of such things. If there is a demand, someone will supply it. If a business doesn't have enough customers, it will be out of business. Government needs to stay out of such things.

 

If I were ever to go into a store that had a sign posted that said, “We don’t sell to or serve Christians,” I would politely take my business elsewhere. If they don’t want my money, that would be fine with me. It’s their loss. I would not raise a ruckus or sue them. Instead, I would pity them and pray for them, because being anti-Christian means being anti-Jesus Christ, which means they need Him as Savior. Not only would they lose out on a sale, they would also be losing out on salvation because of their unbelief. As Christians, there needs to be a difference between how we handle such matters and how unbelievers handle them.

 

It was rightly pointed out by another commenter that 1 Corinthians 13:6 says, “Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.”