Good shepherd

File: Concert for Life

Daniel McCarthy — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 12:04:00 GMT

Please check out this concert featuring BNOW, Daybreak and MFI.

Blog Post: ARticle by Joel Richardson

Daniel McCarthy — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 11:04:00 GMT

Editor’s Note: Joel Richardson is an author, artist, and lecturer, specializing in Islamic eschatology, and its role in how events may unfold in fulfillment of Biblical prophecy.

As a Christian author, teacher and commentator whose message often revolves around “the end times,” I am frequently asked how I cope emotionally with such a constant drum beat of negativity. How can anyone stomach a steady diet of such non-stop gloom and doom without developing a nervous condition?

While I understand the question, the fact of the matter is that discussing “the end times” doesn’t depress me at all, it actually excites me. But before I am quoted out of context, please allow me to explain myself. Discussing the end times actually energizes my spirit because my view of the end times is radically different than the popular understanding of the end times as it is most often conveyed and portrayed. Because the Bible informs my understanding of the end times, instead of anxiety and fear, I am filled with great hope and expectation.

You see, when most people hear the phrases “the end-times” or “the last days,” they often mistakenly understand these terms to be referring to some future destruction of planet earth or the complete end of all mankind. But from a Biblical perspective, this is not how these terms should be understood. Instead, the Bible simply portrays the end-times as the end of one particular age and the beginning of another much, much better age. The things that the Bible portrays as coming to an ultimate end are things that we should all be excited about.

Let’s consider a few examples of exactly what I am talking about.

I am a friend to a ministry called Exodus Cry headquartered in Kansas City, whose efforts are devoted to the abolition of modern day slavery. Did you know there are more slaves today than at any other time in human history? The dark and spidery fingers of the sex-slave trade have worked themselves deep into nearly every corner of the globe. The overwhelming majority of these slaves are young women and girls, some as young as five years old, forced against their wills to endure abuse and degradation beyond description. It’s impossible to hear of this reality without being overwhelmed with emotion. But to be very clear, from a Biblical perspective, when we discuss “the end-times,” this is precisely what we are discussing coming to an end.

And this is unspeakably good news.

The global sex-slave trade will be abolished, those unrepentant criminal predators that have perpetrated these evils will be judged, and every last victim will be personally comforted, healed, vindicated and beautified by the Creator of heaven and earth.

For me, this is the very heart of “the end-times” message. And you can be sure that I’m looking forward to this.

What else will come to an end in the “last-days”?

When I look back to the very first days of my children’s lives on this earth, I can’t help but to think of how absolutely and utterly dependent they were. My family lives next to an elementary school. I love to hear the sounds of laughter and shouting that fills the air during recess. But I also can’t get it out of my head that in the United States, for every twenty kids that are present on the playground, roughly ten more are missing. Where did they go? They were legally murdered by the very people that were meant to protect and care for them. The number is far higher for African Americans; for every ten, there are nearly eight that are gone. This reality should bring anguish to any who have a sense of justice.

Even more disturbing is the fact that abortion is an industry wherein multitudes are slaughtered as a few become filthy rich. I am fully convinced that God is at the same time heartbroken and enraged. With Him, I burn for the day when this great evil will be a thing of the past.

When we discuss the end-times, we are discussing the decisive end of the wholesale slaughter of the most vulnerable, the most dependent, the most innocent little lambs that this world has to offer. So yes, I’m absolutely looking forward to this.

Of course, there are multiplied thousands of other injustices that we could list. When discussing the end-times from a Biblical perspective, we are discussing the end of all of the things that mankind has groaned under for millennia. We are discussing the end of corrupt and unjust governmental leaders, the end of the exploitation of the weak and poor, the end of all war, the end of disease. Who wouldn’t look forward to this?

When I talk about the end times, I’m not talking about the destruction of this planet and all of its inhabitants. Not at all. I’m discussing its redemption, its renewal.

But wait! What about all of the death and destruction that the Bible describes will occur before Jesus returns? To be fair, the Bible most definitely describes some very dark times that will precede the redemption of creation. I believe we are seeing the beginning of those dark days right now. Yes the events in the Middle East are moving toward the unified Islamization of the region. Yes, the increase in natural disasters is going to continue. Yes, the financial crisis will get far, far worse. And for this reason, I’ll continue to blow a trumpet and sound the alarm. Dark days are coming. Wake up. Repent. Get ready.

But from a Biblical perspective, the dark days are never to be the emphasis. The focus is always to be on the Redeemer to come. According to the analogy that Jesus used, the difficulties that lie ahead are only the birth pangs and contractions; they are not the conclusion of the matter. The contractions point to and ultimately lead to birth. And despite the immense pain (or so I have been told), associated with delivery, the miracle of holding a newborn baby always eclipses the suffering that preceded it.

Yes, there are many things these days to be concerned about. There are numerous things that might cause us anxiety or even depression. But I’m looking beyond the dark days to the Messianic Kingdom that will soon be birthed in the earth. Jesus the Messiah will be King over all the earth. I believe this emphatically and I make no apologies. I’ll continue to shout it from the rooftops and yearn for it with every ounce of who I am.

What the caterpillar calls the end of the world, the Master calls a butterfly. - Richard Bach

Blog Post: Al Mohler on the "Inevitable" Gay Marriage

Daniel McCarthy — Sun, 27 Feb 2011 12:05:00 GMT

Though many Christians are going to try to deny "the obvious," evangelical leader Dr. Albert Mohler believes gay marriage is going to become normalized.

"I think it's clear that something like same-sex marriage is going to become normalized, legalized and recognized in the culture. It's time for Christians to start thinking about how we're going to deal with that," he said Friday on the Focus on the Family radio program.

Mohler, president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, was speaking in response to the Obama administration's decision this week to stop defending the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act – federal law that defines marriage as between a man and a woman – in the courts.

Conservative groups and Christians have criticized Obama for going against his duty as president to defend the law.

"When a president takes oath of office, he's upholding ... defending the laws of the United States of America," said Mohler, who also noted that DOMA had passed as a bipartisan effort.

"The White House has clearly made a calculation that it can do this now with far less political risk than it could even two years ago."

Though Obama has always expressed his desire to repeal DOMA, his personal view on marriage had been traditional.

While on the campaign trail, running as the Democratic presidential nominee, Obama asserted his belief that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. He added, while being interviewed by Pastor Rick Warren, that "for me as a Christian, it's also a sacred union. God's in the mix."

Recently, however, he has stated that his views on gay marriage are "evolving."

The Obama administration has been pro-gay since taking office two years ago and Mohler noted that there has been a long trajectory on the issue of gay marriage pointing to this day.

With the Justice Department now pulling its defense of DOMA, pending legal challenges against the federal law will likely result with the nullification of DOMA, Mohler predicted.

"You can say, the cards are pretty much stacked against DOMA," he illustrated.

He warned that when Christians feel threatened, they have to be careful not to lash out with a predictable response.

The Southern Baptist made it clear that he was not saying that they are giving up. Marriage is still an institution Christians need to save, particularly in their own community. But Christians also need to start learning how to deal with the shifting culture and even face the fact that they may lose a few from their flock.

"I think we're going to be surprised and heartbroken over how many people are going to capitulate to the spirit of the age," he noted. "We're going to find now that there may not be as many of us as we thought."

Nevertheless, Christians must be prepared to make marriage one of the many topics where parents have to have "the talk."

"It's interesting now that the world is so morally upside down that when we talk about marriage we have to make a distinction between natural marriage – heterosexual marriage – and this new thing that people are calling marriage," Mohler said.

"We have to prepare our children to be in a context in which they're going to be in a playground with children who have two dads or two moms or who knows what kind of combination will come."

Ultimately, the worldview or the belief that God designed marriage to be between a man and a woman only makes sense if one understands the Gospel, Mohler pointed out, which raises a critical point:

"This whole situation reminds us that we are, first of all, to be Gospel people who are fellow sinners ... saved by grace, with the responsibility to share the Gospel with others."

File: Joel Richardson on Glen Beck

Daniel McCarthy — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 21:00:00 GMT

Here is Joel on GLen Beck!

Blog Post: Gifts Still Available?

Daniel McCarthy — Tue, 15 Feb 2011 11:38:00 GMT

“My grandma is in the hospital, and she needs prayer. Can you pray for healing for her?”

“Of course, let’s pray.”

There’s nothing wrong with this dialogue, but the conversation ending there is tragic—yet, this is how most prayer meetings go. We pray to God like He is going to do all the work. We act like we don’t need to be involved. Ultimately, God does do all the hard work, but that doesn’t make us exempt.

Who is going to wipe grandma’s sweaty brow? Who is going to read her a book, or bring her something to read? Who is going to stay up all night with her when she is in pain? Who is going to bring her meals when she comes home? And who is going to lay hands on her hurting body and pray for her?

There’s a reason why there’s no one around to pray for all the grandmothers in our hospitals. We no longer believe that God uses us to heal people. Instead, we think of healing in abstract terms, or in medical terms. (The typical, "Let the doctors have healing hands" prayer.)

Paul lists miracle workers as the fourth spiritual office in 1 Corinthians 12:27–31. In light of this passage, we’ve already discussed that:

- We don’t compare ourselves to Elijah but should.

- We treat pastors like restaurant managers.

- We tell prophets to be like retailers.

- We banish Sunday school teachers.

In the New Testament, Jesus and the disciples lay hands on people, pray for them, and they are healed. Yet, we have made the people who want to pray over people feel awkward.

Healers are displaced in our churches.

I bet you can’t recall the last time someone told you that they have the gift of healing, or the spiritual office of miracles. People with the office of miracles are scared to say so; and they shouldn’t be.

We don’t see miracles when we look at the church today; instead, we see gridlock. We see church folks locked into pews, and locked into a belief that the work of the church starts at 10 AM and ends at 11 AM. If it doesn’t happen in that hour, it must not be church. We have locked ourselves into an idea of church that’s comfortable—it’s something we can isolate like the rest of life. By thinking of church in these terms, we’ve conveniently pushed out the Spirit: the individual who does the work that God really wants done. And the Spirit just happens to be the one who prophesies and performs miracles through people (John 6:63; 1 Cor 12:4-11).

By pushing aside those with the spiritual office of miracles, we’ve made the church normal. We’ve made the church everyday. It’s boring.

Miracles are the sign of God pushing back the darkness. Miracles are a sign of the kingdom reigning. And if we aren’t pushing back the darkness, and God’s reign is not growing stronger in the world, then we’re not being Christians. You heard me right: a lack of miracles is a sign that we’re not being Christ-like. That was a sign of his ministry, and it must be a sign of ours.

I don’t know who has the office of miracles in my church yet, but I hope I find out soon. Because there are likely people in our congregation who need healing, and I want the Spirit to be able to freely work when that day comes. I want being missional in my faith community to mean pushing back the darkness. I want it to mean the kingdom reigning through our lives. And that means miracles.

What’s the situation in your church? Is the office of miracles at work in your congregation? If so, share with us how. If not, tell us how you think you could revive that office.

Blog Post: 1500 Yr Old Church Found

Daniel McCarthy — Fri, 04 Feb 2011 10:26:00 GMT

AP – A view of a mosaic in the archaeological site where an ancient church was found in Hirbet Madras, central …

. Slideshow:1,500-year-old church found in Israel .

By MATTI FRIEDMAN, Associated Press Matti Friedman, Associated Press – Wed Feb 2, 6:25 pm ET

HIRBET MADRAS, Israel – Israeli archaeologists presented a newly uncovered 1,500-year-old church in the Judean hills on Wednesday, including an unusually well-preserved mosaic floor with images of lions, foxes, fish and peacocks.

The Byzantine church located southwest of Jerusalem, excavated over the last two months, will be visible only for another week before archaeologists cover it again with soil for its own protection.

The small basilica with an exquisitely decorated floor was active between the fifth and seventh centuries A.D., said the dig's leader, Amir Ganor of the Israel Antiquities Authority. He said the floor was "one of the most beautiful mosaics to be uncovered in Israel in recent years."

"It is unique in its craftsmanship and level of preservation," he said.

Archaeologists began digging at the site, known as Hirbet Madras, in December. The Antiquities Authority discovered several months earlier that antiquities thieves had begun plundering the ruins, which sit on an uninhabited hill not far from an Israeli farming community.

Though an initial survey suggested the building was a synagogue, the excavation revealed stones carved with crosses, identifying it as a church. The building had been built atop another structure around 500 years older, dating to Roman times, when scholars believe the settlement was inhabited by Jews.

Hewn into the rock underneath that structure is a network of tunnels that archaeologists believe were used by Jewish rebels fighting Roman armies in the second century A.D.

Stone steps lead down from the floor of church to a small burial cave, which scholars suggest might have been venerated as the burial place of the Old Testament prophet Zecharia.

Ganor said the church would remain covered until funding was obtained to open it as a tourist site.

Israel boasts an exceptionally high concentration of archaeological sites, including Crusader, Islamic, Byzantine, Roman, ancient Jewish and prehistoric ruins.

Blog Post: Psalm 51 - Understanding Sin

Daniel McCarthy — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:48:00 GMT

David is aware his real sin was more serious than the capital crimes of 2 Samuel 11. The root of his wicked deeds was a casual dethroning of God in his heart. None of us have walked clear of this. David alludes to this when he confesses, "Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight, so that you may be justified in your words and blameless in your judgment" (Psalm 51:4).

Excuses, excuses

David refuses to pass off his offenses by making them out to be someone else’s fault – or even the fault of the system. The repetition of the word my and me four times each in Psalm 51:1–3 pushes the point home. He probably could have found multiple ways to excuse himself from some angles. It’s a hard job being King – I am entitled to some rest and some privileges; Bathsheba was looking for some companionship; Uriah would have been killed in battle at some point; it wasn’t me who killed him anyway – it was the Ammonites.

Put your sin in the proper perspective

This line had evidently been enough to keep David from repentance until Nathan came along. We can keep our dull consciences quiet for long periods, excusing our actions in various ways. A common one is: I had no choice. Perhaps even more common is: if you knew what they did to me.

If we hold out long enough, we can even train our consciences to see it the way most convenient for us.

David is now looking from the ultimate angle: God’s. Until we do that, we can kid ourselves all we like, but we are never going to deal with the real problem of our sin.

“We need to see it from God’s vantage point, and God says: TREASON.

”It is God whom we have offended. And it is God who will judge righteously.

Forget the bud, nip the root

Either we come to terms with this or we are not truly repenting. We may be self-pitying, regretful, even remorseful, yet we must reach the point of accepting God’s verdict without any qualification: Lord, you are right, I am wrong, it’s no one else’s fault and you are the one I have ultimately hurt. Go to the root of your sin, or it will grow back.

It is your choice

It’s a big deal to recognize you did have a choice. Those times when we are forced between options are always revealing. To say you have no choice but to sin is to betray that a path other than purity (career, reputation, wealth, ease) is ultimately a higher priority. We do have a choice – and we always choose what we want. It’s what we want that says the most about us.

Hope in God’s character

David has no confidence in past good deeds, nor does he make lavish promises about how much better he will behave from now on. He has a far more mature perspective. Jesus said, "blessed are the poor in spirit" (Matthew 5:3). Anyone coming to God with a list of reasons why he ought to forgive them still has no idea of the scale of their debt, and their own utter lack of power. The only hope is God.

“We do have a choice—and we always choose what we want. It’s what we want that says the most about us.

”David appeals to God’s covenant mercy (steadfast love) – which speaks of his dependable nature. God’s promise to treat his people with undeserved favor and grace which, for David, went back to his promises to Moses.

God has compassion for repentent sinners

David also refers to God’s "abundant mercy," though some translations will say "compassion." Here, the intensity of God’s love is in mind. This is a more emotive word. It speaks of a gut feeling of pity in God for his repentant people. Time and again in Scripture it is shown; and time and again it is displayed by God’s work in our lives.

Because this is the nature of our God, we can have hope – true hope.

Blog Post: What is Apologetics?

Daniel McCarthy — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 20:59:00 GMT

I Peter 3:15 says to “always be ready to give a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you.” Simply put, that’s apologetics. But in this short description, we discover three important details.

First, doing apologetics means playing defense. The Greek word for “defense” is apologia, from which we get the word “apologetics.” Think about a football game. At any time during the game, one team is trying to score (the offense) while the other is trying to stop them (the defense). If your team has a really bad defense, you’ll get blown away. Similarly, maybe you’ve been roughed up by some really tough objections to Christianity. You’ve heard the challenges before. “How can a good God allow suffering?” “The Bible is full of errors.” “Jesus can’t be the only way to God.” Apologetics helps us defend Christianity against tough questions.

Second, doing apologetics means playing offense. Back to the football analogy. A good defense is vital but you can’t win if you don’t score. The offense must advance the ball to get a touchdown. In the same way, apologetics attempts to give a “reason” for our hope by advancing arguments in favor of Christianity. We offer evidence for God’s existence, reasons to trust the Bible, and arguments for the bodily resurrection of Jesus. By playing offense, we give others good reason to think Christianity is true.

Third, doing apologetics means giving hope. What are you defending and giving evidence for? “The hope that is in you.” Ultimately, apologetics points people to our hope, Jesus himself. That’s why “we demolish arguments and every high-minded thing that is raised up against the knowledge of God, taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ” (2 Corinthians 10:4-5). Objections raised against Jesus must be demolished. But notice something. The Bible doesn’t say we demolish people. Rather we demolish arguments. Belittling others is not our goal. Merely winning arguments is not enough. Instead, we remove obstacles of doubt to Christianity so people can take a serious look at Christ, the only source of hope for this world. True apologetics is hopeful.

A final word. I Peter 3:15 is sandwiched between two very important sentences. Peter starts the verse with a challenge: “Set apart the Messiah as Lord in your hearts.” Apologetics should be done amidst a certain kind of life, one where we surrender more and more of ourselves to Christ. When we do this, He transforms us. So a transformed life is the beginning point for our apologetics.

And what will this kind of apologetic look like? Defense doesn’t mean being defensive. Offense doesn’t mean being offensive. Rather, verse 16 tells us our defense is made “with gentleness and respect.” Doing apologetics with Jesus as Lord and Master of our lives means our encounters will be marked by humility, warmth, grace and love, even while we stand boldly for the truth. By doing so, we follow in the way of Jesus, who was “full of grace and truth” (John 1:14).

*Used with permission. This article first appeared in the Apologetics Study Bible for Students published by Holman Bible Publishers, Nashville, Tenn. For information, click here.

Blog Post: Israel Mandate: The Church STanding in the Gap for Israel

Daniel McCarthy — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 13:47:00 GMT

Dear friends!

We want to invite you to A Special Event of worship, prayer, and teaching:

Saturday, January 29th at 11:00am.

"Israel Mandate:The Church standing in the gap for Israel"

Special guest speakers:

Israel Pochtar - Voice of Judah Ministry, Israel ( A Messianic Jewish ministy in Israel)

Yacov Ifraimov - The mayor of the City of Ashdod, Israel

David Bates - State Representative from New Hampshire.

Please join us in learning what the Lord is doing in Israel as we express God's love and support in standing with the Jewish people. Let's pray and believe together for God's promises of His Love and faithfulness to be revealed to Israel.

Rom. 11:15 " ... For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance

be but life from the dead! "

We look forward to seeing you!

Pastor Victor Khokhlan

Address:

King of the Nations House of Prayer

9 Cummings street

Somerville, MA O2145

781-363-6741

Blog Post: Morality and God

Daniel McCarthy — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 19:18:00 GMT

Christians assert that God is the only source of morality. Wanting to reject this assertion, atheists sometimes offer a counter-argument which claims to invalidate the Christian God as the source of morality.

The challenge is often referred to as the Euthyphro Dilemma because it was first raised in Plato’s dialogue Euthyphro. The argument goes like this. Either something is good because God commands it, or else God commands something because it is good.

Christians have problems with both options. If you say something is good because God commands it, then right and wrong are arbitrary. God could command tomorrow that murder, rape, and theft are right, and that love, kindness, and generosity are wrong. That seems bizarre; it runs counter to all of our common moral intuitions. It also conflicts with traditional and orthodox concepts of the Christian God. If murder and rape can be declared good, then we have no idea what kind of God we are worshiping.

On the other hand, if God commands something because it is good, then goodness exists outside of God. The ground for morality would then be independent of God - a stand-alone entity. God would be subservient to this source of morality, and therefore not God at all. The Christian God is not subservient to anything outside himself.

What is the solution to this dilemma? Christians have split this apparent dilemma by offering a third option: goodness is part of God’s nature. God, according to Christians, is the good. God commands the good because he is essentially good. His nature does not change, so he cannot declare murder to be right tomorrow. On the other hand, morality does not exist outside of him, but as part of him. He is only subservient to himself, which is no subservience at all.

It turns out that no dilemma really exists once you understand the nature of God. He truly is the source for all moral values and duties.

Blog Post: Outstanding Book Recommendation

Daniel McCarthy — Thu, 02 Dec 2010 22:48:00 GMT

Is God a Moral Monster? Understanding the Old Testament God (Baker) is officially “in stock” at Amazon.com. It’s also in local bookstores one month ahead of schedule.

I wanted to alert you to this book, which sheds light on troubling problems (and misconceptions) regarding the “Old Testament God”: “genocide,” slavery,” patriarchy and discrimination against women, the sacrifice of Isaac, harsh laws, kosher and purity laws, polygamy, concubinage, etc.

Critics are increasingly vocal about Old Testament ethical problems, yet much misunderstanding of ancient Near Eastern culture and distortion of the biblical texts accompany their arguments. According to some leading OT scholars who have endorsed the book (Christopher Wright, Gordon Wenham, Tremper Longman), this volume should prove to be a helpful resource to these vexing questions.

Here are some of the highlights of the book:

THE HUMANIZING NATURE OF ISRAEL’S LAWS IN CONTRAST TO THE REST OF THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST: I argue that virtually point-for-point, Israel’s legislation is significantly morally elevated—even if not ideal or universal. God meets Israel in the midst of deeply embedded fallen social structures and elevates them, even if not to the ideal level (cp. Matthew 19:8, where Moses permits certain laws because of the hardness of human hearts). The Mosaic Law’s morally elevated status is apparent in the far less-severe nature Israel’s punishments; the Mosaic Law’s lack of mutilation texts (I argue that Deuteronomy 25:11-12 is definitely NOT a mutilation text); the protection of runaway slaves from their masters (anti-return laws); servants automatically freed if bodily harm comes to them from their employers (anti-harm laws); and so on.
CANAANITE WARFARE DIRECTED AT NON-COMBATANTS: Noncombatants were not targeted in the Canaanite (or Amalekite) campaigns but rather non-civilian military, political, and religious centers (“cities”) like Jericho, Ai, and Hazor; these were not civilian centers. War texts using comprehensive language regarding “women” and “children” are stock ancient Near Eastern phrasing, even if women and children are not involved.
HYPERBOLE AND ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN BRAVADO: The biblical text, like other ancient Near Eastern war texts, uses exaggeration or hyperbole (.e.g., “let nothing remain“everything that breathed”). However, the biblical text itself (especially Judges, which is literarily linked to Joshua) reveals that a lot of breathing Canaanites remained and lived among the Israelites. “Wiping out” all the Canaanites was not what Moses intended in Deuteronomy 20 (the term “driving out” or “dispossessing” is much more prominent in these texts—which is NOT the same as “wiping out”). So Joshua (who didn’t literally destroy everything that breathed) “carried out what Moses commanded.”
CONCUBINAGE AS HAVING A “SECONDARY WIFE”: A “concubine” often refers to a “secondary” wife rather than a female used for a male’s sexual pleasure (e.g., after the first/“primary” wife has died—like Abraham’s wife Keturah after Sarah died).
POLYGAMY PROHIBITED: Leviticus 18:18 indicates that polygamy is prohibited by the Mosaic Law; it is not morally permissible even if less than ideal—which is unfortunately commonly assumed by Christians.
OLD TESTAMENT SLAVERY AS INDENTURED SERVITUDE: While critics commonly equate Old Testament “slavery” with the antebellum South’s common harsh treatment of slaves, the term “slave(ry)” is misleading and should be understood as “contractual employment” or “indentured servitude”—much like a sports player who is “owned” by a team or a person contracted to serve a set time in the military. Normally, according to the Law of Moses, servitude within Israel was poverty-induced, and it was to be voluntary and temporary (no more than seven years). I deal with a number of difficult servitude passages.
NEW TESTAMENT SLAVERY AND ONESIMUS: I dip into the New Testament on the topic of slavery, as this is a different issue than Old Testament indentured servitude. In addition to arguing for the radically humanizing treatment of slaves in the New Testament, I argue that Onesimus was in all likelihood not a slave; that interpretation of Philemon comes significantly later in church history. For example, there are no “flight” verbs in Philemon, which would be strange if Onesimus had run away. Various scholars argue that Philemon and Onesimus were not only (alienated) Christian brothers, but possibly biological brothers as well.

I hope this whets your appetite for an in-depth, yet accessible, discussion of perhaps the most troubling questions Christians today must address.

Blog Post: Interesting...I never knew this. Please watch!

Daniel McCarthy — Sun, 21 Nov 2010 13:31:00 GMT

Full Version of Star Spangled Banner

Blog Post: BNOW T'Shirts On Sale

Daniel McCarthy — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 13:29:00 GMT

Hi Folks,

If you are interested in a BNOW T'shirt, I have them for $12 a piece. This is the cost of their production. They are really nice and were selling for $20 at the show.

Dan

Blog Post: Obkective Truth

Daniel McCarthy — Fri, 05 Nov 2010 10:17:00 GMT

Wow, it's already November. Is it just me, or do the years fly by faster than ever? In October I had the pleasure of speaking at CCF, a local Christian school on the nature of truth. Have you ever been confronted with statements like, "That may be true for you, but it's not true for me"? Well, this month we'd like to offer a short response to two errors that people often make related to the nature of truth:

OBJECTION: Truth is in the eye of the beholder. All truth depends on your perspective. What may be true for you is not necessarily true for me. Besides, truth is elusive. No one can really be sure that they know the truth because no one knows everything that can be known about any particular topic. It's arrogant to claim that you know something to be objectively true!

RESPONSE: Some truths are clearly personal and belong to the subjects who hold them. If you and I were standing in a museum looking at a sculpture, each of us might react to it differently. You might say the sculpture makes you feel anxious, I might say it makes me feel calm. But the truth about whether or not the sculpture exists in the first place does not reside in either of us as subjects. The truth about the existence of the sculpture lies in the object itself (the sculpture). Our subjective denial of the sculpture would not change the fact that the sculpture exists. It's not a matter of subjective opinion or perspective, it's a matter of objective truth. The culture around us, however, often makes two illogical claims about truth:

"Objective truth does not exist"
When people make a claim like this, simply ask the question, "Is that true? Are you telling me that it's objectively true that there is no such thing as objective truth?" The skeptic who makes this claim about truth expects us to accept his or her claim as though it is objectively true for everyone and not simply a matter of subjective opinion. In essence they are affirming (as foundational) the very thing they are denying. They are making a "self-refuting" statement that falls on its own sword

"Objective truth cannot be known"
When people make a claim like this, simply ask the question, "Are you sure? Are you telling me that you know with certainty that nothing can be known with certainty?" The skeptic who makes this claim maintains that he or she is in a position to know definitively that nothing can be known definitively. They are again making a "self-refuting" statement that stumbles before it can even get off the starting line.

While you and I may have subjective opinions about how the existence of God makes us feel, the truth about God's existence in the first place (like the truth about the existence of the sculpture) lies not in our subjective perspective, but in the object Himself. God either exists or He does not. God either has a certain, specific nature, or He does not. Our opinions and perspectives do not create the truth about God. We either hold views that are objectively true (they acknowledge the pre-existent, objective truth about God) or we don't. And yes, this means that some of us are holding accurate beliefs and some of us are not. The reality of objective truth demands that we take the question of God's existence seriously. It's not a matter of personal perspective. The truth about God is objective and is to be discovered by those of us who will acknowledge the nature of truth in the first place.

John 8:31-32
So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, "If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free."

Blog Post: No Morality Without God

Daniel McCarthy — Sat, 16 Oct 2010 12:44:00 GMT

The philosopher Joel Marks is an honest man, it seems. For much the better part of a long career, he had had no difficulty in preserving a happy harmony between his atheism and his commitment to a basically Kantian moral philosophy. Naturally, he had been obliged to ignore Kant’s claim that God and the soul are necessary postulates of practical reason (which, frankly, has always seemed like something of a flaw in the deontological glass of the second Critique anyway); but, otherwise, he had kept largely to the Kantian script.

Over the past few years, however, he has had a kind of conversion experience, which has left him, he says, in the curious position of having to “learn to live life all over again.” As he explains in an article in the most recent issue of Philosophy Now, he has belatedly come to realize that for long years he has toiled under an illusion, and that he ought earlier to have examined his assumption that there is any such thing as right or wrong.

Much to his surprise, he now finds himself in agreement with all those “fundamentalists” who say that without God there can be no morality. Without a “commander,” it turns out, there really can’t be any commandments. And so, convinced atheist that he is, Marks finds himself compelled—just by intellectual honesty—to “embrace amorality.”

Or so he says. He has not, however, simply thrown over his moral principles of old in favor of, say, prudently predatory selfishness; nor has he forsaken compassion for some kind of higher hedonism (like the ridiculous Michel Onfray). He may now believe that what we call morality is merely the residue of evolutionary processes, and that its real “purpose” has been to promote the survival of the species. But, even so, he can still choose compassion, he has decided, because it pleases him to do so; he calls this position “desirism.”

He can even try to persuade others to adopt the causes dearest to his heart, such as kindness towards animals, without in the least vitiating his obedience to “Truth” (written with that mystically evocative capital T). All he has to do is reconcile himself to an ethics in the conditional mood.

When speaking to religious persons, he need not pretend to share their beliefs; he need only show that if one should happen to hold their convictions, then one ought—oh—to be a vegetarian. Similarly, he may have deserted the ranks of the Kantians, but that doesn’t mean he can’t stand above them on a nearby ridge as they march by and vigorously exhort them to be true to their own principles.

Of course, when speaking to another amoralist, Marks will have to rely largely on utilitarian arguments; but, for better or worse, he actually thinks such arguments are sound, so that’s no problem. And ultimately, he feels confident, he will always be able to fall back upon a kind of cultural default.

If his interlocutor has grown up in the same culture as he has, then the two of them will already share many predilections and prejudices in common, and Marks will be able to rely on that larger, more original “ethical” grammar. Thus, though there is nothing objectively “evil” or “sinful” about the molestation of children, says Marks, enough of us are sufficiently averse to such behavior that, even if we had to rely on purely naturalistic arguments for our ethical preferences, we would still continue to prohibit it.

Anyway, you can read the piece for yourself if you wish. For myself, I am not entirely sure how to react to it. The more uncharitable side of my nature wants simply to remark that a conversion to the blindingly obvious does not really constitute one of the more momentous events in intellectual history (even if it does constitute an important psychological episode in the life of Joel Marks).

Of course if there is no God, then there can be neither moral right nor moral wrong in any objectively real sense. The “Good as such”—the source and end of moral truth, the highest object of the rational will, which has the power to unite the longing for truth with the imperative to act in this way or that—is found nowhere within nature. Not even those who believe in “natural law” imagine that it is.

On the other hand, I feel a certain sympathy for the Marks of old, as I do for all those committed atheists who become so indignant when they think their moral competence has been impugned. Who, after all, can remain entirely unmoved by the plangent bathos of the atheist moralist’s cri de cœur, “We don’t need God in order to be good”?

We all know that countless persons of no creed whatsoever—atheists, agnostics, the indeterminately “spiritual,” the genially indifferent—are able to behave with exemplary kindness and generosity. Spend some time working with Doctors Without Borders, for instance, and you will meet many physicians who joined the organization out of religious conviction, but also many who did not, and it is impossible to discern any great differences among them as far as compassion or heroism goes.

That said, I have to observe that, in my largely aimless peregrinations through the world, I have been led to a few dark and desolate locales, of the sort that never get mentioned in tourist guides, and it is hard not to notice that the nearer one gets to the ground in places where poverty, disease, despair, and terror are simply part of the quotidian fabric of existence, the more the burden of humanitarian aid is shifted onto the shoulders of religious institutions (generally, though not exclusively, Christian). I don’t doubt the good will, decency, or dedication of atheist altruists, or the supererogation of which many of them are individually capable. But I do occasionally entertain doubts that in general, considered purely proportionately, they can rival their believing counterparts for sheer moral stamina.

That is not an accusation, however. The real question of the moral life, at least as far as philosophical “warrant” is at issue, is not whether one personally needs God in order to be good, but whether one needs God in order for the good to be good. This is something that Marks fails to address when he talks of God simply as a “commander,” rather than as the summum bonum that makes a moral metaphysics possible.

It is simply the case that belief in a real and eternal “goodness-as-such”—which has the power to draw all persons together in a communion of love and knowledge, and which is more than merely a fiction of the individual will—makes it easier for many to devote themselves indefatigably, even blissfully, to the labor of selfless love. In the absence of that conviction, even the hardiest altruistic unbeliever will still at some level tend to hold to a practical certitude regarding the reality of good and evil. This is the implicit theology within all moral longing—an assertion that annoys atheists, perhaps, but true nevertheless.

It make perfect sense to me, then, that a reflective scholar could devote his or her life to philosophy and not discover the contradiction between atheism and moral realism till rather late in life. I am predisposed to think that real and uncompromising atheism, whose intrinsic “metaphysics” is real and uncompromising naturalism, always requires some element of magical thinking in all three of the classical or “critical” philosophical realms: ontology, epistemology, and ethics. But even if that is an unjust assumption, it seems to me hardly debatable that no purely naturalistic approach to ethics has ever succeeded in producing anything resembling a compelling or attractive moral imperative.

Choose whichever you like—standard utilitarianism, Rawls’s theory of justice, attempts to ground moral thinking in evolutionary biology or neurophysiology—you will always find, if you subject your preferred ethical naturalism to sufficiently unflinching scrutiny, that at some primal and irreducible point it must simply presume a movement of good will, an initial moral impulse that, with a kind of ghostly Gödelian elusiveness, can never be contained within the moral system it sustains. All the polyphony of nature falls mute when asked to produce one substantial imperative, unless one believes (explicitly or tacitly) that the voice of nature has its origin and consummation in the voice of God.

I am not convinced, I should add, that Marks has really succeeded in becoming quite the consistent amoralist that he thinks is. Call it what he will, I still cannot regard his devotion to personal probity or his “preference” for compassion or his desire to persuade others as anything other than a morality. There are preferences and there are preferences, desires and desires, and they differ from one another in quality according to their objects and their intensity. Certainly a desire to convince someone not to be cruel to animals is not a desire simply to communicate an aesthetic inclination.

This past year, I became quite attached to the string quartets of Vagn Holmboe, and I’m quite eager to share that enthusiasm with other music lovers; but I know that that is not at all comparable to my desire that others should agree with me regarding the evil of child-molestation. And I do not think Marks’s desire to persuade others to hate vivisection (his example) has the quality—the simple existential quality—of mere personal desire.

Whatever the case, though, Marks might be wise to hope that he is wrong. There is a genuinely winsome, but dangerous, naïveté in his presuppositions regarding the cultural consensus upon which he would like to allow his ethical arguments to rest. He even goes so far as to opine that morality is not only largely superfluous to daily life, but that its removal might even make for a better world, more conducive to our common happiness. What can one say to this?

For one thing, any decent knowledge of human history should apprise one of the sheer cultural contingency of all moral premises. Not only is it the case that, throughout history, cultures have been able to thrive and perdure without ever cultivating any of the ethical “desires” Marks hopes to find among his neighbors and fellow citizens, it is also the case that the ethical predispositions of a people can shift with remarkable suddenness and violence once the intricate weave of metaphysical, moral, aesthetic, and imaginative paradigms giving shape to a culture starts to change.

That is inevitable, in any event. But surely the belief that moral principles are only a combination of evolutionary epiphenomena and sentimental predilections must weaken the will to seek the good, and a whole culture that truly came to believe that all moral choices are merely personal preferences might find that the inventiveness and spontaneity of the liberated will are capable of just about anything, and responsible to nothing. After all, it is not as if the lessons of modern history have given us no cause for apprehension on that score.

Well, who can say? Marks means well. But après moi le déluge, as Louis XV said (exhibiting a prescience rare for a Bourbon). Louis knew the French monarchy would not long survive him, but he knew also that there was enough vitality left in the moribund old estates of France to keep the inevitable at bay while he still lived. Similarly, Marks need not worry that he will live to see precisely what sort of society a truly amoralist culture might produce. And anyway, as he notes in his article, he has no children.

Blog Post: Book on Bringing Kids Up Christian

Daniel McCarthy — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 11:14:00 GMT

“Almost Christian” is one of the best books on youth culture that has come out for some time. The author, Kenda Creasy Dean, begins the book by saying, “Let me save you some trouble. Here is the gist of what you are about to read: ‘American young people are, theoretically, fine with religious faith—but it does not concern them very much, and it is not durable enough to survive long after they graduate from high school. One more thing: we’reresponsible” (p. 3).

I could not agree more.

And yet Dean does not leave us without hope. She specifically says towards the end of the book, “I find that I have arrived at only two conclusions with any confidence. Here is the first: When it comes to vapid Christianity, teenagers are not the problem—the church is the problem. And the second: the church also has the solution” (p. 189). Yes! The church does have the solution and we can move into the future with confidence and hope.

There has been a lot of talk recently about why kids are leaving the faith (and if they are leaving the faith in droves). Rather than focusing on how we can keep young people in the faith, she says the central question should be, “Does the church matter?” (p. 9). The problem, she says, is that kids approach religious participation, like music and sports, as an extracurricular activity, which may be helpful and interesting, but certainly not necessary for an integrated life. Young people are particularly inarticulate about matters of their faith. She says:

“Time and time again in our interviews, we met young people who called themselves Christians, who grew up with Christian parents, who were regular participants in Christian congregations, yet who had no readily available faith vocabulary, few recognizable faith practices, and little ability to reflect on their lives religiously” (p. 16). Young people who have a hard time articulating what they believe about God, she says, have a hard time forming a significant connection God.

So, how do we proceed? How do we help young people genuinely connect with God? Dean gives a few words of advice that are particularly helpful.

First, the solution is not in “beefing” up our programs or making worship more “cool” and attractive. Rather, we need to model the kind of mature, passionate faith we say we want young people to have. She asks a penetrating question, “Do we practice the kind of faith that we want our children to have?” (p. 39). My dad often told me that we are only able to take young people as far as we’ve gone ourselves. We need to begin by looking in the mirror.

Second, relationships are the medium through which convictions are built. Real faith is most likely to develop in the rich relational soil of families, congregations, and in mentoring relationships where young people see faith lived out and practiced.

Third, beliefs matter. It was refreshing to hear Dean mention the importance of developing a governing ideology (beliefs). She has a great quote on page 15, “We ‘teach’ young people baseball, but we ‘expose’ them to faith.” We need to actively teach young people how to think biblically and to put those beliefs into action. It won’t happen by accident.

Fourth, young people need practice talking about their faith. One of the reasons young people are so inarticulate about religion is that they spend little time in communities where a language of faith is spoken. Rarely are teens given an opportunity to practice using faith vocabulary. This year I am giving my students “Case Study” assignments where they have to teach their parents basic theological lessons. Not only have the parents been deeply appreciative; it provides a natural platform for students to talk theologically, thus making their beliefs real.

Mormons outperform all other religious groups in terms ofbeing articulate about their faith. They were overwhelmingly more likely to talk about God, the Scriptures, prayer, or other religious or spiritual things with family and friends (74% compared to 46% for evangelical teens). Mormons actually apply Deuteronomy 6:4-7 to their families. Why don’t we Christians do the same?

Fifth, raise the bar. Dean says, “Afraid of being branded as religious zealots, many American churches have overcompensated, setting the barlow for religious commitment of any kind, tending God’s garden with forks and spoons when tractors and backhoes are in order.” Again, Yes! I could not have said it better myself. Too many people have lowered the bar for this generation, focusing on quantity instead of quality. The more I raise the bar for students the more they respond. Students are capable of great things if we’ll prepare them.

There is much reason for concern with this generation. But as Dean points out, the solution lies with the church and with each one of us. I am hopeful that we can make a significant difference if we follow the pattern Dean has laid out. For those who care about the next generation, “Almost Christian” is worth the investment.

Blog Post: Kirk Promotes NESA

Daniel McCarthy — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 19:46:00 GMT

Check it out!

File: Genesis 1 Interpretations

Daniel McCarthy — Wed, 15 Sep 2010 20:24:00 GMT

A number of different perspectives on Genesis.

Blog Post: Solemn Assembly Update 9/13

Daniel McCarthy — Mon, 13 Sep 2010 13:40:00 GMT

Dear friends, intercessors and pastors!

God is on the move in New England! He is calling all of us back to the Roots of our Faith! He is calling us Back to the Roots of our Nation!

One year ago, we started calling the Body of Christ in New England to come together, on September 25th of 2010 in Plymouth, Mass. to Rediscover and Reclaim God's dream, God's will and God's purpose for New England and America!

The purpose of the New England Solemn Assembly is:

1. Respond to the urgency of the Holy Spirit to bring people back to the covenant as key to revival.

2. Return to the birthplace of this country and re-establish the covenant with God that pilgrims first formed.

3. Reclaim the Christ-centered heritage of America

4.Unite all six states for a New England to return to the one, true holy God to a place of honor in our lives.

We stand at a critical juncture in America!

We, as a nation, have been immensely blessed by God ! However, we have forgotten where we have come from and Who is the source of our blessings! The purpose why our country has been so blessed has been lost in our generation!

With the increasing shaking and judgments released already upon us , God is trying to get our attention and started sending alarming warnings, If we will not turn from our wicked ways, more judgment is coming our way!

" Rend your hearts and not your garments!", is the word of the Lord for our Nation! Don't pray anymore: God bless America, because He did! Now we need to pray : America, it's time to bless God! Enough religious talk and religious services! " Where is the fruit of your repentance , America?".

The judgment of the Lord starts in the house of the Lord. This is where the problem started and that is where the solution is: it's with the people of God! God says in 2 Cron.7:14 : "If MY people will turn from their wicked ways..."

We, as a nation, have deeply hurt the heart of God with our arrogance and pride. We are boldly promoting policies and agendas that provoke His Holy Name to retaliate with Holy Anger and Vengeance against us. God is deeply offended for what is happening in our nation! We have been given Much and now God has started keeping us accountable!

The kind of repentance that God is looking is expresses in the Book of Joel: " ... mourn like a virgin that lost her husband of her youth...", Joel 1:8, and " Return with all your heart with fasting and weeping and mourning", Joel:2:12. God is addressing the elders of the people to take corporate responsibility for the what has come to us and to call people to gather for a Solemn Assembly to repent with tears and brokenness.

More that 100 ministries and churches from all over New England responded to support and to be part of the Solemn Assembly in Plymouth. In each time zone and in many states as well ( including Hawaii and Alaska) Solemn Assemblies/prayer rallies will gather together and unite with us in Plymouth on September 25th to stand in the gap for our nation: to repent and to renew the covenant with the Lord on behave of our nation in this generation. We believe that when we touch the heart of God this will unlock heaven to release another Mighty Awakening in this nation that we desperately need.

God brought to our Solemn Assembly planning meeting Kirk Cameron( from "Left behind " series), who is working on a New Documentary, "MONUMENTAL: In Search of America’s National treasure " (www.monumentalmovie.com). This movie is about Christian heritage and the history of the birth of America that is connected to the first Pilgrims, that settled in Plymouth, Mass.

Kirk and his filming crew walked into our prayer meeting when we were praying and seeking God. The Solemn Assembly will be part of the " Monumental "movie on the 25th of September. We are absolutely blown away how God brought both of us together: The Solemn Assembly and the Monumental!

So what began, as a prayer and a dream that many of us had, to see God moving with His power and purposes in New England is becoming a reality. We all sense, that God is on the move already. It's both: shakings and judgments and the release of His glory and purpose for His church!

Join us on September 25th at 9:30Am for a pre-rally at the Monument to the Forefathers with Kirk Cameron and at 12:00noon for the Solemn Assembly.

If you are not from Boston or New England you can watch live on the Internet: www.praytv.org

Thank you for praying together with us and for us as we seek His Counsel and wisdom.

For another Great Awakening in New England and America

Victor Khokhlan

Mass. Remnant State Representative.

781-363-6741

Blog Post: Solemn Assembly Update

Daniel McCarthy — Thu, 09 Sep 2010 11:19:00 GMT

"Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent and do the first works, or else I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place-unless you repent." Revelation 2:5

"Therefore 'Come out from among them and be separate,' says the Lord. Do not touch what is unclean, and I will receive you." 2 Cor. 5:17

Dear friends,

Greetings in Jesus' name!

As you know from our last email, the Lord has stirred many pastors and leaders across the six states of New England to call for a Solemn Assembly on 9/25/10, in Plymouth, MA. The theme of this gathering is "Return-Rediscover-Reclaim" God's purposes for America. The number of pastors and leaders who bear witness to this continue to increase on a weekly basis. The signators are many across denominational lines, including Baptists, Pentecostals, Assemblies of God, Vineyard Christian Fellowship, Christian and Missionary Alliance, Church of the Nazarene, non-denominational churches, as well as many other para-church ministries. They also include a wide ethnic representation such as Russian, Latino, Brazilian, Korean, and African leaders from across New England. (See updated letter below).

As you might recall from the flyer and the Youtube invitational video, the Lord stirred the organizers of this assembly to begin that day by a morning tour of the National Monument to the Forefathers in Plymouth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Monument_to_the_Forefathers. This is perhaps the most significant American monument that speaks of America's Christian heritage and covenant with God. The purpose of beginning our Solemn Assembly this way is to "Remember from where we have fallen."

Simultaneously, the Lord has been stirring Christian actor Kirk Cameron (who made the movie "Fireproof") with the same message to call America back to its Christian roots. He is preparing this message through a movie documentary about America's Christian heritage, and a main part of his movie is about the National Monument to the Forefathers. The movie is called "Monumental" http://www.monumentalmovie.com/synopsis/

The Lord somehow connected the movie team with the Solemn Assembly planning team and they both recognized that the Lord is stirring them with the same message at the same time. They both realized that God is clearly saying something to His people for this time. The movie team recognized the importance of the Solemn Assembly and they are letting the nation know about it. They also decided to come film the tour on the morning of September 25th in Plymouth to stir America and record this moment as God's remnant are responding to the stirring of the Holy Spirit.

As a preparation for this gathering, we encourage you to join us for a 10 day fast beginning tonight. See attached 10-day prayer guide devotional and flyer.

New England Solemn Assembly details:

9:30 am-11 am: Historic tour by Dr. Paul Jehle and Kirk Cameron at the Forefathers monument, Allerton street, Plymouth, MA

12 noon-4 pm: Solemn Assembly, Plymouth Memorial Hall, 83 Court Street, Plymouth, MA

We look forward to seeing you there!

The New England Solemn Assembly planning team.