Monthly Archives: March 2014

A review of “There is a God” by Antony Flew March 31, 2012 and the 5 reasons Flew changed his mind!!

________

Antony Flew on God and Atheism

Published on Feb 11, 2013

Lee Strobel interviews philosopher and scholar Antony Flew on his conversion from atheism to deism. Much of it has to do with intelligent design. Flew was considered one of the most influential and important thinker for atheism during his time before his death (he’s a much better thinker than Richard Dawkins too – even when he was an atheist). His conversion to God-belief has caused an uproar among atheists. They have done all they can to lessen the impact of his famous conversion by shamelessly suggesting he’s too old, senile and mentally deranged to understand logic and science anymore.

News on Antony Flew’s conversion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1e4FU…

Interview and discussion with Antony Flew:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53REH…

Is Goodness Without God is Good Enough? William Lane Craig vs. Paul Kurtz

Published on Jul 29, 2013

Date: October 24, 2001
Location: Franklin & Marshall College

Christian debater: William Lane Craig
Atheist/secular humanist debater: Paul Kurtz

For William Lane Craig: http://www.reasonablefaith.org/
For Paul Kurtz: http://paulkurtz.net/
To purchase this debate: http://apps.biola.edu/apologetics-sto…
To purchase a published version of this debate:http://apps.biola.edu/apologetics-sto…

__________________________

Piers Morgan Tonight CNN Official Interview: Ricky Gervais says atheism shouldn’t offend

Uploaded on Jan 20, 2011

Ricky Gervais tells CNN’s Piers Morgan why he’s an atheist, and why his jokes about God shouldn’t offend believers.

The Bible and Science (Part 01)

____________

Making Sense of Faith and Science

Uploaded on May 16, 2008

Dr. H. Fritz Schaefer confronts the assertion that one cannot believe in God and be a credible scientist. He explains that the theistic world view of Bacon, Kepler, Pascal, Boyle, Newton, Faraday and Maxwell was instrumental in the rise of modern science itself. Presented as part of the Let There be Light series. Series: Let There Be Light [5/2003] [Humanities] [Show ID: 7338]

________________

___________

__________

During the 1990′s I actually made it a practice to write famous atheists and scientists that were mentioned by Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer and challenge them with the evidence for the Bible’s historicity and the claims of the gospel. Usually I would send them a cassette tape of Adrian Rogers’ messages “6 reasons I know the Bible is True,” “The Final Judgement,” “Who is Jesus?” and the message by Bill Elliff, “How to get a pure heart.” I would also send them printed material from the works of Francis Schaeffer and a personal apologetic letter from me addressing some of the issues in their work.

The famous atheist Antony Flew was actually took the time to listen to several of these messages and he wrote me back in the mid 1990′s several times.

Discussion (1 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas

Uploaded on Sep 22, 2010

A discussion with Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas. This was held at Westminster Chapel March, 2008

______________

There is a God by Antony Flew

March 31, 2012 § Leave a comment

 In 2004, Antony Flew, longtime atheist  philosopher of religion, announced in what was going to be a debate against a theist, that he had changed his mind – and he now believes that there is, in fact, a God. The book first talks about Flew’s past, and what caused him to become an atheist in the first place. He discusses his atheist works, and why he has changed his mind about the things he has written. He has always held that “Follow the evidence, wherever it leads,” coined by Socrates, to be his motto, and he feels that the evidence now available by science points towards a creator.

Flew comments that he received a lot of heat from his fellow atheists after his conversion, many of which stated publicly that the conversion had to do with being ‘senile’ or ‘afraid of death’ (Flew is over 80 years old), or that he wasn’t up to date with the latest abiogenesis research. Flew, however, doesn’t believe any of these are accurate. He still doesn’t believe there is an immortal soul (which is odd, because I think a lot of the best evidence is for an immortal soul). He also holds that no abiogenesis will ever figure out the mystery of life. He elaborates later in his book, explaining that there is more than just the biological factor of life first forming, but rather how consciousness can be developed through naturalistic mechanisms at all, as well as the concept of ‘self’ or ‘I.’ As far as being ‘senile,’ as Richard Dawkins says, I can attest to the fact that his mind seemed to be working just fine in the writing of this book.

I found Flew’s works during his atheist years to be much more impressive than that done by today’s “New Atheist” movement. Atheism, in general, does not have many positive arguments for it, or namely, arguments that show God’s characteristics to be incoherent, or impossible given what we know about the world. Typically, atheism is believing the arguments for theism just are not good enough, or fail in some way. From my observation, Flew did things that the “New Atheists” are not doing, namely, put the ball in the theists court. One of Flew’s contentions is that the attributes of God need to be defined in a coherent way before any debate on his existence could begin. He also argued extensively that the burden of proof lies in the theist’s court, and that atheism should be the default position taken until convinced otherwise. I haven’t read Flew’s work myself, but it seems he did more than the New Atheist writers do by actually placing the theist on his heels, defending his concept of God, instead of simply denying that the arguments for God are good enough.

Flew also spends a good deal of time talking about science and it’s relation to God. He talks about the misrepresentation of Einstein, and how Einstein wanted first and foremost to discover the “Mind of God” with his work. Subsequent scientists, like Max Plank, Werner Heisenberg, Erwin Schrodinger, and Paul Dirac have also felt that examining nature allows one to understand the Mind of God. Even Charles Darwin is quoted as saying he deserves to be called a theist (It makes me think of a bumper sticker used by evolutionists that has the word ‘Darwin’ inside of the fish used as the symbol of the Christian Church. If you’re following Darwin, and Darwin followed God, what does this mean about you?) He believes the conflict between science and religion is not actually a conflict, but as Max Plank says, a fight against “skepticism, dogmatism, and unbelief…”

To summarize the factors that brought Flew to belief in God:

1.) How is that we have a set of laws that drives feature-less gases to life, consciousness and intelligence?

2.) Where do the laws of physics come from?

3.) Fine-tuning argument

4.) How did life go live?

5.) Cosmological Argument

(1), (2), (3) Flew feels that the laws of the universe are too fine-tuned to be just taken for granted, and he doesn’t feel any objections fully take a ‘design’ factor out of the equation. First, science rests on the fact that induction is possible, or that we will repeatedly observe the same results – when there isn’t any reason why this would have to be the case. Paul Davis makes two points about this, saying:

– A theory of everything (something proposed to account for the stability of the laws of nature, relating them all to one another) which would show that this is the only logically consistent world is ‘demonstrability wrong.’

– Some maintain the laws of physics are ‘our laws’ and not natures. Davis says this is ‘arrant nonsense,’ these laws really exist, and scientists uncover the laws, not invent them.

So this type of thinking can go in two paths:

– What upholds the laws of nature?

– Why do we have laws of nature that are ‘fine-tuned’ towards life?

When I first heard the fine-tuning argument, I originally thought it was great. I then slowly moved away from it, as I didn’t want to place any faith in a “God of the Gaps” argument. The thing to remember about this argument is that if the universe happened by blind chance, then it would not have ‘catered’ to life in any way. There is no ‘right answer’ for a randomly spawning universe, and even if the laws are interconnected in some way, it would not have to cater and facilitate towards life. So even if the laws are interconnected, somehow, I can’t see how that would necessitate it catering towards life.

The multiverse option, which I’ve talked about before, is excessive. I think the question that sums it up is asking a proponent of it – how many universes are there? The answer is ‘a lot.’ Why is it a lot? Because it needs to balance the odds. That’s really the only purpose behind the multiverse theory –  to get rid of a need for design.

___________

Discussion (2 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas

___________

(A thought – what would happen if multiple universes were discovered, but they all we’re life-permitting?)

(4) Life, unlike non-living things, has an inherent goal, a purpose (This type of thinking is similar to Aristotle with final and formal causes, which I’m reading about now in another book). There are many issues about life, from the concept of self, the mind-body problem, how the first replication of life could occur, why things evolve towards more complex systems, origin of the code that is DNA, how sexual reproduction could have itself evolved. It seems, if I understand Flew correctly, the overwhelming number of issues, some seeminly solvable, some more unreasonable, led flew to the feeling that, as he says, “the only satisfactory explanation for the origin of such ‘end-directed, self-replicating’ life as we see on earth is an infinitely intelligent Mind.”

(5) Flew notes that he always felt at some point, people need to take things as a brute fact. For theists – God is that brute fact. For atheists, the Big Bang, or the universe in general is the ultimate brute fact. However, Flew feels that the Big Bang changes how cosmological arguments are done. Flew feels that no matter how you describe the universe, whether it existed forever, or originating from a point outside of space-time, or else in space but not in time, or having a total energy of zero – theists still will always be able to ask ‘why is there something rather than nothing?’ As Richard Swineburne summarizes, ‘it is very unlikely that a universe would exist uncaused, but rather more likely that God would exist uncaused. Flew feels that this, more vague way of stating things, is the correct way to form a cosmological argument.

Flew ends his book saying that discoveries in science have led him to believe in the existence of an intelligent Mind. Flew ends, saying:

“Some claim to have made contact with this Mind. I have not-yet. But who knows what could happen next? Someday I might hear a Voice that says, “Can you hear me now?”

For Flew, science, the very thing that atheism clings to, in hopes that it will one day rid mankind’s need for the Divine, inevitably led Flew to a belief in God. I think Flew’s story is very motivational, and it’s a great story to read for those struggling with faith, and even for those who are strong in their faith (and by ‘faith’ I mean Aquinas’s usage of the word, not the ‘New Atheist’ usage of the word, of course). Man is very reluctant to admit they made a mistake in their judgement, and the hold of an ideology, for whichever team one plays for, is always a threat. That’s why it’s impressive when people who have obtained so much knowledge are able to overcome any pride involved, and admit the evidence now leads elsewhere.

___________

Discussion (3 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas

Related posts:

Review of Antony Flew Book: THERE IS A GOD Article by R.C. Sproul May 2008

During the 1990′s I actually made it a practice to write famous atheists and scientists that were mentioned by Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer and challenge them with the evidence for the Bible’s historicity and the claims of the gospel. Usually I would send them a cassette tape of Adrian Rogers’ messages “6 reasons I know […]

The Death of a (Former) Atheist — Antony Flew, 1923-2010 Antony Flew’s rejection of atheism is an encouragement, but his rejection of Christianity is a warning. Rejecting atheism is simply not enough, by Al Mohler

________________________________ Discussion (1 of 3): Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas Uploaded on Sep 22, 2010 A discussion with Antony Flew, N.T. Wright, and Gary Habermas. This was held at Westminster Chapel March, 2008 ______________________ During the 1990′s I actually made it a practice to write famous atheists and scientists that were mentioned by Adrian […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Tagged  | Edit | Comments (0)

Antony Flew’s journey from Atheism to Theism

During the 1990′s I actually made it a practice to write famous atheists and scientists that were mentioned by Adrian Rogers and Francis Schaeffer and challenge them with the evidence for the Bible’s historicity and the claims of the gospel. Usually I would send them a cassette tape of Adrian Rogers’ messages “6 reasons I […]

“Woody Wednesday” Discussing Woody Allen’s movie “Crimes and Misdemeanors” and various other subjects with Ark Times Bloggers (Part 6) Judah ” I believe in God, Miriam. I know it… because without God the world is a cesspool”

_____________________________ Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 3 Uploaded by camdiscussion on Sep 23, 2007 Part 3 of 3: ‘Is Woody Allen A Romantic Or A Realist?’ A discussion of Woody Allen’s 1989 movie, Crimes and Misdemeanors, perhaps his finest. By Anton Scamvougeras.http://camdiscussion.blogspot.com/ antons@mail.ubc.ca ______________ I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times […]

“Woody Wednesday” Discussing Woody Allen’s movie “Crimes and Misdemeanors” and various other subjects with Ark Times Bloggers (Part 5) “Judah knew in his heart that God was watching his every move!!!”

Crimes and Misdemeanors: A Discussion: Part 2 Uploaded by camdiscussion on Sep 23, 2007 Part 2 of 3: ‘What Does The Movie Tell Us About Ourselves?’ A discussion of Woody Allen’s 1989 movie, perhaps his finest. By Anton Scamvougeras. http://camdiscussion.blogspot.com/antons@mail.ubc.ca______________ I have gone back and forth and back and forth with many liberals on the Arkansas Times Blog on many issues such […]

TRUTH TUESDAY Review of Francis Schaeffer’s work by Robbie Grayson

Review of Francis Schaeffer’s work by Robbie Grayson

_______________

In the film series “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?” the arguments are presented  against abortion (Episode 1),  infanticide (Episode 2),   euthanasia (Episode 3), and then there is a discussion of the Christian versus Humanist worldview concerning the issue of “the basis for human dignity” in Episode 4 and then in the last episode a close look at the truth claims of the Bible.

Francis Schaeffer: How Should We Then Live? (Full-Length Documentary)

Francis Schaeffer Whatever Happened to the Human Race (Episode 1) ABORTION

Francis Schaeffer: What Ever Happened to the Human Race? (Full-Length Documentary)


Part 1 on abortion runs from 00:00 to 39:50, Part 2 on Infanticide runs from 39:50 to 1:21:30, Part 3 on Youth Euthanasia runs from 1:21:30 to 1:45:40, Part 4 on the basis of human dignity runs from 1:45:40 to 2:24:45 and Part 5 on the basis of truth runs from 2:24:45 to 3:00:04

Tuesday, August 30, 2011

INTERPRETING FRANCIS SCHAEFFER FOR THE POMO



My first encounter with Francis Schaeffer was in the bathroom at a fundamentalist college. Inspecting the cleanliness of rooms on my hall one Saturday morning (a daily job that sophomore year), I came across a seditious-looking, oversized hardback, lying on the back of a bathroom toilet. In ridiculously large Courier font on the front cover of the white dust jacket it read Whatever Happened to the Human Race?



Feeling the aesthetic sensation that I was being shouted at, I picked up the book and turned it over. On the back were photos of two, interesting-looking characters (Amish versions of the founding fathers, I thought) whom I learned to be C. Everitt Koop (U.S. Surgeon General under Ronald Reagan) and an intriguing character simply named Francis A. Schaeffer. 

 

Not sure whether or not I would find history or nudity between its covers, I opened it to find the continuation of Courier font. I forgot about room inspections.


A theological argument that read like a Modern history book, I inquired of the owner to explain the meaning of it to me. In short order I left his room with a copy of an antiquated paperback of Schaeffer’s He is There and He Is Not Silent, spending the rest of that morning in my dorm room, lying on my back, trying to cipher his complicated arguments, tears streaming down my face.


Having read most of Schaeffer’s written work (and many of his books several times), having watched his popular documentary series dozens of times, and having listened to the high-pitched whine of his voice on cassette lectures for literally hundreds of hours over the past twenty years, I have developed a basic familiarity with Francis Schaeffer’s theological mindset and cultural perspective, albeit a basic one.



I later learned that the Calvinism I had been taught in Europe had been filtered through the influence of Francis Schaeffer and that some of his ideas for which I immediately felt a powerful affinity during my first readings had been taught to me in the little village of Mehlingen, Germany. However, years later I have learned that I learned about Francis Schaeffer in a backwards fashion. While many people were light years ahead of me in his documentary series How Should We Then Live (what I like to term “Commercial Schaeffer”), I wrestled with the abstraction of his thoughts before I ever knew about the motion flicksThat has resulted in my own emphasis on Schaeffer.


I am struck by how many times Schaeffer’s name comes up among evangelicals and the politically conservative, a group largely influenced by a smattering of Schaeffer. Usually citing Schaeffer’s political concerns in How Should We Then Live, I find discussion with many from these groups to be generic (they focus on the anti-Christian sentiment from American government) and short-lived (“Schaeffer was the greatest evangelical figure of the 20th century.” Period.) as well as disappointing (“Mmm, yes, Francis Schaeffer was a GREAT man of God.”). I have often wondered if we have been reading the same books. 


Much of Schaeffer’s overt legacy is his intellectual contribution to the anti-abortion movement and the consequent rallying together of the Moral Majority under his ideas. He is also known for the popular Schaefferism “All truth is God’s truth” which has in practice meant that playing John Lennon in church is allowable or that creating cheap, Christian facsimiles of “secular” originals is obligatory (I was recently in both a fundamentalist and a charismatic church, respectively, which parodied Schaeffer’s ideology, complete with a coffee shop, skate park, and a Border’s bookstore look-alike). Francis Schaeffer’s name is a talisman, a relic, a stamp of approval for religious, political action. His ideas have not changed much in the almost 30 years since his passing.


Were Schaeffer present in 2011, I am sure he would have already re-framed or rebranded himself in light of the new dominant world spirit (Call it what you may. Just don’t wrongly associate it with the Old Modernism). I would like to highlight a few ideas of Schaeffer’s (in no particular order) that I think relevant to the POMO (aka, post-modern).

Francis Schaeffer “BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY” Whatever…HTTHR





1. Schaeffer was not a professional theologian; Schaeffer was an evangelist. Each of his works are best understood with this truth in mind. While Schaeffer used a theological framework and theological ideas, he did not see his main contribution to the world to be a theological one. He saw his main contribution to be cultural, aka, conversational. Schaeffer created a language unique to describing the anomaly of “Modern man.” That is one of the reasons Schaeffer’s influence (pre-Religious Right) was widely influential in the Woodstock community as well as in the university (each on either extreme spectrum of the “Evangelical” Schaeffer helped to shape). 


Using orthodox, theological constructs, Schaeffer created new categories that were culturally-specific and language-specific for the Modern. For example, Schaeffer describes Adam as an “unprogrammed man.” Elsewhere he describes the distinction between existential and orthodox theological expressions to hinge upon whether or not that individual believed in “Adam’s bones” (belief in the Bible’s Adam demanded a belief that the remains of his bones lay somewhere on or in the earth). 


Schaeffer even uses Einstein’s relativity language when he speaks of a literal creation “in space and time.” To distinguish Adam as human without the modern connotation of determinism, Schaeffer used the term “mannishness”, the sum of all that it means to be human.


Schaeffer did not create language for ivory tower enjoyment. He sought to encapsulate the ideas of a scientifically-infatuated culture in imagery that correlated to ancient Biblical truths and he tried to represent them in as Modern a way as possible. In The Church at the End of the 20th century, Schaeffer explains the schizophrenia of the Modern’s intellectual touting of an ideology the consequences of which he or she revolts against in areas of actual meaning. “Cage directed some of his own chance music and when it was over he thought he heard steam escaping from the steam pipes. Then he realized that the musicians were hissing…. They were hissing because they did not like the results of their own teaching when they heard it in the medium to which they were sensitive. They were hissing themselves.” (italics added) 

Dr. Francis schaeffer – The flow of Materialism(from Part 4 of Whatever happened to human race?)





2. Schaeffer did not parrot the traditional expression of a harsh Calvinism, and this caused him problems with his mentors. One need only to read of Van Til’s reprimanding Schaeffer’s cultural approach to Modern man to understand that while Schaeffer borrowed heavily from the Calvinistic greats, he made a distinction between what he considered a Modern, Calvinistic view of determinism (variants on fatalism at least in expression) and the “dynamic equivalence” of a true freedom of the will. 


Schaeffer makes it clear that God gave Adam the “unprogrammed man” an unprogrammed choice. The Old Calvinists flinched at this expression because they had no category to which they could popularly appeal save for the Modern concept of determinism: that man is “predestined” (read “determined”) to “this” or “that.” Schaeffer revolted against the modern concept of man’s will as robotic because man was made in the image of God and God is not programmed. Man is not a “machine.”


In his book How Should We Then Live, Schaeffer uses the analogy of ripples (as in ripples caused by a stone dropped into water). He says that the ripples are “real” and that these ripples move in ever-widening, concentric circles, referencing real causes and having real effects in the world around us.  Schaeffer’s emphasis on this latent Calvinistic view severed a great many relationships he had. For some, Schaeffer was seen to have crossed over to the very Aristotelian side against which he was speaking (Thomas Aquinas’ view of grace and nature).

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical flow of Truth & History (intro)





3. Schaeffer advocated a serious “earthy” consideration of matter versus the exclusive “Platonic” idealization of the soul. In Pollution and the Death of Man, Schaeffer explains a critical aspect of his theology upon which the development of his entire cultural conversation hinged, explaining a lot of the reasons behind his interest in and commendation of the study of pop culture and other contemporary interests deemed useless by most of his peers. Schaeffer calls this idea the “covenant of creation.”


In this view Schaeffer says that all “covenants” (aka, relationships) are “fixed” because God entered into a relationship or a covenant with the “stuff’ (actual matter) that He created. In other words God swore to respect the material integrity of the things he created. So God will always deal with a tree like the tree that it is and not like, say, a man. Schaeffer uses the example of Moses and the burning bush. God suspended the normal, relational combination of a bush (wood) + fire = smoke for a specific reason: God was relating to Moses on the basis of his humanity. 


In other words, God, having created Moses as a man who aspires to reason, created an anomaly (a miracle) that He designed would lure Moses to the burning bush because Moses as a man had the aspiration that a bush on fire would result in smoke and ash. And this bush didn’t. Further, Schaeffer tells us that God kept the integrity of the bush and the fire because they were both recognizable as such to Moses.


We can go on further to say that when Moses threw down his staff in the pharaoh’s palace and it turned into a snake that it was a miracle (because snakes are not wood). However, when Moses picked it back up, it became wood once more. Had it remained a snake and slithered into the desert and died, that would have been magic and a breach of the material integrity. Further yet, Moses’ snake eats up the other magicians’ snakes when they performed the same miracle that Moses did. 


But there is no contradiction here either, because Moses’ snake ate up the other snakes (staffs) which became wood once more. Though Schaeffer does not say it, I guarantee you that he would argue that Moses’ staff was much larger after it “ate up” the magicians’ snakes than before simply because the material that now made up Moses’s staff was quantitatively larger. In this covenant of creation, Schaeffer was very careful to consider the minutest of details of the physical world around him as well as the details of historical events expressed through ideas.

Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical Flow of History & Truth (1)





4. In all of Schaeffer’s works, he mainly gave us a model for how to communicate to a culture. His focus was not merely on the facts of his generation. He taught us a cultural method of how to arrange facts. Schaeffer self-consciously lived in a transient world where things change, says he, because they are not the Infinite-Personal God Who does not change. So the more that the body of scientific knowledge grows, certain facts will “change.”


This “Infinite-finite” distinction led Schaeffer to believe in the fraternity of created things or matter. That is to say, Schaeffer believed that on the basis of ontology (the area of being) there is no qualitative differentiation of matter. On the basis of ontology you have the Infinite-Creator God and then you have everything else.  


In other words, he really believed that on the basis of ontology man was related to every other created thing. However, as man being made in the image of God (at God’s prerogative), Schaeffer believed that man was arbitrarily special and different than all other matter (Schaeffer calls this the “arbitrary” will of God because God chose to do so because He wanted to do it and not because he Had to do it. God is not programmed and did not have to refer to that which was greater than Himself). 


As touching man being made in the image of God, Schaeffer held no qualitative distinction between the genders, races, or even popular, modern cultural preferences like sexuality or religion. None whatsoever. You can read Schaeffer’s letters to members of the homosexual community, and you are amazed at the dignity with which he treated them and the seriousness with which he treated their emotions.

In Schaeffer’s Whatever Happened to the Human Race he clearly links the plight of the unborn child to the plight of the African-American slave. He speaks of how slavery and the sub-human view of race eventually morphed into the lawful extermination of unborn children of every race. Actually, one of the last things for which he was remembered was his becoming the apologist for the Religious Right and intellectual father of the anti-abortion movement.

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical Flow of Truth & History (part 2)





It has been almost thirty years since Schaeffer passed, and still there is no significant reinterpretation of Schaeffer’s ideas to address the framework of our very own post-Cold War or post-modern era (or whatever you may wish to call it). What you often hear from the evangelical corner are the sound-bytes of Schaeffer from the early 1980’s largely leveled to bolster political interests. Schaeffer-loving is often times merely an addendum to the political resume.


I have the sneaking suspicion that, perhaps, many who use Schaeffer on their resume are probably a little confused about his fundamental beliefs that long preceded the abortion issue. For example, few people understand that Schaeffer’s theology drastically developed when he was sent abroad to study the state of the Christian Church in Europe following World War II. Europe was already despairing of Modernism and entering into the European post-modern blahs. Schaeffer’s ideology, then, can be understood to be the cultural differential of his trying to reconcile what was happening on both the European and American continents. But the simplistic analysis we hear in the States is the same intransigent idea of Schaeffer that offers no fresh perspective and no enlightening guidance about present times.


I am certain that Schaeffer would, were he alive, empathize with the POMO, ciphering his hard core, gangsta rap, and world music, sobbing at the hopelessness of Indie films, walking the aisles of Bonnaroo chatting with drifters. I cannot imagine him ridiculing the documentaries of Michael Moore (not that he would necessarily agree with him), or encouraging the disparagement of Ellen Degeneres (not that he would necessarily agree with her). 


He would have wept over the death of Kurt Cobain, rallied all Americans with steely resolve at 9/11, been an honorary member of the U.N, and been present at the inauguration of President Barack Obama. He would have taken time to fall asleep on the beach, babysit his grandchildren, and watch old reruns of The Cosby Show. He would have a smartphone (probably the iphone 4 and researching the iphone 5). I think he would have even had the Mac Air versus a Dell.


What is for certain is that he would not be lobbying in the ranks of the neo-cons, libertarians or progressives. He would not appreciate his name being used as political endorsement. He probably would not be writing political books, and he probably would not be taking interviews from neo-Christian radio personalities. For all I know he might have retreated to the hills of Switzerland once more (if they would have him) to a quiet chalet, reading the Harry Potter series for the fifth time, savoring tea, or snoring in his rocking chair. 


In only the way Schaeffer could, he would have created one hundred new conceptual amalgamations, one hundred new terms, and sixteen new perspectives about our current world situation that would allow us fresh enlightenment and even give us an edge on our ability to problem-solve new problems we don’t yet recognize because we are in love with the old ones.

7 comments:

  1. Insighful, practical reliving of a titan, who was unpackaged and committed to being the best Bible-believing Christian he could be. One concerned with making the big things, big things if you would. I’ve been shaped in many ways by his influence and stand committed to having a relevant, impactful faith as he lived.

    Reply

  2. Robbie….funny you thot u would find nudies in the book…HA. I have wrestled with Schaeffer for a long time. Part because I disagreed with him and God forbid you did that…it’s down right sacrilegious… like not liking C.S. Lewis’s writings. I am not a big fan of Tolkien either. Is there any hope for me?? The other reason I struggle is because of my peanut brain. I am glad you pointed out he was an evangelist. He has allot to say, allot to ponder and meditate on. I like writer that make you think. May you reason why you believe this or that…why you follow him or her. What you believe and why. I think you have challenged me to pick up the books again….no nudies in mine…and give him another opportunity to help me think. Well written my friend. I look forward to more insight.

    Reply

  3. @Dave What I like about Schaeffer is that he considered himself to be Modern, too. He wrestled with depression for a good part of his life, even considering suicide while a missionary. But he came through.

    @Pege Haha, both men looked like eclectic artists for which I had no reference. I remember browsing through second-hand bookstores in Europe with odd-looking books like Schaeffer’s, only to open them up to “surprises.” The way people speak about Schaeffer nowadays, he is criticized as a political figure. He realized well before he passed that he was being used. One of his last works THE GREAT EVANGELICAL DISASTER demonstrated his understanding that the people he helped to create got him all wrong. On the front cover the artist has drawn a picture of a traditional church with only a slither of an earthy foundation below it. Schaeffer speaks of such an ideology as having your feet planted firmly in midair. He is a good read!

    Reply

  4. Robbie, just read this… great synopsis. Helped my understanding of him more.

    Love the Muggeridge / Schaeffer sketch at the top. I first saw that on the over of Touchstone when I was working on Muggeridge for my graduate work.

    Reply

  5. Dale, thanks. Send me a brief on Muggeridge. I am curious.

    Reply

  6. Thanks for the analysis of Schaeffer and his work. I do somewhat disagree with your finishing paragraphs (perhaps because I am in my 70’s and have little regard for this age and its proclivities.) I consider Schaeffer my main mentor, having set under his teaching when first I became a Christian. Before my conversion, I was a militant atheist and Schaeffer’s historical sketch on how Western Society emerged into the “modern modern” helped me immensely. Thanks again for your work, I found it intriguing.

    Reply

  7. @JackLawrence Thank you, sir. I think my conclusion was somewhat cynical of the current political sentiment of Schaeffer (“commercial Schaeffer”, as I like to call it). I am surprised at times to hear Schaeffer’s ideas reduced to sound-bytes for political action. One part of Schaeffer’s intrigue to me is that he created a niche for theological conversation unlike any other figure of his day and that he displayed a toleration for long-term conversations he anticipated would take years to develop. I just turned 40, and no one like Schaeffer has ever caught my philosophical attention… ever.

____________

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – The Biblical Flow of Truth & History (part 2)

Related posts:.

Taking on Ark Times bloggers about abortion on the 40th anniversary date of Roe v. Wade (Part 7) “Poverty not good reason for abortion, why not give up for adoption?”

Dr Richard Land discusses abortion and slavery – 10/14/2004 – part 3 The best pro-life film I have ever seen below by Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop “Whatever happened to the human race?” Over the years I have taken on the Ark Times liberal bloggers over and over and over concerning the issue […]

Taking on Ark Times bloggers about abortion on the 40th anniversary date of Roe v. Wade (Part 6) For many pro-abortionists ” …the problem is not determining when actual human life begins, but when the value of that life begins to out weigh other considerations”

The best pro-life film I have ever seen below by Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop “Whatever happened to the human race?” Francis Schaeffer pictured above._________ The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This book  really […]

Taking on Ark Times bloggers about abortion on the 40th anniversary date of Roe v. Wade (Part 5) “Slavery issue compared to rights of unborn child”

The best pro-life film I have ever seen below by Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop “Whatever happened to the human race?” Over the years I have taken on the Ark Times liberal bloggers over and over and over concerning the issue of abortion. I asked over and over again for one liberal blogger […]

Taking on Ark Times bloggers about abortion on the 40th anniversary date of Roe v. Wade (Part 4) “How do pro-lifers react to the movie THE CIDER HOUSE RULES?”

Francis Schaeffer pictured above._________ The best pro-life film I have ever seen below by Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop “Whatever happened to the human race?” Over the years I have taken on the Ark Times liberal bloggers over and over and over concerning the issue of abortion. I asked over and over again […]

Taking on Ark Times bloggers about abortion on the 40th anniversary date of Roe v. Wade (Part 3) “What should be the punishment for abortion doctors?”

The best pro-life film I have ever seen below by Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop “Whatever happened to the human race?” On 1-24-13 I took on the child abuse argument put forth by Ark Times Blogger “Deathbyinches,” and the day before I pointed out that because the unborn baby has all the genetic code […]

Taking on Ark Times bloggers about abortion on the 40th anniversary date of Roe v. Wade (Part 2) “The pro-abortion child abuse argument destroyed here”

PHOTO BY STATON BREIDENTHAL from Pro-life march in Little Rock on 1-20-13. Tim Tebow on pro-life super bowl commercial. Over the years I have taken on the Ark Times liberal bloggers over and over and over concerning the issue of abortion. Here is another encounter below. On January 22, 2013 (on the 40th anniversary of the […]

Taking on Ark Times bloggers about abortion on the 40th anniversary date of Roe v. Wade (Part 1)

Dr Richard Land discusses abortion and slavery – 10/14/2004 – part 3 The best pro-life film I have ever seen below by Francis Schaeffer and Dr. C. Everett Koop “Whatever happened to the human race?” Over the years I have taken on the Ark Times liberal bloggers over and over and over concerning the issue […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Arkansas Times, Francis Schaeffer, Prolife | Edit | Comments (0)

Open letter to President Obama (Part 536) If America does not get welfare reform under control, it will bankrupt America

Open letter to President Obama (Part 536)

(Emailed to White House on 6-6-13.)

President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here.

I have been writing on my blog for over two years now concerning the disturbing trend of more and more people becoming dependent on the federal government for more of their income than ever before. This encourages laziness in my view and in the case of the food stamp system many people find themselves in what Milton Friedman calls the “Welfare Trap.”  (Much of this trend started under President Bush and had Republican support.) I wanted to point out that we should cut back on government spending and let the private economy do it’s magic.

Welfare Can And Must Be Reformed

            Uploaded on Jun 29, 2010

If America does not get welfare reform under control, it will bankrupt America. But the Heritage Foundation’s Robert Rector has a five-step plan to reform welfare while protecting our most vulnerable.

__________________________
 Will Rogers has a great quote that I love. He noted, “Lord, the money we do spend on Government and it’s not one bit better than the government we got for one-third the money twenty years ago”(Paula McSpadden Love, The Will Rogers Book, (1972) p. 20.)
We got to slow down the growth of Food Stamps. One way to do it is to tell the 48 million food stamps users to eat more broccoli!!!!
APRIL 19, 2013 1:14PM

Food Stamp Fraud and Twinkies

The federal food stamp program—now called SNAP—is attracting a lot of media coverage. One reason for this is that the program’s costs have exploded—spending more than quadrupled during the Bush-Obama years to $82 billion in 2013 (see here and here p. 16). The Clinton, Bush, and Obama administrations all took steps to loosen the purse strings on food stamp eligibility, and those changes have led to the ballooning costs of recent years during the stagnant economy.

Aside from the rising costs, two other aspects of SNAP have garnered interest. One is food stamp fraud. The other is the program’s “Twinkie problem”: taxpayers are paying for billions of dollars of junk food, which seems like a huge waste of money to most people.

These two issues have come together in a high-profile effort by a group of media organizations that is demanding greater transparency in SNAP operations. The organizations—led by the Association of Health Care Journalists (AHCJ)—have sent a letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack (whose agency oversees SNAP) asking for full disclosure about where food stamps are being spent and what they are being spent on. The Daily Caller reports on the issue here.

Let’s look at the fraud issue. The government claims that the food stamp trafficking rate is just 1 percent and the general overpayment rate is just 4 percent. I suspect that the real rates are much higher, for three reasons: First, the overall costs of SNAP and the number of beneficiaries have skyrocketed. Second, SNAP is ideally suited for abuse: the USDA has few investigators to police the roughly 200,000 SNAP retailers, any of whom could be scamming the system. Third, overpayment rates on other federal subsidy programs are often around 10 percent. Medicare and Medicaid overpayments are in that range, for example, and overpayments have long been around 20 percent in the EITC program.

The AHCJ-led effort is asking the USDA to release data on food stamp purchases by retail outlet. This would be a very useful resource for investigators across the nation to help the government reduce waste and fraud. Are food stamps being cashed in at liquor stores? Which corner stores have unusually high food stamp usage? Let’s get detailed SNAP data on the Internet and allow journalists and the public to help answer these questions. After all, scandal after scandal illustrate that the federal government is lousy at policing programs itself.

The journalists are also asking the USDA to provide detailed breakdowns of the types of food being purchased with SNAP money. It’s remarkable that in an era of Bloomberg-style efforts to restrict private food choices, the government itself runs a giant $82 billion program that subsidizes junk food. How much junk food? We don’t know, and that’s what many journalists want to find out.

Food stamps can be used to purchase just about any edible item other than alcohol, hot food, restaurant meals, and live animals. The USDA explains the rules here and specifically notes that “soft drinks, candy, cookies, snack crackers, and ice cream” are allowed.

Many health experts would like to ban junk food purchases in the food stamp program because they want Americans to eat more nutritious food. I’m a libertarian, so I don’t want the government telling people what to eat. But I think banning junk food in SNAP would be a good step for a different reason: it would greatly reduce demand for the program and thus cut taxpayer costs. If we told the 48 million users of food stamps that they could only use their electronic subsidy cards to buy items like spinach and broccoli, a lot fewer people would use the program and they would buy less stuff.

Why has the USDA been stonewalling journalists on providing SNAP program data? I’m guessing that federal officials don’t want to be embarrassed about: 1) how much taxpayer money goes toward junk food, and 2) the endless series of stories about SNAP fraud that would likely be generated if journalists could explore the program’s operational details.

Optimally, SNAP should be terminated altogether and food subsidy activities left to the states—or better, to private charities. But until that reform happens, the current effort to pry open the workings of this giant hand-out program would be big step in the right direction.

Some links of interest:

A leaked database of food stamp usage in Massachusetts. This is the type of data that should be released nationally by the USDA.

A study on the corporate lobbying surrounding food stamps. This liberal group doesn’t want to cut spending, but it provides an excellent summary of the junk food issue, transparency, and the benefits of SNAP to the banking industry.

WaPo columnist Charles Lane on SNAP junk food.

Some of Tad DeHaven’s analyses of food stamps are herehereherehere, and here.

My overview of federal food subsidies.

 

_______________________

Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733, lowcostsqueegees@yahoo.com

 

Related posts:

Republicans for more food stamps?

Eight Reasons Why Big Government Hurts Economic Growth __________________ We got to cut spending and we must first start with food stamp program and we need some Senators that are willing to make the tough cuts. Food Stamp Republicans Posted by Chris Edwards Newt Gingrich had fun calling President Obama the “food stamp president,” but […]

Obama promotes food stamps but Milton Friedman had a better suggestion

Milton Friedman’s negative income tax explained by Friedman in 1968: We need to cut back on the Food Stamp program and not try to increase it. What really upsets me is that when the government gets involved in welfare there is a welfare trap created for those who become dependent on the program. Once they […]

400% increase in food stamps since 2000

Welfare Can And Must Be Reformed Uploaded by HeritageFoundation on Jun 29, 2010 If America does not get welfare reform under control, it will bankrupt America. But the Heritage Foundation’s Robert Rector has a five-step plan to reform welfare while protecting our most vulnerable. __________________________ If welfare increases as much as it has in the […]

Which states are the leaders in food stamp consumption?

I am glad that my state of Arkansas is not the leader in food stamps!!! Mirror, Mirror, on the Wall, Which State Has the Highest Food Stamp Usage of All? March 19, 2013 by Dan Mitchell The food stamp program seems to be a breeding ground of waste, fraud, and abuse. Some of the horror stories […]

Food Stamp Program is constantly ripped off and should be discontinued

Uploaded by oversightandreform on Mar 6, 2012 Learn More at http://oversight.house.gov The Oversight Committee is examining reports of food stamp merchants previously disqualified who continue to defraud the program. According to a Scripps Howard News Service report, food stamp fraud costs taxpayers hundreds of millions every year. Watch the Oversight hearing live tomorrow at 930 […]

“Friedman Friday” Milton Friedman remembered at 100 years from his birth (Part 5)

Testing Milton Friedman – Preview Uploaded by FreeToChooseNetwork on Feb 21, 2012 2012 is the 100th anniversary of Milton Friedman’s birth. His work and ideas continue to make the world a better place. As part of Milton Friedman’s Century, a revival of the ideas featured in the landmark television series Free To Choose are being […]

“Friedman Friday” Milton Friedman remembered at 100 years from his birth (Part 4)

I ran across this very interesting article about Milton Friedman from 2002: Friedman: Market offers poor better learningBy Tamara Henry, USA TODAY By Doug Mills, AP President Bush honors influential economist Milton Friedman for his 90th birthday earlier this month. About an economist Name:Milton FriedmanAge: 90Background: Winner of the 1976 Nobel Prize for economic science; […]

“Friedman Friday” Milton Friedman remembered at 100 years from his birth (Part 2)

Testing Milton Friedman – Preview Uploaded by FreeToChooseNetwork on Feb 21, 2012 2012 is the 100th anniversary of Milton Friedman’s birth. His work and ideas continue to make the world a better place. As part of Milton Friedman’s Century, a revival of the ideas featured in the landmark television series Free To Choose are being […]

One of John MacArthur’s finest sermon’s Jesus’ Power over Death, (Matthew 9:23-26) Refers to quote from late in Gandhi’s life!!

___________

Grace to You :: Unleashing God’s Truth, One Verse at a Time

 

One of John MacArthur’s finest sermon’s Jesus’ Power over Death, (Matthew 9:23-26) Part 2

Scripture:
Code: 2266

Would you look with me at Matthew chapter 9…Matthew chapter 9…We’re continuing in our
examination of verses 18 through 26. Matthew 9 verses 18 through 26, and we’ve entitled this
section, “Jesus’ Power Over Death.” Nothing is more wonderful…to us than to know that Christ has
conquered death. The writer of Hebrews tells us that, “Jesus came to destroy him who had the power
of death; and, as a result of that, to deliver them who, through fear of death, were all their lifetime
subject to bondage.” Hebrews 2:14 and 15.

In other words, the writer says that men live their entire lives subject to the bondage of the fear of
death; but Christ has come to deliver them from that fear. Death is the specter that haunts every
person’s life. The longer you live, the more inevitably it looms in the future. To know that Christ has
conquered that is the ultimate joy…For most of the world, they have no such knowledge…and they
fear death.

I suppose in my lifetime, the man who seemed to have it most together, the man who throughout the
whole specter of the world’s lifestyle, world’s religion…throughout all of the demonstration of
popularity and media and all of those things, the man who stands out as the man, at least in my
lifetime, that the world thought had it most together, was Mahatma Gandhi…Seemed to be at peace.
Seemed to have absolute tranquility of soul. Seemed to know nothing of fear…

Fifteen years before Gandhi’s death, he wrote this. “I must tell you in all humility that Hinduism as I
know it entirely satisfies my soul. It fills my whole being, and I find a solace in the Bhagavad and
Upanishads that I miss even in the Sermon on the Mount.” Utterly at peace, utterly comfortable with
his Hinduism. Just before his death, he wrote this. “My days are numbered. I am not likely to live
very long, perhaps a year or a little more. For the first time in 50 years, I find myself in the slew of
despond.” Footnote: It was interesting. He must have been reading Pilgrim’s Progress. Then he
said this. “All about me is darkness, and I am desperately praying for light.” Even Mahatma Gandhi,
who seemed to have it all together as he began to face the inevitability of death, saw it all falling
apart…

People do silly things when they think about dying because of their fear. One man that I read about is
a Turkish watchmaker who decided that he wanted to build himself a special grave with an eight-inch
window on top…and he planned to install a pushbutton electric alarm bell inside the grave; because, if
he was buried alive by mistake, he could push the button and ring the cemetery’s guard room. He

also planned to have an electric light bulb in there, and he instructed the people who buried him to be
sure they left the bulb on for seven days, came back; and if he was dead, they could then turn it out…

In Brazil, an architect has designed a 39-story skyscraper cemetery. There are a lot of skyscrapers in
Brazil. Most of them have living people in them, but this one is gonna have bodies in it, with a
capacity of 147,000 corpses. It has a heliport, so the bodies can be flown in quickly. There will be
two churches and 21 chapels and comfortable beds for grieving friends. There will also be soothing
and somber background music piped in 24 hours a day. This to deal with the incredible burial
problem in the crowded portions of Brazil.

You know that Great Britain is the first country in the world to have more cremations than burials?
They’re facing the fact that there are no places left to put the bodies. In Japan, the graves are so
crowded that only if you are in the imperial family can you be assured of or guaranteed a
grave…Russia has the world’s largest cemetery. It has one cemetery that contains 500,000 corpses.
They just built a mausoleum in San Diego. In that one mausoleum, they have room for 70,000
bodies; and adjacent to it, they have a garden; and in that garden is a replica of the tomb from the
garden in Jerusalem where they believe Jesus may have risen; and alongside the mausoleum will be
that replica. It’ll be empty, and the door is always open, so that you can be notified visually that
Jesus’ tomb is empty; and the message seems to be that those other tombs wherein lies one who
knows Him will be emptied someday, as well.

Nonetheless, the earth is pockmarked with graves. They go down. They go up. They’re
everywhere. Death looms on the horizon of every individual’s life. How marvelous it is to realize,
then, that Jesus came to conquer death. If you’re to look at John chapter 5, that, perhaps, would be
as good a place as any to get a focus on this, although we could discuss many passages. Just listen
to several verses from John 5.

Verse 21, “For as the Father raiseth up the dead and giveth them life, even so the Son giveth life to
whom He will.” Verse 24, “Verily, verily I say unto you, he that heareth My Word and believeth on
Him that sent Me, hath everlasting life.” Verse 26, “For as the Father hath life in Himself, so He hath
given to the Son to have life in Himself.” In chapter 11, He says, “I am the resurrection and the Life.
He that believeth in Me, though he were dead, yet shall he live; and whosoever liveth and believeth in
Me shall never die.” In other words, Jesus claimed to have power over death. He said, “The Father
has power over death, and He’s given Me power over death.” He also said, “Because I live, ye, too,
shall live, also.”

Now, the work of the Messiah was to conquer death, to remove the fear of death, to do, as the
Apostle Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15, to take the sting out of death, to take the victory out of the
grave, the Messiah would come. “Ultimately, the Messiah would bring about an eternal state…says
Revelation 21:4…where there will be no more death. The Messiah would conquer death. If that’strue, then anyone who claims to be the Messiah should demonstrate his power over death, right?…

Look with me at Matthew 11 verse 5. John the Baptist was concerned to know if Jesus was truly the
Messiah, the Son of David, the Promised One; and so John sent a couple of his disciples to find out;
and in verse 3 of Matthew 11, the disciples came and said, “‘Art Thou He that should come, or do we
look for another? Are You the Messiah? Are You the Promised One? Are You the One John has
been heralding?’ And Jesus answered and said to them, ‘You go and show John those things which
you hear and see…and what are they?…the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are
cleansed, the deaf hear, and the dead are…what?…raised up.” Messianic credentials…That’s how we
know He is the King.

Now, Matthew wants us to understand this, so in chapter 8 and 9, Matthew has presented the
miraculous power of the Messiah. He has shown us that Jesus had power over disease in chapter 8
verses 1 to 17. He has shown us that He had power over disorders, physical, spiritual, and moral
disorders, in chapter 8 verses 23 through chapter 9 verse 17. And now in chapter 9:18 down through
verse 35, he shows us that He has power over death. Disease, disorder, and death. He can give
sight to the blind. He can give hearing to the deaf. He can make the dumb to speak, and He can
raise the dead; and therein lies the credential of the Messiah…He can do, by way of preview, what He
will do in His Kingdom and throughout eternity…

Now, in our text, beginning in verse 18, we focus on His power over death — the ultimate enemy; and
there are three miracles here. The first one is the raising of a dead girl. The second one is giving
sight to blind eyes, and the third, giving a voice to one who is dumb.

In some sense, they all illustrate His power over death. In one case, He gives speech to a dead
voice. In another, sight to dead eyes; and then pulling it all together, not only can He raise the parts
of the body from deadness, but the whole of the body from deadness as He raises this little girl from
death.

Now, as we said two weeks ago when we began our study of the verses 18 to 26, we not only wanna
focus on the miracle itself of the resurrection; but we wanna watch Jesus, because we will learn here
how He worked with people. We not only see the factors involved in His power as God manifest, but
we also see the tenderness of His working with people, and that becomes abundantly clear as we
look through the passage.

Now, let’s review just briefly. The pattern of Jesus in dealing with people, and this is the outline we
wanna follow. First of all, Jesus was accessible. Verse 18, look how it begins. “While He spoke
these things unto them.” Stop right there. You remember last time that we pointed out to you that
Jesus was busy in conversation with the Pharisees, the followers of John the Baptist. Everywhere He
went was a mass of humanity, crowding, and circling around Him. Always in the midst of a crowd. Always surrounded by people. We see this throughout the flow of the Book of Matthew. You start
back in chapter 4, for example, verse 25; and it says, “And there followed Him great multitudes of
people.” And you come to chapter 8 and verse 1; and it says, “And when He was come down from
the mountain, great multitudes followed Him.” And you come to chapter 12 verse 15, “And great
multitudes followed Him,” and you can go all the way on to chapter 19 and just the 2nd verse there;
and it says, “And great multitudes followed Him.” And in chapter 20 verse 29, “Great multitude
followed Him”; and in chapter 21 verse 8, “A great multitude followed Him.”

In other words, His whole life was in accessibility to people. Answering questions. Meeting needs.
Preaching, teaching, healing, casting out demons…This is a marvelous principle, people. God is
accessible. He’s there. He can be found. He can be sought out. He is not the god of the pagans.
He is not the god whose people cannot find Him, and the god of the Old Testament people to whom
the prophet said, “Maybe he’s on a vacation. Maybe he’s asleep. You better yell a little louder and
wake him up.” Our God is not so. When Jesus Christ came into the world, and He was God
incarnate, God became accessible.

Second, He was not only accessible, He was available; and we move from the crowd to the individual
in verse 18. It says, “There came a certain ruler.” One man out of the crowd; and down in verse 20,
“And behold, a woman.” Out of the mass of everything, the focus is on a man and a woman, an
individual. He’s not just accessible. That is, you can attend His meetings. He’s available. You can
confront Him individually, and you can move into His life, and He into your life. He came to individual
people. He touched a leper. He went home with a centurion who had a paralyzed servant. He
touched a woman with a fever, and He dealt with a demon-possessed man. He healed a paralytic;
and, here, He meets a…a father who has a dying daughter, and a woman with a severe hemorrhage.
I mean He’s always available to the individual, and there are two things that that availability involves.
One is need, and the other is faith. Where there…wherever there’s deep need, wherever there’s
great faith, He’s available.

Look at verse 18. It says, “There came a certain ruler,” and the other Gospels tell us he was the ruler
of the synagogue. He was the epitome of the religious establishment. He was probably the leading
citizen, the most respected and honorable and religious man. He was a part of the establishment that
usually was identified against Christ; and, yet, in absolute desperation, because his daughter was
dead, he came to Jesus. First time as he came, the daughter was only dying; but, by the time
Matthew picks up the account, the daughter’s already dead; and the man is desperate. And he
comes, therefore, out of deep need; but he also expresses great faith, because in verse 18, he says,
“My daughter is even now dead, but come and lay Your hand on her, and she’ll live.” This is great
faith. Great faith.

He had a deep need and great faith, and therein lies the ground necessary for the meeting of a soul
with God. Notice the middle of verse 18. He worshiped Him. He worshiped. This man had the faithto be saved. Worship is one of Matthew’s favorite words. It can be phony worship. It can be. In
chapter 18 of Matthew’s Gospel and verse 26, I think it a phony worship. Remember, Jesus was
telling a story about a man who owed so much he couldn’t pay it. He came and he worshiped the
master, and he said, “Ohhhhh, please forgive me. Please forgive me. Please forgive me. I’ll pay it
all.” And the man forgave him, and then that man turned right around to a man who owed him a little,
tiny bit, and threw him in prison when he wouldn’t pay. Man was a phony. He was a hypocrite. In
verse 26, “The servant…that man…fell down and worshiped him, saying, ‘Lord, have patience with
me, and I’ll pay thee all.'” And that worship was phony. So worship can be faked. It can be external.
It can be self-serving.

We find a selfish worship also in Matthew 20 verse 20… because there same the mother of James
and John. James and John decided they wanna sit on the right and left hand in the Kingdom; and
they wanted to be elevated above all the other disciples; and so they sent their mother; and she
comes to Jesus; and it says, “She came worshiping Him and desiring a certain thing of Him.” Now,
that was a self-seeking worship. Worship can be phony or self-seeking, but it can also be real and
genuine; and I believe when this man came, he came in a genuineness of heart.

If you were to look, for example, at Matthew 14 verse 33, I think you’d see a genuine worship. Jesus
had walked on the water; and when He got to the boat, it says, when they were in the boat, the
people who were there “worshiped Him, saying, ‘Of a truth Thou art the Son of God.'” Now, there’s
the real stuff. True worship. You see it in 15, don’t you? Chapter 15 verse 21, “Jesus departs into
the borders of Tyre and Sidon; and there comes a Gentile woman and says, ‘Have mercy on us, O
Lord, Son of David! My daughter’s grievously vexed with a demon.’ He didn’t answer her a word…He
was gonna give a dramatic illustration here…And the disciples said, ‘Send that woman away. She’s
bugging us.’ And He answered and said, ‘I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of
Israel.'”

He was showing them how important it was, first of all in His ministry, before He went to the Gentiles,
to go to the Jews, and to offer the Kingdom to the Jews. “But she came…persistently, verse 25…and
worshiped Him, saying, ‘Lord help me.'” And I believe her worship is real and genuine; and, in a
sense, His sort of ignoring her forces out the reality of her faith. “He answered and said to her, “Is it
not right to… to take the children’s bread and cast it to dogs. Do I owe any obligation to you? A
Gentile?’ And she said, ‘Truth, Lord; what do You mean by that? You’re right. I don’t deserve
anything. I don’t deserve anything.'”

Now, there’s a meek spirit. There’s a sinful attitude. “I don’t deserve anything; but, Lord, even dogs
eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.’ Jesus answered and said to her, ‘O woman, great
is thy faith.'” Now, that’s real worship. Not self-seeking. She knew she didn’t deserve anything…but
the crumbs. So worship can be phony, can be self-seeking; or it can be real; and go back now to
Matthew 9; and I think what you’ll see here is real worship. “He worshiped Him and said, ‘If you just

lay Your hand on her, she’ll live.'”…He really believed that.

And back in chapter 8, remember in verse 8, the centurion said, “My servant is sick, and if You’ll just
say the Word, he’ll be well.” And Jesus said that was the greatest faith He’d ever seen in Israel. But
that man only believed that Jesus could heal. This man believes that he can raise the dead. He must
believe that He is, in fact, the Christ of God.

By the way, this is more faith than the disciples showed on a lot of occasions. You know that?
Chapter 8, the…the waves were rocking the boat. Verse 26, “He said unto them, ‘Why are you afraid,
O ye of…what kind of faith?…little faith?'” And He said that to them again and again. Chapter 14
verse 31, chapter 16 verse 8, He says, “O ye of little faith. O ye of little faith.” Chapter 6 verse 30, “O
ye of little faith.”

If the disciples believed and had little faith, and this man has this kind of faith, he must have passed
the point where his faith was adequate for redemption. I believe the man really believed. He had a
deep need. He was desperate, and he had a great faith…and Jesus responds to great faith. Verse
19, “He rose and followed him,” and so did the disciples the other Gospels add, and so did the whole
crowd. So there’s a big mass bulging through the little streets as they wind their way down to this
fellow’s house. Jesus was accessible, and He was available. He moves away from the mass to
follow this one man who had a deep need.

But, thirdly, I love this, Jesus was also touchable. He was touchable. The crowd had heard. The
individual man had worshipped, and now we meet a woman who touched. Verse 20, “Behold, a
woman who had been diseased with an issue of blood twelve years came behind Him
and…literally…grabbed or clutched the tassel hanging from His garment.” She had had an issue of
blood. That was some kind of a hemorrhage, some uniquely female bleeding problem, probably
caused by a fibroid tumor. Could have been carcinoma, but it’s likely that if it had, she would not
have lived for twelve years. The Levitical law said that when a woman has an issue of blood, when
she has this kind of a problem, her clothes are unclean, the bed she’s on is unclean, anything she sits
on is unclean, and anything she touches is unclean. She was put out of the synagogue, out of a
family, out of a marriage relationship. She had been isolated for twelve years as an unclean person.
A desperate condition. Shut off from family, friends, fellowship, the synagogue, no one could touch
her without being defiled; but she had heard about Jesus; and she, too, had a desperate need; and
she, too, had faith; and she kept saying to herself, in verse 21, and the Greek says she kept saying it
over and over, “If I can just touch His garment, I’ll be well. The Man has so much power, that if I can
just touch Him.”

And a Jew had four little tassels hanging from an element on his robe, and they were made of blue,
and they symbolized, according to Numbers 15 and Deuteronomy 22, they symbolized the
identification with the law of God, and they marked a Jew as a Jew; and, as Jesus moved through thecrowd, the little tassel would flap back and forth on His back; and she lunged out and grabbed
that…and held on.

Verse 22, what happened? “Jesus turned around, and He saw her, and He said, ‘Daughter, be of
good comfort; thy faith hath made thee well.’ The woman was made well from that hour.” He
responded to that. He was touchable. He was…He was sensitive and responsive…

You know…when Sir James Simpson, great saint, lay dying, a friend wished to comfort him and said
to him, “Well, James, soon you will be able to rest on the bosom of Jesus.” In his consummate
humility, he said this, “Well, I don’t know that I can quite do that; but I do think I can take hold of His
garment.” The woman didn’t wanna be exposed in her embarrassment and shame. She just wanted
to reach out and touch, but she had the faith to believe that that was all that was necessary, because
there was so much power. The ruler had somewhat of an inadequate motive. He really wanted his
little girl alive; and the lady had somewhat of an inadequate faith. It was a little superstitious; but
Jesus took them where they were, redeemed ’em both…

Now, look for a moment. When it says at the end of verse 21 that she thought she could touch Him,
and then Jesus turned around…something happened in there that Matthew doesn’t record, but Luke
does; and I want you to see it in Luke chapter 8. There’s a lot of interplay that…that the other
Gospels touch that we can’t cover; but I…I want at least show you this. Verse 44 of Luke 8 says,
“And when she came behind and touched the border of His garment, immediately the issue of blood
stanched,” or stopped, was over. She was healed instantly, and I love this. “And Jesus said, ‘Who
grabbed Me? Who grabbed Me?’…When everybody denied it, and Peter and they that were with Him
said, ‘Master, the multitude crowd Thee and press Thee, and sayest Thou, ‘Who touched Me? You
gotta be kidding. You’re being shoved and pushed and jostled all the way down the street, and
You’re saying, ‘Who touched Me?'”…

But Jesus knew the difference between the jostling of the fickle mob and the grasping of a faithful
soul. “Who touched Me?” And I love this in verse 46, “Jesus said, ‘Somebody has touched Me.
Somebody grabbed Me, for I perceive that power is gone out of Me.'” It’s an incredible statement.
You know what it tells me? That Jesus was so much the channel of the will of the Father, that the
Father could heal through Him before He even knew who was involved. When He said, “I came to do
the will of Him that sent Me,” He meant that. He felt the power go…He was touchable. So sensitive
to the one who touched. He knows the difference between somebody who bangs up against Him and
is curious, somebody who’s a thrill seeker, and somebody who hangs on in desperation and faith. He
knows the heart to connect up with. He knows the person to pull outta the crowd, and say, “You’re
the one.”…

Lemme take you to a fourth thought. Not only was He accessible, available, and touchable, but He
was impartial. He was impartial. When He turned around to get involved with this one woman, Heshowed that He was so impartial. He coulda said, “Look, lady, um, could…could you let go of My
tassel? I’m… I’m trying to get down to the ruler’s house.” As somebody said, “Don’t hassle my
tassel.” “I’m trying to…I got…I got this…listen, if we can get this guy converted, see, this guy runs the
synagogue, I mean we can have a revival in this town. I mean, please let go. I mean I gotta be on
My way here. This… this is very serious.”

No, you see, God has never looked for the superstars and the bright lights and the famous people.
He’s always been content with folks like us. The Bible says that the prophet Isaiah predicted when
the Messiah would come, He would preach the Gospel to the…what?…poor. And Paul said, “Not
many noble, and not many mighty, but He’s chosen the base and the weak and the ignoble and the
foolish things.”…I mean we are a motley crew, you know that? Really.

I was reading this week a very interesting book called Fearfully and Wonderfully Madewritten by Dr.
Paul Brand and Phil Yancey. It’s a book you oughta read. Tremendous. In one section of it, he talks
about how…the people of God are such an unlikely bunch; and he quotes from novelist Frederick
Bookner, who said this. “Who could’ve predicted that God would choose not Esau, the honest and
reliable, but Jacob, the trickster and heel? Who could have predicted that God would put his finger
on Noah, who hit the bottle? Or on Moses, who was trying to beat the rap in Midian for braining a
man in Egypt. And if it weren’t for the honor of the thing, He’d just as soon let Aaron go back and
face the music. Who could have predicted that God would choose the prophets who were a ragged
lot, mad as hatters, most of ’em.”

And then Paul Brand adds, “The exception seems to be the rule. The first humans God created went
out and did the only thing God asked ’em not to do. The man he chose to head a new nation known
as God’s people tried to pawn off his wife on an unsuspecting Pharaoh; and the wife, herself, when
told at the ripe old age of 91 that God was ready to deliver the son He had promised her, broke into
rasping laughter in the face of God. Rahab, a harlot, became revered for her great faith; and
Solomon, the wisest man who ever lived, went out of his way to break every proverb he so astutely
composed…

Even after Jesus, the pattern continued. The two disciples who did the most to spread the Word after
His departure, John and Peter, were the two He had rebuked most often for petty squabbling and
muddleheadedness. And the Apostle Paul, who wrote more books than any other Bible writer, was
selected for the task while kicking up dust whirls from town to town sniffing out Christians to torture.
Jesus had nerve in trusting the high-minded ideals of love and unity and fellowship to this group. No
wonder cynics have looked at the church and sighed, “If that group of people is supposed to
represent God, I’ll quickly vote against Him.” Or as Nietzsche expressed it, “His disciples will have to
look more saved if I’m to believe in their Savior.”
We are a motley crew, aren’t we?…The ignoble and the weak and the foolish. We all have this in
common: we have a sense of desperate need, and we have faith to believe. So Jesus is impartial.
“God is…says the apostle…no respecter of…what? …persons.” There’s neither male nor female, Jew
nor Greek, bond or free, rich or poor. All are one…

So Jesus Christ pulls everything to a halt to deal with the outcast woman; and as He deals with her,
He doesn’t deal with her from a distance. Watch what He says to her. Verse 22 of Matthew 9,
“Daughter.” Daughter? Wait a minute, that’s so intimate. That’s so personal. That’s so familial.
That’s so tender. That has so much warmth, so much affection. Daughter — that just pulls her
in…”Be of good comfort; be comforted, daughter.” What tenderness. What impartiality..

Then He says this. I love this. “‘Your faith has made you well.’ And the woman was well from that
hour.” Now, wait a minute. She’d already been healed. This is in addition to that. She was healed
the minute she touched, but when He pulled her out, He said, “There’s something else. Your healing
didn’t have anything to do with your faith, not really. That was a sovereign act of God.” If you study
the Gospels and the record of Christ, you will find multitudes upon multitudes of people who were
healed, and it says nothing about whether they believed or not. Did the little girl who was raised from
the dead have faith? Afraid not. How about the paralyzed servant of the centurion who was healed,
did he have faith? No.

In fact, you can go through the Gospels and find many, many, many places where people were
healed, and there is no indication that they particularly had faith. Healing was a sovereign act on
God’s part as Jesus demonstrated His deity; and healing is still a sovereign act on God’s part. But in
addition to the physical healing, He said, “Your faith has,” and He did not use the word iahohmy
which means to be made well physically. He used the word sodzo, which is the New Testament word
to be saved. “‘Your faith has saved you,’ and she was saved from that hour.” Yes, there’s a sense in
which she was saved from the horrors of the disease; but there is also a redemptive issue here. She
was saved…There was a…more than a physical healing.

Look at Mark 10. Lemme see if I can demonstrate this to you. This, to me, is a thrilling truth. Mark
10:46, and we’re gonna draw this thing together. Mark 10:46, “They came to Jericho. As He went
out of Jericho with His disciples and a great number of people…as always…blind Bartimaeus, the son
of Timaeus, sat by the wayside begging. When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to
cry out and say, ‘Jesus, Thou Son of David, have mercy on me!'” He’d identified Him by His
Messianic title. “And many charged him that he should hold his peace.” “Be quiet, Bartimaeus.”

“But he cried the more, a great deal, ‘Thou Son of David, have mercy on me!'” This was the cry of his
great faith. “And Jesus stood still, and commanded him to be called. And they called the blind man,
saying unto him, ‘Be of good comfort; rise; He calleth thee.’ And he, casting away his garment, rose
and came to Jesus. And Jesus answered and said unto him, ‘What will thou that I should do untothee?’ The bind man said unto Him, ‘Lord, that I might receive my sight.’ And Jesus said unto him,
‘Go thy way. Thy faith hath…and He uses sodzo…saved thee.’ And immediately he received his
sight, and he followed…whom?… Jesus on the way.”

I think, in that case, the word sodzois used to indicate that, not only was the man healed, but the man
also received salvation. There was a saving element. His soul. If he had that kind of faith, that was
sufficient to save his soul if he believed that this was the Lord and this was the Son of David.

Look at Luke 7 verse 44, tremendous account. Thrilling, and I wanna show you this is a most
important parallel. Luke 7:44, there’s a woman…and it says in verse 44, “Jesus turned to the
woman…and you’ll get the story as we go…and said, ‘Simon, Simon, do you see this woman? I
entered into your house: You gave Me no water for My feet, but she washed My feet. She has
washed My feet with tears and wiped them with the hair of her head. You gave Me no kiss, but this
woman since the time I came in has not ceased to kiss My feet. My head with oil you did not anoint,
but this woman has anointed My feet with ointment. Wherefore I saw unto you, her sins, which are
many, are forgiven, for she loved much. But to whom little is forgiven, the same loves little.’ And He
said unto her, ‘Thy sins are forgiven.'”

Listen, this woman demonstrated so much love and so much worship and so much respect for Christ
that it was enough to bring her redemption, and He forgave her sin. “And when they were eating that
were eating with Him began to say within themselves, ‘Who is this that forgiveth sins also? Who can
do this?’ And He said to the woman…watch this, same identical phrase used in the healings that
we’ve read before…’Thy faith hath saved thee.'”

There is no healing here. There is only the forgiveness of sin; and that phrase, with the word sodzo
in it in the Greek, is used to speak of her salvation. That’s why I say we have to see that aspect when
the phrase uses the word sodzo.

Luke 17, you remember the story? Ten lepers came to Jesus. “He saw them. He said, ‘Go to the
priest…in verse 14 of Luke 17…Go to the priests.’ It came to pass that as they went, they were
cleansed.” Now watch. Ten came, ten were sent, ten were cleansed. That is katharidzo, katharidzo
, to be washed, cleansed. “One of them when he saw that he was healed, turned around and with a
loud voice glorified God, fell down on his face at His feet, the feet of Jesus, giving Him thanks; and he
was a Samaritan. And Jesus answering said, ‘Were not there ten cleansed? Where are the nine?’
There are not found that returned to give glory to God, except this stranger? Just one came back?”

What’d He say to that one? “Arise, go thy way. Thy…same phrase…thy faith hath…and He uses
sodzo…saved thee.” It’s one thing to be katharidzo. It’s something else to be sodzo, see. There is a
cleansing of ten. There is a saving of one. Of one. So when the word is used for saving, it’s
unfortunate the English Bible doesn’t make that distinction, because I believe it implies a redemptiveaspect. As I said before, faith is not necessary for healing. Do you know there are people who have
diseases who get well who aren’t Christians?…And there are Christians who die…That is a sovereign
thing…Sometimes God does honor our faith in healing; but always does He honor our faith in saving…

Well, you see, Jesus loved people. He was accessible. You can turn back to Matthew 9 now. He
was a accessible. He was available. He was touchable. He was impartial…Little outcast lady was as
important to Him as the ruler of the synagogue. God deliver us from playing to the expensive seats,
you know? And ignoring the needy.

In the book, A Night to Remember, Walter Lord tells about the sinking of the Titanic in 1912. I
think…think it was in the month of April; and when it hit The American, which is the New York paper,
the headline said, “John Jacob Astor, millionaire, drowns.” Other people also drowned, but that’s the
way it is with the world. Only the rich and the famous get the press. Not so with Christ. If you learn
anything from this, will you not only learn how powerful He is, but will you learn how accessible,
available, touchable, and impartial He is? That’s how it is with God. That’s how it should be with
those who represent Him.

And I wanna close with this. Fifthly, He was powerful. He was powerful. He was powerful. We can
be the first four, but it gets a little sticky here. I can sympathize with you and hold out my hand to hold
onto yours; but if you’re sick, I can’t heal you; and if you’re dead, I can’t raise you. This is what sets
Him apart. Verse 23, I just love this. “And Jesus came to the ruler’s house.” Now, the interlude has
taken so long, the girl’s dead. “And He came and He saw the musicians and the people making a
noise.” Now wait a minute, this is…this is a girl dead. What’s all this racket?

You know, have you ever gone to a funeral home. Somebody’s dead. I mean it’s so quiet in there.
Everybody walks around whispering, black suits, very quiet. You go sneaking down little halls and
little rooms, little quiet caskets, little organs playing. Very quiet. Somebody drops something, you
just, you know, oooohhhhh. Our…our culture is that you get real quiet. Their culture, you get really
noisy. Real noisy. Racket all over the place. People making a whole buncha noise.

Now, lemme tell you what went on. Three basic things went on in a Jewish funeral. By the way, the
girl’s been dead long enough for the funeral to start, so they knew she was very sick, and they’ve
already been on call ready to move in. So you have professional mourners. There were women
called wellwallor willwella. Those were the terms used for ’em, and they came in. They were
professional shriekers. They screamed and shrieked and wailed and all this. But lemme tell you the
three things that were part. First of all, there was the rending of garments. You were supposed to rip
your clothes. That was symbolic of your grief, and they had 39 different rules and regulations on how
to rip your clothes…According to the Talmud, you had to do it while you were standing up. You had to
do it over your heart or near your heart. If you were a mother and father, it had to be right over your
heart. If you were not the mother or father, it could be anywhere near. And you had to rip it bigenough to stick your fist through; and then you had to leave the rip for seven days; and for the next
30, you could stitch it with big stitches, but you couldn’t sew it permanently, so people would know
you still felt bad. And in order for women not to expose themselves in an indiscreet manner by
ripping their clothes, they would rip their undergarment; and then wear it backwards. And there were
39 different things.

So here it all begins. Everybody is somewhere ripping their clothes; and, believe me, this woulda
been a big funeral, because this was a very important man; and they’re all in there tearing their
clothes. The second thing was the wailing, and the professional women would come in and begin to
wail. They would have been paid, and they would’ve learned the domestic history of the whole family,
so they would be bringing up the names of everybody who had ever died in that family, and erupting
old sorrows long ago buried. “Oh, remember Alice. Oh, remember Charlie,” and would go on and
on. They would bring everything up, and they would wail and shriek and scream and make all this
racket. Trying to touch every tender cord they possibly could for every person who’d ever died.

The third thing were, you’ll notice in verse 23, the musicians. Flute players. They had all different
kinds of flutes; but they’d come in and play flutes. The Talmud says this, “The husband is bound to
bury his dead wife and to make lamentations in mourning for her according to the custom of all
countries; and also the very poorest among the Israelites will not allow her less than two flutes and
one wailing woman.” I mean even if you were in abject poverty, you had to hire one wailing woman
and two flutes. Now, if you’re wealthy, the Talmud said, it should be in accord with your wealth.

So here is a man who probably had a lot of means; and the place was filled with flutes; and you could
imagine what a mess. Ripping and tearing, screaming and shrieking and wailing, and guys all over
the place playing flutes. In fact, they did this in the Roman world, too, and they said, and Seneca
wrote that, “There were so many flute players playing, and there was so much screaming at the death
of Emperor Claudius that they felt that Claudius himself probably heard it, even though he was
dead.”…

So you can see what a funeral was like in those times. Jesus saw the musicians and the people
making all this noise. Verse 24, watch. “And He said to them, ‘Go away. Get out. The Prince of
Peace arrives.’ He says, ‘Go away.'” “Why, this is proper. The Talmud requires all this. We’re doing
what we’re supposed to do.” “Go away.” Reason? “The girl is not dead. She’s sleeping.” “What do
you mean?”

Look what it says at the end of verse 24. “They laughed in His face.”…What is He saying? The girl is
not dead. Doesn’t He know? Of course He knows she’s dead. Been reported already that she’s
dead, and He knows He’s gonna raise her from the dead. Of course He knows she’s dead; but what
He’s saying is, “You cannot treat her death as death. You must treat it as sleep, because it is so
temporary.” See? That’s what He’s saying. “You have to treat her as if she’s just asleep.” And theimplication is, “‘Cause I’m gonna raise her from the dead,” and that’s why they laughed. They
laughed in His face. “He’s gonna wake her up.”

That’ll tell you a little bit about the fact that they were paid mourners, right? When their weeping
turned to laughing that fast. They could cry for this child, or they could laugh at Jesus in an instant;
and so they mocked Him in the face. In fact, the verb means they laughed hard. They really laughed
hard, as the scornful laughter of a superior who laughs over someone who is stupid. By the way, that
verb is only used in this story, and it is used in this story three times. It is the kind of scornful laughter
reserved for mocking a fool. Only a fool would think He could raise her from the dead.

And they had seen other miracles, you see, this crowd in Capernaum; but they still didn’t believe.
Just what Jesus said, “If they don’t believe Moses and the prophets, they won’t believe the One
raised from the dead.” But, anyway, “He said, ‘Stop. Go away.’ And they laughed in His face.”
Verse 25, “When the people were put forth, He got rid of ’em, He went in, took her by the hand…and
the other Gospel record says…”He said to her, “Toletha pumi.” Know what that means? Little girl,
arise. Little girl, arise. “Took her by the hand, and the girl arose.”

You know what it says? It says, “The parents…in the other Gospels…were astonished.” And Jesus
told ’em not to tell anybody, but they couldn’t resist it, and they just put more pressure on Him as His
enemies moved in closer.

Luke 8:55 has an important word to add to this. It says, “And her spirit came again.” That means that
she was truly dead, “and her spirit came to her again, and she arose.” You know, Jesus didn’t have
to touch the little girl. Didn’t have to reach out His hand to her. Coulda just said the word, but it is the
way of God to be tender. Do you understand that? It is the way of God to be gentle. It is the way of
God to be affectionate and loving. It is the way of God’s people to greet one another with a holy kiss
as an extension of His affection toward them.

And verse 26 says, “The fame of this went abroad into all that land.” You know what they said about
Him? “He has power over disease. He has power over disorders. He has power over death. He can
redeem.” And so Matthew reaches a pinnacle in his presentation of the power of Jesus Christ. “He is
the One…says John…who holds the keys of hell and death.”…Great truth.

Beloved, we have no need to fear death, none at all. The poet put it this way. I love this. “No longer
must the mourners weep, nor call departed children dead. For death is transformed into sleep, and
every grave becomes a bed.”…As a young man, D. L. Moody was called upon suddenly to preach a
funeral sermon. He decided that he would hunt the Gospels to try to find one of Christ’s funeral
sermons, but he searched in vain. He found that every time Christ attended a funeral, He broke it up
by raising the person from the dead; and so He never gave a funeral sermon. When the dead heard
His voice, they immediately sprang to life.
We should rejoice in death, because we have conquered death. He will not leave His Holy One to
see corruption. He will show us the path of life. In His presence, His fullness of joy, and at His right
hand are treasures for ever more. I think Arthur Brisbane captured it for me when I look at a funeral.
Arthur Brisbane wanted to demonstrate what a funeral was like, so he pictured a crowd of grieving
caterpillars, all wearing black suits; and all these caterpillars are crawling along mourning; and they’re
carrying the corpse of a cocoon to its final resting place. The poor distressed caterpillars, weeping;
and above them is fluttering around this incredibly beautiful butterfly, looking down in utter
disbelief…Christ gives us hope.

Two weeks ago, when I preached the first half of this sermon, it touched somebody’s heart; and they
wrote me this letter. “Dear John, My family and I have had a tragic loss. My younger brother was
shot and killed Thursday afternoon. He was a professional auto repossesser for the last four years,
first working in the Valley, and then in Los Angeles. He had just decided to move his work back to the
Valley, because he felt doing the type of work he did that Los Angeles was not a safe area. He had
been working in the Valley since last week and seemed to feel much safer.

“On Thursday afternoon, he and his partner went to an address in Burbank, the city where our family
has lived for the past 14 years, to repossess a car that the owner had failed to make his payments
on. My brother’s partner went up to the door where the owner of the vehicle lived to tell the man that
his car was being repossessed unless he could make a payment on the spot. The man allegedly
said, ‘Take the car,’ so my brother and his partner proceeded to take the vehicle when, suddenly, the
man came out of his apartment with a rifle. My brother immediately told the man that there would be
no problem. They wouldn’t take the car. The man then fired one shot from the gun, hitting my brother
in the chest and instantly killing him.

“I and my family are having a rough time dealing with this incident, even though we all know there
was a reason why Jesus allowed this to happen. Your sermon today on Jesus’ power over death was
timely and brought great comfort to myself and my two sisters, who are both Christians; but we were
attending Grace today for the first time. My brother was a wonderful, warm human being, who would
help anyone, be it a stranger or a friend, in a time of need. He was one of those people that would
stop to help someone who was stranded in their car, even though he might be on his way to work.
Sometimes I feel like everything is okay, and that I’m at peace knowing he’s with the Lord. But then
there are those other times when all I can think about is my brother lying in the street, and I’d give
anything to have him back. But I know that he will be back when Jesus raises the dead, and I have
that joy to look forward to. I thank you and the Lord for the message today and the knowledge that
my brother is at peace. In Jesus’ name.” It’s a great hope, isn’t it? It’s the only thing that can sustain,
to know that He has power over death. Let’s pray.
Thank You, Father, for our time this morning, for how You’ve ministered to us in the Word. Meet
every need in this place. For those who do not know You, maybe this be the day they open their
heart to believe. For those who do, may there be a deepening of commitment. For those You’re
calling to join and unite with Your church, may they respond today. Be obedient…

While your heads are bowed, just in a final second, if you don’t know Christ, right where you sit, just
open your heart to Him. Invite Him to come in and save you and forgive your sin and…show you His
mercy and salvation, give you victory over death. He’ll do that.

Father, bring those that You would have to come and touch every life with the great hope that is ours,
because You have the power over death. Bring us together again tonight in anticipation that You’re
gonna speak to us as we open up our heart to share the things that You’ve been doing there. Thank
You for this day and this people. We give You all the glory. In Christ’s name. Amen.

Available online at: http://www.gty.org
COPYRIGHT (C) 2014 Grace to You
You may reproduce this Grace to You content for non-commercial purposes in accordance with
Grace to You’s Copyright Policy (http://www.gty.org/connect/copyright).

Related posts:

John MacArthur on fulfilled prophecy from the Bible Part 2

I have posted many of the sermons by John MacArthur. He is a great bible teacher and this sermon below is another great message. His series on the Book of Proverbs was outstanding too.  I also have posted several of the visits MacArthur made to Larry King’s Show. One of two most popular posts I […]

John MacArthur on fulfilled prophecy from the Bible Part 1

I have posted many of the sermons by John MacArthur. He is a great bible teacher and this sermon below is another great message. His series on the Book of Proverbs was outstanding too.  I also have posted several of the visits MacArthur made to Larry King’s Show. One of two most popular posts I […]

John MacArthur on the Bible and Science (Part 2)

John MacArthur on the Bible and Science (Part 2) I have posted many of the sermons by John MacArthur. He is a great bible teacher and this sermon below is another great message. His series on the Book of Proverbs was outstanding too.  I also have posted several of the visits MacArthur made to Larry […]

John MacArthur on the Bible and Science (Part 1)

John MacArthur on the Bible and Science (Part 1) I have posted many of the sermons by John MacArthur. He is a great bible teacher and this sermon below is another great message. His series on the Book of Proverbs was outstanding too.  I also have posted several of the visits MacArthur made to Larry […]

John MacArthur on www.thedailyhatch.org

I have posted many of the sermons by John MacArthur. He is a great bible teacher and this sermon below is another great message. His series on the Book of Proverbs was outstanding too.  I also have posted several of the visits MacArthur made to Larry King’s Show. One of two most popular posts I […]

John MacArthur quotes Francis Schaeffer in his message “The War against Reason”

John MacArthur quotes Francis Schaeffer in his message “The War against Reason” The Scientific Age Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 _______________ Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason Dr. Schaeffer’s sweeping epic on the rise and decline of Western thought and Culture _______________________   I love the works of Francis Schaeffer and I have […]

John MacArthur on Proverbs (Part 10) Summing up Proverbs study

Over and over in Proverbs you hear the words “fear the Lord.” In fact, some of he references are Proverbs 1:7, 29; 2:5; 8:13; 9:10;14:26,27; 15:16 and many more. Below is a sermon by John MacArthur from the Book of Luke on 3 reasons we should fear the Lord. (I have posted John MacArthur’s amazing […]

John MacArthur on Proverbs (Part 9) “Love your neighbor”

Over and over in Proverbs you hear the words “fear the Lord.” In fact, some of he references are Proverbs 1:7, 29; 2:5; 8:13; 9:10;14:26,27; 15:16 and many more. Below is a sermon by John MacArthur from the Book of Luke on 3 reasons we should fear the Lord. (I have posted John MacArthur’s amazing […]

John MacArthur on Proverbs (Part 8) “Manage your money”

Over and over in Proverbs you hear the words “fear the Lord.” In fact, some of he references are Proverbs 1:7, 29; 2:5; 8:13; 9:10;14:26,27; 15:16 and many more. Below is a sermon by John MacArthur from the Book of Luke on 3 reasons we should fear the Lord. (I have posted John MacArthur’s amazing […]

John MacArthur on Proverbs (Part 7) “Pursue your work”

Over and over in Proverbs you hear the words “fear the Lord.” In fact, some of he references are Proverbs 1:7, 29; 2:5; 8:13; 9:10;14:26,27; 15:16 and many more. Below is a sermon by John MacArthur from the Book of Luke on 3 reasons we should fear the Lord. (I have posted John MacArthur’s amazing […]

“Music Monday” The Daylights (Music Group) Part 1

The Daylights (Music Group) Part 1

Both Ricky and Ran Jackson went to school at Ouachita Baptist in Arkansas and here is a fine story on them at this link.

_______________

The Daylights – Guess I Missed You.wmv

The Daylights “Terra Firma” Music Video

Uploaded on Nov 7, 2007

Music Video for The Daylights and their song, “Terra Firma”. Directed by Ben Grayson.

_______________________

The Daylights – Rogue Machine (Don’t Say That You Want Me) Official Video

Uploaded on Feb 19, 2010

Official Music Video For Rogue Machine By The Daylights.
Directed By Walter May
DP Ryan Myer

______________________

The Daylights, ‘Weapons’ Music Video

Uploaded on Sep 12, 2007

Directed by Walter May, Director of Photography Samuel Brownfield

The Daylights “Quick Fix” Music Video directed by Walter May

The Daylights: Happy Live

if they are excited to be back in Dallas, an

I ask them if they are excited to be back in Dallas, and sans hesitation, I receive a collective “yeah” coupled with the nodding of heads. “Are y’all from Dallas?” asks bassist and vocalist Ricky Jackson, his organic southern drawl showing. A state-shifter between Texas and California for my entire life, talking about where I’m from is one of the hardest conversations to have. Currently experiencing a problem similar to mine, as LA transplants on tour in their hometown of Dallas, The Daylights are the only band that can help me confront this location-based conundrum.

“I don’t think that we would claim to be from LA. We’re pretty proud Texans. Annoyingly so, I’d say. So we definitely say we’re from Dallas. As a band we’re from LA, because we met in LA, we live in LA, we formed there, we write there, we do everything there, and have a studio there, but we’re definitely Texans, and he’s definitely a Dane,” Ricky says, gesturing to Svend. “If we’re asked, ‘where are you from?’ Texas rolls right off the lips. If you say, ‘where are you guys based out of?’ it’s LA.” This doesn’t help shorten my answer any, but it does provide ample context for a pretty in-depth response.

“The thing is, we are hardcore Rangers, Mavs, and Cowboys fans.” Good thing, as it’s the perfect time to harness those particular affiliations (except for maybe the Cowboys). “[Texas has] also changed a lot since we left, it seems like the Mavericks are actually a good basketball team now, which is weird. And the Rangers are actually good.” Heck yes, ALCS champs, and heading in that direction again this season, (not to jinx them) thankyouverymuch. “I don’t know what any of those things are, so, sure,” says the Dane. “It’s pretty tough being with two Texans. They’re proud.”

Does he have to fight for his voice to be heard? “Sometimes,” says Svend. “I mean, we’re very similar and very different at the same time. I think it creates a very interesting dynamic.” I ask him what kind of sports fan he is; if you’re going to put up with two Texans, you better have some kind of affiliation. “If it’s either bat ball or tackle ball, I don’t know,” he laughs. “I just like to tease them because football to me is nothing with a ball and foot.” Point taken, but don’t tell that to Jerry. So what does Svend think of this state? “Oh I love it – I like Texas a lot.” Smart answer. “We could still actually secede,” Ran quips. “But anyway, we’re very proud to be from Texas, to answer your question!” he laughs, after a massively round about way to say where we’re all from.

The Daylights possess the sort of sound that belongs onstage at American Airlines Center, rivaling acts such as Kings of Leon and Rihanna. When thinking of a band to compare them to, U2 continues to surface.

For now, venues such as The Prophet Bar support their sound and provide fans with a close-up concert experience. “We dig playing on a smaller stage in smaller rooms, so you can have that intimate atmosphere,” Ricky says. “It’s good to connect with our fans and be able to hang out after,” adds Ran.

The Jackson brothers stem from a musical family tree; their mother had a career as a professional drummer. “We didn’t get fed unless we sang in five-part harmony,” Ricky jokes of their childhood. With a larger-than-life sound, and the potential to ignite radios into flames, the wonderful thing about The Daylights is that on each song of their 15-track self-titled debut album – regardless of how much mainstream play they will inevitably receive from MTV – there are noticeable moments of truthfulness to themselves as a band. The instrumental tracks, “Richmond Park,” Pts I and II, leave one wondering what the hell must’ve happened there.

Their current single, “Rogue Machine,” is doing very well on the charts, but after listening to their self-titled debut album, I have to know if there are plans to release “Outsider” as the next single. “It’s funny you say that” Ran starts, “because for the longest time, everyone thought that was going to be our single, and then we wrote “Rogue Machine” and that was the favorite. I’m rooting for “Outsider” to be our new single – what do you think?” If that were to occur, it would do for them what “Breakeven” did for The Script. You know, put them on the map. Pinpoint their exact coordinates in terms of musical popularity. “Can you guarantee that?” Ricky questions, teasingly. Put me down for a high five and a ‘thank you to’ on the next album’s digital booklet, if I’m accurate.

“I think our band’s favorite song, correct me if I’m wrong, is ‘Weapons,’” says Ran, and the guys go on about how radio isn’t into the ‘deeper sort of songs’, but those are the songs they love to write. “I think “Weapons,” would be a blast; I think “Digital_Kiss” would be great for alternative radio,” Ran says of deciding which song to release next. What to do? Overseas fans are already demanding The Daylights jump ship and sail across the Atlantic for a show. “I think that would help decide our next single,” they determine.

The Daylights are genuinely nice guys with the raw talent to elevate them to the next level. “We’re writing a ton, we’re touring nonstop, we’ve been recording in the studio nonstop; so for us, it’s just about continuing to create, and have a blast. I think that’s the most important ingredient,” Ran says of the band’s future. Hey, music scene – take heed – you won’t want to leave The Daylights in the dark.

The Daylights will be back in Dallas Tuesday, June 7, at The Prophet Bar

Photography by Luke Boney. Visit here for concert review and here for concert photos

Laura Stillo is the Arts & Entertainment Writer and Creative Social Media Producer for YouPlusDallas. Follow her on Twitter at @laurastillo.

– See more at: http://www.youplusdallas.com/cityblog/arts-entertainment/2011/05/the-semi-local-location-jumping-hailing-from-two-continents-but-really-is-from-dallas-band-that-is-taking-over-our-radar-screen-the-daylights/#more-4592

The Semi-Local Location-Jumping Hailing from Two Continents but Really is From Dallas Band That is Taking Over Our Radar Screen: The Daylights

Posted by    |    May 6th, 2011 at 5:07 pm

Currently on their first headlining tour, prodigal band The Daylights sat down with YouPlusDallas to tell us about their music, origin, and fan affiliation.

“What a couch!” guitarist and vocalist Ran Jackson exclaims before shaking my hand and introducing himself. We’re in the green room of The Prophet Bar, where a worn, mustard yellow sofa sits against the wall, beckoning the band to have a seat for their on-camera interview. “I think we’re going to need to take a bath after we get off this couch,” he jokes. The band is relaxed and down to earth, cracking jokes with each other a few hours before they go onstage. “So what history does this room have?” Ran questions. Drummer Svend Lerche, with his dark hair and unexpectedly bright blue eyes, guesses the rainbow of colors the room may have seen before living up to its namesake. “It’s very green,” he offers, but Ran disagrees.“[It’s] more of like a green tea – matcha green tea.” I can relax a little now – it’s refreshing to know that the up-and-coming rock stars have an authentic sense of humor.

The Daylights have toured with big names such as OneRepublic and Needtobreathe. “They’re good guys,” says Svend, “good to hang. That was almost the best thing about the tour, was to hang with them.” Recently, the talented musicians earned their first headlining tour. “It kind of exceeded our expectations, actually,” Ran says of the tour that kicked off on the west coast, “everywhere we went, we were like, ‘well, we’ve never headlined that city before.’”

I ask them if they are excited to be back in Dallas, and sans hesitation, I receive a collective “yeah” coupled with the nodding of heads. “Are y’all from Dallas?” asks bassist and vocalist Ricky Jackson, his organic southern drawl showing. A state-shifter between Texas and California for my entire life, talking about where I’m from is one of the hardest conversations to have. Currently experiencing a problem similar to mine, as LA transplants on tour in their hometown of Dallas, The Daylights are the only band that can help me confront this location-based conundrum.

“I don’t think that we would claim to be from LA. We’re pretty proud Texans. Annoyingly so, I’d say. So we definitely say we’re from Dallas. As a band we’re from LA, because we met in LA, we live in LA, we formed there, we write there, we do everything there, and have a studio there, but we’re definitely Texans, and he’s definitely a Dane,” Ricky says, gesturing to Svend. “If we’re asked, ‘where are you from?’ Texas rolls right off the lips. If you say, ‘where are you guys based out of?’ it’s LA.” This doesn’t help shorten my answer any, but it does provide ample context for a pretty in-depth response.

“The thing is, we are hardcore Rangers, Mavs, and Cowboys fans.” Good thing, as it’s the perfect time to harness those particular affiliations (except for maybe the Cowboys). “[Texas has] also changed a lot since we left, it seems like the Mavericks are actually a good basketball team now, which is weird. And the Rangers are actually good.” Heck yes, ALCS champs, and heading in that direction again this season, (not to jinx them) thankyouverymuch. “I don’t know what any of those things are, so, sure,” says the Dane. “It’s pretty tough being with two Texans. They’re proud.”

Does he have to fight for his voice to be heard? “Sometimes,” says Svend. “I mean, we’re very similar and very different at the same time. I think it creates a very interesting dynamic.” I ask him what kind of sports fan he is; if you’re going to put up with two Texans, you better have some kind of affiliation. “If it’s either bat ball or tackle ball, I don’t know,” he laughs. “I just like to tease them because football to me is nothing with a ball and foot.” Point taken, but don’t tell that to Jerry. So what does Svend think of this state? “Oh I love it – I like Texas a lot.” Smart answer. “We could still actually secede,” Ran quips. “But anyway, we’re very proud to be from Texas, to answer your question!” he laughs, after a massively round about way to say where we’re all from.

The Daylights possess the sort of sound that belongs onstage at American Airlines Center, rivaling acts such as Kings of Leon and Rihanna. When thinking of a band to compare them to, U2 continues to surface.

For now, venues such as The Prophet Bar support their sound and provide fans with a close-up concert experience. “We dig playing on a smaller stage in smaller rooms, so you can have that intimate atmosphere,” Ricky says. “It’s good to connect with our fans and be able to hang out after,” adds Ran.

The Jackson brothers stem from a musical family tree; their mother had a career as a professional drummer. “We didn’t get fed unless we sang in five-part harmony,” Ricky jokes of their childhood. With a larger-than-life sound, and the potential to ignite radios into flames, the wonderful thing about The Daylights is that on each song of their 15-track self-titled debut album – regardless of how much mainstream play they will inevitably receive from MTV – there are noticeable moments of truthfulness to themselves as a band. The instrumental tracks, “Richmond Park,” Pts I and II, leave one wondering what the hell must’ve happened there.

Their current single, “Rogue Machine,” is doing very well on the charts, but after listening to their self-titled debut album, I have to know if there are plans to release “Outsider” as the next single. “It’s funny you say that” Ran starts, “because for the longest time, everyone thought that was going to be our single, and then we wrote “Rogue Machine” and that was the favorite. I’m rooting for “Outsider” to be our new single – what do you think?” If that were to occur, it would do for them what “Breakeven” did for The Script. You know, put them on the map. Pinpoint their exact coordinates in terms of musical popularity. “Can you guarantee that?” Ricky questions, teasingly. Put me down for a high five and a ‘thank you to’ on the next album’s digital booklet, if I’m accurate.

“I think our band’s favorite song, correct me if I’m wrong, is ‘Weapons,’” says Ran, and the guys go on about how radio isn’t into the ‘deeper sort of songs’, but those are the songs they love to write. “I think “Weapons,” would be a blast; I think “Digital_Kiss” would be great for alternative radio,” Ran says of deciding which song to release next. What to do? Overseas fans are already demanding The Daylights jump ship and sail across the Atlantic for a show. “I think that would help decide our next single,” they determine.

The Daylights are genuinely nice guys with the raw talent to elevate them to the next level. “We’re writing a ton, we’re touring nonstop, we’ve been recording in the studio nonstop; so for us, it’s just about continuing to create, and have a blast. I think that’s the most important ingredient,” Ran says of the band’s future. Hey, music scene – take heed – you won’t want to leave The Daylights in the dark.

The Daylights will be back in Dallas Tuesday, June 7, at The Prophet Bar

Photography by Luke Boney. Visit here for concert review and here for concert photos

Laura Stillo is the Arts & Entertainment Writer and Creative Social Media Producer for YouPlusDallas. Follow her on Twitter at @laurastillo.

– See more at: http://www.youplusdallas.com/cityblog/arts-entertainment/2011/05/the-semi-local-location-jumping-hailing-from-two-continents-but-really-is-from-dallas-band-that-is-taking-over-our-radar-screen-the-daylights/#more-4592

The Semi-Local Location-Jumping Hailing from Two Continents but Really is From Dallas Band That is Taking Over Our Radar Screen: The Daylights

Posted by    |    May 6th, 2011 at 5:07 pm

Currently on their first headlining tour, prodigal band The Daylights sat down with YouPlusDallas to tell us about their music, origin, and fan affiliation.

“What a couch!” guitarist and vocalist Ran Jackson exclaims before shaking my hand and introducing himself. We’re in the green room of The Prophet Bar, where a worn, mustard yellow sofa sits against the wall, beckoning the band to have a seat for their on-camera interview. “I think we’re going to need to take a bath after we get off this couch,” he jokes. The band is relaxed and down to earth, cracking jokes with each other a few hours before they go onstage. “So what history does this room have?” Ran questions. Drummer Svend Lerche, with his dark hair and unexpectedly bright blue eyes, guesses the rainbow of colors the room may have seen before living up to its namesake. “It’s very green,” he offers, but Ran disagrees.“[It’s] more of like a green tea – matcha green tea.” I can relax a little now – it’s refreshing to know that the up-and-coming rock stars have an authentic sense of humor.

The Daylights have toured with big names such as OneRepublic and Needtobreathe. “They’re good guys,” says Svend, “good to hang. That was almost the best thing about the tour, was to hang with them.” Recently, the talented musicians earned their first headlining tour. “It kind of exceeded our expectations, actually,” Ran says of the tour that kicked off on the west coast, “everywhere we went, we were like, ‘well, we’ve never headlined that city before.’”

I ask them if they are excited to be back in Dallas, and sans hesitation, I receive a collective “yeah” coupled with the nodding of heads. “Are y’all from Dallas?” asks bassist and vocalist Ricky Jackson, his organic southern drawl showing. A state-shifter between Texas and California for my entire life, talking about where I’m from is one of the hardest conversations to have. Currently experiencing a problem similar to mine, as LA transplants on tour in their hometown of Dallas, The Daylights are the only band that can help me confront this location-based conundrum.

“I don’t think that we would claim to be from LA. We’re pretty proud Texans. Annoyingly so, I’d say. So we definitely say we’re from Dallas. As a band we’re from LA, because we met in LA, we live in LA, we formed there, we write there, we do everything there, and have a studio there, but we’re definitely Texans, and he’s definitely a Dane,” Ricky says, gesturing to Svend. “If we’re asked, ‘where are you from?’ Texas rolls right off the lips. If you say, ‘where are you guys based out of?’ it’s LA.” This doesn’t help shorten my answer any, but it does provide ample context for a pretty in-depth response.

“The thing is, we are hardcore Rangers, Mavs, and Cowboys fans.” Good thing, as it’s the perfect time to harness those particular affiliations (except for maybe the Cowboys). “[Texas has] also changed a lot since we left, it seems like the Mavericks are actually a good basketball team now, which is weird. And the Rangers are actually good.” Heck yes, ALCS champs, and heading in that direction again this season, (not to jinx them) thankyouverymuch. “I don’t know what any of those things are, so, sure,” says the Dane. “It’s pretty tough being with two Texans. They’re proud.”

Does he have to fight for his voice to be heard? “Sometimes,” says Svend. “I mean, we’re very similar and very different at the same time. I think it creates a very interesting dynamic.” I ask him what kind of sports fan he is; if you’re going to put up with two Texans, you better have some kind of affiliation. “If it’s either bat ball or tackle ball, I don’t know,” he laughs. “I just like to tease them because football to me is nothing with a ball and foot.” Point taken, but don’t tell that to Jerry. So what does Svend think of this state? “Oh I love it – I like Texas a lot.” Smart answer. “We could still actually secede,” Ran quips. “But anyway, we’re very proud to be from Texas, to answer your question!” he laughs, after a massively round about way to say where we’re all from.

The Daylights possess the sort of sound that belongs onstage at American Airlines Center, rivaling acts such as Kings of Leon and Rihanna. When thinking of a band to compare them to, U2 continues to surface.

For now, venues such as The Prophet Bar support their sound and provide fans with a close-up concert experience. “We dig playing on a smaller stage in smaller rooms, so you can have that intimate atmosphere,” Ricky says. “It’s good to connect with our fans and be able to hang out after,” adds Ran.

The Jackson brothers stem from a musical family tree; their mother had a career as a professional drummer. “We didn’t get fed unless we sang in five-part harmony,” Ricky jokes of their childhood. With a larger-than-life sound, and the potential to ignite radios into flames, the wonderful thing about The Daylights is that on each song of their 15-track self-titled debut album – regardless of how much mainstream play they will inevitably receive from MTV – there are noticeable moments of truthfulness to themselves as a band. The instrumental tracks, “Richmond Park,” Pts I and II, leave one wondering what the hell must’ve happened there.

Their current single, “Rogue Machine,” is doing very well on the charts, but after listening to their self-titled debut album, I have to know if there are plans to release “Outsider” as the next single. “It’s funny you say that” Ran starts, “because for the longest time, everyone thought that was going to be our single, and then we wrote “Rogue Machine” and that was the favorite. I’m rooting for “Outsider” to be our new single – what do you think?” If that were to occur, it would do for them what “Breakeven” did for The Script. You know, put them on the map. Pinpoint their exact coordinates in terms of musical popularity. “Can you guarantee that?” Ricky questions, teasingly. Put me down for a high five and a ‘thank you to’ on the next album’s digital booklet, if I’m accurate.

“I think our band’s favorite song, correct me if I’m wrong, is ‘Weapons,’” says Ran, and the guys go on about how radio isn’t into the ‘deeper sort of songs’, but those are the songs they love to write. “I think “Weapons,” would be a blast; I think “Digital_Kiss” would be great for alternative radio,” Ran says of deciding which song to release next. What to do? Overseas fans are already demanding The Daylights jump ship and sail across the Atlantic for a show. “I think that would help decide our next single,” they determine.

The Daylights are genuinely nice guys with the raw talent to elevate them to the next level. “We’re writing a ton, we’re touring nonstop, we’ve been recording in the studio nonstop; so for us, it’s just about continuing to create, and have a blast. I think that’s the most important ingredient,” Ran says of the band’s future. Hey, music scene – take heed – you won’t want to leave The Daylights in the dark.

The Daylights will be back in Dallas Tuesday, June 7, at The Prophet Bar

Photography by Luke Boney. Visit here for concert review and here for concert photos

Laura Stillo is the Arts & Entertainment Writer and Creative Social Media Producer for YouPlusDallas. Follow her on Twitter at @laurastillo.

– See more at: http://www.youplusdallas.com/cityblog/arts-entertainment/2011/05/the-semi-local-location-jumping-hailing-from-two-continents-but-really-is-from-dallas-band-that-is-taking-over-our-radar-screen-the-daylights/#more-4592

Boy On The Moon by The Daylights

The Daylights Outsider Lyrics


Related posts:

MUSIC MONDAY: Keith Green Story (Part 2)

The Keith Green Story pt 3/7 Keith Green had a major impact on me back in 1978 when I first heard him. Here is his story below: Spiritual Conversion Keith had a Jewish and Christian Science background, but grew up reading the New Testament. He called it “an odd combination” that left him open minded […]

MUSIC MONDAY:Foreigner’s connection to Amy Winehouse (Great song by Lou)

The Lou Gramm Band – You Saved Me (great song) Uploaded by SacredWarrior1991 on May 2, 2011 This song is taken from The Lou Gramm Band (LGB – 2009). ______________________________________ The Lou Gramm Band – I Wanna Testify (great song) Uploaded by SacredWarrior1991 on May 2, 2011 This song is taken from The Lou Gramm […]

MUSIC MONDAY: Lou Graham knows what love is

Double Vision – Foreigner Foreigner- Urgent Foreigner – Cold As Ice _____________________________ The Lou Gramm Band – Redeemer (great song) Uploaded by SacredWarrior1991 on May 2, 2011 This song is taken from The Lou Gramm Band (LGB – 2009). ____________________________________ Lou Gramm Knows What Love Is – CBN.com Uploaded by CBNonline on Nov 4, 2009 […]

“Music Monday” Katy Perry

    Katy Perry Dedicates Song to Tim Tebow at Super Bowl Party Sun, Feb. 05, 2012 Posted: 07:01 PM EDT Flamboyant pop star Katy Perry dedicated suggestive song “Peacock” to evangelical quarterback Tim Tebow at a pre-Super Bowl party Saturday night. Perry, the daughter of Christian ministers, said “This one goes out to Tim […]

“Music Monday” Blondie

Wikipedia reported: Blondie Chris Stein and Deborah Harry in 2008 Background information Origin New York City, US Genres New Wave punk rock[1][2] dance-rock[3] pop punk[3][4] post-punk power pop Years active 1974–1982 1997–present Labels Chrysalis/EMI Beyond/BMG Epic Sanctuary Private Stock Website http://www.blondie.net Members Debbie Harry Chris Stein Clem Burke Leigh Foxx Matt Katz-Bohen Tommy Kessler Jimmy […]

MUSIC MONDAY:Chynna Phillips is open about her Christian faith

Chynna Phillips is open about her Christian faith jh31 “Dancing with the Stars” (DWTS) is a  very popular show.  I have only watched it a little, but I am a big fan of Chynna Phillips. I love a lot of her music. Dancing With the Stars: Chynna Phillips Speaks Openly About Her Christian Faith Actress […]

“Music Monday” Avril Lavigne’s best songs

“Keep holding on” is my favorite Avril Lavigne song. Enjoy this clip of it followed by a 2007 interview of Lavigne.

“Music Monday” All-American Rejects Part 4 (Leadsingers Tyson Ritter and Gene Simmons have something in common)

In-Studio Interviews – Tyson Ritter ‘The All American Rejects’ Interview: Kids In The Street I enjoyed the concert in Little Rock on 12-13-12, and lead singer Tyson Ritter wrote a song on his latest cd that we should all pay attention to because it covers an issue that both him and many other lead singers […]

“Music Monday” All-American Rejects Part 3 (Lessons from Tyson Ritter and the path of sexual impurity)

The Poison – The All-American Rejects Avril Lavigne and Tyson Ritter from All American Rejects Talk Almost Alice The All-American Rejects – Dirty Little Secret Tyson Ritter, the leadsinger of the All-American Rejects has admitted that he was a jerk for the last couple of years when he lived a sexually impure life by sleeping […]

“Music Monday” Videos of those in 27 club

I’m In A Rock ‘N’ Roll Band – The Singer (Part 1) Jim Morrison – books on tape – w subtitles Light My Fire – The Doors The Rolling Stones – Satisfaction ________________________ The Rolling Stones – The Breakthrough The Rolling Stones – Brian Jones The Rolling Stones- Paint it Black Nirvana – Smells Like […]

John Lennon “Music Monday”

Great article by Muehlenberg. Bill Muehlenberg’s commentary on issues of the day… John Lennon, Rock Culture, and Eternity It may have been “twenty years ago today, Sgt. Pepper taught the band to play,” as the Beatles sang about in their 1967 album “Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band,” but I in fact wish to go […]

“Music Monday” with the group Badfinger

Wikipedia reported: “Without You” is a song written by Pete Ham and Tom Evans of British rock group Badfinger, and first released on their 1970 album No Dice. The song has been recorded by over 180 artists,[1] and versions released as singles by Harry Nilsson (1971) and Mariah Carey (1994) became international best-sellers. Paul McCartney […]

MUSIC MONDAY: Five For Fighting

My son Wilson Hatcher put together this post. I LOVE this song!!! This is an AWESOME band!

“Music Monday” Moby

“The Next Three Days” Soundtrack – Be The One by Moby Moby – Extreme Ways (The Bourne Ultimatum soundtrack) I really enjoyed reading about Moby and his views on Christianity. Moby From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia   Jump to: navigation, search For other uses, see Moby (disambiguation). Moby Moby in 2009 Background information Birth name […]

“Music Monday” People in the Johnny Cash video “God’s Gonna Cut You Down”

Wikipedia noted: Johnny Cash recorded a version of “God’s Gonna Cut You Down” on American V: A Hundred Highways in 2003, with an arrangement quite different from most known gospel versions of the song. A music video, directed by Tony Kaye,[1] was made for this version in late 2006. It featured a number of celebrities, […]

“Music Mondays” here on the www.thedailyhatch.org

Would you like to know the spirtual meaning of these words above by Coldplay or find a christian response to the song “The Last Resort” by Papa Roach? You could if you checked out “Music Monday” here every week and see all the videos and articles. Take a look at the links before that refer to these songs: […]

“Music Monday” O Brother Where Art Thou – Man Of Constant Sorrow

O Brother Where Art Thou – Man Of Constant Sorrow Uploaded by MartinBestClips on Oct 29, 2009 O Brother Where Art Thou – Man Of Constant Sorrow O Brother Where Art Thou film movie comedy 2000 George Clooney John Turturro John Goodman Holly Hunter _________________ Wikipedia notes: History There is some uncertainty whether Dick Burnett […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Current Events | Edit | Comments (1)

Open letter to President Obama (Part 535) Kermit Gosnell and Planned Parenthood supporting infanticide?

Open letter to President Obama (Part 535)

(Emailed to White House on 5-17-13.)

President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here. I know that you don’t agree with my pro-life views but I wanted to challenge you as a fellow Christian to re-examine your pro-choice view.

___________________

Francis Schaeffer Whatever Happened to the Human Race (Episode 1) ABORTION

Francis Schaeffer: What Ever Happened to the Human Race? (Full-Length Documentary)


Part 1 on abortion runs from 00:00 to 39:50, Part 2 on Infanticide runs from 39:50 to 1:21:30, Part 3 on Youth Euthanasia runs from 1:21:30 to 1:45:40, Part 4 on the basis of human dignity runs from 1:45:40 to 2:24:45 and Part 5 on the basis of truth runs from 2:24:45 to 3:00:04

 

________________

_____________

Tony Perkins: Gosnell Trial – FOX News

Published on May 13, 2013

Tony Perkins: Gosnell Trial – FOX News

________________

Kermit Gosnell and Planned Parenthood: Pro-Infanticide Buddies

by Anna Higgins | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 4/19/13 10:25 AM

The horrors that have been revealed by witnesses in the murder trial of abortionist Kermit Gosnellare almost unspeakable. It appears the disgusting conditions found at his facility were just the tip of the iceberg.

As we hear further testimony, we have discovered that babies born alive were routinely killed with scissors. One worker testified that she heard a baby scream as it was killed and another worker said she witnessed a baby “jump” when it was stabbed with scissors. Just as disturbing is the fact that these gruesome deaths could have been prevented had this abortion facility been inspected by the state of Pennsylvania. Despite numerous complaints, it is reported that Gosnell’s house of horrors remained uninspected since 1993.

According to the Grand Jury Report, the political powers that be in Pennsylvania decided that inspections should be avoided because they would pose a “barrier to women.” These facts together are so appalling that they should disturb any human being on the most visceral level, no matter his political affiliation.

In the midst of the Gosnell trial, another shocking infanticide story broke.

Alisa LaPolt Snow, lobbyist for the Florida Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, testified in opposition to a bill that would require life-saving treatment for infants born alive following a failed abortion. She complained that such born alive infant protection acts “insert politics where it doesn’t belong.” Administering life-saving treatment to a live infant interferes with “a woman’s ability to make her own personal, medical decisions.” It is hard to imagine a policy that could be less political than saving the life of a struggling infant who is alive outside the womb. Legislators were shocked by these statements, as well they should have been.

The response of Americans to these horrific stories of infanticide has also been shock and outrage. Until last week, however, there was almost no way to gauge the opinion of the public because the mainstream media had remained virtually silent, largely refusing to cover these stories. Thanks to grassroots efforts from astute citizens, concerned non-profit groups, and a few courageous congressmen, the media seem to have gotten the message that silence in the face of such important human rights events is unacceptable.

Rep. Chris Smith held a special speaking panel in the House of Representatives on April 11 to address this very issue. One speaker, Rep. Marlin Stutzman of Indiana, gave a very eloquent summary of this egregious violation of journalistic responsibility. He noted of the Gosnell debacle, “The loss of these lives should scar the consciences of people everywhere … Gosnell is a predator who should be publicly exposed and denounced.” As for the media, Rep Stutzman hit the nail on the head, asking, “How is it in our day of constant news, not a single major news outlet has reported [on the Gosnell trial]?” He also made a very poignant point that gets to the heart of why this story had gone unreported – perhaps it is that our national conscience has been seared by the deaths of 1.2 million children by abortion every year.

Perhaps we have become so accustomed to accepting abortion as a “choice” rather than the death of a unique human being that infanticide has become simply a natural and acceptable extension of the “abortion right.” This Pennsylvania abortion facility is not the first, nor will it be the last, to be revealed as unsafe and unsanitary. In fact, many facilities around the country have been found to be in violation of basic health and safety standards. Just last week a Planned Parenthood in Wilmington, Delaware closed its doors when two employees released statements that the facility was performing abortions in an unsafe and unsanitary manner. The local TV station covered this story extensively, to their credit. However, these violations continue to go largely unreported in the media.

Every American should be incensed that he cannot trust the media to cover, in a neutral manner, serious events affecting human rights without heavy pressure from the public and from Congress. We are constantly bombarded with stories of celebrities and athletes, yet this important story – the perpetration of violence against children – was largely ignored. We must remain vigilant and demand that all stories affecting our families and our values be given fair coverage. Tony Perkins, President of Family Research Council, along with several conservative leaders signed on to a letter authored by the Media Research Center demanding that networks stop censoring coverage of these events. It is our hope that the media continues coverage of the Gosnell trial in a fair, impartial manner and that stories so obviously important to the national interest are never again pushed to the wayside.

LifeNews Note: Anna Higgins writes for the Family Research Council blog.

Political Cartoons by Chuck Asay

Next Political Cartoon

______________________

Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband. I also respect you for putting your faith in Christ for your eternal life. I am pleading to you on the basis of the Bible to please review your religious views concerning abortion. It was the Bible that caused the abolition movement of the 1800’s and it also was the basis for Martin Luther King’s movement for civil rights and it also is the basis for recognizing the unborn children.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733, lowcostsqueegees@yahoo.com

Related posts:

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 1 0   Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode X – Final Choices 27 min FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 9 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IX – The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence 27 min T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 8 “The Age of Fragmentation” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 8 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VIII – The Age of Fragmentation 27 min I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 7 “The Age of Non-Reason” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 7 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 6 “The Scientific Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 How Should We Then Live? Episode 6 of 12 ________ I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 5 “The Revolutionary Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live? Episode 5: The Revolutionary Age I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 4 “The Reformation” (Schaeffer Sundays)

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IV – The Reformation 27 min I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to […]

“Schaeffer Sundays” Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance”

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance” Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 3) THE RENAISSANCE I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 2 “The Middle Ages” (Schaeffer Sundays)

  Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 2) THE MIDDLE AGES I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 1 “The Roman Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 1) THE ROMAN AGE   Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why […]

By Everette Hatcher III | Posted in Francis Schaeffer | Edit | Comments (0)

“Schaeffer Sunday” The Practical Impossibility of Atheism by William Lane Craig (includes film DEATH BY SOMEONE’S CHOICE)

The Practical Impossibility of Atheism

By William Lane Craig
Guest Contributor

0 Comment(s)

CBN.com – Excerpted with permission from On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision

About the only solution the atheist can offer is that we face the absurdity of life and live bravely. The British philosopher Bertrand Russell, for example, believed that we have no choice but to build our lives upon “the firm foundation of unyielding despair.” Only by recognizing that the world really is a terrible place can we successfully come to terms with life. Camus said that we should honestly recognize life’s absurdity and then live in love for one another.

The fundamental problem with this solution, however, is that it’s impossible to live consistently and happily within the framework of such a worldview. If you live consistently, you will not be happy; if you live happily, it is only because you are not consistent.

Francis Schaeffer has explained this point well. Modern man, says Schaeffer, resides in a two-story universe. In the lower story is the finite world without God; here life is absurd, as we have seen. In the upper story are meaning, value, and purpose. Now modern man lives in the lower story because he believes there is no God. But he cannot live happily in such an absurd world; therefore, he continually makes leaps of faith into the upper story to affirm meaning, value, and purpose, even though he has no right to, since he does not believe in God.

Let’s look again, then, at each of the three areas in which we saw that life was absurd without God, to see how difficult it is to live consistently and happily with an atheistic worldview.

Meaning of Life

First, the area of meaning. We saw that without God, life has no meaning. Yet philosophers continue to live as though life does have meaning. For example, Sartre argued that one may create meaning for his life by freely choosing to follow a certain course of action. Sartre himself chose Marxism.

Now this is totally inconsistent. It is inconsistent to say life is objectively absurd and then to say you may create meaning for your life. If life is really absurd, then you’re trapped in the lower story. To try to create meaning in life represents a leap to the upper story. But Sartre has no basis for this leap. Sartre’s program is actually an exercise in self-delusion. For the universe doesn’t really acquire a meaning just because I happen to give it one. This is easy to see: Suppose I give the universe one meaning, and you give it another. Who’s right? The answer, of course, is neither one. For the universe without God remains objectively meaningless, no matter how we happen to regard it. Sartre is really saying, “Let’s pretend the universe has meaning.” And this is just fooling yourself.

The point is this: If God does not exist, then life is objectively meaningless; but man cannot live consistently and happily knowing that life is meaningless; so in order to be happy he pretends life has meaning. But this is, of course, entirely inconsistent—for without God, man and the universe are without any real significance.

Value of Life

Turn now to the problem of value. Here is where the most blatant inconsistencies occur. First of all, atheistic humanists are totally inconsistent in affirming the traditional values of love and brotherhood. Camus has been rightly criticized for inconsistently holding both to the absurdity of life and the ethics of human love and brotherhood. The view that there are no values is logically incompatible with affirming the values of love and brotherhood. Bertrand Russell, too, was inconsistent. For though he was an atheist, he was an outspoken social critic, denouncing war and restrictions on sexual freedom. Russell admitted that he could not live as though ethical values were simply a matter of personal taste, and that he therefore found his own views “incredible.” “I do not know the solution,” he confessed.6

The point is that if there is no God, then objective right and wrong do not exist. As Dostoyevsky said, “All things are permitted.” But man cannot live this way. So he makes a leap of faith and affirms values anyway. And when he does so, he reveals the inadequacy of a world without God.

The horror of a world devoid of value was brought home to me with new intensity several years ago as I watched a BBC television documentary called The Gathering. It concerned the reunion of survivors of the Holocaust in Jerusalem, where they rediscovered lost friendships and shared their experiences. One former prisoner, a nurse, told of how she was made the gynecologist at Auschwitz. She observed that pregnant women were grouped together by the soldiers under the direction of Dr. Josef Mengele and housed in the same barracks. Some time passed, and she noted that she no longer saw any of these women. She made inquiries. “Where are the pregnant women who were housed in that barracks?” “Haven’t you heard?” came the reply. “Dr. Mengele used them for vivisection.”

Another woman told of how Mengele had bound up her breasts so that she could not suckle her infant. The doctor wanted to learn how long an infant could survive without nourishment. Desperately this poor woman tried to keep her baby alive by giving it pieces of bread soaked in coffee, but to no avail. Each day the baby lost weight, a fact that was eagerly monitored by Dr. Mengele. A nurse then came secretly to this woman and told her, “I have arranged a way for you to get out of here, but you cannot take your baby with you. I have brought a morphine injection that you can give to your child to end its life.” When the woman protested, the nurse was insistent: “Look, your baby is going to die anyway. At least save yourself.” And so this mother felt compelled to take the life of her own baby. Dr. Mengele was furious when he learned of it because he had lost his experimental specimen, and he searched among the dead to find the baby’s discarded corpse so that he could have one last weighing.

My heart was torn by these stories. One rabbi who survived the camp summed it up well when he said that at Auschwitz it was as though there existed a world in which all the Ten Commandments were reversed. Mankind had never seen such a hell.

And yet, if God does not exist, then in a sense, our world is Auschwitz: There is no right and wrong; all things are permitted.

But no atheist, no agnostic, can live consistently with such a view. Nietzsche himself, who proclaimed the necessity of living beyond good and evil, broke with his mentor Richard Wagner precisely over the issue of the composer’s anti-Semitism and strident German nationalism. Similarly, Sartre, writing in the aftermath of the Second World War, condemned anti-Semitism, declaring that a doctrine that leads to mass extermination is not merely an opinion or matter of personal taste of equal value with its opposite. In his important essay “Existentialism Is a Humanism,” Sartre struggles vainly to elude the contradiction between his denial of divinely preestablished values and his urgent desire to affirm the value of human
persons. Like Russell, he could not live with the implications of his own denial of ethical absolutes.

Neither can the so-called New Atheists like Richard Dawkins. For although he says that there is no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference, he is an unabashed moralist. He vigorously condemns such actions as the harassment and abuse of homosexuals, religious indoctrination of children, the Incan practice of human sacrifice, and prizing cultural diversity over the interests of Amish children. He even goes so far as to offer his own amended Ten Commandments for guiding moral behavior, all the while marvelously oblivious to the contradiction with his ethical subjectivism.

Indeed, one will probably never find an atheist who lives consistently with his system. For a universe without moral accountability and devoid of value is unimaginably terrible.

Purpose of Life

Finally, let’s look at the problem of purpose in life. The only way most people who deny purpose in life live happily is either by making up some purpose—which amounts to self-delusion, as we saw with Sartre—or by not carrying their view to its logical conclusions. The temptation to invest one’s own petty plans and projects with objective significance and thereby to find some purpose to one’s life is almost irresistible.

For example, the outspoken atheist and Nobel Prize–winning physicist Steven Weinberg, at the close of his much-acclaimed book The First Three Minutes, writes,

It is almost irresistible for humans to believe that we have some special relation to the universe, that human life is not just a more-or-less farcical outcome of a chain of accidents reaching back to the first three minutes, but that somehow we were built in from the beginning.… It is very hard to realize that this all is just a tiny part of an overwhelmingly hostile universe. It is even harder to realize that this present universe has evolved from an unspeakably unfamiliar early condition, and faces a future extinction of endless cold or intolerable heat. The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it also seems pointless.

But if there is no solace in the fruits of our research, there is at least some consolation in the research itself. Men and women are not content to comfort themselves with tales of gods and giants, or to confine their thoughts to the daily affairs of life; they also build telescopes and satellites and accelerators, and sit at their desks for endless hours working out the meaning of the data they gather. The effort to understand the universe is one of the very few things that lifts human life a little above the level of farce, and gives it some of the grace of tragedy.

There’s something strange about Weinberg’s moving description of the human predicament: Tragedy is not a neutral term. It expresses an evaluation of a situation. Weinberg evidently sees a life devoted to scientific pursuits as truly meaningful, and therefore it’s tragic that such a noble pursuit should be extinguished. But why, given atheism, should the pursuit of science be any different from slouching about doing nothing? Since there is no objective purpose to human life, none of our pursuits has any objective significance, however important and dear they may seem to us subjectively. They’re no more significant than shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic.

_______________

I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the video below. It is very valuable information for Christians to have.  Actually I have included a video below that includes comments from him on this subject.

In the film series “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?” the arguments are presented  against abortion (Episode 1),  infanticide (Episode 2),   euthenasia (Episode 3), and then there is a discussion of the Christian versus Humanist worldview concerning the issue of “the basis for human dignity” in Episode 4 and then in the last episode a close look at the truth claims of the Bible.

Francis Schaeffer Whatever Happened to the Human Race (Episode 1) ABORTION

Francis Schaeffer: What Ever Happened to the Human Race? (Full-Length Documentary)


Part 1 on abortion runs from 00:00 to 39:50, Part 2 on Infanticide runs from 39:50 to 1:21:30, Part 3 on Youth Euthanasia runs from 1:21:30 to 1:45:40, Part 4 on the basis of human dignity runs from 1:45:40 to 2:24:45 and Part 5 on the basis of truth runs from 2:24:45 to 3:00:04

 

Dr. C. Everett Koop pictured above.

__________

Related posts:

Francis Schaeffer’s prayer for us in USA

 Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This book  really helped develop my political views […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 1 0   Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode X – Final Choices 27 min FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 9 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IX – The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence 27 min T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 8 “The Age of Fragmentation” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 8 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VIII – The Age of Fragmentation 27 min I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 7 “The Age of Non-Reason” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 7 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 6 “The Scientific Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 How Should We Then Live? Episode 6 of 12 ________ I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 5 “The Revolutionary Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live? Episode 5: The Revolutionary Age I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 4 “The Reformation” (Schaeffer Sundays)

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IV – The Reformation 27 min I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to […]

“Schaeffer Sundays” Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance”

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance” Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 3) THE RENAISSANCE I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 2 “The Middle Ages” (Schaeffer Sundays)

  Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 2) THE MIDDLE AGES I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 1 “The Roman Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 1) THE ROMAN AGE   Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why […]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 5) TRUTH AND HISTORY

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 5) TRUTH AND HISTORY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis This crucial series is narrated by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Today, choices are being made that undermine human rights at their most basic level. Practices once […]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY

The opening song at the beginning of this episode is very insightful. Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis This crucial series is narrated by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Today, choices […]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 3) DEATH BY SOMEONE’S CHOICE

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 3) DEATH BY SOMEONE’S CHOICE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis This crucial series is narrated by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Today, choices are being made that undermine human rights at their most basic level. Practices […]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” (Episode 2) SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” (Episode 2) SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis This crucial series is narrated by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Today, choices are being made that undermine human rights at their most basic level. Practices […]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE

It is not possible to know where the pro-life evangelicals are coming from unless you look at the work of the person who inspired them the most. That person was Francis Schaeffer.  I do care about economic issues but the pro-life issue is the most important to me. Several years ago Adrian Rogers (past president of […]

The following essay explores the role that Francis Schaeffer played in the rise of the pro-life movement. It examines the place of How Should We Then Live?, Whatever Happened to the Human Race?, and A Christian Manifesto in that process.

This essay below is worth the read. Schaeffer, Francis – “Francis Schaeffer and the Pro-Life Movement” [How Should We Then Live?, Whatever Happened to the Human Race?, A Christian Manifesto] Editor note: <p> </p> [The following essay explores the role that Francis Schaeffer played in the rise of the pro-life movement.  It examines the place of […]

Who was Francis Schaeffer? by Udo Middelmann

Great article on Schaeffer. Who was Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer? By Francis Schaeffer The unique contribution of Dr. Francis Schaeffer on a whole generation was the ability to communicate the truth of historic Biblical Christianity in a way that combined intellectual integrity with practical, loving care. This grew out of his extensive understanding of the Bible […]

“Sanctity of Life Saturday” Abortion debating with Ark Times Bloggers Part 1 “Is abortion a slippery slope to infanticide?”(includes the film DEATH BY SOMEONE’S CHOICE and editorial cartoon)

I have debated with Ark Times Bloggers many times in the past on many different subjects. Abortion is probably the most often debated subject and I have noticed that many pro-life individuals are now surfacing on the Arkansas Times Blog.  Here are some examples. Arhogfan501 asserted: This is the beginning of the end for recreational abortion in Arkansas. Songbird777 noted: Babies have a right to live and not be chopped up for someone else’s convenience. The person using the username “baker” commented: Planned Parenthood (PPA) does not nor cannot provide mammograms, indeed no affiliate has the necessary license. PPA is an abortion provider and at some 900 plus killings a day rather prolific.

Here is another debate I got into recently on the Arkansas Times Blog:

The person using the username “the outlier” on the Arkansas Times Blog on 3-5-13 wrote:

A fetus is not a human being. Abortion is not a slippery slope to infanticide and euthanasia.

I responded:

The outlier said “abortion is not a slippery slope to infanticide” however Justice Harry Blaackmun in his Roe v Wade related the two issues.

Abortion was present even in ancient times. Under Roman rule “[n]ot only [was] … abortion permitted; [but also] infanticide. The shriveled remains of exposed babies could be found in every countryside of the [Roman] Empire…” Supreme Court Justice Harry Blackmun referred to this culture in Roe v. Wade: “Greek and Roman law afforded little protection to the unborn … Ancient religion did not bar abortion.”

I truly believe that many of the problems we have today in the USA are due to the advancement of humanism in the last few decades in our society. Ronald Reagan appointed the evangelical Dr. C. Everett Koop to the position of Surgeon General in his administration. He partnered with Dr. Francis Schaeffer in making the video below. It is very valuable information for Christians to have.  Actually I have included a video below that includes comments from him on this subject.

In the film series “WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE HUMAN RACE?” the arguments are presented  against abortion (Episode 1),  infanticide (Episode 2),   euthenasia (Episode 3), and then there is a discussion of the Christian versus Humanist worldview concerning the issue of “the basis for human dignity” in Episode 4 and then in the last episode a close look at the truth claims of the Bible.

___________

From the website www.jeremiahproject.com:

The Slippery Slope

Once government begins to define life and humanity, there is no end to the possibilities for subjective and selective determination as to who will be allowed to live.

At one time, blacks were not recognized as human beings. This was the rationale behind the slave trade that brought black Africans to the United States. They were transported in slave ships that held them confined in the same manner that livestock is confined when shipped to the slaughter houses. In Nazi Germany, only the Aryan race was considered human, and we know the consequences of that thinking. The treatment of Jews and other non-Aryans was similar to that of animals. And the Nazi genetic experiments remain a source for horror stories even today.

Will a society which has assumed the right to kill infants in the womb – because they are unwanted, imperfect, or merely inconvenient – have difficulty in assuming the right to kill other human beings, especially older adults who are judged unwanted, deemed imperfect physically or mentally, or considered a possible social nuisance?

The next candidates for arbitrary reclassification as non-persons are the elderly. This will become increasingly so as the proportion of the old and weak in relation to the young and strong becomes abnormally large, due to the growing antifamily sentiment, the abortion rate, and medicine’s contribution to the lengthening of the normal life span. The imbalance will cause many of the young to perceive the old as a cramping nuisance in the hedonistic lifestyle they claim as their right. As the demand for affluence continues and the economic crunch gets greater, the amount of compassion that the legislature and the courts will have for the old does not seem likely to be significant considering the precedent of the non-protection given to the unborn and newborn. [Francis Schaeffer, Whatever Happened to the Human Race?]

Euthanasia
Joseph Fletcher, the popularizer of “situational ethics,” in his 1973 discussion of death with dignity gives this argument for euthanasia:

It is ridiculous to give ethical approval to the positive ending of sub-human life in utero as we do in therapeutic abortions for reasons of mercy and compassion but refuse to approve of positively ending a sub-human life in extremis. If we are morally obliged to put an end to a pregnancy when an amniocentesis reveals a terrible defective fetus, we are equally obliged to put an end to a patient’s hopeless misery when a brain scan reveals that a patient with cancer has advanced brain metastases. [Joseph Fletcher, “Ethics and Euthanasia,” American Journal of Nursing, 1973.]

One is reminded of the slave holders who devoutly espoused the theory that slavery was really for the good of the black man and that in the end he would be thankful for the opportunity to share in the white man’s culture, even from the distance of the garden shed. The Nazis also argued that their victims were being sacrificed for the high end of the general good of society. Many well-meaning people are attracted to what might seem to be the beneficial aspects of some sort of euthanasia program, because they think they can be free of the guilt of responsibility.

The “right-to-die” movement is not calling for a right to die, they’re mostly talking about a right to kill. The advocates of euthanasia are asking the government and courts to step aside and allow people who are feeble and elderly to be snuffed out.

Consider the people who were “assisted” in ending their lives by Dr. Jack Kevorkian. He wasn’t killing terminally ill patients – they had Alzheimer’s and were in a lot of pain, but they were alive and walking around. Dr. Kevorkian portrays another basic belief of humanist ideology – the extermination of the old, useless, and the infirm. Kervorkian believes that he has the right to help people out of their pain if they want to die. He claims to render “a medical service,” and his lawyer is clear that “he’s not going to stop … doing the right thing.” Already the suicide doctor has had an impact on our society’s views regarding suicide and euthanasia.

Language is an important tool in convincing others of your position. Euthanasia advocates have been skillful in masking their true intent with slogans like “death with dignity” and “a right to die.” These phrases easily capture people’s attention. Everyone believes in a death with dignity.

Though I’m sure the medical community is well intentioned, it is still a fact that their idea of mercy is increasingly to dehumanize their patients, to disguise the helpless person so that not even their family recognizes them. In time, the family’s love turns to pity, which turns to horror until, to our warped hearts, murder becomes mercy.

But these slogans take on new meaning when they are interpreted by our courts. The right to die may sound wonderful – until we realize that legally it means that you can kill yourself or someone can kill you, even if you don’t want to die. Language is powerful. But when it is interpreted by the courts it becomes much more than mere slogans. It becomes the law of the land, and often that interpretation is not at all what we expected.

  • Daily, senior citizens and accident victims are starved to death because their families have been convinced that even food and water are extraordinary means to preserve their life.
  • Over one-fifth of Medicare expenses are for persons in their last year of life. Thus in fiscal year 1978, $4.9 billion dollars was spent for such persons and if just one-quarter of those expenditures were avoided through adoption of living wills, the savings under Medicare alone would amount to $1.2 billion. [ WASHINGTON POST, June 22, 1977]
  • The drug company, Hoescht AG, has been granted the first patent for a euthanasia drug developed by Michigan State University. The drug is intended for use on animals but the patent is worded to include humans. (Source: UPI)

Critics of the U.S. Supreme Court’ Roe v. Wade decision have long claimed that legalized abortion would lead to legalized euthanasia. Supporters of Roe have often scoffed at the idea, insisting that decisions to eliminate a human fetus in no way devalue the lives of born persons. Yet recent court cases in Michigan and Washington have reversed the debate: Euthanasia supporters are openly citing Roe as precedent for a constitutional right to “rational” suicide. In the case of People v. Kevorkian, a trial judge has relied partly on Roe and the later abortion case, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, to find a consitutional right to assisted suicide. Jack Kevorkian’s attorney, Geoffrey Fieger argues that such a right is even better grounded than a right to abortion, because no unwilling ‘third party’ is involved.

Citing Planned Parenthood vs. Casey, on May 3, 1994, Washington U.S. District Court Judge Barbara Rothstein struck down the Washington state law that banned physician assisted suicide. Judge Rothstein stated that the terminally ill “have the same right to hasten death that they have to choose an abortion…” “Like the abortion decision, the decision of a terminally ill person to end his life involves the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime,” the judge wrote in her decision.

Francis Schaeffer Whatever Happened to the Human Race (Episode 1) ABORTION

Francis Schaeffer: What Ever Happened to the Human Race? (Full-Length Documentary)


Part 1 on abortion runs from 00:00 to 39:50, Part 2 on Infanticide runs from 39:50 to 1:21:30, Part 3 on Youth Euthanasia runs from 1:21:30 to 1:45:40, Part 4 on the basis of human dignity runs from 1:45:40 to 2:24:45 and Part 5 on the basis of truth runs from 2:24:45 to 3:00:04

 

Dr. C. Everett Koop pictured above.

__________

President Obama before appointing a Supreme Court Justice said that he wanted the judge to  be empathic. Pro-life people wanted to know if that judge would care about the smallest in our society? Here is an editorial cartoon that deals with that issue.

Related posts:

Francis Schaeffer’s prayer for us in USA

 Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis The 45 minute video above is from the film series created from Francis Schaeffer’s book “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” with Dr. C. Everett Koop. This book  really helped develop my political views […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 10 “Final Choices” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 1 0   Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode X – Final Choices 27 min FINAL CHOICES I. Authoritarianism the Only Humanistic Social Option One man or an elite giving authoritative arbitrary absolutes. A. Society is sole absolute in absence of other absolutes. B. But society has to be […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 9 “The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 9 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IX – The Age of Personal Peace and Affluence 27 min T h e Age of Personal Peace and Afflunce I. By the Early 1960s People Were Bombarded From Every Side by Modern Man’s Humanistic Thought II. Modern Form of Humanistic Thought Leads […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 8 “The Age of Fragmentation” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 8 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VIII – The Age of Fragmentation 27 min I saw this film series in 1979 and it had a major impact on me. T h e Age of FRAGMENTATION I. Art As a Vehicle Of Modern Thought A. Impressionism (Monet, Renoir, Pissarro, Sisley, […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 7 “The Age of Non-Reason” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 7 Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode VII – The Age of Non Reason I am thrilled to get this film series with you. I saw it first in 1979 and it had such a big impact on me. Today’s episode is where we see modern humanist man act […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 6 “The Scientific Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 6 How Should We Then Live 6#1 Uploaded by NoMirrorHDDHrorriMoN on Oct 3, 2011 How Should We Then Live? Episode 6 of 12 ________ I am sharing with you a film series that I saw in 1979. In this film Francis Schaeffer asserted that was a shift in […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 5 “The Revolutionary Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

E P I S O D E 5 How Should We Then Live? Episode 5: The Revolutionary Age I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Francis Schaeffer noted, “Reformation Did Not Bring Perfection. But gradually on basis of biblical teaching there […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 4 “The Reformation” (Schaeffer Sundays)

Dr. Francis Schaeffer – Episode IV – The Reformation 27 min I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer makes three key points concerning the Reformation: “1. Erasmian Christian humanism rejected by Farel. 2. Bible gives needed answers not only as to […]

“Schaeffer Sundays” Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance”

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 3 “The Renaissance” Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 3) THE RENAISSANCE I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer really shows why we have so […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 2 “The Middle Ages” (Schaeffer Sundays)

  Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 2) THE MIDDLE AGES I was impacted by this film series by Francis Schaeffer back in the 1970′s and I wanted to share it with you. Schaeffer points out that during this time period unfortunately we have the “Church’s deviation from early church’s teaching in regard […]

Francis Schaeffer’s “How should we then live?” Video and outline of episode 1 “The Roman Age” (Schaeffer Sundays)

Francis Schaeffer: “How Should We Then Live?” (Episode 1) THE ROMAN AGE   Today I am starting a series that really had a big impact on my life back in the 1970′s when I first saw it. There are ten parts and today is the first. Francis Schaeffer takes a look at Rome and why […]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 5) TRUTH AND HISTORY

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 5) TRUTH AND HISTORY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis This crucial series is narrated by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Today, choices are being made that undermine human rights at their most basic level. Practices once […]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY

The opening song at the beginning of this episode is very insightful. Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 4) THE BASIS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY Published on Oct 7, 2012 by AdamMetropolis This crucial series is narrated by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Today, choices […]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 3) DEATH BY SOMEONE’S CHOICE

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 3) DEATH BY SOMEONE’S CHOICE Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis This crucial series is narrated by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Today, choices are being made that undermine human rights at their most basic level. Practices […]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” (Episode 2) SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race?” (Episode 2) SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS Published on Oct 6, 2012 by AdamMetropolis This crucial series is narrated by the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer and former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Today, choices are being made that undermine human rights at their most basic level. Practices […]

Francis Schaeffer: “Whatever Happened to the Human Race” (Episode 1) ABORTION OF THE HUMAN RACE

It is not possible to know where the pro-life evangelicals are coming from unless you look at the work of the person who inspired them the most. That person was Francis Schaeffer.  I do care about economic issues but the pro-life issue is the most important to me. Several years ago Adrian Rogers (past president of […]

The following essay explores the role that Francis Schaeffer played in the rise of the pro-life movement. It examines the place of How Should We Then Live?, Whatever Happened to the Human Race?, and A Christian Manifesto in that process.

This essay below is worth the read. Schaeffer, Francis – “Francis Schaeffer and the Pro-Life Movement” [How Should We Then Live?, Whatever Happened to the Human Race?, A Christian Manifesto] Editor note: <p> </p> [The following essay explores the role that Francis Schaeffer played in the rise of the pro-life movement.  It examines the place of […]

Who was Francis Schaeffer? by Udo Middelmann

Great article on Schaeffer. Who was Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer? By Francis Schaeffer The unique contribution of Dr. Francis Schaeffer on a whole generation was the ability to communicate the truth of historic Biblical Christianity in a way that combined intellectual integrity with practical, loving care. This grew out of his extensive understanding of the Bible […]

“WHAT’S SO IMPORTANT ABOUT PRE-MILLENNIALISM?” Walter C. Kaiser, Jr.(3200 words)

_______________

Great article by one of my spiritual heroes!!!

“WHAT’S SO IMPORTANT ABOUT PRE-MILLENNIALISM?”

 Walter C. Kaiser, Jr.

President-Emeritus

Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary

             One of the most common misconceptions in Biblical interpretation today is that “the thousand years” (hence: the “millennium”), of which John speaks in Revelation 20:1-7, are mentioned nowhere else in the Scripture.  And since it is generally agreed that no major doctrine should be based on any one single passage of the Bible, it is no wonder then that all too many have concluded that pre-millennialism likewise should not be among any of our major doctrinal creeds.

However, a more careful study of God’s Word dissipates this conclusion.  The truth is that the “thousand years,” along with parallel expressions, are found in both testaments and constitutes one of the high points in Biblical prophecy.  Before we look at some of these key texts, it is important to note that the Kingdom of God in heaven and on earth is one of the grand themes of the whole Bible.  A quick review of that Kingdom (in its inception, progress, conduct, and consummation) should set the stage for our considering the key teaching passages in a pre-millennial doctrine.

The Kingdom of God

The Two Advents: The Kingdom of God has two advents, two ages, two resurrections, and two end points.  Few, except some of Jesus’ own kin-folks, deny that the first advent has already occurred.  In a Television debate I had with Rabbi Pincas Lapide on the John Ankerberg Television show a good number of years ago, he observed that the difference between his Jewish viewpoint and my evangelical one was that I, as an evangelical, believed in two comings of the Messiah and he, as a believer in the Tenak (= the Old Testament), only adopted one: a coming of the Messiah in a time of world peace.  I replied, “But Dr. Lapide, Zechariah 12: 10 says `They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child… a firstborn son.’  I asked, `Who is the one speaking in this text that they will look on?’  He replied: `The Almighty!’  Then I asked, `How did he get pierced, then?’  ‘I do not know he said.’  My retort was, `I have an idea how: it was at Calvary in his first coming.’  Later the Messiah will come in a second advent in a time of final peace as this same chapter in Zechariah points out.”  Yes, there are two advents advocated in the Biblical text of both the Old and the New Testaments.

The Two Ages: But besides the two advents of Messiah, there are also two ages: in Hebrew- “`Olam Hazzeh,” “This age,” and “`Olam Habba, “The age to come.”  The New Testament Greek employs these same two divisions of time some thirty times: “Aion ho houtos, “This age,” and “Aion ho mellon,” “The age to come.”  The “Age to come” overlaps “this Age” with the work of Christ in casting out demons, and especially in his resurrection from the dead.  While the “age to come” is still only in its incipient form, for the second advent will come in the future in its full realization.

The Two Resurrections of I Corinthians 15: 22 – 24

Even more significantly, there are two resurrections, not just one.  Revelation 20: 5 speaks of “the first resurrection,” which all too many seek to reduce in meaning by spiritualizing, allegorizing, or idealizing it in place of a literal resurrection.  But what John calls “the first resurrection,” the apostle Paul refers to “those who are Christ’s at his coming” in 1 Corinthians 15: 23.  In fact, the Apostle Paul has given us just as strong a text for pre-millennialism as has the Apostle John in the Apocalypse.

I Corinthians 15: 22 begins that just as “…in Adam all die, [for which the cemetery is our main, but all convincing, evidence], so in Christ all will be made alive.”  This affirms that every mortal, regardless of race, gender, religion, or the absence of any religious affiliation, will be resurrected in the final day.  Instead of proving universalism, as Karl Barth taught from this passage (i.e., that every one will eventually be saved), the Greek text, which had no punctuation in the original text, follows immediately after observing that “all will be made alive,” with the qualification, “but each in his own turn.” The Greek word for “turn” is a military term (Tagmati), meaning “rank,” “squad,” or “platoon.” So all are resurrectible, i.e., they can “be made alive,” but only in distinct squads, platoons, or divisions.  This text lists three such squads: (1) [vs 23] “Christ, the firstfruits,” [at the first Easter morning] (2) “then, when he comes for those who belong to him,” and (3) [vs 24] “Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power” (emphasis mine).  The most important matter to note is that Christ’s resurrection sets the pattern for the two resurrections that are to follow in the plan of the Kingdom of God. It is also important to note that there is a temporal space of time between the resurrections as indicated by the word “then,” which in Koine and Classical Greek is represented by the words that always go together: epeita …. eita, (“then …. Then).”  These two are routinely found together in Greek to represent a time period between them as in the Gospel record, “First the blade and then the ear and then the full corn [old world wheat and the like] doeth appear.”  Surely this signals the growth of the wheat in its various stages with a time gap between them.  That is exactly what the apostle John was indicating, though he was more specific as to the time period, labeling it as a “thousand years.”

In just the same manner, the Greek Aorist tense of “lived” or “came to life” (in Revelation 20: 40 indicated one definite act, which was called the “First Resurrection” in Revelation 20: 4.  “They lived” can only mean they came to life again and returned to a life like their former life as it also means in Revelation 2:8, and of the beast in Revelation 13:14 and elsewhere (e.g., John 5: 25; Romans 8: 13).  The famous quote of Alford needs to be stated again:

“If in a passage [Rev 20:4] where two resurrections are mentioned, – where certain souls lived, at first, and the `Rest of the dead’ lived only at the end of a specified period, after that first, — the `First Resurrection’ may be understood to mean a spiritual rising with Christ, while the second means a literal rising from the grave, then there is an end of all significance in language, and Scripture is wiped out as a definite testimony to anything. If the `First Resurrection’ is spiritual, then so is the second, – which I suppose none will be hardy enough to maintain.  But if the second is literal, then so is the first, which, in common with the whole primitive church, and many of the best expositors, I do maintain and receive as an article of faith and hope….  I have ventured to speak strongly, because my conviction is strong, founded on the rules of fair and consistent interpretation.  It is a strange sight, in these days, to see expositors, who are among the first, in reverence of antiquity, complacently casting aside the most cogent instance of unanimity which primitive antiquity presents.”

The First Resurrection is just as literal a resurrection in John’s Apocalypse as it is in Paul’s “those who belong to him when he comes” (1 Cor 15:23).  And in both John and Paul, those resurrections are separated by a period of time.

Nor does the fact that John saw only “souls” detract from a literal bodily resurrection, for the souls that had heretofore enjoyed heavenly joy were now to be reunited with their bodies.  Note that John does not say the “souls” “lived and reigned,” but the same “they” who were beheaded, and the “they” who had not received the mark of the beast, were the same ones who “came alive” and were reunited with their bodies and who reigned with Christ for a thousand years.

The Two Ends: There are also two ends along with the two advents, two ages, and two resurrections.  The first end is signaled by the coming of the Son of Man, our Lord Jesus from the clouds of heaven in his second advent. The prophet Daniel brilliantly laid this out in Daniel 7:9 – 14 as did the prophet Ezekiel in his Apocalypse in chapters 37 – 48. Instead of a Valley of Dry Bones, the nation Israel is resurrected again with an implantation of the revitalizing breath of Life in each of the skeletons of bones as the nation is once again placed back in her own land.  This marks the opening of the Age to Come, now in its full view (even though it had been inaugurated in the life and times of Jesus the Messiah), and the thousand year rule and reign of Christ with his saints of both Jewish and Gentile believers.

The second end comes with the Great White Judgment throne in which all the rest of the dead are resurrected to be examined by our Lord to see if their names are in the Lamb’s book of Life.  This does not end the Age to come, for it goes on without cessation into the eternal state and the Messianic Age of Eternity.

The Witness of Isaiah 24: 21-23 to the “Multitude of Days”

            In addition to the two great New Testament passages dealing with the millennium, Isaiah 24:21 – 23 can take the next pride of place.  It too places its prediction in “that day of the Lord” (Isa 24:21), which “Day of the Lord” is mainly an Old Testament term that parallels the contents of the New Testament “Apocalypse of Jesus Christ” (Rev 1:1).  Exhibiting the organic nature of prophecy, a separate name in germ form (an example of an epigenetic growth) is used for what John will later call in Greek Chilia Ete, “a thousand years.”  Isaiah names that same period of time Rov Yamim, “a multitude of days,” or “many days.”

Isaiah speaks of the Day of the Lord when Messiah himself will judge and then restore the kingdom to Israel.  At that time, the Lord will “punish” (or “visit”) the powers in heaven above and the kings of the earth in such a fashion that they will be gathered together as “prisoners” in a “pit” or “dungeon” and “shut up in prison.”  “After many days,” (i.e., equal to John’s “millennium,” but here not specified exactly) they will appear for judgment.  At that same time, “the moon will be confounded and the sun ashamed when the Lord Almighty will reign on MountZion and in Jerusalem and before his elders, gloriously” (Isa. 24: 22-23).  Here, then, is a third major teaching text on the millennium.

This is the time during the thousand years when Satan is cast down to the pit “In that day.”  It is when Michael stands forth to fight for Israel (Dan 12:1; Rev 12:7) and when according to the vision of John “the angel, having the key of the abyss, and a great chain in his hand, laid hold of the dragon, the Old Serpent, which is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, and cast him into the abyss, and shut and sealed him over, that he should deceive the nations no more, until the thousand years should be finished, or almost so, after which he must be loosed for a little season” (Rev 20:1-3).

Note that Isaiah also fixes the duration of the imprisonment of Satan as a “multitude of days,” or “many days.”  Isaiah also says that it is “after” these “many days” that the “powers of heaven” and the kings of earth” will have their final retribution.  This implies their future unchaining and being loosed again.  Thus Isaiah 24:22 involves a resurrection of the wicked at the close of the “many days.”

The Witness of Ezekiel 37 – 48

            In this Ezekielian Apocalpyse of chapters 37 – 48, the “whole house of Israel” is reanimated and revivified in the Valley of Dry Bones (Ezk 37: 5, 11).  There, as one flock under one Shepherd and one nation under one king, the resurrected faithful dead of the nation Israel are resurrected and taken back to their promised land, just as God had promised in Deuteronomy 32:39; Psalm 17:15; 49:14, 15; Hosea 13:14; Isaiah 25:6 – 9; 26:14, 19; Ezekiel 37:12; Daniel 12:1-3.  Their “many days” of peace and blessedness are expanded on in Ezekiel 37:1 – 28, as well as in Isaiah 2:2-5; 11:6 – 9; 24:23; 25:6 – 9; 60:1 – 22; 61:4 – 11; 62:2 – 12; 65:17 – 25; 66:20 23.   This will be the time when Yahweh Shammah, “The LORD is there” (Ezekiel 48:35) living among them.

But again, “after many days,” (Ezekiel 38: 8), Judgment will come on Gog with a punishment and visitation similar to what Isaiah 24:22 and Revelation 20:7 – 10 depict.  The termini of Isaiah 24:22, Ezekiel 38:8 and Revelation 20:7 are identical.  Remarkably, Ezekiel 28:25 – 26 notes that Israel will be secured from attack and the people will live in safety and their security will be undisturbed (also Ezekiel 38:8, 11, 12; Jeremiah 32:36 – 44).

Other Equivalent Expressions in Other Passages

            If time and space would allow, we could add Psalm 102:13 – 22, where Messiah comes with his holy angels with glory to build up Zion.  Then he will judge the world in righteousness and “give dominion in the morning.”  In addition to Psalm 102, is the expression “In His days,” found in Psalm 72:7. This too is a text noted as a great Messianic Psalm.

There is also that group of four bright Messianic Psalms in Psalms 96, 97, 98, and 99, ending in the remarkable Psalm 100.  Here every land in the world is called upon to make a joyful noise unto the Lord as he concludes the work in history he said he would do.

Conclusion

            But notwithstanding all this data (and much more) on the terms for the “Thousand Years,” “Multitude of Days,” “Many Days,” “In His Day,” the case for Pre-millennialism is almost completely missed if one does not focus on the everlasting promise of God made to his people Israel.

Pre-millennialism is defined not merely as the future time in the Rule and Reign of God (the kingdom of God), bounded by the resurrection of all believers on the front end and the resurrection of the unbelieving wicked dead on the opposite end, during which period Satan is bound, but loosed for a brief time at the end of the millennium before he is cast forever into the abyss.  It is more precisely the time when God finishes in space and time what he promised historically to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and David and his line.  It is therefore a whole philosophy of history with implications for the Christ-and-culture-hiatus that must find its resolution in the Lord of all creation and all value and beauty.

Principally the Abrahamic promise (Genesis 12:2 – 3) had three parts: (1) the promise of a Seed, the coming Messiah, (2) the promise of the land as a gift to Israel, but owned by God, and (3) the promise of the “Gospel” in which all the families of the earth would be blessed (Paul equated this aspect of the promise with the “Gospel” in Galatians 3:8).

It is impossible to read, teach, and preach on the prophets of the Old Testament without bumping into the promise of a return of Israel to her land again and again, something like one verse out of every eight verses in the prophets!!!  This is what makes the return of Israel to her land once again in the future the most important and key part of the premillennial doctrine.

Some will attempt to say that Israel forfeited that promise when she disobeyed, but what she forfeited was only the right each of those disobedient persons or generations had to participate in the blessing promised.  Nevertheless, Israel still had to transmit the promise even though some would not enjoy its benefits.  Transmission of the promise is one thing; participation in the blessings of the promise is another thing altogether!

To say that the Church replaces Israel is not only a form of supersessionism, but it is also without exegetical merit as I have argued elsewhere.[1]  Yes, Gentiles are included in the term “People of God” (just as the Jewish people who believe are part of the “People of God”), but the term “Israel” never loses its unique national, geo-political, or ethnic flavor.  This is not because God has favorites or that he is chauvinistic, but rather because God is faithful and true to his word. Once again, note clearly that there is a divine philosophy of history, in which God does complete within space and time what he proposed earlier on in redemptive history.

What is lost, some will ask, if we demote Pre-millennialism to a secondary doctrinal status?  Isn’t it true that the majority of Christians today do not recognize it as taught in the Bible – especially in a reformed or covenantal understanding of the text?  And if they do not recognize this doctrine, isn’t it also true that most think this teaching is reduced to only one teaching passage in the Bible?

But we have shown that it is widely represented in the Biblical text.  Moreover, most will also concede that pre-millennialism was the majority view of the Christian Church in the first three or four Christian centuries.  It was the influence of Origen’s allegorizing tendencies, St Augustine’s change of his mind on this doctrine, and of the collaboration of Eusebius, Bishop of Nicomedia, with Emperor Constantine in their desire to capture the geo-political sides of the discussions of the Kingdom of God that brought the major change into the life of the Church.

But what is affected the most is the doctrine of redemption and God’s promise-plan for the ages.  It becomes a much more difficult matter to teach the Kingdom of God with its two ages, two advents, two resurrections and two ends without these key texts. Moreover, most will need to shy away from teaching the whole counsel of God, especially as it is found in the prophets.  Also, the very warp and woof of salvation, which Paul says in Romans 1:16 instructs us that it is impossible to talk about so great a “salvation” without at the same time noting that this Gospel is the power of God for salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile.  Romans 9–11 then, becomes not a parenthesis or an intercalation that interrupts the main flow of the story of redemption; on the contrary, one cannot talk about the gospel or our salvation without constantly intermingling the Jew/Gentile question.  Like it or not, the Jewish question will be the ragged edge on which many will be tested and found deficient from an truly exegetical standpoint of the clear witness of Scripture.

I urge Christ’s Church to go slowly in its rush to jettison the pre-millennial position, or to avoid teaching about the future return of Israel to the land God promised her.  It can only lead to other problems down the road:  problems with correctly exegeting numerous passages from the prophets about Israel’s future; problems with the nature and extent of the “Gospel,” problems with a view of history; problems with the definition of the Kingdom of God; and problems with being ashamed of the whole redemptive program of God that is for the Jew first and then for the Gentile/Greek.

May our Lord grant us his grace and wisdom to fairly represent the entirety of the “Good News.”

Walter C. Kaiser, Jr.

President Emeritus

Colman M. Mockler Distinguished Professor of Old Testament and Ethics

Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary

9/06

[1] Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., An Assessment of Replacement Theology: The Relationship           Between Israel of the Abrahamic-Davidic Covenant and the Christian Church,” Mishkan, 21(1994): 9-20.

_____________

Open letter to President Obama (Part 534) HUD needs to be eliminated

Open letter to President Obama (Part 534)

(Emailed to White House on 6-10-13.)

President Obama c/o The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I know that you receive 20,000 letters a day and that you actually read 10 of them every day. I really do respect you for trying to get a pulse on what is going on out here.

The federal government debt is growing so much that it is endangering us because if things keep going like they are now we will not have any money left for the national defense because we are so far in debt as a nation. We have been spending so much on our welfare state through food stamps and other programs that I am worrying that many of our citizens are becoming more dependent on government and in many cases they are losing their incentive to work hard because of the welfare trap the government has put in place. Other nations in Europe have gone down this road and we see what mess this has gotten them in. People really are losing their faith in big government and they want more liberty back. It seems to me we have to get back to the founding  principles that made our country great.  We also need to realize that a big government will encourage waste and corruption. The recent scandals in our government have proved my point. In fact, the jokes you made at Ohio State about possibly auditing them are not so funny now that reality shows how the IRS was acting more like a monster out of control. Also raising taxes on the job creators is a very bad idea too. The Laffer Curve clearly demonstrates that when the tax rates are raised many individuals will move their investments to places where they will not get taxed as much.

You want a suggestion on how to cut the government then start at HUD. I would prefer to eliminate all of it. Here are Dan Mitchell’s thoughts below:

As part of my “Question of the Week” series, I had to decide which department of the federal government was most deserving of abolition.

With a target-rich environment of waste, fraud, and abuse in Washington, that wasn’t an easy question to answer. But I decided to pick the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and I had some good reasons for that choice.

Well, thanks to the sequester, we can say that we’ve achieved 1.9 percent of our goal. Here are some blurbs from a Reuters report.

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development on Monday said it plans to shut its doors for a total of seven days between May and September due to budget cuts and will furlough more than 9,000 employees on those days. …The agency will determine the exact shutdown dates at a later time.

The motto of special interests

This is what I call a good start.

You won’t be surprised to learn, though, that the bureaucracy is whining that these tiny cutbacks will have horrible effects.

In cataloging the impact of sequestration to a Senate panel last month, HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan warned lawmakers that the government spending cuts would have harsh consequences for housing programs and could threaten Superstorm Sandy recovery efforts in the U.S. Northeast. “The ripple effects are enormous because of how central housing is to our economy,” Donovan told lawmakers.

Well, I hope that the “cuts” will have “harsh consequences for housing programs.” I’ve read Article I, Section VIII, of the Constitution, and nowhere does it say that housing is a function of the federal government.

And I’ve also explained that disaster relief is not Washington’s responsibility.

Most worthless department in Washington?

Last but not least, I agree that housing is important to our economy. But that’s precisely why I don’t want the federal government involved.

Didn’t we learn from the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac debacle that bad things happen when the federal government tries to subsidize that sector.

Heck, I don’t even want tax preferences for housing.

No wonder I picked the Department of Housing and Urban Development for the background for my video on bloated and wasteful bureaucracy.

___________

Here is a cartoon that illustrates perfectly what I think of this department:

Payne Sequester Cartoon

Very good cartoon.

_____________

Thank you so much for your time. I know how valuable it is. I also appreciate the fine family that you have and your commitment as a father and a husband.

Sincerely,

Everette Hatcher III, 13900 Cottontail Lane, Alexander, AR 72002, ph 501-920-5733, lowcostsqueegees@yahoo.com