The Boundaries of Reality

Chuck Missler

[Português]

The startling discovery of modern science is that our physical universe is actually finite. Scientists now acknowledge that the universe had a beginning. They call the singularity from which it all began the "Big Bang."

While the details among the many variants of these theories remain quite controversial, the fact that there was a definite beginning has gained widespread agreement.1 This is, of course, what the Bible has maintained throughout its 66 books.

From thermodynamic considerations, it also appears that all processes in the universe inevitably contribute the losses from their inefficiencies to the ambient temperature, and thus the universe ultimately will attain a uniform temperature in which no work - all of which ultimately derives from temperature differences - will be able to be accomplished. Scientists call this ultimate physical destiny the "heat death."

Mankind, therefore, finds itself caught in the finite interval between the singularity that began it all and a finite termination. The mathematical concept of infinity - in any spatial direction or in terms of time - seems astonishingly absent in the physical macrocosm, the domain of the astronomers and cosmologists.

In the microcosmic domain, there also appears to be an even more astonishing boundary to smallness. If we take a segment of length, we can divide it in half. We can take one of the remaining halves, and we can divide it in half again. We naturally assume that this can go on forever. We assume that no matter how small a length we end up dealing with, we can always - at least conceptually - divide any remainder in half. It turns out that this is not true. There is a length known as the Planck length, 10-33 centimeters, that is indivisible.

The same thing is true of mass, energy, and even time. There is a unit of time which cannot be subdivided: 10-43 seconds. It is in this strange world of subatomic behavior that scientists have now encountered the very boundaries of physical reality, as we experience it. The study of these subatomic components is called quantum mechanics, or quantum physics.

The startling discovery made by the quantum physicists is that if you break matter into smaller and smaller pieces you eventually reach a point where those pieces - electrons, protons, et al. - no longer possess the traits of objects. Although they can sometimes behave as if they were a compact little particle, physicists have found that they literally possess no dimension.

Another disturbing discovery of the physicists is that a subatomic particle, such as an electron, can manifest itself as either a particle or a wave.

If you shoot an electron at a television screen that has been turned off, a tiny point of light will appear when it strikes the phosphorescent chemicals that coat the glass. The single point of impact which the electron leaves on the screen clearly reveals the particle-like side of its nature.
But that is not the only form the electron can assume. It can also dissolve into a blurry cloud of energy and behave as if it were a wave spread out over space. When an electron manifests itself as a wave, it can do things no particle can. If it is fired at a barrier in which two slits have been cut, it can go through both slits simultaneously. When wavelike electrons collide with each other they even create interference patterns.

It is interesting that in 1906, J. J. Thomson received the Nobel Prize for proving that electrons are particles. In 1937 he saw his son awarded the Nobel Prize for proving that electrons were waves. Both father and son were correct. From then on, the evidence for the wave/particle duality has become overwhelming.

This chameleon-like ability is common to all subatomic particles. Called quanta, they can manifest themselves either as a particle or a wave. What makes them even more astonishing is that there is compelling evidence that the only time quanta ever manifest themselves as particles is when we are looking at them.

The Danish physicist Niels Bohr pointed out that if subatomic particles only come into existence in the presence of an observer, then it is also meaningless to speak of a particle's properties and characteristics as existing before they are observed. But if the act of observation actually helped create such properties, what does that imply about the future of science?

Anyone who isn't shocked by quantum physics has not understood it. Niels Bohr

It gets worse. Some subatomic processes result in the creation of a pair of particles with identical or closely related properties. Quantum physics predicts that attempts to measure complementary characteristics on the pair - even when traveling in opposite directions - would always be frustrated. Such strange behavior would imply that the particles would have to be interconnected in some way so as to be instantaneously in communication with each other.

One physicist who was deeply troubled by Bohr's assertions was Dr. Albert Einstein. Despite the role Einstein had played in the founding of quantum theory, he was not pleased with the course the fledgling science had taken.

In 1935 Einstein and his colleagues Boris Podolsky and Nathan Rosen published their now-famous paper, "Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?"2

The problem, according to Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, is that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. The instantaneous communication implied by the view of quantum physics would be tantamount to breaking the time barrier and would open the door to all kinds of unacceptable paradoxes.

Einstein and his colleagues were convinced that no "reasonable definition" of reality would permit such faster-than-light interconnections to exist, and therefore Bohr had to be wrong. Their argument is now known as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox, or EPR paradox for short.

Bohr remained unperturbed by Einstein's argument. Rather than believing that some kind of faster-than-light communication was taking place, he offered another explanation:

If subatomic particles do not exist until they are observed, then one could no longer think of them as independent "things." Thus Einstein was basing his argument on an error when he viewed twin particles as separate. They were part of an indivisible system, and it was meaningless to think of them otherwise.

In time, most physicists sided with Bohr and became content that his interpretation was correct. One factor that contributed to Bohr's following was that quantum physics had proved so spectacularly successful in predicting phenomena, few physicists were willing to even consider the possibility that it might be faulty in some way. The entire industries of lasers, microelectronics, and computers have emerged on the reliability of the predictions of quantum physics.

The popular Cal Tech physicist Richard Feynman has summed up this paradoxical situation well:

I think it is safe to say that no one understands quantum mechanics... In fact, it is often stated that of all the theories proposed in this century, the silliest is quantum theory. Some say that the only thing that quantum theory has going for it, in fact, is that it is unquestionably correct.
When Einstein and his colleagues first made their proposal, technical reasons prevented any empirical experiments actually being performed. The broader philosophical implications were, ironically, ignored and swept under the carpet.

Hyperspaces

The ancient Hebrew scholar Nachmonides, writing in the 12th century, concluded from his studies of the text of Genesis that the universe has ten dimensions: that four are knowable and six are beyond our knowing.

Particle physicists today have also concluded that we live in ten dimensions. Three spatial dimensions and time are directly discernible and measurable. The remaining six are "curled" in less than the Planck length (10-33 centimeters) and thus are only inferable by indirect means.3
(Some physicists believe that there may be as many as 26 dimensions.4 Ten and twenty-six emerge from the mathematics associated with superstring theory, a current candidate in the pursuit of a theory to totally integrate all known forces in the universe.)

Fracture in Genesis 3?

There is a provocative conjecture that these ten (or more) dimensions were originally integrated, but suffered a fracture as a result of the events summarized in Genesis Chapter 3. The resulting upheaval separated them into the "physical" and "spiritual" worlds.

There appears to be some Scriptural basis for an original close coupling between the spiritual and physical world. The highly venerated Onkelos translation of Genesis 1:31 emphasizes that "...it was a unified order."

The suggestion is that the current physics, including the entropy laws, ("the bondage of decay") were a result of the fall.5

The entropy laws reveal a universe that is "winding down." It had to have been initially "wound up." This windup - the reduction of entropy, or the infusion of order (information) - is described in Genesis 1 in a series of six stages. The terms used in this progressive reduction of entropy (disorder) are, erev and boker, which ultimately led to their being translated "evening" and "morning."

Erev and Boker

Erev is dark, obscure randomness; it is maximum entropy. As darkness envelopes our horizon, we lose the ability to discern order or patterns. The darkness is "without form and void."
From this term we derive the current sememe for "evening," when the encroaching darkness begins to deny us the ability to discern forms,shapes, and identities.

Boker is the advent of light, where things begin to become discernible and visible; order begins to appear.

This relief of obscurity, and the attendant ability to begin to discern forms, shapes, and identities has become associated with dawn or "morning," as the early twilight begins to reveal order and design. Evening and mornings constituted the principal stages of creation. Six "evenings" and "mornings" became the "days" constituting the creation "week." However, what we know about the physical universe is only from observing the universe after the upheavals of Genesis 3.

This article was originally published in the
July 1998 Personal Update NewsJournal.
For a FREE 1-Year Subscription, click here.
________________________________________
**NOTES**
________________________________________

1. For a more complete discussion, see The Creator Beyond Time and Space, by Chuck Missler and Mark Eastman.
2. Albert Einstein, Boris Podolsky, and Nathan Rosen, "Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete?" Physical Review, 47 (1935), p.777.
3. Michio Kaku, Hyperspace, Oxford University Press, New York, 1994.
4. Strangely, 26 is the gematria of the tetragamaton, YHWH.
5. Hebrews 11:3; Romans 8:19-23; Psalm 102:25-27; Proverbs 16:33; Ephesians 1:11; Hebrews 1:2-3; Colossians 1:16,17.

Who Were the Magi?

Chuck Missler

[Português]

Each year, as we approach the holiday season, our preparations for Christmas include revisiting the events surrounding the birth of Our Lord. Bethlehem,1 the shepherds, and the angels are familiar to us all. But not much is generally known about the mysterious "Magi" who came to worship the infant Jesus. The following background may be helpful to stimulate conversations around the fireplace as our thoughts turn to this incredible event from which we measure our very calendar.

Traditions

Most of what we associate with the "Magi" is from early church traditions. Most have assumed there were three of them, since they brought three specific gifts (but the Biblical text doesn't number them). They are called "Magi" from the Latinized form of the Greek word magoi, transliterated from the Persian, for a select sect of priests. (Our word "magic" comes from the same root.)

As the years passed, the traditions became increasingly embellished. By the 3rd century they were viewed as kings. By the 6th century they had names: Bithisarea, Melichior, and Gathaspa. Some even associated them with Shem, Ham and Japheth-the three sons of Noah-and thus with Asia, Africa, and Europe. A 14th century Armenian tradition identifies them as Balthasar, King of Arabia; Melchior, King of Persia; and Gasper, King of India.
(Relics attributed to them emerged in the 4th century and were transferred from Constantinople to Milan in the 5th century, and then to Cologne in 1162 where they remain enshrined.) These are interesting traditions, but what do we really know about them?

The Priesthood of the Medes

The ancient Magi were a hereditary priesthood of the Medes (known today as the Kurds) credited with profound and extraordinary religious knowledge. After some Magi, who had been attached to the Median court, proved to be expert in the interpretation of dreams, Darius the Great established them over the state religion of Persia.2 (Contrary to popular belief, the Magi were not originally followers of Zoroaster.3 That all came later.)

It was in this dual capacity, whereby civil and political counsel was invested with religious authority, that the Magi became the supreme priestly caste of the Persian empire and continued to be prominent during the subsequent Seleucid, Parthian, and Sasanian periods. 4

The Role of Daniel

One of the titles given to Daniel was Rab-mag, the Chief of the Magi.5 His unusual career included being a principal administrator in two world empires-the Babylonian and the subsequent Persian Empire. When Darius appointed him, a Jew, over the previously hereditary Median priesthood, the resulting repercussions led to the plots involving the ordeal of the lion's den.6

Daniel apparently entrusted a Messianic vision (to be announced in due time by a "star") to a secret sect of the Magi for its eventual fulfillment. But first let's review some historical background.

Political Background

Since the days of Daniel, the fortunes of both the Persian and the Jewish nation had been closely intertwined. Both nations had, in their turn, fallen under Seleucid domination in the wake of Alexander's conquests. Subsequently, both had regained their independence: the Jews under Maccabean leadership, and the Persians as the dominating ruling group within the Parthian Empire.

It was at this time that the Magi, in their dual priestly and governmental office, composed the upper house of the Council of the Megistanes (from which we get the term "magistrates"), whose duties included the absolute choice and election of the king of the realm.

It was, therefore, a group of Persian-Parthian "king makers" who entered Jerusalem in the latter days of the reign of Herod. Herod's reaction was understandably one of fear when one considers the background of Roman-Parthian rivalry that prevailed during his lifetime.

Rome on the Rise

Pompey, the first Roman conqueror of Jerusalem in 63 B.C., had attacked the Armenian outpost of Parthia. In 55 B.C. Crassus led Roman legions in sacking Jerusalem and in a subsequent attack on Parthia proper. The Romans were decisively defeated at the battle of Carrhae with the loss of 30,000 troops, including their commander. The Parthians counterattacked with a token invasion of Armenia, Syria, and Palestine.

Nominal Roman rule was reestablished under Antipater, the father of Herod, who, in his turn, retreated before another Parthian invasion in 40 B.C.

Mark Antony reestablished Roman sovereignty in 37 B.C. and, like Crassus before him, also embarked on a similarly ill-fated Parthian expedition. His disastrous retreat was followed by another wave of invading Parthians, which swept all Roman opposition completely out of Palestine (including Herod himself, who fled to Alexandria and then to Rome). With Parthian collaboration, Jewish sovereignty was restored, and Jerusalem was fortified with a Jewish garrison.

Herod, by this time, had secured from Augustus Caesar the title of "King of the Jews." However, it was not for three years, including a five months' siege by Roman troops, that Herod was able to occupy his own capital city! Herod had thus gained the throne of a rebellious buffer state which was situated between two mighty contending empires. At any time his own subjects might conspire in bringing the Parthians to their aid. At the time of the birth of Christ, Herod may have been close to his final illness. Augustus was also aged, and Rome, since the retirement of Tiberius, was without an experienced military commander. Pro-Parthian Armenia was fomenting revolt against Rome (which was successfully accomplished within two years.)

The Tensions in Parthia

The time was ripe for another Parthian invasion of the buffer provinces, except for the fact that Parthia itself was racked by internal dissension. Phraates IV, the unpopular and aging king, had once been deposed and it was not improbable that the Persian Magi were already involved in the political maneuvering requisite to choosing his successor. It was conceivable that the Magi might be taking advantage of the king's lack of popularity to further their own interests with the establishment of a new dynasty, which could have been implemented if a sufficiently strong contender could be found.

At this time it was entirely conceivable that the Messianic prophecies of the Old Testament, culminating in the writings of Daniel, one of their own Magians, was of profound motivating significance. The promise of a divinely imposed world dominion at the hands of a Jewish monarch might be more than acceptable to them. (Their own Persian and Medo-Persian history was studded with Jewish nobles, ministers, and counselors; and in the great Achaemenid days, some of the kings themselves were of Jewish blood.)

The Entourage to Jerusalem

In Jerusalem, the sudden appearance of the Magi, probably traveling in force with all imaginable oriental pomp and accompanied by an adequate cavalry escort to insure their safe penetration of Roman territory, certainly alarmed Herod and the populace of Jerusalem.

It would seem as if these Magi were attempting to perpetrate a border incident which could bring swift reprisal from Parthian armies. Their request of Herod regarding the one who "has been born King of the Jews"7 was a calculated insult to him, a non-Jew 8 who had contrived and bribed his way into that office.

Consulting his scribes, Herod discovered from the prophecies in the Tanach (the Old Testament) that the Promised One, the Messiah, would be born in Bethle-hem.9 Hiding his concern and expressing sincere interest, Herod requested them to keep him informed.
After finding the babe and presenting their prophetic gifts, the Magi "being warned in a dream" (a form of communication most acceptable to them) departed to their own country, ignoring Herod's request. (Within two years Phraataces, the parricide son of Phraates IV, was duly installed by the Magi as the new ruler of Parthia.)

Daniel's Messianic Role

Living six centuries before the birth of Christ, Daniel certainly received an incredible number of Messianic prophecies. In addition to several overviews of all of Gentile world history,10 the Angel Gabriel told him the precise day that Jesus would present Himself as King to Jerusalem.11

It is interesting that Daniel's founding of a secret sect of the Magi also had a role in having these prominent Gentiles present gifts at the birth of the Jewish Messiah.

The Christmas Gifts

The gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh were also prophetic, speaking of our Lord's offices of king, priest, and savior. Gold speaks of His kingship; frankincense was a spice used in the priestly duties; and myrrh was an embalming ointment anticipating His death.

In the Millennium, He will also receive the gifts of gold and frankincense;12 but no myrrh: His death was once and for all.

What gifts are YOU going to give Him this year? Discuss it with Him.

* * *

For a review of other background items, see The Christmas Story: What Really Happened. Also, for a complete study of one of the most captivating and astonishing books of the Bible, see our Expositional Commentary on the Book of Daniel.

This article was originally published in the
November 1999 Personal Update NewsJournal.
For a FREE 1-Year Subscription, click here.
________________________________________
**NOTES**
________________________________________

1. For background on Bethlehem, study the Book of Ruth, our briefing package, The Romance of Redemption, or Chuck's Expositional Commentary on Ruth and Esther.
2. Oneiromancy, not astrology, is their key skill mentioned by Herodotus, I.107, 120; VII.19.
3. Encyclopedia Britannica, 7:691.
4. Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, 4:31-34.
5. Daniel 4:9; 5:11.
6. Daniel Chapter 6.
7. Matthew 2:2.
8. Herod was Idumean (an Edomite), a traditional enemy of Israel.
9. Micah 5:2. (Revealed by Holy Scripture, not astrology.)
10. Daniel 2 and 7. See also, An Empire Reborn?.
11. Daniel 9:24-26. See also, Daniel's 70 Weeks.
12. Isaiah 60:6.

Character of the Cults

Patrick Zukeran

Challenge of the Cults

This church is growing so rapidly, sociologist Rodney Stark predicts that by the year 2080, it will become the most important world religion to emerge since the rise of Islam.1 What church is Dr. Stark describing? It is not a Christian church but the Mormon Church, an organization labeled as a cult. The rise of the Mormon Church represents the growing challenge facing the church, the kingdom of the cults.

What is a cult? The greatest authority on the cults, the late Dr. Walter Martin, described a cult as "A group of people gathered around a specific person's misinterpretation of the Bible."2 Cults are groups that claim to be in harmony with Christianity but deny foundational Christian doctrines such as the Trinity or the unique deity of Jesus Christ.

In Matthew 7:15-17, Jesus gives us a warning about the coming of the cults. He states, "Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them." What Jesus was warning was that cultists will look, act, and sound like Christians. However, that is only in external appearance. One can parade as a true believer for a time, but eventually one's words, actions, and especially one's beliefs--their "fruit"--will give one away as a counterfeit.

The growth of the cults can be attributed to several factors. First, it is a fulfillment of the warning given by Jesus and the apostles. In Matthew 24:23-26, Jesus warns us that as His return draws near, there will be an increase in false prophets who will ensnare many in their false teachings. In 2 Peter 2:1-3, Peter warns us that false teachers will arise from within the church.

The second factor in the growth of the cults is the breakdown of the family. Cults provide the family atmosphere many from broken homes long for; the cult leader often takes the place of a father figure.

Finally, we can attribute the growth of the cults to the failure of the church. As my mentor repeatedly stated, "The cults are the unpaid bills of the church." The cults thrive because Christians are lacking in biblical and theological understanding. Dr. Martin stated, "The rise of the cults is directly proportional to the fluctuating emphasis which the church has placed on the teachings of biblical doctrine to Christian laymen. To be sure, few pastors, teachers, and evangelists defend adequately their beliefs, but most of them -- and most of the average Christian laymen –- are hard put to confront and refute a well-trained cultist of almost any variety."3 If the church engaged in solid and in-depth Bible teaching, the cults would not flourish as they do today.

Doctrinal Character of the Cults

How do you know if a religious group is a cult? Jesus said that you will know false prophets by their fruits. In stating this he was not only speaking of their words and actions but of their doctrinal beliefs as well. Cults deviate from biblical Christianity in several key areas of doctrine.

Cults promote false teaching on the nature of God. The Bible teaches there is one God revealed in three distinct persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The central feature that distinguishes cults from biblical Christianity is the doctrine of the Trinity. All cults have a distorted view of this doctrine. For example, the Jehovah's Witnesses condemn the doctrine of the Trinity, and Mormons teach tritheism, three gods who make up the godhead.

Second, cults teach a false view of Jesus. The Bible teaches that Christ is 100 percent man and 100 percent God. This has been called the hypostatic union. In 2 Corinthians 11:4, Paul warned about false teachers teaching another Jesus. A modern-day example of false teaching is Christian Science which teaches that Jesus was not God but a man who displayed the Christ idea. He neither died for sins, nor was He resurrected.

Third is a false teaching on salvation. All cults have a works-oriented Gospel. The death of Christ is believed to give followers the potential to be saved. So after believing in Christ, one must serve the organization to attain salvation. Salvation is found in the organization and one is never really sure if one has done enough to be worthy of salvation. In the International Church of Christ, for example, disciples are scrutinized by their discipler daily to determine if they performed as worthy disciples. Failure to meet the standards may result in discipline. Disciples can never be certain they have done enough for salvation.

Fourth, there is extra-biblical revelation and the denial of the sole authority of the Bible. Cults claim that extra revelation is given to the leader whose words are seen as inspired by God and equal to the Bible. If there is a conflict between the Bible and the leader's words, the latter takes precedence. So in reality, the leader's writings take precedence over the Bible. When interacting with cultists, I often hear them claim their teachings are consistent with the Bible. However, when I point out where their teachings deviate from the Bible, they eventually claim the Bible to be in error. In most cases, cultists claim the Bible has somehow been corrupted by the church.

Sociological Structure of the Cults

Not only do cults deviate doctrinally from biblical Christianity, they have distinctive sociological characteristics. The first is authoritarianism. The leader or organization exercises complete control over a follower's life. The words of the leadership are ultimate and often considered divinely inspired. Going against the leadership is equivalent to going against the commands of God.

The second characteristic is an elitist mentality. Most cults believe they are the true church and the only ones who will be saved. This is because the group believes they have new revelation or understanding that gives them superior standing.

Third is isolationism. Due to their elitist mentality, cultists believe those who do not agree with them are deceived or under the influence of Satan. Therefore, many feel their members must be protected from the outside world, and physical or psychological barriers are created. Members are prohibited from communicating with those outside the organization who do not agree with the teachings of the group.

Fourth, there is closed-mindedness and the discouragement of individual thinking. Because of its authoritarian nature, leaders are the only ones thought to be able to properly interpret the Bible. All members are to turn to the organization for biblical interpretation and advice on life decisions. Therefore, individual thinking and questioning is discouraged. There is an unwillingness to dialogue and consider other viewpoints.

Fifth is a legalistic lifestyle. As mentioned earlier, salvation is not based on grace; cults teach a works-oriented gospel. This leads to a lifestyle of legalism. Followers must live up to the group's standards in order to attain or maintain their membership and hope for eternal life. Followers are required to faithfully serve, and attend meetings, studies, and services. As a result, there is tremendous pressure to live up to the requirements of the organization.

Finally there is a difficult exit process. Since salvation is found in the organization, leaving the organization is considered by many to be leaving God. All former members who leave cults are shunned by members which often includes members of their own family. Many are warned that if they leave, they will be condemned to hell, or seduced by Satan. Many ex-members are harassed by the organization even after they leave. Exiting members often end up distrusting any religious organization and end up feeling isolated and alone.

Life in the cults is marked by fear of judgment, pressure, and legalism. This is a far cry from what we are taught in the Bible. Jesus and the apostles taught that the new life in Christ is one of grace, love, and freedom from the law. In Matthew 11:28, Jesus said, "Come to me all who are weary and heavy laden and I will give you rest." The peace and rest promised by Christ is seldom experienced by those in the cults.

Cultic Methodology

When you receive a knock on your door in the mornings, who do you assume it to be? A salesman? A Girl Scout selling cookies? For many of us, we assume it to be a Jehovah's Witness or a Mormon missionary looking to tell us about his or her organization. One of the reasons cults have grown is their methodology.

The methods cults use to win converts are moral deception, aggressive proselytizing, and Scripture twisting. By moral deception I mean cults use Christian terminology to win converts. For example, New Agers use the term born again to support reincarnation. Mormons use terms like the Trinity and salvation by grace but these terms have different meanings than what the Bible teaches. Therefore, many untrained Christians are deceived into believing these groups are actually Christian.

Aggressive proselytizing is another method of the cults. Although many Christian groups use aggressive evangelism, they do so out of a love for God and a desire to see others come to know Christ. Many cultists proselytize for much the same reasons but added to this is the desire to win God's approval. They work for grace rather than from grace. The cults require their members to evangelize. Many groups hold their members accountable for the number of hours they spend witnessing for the organization. Many members feel guilty if a day or so goes by without them proselytizing.

Scripture twisting is another method of the cults. Cultist quote verses in the Bible that support their position, but skip over the verses that do not. Often, there is gross misinterpretation of Scripture so that contradictory verses will better fall in line with their views.

For example, Jehovah's Witness and Mormons try to use verses to show Jesus is a created being. However, their position is easily shown to be incorrect when you explain the context and correct meaning of the terms. Also, when you show additional verses that contradict their position, they are often surprised and realize they have never seen those verse before or that the organization's explanations of those verses are unable to be supported.

To successfully engage in conversation and effectively witness to those in the cults, Christians must be prepared in the following ways. First Peter 3:15 states that we must always be "prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect." We must be prepared by knowing the word of God through diligent study of it. Second, we must be prepared to overcome our fears and lovingly reach out to cult members, exercising the fruits of patience and gentleness as we share the truth.

Danger of the Cults

The rise of the cults pose a serious challenge to the church because they present several dangers to the church and families involved. First, there is a spiritual danger. First Timothy 4:1 states "...that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons." Ultimately the spirit behind all lies and deception is the devil, so the ultimate force behind the cults is the evil one.

Galatians 1:8 states, "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other that than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned." The false gospel of the cults cannot lead anyone to salvation. There are eternal consequences for false beliefs. For this reason Jesus and the apostles are very harsh on false teachers.

There is also a psychological danger. The mind controlling techniques used by the organizations can cause immense damage mentally and emotionally. Living under the pressure, guilt, and dependence on the organization has proven to have tremendous negative effects on individuals.

Third, there is domestic danger. Individuals are taught that loyalty to the organization is equivalent to allegiance with God. Therefore, loyalty to the organization supercedes loyalty to family. Thus, if a family member begins conducting himself in a way the organization does not approve of, the cult will often separate the family from the individual member. Isolation can be emotional or physical. Numerous families have been separated as a result.

In some cases there is a physical danger. The teachings of David Koresh cost the Branch Davidians their lives. Hobart Freeman taught that believers did not need medicine for illnesses, and told his followers to throw all theirs away. As a result, he and fifty-two of his members died from curable conditions.

In light of this threat, what are Christians called to do? First, we are called to study and know the Word of God. Paul writes to Timothy and all saints saying, "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the world of truth." Christians should master the Bible so that they will not be deceived by any false teaching. Second, Titus commands us to be able to confront and refute false teachers. Finally, in Acts 20, Paul exhorts the leaders of the church to protect their flock from the false teachers that will prey upon the sheep. Every Christian is called to know the truth so well they can confront false teaching, and protect their church and family from it.

Notes

1. Richard Ostling, Mormon America (San Francisco, Calif.: Harper Collins Publishing Inc. 1999), p. XVI.
2. Walter Martin & Hank Hannegraph, The Kingdom of the Cults (Minneapolis, Mich.: Bethany House Publishers, 1997), p. 17.
3. Norman Geisler, When Cultists Ask (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 1997), p. 15.

Bibliography

Cults

1. Ankerberg, John and Weldon, John. Cult Watch. Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House Publishers, 1991.
2. Boa, Ken. Cults, World Religions, and the Occult. Wheaton, lll.: Victor Books, 1990.
3. Martin, Walter & Hank Hannegraph. Kingdom of the Cults. Minneapolis, Minn.: Bethany House Publishers, 1997.
4. Geisler, Norman and Rhodes, Ron. When Cultists Ask. Grand Rapids, Mich: Baker Books, 1997.
5. Rhodes, Ron. Challenge of the Cults. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan Publishing, 2001.

Mormonism

1. Ankerberg, John, and Weldon, John. Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Mormonism. Eugene, Ore: Harvest House Publishers, 1992.
2. Blomberg, Craig and Robinson, Stephen. How Wide the Divide? Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1997.
3. Oslting, Richard & Joan. Mormon America. San Francisco, Cal.: Harper Collins Publishers, 1999.

Jehovah's Witnesses

1. Bowman, Robert. Jehovah's Witnesses, Jesus Christ, and the Gospel of John. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 1989.
2. _______. Why You Should Believe in the Trinity. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 1989.
3. Rhodes, Ron. Reasoning From the Scriptures with the Jehovah's Witnesses. Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House Publishers, 1993.

________________________________________
©2003 Probe Ministries.
________________________________________

About the Author

Patrick Zukeran is an associate speaker for Probe Ministries. He has a BA in Religion from Point Loma Nazarene University and a Master of Theology from Dallas Theological Seminary, and is a doctoral student at Southern Evangelical Seminary. He is an author, radio talk show host, and a national and international speaker on apologetics, cults, world religions, Bible, theology, and current issues. His radio talk show "Evidence and Answers" airs weekly on KWORD 100.7FM in Dallas, Texas. Before joining Probe, Pat served for twelve years as an Associate Pastor. He can be reached at pzukeran@probe.org.

What is Probe?

Probe Ministries is a non-profit ministry whose mission is to assist the church in renewing the minds of believers with a Christian worldview and to equip the church to engage the world for Christ. Probe fulfills this mission through our Mind Games conferences for youth and adults, our 3 1/2 minute daily radio program, and our extensive Web site at www.probe.org.

Further information about Probe's materials and ministry may be obtained by contacting us at:
Probe Ministries
1900 Firman Drive, Suite 100
Richardson, TX 75081
(972) 480-0240 FAX (972) 644-9664
info@probe.org

www.probe.org

Actions Speak Louder Than Words

Chuck Missler

Originally published in September 19th, 2006.

[Portuguese]

(why are so many against the visit of the Pope Benedict XVI to Turkey? Find out here).

Pope Benedict XVI has received heavy criticism for quoting a 14th century Byzantine emperor's remarks on Islam. In a speech to an academic audience in Germany, the Pope spoke about spreading faith through reason, rather than through violence. During the speech, he quoted Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Palaeologus, saying, "Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."

The Pope also quoted the emperor's argument that, "Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats... To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death."

The Pope's comments roused great resentment in the Islamic world. Most Muslims expressed their anger without resorting to violence. However Muslim protesters in Iraq and Kashmir burned the Pope in effigy, as many as 1,000 Muslims rallied to protest in Indonesia, and Al-Qaeda militants in Iraq vowed war on "worshippers of the cross." Following the Pope's comments 2,000 Palestinians protested in Gaza City, accusing the Pope of leading a new Crusade against the Muslim world. The following day five churches were attacked in the Palestinian territories, according to an Associated Press report:

"Firebombings left black scorch marks on the walls and windows of Nablus Anglican and Greek Orthodox churches. At least five firebombs hit the Anglican church and its door was later set ablaze. Smoke billowed from the church as firefighters put out the flames. In a phone call to The Associated Press, a group claimed responsibility for those attacks, saying they were carried out to protest the Pope's remarks in a speech this week in Germany linking Islam and violence."

Muslim leaders worldwide have demanded that the Pope make amends, and he has since apologized publicly for his comments.

The Root of the Problem

Over the past few days many commentators have weighed in on the controversy. Some say the Pope's apology was inadequate. Others say his comments were taken out of context. However very few people seem to have stopped to ask the obvious question: is it true? Does the Koran advocate the use of violence as a means of spreading the Islamic faith?

Most Americans - and even most Christians - have no real awareness of the nature of Islam: its origin, its agenda, and its methods. There are, of course, "moderate" Muslims throughout the world that are peace-loving and do not share the views of "extremists" and "fundamentalists." But we also need to recognize that the root teachings of the Koran are anything but peace-loving:

"Fight and slay the pagans (infidels) wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war." - Sura 9:5

"Prophet, make war on unbelievers and hypocrites, and deal rigorously with them." - Sura 9:73

"Let not the unbelievers think they will ever get away. They have not the power to do so. Muster against them all the men and cavalry at your command, so that you may strike terror into the enemy of God and your enemy... Prophet, (Muhammed) rouse the faithful to arms! If they (the non-Muslims) incline to peace (accept Islam) make peace with them." - Sura 8:59

"If they reject your judgement, know that it is Allah's wish to scourge them for their sins." - Sura 5:49

"Believers (Muslims), take neither Jews nor Christians to be your friends: they are friends with one another. Whoever of you seeks their friendship shall become one of their number, and God does not guide (those Jewish and Christian) wrong-doers." - Sura 5:51

Don't let yourself be blinded by misleading propaganda and politically-correct generalities. The cause of Islamic terrorism is not the quest for social justice. It is not freedom for a specific group of subjugated people. The goal of Islamic terrorism - ultimately - is to bring the whole world into subjection to their version of fundamentalist Islam. No amount of appeasement will stop them. They do not want peace unless it comes on their terms.

K-House

The Speed of Light Exceeded

Chuck Missler

[Português]

Some scientists now claim they have broken the ultimate speed barrier: the speed of light.1

Particle physicists at the NEC Research Institute at Princeton apparently have indicated that light pulses can be accelerated to up to 300 times their normal velocity of 186,282 miles per second.

In work carried out by Dr. Lijun Wang, a pulse of light was transmitted towards a chamber filled with specially treated cesium gas. Before the pulse had fully entered the chamber, it had gone right through it and traveled an additional 60 feet across the laboratory. In effect it appeared to exist in two places at once, a phenomenon that Dr. Wang explains by saying it traveled 300 times faster than the normal velocity of light.

(Exact details of the findings remain confidential because they have been submitted to the international scientific journal, Nature, for review prior to possible publication.)
The implications would appear to be staggering. It could shatter Einstein's Theory of Relativity, since it depends in part on the speed of light being a constant and unbreachable. Needless to say, this research is destined to cause continuing controversy among physicists. (Barry Setterfield's controversial suggestions that the speed of light is not a constant have been highlighted in our Personal Update journal for many years.)

One interpretation of the Princeton experiment suggests that light arrived at its destination almost before it has started its journey: In effect, it appeared to be leaping forward in time. One of the possibilities is that if light could travel forward in time, it could carry information. This would breach one of the basic principles in physics-causality, which says that a cause must come before an effect.

In Italy, another group of physicists has also succeeded in breaking the light speed barrier. In a recently published paper, physicists at the Italian National Research Council described how they propagated microwaves at 25% above normal light speed. The group also speculates that it could prove possible to transmit information faster than light.

Dr. Guenter Nimtz, of Cologne University, recently gave a paper to a conference in Edinburgh describing how information can be sent faster than light. He believes, however, that this will not breach the principle of causality because the time taken to interpret the signal would fritter away all the savings. "The most likely application for this is not in time travel but in speeding up the way signals move through computer circuits," he said.

Dr. Raymond Chiao, professor of physics at the University of California at Berkeley, who is familiar with Wang's work, said he was impressed by the findings. Separate experiments carried out by Chiao indicate simultaneous multiple localities. He has shown that in certain circumstances photons-the particles which constitute light-could apparently jump between two points separated by a barrier in what appears to be zero time. The process, known as "tunneling," has been used to make some of the most sensitive electron microscopes.

The implications of Wang's experiments will, of course, arouse fierce debate. Many will question whether his work can be interpreted as proving that light can exceed its normal speed-suggesting that another mechanism may be at work.

Wang emphasizes that his experiments are relevant only to light and may not apply to other physical entities. But some scientists are beginning to accept that man may eventually exploit some of these characteristics for interstellar space travel.

The Nature of Reality

Wang's experiment is the latest and among the potentially most important evidences that the physical world may not operate according to the presently accepted conventions. In the new world that modern science is beginning to perceive, subatomic particles can apparently exist in two places at the same time-making no distinction between space and time.

The problem, according to Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, is that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. Any instantaneous communication implied by the view of quantum physics would be tantamount to breaking the time barrier and would open the door to all kinds of unacceptable paradoxes.

Einstein and his colleagues were convinced that no "reasonable definition" of reality would permit such faster-than-light interconnections to exist. (Their argument is now known as the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox, or EPR paradox for short.)

Rather than believing that some kind of faster-than-light communication was taking place, Niels Bohr offered another explanation: If subatomic particles do not exist until they are observed, then one could no longer think of them as independent "things."

Thus, Einstein was basing his argument on an error when he viewed twin particles as separate. They were part of an indivisible system, and it was meaningless to think of them otherwise. In time, most physicists sided with Bohr and became content that his interpretation was correct.

The Cosmos as a Hyper- Hologram?

There seems to be evidence accumulating to suggest that our world and everything in it are only ghostly images, projections from a higher level of reality so beyond our own that the real reality is literally beyond both space and time. The main architect of this astonishing idea includes one of the world's most eminent thinkers: University of London physicist David Bohm, a protégé of Einstein's and one of the world's most respected quantum physicists.

Bohm's work in plasma physics in the 1950s was considered a landmark. Earlier at the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, he noticed that in plasmas (gases composed of high density electrons and positive ions) the particles stopped behaving like individuals and started behaving as if they were part of a larger and interconnected whole. Moving to Princeton University in 1947, there too he continued his work in the behavior of oceans of particles, noting their highly organized overall effects and their behaving as if they knew what each of the untold trillions of individual particles were doing.

Bohm's sense of the importance of interconnectedness, as well as years of dissatisfaction with the inability of standard theories to explain all of the phenomena encountered in quantum physics, left him searching. While at Princeton, Bohm and Einstein developed a supportive relationship and shared their mutual restlessness regarding the strange implications of current quantum theory.

One of the implications of Bohm's view has to do with the nature of location. Bohm's interpretation of quantum physics indicated that at the sub-quantum level location ceased to exist. All points in space become equal to all other points in space, and it was meaningless to speak of anything as being separate from anything else. Physicists call this property "non-locality."

The Bell Inequality

Bohm's ideas left most physicists unpersuaded, but they did stir the interest of a few. One of these was John Stewart Bell, a theoretical physicist at CERN, the center for atomic research at Geneva, Switzerland. Like Bohm, Bell had become discontented with the quantum theory and felt there had to be some alternative.

When Bell encountered Bohm's ideas, he wondered if there was some way of experimentally verifying non-locality. Freed up by a sabbatical in 1964, he developed an elegant mathematical approach which revealed how such a two-particle experiment could be performed - the now famed Bell Inequality.

The only problem was that it required a level of technological precision that was not yet available. To be certain that particles - such as those in the EPR paradox - were not using some normal means of communication, the basic operations of the experiment had to be performed in such an infinitesimally brief instant that there wouldn't be enough time for a ray of light to transit the distance separating the two particles. Light travels at about a foot in a nanosecond (thousand-millionth of a second). This meant that the instruments used in the experiment had to perform all the necessary operations within a few nanoseconds.

As technology improved it was finally possible to actually perform the two-particle experiment outlined by Bell. In 1982, a landmark experiment performed by a research team led by physicist Alain Aspect, Jean Dalibard, and Gérard Roger at the Institute of Theoretical and Applied Optics, in Paris, succeeded.

They produced a series of twin photons by heating calcium atoms with lasers, allowed each photon to travel in opposite directions through 6.5 meters of pipe and pass through special filters that directed them toward one of two possible polarization analyzers.
It took each filter 10 nanoseconds to switch between one analyzer or the other, about 30 nanoseconds less than it took light to travel the entire 13 meters separating each set of photons. In this way Aspect and his colleagues were able to rule out any possibility of the photons communicating by any known physical process.

The experiment was a success. Just as quantum theory predicted, each photon was still able to correlate its angle of polarization with that of its twin. This meant that either Einstein's ban against faster-than-light communications was being violated, or the two photons were non-locally connected.

This experiment demonstrated that the web of subatomic particles which comprise our physical universe-the very fabric of "reality" itself-may possess what appears to be a "holographic" property.2

Is Reality Only Virtual?

One of Bohm's most startling suggestions is that the tangible reality of our everyday lives is really a kind of illusion, like a holographic image.

Underlying it is a deeper order of existence, a vast and more primary level of reality that gives birth to all the objects and appearances of our physical world in much the same way that a piece of holographic film gives birth to a hologram. Bohm calls this deeper level of reality the implicate ("enfolded") order and he refers to our level of existence the explicate (unfolded) order.3

Many physicists remain skeptical of Bohm's ideas, but among those who are sympathetic, however, are Roger Penrose of Oxford, the creator of the modern theory of black holes; Bernard d'Espagnat of the University of Paris, one of the leading authorities on the conceptual foundations of quantum theory, and Cambridge's Brian Josephson, winner of the 1973 Nobel Prize in physics. Josephson believes that Bohm's implicate order may someday even lead to the inclusion of God within the framework of science, a view which Josephson supports.4

The holographic paradigm is still a developing concept and riddled with controversies. For decades science has chosen to ignore evidences that do not fit the standard theories. However, the volume of evidence has now reached the point that denial is no longer a viable option.
(The recent entertaining movie, The Thirteenth Floor, explores a "simulation within a simulation," with a plot involving virtual people inhabiting a virtual world with the participants transferring between levels.)

These notions are not very distant from the Biblical presentation of the physical world as being subordinate to the superior reality of the spiritual world.5

The Bible, incidentally, is also unique among all religious books in that it also presents a universe of more than three dimensions, 6 reveals a Creator that is transcendent over His creation,7 and who entered time and space to create the ultimate paradox by fulfilling our future!

* * *

This article was originally published in the
July 2000 Personal Update NewsJournal.
For a FREE 1-Year Subscription, click here.
________________________________________
**NOTES**
________________________________________

1. Jonathan Leake, "Eureka! Scientists Break The Speed of Light," Science Editor, Sunday Times, June 4, 2000. Internet: http://www.sunday-times.co.uk
2. It may come as a surprise to learn that the first direct technological implementation of these strange principles of quantum mechanics is in cryptology: British researchers have constructed a device for quantum key encryption and decryption. The device allows a key to be secretly distributed in such a way that should the key become known to an unintended listener, both the transmitter of the key and all designated recipients of it will instantaneously know it. (Paul D. Townsend, "Quantum Cryptography on Multi-user Optical Fibre Networks," Nature, No. 385, 1997, pp.47-49; Richard J. Hughes, "Quantum Security is Spookily Certain," Ibid. See also Cosmic Codes .)
3. This is reminiscent of the Red King's dream in Through the Looking Glass, in which Alice finds herself in deep metaphysical waters when the Tweedle brothers defend the view that all material objects, including ourselves, are only "sorts of things" in the mind of God.
4. The Reach of the Mind: Nobel Prize Conversations, Saybrook Publishing Co., Dallas TX, 1985, p.91.
5. 2 Corinthians 4:18.
6. Ephesians 3:18.
7. Eastman & Missler, The Creator Beyond Time and Space, The Word for Today, Costa Mesa CA, 1996.

Lebanon's Political Unrest

Chuck Missler,
from the November 21, 2006 eNews issue

[Português]

On Tuesday, Pierre Gemayel, an influential member of the Lebanese government, was gunned down in the capital city of Beirut. Gemayel was a Christian who was opposed to Syria's involvement in Lebanese politics. Gemayel's assassination has received prompt condemnation from the international community, and it has further complicated an already tense situation. In the past two years at least five other prominent Lebanese figures have been assassinated, all of which were outspoken critics of Syria.

If Syria is responsible for Gemayel's death, then clearly it hasn't learned from past mistakes. In February of last year another prominent critic of Syria was assassinated. Rafik Hariri, an influential leader and former Prime Minister of Lebanon, was killed in a massive explosion which took the lives of 21 people. It is widely believed that Syria is directly responsible for the bombing, however their plan backfired. Instead of silencing an influential critic, Syria made Hariri a martyr and brought international attention to the situation in Lebanon. Under immense pressure from the international community, Syria was forced to withdraw its troops from Lebanon, putting an end to its 30 year military presence in the war-torn nation.

It has yet to be seen what effect Pierre Gemayel's death will have on Lebanese politics, however his supporters have already begun to rally against Hezbollah and its pro-Syrian allies. Meanwhile, there is mounting evidence to suggest that Syria, Iran, and Hezbollah may attempt to topple the fragile Lebanese government. In recent weeks, Hezbollah has been consolidating its power in Lebanon, even going so far as to demand more seats in the parliament. Hezbollah's leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah has said that the current Lebanese government would "go" and a new one would take its place. He did not say how or when it would happen. Then, following Nasrallah's comments, six pro-Syrian members of the 24-seat Lebanese cabinet resigned.

Nasrallah has threatened to call for protests in opposition to the government, but experts believe Hezbollah won't make any move without the express permission or backing of Iran and Syria. In addition to mass protests, Hezbollah may attempt to topple the country's weak democratic government by organizing boycotts and strikes - paralyzing the country. They could even attempt to shut down electrical power, water, and government services in an attempt to further destabilize the region. If Hezbollah is successful in seizing power in Lebanon, then the nation would undoubtedly become a staging point for Iran's war with Israel and the West.

According to the UN Security Council resolution that ended the Israeli-Hezbollah war this summer, Hezbollah was supposed to be disarmed. But, not surprisingly, that never happened. The Security Council has passed at least 7 resolutions going back 28 years that have demanded the same thing - none have been successfully put into action. Iran and Syria are now taking advantage of the current calm to re-arm the terrorist organization. Iran does not yet have the military strength to carry out a direct attack on Israel, thus it uses Hezbollah as its proxy. Hezbollah is an important player in Lebanon's politics and a major provider of social services to thousands of Lebanese Shiites. It operates hospitals, schools, orphanages and a television station. Its base is in Lebanon's Shiite-dominated areas, including parts of Beirut, southern Lebanon, and the Bekaa Valley. In addition, US intelligence reports say that Hezbollah cells operate in regions including Europe, Africa, South America, and North America.

Experts attribute much of Hezbollah’s widespread popularity to its claim that it forced Israel to retreat from territory it held, something no Arab government or group had ever accomplished. Hezbollah waged a violent, 18-year campaign against Israel’s control of a self-declared “security zone” in southern Lebanon, which Israel had established after the 1982 invasion of Lebanon by forces under then-Defense Minister Ariel Sharon. In 2000, after suffering mounting casualties, then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak ordered Israeli troops to unilaterally leave the security zone. For millions of Arabs, Hezbollah achieved heroic status, and many Palestinian militants at war with Israel cite Hezbollah as an inspiration.

Ted Haggard and The Importance of Accountability

Chuck Missler
from the November 07, 2006 eNews issue


[Português]

Ted Haggard admitted to "sexual immorality" this week - without going into detail - and has been removed from his position as president of the National Association of Evangelicals and as pastor of New Life Church in Colorado Springs. The news of his relationship with a homosexual male has shocked and deeply saddened the evangelical community in America, and - like David with Bathsheba - "hast given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme (2 Samuel 12:14)."

Haggard wrote a letter to his congregation, apologizing for his actions and accepting all responsibility for what he had done. He said,

…There is a part of my life that is so repulsive and dark that I have been warring against it all of my adult life. For extended periods of time, I would enjoy victory and rejoice in freedom. Then, from time to time, the dirt that I thought was gone would resurface, and I would find myself thinking thoughts and experiencing desires that were contrary to everything I believe and teach.

Through the years, I’ve sought assistance in a variety of ways, with none of them proving to be effective in me. Then, because of pride, I began deceiving those I love the most because I didn’t want to hurt or disappoint them.

The public person I was wasn’t a lie; it was just incomplete. When I stopped communicating about my problems, the darkness increased and finally dominated me. As a result, I did things that were contrary to everything I believe.

He did not make excuses. He did not say, "Oh, my behavior wasn't so bad." He recognized the depth of his sin and failure, and willingly agreed to step down from his positions of leadership.

Aside from his apology, however, Haggard said something in his letter that every church leader in the country, and indeed every Christian, should take note of. He said, "when I stopped communicating about my problems." In other words, when he stopped being honest, when he stopped making sure he stayed accountable to somebody, that's when he lost the fight and slid into the pit.

James 5:16 says, "Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much."

Ted Haggard was a major Christian leader in America, a public figure, and a spokesperson for the evangelical community. Not only did his position require great responsibility, it also required great protection. The Enemy of our souls knows how to exploit our weaknesses to his advantage, and we as Christians, and especially Christian leaders, must have people praying for and with us constantly in order to defeat the efforts of that Enemy.

Every single one of us has an area of vulnerability through which we can easily be tempted to sin. We may struggle with anger, or laziness, lust, or pride. We all have our Achilles heel, our thorn in the flesh that keeps us humble and aware of our need to totally depend on Christ. But, if we do not communicate with one another about the areas where we struggle the hardest, then we won't get the prayer and assistance we need.

Christian leaders are not more holy and immune to temptation than the common Christian man or woman in the pew. This is a reminder that all of us need to pray for our pastors on a regular basis, and for any Christian leader in our lives. We need to keep careful watch of ourselves and make sure that we have trusted, mature Christian brothers or sisters (men should meet with men, women with women) with whom we regularly gather to share our struggles with temptation and the areas in which we need prayer. We need to pray with our spouses on a regular basis, and remain transparent. As the body of Christ, we must take care of one another - we need each other (1 Cor 12:12-27).

Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ.
Galatians 6:1-2

Wherefore lift up the hands which hang down, and the feeble knees; And make straight paths for your feet, lest that which is lame be turned out of the way; but let it rather be healed. Follow peace with all [men], and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord: Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; Hebrews 12:12-15a
But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.
Hebrews 3:13

The news of Ted Haggard's sin grieves the Christian community, but it also serves as an important reminder; Christ alone is holy, and only he gave us a perfect example. Christianity depends on faith in Jesus Christ, not in evangelical leaders. Christ is the solid rock on which we stand, and we can have confidence in Him alone.

K-House

Comentário sobre a Batalha pela Bíblia

Manoel José de Miranda Filho*

Muito interessante esta questão da Batalha pela Bíblia, irmão.

Mas, como sempre, quero tecer um comentário. Jesus passou pelos problemas, ou por cima deles como querem os liberais que acreditemos? Vou usar a maiêutica de Sócrates e pedir
que eles me provem que Jesus não andou por sobre as águas.

As muitas ciências hoje tentam provar que Deus não existe, que Jesus é apenas um mito ou alguém que veio para a sua terra como um profeta como osoutros profetas vieram e que o processo da criação é meramente religioso.

Sobre a existência de Deus, as mais lisonjeiras teorias dos homens em relação ao que a razão humana se "orgulha" de ter conseguido provar é que estes assuntos não passam de meras hipóteses e conjecturas. Em período algum da história humana há exemplo de filósofo, cientista ou seja lá o que for, que manifestasse a pretensão de ter adquirido a idéia primitiva da existência de Deus por meio de investigação pura e simplesmente racional. Ou seja, em todos os casos em que se trata de raciocínio destinado a demonstrar a existência de Deus, não é possível chegar ao conhecimento do fato como verdade original e sim simplesmente se consegue fortalecer e confirmar verdade já conhecida e admitida. Se pudéssemos admitir que o homem estivesse colocado em situação tão absolutamente privada da luz da Revelação que ficasse sem a idéia de Deus, seria difícil admitir que ele tivesse capacidade, por si só, através do raciocínio, de chegar à conclusão da existência do que lhe era totalmente desconhecido (você é filósofo e sabe do que estou falando, até melhor do que eu). Nestas condições ele andaria apalpando-se no meio das mais densas trevas, (lembra sobre a caverna e a luz que se achou dentro dela? As densas trevas são essa caverna e a luz que outrora se achou por dentro dela é JESUS CRISTO, luz do mundo), sem adiantar nem sequer um passo na aquisição do conhecimento da existência ou da natureza do Criador, conservando-se nesta ignorância até que tombasse morto como as bestas (as feras selvagens) que perecem. Entretanto, é evidente, à vista do que afirmam as Escrituras, que rodeados como nos encontramos pela luz da Revelação em todo o seu esplendor, ou mesmo, como em geral acontece com as nações pagãs, apenas auxiliadas pelo vislumbre da TRADIÇÃO, podemos ver nas obras da natureza através das nossas "faculdades racionais", no mundo que nos rodeia, numerosas provas que demonstram a existência de Deus.

Sobre o processo de criação, vamos por partes. A Antropologia nos ensina que o homem foi criado através de uma sublime "intervenção milagrosa" na natureza, refutando a sabedoria e glória divina da criação. Têm-se que o homem foi criado de uma derivação de seres orgânicos ou de alguns tipos primitivos e, graças ao desenvolvimento e aperfeiçoamento de plantas e animais tornou-se o homem. Até hoje esta evolução de Darwin não foi comprovada, pois na ciência o que vale é quando se comprova através de dados verídicos.

A ciência já admite hoje que o homem pode ter vindo do barro ou da terra devido a quantidade de minérios que existem dentro do corpo humano, fósforo, ferro, cálcio e etc., com isso, a ciência diz que o homem pode ter aparecido no mundo repentinamente, não por evolução de seres inferiores, mas repentinamente. Os crânios dos homens primitivos mostram claramente que estes tinham a mesma organização cerebral que o homem possui hoje e podemos portanto supor que tinham a mesma natureza intelectual e moral.

A Geologia harmoniza-se com a Bíblia da forma como o homem entrou no mundo. Em ambos os
relatos (geologia e Bíblia), o homem é visto como geologicamente moderno e as ossadas encontradas até hoje mostram acerca de uma identidade e origem comum de todos os homens. A capacidade cerebral dos mais antigos homens testificam que eram os senhores da criação e pouco aliados de animais, o que nos lembra as passagens de gênesis sobre o homem dominar a terra. Visto que existimos e não somos a causa primária da nossa existência, visto que a natureza existe através de mim e em mim, eu existo, mas não em mim, mas em Deus, que não existe em ninguém e somente Nele mesmo, sendo este SER a causa primária de todas as coisas (você é fera nisso: Existencialismo).

Visto também que a teoria da evolução pressupõe um germe criado e que este germe pressupõe um criador e visto ser impossível que a matéria originasse o movimento, posso concluir que a causa primária do movimento criador deve ser uma mente independente e acima da matéria, que a nossa existência é obra desta mente independente e que como seria coisa impossível que essa mente agisse sem que primeiramente existisse, logo vemos a existência de Deus demonstrada como causa primária de nossa própria existência. Desculpe se estou lhe perturbando a paciência dizendo essas coisas que você já sabe.

Sobre nosso querido e amado Jesus (na sua natureza humana), primeiramente os gnósticos diziam que a divindade entrou em Jesus logo após o batismo efetuado por João Batista, que era baseada num princípio da filosofia dos antigos gregos de que "a matéria está inseparavelmente relacionada com o mal". Esta teoria levou Marcião no início do século II a reformar ensinos dos gnósticos, sustentando que Cristo em lugar de nascido de mulher, desceu com aparência de um corpo humano a Cafarnaum, para anunciar aos homens a existência do princípio do bem, até desconhecido. Os marcionistas diziam que o corpo de Jesus não era real, não passando de um fantasma ou sombra e que Jesus o usava para conversar com os homens.

As diferentes formas de gnosticismo não negavam as afirmações às escrituras da humanidade
de Cristo, mas afirmavam que elas só existiam de forma aparente, por isso chamados docetas ou fantasistas. Mais tarde Eutíquio caiu num erro semelhante, ensinando que a humanidade de Cristo foi absolvida na divindade e que seu corpo não tinha existência real. Enquanto esse povo negava a existência real do corpo de Cristo, a heresia apolinária rejeitou a existência de uma alma humana em nosso Salvador. Na sua natureza divina, três teorias distintas foram adotadas.

Socino ensinava que o Salvador começou a sua existência ao nascer de Maria, se bem que "possuído" de santidade e excelências extraordinárias. Ário ensinava que ele era o primeiro e o mais exaltado dentre os seres que Deus criou em qualquer tempo, mas que apesar disso, foi
"criado". Os trinitários, ao contrário, ensinam que ele possui duas naturezas distintas: A humana, nascida por Maria e crucificada no madeiro, e a divina, unida com a humana (visão mórmon hoje). Então, esses ataques ao nosso Senhor e Salvador são antigos. Sua natureza humana (Gal 4:4; Hb 2:14-17; Lc 2:52; Mt 4:2; Jo 19:28; Jo 11:35) e sua natureza divina
(Jo 1:1-3,10,11; Cl 1:15-17; Cl 1:17; 2Tm 4:1; Is 40:3) e outras mais.

É por isso que eu te falei sobre a maiêutica, não tenho medo de forma nenhuma de ser levado por eles, pois tanto na vida prática (empirismo), como na ciência (lógica, matemática) como na Palavra do Senhor (a nossa querida Bíblia), temos grandes argumentos para crermos que o Senhor existe e que podemos refutar qualquer coisa que seja contra DEUS e NOSSO QUERIDO REDENTOR SENHOR JESUS CRISTO. Quem tem que me provar o contrário são eles. E vai ser
muito difícil!!!!!!!!!

Fica com Deus meu irmão. Espero não ter tomado o teu tempo.

*Manoel José de Miranda Filho é estudante de teologia na FAEPI (Faculdade Evangélica do Piauí), em Teresina, Brasil.

Bibliografia pesquisada:

• Manual Prático de Teologia (Eduardo Joiner)
• Introdução à Teologia Sistemática (J. Millard Erickson)
  
• Teologia Sistemática (Louis Berkhof)
  
• História da Igreja Cristã (Jesse Lyman Hurlbut)
• História da Teologia Cristã (Roger Olson)
  

E alguns grifos existentes no texto, pertencem a mim (Miranda) também.

Chance and Intelligent Design (Part 4)

James A. Choury
WorldVenture missionary to North Brazil

[Leia este artigo em português]

One common misconception regarding probability is that enough time makes even highly improbable events almost certain. This misconception may be a result of confusing two different types of circumstances. These circumstances are known as independent and dependent events. To illustrate this difference we can use coins and cards since this makes possible fairly simple mathematical calculations.

Two events are independent when the result of one has absolutely no effect on the other. Tossing one coin twice or tossing two coins at the same time are independent events. Drawing one card from a deck and replacing and shuffling the deck and then drawing the second card are two independent events. The odds remain unchanged when dealing with independent events. For example, the odds of tossing a head on any given toss of a coin are 50%. If I have tossed the coin three times and never have gotten a head the odds on the fourth toss of getting a head are still just 50%. This is a simple example of how our natural tendency is to think that the odds get better when, in fact, they do not.

However, drawing one card from a deck and not replacing it definitely affects the odds on the next draw of a card. The deck has been modified! This is an example of dependent events.

The odds of drawing a spade from a deck of cards on the first draw are 13/52 or .25000 or 25%. If the first card was not a spade, and the card is not replaced, the odds of drawing a spade on the second draw are 13/51 or .25490 or 25.4%. Note that the odds improved. After drawing 8 cards and never getting a spade and not replacing the cards the odds of getting a spade on the ninth draw would be 13/44 or .29545 or 29.5%. If no spade is drawn in 39 draws and the cards were not replaced then the odds of drawing a spade just before the 40th draw would be 13/13 or 1.000 or 100% because at that point there would only be spades in the deck and drawing a spade would be a certainty.

In discussions concerning the origins of the universe and of life, we can begin talking of independent events where the odds remain the same with each new “trial” (i.e. they never improve) and slip into treating the independent events as though they were dependent. From there it is easy to conclude that the desired event must eventually occur because the odds continually improve until becoming a certainty.

One example might be the thought that life originated when lightning struck a pool with slime in it. (Seldom is the question of where the slime came from addressed). Lightning strikes the pool. The odds of life being formed in this way are highly unlikely and in this case nothing happens. (By the way, it is much more probable that any “incipient” life be extinguished in this way than produced). But some time later another pool of slime is struck by lightning. Again nothing happens but sometime later another pool of slime is struck by lightning, etc. Clearly these are independent events and the odds never improve. Yet we are tempted to think that given billions of years it has got to happen eventually. Given enough time it becomes a certainty. Actually the probability never gets any better. (Perhaps it would improve the odds if lightning were to strike the same pool of slime many times but that only brings in more highly unlikely events).

When discussing issues dealing with probability we must remember that if the events are independent the odds do not improve with time.

Here is a less controversial example to illustrate the point. Let’s imagine a large tray with 50 coins in it. The odds of all the coins being “heads” by chance are 1/250 or 8.88 to the negative 16th power. There is only one way all the coins can come up heads. There are 1,125,899,907,000,000 ways for the coins to come up not all heads. If the tray were “bumped” every second allowing the coins to fly into the air and land again in the tray they would never “by chance” come up all heads because the odds never improve. The odds at each trail would still be 8.88 to the negative 16th power against it. It is ever more probable that at least one coin will be “rebellious” to our wishes and insist on coming up tails.

In discussions of the origin of the universe and of life we are often encouraged to think that given enough time it would have to happen simply by chance. Understanding the difference between independent and dependent events helps us see the error of this way of thinking. The point is the odds never get any better no matter how much time is allowed.

In this brief, four part, study of logic and probability we have seen that the debate concerning the origin of life and of the universe quite naturally and of necessity falls into two camps, i.e., chance or intelligent design. The Law of the Excluded Middle forces the debate into those two, mutually exclusive, options. We have also seen though our rapid lesson on probability that joint, complex, interrelated and highly improbable events are extremely unlikely so as to border on the impossible. These logical and mathematical realities should lead the unbiased inquirer to conclude that the universe and life itself came into being by means of intelligent design.

Why then do so many cling so tenaciously to the “by chance” explanation of the origin of the universe and of life? One reason may be the Law of the Excluded Middle combined with rejection of the concept of a designer. Remember, if it wasn’t by chance then it must have been by “not chance”. But “not chance” is equivalent to saying design and that means intelligent design. One must either accept intelligent design or insist that everything that exists and life itself happened by chance. Those with a philosophical commitment which excludes design are left with chance as the only logical choice available to them. The problem lies in that often this philosophical presupposition is believed to be science and is proclaimed as science. The actual scientific evidence and logic lie on the side of intelligent design.

Sou Um Fundamentalista?

Dave Hunt

[Saiba mais sobre esse assunto]

"Você é um fundamentalista!" A acusação me foi dirigida quando ainda era um calouro da universidade, recém-saído do serviço militar, em 1947. Da maneira como ela foi feita, com tamanho desprezo, nenhuma explicação foi necessária para compreender que ser rotulado de "fundamentalista" era um dos mais terríveis insultos no orgulhoso mundo acadêmico. Respondi algo como: "Se ser fundamentalista significa aderir aos sólidos fundamentos da matemática, da contabilidade, da química ou de qualquer outra ciência, então aceito alegremente o título. E já que a Bíblia é literalmente a Palavra de Deus e é inerrante (sem erros), a única escolha inteligente é aceitá-la e permanecer fiel aos seus fundamentos". Essa resposta apenas aumentou a frustração e a ira dos que debatiam acaloradamente comigo já por duas horas.

A ocasião foi o primeiro encontro da "Hora dos Críticos", uma novidade que havia sido criada recentemente por alunos e professores da universidade para ridicularizar e desacreditar a Bíblia. Entre os espectadores havia um bom número de crentes que eu conhecia do grupo cristão do campus, mas nenhum deles disse uma palavra sequer. Fiquei sozinho naquele auditório, sendo alvejado com argumentos de todos os lados, todos favoráveis à evolução e ao ateísmo. Sendo um ingênuo jovem de 21 anos, fiquei chocado com a animosidade tão abertamente demonstrada contra a Bíblia e contra o Deus da Bíblia.

Naquele ponto da minha vida, mal ouvira falar de Harry Emerson Fosdick, pastor da Primeira Igreja Presbiteriana de Nova Iorque, uma pessoa-chave no liberalismo/modernismo americano. Tampouco fazia idéia da crescente rejeição da infalibilidade da Bíblia entre muitas pessoas que se chamavam cristãos. O nome de J. Gresham Machen era-me completamente desconhecido. Portanto, nada sabia acerca da batalha perdida que ele sustentara no Seminário de Princeton, na década de 1920, contra as heresias que levaram aquela escola a tornar-se completamente liberal e que alcançaram a maioria das igrejas presbiterianas.

Cristianismo com "roupagem" moderna

Os servos mais eficientes de Satanás são mestres em ambigüidades. Fosdick reivindicava honrar a doutrina, mas ao mesmo tempo advertia sobre o "perigo de dar ênfase demais à doutrina..." Ele afirmou que "nada realmente importa na religião, a não ser aquelas coisas que fomentam o bem individual e público... e o progresso social."1 Fosdick foi reconhecido naquele tempo pela maioria dos cristãos verdadeiros como o incrédulo que realmente era. Mas, Norman Vincent Peale, não menos herege que Fosdick, conseguiu achar aceitação virtualmente em toda parte, bem como seu famoso discípulo Robert Schuller.

O modernista toma as últimas idéias do mundo secular e enganosamente as veste com linguagem cristã. Ninguém tem feito isso com maior perfeição do que os atuais psicólogos cristãos, que de algum modo tomam teorias anticristãs de inimigos declarados do Evangelho e as "integram" à teologia. Peale foi o primeiro a fazer isso. Em 1937, ele fundou uma clínica "cristã" de psiquiatria em sua igreja. A clínica tornou-se modelo para numerosas outras semelhantes, as quais têm gerado fortunas para seus fundadores.

Machen foi exato ao demonstrar que a intimidação pela ciência e o desejo de obter aceitação e respeito na comunidade acadêmica têm resultado em comprometimentos, que na prática descaracterizam o Evangelho. Essa ânsia tem influenciado cada vez mais os seminários e faculdades cristãs. Machen acusou os liberais de "tentar remover do cristianismo todas as coisas que não possam ser aceitas pela ciência."2

Muitos dos evangélicos de hoje em dia parecem pensar que os cientistas sabem mais sobre o Universo do que o próprio Criador. Será que a Bíblia é frágil devido à ignorância de Deus? O resultado é um comprometimento fatal para a verdadeira fé. Temos observado isso na aceitação da evolução teísta por parte da revista "Christianity Today" (Cristianismo Hoje), dos "Promise Keepers" (Guardadores de Promessas) e de muitos seminários e universidades cristãs, mesmo que ela contradiga plenamente a Bíblia e subverta o Evangelho. O mesmo comprometimento ocorre quando se questiona a narrativa bíblica do dilúvio.

Billy Graham, que há décadas abandonou sua posição fundamentalista, recentemente disse não estar certo se o dilúvio de Noé foi realmente de âmbito mundial. O New Bible Commentary da InterVarsity também afirma: "A narrativa (bíblica) não relata diretamente um dilúvio universal..." A Bíblia, ao contrário, não deixa espaço para tais devaneios: "...tudo o que há na terra perecerá" (Gn 6.17). "...e da superfície da terra exterminarei todos os seres que fiz" (Gn 7.4). "...e os montes foram cobertos. Pereceu toda carne..., ficou somente Noé, e os que com ele estavam na arca" (Gn 7.20-23). As instruções de Deus para Noé, de que trouxesse um par de cada espécie para a arca, só têm sentido se o dilúvio atingiu o mundo inteiro. Deus prometeu não voltar a destruir a terra por água novamente (Gn 9.11), todavia têm havido muitas enchentes regionais desde aquele tempo. A destruição futura do mundo, conforme profetizada por Pedro, seria apenas um incêndio localizado, se o dilúvio com que é comparado foi limitado (2 Pe 3.6-7). Finalmente, Jesus compara Seu futuro julgamento da humanidade ao dilúvio (Mt 24.38-41).

Um cristianismo sem inerrância

Temos que crer na Bíblia inteira. Isto é fundamentalismo bíblico. Se Gênesis não é exato em cada detalhe, em qual parte da Bíblia poderemos confiar, então? Se a Bíblia está errada quanto à origem do homem e seu pecado, como poderemos confiar no que ela diz sobre a sua redenção e seu destino eterno? Na verdade a Bíblia está absolutamente certa em tudo que declara.

Se as últimas descobertas da ciência concordam ou não com a Bíblia, isso não deve inquietar ao fundamentalista. Como confiamos em Deus, não somos intimidados pelos homens. Só um tolo trocaria a Palavra infalível de Deus pelas opiniões mutáveis e falíveis dos homens. Os cientistas cometem erros e muitas vezes são condicionados por preconceitos. No seu livro Great Feuds in Science, o historiador Hal Hellman documenta que até os maiores cientistas têm sido "influenciados por orgulho, ambição, cobiça, inveja e até por evidente impulso de estar certo".3

Tragicamente, diminui gradativamente o número de cristãos que ainda defendem a inerrância bíblica e a sua suficiência, como Harold Lindsell documenta em The Battle for the Bible. O Seminário Teológico Fuller é um exemplo citado por ele. Podemos dizer com certeza que para as multidões envolvidas no atual movimento evangélico a inerrância raramente se constitui num problema, pois tais pessoas se apóiam em experiências e emoções mais que em doutrina. Para muitos atualmente, o amor por Jesus é um maravilhoso sentimento, divorciado completamente da verdade que Jesus afirma ser. No livro The Bible in the Balance, Lindsell confessa que "a palavra 'evangélico' tem se tornado tão desonrada que perdeu sua utilidade... Talvez seja melhor adotar a palavra 'fundamentalista', mesmo com todos os ataques depreciativos que tem sofrido por parte dos seus críticos".

Motivos de rejeição do fundamentalismo

O fundamentalismo tem sido estigmatizado por duas razões: (1) alguns cristãos fundamentalistas são fanáticos e afastam-se de outros cristãos de uma forma insensata e anti-bíblica; e (2) por causa do exemplo do fundamentalismo muçulmano, que apregoa que todos precisam adotar as mesmas roupas e costumes que Maomé adotou no século VII. Consagrados que são ao alvo islâmico de conquistar o mundo pela força, esses muçulmanos fundamentalistas são responsáveis por muitos dos atuais atos de terrorismo. Por conseqüência, também os cristãos fundamentalistas, cuja lei maior é o amor, são freqüentemente retratados com estas mesmas cores de fanatismo.

Um cristianismo de popularidade

Todos que desejam confiar e obedecer à Palavra de Cristo e que querem ser Seus verdadeiros discípulos (Jo 8.31-32), precisam estar prontos a permanecer sozinhos, como Daniel e seus amigos. Com medo de serem diferentes, muitos cristãos seguem a multidão. Famintos pelos louvores deste mundo, eles amam "mais a glória dos homens, do que a glória de Deus" (Jo 12.43). C.H. Spurgeon ficou virtualmente sozinho, abandonado mesmo pelos seus ex-alunos e amigos, quando foi censurado pela União Batista Britânica, por sua indisposição em tolerar a apostasia dentro daquele grupo. A. W. Tozer declarou, pouco antes de morrer: "por causa do que tenho pregado não sou bem recebido em quase nenhuma igreja na América do Norte." Que acusação contra aqueles pastores e igrejas!

Cristo advertiu: "Ai de vós, quando todos vos louvarem! porque assim procederam seus pais com os falsos profetas" (Lc 6.26). Ele afirmou que a verdadeira fé em Deus é impossível quando nós aceitamos "glória uns dos outros", e, contudo, não procuramos "a glória que vem do Deus único" (Jo 5.44). John Ashbrook escreve que o "novo evangelicalismo está determinado a impressionar o mundo com seu intelectualismo. Ele tem estado a buscar o respeito da comunidade acadêmica. Determinou ganhar glória nas fontes do ensino secular."4 Carl Henry observou que "em conseqüência da crescente atitude de tolerância... a fé cristã foi embalada de forma a facilitar sua comercialização."5

O único inimigo do liberalismo é a firme adesão do fundamentalismo à autoridade e suficiência das Escrituras. D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones lamenta o fato de que muitos evangélicos mudaram de "pregar" para "compartilhar" a Palavra de Deus, o que sutilmente transfere a autoridade da Palavra de Deus para a experiência e opinião humanas.6 Tal comprometimento, além de não ajudar o incrédulo a enxergar a luz; ainda o deixa mais cego. Essa tolerância estimula a resistência dos homens em se submeterem à autoridade de Deus. O liberalismo, inevitavelmente, endurece cada vez mais contra a verdade. Podemos ver isso atualmente em todo o mundo.

A tolerância quanto ao homossexualismo

A aceitação de homossexuais, em nome da tolerância e do liberalismo, tem produzido uma intolerância cada vez maior contra qualquer outro ponto de vista. O mundo inteiro, que por milhares de anos considerou o homossexualismo como antinatural e vergonhoso, agora está sendo forçado a abandonar tal convicção. Os homossexuais, que reivindicavam tolerância, têm se mostrado totalmente intolerantes na medida em que conquistam poder. Eles atacam com malícia, verbal e fisicamente, qualquer pessoa que queira manter uma opinião independente. O mundo tem sido coagido a garantir privilégios especiais aos homossexuais, apesar do estilo de vida "gay" ser cheio de práticas nocivas, levando à proliferação de doenças que ameaçam a sociedade em geral e reduzem pela metade a expectativa de vida das pessoas. A incurável AIDS, embora se propague em proporções epidêmicas, afetando inocentes e sendo fatal para todos que a contraem, é tratada com um sigilo perigoso e um status privilegiado, devido à sua penetração entre os homossexuais.

A tolerância quanto ao evolucionismo

Vemos a mesma intolerância nos evolucionistas que acusam os criacionistas de pensamento bitolado. A ciência deve promover a liberdade de investigar e aceitar os fatos. Mas, em nome da ciência, a teoria da evolução é ensinada às crianças nas escolas públicas como fato, enquanto as evidências contra ela são omitidas e a alternativa bíblica e racional da criação de Deus não é admitida nem considerada.

A situação na Rússia

Numa recente viagem a Rússia, um dos principais responsáveis pelo sistema educacional nos disse o seguinte: "Por setenta anos vimos os frutos da imposição dogmática de apenas uma opinião aos alunos. Estamos cheios disso e ansiosos para considerar as alternativas". O colapso do comunismo deixou um vácuo moral que a Rússia está tentando preencher com os ensinos da Bíblia. Paradoxalmente, as escolas da Rússia agora acolhem os mesmos ensinos morais e da criação que estão banidos das escolas americanas! Não podemos saber quanto tempo isso vai durar. A Igreja Ortodoxa Russa, intolerante e firmemente contrária ao Evangelho, está procurando retomar o monopólio da religião - e alguns evangélicos americanos estão cooperando com esse sistema anticristão. Oremos pela Rússia.

O "cristianismo" foi introduzido em 988 d.C. no país que mais tarde se tornou a Rússia, pelo príncipe Vladimir. Antes ele havia considerado o islamismo, já que suas vinte esposas não causavam problema para aquela "fé". Mas como o islamismo proíbe o álcool, ele acabou abraçando o "cristianismo" da Igreja Ortodoxa, onde o álcool corria livremente (muitos monges e sacerdotes bebem intensamente) e onde a opulência dos rituais tem um apelo misterioso. Ele decretou uma esposa como "oficial", mantendo as outras dezenove como concubinas, enquanto usava o álcool livremente. Foi assim que a Rússia "converteu-se" ao "cristianismo". Em 1988, o milésimo aniversário desse evento foi celebrado com pompa e ritual. Billy Graham esteve presente para trazer suas congratulações. Na ocasião, ele disse: "Sinto-me profundamente honrado em congratular-me com vocês nesta histórica e alegre ocasião em que se comemora o milésimo aniversário do batismo da Rússia, proporcionado pelo batismo do príncipe Vladimir, de Kiev..."7

A Igreja Ortodoxa, assim como o catolicismo romano, é inimiga jurada do Evangelho. Ela tem mantido o povo russo na escravidão e na superstição, ensinando-o a buscar nela a salvação, beijando seus ícones, pagando por orações e sacramentos. Embora rejeite o purgatório do catolicismo, ensina que, através de nossas orações, as almas podem ser resgatadas do inferno para o céu.

Visitamos, nas proximidades de Moscou, o centro da Igreja Ortodoxa, com seu seminário e muitas igrejas. Monges com quem falei explicaram que a morte de Cristo possibilitou a nossa entrada no céu, desde que fôssemos batizados, participássemos dos sacramentos e "vivêssemos o Evangelho". Para eles, a porta que Cristo abriu está no cume duma alta escada que precisamos subir pelos nossos próprios esforços, obedecendo à Igreja e auxiliados por ela.

Fui um dos preletores numa conferência em Moscou que atraiu pastores e membros de igrejas de toda a Rússia. Havia uma indisfarçável expectativa de que a Palavra de Deus fosse ensinada. Eu expus abertamente os ensinos e práticas não-bíblicas da Igreja Ortodoxa Russa que (como a Igreja Católica no Ocidente) perseguiu e assassinou multidões de verdadeiros cristãos. A Igreja Ortodoxa, que estabeleceu parceria tanto com os czares como com os comunistas que os sucederam, pressionou o presidente Yeltsin a favor da nova lei que suprime a liberdade religiosa (essa lei está sendo atualmente implementada em pequenas cidades fora de Moscou). Centenas de fitas de vídeo e de áudio de nossa conferência estão sendo distribuídas por toda a Rússia. Oremos para que dêem frutos!

Fundamentalismo é não negociar o inegociável

Como avisamos aos irmãos e irmãs da Rússia, o verdadeiro "crer no Senhor Jesus Cristo" para a salvação tem que ser uma profunda convicção e não apenas uma mera preferência. E esta corajosa convicção certamente será seguida de grande oposição e terrível violência da parte de Satanás e da carne. Lembrando que a eternidade nos espera em breve, jamais devemos trocar o eterno "muito bem, servo bom" de Deus pela aprovação dos homens nesta vida tão curta. A plenitude de vida, tanto agora como por toda a eternidade, tanto para nós mesmos como para as pessoas a quem temos a oportunidade e a responsabilidade de influenciar, depende desta verdade inegociável.

(TBC 8/98 - publicado anteriormente em português no Jornal Fundamentalista - União Bíblica Fundamentalista - Cx. Postal 567 - 60001-970 FORTALEZA CE 0 ++ (85) 214-1412)

CENTRO APOLOGÉTICO CRISTÃO DE PESQUISAS


© Copyright CACP 2003

Pr. João Flávio & Presb. Paulo Cristiano