We are putting a bathroom and kitchenette in our basement, and I bought a Formica-covered countertop and a drop-in sink for the project. The next step is to figure out how to insert the sink in the countertop.
Have you ever been in this situation? I thought the process was pretty straight-forward, until I saw that I needed a new jig saw blade.
So–being a product of the 21st century–I checked out some YouTube videos. Since I had to buy a new blade, I wondered if there was one that was preferred for cutting through Formica (though I kind of expected to use just a simple, regular fine-tooth blade).
Well…was I wrong! It turns out you need to buy a special blade, determined by whether you are going to cut downwards from the top, or upwards from the bottom. Who knew?
The reason I tell this story is to illustrate that sometimes we have to go beyond what seems obvious–what seems to be true–to find out the real truth in any situation.
For example–regarding Cro-Magnon Man…
There is a word that I use a bit more than most people would like, “epistemology”. Epistemology describes the study (or science) of knowledge, especially in the sense of knowing what is true.
What do you think is the source of truth? Like if you’re building a wall, you usually use a level and a measuring tape.
For that kind of project, those are your sources of truth.
When the Bible and what Scientists say seem to disagree, why do you believe the Scientists? Have they earned your trust? Have they proven their trustworthiness?
Did you know that:
Cro-Magnons were–for all intents and purposes–not very different, physically, from modern Europeans.
“(They) carried a mtDNA sequence that is still common in Europe…” (https://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0002700)
Carbon dating is not as reliable as most people think, and the assumptions on which it is based are open to question.
“The amount of Carbon-14 in the atmosphere has not been steady throughout history. In fact, it has fluctuated a great deal over the years.” (https://anthropology.msu.edu/anp264-ss13/2013/02/07/radiocarbon-dating-a-closer-look-at-its-main-flaws/)
Radiocarbon dating is periodically “tweaked” (recalibrated using new data).
“The result could have implications for the estimated ages of many finds…which according to the latest calibrations are 1,000 years younger than previously thought.” (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01499-y)
Let me ask you a question–Are you willing to base your opinions about the Bible, God, heaven and hell on what the Scientists are saying…today?
This blogsite is about helping people to look at information in a whole new way– an alternative way–to at least question whether the information we are being given is adequate anymore for living a successful life.
For example, a few months ago, we had a shortage of chicken in the grocery stores. It was a real problem for most people. Later, the governor of our home state of Virginia explained that several major processing plants had been closed due to COVID19. Fortunately, my wife and I buy our chickens from a local farm, so we never had a problem. We never bought meat from a farm before. But now, we find that’s it’s far better (for many reasons), and we’ve been starting to do the same with milk, eggs, and vegetables as well. And, we’ve been finding that we can make 4-5 quarts of home-made, high-grade soup from our left-over pasture-raised chicken and organic vegetables that is better than the bone-broth that we used to buy at Whole Foods for about $5/qt.
As another example, we got a strange notice from our water company last year, which indicated that the quality of our city’s drinking water was not as good as we had previously thought. At first, we thought of buying bottled water, but then we realized that we could double-filter the water from our refrigerator and get much better quality water for about 1/3 the price of buying it.
What’s that got to do with Cro-Magnon Man you may ask?
My question is, Why do you believe what they tell you anymore? Have you researched it for yourself?
Let me give you a couple of things to consider:
Cro-Magnon Man was discovered in 1868, right?
Radiocarbon dating was not developed until 1946.
How did they know how old Cro-Magnon Man was in the mean-time? What made them think he was older than 8,000 years (the time-frame that the Bible gives for the history of the human race)?
A friend told me other day that they did not know whether they could believe the Bible, and they mentioned Cro-Magnon Man as evidence that the Bible could not be taken seriously. After all, isn’t Cro-Magnon Man a million years old?
I looked, for starters, at the old Encyclopedia Britannica my mother bought for us in 1973. This is what it says:
“CRO-MAGNON MAN, the name originally given to a small number of human skeletons of prehistoric age found in a rock shelter at Cro-Magnon near Les Eyzies in the Dordogne department of France.”
Encyclopedia Britannica 1973, volume 6, p. 795
The Encyclopedia went on to say, “The skeletons themselves were fragmentary, but three crania were fairly well preserved…” and “proved to be typical of a race widespread throughout Europe at this time, most common in France, but stretching north to Belgium and from Wales to eastern Europe.”
What did they mean, when they used the word, “race”?
The authors went on to say:
“In classification he (Cro-Magnon Man) falls into the ‘caucasoid‘ subspecies of modern man…(and) only had a few characteristics which would serve to distinguish them from some modern western and north Europeans.”
Encyclopedia Britannica 1973, p. 796
So–all that being said–how do we know how old these fragmentary skeletons actually are?
The Encylopedia says:
“Radiocarbon age determinations from certain sites in France suggest that the earliest known Cro-Magnon skeletal remains date from about 330,ooo years B.C…”
Encyclopedia Britannica 1973, p. 796
But one thing you should think about: Radiocarbon dating CANNOT be used to date remains that are thought to be 330,000 years old.
“Samples that are older than about 40,000 years are extremely difficult to date due to tiny levels of carbon-14. Over 60,000 years old, and they can’t be dated at all.”
Regardless of one’s political views, it’s fair to say that it’s getting pretty ugly out there. And I think that one of the reasons this is happening is because people are confused.
For example, a lot of terms are thrown around by politicians and the media which we would do well to look at briefly:
Democrats = political party, started by Martin Van Buren, to support the candidacy of Andrew Jackson in 1828. In the 1850's, the part split over the issue of slavery, allowing Republican Abraham Lincoln to win the 1860 election. (History.com)
Republicans = political party, founded in 1854 to oppose the westward expansion of slavery in America. It's first presidential candidate was Abraham Lincoln. (History.com)
In his book, AreYouLiberal? Conservative? or Confused?, Richard J. Maybury claims:
“Both (parties) tend to hover close to the center, which is where they perceive the bulk of the voters to be.”
Richard J. Maybury (“Uncle Eric”)
That was the way it was in the 1970’s (think Gerald Ford), but if you think back, American Presidents Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy could also be considered centrists or moderates.
Moderates (Centrists) = "One who is in the middle of the left-right spectrum...not to the extremes..." (Richard Maybury)
And even in the 1980’s, we had Conservatives and Liberals, like Ronald Reagan, “Teddy” Kennedy, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Walter Mondale and Geraldine Ferraro. But it was still an era of compromise.
Modern Liberalism = "based, in general, on faith in progress and in the ability and goodness of man, and on the firm belief in the importance of the rights and welfare of the individual...Liberalism advocates steady change" (Columbia Encyclopedia, 3rd Ed.)
Conservative = "the desire to maintain, or conserve, the existing order...Conservatives value highly the wisdom of the past and are generally opposed to widespread reform." (Columbia Encyclopedia, 3rd Ed.)
But what would our Founding Fathers think of the nation that we’ve become? (For an excellent understanding of their point of view, I recommend, What Would Thomas Jefferson Think About This? by Richard J. Maybury.)
The popular musical Hamilton does a pretty good job of trying to tell us about them (See our blog ). They were Classical Liberals.
Classic Liberalism = "One who believes that the country should have a small, weak government, and free markets, and that the individual is endowed by his Creator with inalienable rights to his life, liberty, and property. Also, one who believes in Natural Law and common law, or Higher Law (think Thomas Jefferson)." (Richard Maybury)
But they were not radicals. Radicalism results in “widespread hysteria,” burning, and looting.
And it leads–in the end–to despotism, and the all-powerful State.
Statism = "The opposite of the original American philosophy (Classical Liberalism). Says political power is a good thing. Government is our friend, our protector, the solution to our problems, and there is no higher law than government's law." (Richard J Maybury)
There are many, many examples of this in history–in France, in Germany, in Russia, in China.
The Bible says:
“This is the spirit of the antichrist; you have heard that he is coming, and he is already in the world now.”
1 John 4:3
One of my pastors once said something very wise about this. He said that every generation has an antichrist waiting in the wings. I think that is true. Yet, it’s really up to us. The Bible says:
” You know what currently restrains him…”
2 Thessalonians 2:6
The American people have restrained him before, and we can do it again.
(From a Biblical, Philosophical and Historical point of view)
Democracy = "a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives." (Bing)
Democracy was not invented by the Americans (after the Revolutionary War), nor by the French (after the French Revolution). According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, it was developed by the ancient Greeks about 2500 years ago.
National Geographic adds that democracy gives people a methodology for replacing their government “through peaceful transfers of power rather than violent uprising or revolution.”
So why is it associated with the Americans and the French? They both replaced monarchies (rule by a king or queen) with democracies.
So then, what is the purpose of “violent uprising or revolution” in a democratic governmental system?
The Huffington Post weighs in with this:
“Popular uprisings against state authorities that are largely democratic in nature…can be viewed and, rightly so, as a disproportionate, if not misguided, response to the ills of the democratic system or democratically elected leaders.”
(From a Biblical, Philosophical and Historical point of view)
“The light shineth in the darkness…”
John 1:5
I find this New Testament teaching fascinating. Firstly, What is it referring to, when it calls one thing “Light” and something else “Darkness”? The implication is that everything is not the same; that things are different–and further, it seems to be implying that everything is NOTequal (despite what many people say), but that some things are preferable (e.g., Light) to other things (e.g., Darkness).
By now, most of us have seen the musical, “Hamilton.” (If not, I recommend you do!) The musical centers around the relationship between founding fathers Alexander Hamilton and “Aaron Burr, Sir.“
The men, Hamilton and Burr, remind one of several famous several pairs of counterparts in the Bible, such as Abraham and Lot, Jacob and Esau, and even Moses and the Pharaoh of Egypt.
First, let’s look at Abraham and Lot–the differences between them. Abraham is often referred to as a man of faith, though he screwed up a number times.
Genesis 12:1, God says to Abraham (then known as Abram), “Go…to the land that I will show you…”
Genesis 12:4 tells us, “So Abram went…”
Verse 7 “He built an altar to the Lord…”
Verse 8, he built another altar.
Genesis 13:8-9, there’s quarreling between Abram’s men, and his nephew, Lot’s.
The two men choose to separate.
Abram lets Lot choose west or east.
Verse 10, Lot chooses the east–the “better” land (the Jordan Valley).
Verse 12-13, that includes the city of Sodom.
Genesis 13:14-17, God’s promise to Abraham (not including Lot):
“Lift up thy eyes, and look from the place wherein thou now art, to the north and to the south, to the east and to the west. All the land which thou seest, I will give to thee, and to thy seed for ever.”
Genesis 13:14-17
Verse 18, Abram built another altar to the Lord.
Genesis 15:6 “(Abram, now called Abraham) believed the Lord, andHe credited it to him as righteousness. In other words, despite Abraham’s failures, God considered him to be a righteous man.
righteousness = "the quality or state of being just or rightful." (Dictionary.com)
The Greek word originally used in the Bible to describe that is dipsos, which is G1373 in Stong’s Concordance: “wavering, uncertain, divided in interest, vacillating.”
Verse 8, he offers his own daughters to the men of Sodom.
Verse 9, the men of Sodom treat him like a hypocrite, saying, “he’s acting like a judge!”
In the Hebrew, the word that’s used is shaphat, H8199 (to act as law-giver).
Verse 14, When Lot advises them to flee the city for safety, “his sons-in-law thought he was joking”
Verse 18 When the angels tell Lot to flee to the mountains, Lot replies, “No, my lords—please…I can’t run to the mountains…I will die. Look, this town is close…Please let me go there…”
Verses 30-36, It didn’t turn out well.
But 2 Peter 2:8 calls Lot:
“The just soul…”
Douay-Rheims Bible
Other translations call him:
“That righteous man”
King James Version
How can that be?
Is it possible that right-standing with God is based on our beliefs (despite our less-than-virtuous behavior)?
In Genesis 25:34, we find the statement, “Esau despised his birthright.”
despise = "feel contempt or a deep repugnance for." (Bing)
The Hebrew word the Bible uses is bazah, which is H959 in Stong’s Concordance: “to despise, hold in contempt, disdain.”
Even a cursory look at the book of Genesis shows that Jacob did not have sterling character, but there was a difference between he and Esau, just as we will see that there was between Hamilton and Burr.
To begin with, as we said before, Esau revealed his character, see Gen 25:31).
This seems reminiscent to Shakespeare’s:
“This above all- to thine own self be true…”
Hamlet, Act I, Scene 3
Peoples’ choices–often made when under pressure, quite often end up determining their destinies.
From this perspective, let’s look at Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr’s early lives.
Their love stories and the births of their children could have been an opportunityfor both men to turn their hearts in God’s direction.
In the song, “Dear Theodosia,” Burr says, “When you cried, you broke my heart.” Hamilton says, “When you smile I am undone… I fall apart, and I thought I was so smart.“
The Bible says:
“The Lord is near to the broken-hearted…”
Psalm 34:18
And:
“The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart…”
Psalm 51:17
This reminds one of David, the man who committed adultery with Bathsheba and had her husband Uriah killed.
In the song, “It’s Quiet Uptown,” Alexander Hamilton says, ““I take the children to church on Sunday / A sign of the cross at the door / And I pray / That never used to happen before.” In Ron Chernow’s biography of Hamilton, which was the inspiration for the musical, he writes: “It is striking how religion preoccupied Hamilton during his final years.”
♫“Forgiveness, can you imagine?”♫
The grace of God was available to both Hamilton and Burr’s lives, just as it had been to both Jacob and Esau. Yet, their legacies are the result of their choices.
The New Testament, looking back on Esau’s life in hindsight, calls him:
“(An) ‘immoral (and) godless person…who sold his own birthright for a single meal…though he sought for (the blessing) with tears.”
Hebrews 12:16-17
Under pressure–when “push came to shove“–Esau revealed his true nature by his choices. And this was the case with Hamilton and Burr.
In 1800, Aaron Burr had been elected Vice-President under Jefferson, but Jefferson said of him:
“[H]is conduct very soon inspired me with distrust…I habitually cautioned Mr. Madison against trusting him too much.”
Burr’s is a notorious case. But was he outside the reach of God’s grace? That is a not only a profound question, but also a very practical one, that has ramifications for all of us. One might say that it (God’s grace) “doesn’t discriminate between the sinners and the saints.“
In fact, the Bible distinctly says that:
“The Lord does not delay His promise, as some understand delay, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish but all to come to repentance.”
2 Peter 3:9
Does that mean that God’s promises are for everybody–that God’s “salvation” is universal?
No, but it is available to all who accept it, in spite of anything they may have done, in the same way that Hamilton seems to have done.
But is it possible to resist God’s grace?
Yes, we know that Esau must have rejected it (Hebrews 12:16-17).
Lot, though he seems to be a lot like Esau, did not.How do we know? (2 Peter 2:7).
Hamilton seems to have not.
“It is striking how religion preoccupied Hamilton during his final years.”
Ron Chernow
This apparent mystery is made clear in the story of Moses and Pharaoh, king of Egypt. Why? The Bible tells us that Pharaoh, like Esau, despised God.
despise = "feel contempt or a deep repugnance for." (Bing)
“Pharaoh said, ‘Who is the LORD, that I should obey his voice…?'”
Exodus 5:2
God was aware that Pharaoh held him in low esteem. But God did not react to Pharaoh in indignation.
indignation = "anger or annoyance provoked by what is perceived as unfair treatment."
Instead God gave Pharaoh ten opportunities to turn to humble himself before Him. But Pharaoh did not.
Have you ever seen the movie and TV show, Stargate SG-1? They really did an excellent job with their visualizations of the Goa’uld as the rulers of ancient Egypt.
These were wicked, evil, and arrogant people. And, like a lot of people in powerful positions, they were paranoid and petty.
“Ye shall no more give the people straw to make brick, as heretofore: let them go and gather straw for themselves.“
Exodus 5:7
Think of Henry VIII of England.
God brought ten plagues upon the land of Egypt. Why?
The Bible tells us:
“The Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD, when I stretch forth mine hand upon Egypt…”
Exodus 7:5
People will argue that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart. That’s true. But do you not know that God allows all of our hearts to be hardened, if we allow it? It’s true. Each “plague” that life throws in our path is an opportunity for us to harden our hearts, to raise a fist toward the heavens and curse God (Sovereign of the Universe). It may be a mystery, but it’s not a secret.
It’s simple. God wants us to wantHim. Why? Is God insecure? No, God only wants authentic believers in His kingdom.
authentic = "not false or imitation" (Mirriam-Webster)
“Now for a little while…you have been grieved by various trials, that the genuineness of your faith…may be found to praise, honor, and glory at the revelation of Jesus Christ.”
1 Peter 1:6-7
“The Father seeketh such to worship Him.”
John 4:23
“I love those who love Me, and those who seek Me find Me.”
Proverbs 8:17
“You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart.”
Jeremiah 29:13
“The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us.”
Acts 17:24-27
That is why the Bible tells us at least three different times:
“Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your heart…”
Psalm 95:6-11; Hebrews 3:7-19; Hebrews 4:1-8 (and see Deuteronomy 1:26-38)
Like Aaron Burr (who lost his wife, grandson, and precious daughter), Pharaoh lost his own son–his heir.
“And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead. And he called for Moses and Aaron by night, and said, Rise up, and get you forth from among my people, both ye and the children of Israel; and go, serve the LORD…”
Exodus 12:30-31
And like Burr, Pharaoh–even at that point, even after all that suffering–turned away from all those opportunities to humble himself, to soften his heart, and to accept God’s grace.
“And it was told the king of Egypt that the people fled: and the heart of Pharaoh and of his servants was turned against the people, and they said, ‘Why have we done this, that we have let Israel go from serving us?’ …And he took six hundred chosen chariots, and all the chariots of Egypt, and captains over every one of them… And the Egyptians pursued, and went in after them to the midst of the sea, even all Pharaoh’s horses, his chariots, and his horsemen… And the waters returned, and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them…. But the children of Israel walked upon dry land in the midst of the sea; and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand, and on their left.”
Exodus 14:5-29
Grace is always available to those who turn to God. And He, in His mercy redeems our life–our story.
redeem = "to buy back, repurchase;" "to free from captivity by payment of ransom;" "to extricate from or help to overcome something detrimental;" "to release from blame or debt, clear;" "to free from the consequences of sin." (Mirriam-Webster)
So what about you? What are youwaiting for?
Will you accept God’s offer of reconciliationand redemption? Will you accept His grace?
In “The Ox-Bow Incident,” made in 1943, we get a very clear portrayal of democracy in action.
democracy = "comes from two Greek words that mean people (demos) and rule (kratos)." (National Geographic)
democracy = "government by the people, especially: rule of the majority." (Mirriam-Webster)
Genesis 12 begins the story of how God, in much the same way that He had previously chosen the individual man–Noah–to save the human race, selected a particular family of people–a tribe, if you will, to become his chosen people, to be His representatives to the rest of humanity.
We learn later, in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, that God’s chosen form of government is actually theocracy.
theocracy = "The Jews were under the direct government of God himself. The nation was in all things subject to the will of their invisible King." (Easton's Bible Dictionary)
Is the implication, then, that God wants the whole human race to enter into that type of system of government?
Well, yes, as a matter of fact, except that Jesus (the “Son of God”) will temporarily reign until He turns rule of all things to His Father.
“And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: ‘All power is given to Me in heaven and in earth.'”
Matthew 28:18
“For He must reign, until he hath put all his enemies under his feet.”
1 Corinthians 15:25
However, until Christ returns to do that, God has left it to men to rule themselves.
Interestingly, when the American colonists set up their brand-new experiments in self-rule, they did not choose a democracy. The question to carefully consider is why not?
“The founders feared that passions could arouse the public, and national policy could become hostage to these passions. Therefore, they wanted men mediating between public opinion and national policy. They also expected these men to be of substance and property, with much to lose from error and also more difficult to corrupt.”
“Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and in general have been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths
James Madison, Federalist Papers No. 10
No discussion of governmental systems would be complete, I think, without a glance at King Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, interpreted by Daniel in Daniel 2.
kaiser = "Kaiser is the German title meaning "Emperor". Like the Russian Tsar it is directly derived from the Roman Emperors' title of Caesar..." (Definitions.net)
There are still ways that the legacy of the Roman Empire lives on in Europe, England and even in the United States of America.
The U.S. Capitol
But what about the “iron mixed with clay?”
The main difference today between the governmental systems of most of the statue in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream is that all of the empires mentioned above were ruled by a dictator, while most of the modern countries are considered democracies.
democracy = 'control of an organization or group by the majority of its members;the practice or principles of social equality." (Bing)
That seems to make sense to me, that people would want to rule themselves by democracy, rather than submit to a dictatorship.
dictatorship = "autocracy (a system of government by one person with absolute power), absolute authority in any sphere." (Bing)
Then, let me ask you a question: Why doesn’t the malleableclay REPLACE the iron in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream?
malleable = "easily influenced; pliable" (Bing)
“And whereas thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay… but they shall not stick fast one to another, as iron cannot be mixed with clay.”
Daniel 2:43
Rather than replace the iron, the clay attempts to mix with it, but it is not possible. Eventually, under enough pressure the weaker, brittle clay will fall off. And only iron will remain.
In the book, How Should We Then Live?, Dr. Francis A. Schaeffer wrote (in 1976):
“Overwhelming pressures are being brought to bear on people who have no absolutes… The pressures are progressively preparing modern people to accept a manipulative, authoritarian government.. If these pressures do continue to mount, which seems probable, do you think people, young or old, will at great cost to themselves, at the cost of their present personal peace and affluence, stand up for liberty or for the individual? …When these outward forms are imposed on (their) wordview (which) would never have produced freedom without chaos in the first place, people will not stand when the pressures increase… As the memory of the Christian base grows ever dimmer, freedom will disintegrate…”
“I will require the blood of your lives… at the hand of every man, and of his brother, will I require the life of man.
Genesis 9:5
This is a verse of the Bible that can probablybeeasily overlooked, but it really is quite foundational to the world you probably want to live in.
In other words, God was letting mankind know that He was going to hold individuals accountable for how they treated their fellow man. This was the beginning of a foundation for civil law.
Later, when Moses wrote what is known as the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament), he included what is known as the Mosaic Law. However, in the New Testament, Paul (the apostle) gave us a new understanding of each individual’s moral responsibility for his own actions:
“The law is not made for the just man, but for the unjust and disobedient, for the ungodly, and for sinners, for the wicked and defiled, for murderers of fathers, and murderers of mothers, for manslayers…”
In the French Revolution that began in 1789, and the “Reign of Terror” that followed it, people died. The king, Louis XVI, died. His queen, Marie-Antoinette, died. In fact, 40, 000 people died before it was said and done, including the Rebellion’s architect, Maximilien Robespierre.
In that same year, 1789, the U.S. Constitution was ratified.
And (wisely) founding father John Adams wrote this about it:
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
And many years after that, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke these words:
“It wouldn’t take us long to discover the substance of (the American) dream. It is found in those majestic words of the Declaration of Independence, words lifted to cosmic proportions: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by God, Creator, with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.’ This is a dream. It’s a great dream….”
Dr. King went on to say, “..That dream goes on to say another thing that ultimately distinguishes our nation and our form of government from any totalitarian system in the world. It says that each of us has certain basic rights that are neither derived from or conferred by the state. In order to discover where they came from, it is necessary to move back behind the dim mist of eternity. They are God-given, gifts from His hands. Never before in the history of the world has a sociopolitical document expressed in such profound, eloquent, and unequivocal language the dignity and the worth of human personality. The American dream reminds us, and we should think about it anew on this Independence Day, that every man is an heir of the legacy of dignity and worth…”
Then he said:
“Now ever since the founding fathers of our nation dreamed this dream in all of its magnificence…America has been something of a schizophrenic personality, tragically divided against herself. On the one hand we have proudly professed the great principles of democracy, but on the other hand we have sadly practiced the very opposite of those principles.
Dr. Martin Luther King, on “The American Dream”
And on July 4, 1965, when he spoke those words in Atlanta, Dr. King was 100 percent right.
Why? Why was the “dream” of America out of reach for so many black-skinned people?
“You see, the founding fathers were really influenced by the Bible. The whole concept of the imago dei, as it is expressed in Latin, the ‘image of God,’ is the idea that all men have something within them that God injected. Not that they have substantial unity with God, but that every man has a capacity to have fellowship with God.And this gives him a uniqueness, it gives him worth, it gives him dignity. And we must never forget this as a nation: there are no gradations in the image of God. Every man from a treble white to a bass black is significant on God’s keyboard, precisely because every man is made in the image of God. One day we will learn that. We will know one day that God made us to live together as brothers and to respect the dignity and worth of every man.”
It sounds like Dr. King’s “dream,” was filled with hope for the future.
The story of human relations through time is an interesting one.
And it starts in an unusual place.
“Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth.”
Genesis 9:1
Seemingly–for a while–they did just that.
In Genesis, chapters 9-10, we see a description of a culture wherein people had small family property holdings, and when children were born, grew to adulthood, married, and had children of their own, they would spread out (scatter), build their own homes, and raise their own families. Each household would have enough land to support themselves. There were no “rich” people or “poor” people. There were no “lords” or “serfs.” There were no “masters” or slaves.”
Yet in Genesis 11, we read:
“And when they removed from the east, they found a plain in the land of Sennaar, and dwelt in it. And each one said to his neighbour… ‘Come, let us make a city and a tower, the top whereof may reach to heaven: and let us make our name famous before we be scattered abroad into all lands.'”
What’s your understanding of “the American Dream?” Is it all about making a name for yourself?
Or is it about something else?
What’s this imago dei thing that Dr. King was talking about?
One article interestingly claims:
“(Following the Civil War) many black leaders argued against special privileges and requested for blacks only ‘the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’ specified in the Declaration of Independence.”
“Everybody has asked the question, … ‘What shall we do with the Negro?’ I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! Your doing with us has already played the mischief with us. Do nothing with us!”
Frederick Douglass, “What the Black Man Wants,” 1863
Listen carefully to an excerpt from a book about Frederick Douglass:
“It was (‘an elderly, partially literate, and intensively devout black man, whom Douglass would later refer to as Uncle Lawson‘) who imparted to the impressionable young Frederick a strong sense of self-esteem, convincing the youth that he had an important mission to fulfill.”
Are you convinced that you have an important mission to fulfill?
Back in Genesis 9-10, everyone had a purpose. Each family had to own a cow or a goat (milk for the children, and perhaps cheese), and chickens (for eggs and meat). Children often fed, cleaned up after them, milked them, and collected eggs from them. Each family had a small farm, and a small orchard. Each family had a garden. Often, children tended it. Mothers made clothes for their children. Fathers tanned hides. Children picked fruit. Mothers made jam, baked pies, fermented vegetables, milled wheat, baked bread, made elderberry syrup for dealing with illnesses. Fathers hunted, fished, made repairs, built homes and constructed needed tools and equipment. Parents taught children to read, write, and do arithmetic. Children submitted to parents. Families helped each other when necessary.
But a fellow named Nimrod came along:
“Now (Cush) begot N(i)mrod: he began to be mighty on the earth. And he was a stout hunter before the Lord. Hence came a proverb: Even as N(i)mrod the stout hunter before the Lord. And the beginning of his kingdom was Babylon, and Arach, and Achad, and Chalanne in the land of Sennaar.’A stout hunter’: Not of beasts but of men: whom by violence and tyranny he brought under his dominion. And such he was, not only in the opinion of men, but before the Lord, that is, in his sight who cannot be deceived.”
This new re-structured, re-imagined world is one of specialization, mechanization, and centralization. This is an urban world, filled with soot, smoke and sweat-shops.
This was not God’s plan. It was built by Nimrod–for his own benefit. This dude was strictly in in for himself.
“The mainstays of his empire were Babel (Babylon), Erech and Accad, all of them in the land of Shinar. From this country came Asshur (Assyria), and he built Nineveh, Rehoboth-Ir, Calah,and Resen between Nineveh and Calah (this being the capital).”
The earth was filled with violence in Noah’s day, but the Bible tells us that “God’s patience waited” (1 Peter 3:20).
Why did God wait? What was He waiting for?
“The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you,not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.
2 Peter 3:9
Why was the ark being prepared?
Noah’s Ark
God, contrary to what you might have heard, is kind.
It has always been God’s desire to give people a means of escape, if they would simply take advantage of it.
“The Lord saw that the wickedness of man (like all that we have been horrified to see played out in the news in 2020) was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart (liketyranny, resistance to civil and public health authorities, selfishness, disobedience, lying, deceiving, conspiring,greed, racism, murder, scheming, rioting, looting, and anarchy) was only evil continually. And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart.”
Genesis 6:5-6
One site, called The Hope Project, says: “The phrase, ‘And the Lord was sorry that He had made man on the earth,’ could be understood in a number of ways…So what is this verse saying to us? …To say that God was sorry and that He grieved in His heart shows us that God has emotions… In the original text the phrase, ‘He was grieved in His heart,’ literally reads, ‘He was grieved to His heart.’ In other words, God looked on the evil in the world and was grieved ‘all the way to His heart.’ One version of the Bible (the NIV) translates this verse, ‘His heart was filled with pain.’ …If God is infinite, then how far is it to the depth of His heart? How big is His heart? How much grief would it take to fill God’s heart? …God knew He was going to hurt this deeply as a result of creating man, and He did it anyway. And not only that, He did it exactly the way He intended to do it. But why would God do such a thing?”
The Bible tells us that:
“God is love…”
1 John 4:8
A.W. Tozer writes:
“The love of God is one of the great realities of the universe, a pillar upon which the hope of the world rests. But it is a personal, intimate thing, too. God does not love populations, He loves people. He loves not masses, but men. He loves us all with a mighty love that has no beginning and can have no end.”
“So Lot went out and spoke to his sons-in-law, who had married his daughters, and said, ‘Get up, get out of this place; for the LORD will destroy this city!’ But to his sons-in-law he seemed to be joking.”
Genesis 19:14
And we know that only Noah, his wife, his sons, and their wives were saved.
“A few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.”
1 Peter 3:20
One website, “Answers in Genesis,” says:
“When the door to the Ark was shut, there was room for many more people.”
“God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are.”
1 Corinthians 1:27-28
Today people are claiming that Jesus may be coming back soon, to “Rapture” the church.
“For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air
“Let no one deceive you by any means; for (the Day of the Lord) will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way.”
