Two Talks:
1. For Teens: In this popular video, Ken Ham tackles the biggest creation/evolution questions that he’s constantly asked. Over a dozen “hot topics” are answered.
At this link.
2. The Ultimate Proof of Creation – Dr Jason Lisle
Article: On Knowing When to Resign by D. A. Carson, research professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Deerfield, Illinois, and general editor of Themelios. (original source here)
Certain kinds of questions come my way by email fairly regularly—every few weeks, every couple of months. One of these regulars runs something like this: “How do I know when it is time to resign?” If this is being asked by a pastor who is still young, it is usually prompted by a difficult situation that he longs to flee.
Circumstances of that sort are so diverse that I won’t attempt to address them here. What I have in mind is the pastor who poses this question at the age of 55, or 60, or 65, or 70. This pastor is wondering when it is time to lay down the burden of local church ministry, and consider something else—itinerant ministry, perhaps, or teaching overseas for a while, or working with a mission agency, or half-time pastoral work, perhaps as someone else’s associate. Are there any biblical and theological principles that should shape our reflection on these matters?
(1) In one sense, this is the right question to ask. Here is not someone who has reached some long-awaited ideal retirement age and is looking for an excuse to withdraw from ministry in favor of buying an RV to spend the next couple of decades alternating between fishing lakes and visiting grandchildren. After all, there is no well-articulated theology of retirement in Scripture. Rather, this is a serious question from someone who has borne the heat of the day, and who, for various reasons, wonders if it is not only permitted but right to ask if it is time to move on.
(2) In recent years, I’ve been passing on what I’ve picked up from a few senior saints who have thought these things through. The most important lesson is this: Provided one does not succumb to cancer, Alzheimer’s, or any other seriously debilitating disease, the first thing we have to confront as we get older is declining energy levels. Moreover, by “declining energy levels” I am referring not only to the kind of declining physical reserves that demand more rest and fewer hours of labor each week, but also to declining emotional energy without which it is difficult to cope with a full panoply of pastoral pressures. When those energy levels begin to fall is hugely variable (at age 45? 65? 75?), as is also how fast they fall. But fall they will!
It follows that if one attempts at age 85 to do what one managed to accomplish at age 45, a lot of it will be done badly. Frustrations commonly follow: old-man crankiness, rising resentments against the younger generation, a tendency to look backward and become defensive, even an unwitting destruction of what one has spent a lifetime building up.
Three things follow:
As long as God provides stable energy levels, one should resist the glitter of common secular assumptions about retirement—e.g., that there is (or should be) a universal retirement age, that somehow your work entitles you to a retirement free from all service, that the end of life should be dominated by pleasurable pastimes emptied of self-sacrifice and service. This is not to argue there is no place for, say, time devoted to creative tasks of one sort or another; it is to argue that it is sub-Christian to imagine that our service across the decades entitles us to a carefree retirement.
Once energy levels start to decline (whenever that might be), then, assuming that neither senility nor some other chronic disease is taking its toll, the part of wisdom is to stop doing some things so that with one’s remaining energy one can tackle the remaining things with enthusiasm and gusto. I can think of two or three senior saints who have become wholly admirable models in this regard. In their late 60s, they slowly started to put aside one task after another, with the result that, now in their early 90s, they can still do the one or two remaining things exceptionally well. One of them, for instance, will still preach, but never more than once a day. And he won’t fly anywhere: travel to the place he is to preach is either by car (with someone driving him), or by train. But when he does preach, you can close your eyes and listen to a man thirty or forty years younger.
There is another element in such decisions that is partly subjective, partly temperamental, partly a reflection of one’s sense of call—and of the ways these various factors interact with one another. John Calvin died on May 27, 1564, at the age of 54. All his life he held himself to the most rigorous, punishing schedule. That stunning self-discipline, a reflection of his passion for the glory of God and for the promotion of the gospel, was used by God to make the man astonishingly productive.
On the other hand, all the biographies I have read of him speculate that if in his latter years he had slowed down a little, he might have lived a good deal longer—and had he lived another decade or two, still with stable health, he may well have produced a great deal more.
But who are we to tell John Calvin what he should have done? Human motives are usually mixed. On the one hand, there is something hauntingly exemplary about a person who wants to burn out for Christ, to waste no time, to serve others, “… fill the unforgiving minute / With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run” (Kipling); on the other hand, there may be a wee touch of workaholism in such a stance, in which our very self-identity is tied to the number of hours we put in or the number of things we produce.
On the one hand, it might be a careful and thoughtful stewarding of our declining energies that makes a wise calculation about dropping certain responsibilities so as to maintain more important priorities; on the other hand, who is to deny that there may also be a touch of entitlement, or a cooling of youthful ardor, a dangerous love of mere ease? Each of us will have to give an answer to our own beloved Master, who knows us better than we do. It is probably not too much to suggest that if we are temperamentally drawn to one or the other of these extremes, we should be especially diligent to explore our motives most carefully.
(3) All things being equal (and of course, they never are), one should not leave one’s ministry until one or more of the following conditions is met:
One has to leave for moral reasons. Sadly, such failures are not restricted to young pastors. The older one gets, the more one should pray for grace to finish well.
Serious health issues mean that one can no longer discharge one’s pastoral duties fruitfully, with no realistic hope of returning to full strength (e.g., What is the prognosis after a serious stroke?).
One is clearly called by God to some other ministry. All of the usual complex factors have to be borne in mind. Continue reading
By Dr. Michael Kruger:
This series exams some common beliefs out there in the academic (and lay-level) communities that prove to be problematic upon closer examination.
1. The Term “Canon” Can Only Refer to a Fixed, Closed List of Books
2. Nothing in Early Christianity Dictated That There Would be a Canon
3. The New Testament Authors Did Not Think They Were Writing Scripture
4. New Testament Books Were Not Regarded as Scriptural Until Around 200 A.D.
5. Early Christians Disagreed Widely over the Books Which Made It into the Canon
6. In the Early Stages, Apocryphal Books Were as Popular as the Canonical Books
7. Christians Had No Basis to Distinguish Heresy from Orthodoxy Until the Fourth Century
8. Early Christianity was an Oral Religion and Therefore Would Have Resisted Writing Things Down
9. The Canonical Gospels Were Certainly Not Written by the Individuals Named in Their Titles
10. Athanasius’ Festal Letter (367 A.D.) is the First Complete List of New Testament Books
At this link.
Dr. Roger Nicole (December 10, 1915 – December 11, 2010[1]) was a native Swiss Reformed Baptist theologian. He was an associate editor for the New Geneva Study Bible, assisted in the translation of the New International Version, and was a founding member of both the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy and the Evangelical Theological Society, serving as president of the latter in 1956.
The following excerpt is a transcript from a teaching he conducted decades ago entitled “The Five Points of Calvinism”:
Then comes the third point which is sometimes called Limited Atonement. And here I wax warm because I think that is a complete misnomer. The others I am willing to live with. “Limited Atonement” I cannot live with because that is a total misrepresentation of what we mean to say.
The purpose of using that expression is that the atonement is not universal in the sense that Christ died for every member of the race, in the same sense in which He died for those who will be redeemed. Therefore the purpose of the atonement is restricted to the elect and not spread to the universality of mankind. This is what is meant by “Limited”.
But the problem is that anyone who does not hold that Christ will in fact save everybody has a “limited atonement”. Anyone who says there will be some people saved and other people lost, has to say the atonement does not function for the universality of mankind.
Now some of the people limit it in breadth; that is, they say, the Lord Jesus Christ died for the redeemed and He sees to it that the redeemed are therefore saved. So that there is a certain group of mankind, a particular group, which is the special object of the redemptive love and substitutionary work of Jesus Christ and toward this group then, Christ sees to it that His work is effective and brings about their salvation. And while the remainder of mankind may gain some benefits from the work of Christ, they are however, not encompassed in the same way in His design, as were those whom the Father gave Him. This is one way of limiting it, you may limit it in breadth, if I may put it that way.
The other people who say “Christ died for everybody in the same way”, have to recognize that some people for whom Christ died, at the end are lost, so that the death of Christ does not ensure the salvation of those for whom He died. The effect is therefore that they limit the atonement in depth. The atonement is ineffective. It does not secure the salvation of the people for whom it is intended. And so in some way, the will of God and the redemptive love of Jesus Christ are frustrated by the resistance and the wicked will of men who resist Him and do not accept His grace. So that salvation really consists on the work of Christ plus acceptance or non-resistance or some ingredient of one kind or another that some people add. And it is this ingredient which really constitutes the difference between being saved and being lost.
No one who says “at the end there will be some people saved and other people lost” can really in honesty speak of an “Unlimited Atonement”, and therefore I for one am not happy to go under the banner of “Limited Atonement” as if Calvinists and myself were the ones who wickedly emasculate and mutilate the great scope and beauty of the love and redemption of Jesus Christ.
This is not really a question of limit. This is a question of purpose.
And so we ought to talk about “Definite Atonement.” There is a definite purpose of Christ in offering Himself. Substitution that is not a ‘blanket’ substitution; but a substitution that is oriented specifically to the purpose for which He came into this world, which is to save and redeem those whom the Father has given Him.
Another term that is appropriate, although perhaps less precise is the term “Particular Redemption”, for the redemption of Christ is a particular one, which accomplishes what it purposes. The alternative is that Christ redeemed no one in particular.
Now if we change that language I think we put ourselves away from the very unpleasant onus of being the one who seems to be in the business of restricting the scope of the love of Christ.
If I am ready to say my position is that of “Limited Atonement”, my opponent will come and say, “You believe in Limited Atonement but I believe in Unlimited Atonement” – he seems to be the one who exalts the grace of God.
Now use my words and see what happens.
I say, “I believe in Definite Atonement”. What can my opponent say?
He says, “Well I believe in Indefinite Atonement.”
Now if they want to use the language, I have no opportunity to do anything but to protest. But if I have the choice to use a language to represent my position I certainly do not want to put myself at the psychological disadvantage from the start. And the term “Definite Atonement” you will find in very fine writers like John Owen and William Cunningham of Scotland, and Warfield and others, is a much more accurate representation of precisely what the Reformed position holds. Let us abandon that expression “Limited Atonement” which disfigures the Calvinistic doctrine of grace in the work of Christ. I feel rather strongly on that, as you know.
This excerpt is taken from John MacArthur’s contribution in Sola Scriptura: The Protestant Position on the Bible.
The Reformation principle of sola Scriptura has to do with the sufficiency of Scripture as our supreme authority in all spiritual matters. Sola Scriptura simply means that all truth necessary for our salvation and spiritual life is taught either explicitly or implicitly in Scripture. It is not a claim that all truth of every kind is found in Scripture. The most ardent defender of sola Scriptura will concede, for example, that Scripture has little or nothing to say about DNA structures, microbiology, the rules of Chinese grammar, or rocket science. This or that “scientific truth,” for example, may or may not be actually true, whether or not it can be supported by Scripture—but Scripture is a “more sure Word,” standing above all other truth in its authority and certainty. It is “more sure,” according to the apostle Peter, than the data we gather firsthand through our senses (2 Peter 1:19). Therefore, Scripture is the highest and supreme authority on any matter on which it speaks.
But there are many important questions on which Scripture is silent. Sola Scriptura makes no claim to the contrary. Nor does sola Scriptura claim that everything Jesus or the apostles ever taught is preserved in Scripture. It only means that everything necessary, everything binding on our consciences, and everything God requires of us is given to us in Scripture (2 Peter 1:3).
Furthermore, we are forbidden to add to or take away from Scripture (cf. Deut. 4:2; 12:32; Rev. 22:18-19). To add to it is to lay on people a burden that God Himself does not intend for them to bear (cf. Matt. 23:4).
Scripture is therefore the perfect and only standard of spiritual truth, revealing infallibly all that we must believe in order to be saved and all that we must do in order to glorify God. That—no more, no less—is what sola Scriptura means.
“The whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.” —Westminster Confession of Faith
Pdf – Scriptura Alone by R. C. Sproul: Introduction and First Chapter (here)
What Do We Mean by Sola Scriptura? – Article by Dr. W. Robert Godfrey (here)
Sola Scriptura in Dialogue – Article by Dr. James White (here)
Video & Audio Resources:
Phil Johnson – Why We Can’t Abandon Sola Scriptura:
Dr. James White – 2 Hours on Sola Scriptura:
Dr. Robert Godfrey: Martin Luther and Sola Scriptura:
Dr. Michael Horton: John Calvin and Sola Scriptura:
A young James White:
Dr. James White – Audio Message from 2017:
Dr. Al Mohler (speaking from Deut. 4):
WARNING: SARCASM AHEAD:
I just saw an article written by someone called “Gary” on Bible prophecy entitled “The Divine Message Of The August Eclipse” (original source here, including any links to other articles). I don’t look for these articles, I promise, but somehow they seem to find me. This one came to me by way of a facebook feed.
My responses are in bold type so anyone can follow along. OK here we go…
On August 21, 2017, a total solar eclipse will cross the entire contiguous United States, beginning in Oregon and ending in South Carolina. Incredibly, the eclipse will actually begin as soon as the sun rises on the West Coast (the sun appears to rise in the east and set in the west, but eclipses travel in the opposite direction – see here). In other words, people will witness a black sun rising over the United States. It has also been noted that another total solar eclipse will cross the United States at an opposite angle seven years later in 2024.
Ok, I am staying calm, breathing in and out slowly at this point. Not much to say here, except I am not sure the word “incredibly” is entirely appropriate. Eclipses happen!
Note: Before you continue reading, please realize that this is not an end of the world prediction.
Praise the Lord for that!
We actually believe the world will never end.
Huh? I thought the prophetic promise for this world is pretty bleak, if I am reading 2 Peter 3:10 correctly… but ok. As I say, I am trying to stay calm.
We believe that God may be communicating a message through this eclipse about the general nearness of Christ’s return.
Ok, I am all ears.. carry on.
The amount of prophetic meaning behind these eclipses is simply overwhelming and I dare not attempt to interpret it all. I’ll simply share with you a few of the discoveries I and others have made and you can interpret it for yourself:
How is it that I have the feeling I am about to be underwhelmed rather than overwhelmed?
1. The August eclipse occurs exactly 33 days before the Revelation 12 Sign, beginning in the 33rd state (Oregon), and ending in South Carolina at the 33rd parallel. I’ve personally verified each of these details (see here, here, and here). Can you really chalk up the significance of this to pure coincidence or confirmation bias?
Actually, in that there is nothing in Scripture that speaks about the 33rd state and 33rd parallel… yes, I can chalk this up to coincidence.
It’s been noted that an eclipse like this hasn’t happened in 99 years.
Errr… so what?
That would be 3 x 33 years.
Really?
You know, you are right about that.
What might God be communicating?
Errr… “nothing whatsoever”, is my guess.
One of our readers noticed Ezekiel 33:
The word of the Lord came to me: “Son of man, speak to your people and say to them: ‘When I bring the sword against a land, and the people of the land choose one of their men and make him their watchman, and he sees the sword coming against the land and blows the trumpet to warn the people, then if anyone hears the trumpet but does not heed the warning and the sword comes and takes their life, their blood will be on their own head. Since they heard the sound of the trumpet but did not heed the warning, their blood will be on their own head. If they had heeded the warning, they would have saved themselves. But if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet to warn the people and the sword comes and takes someone’s life, that person’s life will be taken because of their sin, but I will hold the watchman accountable for their blood.’”
I’ve noticed Ezekiel 33 too and I also notice it has nothing to do with the 33rd state and 33rd parallel, and… chapter numbers and verses are not inspired and part of the original text anyway. They were added many centuries later, actually, millennia later.
2. The eclipse is also exactly 40 days from Yom Kippur (The Day of Atonement). “40” represents a period of testing in the Bible as can been seen in the 40 years the Israelites wandered in the wilderness and the 40 days Jesus was tested in the wilderness. This 40 day period leading up to Yom Kippur is more than random.
How so?
In fact, this period of time beginning on August 21st is called the Season of Teshuvah, which in the Jewish faith is a time to get right with God before judgment falls on the Day of Atonement. In other words, repent before time is up.
There is nothing wrong with calling people to repentance. Acts 17:30, 31 says, “The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.” That’s the Biblical reason why all need to repent and that is more than enough reason to do so. Lets just stick with the Bible shall we, rather than trying to find extra reasons for repentance, not found in the Biblical text?
3. While eclipses are not that uncommon, total solar eclipses only occur about every year and a half and often occur over the ocean rather than land. Don’t let anyone fool you into thinking this eclipse is nothing out of the ordinary.
It may be somewhat unusual, but other than that, not much to it, in my opinion… and I am still waiting for a biblical text to be cited that shows that any of this is significant.
Day will be turned to night all across the middle United States. It’s been 99 years since a total solar eclipse crossed the entire United States and having another total solar eclipse cross the entire United States again, forming an ‘X’, just a few years later is perhaps unprecedented.
…and what happened 99 years ago when this happened? We are not told.
4. It’s been noted that the United States is the wealthiest, most powerful, and most influential Gentile nation. It is also the world’s ethnic melting pot and hosts a proto-world government in the form of the United Nations. Lunar eclipses (blood moons) are omens for Israel whereas solar eclipses are omens for the Gentiles.
What is your Biblical basis for this assertion?
The 7 year Tribulation is also known as the Day of the LORD when God enters into judgment with the Gentile nations. The fact that two total solar eclipses, spaced seven years apart, cross the entirety of the contiguous United States, and form an ‘x’ over the chief Gentile nation on earth should give you pause.
ok, I paused.
May I carry on now?
5. The Tribulation (also called Daniel’s 70th Week or The Time of Jacob’s Trouble) is understood to be a worldwide version of the Exodus from Egypt. The plagues and Exodus were a sort of microcosm of the future Day of the LORD. The ruthless Pharaoh was a type of the antichrist, the plagues were a type of the coming worldwide trumpet and vial judgments, the Exodus was a type of both the rapture and the future Israelite remnant that will escape into the wilderness, and so forth. Even some of the minute details were types and shadows. Moses was a type of the future “male child” (Christ and the Church) that was and will be delivered from harm’s way. He escaped the tribulation that his people endured when he was placed in a basket and ended up as a prince in palaces of splendor. Yet his people continued to endure tribulation and suffering until he later returned to deliver them from Egypt. Even some of the specific plagues in Egypt will be replicated on a worldwide scale during the Tribulation. As a matter of fact, there is a direct parallel in the book of Revelation to seven of the ten plagues in Egypt (see here). You could say the Tribulation is almost a “do-over” of the Exodus because the Israelites were not faithful to the end in the first instance, but at the end of the Tribulation will be faithful, saved, and delivered.
Talk of “The Tribulation” opens up a fairly large can of worms. Many miss the significance of various prophecies already fulfilled in the first century, particularly around AD70 in Jerusalem… but to go into detail on this would require a great amount of writing… maybe an entire book. Anyway, hopefully we can continue..
With this in mind, consider that the ‘x’ that will be formed over the United States rests right over a region in southern Illinois called “Little Egypt”.
Wow!
Actually, I take that back! I am not particularly ‘wowed’ to be honest.
Even more – the exact point where the two paths cross is in the town of Makanda, which used to be called the “Star of Egypt”.
and again, Scripture says what about this? Errrr… zero… am I right?
6. The eclipse occurs in conjunction with Regulus, the “King Star”. Regulus is the brightest star in the constellation Leo and Leo is one of the two constellations involved in the Revelation 12 Sign. The fact that this eclipse occurs in Leo, which will be part of the Great Sign the month after, is astonishing. It’s like God’s trying to fix our attention on the King and on the following month’s Great Sign.
Not feeling great astonishment here, sorry!
Also, a reader noticed that the eclipse crosses exactly 12 states and I verified the count to make sure. An eclipse across 12 states just one month before the Revelation 12 Sign that features a woman with a crown of 12 stars.
Again, sorry.. but what does the Bible say about an eclipse across 12 states a month before the Revelation 12 sign (which again is another issue altogether as to what exactly that means)? Errr.. is it the big round digit once again? Yeah, thought so!
7. The first major city that will witness the eclipse is Oregon’s state capital, Salem. Salem is of course the shortened version of “Jerusalem”, which is the most prophetically significant city in the entire Bible.
Admittedly, the Bible has a lot to say about Jerusalem. But nothing to say about Salem, Oregon. Sorry!
Jerusalem was originally called “Salem” in the days of Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18) who was a foreshadowing of Christ or possibly even a Christophany.
You are right!
If that isn’t interesting enough, the closest road to the exact point where the two eclipses cross is Salem Road in Makanda, Illinois. What are the chances of that?
You got me there… not too great… but again, what Biblical text tells us to look for this sign of two eclipses crossing on Salem Road in Makanda, Illinois? Didn’t see those names in my Bible concordance.
8. After crossing Salem, Oregon, the path of totality then crosses Madras, which means “Mother of God” (reminiscent of the Revelation 12 Woman). Then it crosses the city of John Day, which of course reminds us of the Apostle John who recorded the Book of Revelation and described to us the Day of the LORD.
Ok… you’ve lost me now… My name is John and I think I am going to call it a day!
After that it crosses Weiser, Idaho, which is German for “wise man”.
I don’t feel any wiser after reading this.
The wise men from the east were those who were watching the signs in the heavens when Jesus Christ was born. They followed His star and found the exact place where He was born.
Yes, that is true.
Likewise we see another sign in the heavens pointing to the nearness of Jesus’ return.
No, actually we don’t.
The path then points us to John again as it passes over Grandjean, which is French for “Big” or “Tall” John.
Big Bad John! Wasn’t that an old western song from the 60’s? let me look it up?
Yes!!! Yes!!! here it is:
It then crosses Stanley, which means “stone clearing” (see Psalm 118:22, 1 Peter 2:4-7) and Mackay, which means “Son of fire” (see 1 John 4:15, Revelation 1:14, 19:12, Daniel 10:6).
Then it goes through Rexburg (“City of the King”) and Victor (Matthew 12:20, 1 Corinthians 15:54-57, 1 John 5:4) and then again points us to the Apostle John as it goes through Jackson (“Son of John”). The amazing message continues as it goes right through Casper, Wyoming. “Casper” is a Chaldean name and is the traditional name assigned to the wise men/magi (see here).
The eclipse then moves through Alliance, Nebraska. An alliance is a union of multiple parties. The Church is soon to be brought into an eternal alliance with Christ when the Body is joined to the Head. Likewise, down on earth a satanic alliance will soon be forming in the form of ten horns (Revelation 17:12) and a “covenant with many” (Daniel 9:27).
Next up is Ravenna, which means “raven” and points us to the days of Noah. Noah sent forth a raven from the Ark before he sent a dove (Genesis 8:7). Also, Ravenna, Italy was where Julius Caesar gathered his forces before crossing the Rubicon. The term “crossing the Rubicon” is an idiom for saying “the die has been cast” or “past the point of no return”. In other words, there’s no turning back.
The meaning goes on and on and that’s just a small sampling.
Thank the Lord for that!!!
What have you discovered?
Nothing at all!
Maranatha! 
Amen… Come quickly Lord Jesus.
Fond regards,
Big Bad John!
Text: Genesis 1:1-28
Since Charles Darwin first penned his book “Origin of Species” in 1859 (full title: “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life”), there has been a vicious, unrelenting attack on Genesis 1-11. Yet, the truth of God’s word stands. Jesus affirmed Genesis as literal history and our very salvation rests on its foundation. Here’s why?
Excerpt from an article “The most offensive verse in the Bible” by Dan Phillips (original source here)
“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” – Genesis 1:1
“The most offensive thing I believe is Genesis 1:1, and everything it implies. That is, I believe in a sovereign Creator who is Lord and Definer of all. Everything in the universe — the planet, the laws of physics, the laws of morality, you, me — everything was created by Another, was designed by Another, was given value and definition by Another. God is Creator and Lord, and so He is ultimate. That means we are created and subjects, and therefore derivative and dependent.
Therefore, we are not free to create meaning or value. We have only two options. We can discover the true value assigned by the Creator and revealed in His Word, the Bible; or we can rebel against that meaning.
Any time you bring up questions about any of these issues, you do so from one of two stances. You either do it as someone advocating and enabling rebellion against the Creator’s design, or as someone seeking submissive understanding of that design. You do it as servant or rebel. There is no third option.
So yeah, insofar as I’m consistent with my core beliefs, everything I think about sexuality, relationships, morals, the whole nine yards, all of it is derived from what the Creator says. If I deviate from that, I’m wrong.
To anyone involved in the doomed, damned ‘you-shall-be-as-God project,’ that is the most offensive truth in the world, and it is the most offensive belief I hold.”