By: Joe Butta and Steve Daskal
Christian Messianic Analysis and Apologetics
Can inanimate, purposeless, formless nothingness create something animate, purposeful, and alive? That would appear to violate the basic laws of physics [e.g., the laws of thermodynamics]. Before anything was or could be, there had to be Someone. Even the ancients understood this, and came up with a vast array of myths about one or more superhuman “gods” creating the world, starting with dust and water, and then everything else. Their reasons for doing so were obscure, but basically came down to either needing something to occupy themselves with [life and humanity as toys for gods] or needing workers to toil for them and feed their superhuman egos [life and humanity as slaves for gods]. But if these gods had the same vices and many of the same needs as mankind, how could they have created the universe, and why are they worthy of any respect, much less love?
The Bible presents a very different situation, in which an eternal, complete [God needing neither slaves nor toys] creates the universe to enjoy the process [aesthetics, accomplishment] and humanity with whom to enjoy it through interpersonal relationship.
By: Joe Butta/Steve Daskal
Christian Messianic Analysis and Apologetics
There can be little doubt that this world is troubled by a myriad of problems. But that isn’t anything new — mankind has faced problems since Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden. So what has changed? Why do we so often have a sense that something is deeply wrong — that something is missing?
For the most part modern Americans have come to avoid or reject Biblical truth because we have been told through schools and the media/entertainment industry, dominated by secular humanist progressives, that a truly caring, loving God would not permit all the suffering and injustice we perceive around us. They assert that if God did exist, He would want us to be happy. So either God does not care — isn’t really good, God isn’t powerful enough to “clean house,” or God isn’t there and perhaps never was.
FROM: Steve Daskal
CHRISTIAN MESSIANIC ANALYSIS & APOLOGETICS
What Was Happening? Judah is on the Brink of Disaster
— Judah’s new king at this time, Jehoiakim, aka Eliakim, is a relatively young man. But he is characterized in 2 Chronicles 36:1-8 and 2 Kings 23:34-24:6 as being an evil king, who did not follow the pattern of godliness of his father Josiah. Josiah had been an ally of Assyria against Egypt who died in battle when the Egyptians had defeated the last remnant of Assyrian power at Megiddo [in the lands of the former northern Israelite kingdom of Israel].
— Jeremiah refers to him this way: “your eyes and your heart are intent only upon your own dishonest gain, and on shedding innocent blood and on practicing oppression and extortion.” [Jer. 22:17] While it may have required heavy taxes and harsh action to pay the required tributes to great powers and keep his throne in the face of widespread violence and disorder, the tone of Jeremiah’s condemnation [and those in 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles] indicates that not only was Jehoiakim tough and demanding, he was also brutal and corrupt. Jehoiakim apparently reverted to the idolatry and unjust rule of his grandfather Amon and great-grandfather Manasseh [ref 2Ki21]. Jehoiakim also openly rejected and mocked prophetic warnings from Jeremiah [36:23-27] and had them destroyed.
Most people throughout history believed or practiced their religion because they were raised to do so, made to feel guilty if they failed to do so, or coerced by social pressure to “fit in” with their family/clan/neighbors/local elites. Prior to the 20th century, there was generally little questioning of authority, and swift, vigorous punishment for those who dared to do so. What people learned in the home and school was also not all that demanding – it took an hour or so on a sabbath-day, or was the “price” for a feast day off from one’s work demands, or on fairly rare occasion required some self-denial for a fast day. There were always privileged, authoritative “religious” to obey: priests/monks/nuns on up through archbishops, or rabbis, or imams/mullahs, or the like, many of whom in turn had still higher human authorities to whom they were held accountable. These religious did not share their shortcomings, therefore many of the laity were convinced that they, unlike themselves, didn’t have any.
It is easy today to hear many things from various sources. One of the modern day mantras is that Islam is a Religion of Peace. Upon closer inspection neither Muhammad nor any of his early followers used this argument as they defeated the Polytheists, Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Buddhists, Hindus and Sub-Sahara African polytheists and animists on the battlefield. 20th Century Pakistani Muslim scholar Abdul Maududi stated the following:
“But the truth is that Islam is not the name of a ‘Religion,’ nor is ‘Muslim’ the title of a ‘Nation.’ In reality, Islam is a revolutionary ideology and program which seeks to alter the social order of the whole world and rebuild it in conformity with its own tenets and ideals. Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and program of Islam regardless of the country or the nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a State on the basis of its own ideology and program.” [CMAA emphasis]
Back in the 7th century Muhammad had very limited success trying to convince others to adopt his new politico-religious ideology. From 610-622 his followers totaled about 100 when one considers those that earlier escaped to Abyssinia. It was from 623-632 that Muhammad swelled his ranks by practicing political and militant Islam whereby the possessions of his vanquished enemies [Jews, Christians and pagans] became the possessions of Muslims and where the slave trade became lucrative.
Muslims who apostatized were killed on Muhammad’s order and those who left Islam after Muhammad’s death were soundly defeated by Abu Bakr [the first kaliph] in the Ridda Wars which lasted from 632-634.
Christians believe that Jesus instituted Communion at the Last Supper. In fact Jesus had just taken the middle matzah called the Afikomen from the single stack of three matzah during the Passover observance. He broke that matzah and then equated that unleavened bread to His body and poured the wine and equated that to His blood.
Seems simple enough but not for many professing Christians. Catholics believe the bread and wine actually becomes the physical body and blood of Jesus and those Christians who do not believe that are denied Communion in a Catholic Church. A local Catholic Bishop may make an agreement with a local Orthodox Bishop to extend Communion to Orthodox Christians. However, Local Orthodox Bishops will not comply. The Orthodox Church does not permit non-Orthodox Christians to take Communion in an Orthodox Church and the Orthodox Church forbids Orthodox Christians from taking Communion in non-Orthodox Churches.
Likewise Catholics are forbidden from taking Communion from non-Catholic Ministers. The Catholic Church considers taking Communion in a non-Catholic or Orthodox Church to be a grave evil and mortal sin. The Catholic Church considers their Bishops and Orthodox Bishops to have a direct line succession going back to the Apostles. Since non-Orthodox and Catholic Pastors cannot claim that line of succession they are considered illegitimate to offer Communion according to the Roman Catholic Church.