Independence Day

ABD, in honor of the anniversary of the USA's Day of Independence, will be featuring a temporary background change!

We, here at ABD, wish all a very wonderful celebration with friends and family!

************

It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. ; )

Acts 17:11

************

NEW LOOK FOR ABD

A little surprised, maybe? Yes, you're on the right site. As you can see, after a long while, we have changed the ABD theme! Fitting for Spring. And xHWA has designed us a gorgeous new logo. Did you notice the oil lamp under the blog title? It says ABD. Pretty kewl, huh? Thanks xHWA! And thanks for putting up with my picky taste.  :D

Anyway, hope you all love the new look as much as we do!

Happy Spring & God bless you all in your quest for His truth!

~Seeker :D

************

It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom.

Acts 17:11

************

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRAYERS- NO HEP C!!

A while back I told that a family member thought they may have Hepatitis C.

Well I want to  thank you all for your prayers!! I just got the call. No Hep C!!! It was a false positive!

Praise God!

9/11 town hall to re-air Mon, Sept 21

* * * * FLASH TRAFFIC: WASHINGTON UPDATE * * * *

NRB NETWORK WILL RE-AIR 9/11 TOWN HALL MEETING MONDAY NIGHT, SEPTEMBER 21 AT 8pm & MIDNIGHT EASTERN
* Joshua Fund expands efforts to care for the poor and needy in Israel

By Joel C. Rosenberg

(WASHINGTON, D.C., September 21, 2009) -- The following is a press release issued Monday by the NRB Network:
Viewers who missed the National Town Hall webcast featuring Joel C. Rosenberg and Lt.-General (ret.) Jerry Boykin have another opportunity to tune in.
On Monday, September 21st, NRB Network will broadcast the event at 8 pm ET and again at midnight. [Direct TV -- channel 378]
The webcast, which aired live on four television and 750 radio outlets from Calvary Chapel Philadelphia on September 11th, also attracted some 616 church congregations across the country who logged on to watch the discussion about the threat of radical Islam and the church's response.
Rosenberg, a New York Times best-selling author with multiple titles to his credit, previewed his new documentary called Inside the Revolution: How the Followers of Jihad, Jefferson & Jesus Are Battling to Dominate the Middle East and Transform the World. The film was released the day of the event by Tyndale House Publishers.
Lt.-Gen. Boykin, former deputy undersecretary of defense intelligence and founding member of Delta Force, joined Rosenberg in a Q&A session. Other speakers included Tom Doyle, author of two books on Israel and the Middle East and revivalist Hormoz Shariat. Termed the "Billy Graham of Iran", Shariat is a former Shia Muslim who became a Christian after the Iranian Revolution. Today he has a satellite ministry seen by over 7 million Iranians every weeknight.
Viewers will not want to miss this important and informative program on Monday, September 21st at 8 pm and 12 am ET on NRB Network.

Inside the Revolution: National Town Hall Meeting - currently being archived - coming soon

DVD Now Available | Order Now »

INSIDE THE REVOLUTION

                        A groundbreaking documentary film from

New York Times best-selling author Joel C. Rosenberg.

 

THE DVD   Home   About   Guest Bios   Buy DVD   Joshua Fund   Joel's Email Updates   Joel's Resources	THE EVENT   A Message from Joel   Town Hall Radio Special   Watch - Coming Soon!   TV & Radio   Ministry Resources   Churches Who Participated

A Message from Joel Thanks so much to all of you who joined us for the National Town Hall Meeting online, and by TV and radio. Read More »

Town Hall Radio Special Listen to a radio special, with the full audio from the National Town Hall Meeting. Listen Now »

Ministry Resources Here's a list of ministry resources, compiled by Joel Rosenberg for ministry to the Muslim community. View Resources »

 

© 2009 Solomon Productions. All Rights Reserved.

September 11, 2009 INSIDE THE REVOLUTION

A groundbreaking documentary film from New York Times best-selling author Joel C. Rosenberg.

Go here to watch the live Webcast.

About the Documentary

In 1979, the Ayatollah Khomeini seized power in Iran, unleashed the Islamic Revolution, and changed the world forever. Three decades later, New York Times best-selling author Joel C. Rosenberg brings you a groundbreaking documentary film that takes you inside the three most dramatic movements of our time:

• THE RADICALS—Why do Radical Muslims want to annihilate the United States and Israel? Why do they believe the Islamic Messiah’s arrival on Earth is “imminent” and the End of Days is at hand? How close are they to acquiring nuclear weapons and achieving their apocalyptic objectives?
• THE REFORMERS—Aren’t there any Muslims who believe the Radicals are wrong? Is there any real hope such Reformers can create real democracies in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere?
• THE REVIVALISTS—Is it really true that millions of Muslims are abandoning Islam and turning to faith in Jesus Christ? How is it happening? What are their stories?

Inside the Revolution is a 90-minute documentary film with extensive special features and exclusive interviews with:

• Porter Goss, former director of the Central Intelligence Agency
• Lt.-General (ret.) Jerry Boykin, former Delta Force commander and deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence
• Hon. Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel
• Senior Iraqi government officials
• Joel C. Rosenberg, author and founder of The Joshua Fund

Filmed on location in Iraq, Turkey, Morocco, Israel, the United Kingdom, and Washington, D.C.

Live Webcast

On Friday night, September 11, 2009, Joel C. Rosenberg and Lt.-General (ret.) Jerry Boykin, former commander of Delta Force, will host a national town hall meeting to discuss the threat of Radical Islam, the future of Israel, and the role of the Church in the Middle East.

They will show a 30-minute excerpt from the Inside the Revolution documentary film to an audience of some 2,500 in Philadelphia. They will then answer questions from the audience, and from viewers around the country and around the world. Our hope is that pastors in hundreds of congregations throughout North America will choose to show the webcast of the 2-hour event in their auditoriums that Friday night as a catalyst for an ongoing conversation on these vital topics in the weeks and months ahead.

---

Church Broadcast

Registration for churches has now closed. To find a church near you that is broadcasting the Town Hall Meeting, click here. Or watch LIVE online, right here at www.insidetherevolution.org.

Individual Broadcast

We will be broadcasting the event live at 7:00pm Eastern Time, and rebroadcasting it again at 7:00pm Pacific Time, via Windows Media (click here to download). The link will be available on the front page of www.insidetherevolution.org starting at 6:50pm Eastern and Pacific

Broadcast Times

Live Broadcast:
7PM Eastern
6PM Central
5PM Mountain
4PM Pacific

Rebroadcast:
10PM Eastern
9PM Central
8PM Mountain
7PM Pacific

ABOUT JOEL ROSENBERG

Joel C. Rosenberg is the New York Times best-selling author of The Last Jihad, The Last Days, The Ezekiel Option, The Copper Scroll, and Epicenter: How the Current Rumblings in the Middle East Will Change Your World, with more than one million copies in print. He is also the founder and president of the Joshua Fund, a nonprofit charitable and educational organization that provides humanitarian relief for victims of war and terrorism in Israel and the Muslim world.
As a communications strategist, Joel has worked with some of the world's most influential leaders in business, politics, and media, including Steve Forbes, Rush Limbaugh, former Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Natan Sharansky, and former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. As a novelist, he has been interviewed on more than 300 radio and TV programs, including ABC's Nightline, CNN Headline News, Fox News Channel, the History Channel, MSNBC, the Rush Limbaugh Show, and the Sean Hannity Show. He has been profiled by The New York Times, The Washington Times, and The Jerusalem Post, and he was the subject of two cover stories in World magazine. He has addressed audiences all over the world, including Russia, Israel, Jordan, Egypt, Turkey, and Belgium. He has spoken at the White House, the Heritage Foundation, AOL, and the International Spy Museum, as well as at dozens of conferences, universities, churches, synagogues, political events, book-seller conventions, and charitable fund-raisers.
The first page of his first novel-The Last Jihad-puts you inside the cockpit of a hijacked jet, coming in on a kamikaze attack into an American city, which leads to a war with Saddam Hussein over weapons of mass destruction. Yet it was written before 9/11, long before the actual war with Iraq. When published, The Last Jihad spent 11 weeks on the New York Times best-seller list, reaching as high as #7. It raced up the USA Today and Publishers Weekly best-seller lists, hit #4 on the Wall Street Journal list, and hit #1 on Amazon.com.
His second thriller-The Last Days-opens with the death of Yasser Arafat and a U.S. diplomatic convoy ambushed in Gaza. Six days before The Last Days was published in hardcover, a U.S. diplomatic convoy was ambushed in Gaza. Thirteen months later, Yasser Arafat died. The Last Days spent 4 weeks on the New York Times best-seller list, hit #5 on the Denver Post list, and reached #8 on the Dallas Morning News list. Both books were optioned by a Hollywood producer.
The Ezekiel Option centers on a Russian dictator who forms a military alliance with the leaders of Iran who are feverishly pursuing nuclear weapons and threatening to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. On the very day it was published in June 2005, Iran elected a new leader who vowed to accelerate the country's nuclear program and later vowed to "wipe Israel off the map." Six months after the book was published, Moscow signed a $1 billion arms deal with Tehran. The Ezekiel Option spent four weeks on the New York Times hardcover best-seller list and more than six months on the CBA best-seller list. It was named the "Best Christian Novel of 2006" by the Christian Booksellers Association.
The Copper Scroll is the fourth novel in the series and a New York Times, Publishers Weekly, and CBA best seller. On June 1, 1956, The New York Times broke a story that captured the imagination of the world. Another Dead Sea Scroll had been found, unlike any before it, describing unimaginable treasures worth untold billions buried in the hills east of Jerusalem and under the Holy City itself. In the years that followed, scholars came to believe that the Copper Scroll could be history's greatest treasure map, one that could not only lead to great wealth but pave the way to the building of the Third Jewish Temple. But the scroll's code has never been broken, and experts from all sides warn that any effort by Israel to rebuild their Temple in Jerusalem would unleash a war of biblical proportions. Saddam Hussein is gone. Yasser Arafat is dead. A new Iraq is rising. And now White House advisors Jon Bennett and Erin McCoy find themselves facing a terrifying new threat triggered by an ancient mystery.
Epicenter is Joel's first nonfiction book, focusing on the rapidly rising Iranian nuclear threat, why Russia is selling arms and nuclear technology to Iran, why Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad believes it is the end of the world, and why Ahmadinejad is saying that the way to hasten the coming of the Islamic Messiah is to annihilate the United States and Israel. Using exclusive interviews with U.S., Israeli, Arab, and Russian leaders and previously classified documents from the White House, CIA, and State Department, Joel examines 10 future headlines that could come out of Russia and the Middle East, and does so in the light of Islamic, Jewish, and Christian eschatology (end-times theology). Epicenter has spent months on the New York Times, Publishers Weekly, and CBA best-seller lists. It is currently being turned into a documentary for a major national television network.
Joel was born to a Jewish father and a Gentile mother, Joel is an evangelical Christian. His grandparents escaped Russian persecution of the Jews in the early part of the twentieth century. Joel graduated from Syracuse University in 1989 and studied at Tel Aviv University. He is married, has four sons, and lives near Washington, D.C., where he and his wife are members of McLean Bible Church. His Web sites are joelrosenberg.com and joshuafund.net.

Click here to visit Joel's website
Click here to receive Joel's "Flash Traffic" Email Updates.
© 2009 Epicenter Conference. All Rights Reserved.

This information was gathered from the Epicenter Conference website.

Prayer Request

I want to thank everyone for your prayers for my brother. No cancer! No heart issues! Thank God!

Could I impose upon you, once again, and ask you to pray for another family member who just, two days ago, discovered they have Hepatitis C.

I, and my family would be so very grateful!

UPDATE: There are also prayer requests in the comments.

Thank you in advance.

~Seeker

************

It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom.

Acts 17:11

************

A LOOK AT GALATIANS 3-5

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Old Covenant is a stumbling stone that alienates people from Christ. These three chapters must be in a zillion of the posts on this blog, but I will present them again, for those of you who are interested in a close examination. Keep in mind what I say at the end of every article – This is based on my current understanding. You must research thoroughly, on your own (you, your Bible and Jesus of course) because you cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom. Let’s begin!

Galatians 3

Faith or Observance of the Law

¹You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you?

[Okay. Something has changed with the Galatians, and apparently they should know better (you foolish Galatians). What is it? Someone has tricked them about something.]

Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified.

[Christ, by His death, brought in the NC, replacing the OC, which had fulfilled its purpose.]

²I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?

There it is! The subject! Law or Faith! This is the whole heart of this matter with the Galatians!

What is he asking here? He says they received the Spirit because they believed. Could it be that they have been observing the law AND believing, but forgot that they received the Spirit by believing and not by the observing, and Paul was merely reminding them which one it came by? Or that they observed the law, but didn't believe? That wouldn't even make sense, would it? So obviously, he's saying that there is either observing the law, or there is belief. One or the other. The Holy Spirit doesn't come by the OC law though, because observing the OC law alienates one from Christ. Thus, Paul is asking why they have turned back to the OC.]

³Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?

[Same thing here. By faith they had received the Spirit, but now they've turned back to the OC. Thinking that the OC was something they were still required to do.]

⁴Have you suffered so much for nothing—if it really was for nothing?

[They had suffered so much under the curse of the OC. But it was good, because it led them to Christ. But if they returned to the OC, then it was all for nothing because they hadn’t gained Christ.]

⁵Does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you because you observe the law, or because you believe what you heard?

[Again, he says the Spirit doesn't come by the law, but by belief. What's Paul doing here? Is he correcting a misunderstanding because they were keeping the law and having faith, but forgot that the Spirit came by the faith and not the law? Or did they simply return to observing the OC?]

⁶Consider Abraham: "He believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness." ⁷Understand, then, that those who believe are children of Abraham. ⁸The Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith,

[The Gentiles would be justified? How? By their Faith. Does it say they'd be justified because they kept the OC AND had faith? No. Simply by their faith.]

and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: "All nations will be blessed through you." ⁹So those who have faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.

[Those who keep the law? No. Those who have faith. The man of what? Law keeping? No. The man of faith.]

¹⁰All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law."

[What could be so difficult to understand in that statement? Rely on observation of law=under a curse. Why/ Because you are cursed if you don’t do EVERYTHING in the Book of the Law… EVERYTHING. If you keep one part, you MUST keep it in it's entirety. Is the statement not clear?]

¹¹Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith."

[why doesn't it say the righteous live by observance of the law AND faith? Because they are separate. They are oil and water. Just as Jesus said about the new cloth not being compatible with the old, or the new wine with the old wineskin. They are not compatible. You CANNOT put them together!]

¹²The law is not based on faith;

[So one is to keep a law which is NOT based on faith and combine it with faith?! How do you take that which IS NOT faith based and combined it with faith?]

on the contrary, "The man who does these things will live by them."

[This means they are your whole life. You keep the whole thing!]

¹³Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law

[How did He do that? Did He say, "the law is no longer a curse because previously you weren't allowed to have faith while observing it, and that made it a curse, but now I've given you permission to have faith with it so it won't be a curse any more."? Of course not. That doesn't even make sense, does it? God isn't a God of confusion. No, He did it by ending the old, which wasn’t faith based, and giving the new, which is faith based.]

by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree." ¹⁴He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.

[By faith.. we might receive the promise of the Spirit.]

The Law and the Promise

¹⁵Brothers, let me take an example from everyday life. Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case.

[In what case? In the case of the Covenants. NO ONE can set aside or add to a human covenant, OR to God’s Covenant.. not even for lack of a Temple or even practicality! God’s Covenants CANNOT be altered or set aside. Not even God would do so, because He keeps His word. He didn’t alter anything. He simply implemented the New Covenant He had prepared to follow the previous one, once it had been completed.]

¹⁶The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say "and to seeds," meaning many people, but "and to your seed," meaning one person, who is Christ. ¹⁷What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise.

[What's he talking about? It's about the fact that it was faith based with Abraham, and just because, 430 years later, He introduced a law-based covenant to Israel, doesn't mean that the faith-based covenant previously established by God is set aside or does away with the promise of a multitude of children – It was a temporary Covenant with an expiration date, set in place for a specific purpose, which had been fulfilled.]

¹⁸For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on a promise;

[If the inheritance depends on the law, then the promise was meaningless. It's one, or the other. They are oil and water. Not compatible.]

but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise.

¹⁹What, then, was the purpose of the law? It was added because of transgressions

[Israel's.]

until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come.

[It had an expiration date. The date of the death of Christ on the cross. At this point it would no longer be all about Israel, but the Gentiles, also, would be included in the inheritance.]

The law was put into effect through angels by a mediator. ²⁰A mediator, however, does not represent just one party; but God is one.

[That mediator was Moses.. the ‘go-between’ between God and the Israelites. God is one party.. Israel is the other party in this Covenant.]

²¹Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not!

[He's already said that the introduced temporary, law-based covenant would not set aside the faith-based covenant previously established with Abraham.]

For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law.

[Why? Because no law-based covenant can impart life. Why? Because the one observing it would have to be perfect. We know that's just not possible. Otherwise, we would be told that righteousness can come by a law.]

²²But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin,

[Why?]

so that what was promised,

[eternal life]

being given through faith in Jesus Christ,

[not the law]

might be given to those who believe.

[Jew and Gentile, alike.]

²³Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law,

[held prisoners.. By what? The law.]

locked up until faith should be revealed.

[locked up.. For how long? Until faith should be revealed. Revealed in the New Covenant, telling us that salvation can only come by faith. Faith in Christ Jesus.]

²⁴So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ

[The purpose of the law was to lead us to Christ. How? If you were being held prisoner and were told that there was someone who could free you, would you not seek him out? By being cursed under the law and then having Jesus step in to free us from that curse (by ending the law-based covenant and presenting a faith-based covenant, again (as with Abraham. The man of faith.)) Why was the law temporarily put in charge to lead us to Christ?]

that we might be justified by faith.

[Since we can’t be justified by the law.]

²⁵Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.

[What did that say? We are no longer under the supervision of the law. What does that mean, ‘We are no longer under the supervision of the law?’ We are no longer supervised by the law. The law has left the building, (sorry, couldn’t resist that one.) We are no longer under the rule of the law, because what the law was intended to do, had been done, had been fulfilled and Christ had given a New Covenant, a faith-based covenant.]

Sons of God

²⁶You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus,

[Because the OC alienates us from Jesus, but the NC enables us to receive Jesus in us, and only in this way can we be sons of God.]

²⁷for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

[Baptized into Christ, not the law.]

²⁸There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

[Now that’s a powerful statement! Read it again… There is no longer ‘those who observe the law’ and ‘those who do not’, for we are all one in Christ by faith, through the NC.]

²⁹If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed,

[They go hand-in-hand; Christ and Abraham… FAITH. Abraham is the man of faith. Not the man of law. If you belong to Christ, then you have part in the promise.]

and heirs according to the promise.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Galatians 4

¹What I am saying is that as long as the heir is a child, he is no different from a slave, although he owns the whole estate.

[So, as a little boy, though you are heir to the throne, you do not sit on the throne, and you are still bossed around by those who teach and guide you. Just as Israel was by the OC.]

²He is subject to guardians and trustees until the time set by his father.

[And what was that time set by the Father? The moment His Son would die on the cross. Thus ushering in the New Covenant. The one that would replace the Old, and now include even those who were not Israel… The Gentiles, that they too, might receive salvation by faith.]

³So also, when we were children, we were in slavery under the basic principles of the world. ⁴But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under law,

[So, they were slaves to sin, slaves to the law, for a period of time. Even Christ was subject to the law… up until the time set by the Father.]

⁵to redeem those under law,

[He exchanged His life for ours. He freed us from the law, from the curse of the law, from the death penalty.]

that we might receive the full rights of sons.

[Receiving this by faith. By this faith we become sons. Not by law, but by faith. And…]

⁶Because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, "Abba, Father." ⁷So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and since you are a son, God has made you also an heir.

[Do we receive that Spirit by observance of law, or by faith? By faith. No longer a slave.. to sin, to the law.]

Paul's Concern for the Galatians

⁸Formerly, when you did not know God,

[Being Gentile, they did not know God.]

you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. ⁹But now that you know God—or rather are known by God—how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles?

[Now that they know God because the NC includes them, how is it they turn back to the OC?

Let’s pause here a moment… Some may argue that they had not gone back to observing the OC, but to their pagan ways. I ask you this, then: Does that argument hold any water, whatsoever, if we look back at the beginning of Paul’s questions? Look at chapter 3 verse 2. If this is about a return to Pagan ways, then let’s replace some words to indicate so (in red), and see if it makes sense: “Did you receive the Spirit by observing pagan days or by believing what you heard?” Really? These guys thought they could receive the Holy Spirit from one God, while worshiping another god (idols)? That’s not a logical argument.

Let’s look at verse 3 the same way, replacing some words to indicate pagan observance: “Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are now trying to attain eternal life by returning to pagan worship?” These guys must have been REAL ignorant if they actually thought they could receive the gift of one God, from another god (idol).

And verse 5: “Does God give his Spirit and work miracles among you because you observe the pagan law, or because you believe what you heard?” Again, it doesn’t make sense, does it? He is asking if they received the Spirit by observing the OC or by their belief. That actually makes logical sense, doesn’t it? We will visit this issue again in verses 21-31, just a little further down the page.]

Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again?

¹⁰You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! ¹¹I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.

[They had returned to OC observance.]

¹²I plead with you, brothers, become like me, for I became like you. You have done me no wrong. ¹³As you know, it was because of an illness that I first preached the gospel to you. ¹⁴Even though my illness was a trial to you, you did not treat me with contempt or scorn. Instead, you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus himself. ¹⁵What has happened to all your joy? I can testify that, if you could have done so, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me. ¹⁶Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?

¹⁷Those people are zealous to win you over, but for no good. What they want is to alienate you from us, so that you may be zealous for them.

[There were Jews who were trying to convince them that they must be circumcised, avoid certain meats, observe certain days…]

¹⁸It is fine to be zealous, provided the purpose is good, and to be so always and not just when I am with you. ¹⁹My dear children, for whom I am again in the pains of childbirth until Christ is formed in you,

[Wait. What did he mean by that? “…until Christ is formed in you.”? Because earlier, he was asking how they had received the Spirit… Is he saying they no longer have the Spirit in them and thus is in the pains of childbirth until Christ is again formed in them?]

²⁰how I wish I could be with you now and change my tone, because I am perplexed about you!

[And now comes the analogy that compares Hagar and Sarah with the OC and the NC:]

Hagar and Sarah

²¹Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says?

[If you want to be under the OC, you should be aware of what the OC says, which is: Those under the OC will not inherit with those under the NC.]

²²For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman.

[Note the use of the words ‘slave’, and ‘free’.]

²³His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way;

[Note the words ‘slave’ and ‘ordinary’.]

but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise.

[Note the words ‘free’ and ‘promise’.]

²⁴These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants.

[He says he’s making an analogy here, Hagar is one Covenant, and Sarah is the other Covenant:]

One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar.

[So the Covenant given at Mount Sinai bears children who are slaves, represented by Hagar.]

²⁵Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children.

[Meaning that the children of the OC, are slaves, and corresponds to the physical, the old, Jerusalem.]

²⁶But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother.

[Meaning that the children of the NC are free, and corresponds to the new Jerusalem that comes down from heaven in Rev. 21

²⁷For it is written:
"Be glad, O barren woman,

[Who is the barren woman? How about the Gentiles? Because they had not been God’s people.]

who bears no children;
break forth and cry aloud,
you who have no labor pains;
because more are the children of the desolate woman
than of her who has a husband."

[Meaning that there will be far more children of God coming from the Gentiles than that of the Israelites, (she who has a husband).]

²⁸Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise.

[Those who belong to Christ, are the children of Abraham, the children of promise.]

²⁹At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now.

[Just as Ishmael persecuted Isaac, it is the same now, the Jew persecutes the Gentile.]

³⁰But what does the Scripture say? "Get rid of the slave woman and her son,

[Get rid of the OC and it’s children,]

for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son."

[for the slave Covenant’s, (OC) children will never share in the inheritance with the free Covenant’s (NC) children.]

³¹Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.

[Therefore, we are not children of the OC (slaves), but of the NC (free).]

[Okay, back to the pagan days issue. Let’s see what he says to them about these pagan days in chapter 4:21-31.

Verse 21: “Tell me, you who want to be under the pagan law, are you not aware of what the pagan law says?”. 22 Abraham had two sons, one by the pagan woman and the other by the free woman. His son by the pagan woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise.

²⁴These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent one pagan covenant and one covenant from God. One covenant is from the pagan gods and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. ²⁵Now Hagar stands for pagan stuff and corresponds to some pagan place, because she is in slavery with her children. ²⁶But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. ²⁷For it is written:
"Be glad, O barren woman,
who bears no children;
break forth and cry aloud,
you who have no labor pains;
because more are the children of the desolate woman
than of her who is a pagan."

See how badly this theory falls apart? You have to read the entire letter and and keep the subject matter in mind. You can’t take one sentence and say it means something that takes it out of context from the rest of the letter. How can Paul go on and on about the OC and the NC through this whole letter to the Gentiles, and yet in 4:9 be referring to pagan stuff? :/ It’s just like a simple English class assignment: Who? What? Where? When? Why? Remember those? ..Read the story, Who is speaking? Who’s he speaking to? What is it about? Where does it take place? When does he write the letter (after what, takes place), Why? etc. You can keep this experiment in mind as you read the next chapter as well. It’s all part of the letter to the Galatians.]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Galatians 5

Freedom in Christ

¹It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.

[Christ set us free from the OC, the curse of the OC. Stand firm then, and don’t let yourselves be burdened again by the slavery of the OC.]

²Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all.

[If you put yourself under the OC, because you believe it’s required, Christ will be of no value to you, in that He saves those under the NC.]

³Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law.

[If you keep one part of the law, because you believe you are required to, you are obligated to obey the whole law.]

⁴You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.

[Simply stated, if you are keeping the law because you think it’s required, then you have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.]

⁵But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope. ⁶For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

[So how do I understand all this? I understand it to mean that there is no issue in observing these things so long as you understand they’re NOT required. However, there is serious issue if you do it as if a requirement, or teach that it is so, to others. Because by this, one becomes separated from Christ Jesus, our Savior! How do we obtain salvation if we are separated from our Lord?

⁷You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth? ⁸That kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you.

[It’s not from God, he says.]

⁹"A little yeast works through the whole batch of dough."

[No need to comment here. Except that perhaps we derive a whole new meaning.]

¹⁰I am confident in the Lord that you will take no other view. The one who is throwing you into confusion will pay the penalty, whoever he may be.

[And we, clearly, know what this means… And however convincing he may seem.]

¹¹Brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted?

[He says, clearly, that he is no longer preaching OC.. otherwise, why is he still being persecuted for preaching the NC?]

In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished. ¹²As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!

[He sounds pretty upset about the Galatians being led astray from the true gospel, by these people.]

¹³You, my brothers, were called to be free.

[Called to be free.]

But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love.

[Just because you’re free from the OC doesn’t mean that love doesn’t guide your heart.]

¹⁴The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself."

[And there it is: LOVE.]

¹⁵If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.

Life by the Spirit

¹⁶So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature. ¹⁷For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. ¹⁸But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law.

[Because if you are led by the Spirit, it’s because you belong to Christ. If you belong to Christ, it’s because you believe/have faith. If you believe/have faith, then you have stepped away from a law that is NOT faith-based. Because the two are contrary to each other… one brings life, the other brings death. You cannot obligate yourself to that which brings death AND that which brings life. That’s just illogical. It’s also illogical to obligate yourself to that which brings death. So, that leaves life! Life comes by faith! Through Christ! And Christ alone!]

¹⁹The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; ²⁰idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions ²¹and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.

[You notice we don’t see a list that includes Sabbath breaking, eating unclean meats or not observing Holy Days. It’s because that Contract ran it’s course, making way for the New Contract.]

²²But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, ²³gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

[Again, you notice we don’t see a list that includes Sabbath keeping, avoidance of unclean meats or observing Holy Days.]

²⁴Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. ²⁵Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. ²⁶Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.

[And with that, God bless you in your quest for His Truth.]

“Case Dismissed!”

I’m sure everyone has had this pass through their e-mail inbox, but I think it makes clear the simplicity of salvation that legalists have such difficulty grasping. Read it and see if you don’t agree:

After living what I felt was a 'decent' life, my time on earth came to the end.

The first thing I remember is sitting on a bench in the waiting room of what I thought to be a court house.

The doors opened and I was instructed to come in and have a seat by the defense table.

As I looked around I saw the 'prosecutor.'

He was a villainous looking gent who snarled as he stared at me. He definitely was the most evil person I have ever seen.

I sat down and looked to my left and there sat My Attorney, a kind and gentle looking man whose appearance seemed so familiar to me, I felt I knew Him.

The corner door flew open and there appeared the Judge in full flowing robes.

He commanded an awesome presence as He moved across the room I couldn't take my eyes off of Him.

As He took His seat behind the bench, He said, 'Let us begin.'

The prosecutor rose and said,

'My name is Satan and I am here to show you why this woman belongs in hell.'

He proceeded to tell of lies that I told, things that I stole, and In the past when I cheated others Satan told of other horrible Perversions that were once in my life and the more he spoke, the further down in my seat I sank.

I was so embarrassed that I couldn't look at anyone, even my own Attorney, as the Devil told of sins that even I had completely forgotten about.

As upset as I was at Satan for telling all these things about me, I was equally upset at My Attorney who sat there silently not Offering any form of defense at all.

I know I had been guilty of those things, but I had done some good in my life - couldn't that at least equal out part of the harm I'd done?

Satan finished with a fury and said, 'This woman belongs in hell, she is guilty of all that I have charged and there is not a person who can prove otherwise.'

When it was His turn, My Attorney first asked if He might approach the bench. The Judge allowed this over the strong objection of Satan, and beckoned Him to come forward.

As He got up and started walking, I was able to see Him in His full splendor and majesty.

I realized why He seemed so familiar; this was Jesus representing me, my Lord and my Savior. He stopped at the bench and softly said to the Judge, 'Hi, Dad,' and then He turned to address the court.

'Satan was correct in saying that this woman had sinned, I won't deny any of these allegations. And, yes, the wage of sin is death, and this woman deserves to be punished.'

Jesus took a deep breath and turned to His Father with outstretched arms and proclaimed, 'However, I died on the cross so that this person might have eternal life and she has accepted Me as her Savior, so she is Mine.'

My Lord continued with, 'Her name is written in the Book of Life, and no one can snatch her from Me.

Satan still does not understand yet. This woman is not to be given justice, but rather mercy.'

As Jesus sat down,

He quietly paused, looked at His Father and said, 'There is nothing else that needs to be done.'

'I've done it all.'

The Judge lifted His mighty hand and slammed the gavel down. The following words bellowed from His lips..

'This woman is free.'

The penalty for her sins has already been paid in full.

'Case dismissed.'

As my Lord led me away, I could hear Satan ranting and raving, 'I won't give up, I will win the next one.' I asked Jesus as He gave me my instructions where to go next, 'Have you ever lost a case?'

Christ lovingly smiled and said,

'Everyone that has come to Me and asked Me to represent them has received the same verdict as you,

~Paid In Full~

The Plan of God: My Thoughts

This is my understanding of the gist of the plan of God:

It seems to me that Armstongists believe the whole of everything is: obey The Ten or you can't gain the Kingdom. The Ten is the whole of everything.

But here is what I see, seven things:

1. God says "I want children"

2. They can't be created like the angels of whom one third contemplated that which is no love.

3. So we'll expose them to the disease (sin).

4. But that means they can't have eternal life and then We will be without children.

5. But one of Us could pay the debt so that We can have children.

6. Then they'll need to understand the concept of governing themselves, so We'll show them through two juxtaposed covenants;

[The first one will be forced, coming from the the outside - which will change nothing in their hearts, meaning We could wind up with the same situation We had with the fallen angels...

Then We'll follow up with the second, which will demonstrate governing oneself, from the inside, internal - because the governing must come from within them, not from an outside force: "A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still."

So by this juxtaposition of the two covenants, and by living exposed to the disease (thus seeing how horrific it is), there will be no chance of what happened with the fallen angels.]

7. And they MUST understand that the ONLY possible way for them to gain eternal life, the only way this plan can work, is by the GIFT from God of the payment of their debt by JESUS.

Without JESUS you CANNOT have eternal life. We must accept that gift. He then, gives us His Spirit, the vaccine, which begins it's work in us. Complete healing comes upon His return when we are changed.

That's my take, anyway. For all I know, it could go back to the angels. Were they part of the plan, or separate from the plan? Any thoughts...?

************

It is important that you understand; Everything on this blog is based on the current understanding of each author. Never take anyone's word for it, always prove it for yourself, it is your responsibility. You cannot ride someone else's coattail into the Kingdom.

Acts 17:11

************

The Case for Teaching The Bible (TIME - Thursday, Mar. 22, 2007) by David Van Biema

I came across these two very interesting 2007 articles online and wanted to share them with you, our readers:

Miss Kendrick came ready, with props. The day's topic was the Gospel of Matthew. "You can divide all the Beatitudes into two parts," Jennifer Kendrick explained to her teenage audience. "The 'Blessed are the whatevers,' like 'the meek,' and then the reward they will get. So I've made some puzzle pieces here." She passed out construction-paper sheets, each bearing either the name of a virtuous group or its reward, in black marker. "And you've got to find the person who has the other half. What's the first one in the Bible?"

"The poor in spirit," mumbled a crew-cut boy.

"O.K. What goes with the poor in spirit?"

A girl in the front of the room replied, reading from her sheet, "For they will see God."

"Nope," chirped Kendrick. "O.K., find the person that matches yours. I'll take the roll."

By which she meant an official attendance roll. Because the day was Thursday, not Sunday. And the location was not Oakwood Baptist Church, a mile down Texas State Highway 46, but New Braunfels High School, a public school that began offering a Bible-literacy class last fall. The class has its share of conservative Christians. Front-row center sat Rachel Williams, 18, whose mother does teach Sunday school at Oakwood. But not 20 ft. away sat a blond atheist who asked that her name not be used because she hasn't outed herself to her parents. Why take a Bible class? I asked her. "Some of my friends are Christian," she said, shrugging, "and they would argue about, like, whether you can be a Christian and believe in evolution, and I'm like, Okaaaay ... clueless." Williams signed up for a similar reason. "If somebody is going to carry on a sophisticated conversation with me, I would rather know what they're talking about than look like a moron or fight my way through it," she says. The class has "gotten a lot of positive feedback," she adds. "It's going to really rise in popularity."

The same might be said about public-school courses on the Bible nationwide. There aren't that many. But they're rising in popularity. Last year Georgia became the first state in memory to offer funds for high school electives on the Old and New Testaments using the Bible as the core text. Similar funding was discussed in several other legislatures, although the initiatives did not become law. Meanwhile, two privately produced curriculums crafted specifically to pass church-state muster are competing for use in individual schools nationwide. Combined, they are employed in 460 districts in at least 37 states. The numbers are modest, but their publishers expect them to soar. The smaller of the two went into operation just last year but is already into its second 10,000-copy printing, has expressions of interest from a thousand new districts this year and expects many more. The larger publisher claims to be roughly doubling the number of districts it adds each year. These new curriculums plus polls suggesting that over 60% of Americans favor secular teaching about the Bible suggest that a Miss Kendrick may soon be talking about Matthew in a school near you.

To some, this idea seems retrograde. Citing a series of Supreme Court decisions culminating in 1963's Abington Township School District v. Schempp, which removed prayer and devotion from the classroom, the skeptics ask whether it is safe to bring back the source of all that sectarianism. But a new, post-Schempp coalition insists it is essential to do so. It argues that teaching the Bible in schools--as an object of study, not God's received word--is eminently constitutional. The Bible so pervades Western culture, it says, that it's hard to call anyone educated who hasn't at least given thought to its key passages. Finally, it claims that the current civic climate makes it a "now more than ever" proposition. Says Stephen Prothero, chair of the Boston University religion department, whose new book, Religious Literacy (Harper SanFrancisco), presents a compelling argument for Bible-literacy courses: "In the late '70s, [students] knew nothing about religion, and it didn't matter. But then religion rushed into the public square. What purpose could it possibly serve for citizens to be ignorant of all that?" The "new consensus" for secular Bible study argues that knowledge of it is essential to being a full-fledged, well-rounded citizen. Let's examine that argument.

Is it constitutional?

TOWARD THE BEGINNING OF THE COURT'S string of school-secularization cases, the most eloquent language preserving the neutral study of religion was probably Justice Robert Jackson's concurring opinion in the 1948 case McCollum v. Board of Education: "One can hardly respect the system of education that would leave the student wholly ignorant of the currents of religious thought that move the world society for ... which he is being prepared," Jackson wrote, and warned that putting all references to God off limits would leave public education "in shreds." In the 1963 Schempp decision, the exemption for secular study of Scripture was explicit and in the majority opinion: "Nothing we have said here indicates that such study of the Bible or of religion, when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education, may not be effected consistently with the First Amendment," wrote Justice Tom C. Clark. Justice Arthur Goldberg contributed a helpful distinction between "the teaching of religion" (bad) and "teaching about religion" (good). Citing these and subsequent cases, Marc Stern, general counsel for the American Jewish Congress, says, "It is beyond question that it is possible to teach a course about the Bible that is constitutional." For over a decade, he says, any legal challenges to school Bible courses have focused not on the general principle but on whether the course in question was sufficiently neutral in its approach.

Why should I care?

HERE IS ONE OF PROTHERO'S FAVORITE stories of Bible ignorance. In 1995 a federal appeals court upheld the overturn of a death sentence in a Colorado kidnap-rape-murder case because jurors had inappropriately brought in extraneous material--Bibles--for an unsanctioned discussion of the Exodus verse "an eye for eye, tooth for tooth ... whoever ... kills a man shall be put to death." The Christian group Focus on the Family complained, "It is a sad day when the Bible is banned from the jury room." Who's most at fault here? The jurors, who perhaps hadn't noticed that in the Gospel of Matthew Jesus rejects the eye-for-an-eye rule, word for word, in favor of turning the other cheek? The Focus spokesman, who may well have known of Jesus' repudiation of the old law but chose to ignore it? Or any liberal who didn't know enough to bring it up?

According to Religious Literacy, polls show that nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the Bible holds the answers to "all or most of life's basic questions," but pollster George Gallup has dubbed us "a nation of biblical illiterates." Only half of U.S. adults know the title of even one Gospel. Most can't name the Bible's first book. The trend extends even to Evangelicals, only 44% of whose teens could identify a particular quote as coming from the Sermon on the Mount.

So what? I'm not a very religious person

SIMPLY PUT, THE BIBLE IS THE MOST influential book ever written. Not only is the Bible the best-selling book of all time, it is the best-selling book of the year every year. In a 1992 survey of English teachers to determine the top-10 required "book-length works" in high school English classes, plays by Shakespeare occupied three spots and the Bible none. And yet, let's compare the two: Beauty of language: Shakespeare, by a nose. Depth of subject matter: toss-up. Breadth of subject matter: the Bible. Numbers published, translated etc: Bible. Number of people martyred for: Bible. Number of wars attributed to: Bible. Solace and hope provided to billions: you guessed it. And Shakespeare would almost surely have agreed. According to one estimate, he alludes to Scripture some 1,300 times. As for the rest of literature, when your seventh-grader reads The Old Man and the Sea, a teacher could tick off the references to Christ's Passion--the bleeding of the old man's palms, his stumbles while carrying his mast over his shoulder, his hat cutting his head--but wouldn't the thrill of recognition have been more satisfying on their/own?

If literature doesn't interest you, you also need the Bible to make sense of the ideas and rhetoric that have helped drive U.S. history. "The shining city on the hill"? That's Puritan leader John Winthrop quoting Matthew to describe his settlement's convenantal standing with God. In his Second Inaugural Address, Abraham Lincoln noted sadly that both sides in the Civil War "read the same Bible" to bolster their opposing claims. When Martin Luther King Jr. talked of "Justice rolling down like waters" in his "I Have a Dream" speech, he was consciously enlisting the Old Testament prophet Amos, who first spoke those words. The Bible provided the argot--and theological underpinnings--of women's suffrage and prison-reform movements.

And then there is today's political rhetoric. For a while, secular liberals complained that when George W. Bush went all biblical, he was speaking in code. Recently, the Democratic Party seems to have come around to the realization that a lot of grass-roots Democrats welcome such use. Without the Bible and a few imposing secular sources, we face a numbing horizontality in our culture--blogs, political announcements, ads. The world is flat, sure. But Scripture is among our few means to make it deep.

Doesn't secular teaching about the Bible play into the hands of the religious right and the secular left?

YES. BOTH. WHICH MAY SUGGEST THAT EACH is exaggerating its claim. Fundamentalist pastor John Hagee has complained that The Bible and Its Influence, a curriculum Kendrick uses in her class, could "greatly damage" youth too callow to "decipher" what he called its misrepresentations of Scripture. He cited its observation that contrary to Christianity, "other origin stories tell of ... gods who themselves are created." Hagee thundered that this could convince a student that polytheism is as valid as monotheism. But evangelical pundit Chuck Colson favors Bible-literacy courses. "Would I prefer a more explicitly biblical Christian teaching?" he asks. "Of course. But you can't do that in public education. What you can do is introduce the Bible so that people are aware of its impact on people and in history and then let God speak through it as he will."

First Amendment sentinels like Wendy Kaminer, a lawyer and the author of Sleeping with Extra-Terrestrials: The Rise of Irrationalism and the Perils of Piety, fear that given America's overwhelmingly Christian cast, even neutral Bible instruction would amount to preferencing. "If you teach the Bible outside of close conjunction with other religions," she says, "then it becomes a kind of promotion of the majority faith. It becomes too hard for most folks to draw the line between teaching and preaching." Yet the American Jewish Congress's Stern, who has participated in Supreme Court establishment-clause-violation cases, sees Bible class as a plus for anyone following in his footsteps. "Take creationism," he offers. "Unless you are literate in the first two chapters of Genesis, you have no idea what people are fighting about."

All such discussion, of course, assumes that the two sides of the culture wars are duking it out over impressionable young minds. Prothero rejects the premise. He says he has never seen a Bible-literacy course change anyone's faith one way or another. "I think the academic study of religion provides a kind of middle space between those two ways of talking. It takes the biblical truth claims seriously and yet brackets them for purposes of classroom discussion," he says. "It works in a way that feels safe to both the believer and the unbeliever in the room." And people are "tired of the culture wars," he insists. "There's a broad middle who want to do something productive."

So who are the leaders of this movement?

DECADES AFTER THE Schempp DECISION, most school administrators, lawsuit-averse by nature, had eliminated almost any treatment of religion. Then during the evangelical renaissance of the 1990s, a theologically conservative North Carolina group called the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools compiled an outline for Bible courses. The curriculums reached the attention of Charles Haynes, a senior scholar at the First Amendment Center, based in Arlington, Va., who favored teaching about religion in school but didn't think what he was looking at passed constitutional muster. He composed a document, The Bible and Public Schools: A First Amendment Guide, that accomplished two crucial things: it provided bright-line standards on what the law allowed and collected endorsements from so broad a base of advocates (the American Jewish Committee, the Council on Islamic Education, the National Association of Evangelicals and the liberal watchdog group People for the American Way, to name a few) that even the most nervous school board could find what he calls "safe harbor" for a course teaching about the Bible.

Haynes also brought in Chuck Stetson, who wanted to take the next step: a secularly acceptable Bible textbook. Stetson's religious credentials alarm church-state separationists. He is a graduate of Colson's Wilberforce Centurion project, a study group pledged to "restore our culture by effectively thinking, teaching and advocating the Christian world view as applied to all of life." Yet he claims his commitment to his textbook's constitutionality determined its secularity. In late 2005 he unveiled The Bible and Its Influence, which was vetted by 40 religious and legal scholars, including Jews, Protestants and a Roman Catholic bishop. Meant to be read alongside a Bible, the book's 373 oversize pages provide a clearly written--if selective--theme-and-style analysis of key passages in most of the biblical books. Its sidebars--"Cultural Connections," "Historical Connections"--do much of the heavy lifting in transforming a Bible commentary into a textbook.

It seems more legally palatable than its competition. The National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, which has offered its curriculum since 1993, claims a bigger market (382 schools in 37 states) than the newcomer (85 school districts in 30 states). But its 1999 edition reportedly recommended materials from something called the Creation Evidence Museum; a "question for reflection" in the 2005 version suggested that the logistics of Noah's Ark would have been more manageable if some of the animals were babies or hibernating. In 2002 a Florida district court ruled unconstitutional a course that critics claim was loosely based on its New Testament portion (the Council denies a connection). Its spokespeople claim it is refining itself as it goes and its most recent edition, which came out last month, eliminates much literalist bias--but still devotes 18 lines to the blatantly unscientific notion that the earth is only 6,000 years old.

Some secularists are worried about who will teach the literacy classes. Joe Conn and Rob Boston of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State have expressed a concern about how teachers willing to give the Bible secular treatment would be found, particularly in states where vast majorities are evangelical. They note that Stetson's history sections are almost exclusively positive. "A textbook should offer objective study about both the positive and negative uses of the Bible," Conn writes. "Where is the analysis of the role of the Bible in the Inquisition or the Salem witch trials?" They specifically question the tone of a final section, "Freedom and Faith in America," which omits the high court's school-secularization rulings and ends on a truly odd note: a Chinese social scientist attributing the "pre-eminence of the West" to the fact that the "heart of your culture is ... your Christianity." Unlike most of the book, this seems written by Stetson the true believer who took Colson's Centurion program.

A modest proposal

A BASIC QUESTION: WHY TEACH THE BIBLE and not comparative religion? It may not be necessary to provide Islam, Buddhism or Hinduism with equal time, but it seems misguided to ignore faiths that millions of Americans practice each day; and a glance at the headlines further argues for an omnibus course. Yet could a school demand that its already overloaded kids take one elective if they take the other? Concerns about whether a Bible Belt Christian teacher could in good conscience teach a religiously neutral Bible course also plagued me. Was high school Bible study one of those great ideas that vaporizes when exposed to air?

I visited New Braunfels high in early February. Jennifer Kendrick is committed to The Bible and Its Influence, but as a starting point rather than a blueprint. "It gives me ways to approach the topic, and then I put together something else," she says. She's unconvinced of its impartiality. "It will bring up Catholicism and mention Gandhi, but you can tell it's written as if I am a Protestant Christian teaching Protestant Christians."

Actually, she is a conservative Protestant. But her students don't know that, and nothing in the class I saw suggested it. Kendrick aces the compulsories--notes John Locke's use of the Beatitudes and Frank Zappa's riffs on "the meek shall inherit the earth," and ponders why various politicians have found it more convenient to attribute the "city on a hill" to Winthrop rather than to Matthew. When a student asks how Jesus could say the meek shall inherit the earth, when Christianity inherited it only after attaining tremendous strength, she suggests, "When he was giving the sermon, people took it not just as a physical award but an emotional or spiritual kind of award. Later on, when they became more powerful, say, in the Crusades or something, they weren't trying to inherit the earth. They were trying to take it over." Explaining why Jesus' famous sermon took place on a mount, she reminds the students that Matthew was writing for Jews, and a mount is where Moses received the Ten Commandments. "So, supposedly," she says, "Jesus is the new covenant, the new law, for the Jewish people."

She gives over much of the class to a Socratic symposium on Jesus' simplest yet most difficult sayings, which reveals a lot about the class's earnest attempts to make sense of rather disparate worlds. "'Turn the other cheek'--Does that mean we're supposed to let them hit you on the other cheek too?" she asks. A boy answers, "You should, you know, just take what's coming. It's not like if someone hits you. If someone doesn't give you the right change back, you shouldn't come back looking for a fight." A girl argues that it is more of an ideal than a mandate. "So it's a guideline," asks Kendrick, "and you apply it to the situation and see what fits?" This, in turn, upsets a girl in the third row, who asks, "Does that mean that the Ten Commandments are exceptions?"

Kendrick: "That they're literal?"

Everyone: "Yes!"

Trying to make sense of both this consensus and his possible future, an ROTC cadet notes, "Some people say, 'Thou shalt not kill' is really 'Thou shalt not murder,' and in Ecclesiastes it says, 'There's a time for war and a time for peace.'"

I could find little to object to here and much to admire. Here was a conservative teacher going way beyond The Bible and Its Influence, but not in a predictable direction. She name-checked the Crusades, avoided faith declarations and treated the Bible as a living document to be pored over rather than blindly accepted. She even managed to fit in other faiths. Moving on through the Sermon on the Mount, she pulled out another sheaf of papers. "So I'm gonna give these examples of Golden Rules from different cultures. Read 'em and share 'em with the class." They ran from Buddhism to Baha'i. And most did sound a lot alike. Shouted one girl: "The Golden Rule remix!"

One successful class teaching the Bible as an academic subject hardly guarantees that it will work every time or everywhere. But Kendrick shows that it can work. "Bad courses will be taught," predicts Prothero, sitting in his B.U. office with the inscription Sans Dieu Rien--Without God, Nothing--carved above the fireplace. (True to his nonsectarian position, he calls its presence "a coincidence. This used to be a private house.") "People will teach it as a Sunday-school class. And we'll do what we always do when unconstitutional stuff happens in America. We'll get a court to tell us what to do, and then we'll fix it."

Prothero may be overly sanguine about the workings of the U.S. court system. But even if he's wrong, this shouldn't stop schools from making some effort to teach the Bible. The study doesn't have to be mandatory. In a national school system overscheduled with basic skills, other topics such as history and literature deserve core status more than Scripture--provided that these classes address it themselves, where appropriate. But if an elective is offered, it should be twinned mandatorily with a world religions course, even if that would mean just a semester of each. Within that period students could be expected to read and discuss Genesis, the Gospel of Matthew, a few Moses-on-the-mountain passages and two of Paul's letters. No one should take the course but juniors and seniors. The Bible's harmful as well as helpful uses must be addressed, which could be done by acknowledging that religious conservatives see the problems as stemming from the abuse of the holy text, while others think the text itself may be the culprit. The course should have a strong accompanying textbook on the model of The Bible and Its Influence but one that is willing to deal a bit more bluntly with the historical warts. And some teacher training is a must: at a bare minimum, about their constitutional obligations.

And, oh yes, there should be one faith test. Faith in our country. Sure, there will be bumps along the way. But in the end, what is required in teaching about the Bible in our public schools is patriotism: a belief that we live in a nation that understands the wisdom of its Constitution clearly enough to allow the most important book in its history to remain vibrantly accessible for everyone.

David Van Biema is TIME's senior religion writer. His first cover story on the topic ran in 1996

Alabama Picks a Bible Textbook

By David Van Biema Monday, Oct. 22, 2007

Alabama has became the first state in the Union to approve a textbook for a course about the Bible in its public schools, and its surprisingly uncontroversial decision may prove to be a model for others.

According to Dr. Anita Buckley Commander, the Alabama Director of Classroom Improvement, there was no opposition to the October 11 vote by the state Board of Education to include The Bible and Its Influence on the state's list of accepted textbooks. The Board held a hearing on the issue and no one showed up; the book was approved by a vote of 8-0.

The textbook is a product of the Bible Literacy Project, founded and run by Chuck Stetson, a conservative Christian New York-based equity fund executive. Assessing scripture and its subsequent influence on literature, art, philosophy and political culture, it was specifically designed to avoid the Constitution's church-state barriers. Although the text, which has been on the market for two years, is now taught in 163 schools in 35 states, no state had previously endorsed it.

The Bible and Its Influence has a fascinating constellation of supporters and critics. Some of its more liberal champions, such as the American Jewish Congress's counsel Marc Stern, feel that the republic can not only survive but will actually benefit from public school courses on a document as culturally central as the Bible — as long as the classes avoid being devotional. Evangelical heavyweight Chuck Colson hopes that God will speak to students even through a class that is secular in intent. Those opposed to the book include secularists who argue that it already violates the First Amendment and fundamentalists who see its approach as secular and therefore diluting the value of what they see as God's inspired word.

Despite the book's smooth passage through the Alabama school board, it had caused a firestorm in the state's House of Representatives only a year ago. Democrats who liked the book — and may also have been interested in burnishing their religious credentials — had submitted a bill making it the mandatory text for any public school Bible-study classes. State Republicans who didn't like the book, and may also have wanted to deny the Democrats the political God Card in an election year, ensured by their vociferous opposition that the Democratic bill was eventually voted down in committee. Something similar happened in neighboring Georgia, where Democrats submitted a bill prescribing The Bible and its Influence, but Republicans turned it into a much less specific endorsement of Bible classes.

Precisely why the Alabama Board of Education succeeded where the legislature failed (with one distinction: the school board didn't rule out the use of other texts) remains something of a mystery. Presumably most Alabamans would welcome a public school course on the Bible, even if it were from a secular standpoint; "I don't see how [the book] would scare anyone" who has read it, comments Commander. It may be that the Board of Education, which she describes as politically "balanced," is not as caught up in partisanship as is the Alabama House. Moreover, the book was not the Board's sole focus: in fact, its attention was monopolized by a discussion about school reading texts.

Although the Bible Literacy Project officers are thrilled with its success in Alabama, they are not necessarily counting on replicating it elsewhere fast. There are 22 states with similar low-key selection methods, but they tend to consider different curriculum categories year by year, and in some states the category including a Bible course textbook will not roll around for another eight. So, says a spokesperson for the Project, "we have to sit around and wait." In other states, the book doesn't appear to fit into any of the established categories of study. And then there are the 28 states where such decisions are made by local rather than statewide school boards.

The Bible Literacy Project is philosophical about the delays created by the different legislative processes in different states. Although a more centralized legislative initiative would result in faster adoption of the text, that process can fall victim to politics, as Alabama's experience shows. And, for advocates of studying (as opposed to preaching) religion in the public school curriculum, the low-key introduction of the text, whether locale by locale or through the workings of state boards like Commander's, offers an opportunity to assess its fairness and effectiveness before it becomes a nationwide fact.

The Case for Teaching the Bible

Alabama Picks a Bible Textbook