False Premises and False Conclusions from Darwin to Denominations

Logic is greatly misunderstood. We often think logic is based on what we think is obvious. However, that is not how logic works. At the the very base of logic is the idea of drawing a logical conclusion from established premises. The key being both the veracity of the premises and the undeniable (no alternative) to the conclusion drawn.

• Premise: Tom is a cat
• Premise: All cats are felines
• Conclusion: Tom is a feline

This may seem obvious, and to some degree it is. But even with this simple example we are asked to accept that (a) Tom is, in fact, a cat and that (b) all cats are felines. Again, we can show this, but that's the point. We cannot always simply assume a premise is true or that a conclusion is reliable.

• Premise: Tom is a cat
• Premise: All cats are gray
• Conclusion: Tom is gray

Here we see the logical conclusion that Tom is gray. However, the second premise (that all cats are gray) has never been established. If the second premise were true, then, yes, the conclusion would be both logical and sound. So, something can be a logical conclusion based on believed or even generally accepted premises, but that does not make that conclusion necessarily sound.

There are also two assumptions in the first argument. We assume Tom is indeed a cat and we also assume that all cats are felines. Now, that second point may seem crazy, but we have not examined and tested  every single cat who has ever lived to determine they are all felines. That might seem like we're stretching things a bit, but there are times when we assume truths which might not be true due to our limited scope. If someone grows up in a secluded area where all the cats are gray, she may be inclined to believe our second premise is true. 

When it comes to science, many things which are technically theories (that is, they've never been proven to be true or they have never been observed) which we treat as truths. Further, there are things assumed true (no longer considered theories) which either are impossible to test or do not hold up against all the evidence available. Finally, we assume some things are true based solely on our limited capacity to test the veracity of the belief.   

This is not a post on the subject of logic, so we'll have to leave that discussion where it is. We will now turn to Carl Sagan's argument for an enormous and wildly old universe.

The first problem is that the calculations for both age and distance are assumed to be consistent over millions and billions of years (necessarily trillions and quadrillions, etc. of years as no single point of origin can be pinpointed or even assumed). But, again, we will have to leave that where it is. 

Sagan himself, in his Cosmos PBS series, conveniently states that it is not necessary to go back beyond the supposed Big Bang (the dating of which has varied over the years, which in itself should make us question dating conclusions). But if matter is all there is, and matter cannot be created or destroyed (a law of science, not a theory, Law of Conservation of Mass in a closed system), it must then be eternal (having no origin). We must go back infinitely in time. The Big Bang theory itself is an argument against itself. We mention this only to show how the anti-biblical movement expects its adherents to have faith without using the word "faith." They ask that illogical premises be accepted despite our very real logical conclusion that inorganic matter cannot create itself.  

The numbers are incomprehensible. According to current scientific beliefs (Scientism), the nearest star in our own galaxy (Proxima Centauri, the nearest, mind you) is over 4 light years away. One light year equals 9,460,730,472,580 kilometers. Four light years is equal to 2.3514501 x 10 ¹³   Miles. Try to comprehend that number. Now recall that this is the closest star, in our own galaxy. Such impossibly huge numbers are used, in my opinion, so the mind will just accept them. Contemplating such numbers ends in futility and it is easier just to affirm what should result in natural skepticism.

So when the naturalists show us a pretty picture of supposed planets which may be like earth and which may have life (the mathematical numbers are incomprehensible here as well, along with the idea of an infinite past in which life and intelligence and complex biological an chemical information just happen to accidentally develop, for no reason, like that of earth), ask yourself how they could possibly know or test such a conclusion? They can't. We shouldn't even have to get to that point because, as noted, the laws of science not only state that matter can neither be created nor destroyed, but inorganic matter cannot create or become organic material (life).

This is what they show us ("relatively close, 40 light years away" -Fox4 News)

235,145,010,000,000 miles away. No, we cannot comprehend this distance. "Relatively close" is a ridiculous statement meant to cause uncritical acceptance.

Btw, all of the following are artists' renderings (Earth and Kepler-186F) which most people assume are photographs:

NASA essentially gives us "artist's concept" for everything

This is what they are using (color enhanced by NASA):

Darwin described what he called the "simple cell." But a single cell is "irreducibly complex." That is, any reduction in the complex structure of a single cell would render it useless and dead. This begs the question, where did this complex design and the organic information needed for it to exist come from? Further, why and how did a supposed cell create itself out of inorganic material (which we've established is an impossibility)?

And we haven't even touched the hem of the garment on not only complexity of proteins and their accidental creation, but the necessity of only certain proteins, arranged irreducibly in a specific order in order for life to even be possible (and only possible as the protein arrangements alone do not equal life).

 

Darwin and his contemporaries considered cells to be simple, jelly-like structures, but modern science reveals them as highly complex, irreducibly intricate systems... The discovery of such complexity challenges the notion that cells could evolve gradually through small, random changes. Studies suggest that evolving even a single protein from another could take far longer than the age of the universe under natural mutation rates.

The problem in evolution only gets worse from there. Let's just take the human nervous and cardiac systems. These are impossibly complex systems that no computer could even attempt to create with all the data provided, let alone it creating either by accident for no reason. And these extremely complex systems also work in tandem with each other (along with all the other complex systems in the human body). And there are similar, yet uniquely complex and widely varied systems in nearly 7000 mammal species. 

Evolution is sold to us as a force that cares about things like "survival" and "healing" and "procreation" and "advancement." It somehow created complex information from nowhere to insure survival. But the idea of survival in meaningless. What is its point? Everything dies. Nothing matters. 

Death is necessary in the evolutionary system for advancement and survival. If this accepted, we would be saying that evolution makes more complex life, just so it can die and give way to even more complex life. Somehow evolution has a plan! It thinks ahead!  And it kills its creation in order for the next advancement to arrive only so it can kill that off in a never-ending, goalless system of death leading to nothing. 

"Life" (including all life forms) is an accident with no purpose. We have given it value. We have declared it "important." Yet even these thoughts must be explained by random chemical responses to stimuli. This is thinking logically. It is drawing conclusions from even the unproven premises they have foist upon us. In the aforementioned Cosmos series, Sagan demands that his listeners think no farther back than the imagined Big Bang for this very reason. he is training people not to think beyond the premises they are told are proven. But thought itself, like everything else in that system., must also be accidental and explained in purely physical terms.

Every thought of every creature in a system that must be explained solely by the laws of science as men have declared them in terms of those laws. That is, things like feelings or opinions or values are all just chemical responses to stimuli. Uncontrollable. Random and meaningless and none greater than another. 

A murder is no greater than an act of selflessness. Love no greater than lust. Charity no greater than greed. These are all just accidental chemical reactions foreordained by DNA and random stimuli. And even if we don't want to accept such an idea, there remains nothing to distinguish concepts like right and wrong or moral and immoral (no matter how the godless philosopher wants to cloud the clear issue).

A blind, inorganic, non-living, thoughtless force is given the attributes of a caring god, and the irony is lost on the God-rejector. The atheist declares himself smarter than the God of scripture yet far less intelligent than a blind, meaningless, insentient force. He cannot create the simplest thing with all his intelligence that a blind force created by accident for no reason (defying the laws of science to do so). 

They have a god. It is all-powerful, it is all-knowing, it is smarter than the atheist can even comprehend. But it asks nothing of him and he is free to create his own system of morality. This is the god they choose, the god they worship, the god they believe has their best interests at heart. It is also a god they can ignore when their flesh desires whatever it will. In fact, some of the worst acts of the flesh can be excused or even championed as they serve their master's goal of "survival" and evolution.

Sadly, but not surprisingly, many professed Christians and many denominations (including the enormous Roman Catholic Church) have compromised with evolution. In an evolutionary system, death is good and necessary (contradicting its supposed goal of survival) and God is its author. Death is the enemy. It is not the mechanism of advancement, but a power that had to be defeated. 

The acceptance of evolution and an eternal, mindless universe has sewn the seeds of destruction of not only the western world, but of the truths of scripture, the only place men can find the remedy and rescue from the power of death. 

The forces that have poisoned sound doctrine have done so, no gently, but with force. A corrupt laity has imposed its errors on the willfully blind sheep and they accept no compromise. They have joined the God-deniers in there dismissal and mockery of God, the scriptures, and faithful believers. Bible teacher, J. Vernon McGee explained, and rightly warned, his decision to leave the Presbyterian Church because of its compromises with the world:

"[the] liberal leadership [had] taken over the machinery of the presbytery with a boldness and ruthlessness that is appalling." 

Ruthlessness indeed. And the clergy class in the Presbyterian Church as other clergy in other systems claiming the name of Christ has taken along with it countless millions and has led them into darkness and doubt and destruction. 

[McGee] often spoke of the days of societal apostasy in Christianity and secularism that he believed he was witnessing during his lifetime, warning that spiritual apostasy was always the first of the three stages leading to the fall of nations, commonly observed throughout the Bible, the second and third being, respectively, immorality and political anarchy.

-Compare: The Amazing, Alarming, and Awful Apostasy

 

We are in the last stage. The outward church is in apostacy. Immorality is the norm and widely accepted and approved as not only normal, but even as good. Western political parties are embracing the chaos of communism and atheism. The true God is shunned and any politician openly quoting scripture is demonized as the sellers of Sharia Law and ritual-based Christendom are championed. A very dark age is ahead. An age so dark, it cannot be imagined. 

And its cause is greatly because of the surrender of the individual believer to a wicked and corrupt clergy class. This has always been a curse on Christendom. But the curse is now ubiquitous and the clergy class horrifyingly compromised and corrupt. Men love to surrender their duty too a clergy class. A class that has rejected Paul and his revelation for the current age. They'd rather follow their pastor or their denomination. So it was, so it ever shall be.

Study to show yourself approved by God, a workman who need not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

-2 Timothy 2:15 

Follow me [Paul] as I follow Christ.

-1 Corinthians 11:1 

 

I, therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, exhort you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you were called.

-Ephesians 4:1

Satanic Religious Doctrines of the Last Days

We will center this topic on the specific warning in First Timothy. Before we get to the passage in question, let us first jump to Paul's conclusion:

If you remind the brothers of these things, you will be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished by the words of faith and of good doctrine, which you have followed closely.

-1 Timothy 4:6

We study this matter so we may strive to be "a good minister of Jesus Christ." 

To understand the warning, we must also recognize two other notes of context. First, we are in the post-Acts age. That should be very evident based on our look at marriage and Paul's differing instructions in 1 Corinthians 7 (in the Acts Age) along with the Lord's woe (in his earthly ministry to Israel) in Matthew 24 against what Paul instructs in 1 Timothy 5 (Post-Acts age). 

All three of these passages are in context of some sort of end times scenario. The Lord in Matthew 24 is answering a question from his disciples, "when will these things be, and what will be the sign of Your coming and of the end of the age?" Paul in 1 Corinthians 7 discourages marriage (and, by extension, children) because "the time is short." We are quick to add they neither the Lord nor Paul "forbid" marriage, they are advising in light of the terrible time at hand for Israel in the tribulation that being married (having children) will be an additional burden.

I say to the unmarried and widows that it is good for them if they live even as I am.... But if you marry, you have not sinned. And if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Nevertheless they will have trouble in this life, but I would spare you that.

-1 Corinthians 7:8, 28

 

Woe to those who are with child and to those who nurse in those days! Pray that your escape will not be in the winter or on the Sabbath. For then will be great tribulation, such as has not happened since the beginning of the world until now, no, nor ever shall be.

-Matthew 24:19-21 

Therefore I desire that the younger women marry, bear children, manage the house, and give no occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.

-1 Timothy 5:14

Before we move on, I would also note that the Lord in Matthew 24 is addressing Israel. He tells us in Matthew 15 (seen also in his instructions for the preaching of the Gospel of the Kingdom in Matthew 10) that his earthly ministry was for Israel alone (15:24). The discourse in Matthew 24-25 is specifically in regard to prophecy concerning Israel. It must be understood in this context or fanciful interpretations will arise (as we have seen from the clergy class since very early on in this current age).

“So when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.

-Matthew 24:15-16

But we must leave that there. Let us return to the opening of First Timothy chapter four:

Now the Spirit clearly says that in the last times some will depart from the faith and pay attention to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their consciences seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods, which God has created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and not to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving, for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

-1 Timothy 4:1-5

If we allow ourselves just  a straightforward application of this passage we will quickly see the demonic has overcome professing Christendom. Not only the doctrine of celibacy for the leading class of some but also the prohibitions. Christians across the spectrum take great pride is denying themselves during things like man's season of Lent.

The vast sex and molestation scandals we have seen in recent years exposing wickedness across American Catholic dioceses through her priesthood has been eye-opening. And the desperate attempt to point at other denominational sex scandals is an utter denial of Rome's claim to be the "one true church outside of which there is no salvation" ("extra Ecclesiam nulla salus"). She claims to be the sole mediator between Christ and man but resorts to finger pointing at those she has historically condemned in order to try and claim they're no different than any other "denomination" (a concept not recognized by Rome). 

Thomas Aquinas (who R.C. Sproul unbelievably dubbed one of the greatest Christian minds) wrote:

“The unity of the Church exists primarily because of the unity of faith; for the [Catholic] Church is nothing else than the aggregate of the faithful. And because without faith it is impossible to please God, for this reason there is no room for salvation outside the Church. Now the salvation of the faithful is consummated through the sacraments of the Church, in which [sacraments] the power of the Passion of Christ is effective” 

(Source: Exposition Primae Decretalis ad Archdiaconum Tudertinum, ed. by Fr. R. Verardo, Opusculum Theologica, Vol. I, Marietta, Turin, 1954, p. 425).

The doctrine of salvation in the CC alone is a large one, but for context let me quote a few statements (we have noted some of these in other studies):

The Catholic Church has always taught that outside the Church there is no salvation (Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus). This doctrine has been solemnly defined by:

• The Fourth Lateran Council (1215)
• The Council of Florence (1439), Cantate Domino
• Pope Boniface VIII in 1302:

“We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”— Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, 1302


The Council of Trent affirmed that salvation requires sanctifying grace, faith, and the sacraments, especially baptism.

“Those who are not within the Catholic Church... cannot be saved.”— The Catechism of the Council of Trent

“The greater number of adults perish.”— St. Alphonsus Liguori

-Source: true catholic faith dot com (quoting the originals) 

Since Vatican II (AD 1962-1965), the CC has become far more slippery with their tongues concerning salvation.  They play with words and concepts such as we find in  the documents of Vatican II (and as repeated in the current catechism):

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it. 

-CCC 846

“The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.” 

-CCC 841

While having to affirm that salvation is found in the CC alone and the "necessity" of Baptism, Rome had to deal with Muslims (among others). The slippery words are "the plan of salvation also includes." This allows them the out in light of the obvious contradiction. Muslims are not excluded, but that does not touch the doctrine of the necessity of the CC. Of course, they dance all other this and around it and through it in so many ways in so many places (including in the words of "Saint" John Paul II), but we have covered these things elsewhere. 

We will leave that there. But we note these things again in context of the last days compromises, alliances, and false earthly kingdom that will be pursued more and more as we head towards the end of the current age. I will say here again: if I said any of these things about my church or theology, I would be labeled a heretic, and an apostate, and a false prophet. Meanwhile, the entity that has slaughtered more Bible believing Christians than the Roman Empire (and celebrated the slaughters) gets a pass. Scrutiny and comparing scripture with scripture, in this one case, is condemned as "hate." This is not some wild accusations, many former Catholics suffered this charge in the 1990s as the ecumenical movement roared.

Popular Evangelical Bible teacher, Jack Van Impe, condemned those who would not join with Rome. He went as far as holding up the 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church on his TV program and called it "the Word of God." A large Reformed newsletter condemned "vociferous ex-Catholics" for not joining the ecumenical bus. Chuck Colson, Pat Robertson, J. I. Packer, Os Guinness, and Bill Bright (among others) signed the 1994 document, "Evangelicals and Catholics Together." 

Can we the roots here of those who profess the faith but are quick to abandon it in the name of “unity” or “love?” Our primary loyalty should be to Christ alone and to his finished work alone. Any compromise on that to any degree is not love, but rather what Paul warns, a departure from the faith. They have been seduced by wicked doctrines of demons in the name of “tolerance.”

We will not (and cannot) dive into all the horrific Christ-denying doctrines of the Papists here. We only note a few as it is incredible how so many (especially among the Reformed) hold Aquinas (a Christ-denying, demonic teacher) in such high regard. But that is the context of Paul's warning. The "doctrines of devils" which Paul warns will be imposed on the laity, will not come from the drug dealer or the Polytheistic religions, it will come in the name of Christ. The drug addict or the pagan cannot deceive as well as he who comes in the name of the Lord can. 

For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his [Satan's] ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.

-2 Corinthians 11:13-15

And as I note to those silly Catholics who, in the name of "real" Catholicism, opposed Pope Francis (and now Pope Leo) at every turn… there is no such opposition allowed in true Catholicism. We note again:

 

“The Church is one, holy, catholic, and also apostolic. We believe in her firmly and we confess with simplicity that outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins. . . . It is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff”

-Pope Boniface VIII  

Since Garibaldi defeated the Papal armies in the late 19th century, Rome has sought to massage this, and the other utterly clear Papal and Conciliar decrees, to not mean what they clearly state. But, either directly or indirectly, the Pope and that system are the clearest representation of what Paul has warned against in his epistle.

But it is not to that system that I believe Paul refers, but rather to an unwitting and deceived Evangelical Trojan Horse that will capture the uniformed, those weakened by years of mishandling of scripture by the clergy class across the board.

We know the CC forbids their priests to marry (with rare exception) and we know they forbid the eating of meat on certain days. If one does eat meat on certain days, with full knowledge and intent of the heart, they teach that the eternal state of his soul is in danger of torture by God for eternity in "hell." 

We must note that the rules concerning the eating of meats have changed over the centuries. Until fairly recently the consumption of meat was forbidden on every Friday. In centuries past there were daily time elements and the restrictions and condemnations including other things beyond just meat. Currently, local bishops hold certain powers of binding and loosing over their dioceses. 

Millions upon millions were and are in slavery to a tiny clergy class. And it will only get worse as the last days progress. Those outside of Rome will align themselves for political or other purposes and the true believer will be shunned in the name of Christ. 

Man is almost incurably religious and superstitious (Acts 17:22). We see this in how the Greek mythological version of the afterlife permeates Christendom. The resurrection is lost. The true earthly plan is subdued and rejected. And a clergy class has risen up to keep billions in darkness.

So, while Rome will be behind much of the deception, as Paul notes in Philippians, the shaming and rejection will come from those who have been deceived. Rome is ready to welcome the true believer as long as he buys the deception. If one does not, he will be turned over to his own for rejection. Rome will play the victim of his "hate" and his own brethren will mock him to scorn and reject him as a hindrance to the "kingdom."

Now the Spirit clearly says that in the last times some will depart from the faith and pay attention to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their consciences seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods, which God has created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and not to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving, for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer. If you remind the brothers of these things, you will be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished by the words of faith and of good doctrine, which you have followed closely. But refuse profane and foolish myths. Instead, exercise in the ways of godliness. For bodily exercise profits a little, but godliness is profitable in all things, holding promise for the present life and also for the life to come. This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptance. For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe.

-1 Timothy 4:1-10

Note again, the false doctrines will arise from among those who "depart from the faith and pay attention to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons." 

We must incorporate these ideas into our discernment:

• Some spirits are religiously seductive
• Some doctrines from professed believers are demonic
• Some ministers are ministers of Satan
• Satan presents himself as an Angel of Light

In the Acts age, Paul concerned himself with avoiding and denouncing both physical adultery and spiritual adultery.  

I would to God you could bear with me a little in my folly. Indeed, bear with me. For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy. For I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. But I fear that somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve through his trickery, so your minds might be led astray from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he who comes preaches another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if you receive another spirit, which you have not received, or another gospel, which you have not accepted, you might submit to it readily enough.

-2 Corinthians 11:1-4

There is one gospel in the current age (as we just studied). I see the last days a confused "gospel" the doctrines of men mixed with commandments meant of other ages for other callings. Beware, the deception will be enticing and will appeal to our best (carnal) natures. 

For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy. For I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. But I fear that somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve through his trickery, so your minds might be led astray from the simplicity that is in Christ. 

-1 Timothy 4:2-3

 

And to Adam He said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten 

from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat of it,’
Cursed is the ground on account of you;
in hard labor you will eat of it
all the days of your life.
Thorns and thistles it will bring forth for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
By the sweat of your face
you will eat bread
until you return to the ground,
because out of it you were taken;
for you are dust,
and to dust you will return.”
-Genesis 3:17-19

Again... Satan didn't tempt Eve with adultery, he tempted her with simply not believing God's standard for her age. She created her own religion. And God didn't ask, "did you vote on how you feel about my standards?" either. 

Unimaginable Evil

Cain said to Abel his brother, “Let us go out to the field.” And when they were in the field, Cain rose up against his brother Abel, and killed him. Then the Lord said to Cain, “Where is Abel your brother?” He said, “I do not know; am I my brother’s keeper?” And the Lord said, “What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood is crying to me from the ground. And now you are cursed from the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand...

-Gen 4:8-11

When we visit this account in Genesis 4, we look to the previous chapters to try and find a "law" against murder. We find no such law. Before we continue, let us dismiss the argument posited by some that the law was given, just not yet in writing. This argument should be dismissed with prejudice for many reasons, but we can simply point to two obvious reasons.  

• There was no Israel at this point as specifically denoted in the Law of Sinai
• Paul's argument for grace states unequivocally that the Law was given 430 years after Abraham

Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, “And to seeds,” as of many, but as of one, “And to your Seed,” who is Christ. And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect. For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no longer of promise; but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

-Galatians 3:16-18

We have covered the place of the Law in previous studies. We now return to Cain. It is clear from the passage in Genesis 4 that the taking of Abel's life was clearly wrong. It was clearly sin. Cain brought a curse upon himself. He knew in his conscience that he had done wickedly despite attempts to sear that conscience.

In the previous chapter, Adam and Eve violated the only Law they had at the time, "Have you eaten of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?" The Lord had "commanded" them not to eat from a specific tree. Is this a "law" for this age? No. It makes no sense in this age. The economy is quite different today.

But let us not miss another aspect of God's words to Adam.

 

But the Lord God called to the man, and said to him, “Where are you?” And he said, “I heard the sound of thee in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.” He said, “Who told you that you were naked?..."

At this point, being naked was natural and good. This was not so afterward. Of course, the only people at that time were Adam and Eve (husband and wife) and nakedness is no sin in that relationship. But we must note that the Lord clothed them before the birth of Cain ("And the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins, and clothed them" Gen 3:21). This may have been in preparation for the birth of Cain, but regardless, conditions and expectations (economies, dispensations) and rules changed.

What did not change with the birth of Cain was the understanding that murder was wrong. Some things are inherently wrong. The act of the Serpent to deceive Eve was counted as wickedness despite no specific law being violated. Adam and Even were essentially Gentiles. Paul notes that even Gentiles without the law understand certain things are wrong and/or evil.

For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified; for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them) in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.

-Romans 2:12-16

What "law" do they have written in their hearts? Check virgins for purity? Do not wear clothes of mixed fabrics? Pay 50 shekels for a defiled daughter? The law have we all have written in our hearts tells us stealing is wrong. Murder is wrong. Lying is wrong. Cain needed no written law. The inward law is confirmed in the conscience.

The conscience can be seared, however. Refusing the witness of the conscience or simply caving to the desires of the flesh can quench any voice within (for both the believer and for the unbeliever). This will be especially true in the last days.

Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron...

-1 Tim 4:1-2

It is for the seared in heart and mind to whom the law is concerned. The Gentile does not need the law to tell him murder or sexual depravity is wrong. Romans 1 lays out the decay of the Gentile mind from conscience to wickedness. It is only here that we might introduce the law, solely to, perhaps, revive the conscience. 

But we know that the law is good if one uses it according to the rules, knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers...

-1 Timothy 1:8-10

AC Gaebelein notes of 1 Timothy, "To use the law is for the believer a denial of grace." The believer may sear the conscience in his old nature, but he has a new nature (holy spirit) to which we can appeal. We do not need the law. In his Roman epistle Paul speaks of the believer being dead to the law. We will examine that further in our next entry.

The immediate context of the 1 Timothy 4 passage above is those who speak lies with no pang of conscience left in themselves. This passage goes on to state that while these have internally seared consciences, they will impose external laws and expectations on others (particularly in a religious context, but we can see a greater application). We have seen some of the greatest wickedness over the centuries from those within a religious context (as we are careful to note atrocities also arising out of atheistic philosophies). 

forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth

Imposing an external set of laws on others gives one a sense of righteousness not found in the darkened heart. This is why some of the most Draconian laws and the loudest voices against perceived and manmade evils come from those involved in true wickedness.

Crimes against children are heinous and clearly wicked. Yet, in our day, children suffer unimaginable horror at the hands of many who seek to impose manmade measures of "righteousness" upon the rest of us. They practice wicked ritual involving children and other vulnerable and they signal their self-defined virtue to the world about them. They hold up banners of heroism in themselves as they commit acts that we dare not eve mention the level of wickedness is so high. 

It is often the sexual deviant who screams the loudest about popular movements of the day. It is the supporter of torturing and murdering children in the womb who often carry the banner of "love" and "acceptance," pitting themselves against imagined windmills of perceived evil.

I believe this is partly because of the searing process for the conscience and a manifestation of the fallen nature which exalts itself above all that is of God. Do not be fooled when this external virtue comes in the cloak of religion. It is in this context that itcan the most deceptive and attractive. Paul warns us that this tactic will be the case. We must recognize that Satan presents himself as an Angel of Light and his ministers as the ministers of righteousness (2 Cor 11). This is a powerful warning.

It has often been unfathomable to me how anyone who comes in the name of the Lord can "celebrate" the torture and murder of babies in the womb (and now some are calling for legalizing this slaughter in the birth canal). Similarly, it seems unfathomable that millions would turn a blind eye to the exploitation and horrible abuse of children.

The pattern has been the same with many evils.

1. Deny the evil exists and that it is only a conspiracy theory
2. Exposure
3. Embrace the evil as good

We saw this with Planned Parenthood selling baby body parts. First, they claimed "doctored video," but after the unedited video was released revealing the truth, the use of baby body parts was deemed a net "good" for society.

This is why trying to convince certain people with facts is useless. They are deluded in self-righteousness. The move from "That is a Lie!" to "Of course it's true and it's good" pattern works in the mind convinced it is inherently good. Of course, this "goodness" is filtered through the eyes of men and not through the eyes of God.

In John's gospel he recounts the Lord's words for his greater flock:

They will put you out of the synagogues; indeed, the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God. And they will do this because they have not known the Father, nor me.

-John 16:2-3

These are people doing things in the name of God. They think they are the righteous ones.

In the religious world (even in the Evangelical world) even the holy and good Law can be misused by those determined to enslave others to a Law that could neither cleanse nor save. The only hope is walking in the New Nature granted by grace through faith. This is the "holy spirit" spoken of in scripture. There is a Holy Spirit which is God and a holy spirit which is the new nature in the believer.

But even in the believer the voice of the New Nature can be quenched if one chooses to walk according to the old nature. We must remember that ALL men have the old nature. Unbelievers have only the old nature with its faulty conscience while believers have both and old and a new nature. We are still in danger of walking in the latter. We have discussed the two natures in previous studies.

Let me close by saying that I think the unimaginable evil being practiced today will only get worse and that the imposition and use of religious terminology will accompany some of the wickedness as the self-declared "virtuous" ones will present themselves as Angels of Lights like their father does.

This sickness has even infected the company of believers as Paul warn us. And why is this? This is nothing new. Wickedness and sin from Adam to the worshippers of Moloch to the Pharisees to the Popes has come in the name of virtue and religion and righteousness. When wickedness is exposed, it often becomes virtuous and this transformation is often done in the cloak of religion.