(Disclaimer: Some articles and links to articles published in this ezine may contain false doctrine. They are included due to some valuable content. The fact that they are printed here does not mean that we accept or endorse their doctrine. All writings of men, including ours, should be carefully compared to the New Testament writings.)


One of the most valuable tools I have found on the internet is the website "ANSWERS.com". It is not only a dictionary, but devotes an entire page to each word. Most words have an audio pronounciation and some even have an audio sentence using the word. Try it, you'll like it!

Concise dictionary information

SUBTLE:  adj  a. So slight as to be difficult to detect or describe; elusive: a subtle smile.
                        b. Difficult to understand; abstruse: an argument whose subtle point was lost on her opponent.

I've always kindly wanted to teach about a year's class on this subject. But it is surprisingly difficult to find all of the subtleties throughout the Bible. I try to make a note when I discover one. But then I lose the note. I call these things subtleties because the writers often pass over them with no explanations whatsoever. Take the first three words in the Bible, "In the beginning...". You might be able to discuss these three words for a full 13 weeks. But then, if you start plowing that deep, you would never finish.

Many of these subtleties are the result of brevity. Many scholars contend (and I agree whole heartedly) that the brevity of scriptural explanations is solid and sound evidence that it is a book of inspiration. These briefly explained incidents throughout the Bible are strong evidence that the writers were not trying sell the book but merely stating the facts as revealed by the Holy Spirit. ( Christian Courier.) ( J. W. McGarvey's Evidences of Christianity, page 219 )

But let's consider them for a few minutes anyway. What did Moses mean to cover with these three words? Beginning of what? Certainly not God. Certainly not those he later refers to as "us". Not His entourage of angels and or cherubims, or seraphims or whatever He had at the time.

No doubt the writer meant the beginning of physical matter, of time and space and anything concerned with a physical realm. Again we enter into what is often referred to as the "twilight zone". We can't understand it. But "time" is a meaningful consideration. We have all heard others make statements as "from the beginning of time" and "until the end of time". Time is a form of measurement of passing from present to future, and is counted by our repetition of days and nights from one event to another. When in eternity, all of this becomes irrelevant. There will be no days nor nights, no light except from God and time becomes useless with no beginning, no ending.

A spirit is non-physical in any respect. All physical matter is temporal (temporary) and is constantly deteriorating. It cannot be eternal and therefore it cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. (1 Corinthians 15:50)

Just as we eat 3 meals a day to sustain our physical bodies, we must also feast on God’s word daily to sustain our souls. If we don’t we are in danger of losing our souls. God says in Hosea 4:6, "My people are destroyed for a lack of knowledge." People will be lost because they did not care enough to read and study God’s instruction book on how to go to Heaven.

Paul says in 2 Thessalonians 2:10 that people will be lost "because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved." Satan wants to distract us with the cares and deceits of this world. He does not want us to read and study our Bibles every day. He knows that we become weak and vulnerable when we fail to study. Our strongest defense is a shield of faith. How do we obtain that shield of faith to protect us? Romans 10:17 says, "So then faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God." The more we study the word of God the stronger our faith will be. If we want to protect ourselves against Satan we must have a strong faith.

In years past we in the churches of Christ were known as "walking Bibles" because brethren then studied their Bibles. But sad to say, this is no longer true because we have failed to study God’s word, as we should. But what happens when we fail to study God’s word and become spiritually starved? 2 Peter 3:16 says that those who are "untaught and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the scriptures." We cannot understand God’s word unless we study it. And because of this Jesus says in Matthew 15:14, "They are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a ditch."

To keep from wandering around in spiritual darkness, let’s study God’s word so that "Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path" (Psalms 119:105). Let’s not endanger our souls by a lack of study of God’s word. Let’s take time to study it daily.

"Without God, there is no virtue, because there's no prompting of the conscience. Without God, we're mired in the material, that flat world that tells us only what the senses perceive. Without God, there is a coarsening of the society. And without God, democracy will not and cannot long endure. If we ever forget that we're one nation under God, then we will be a nation gone under."...Ronald Reagan

According to philosophers, anthropologists, and sociologists, America’s prevailing worldview is “postmodernism.” Moving beyond modernism, with its emphasis on facts (scientific or otherwise), postmodernism says that reality is purely a matter of individual and social perceptions. There is nothing “out there” independent of human or social interpretation. Consequently, when a postmodernist reads a book, he is not trying to learn what the author is saying. Instead, he asks himself, “What does this mean to me?” It is his subjective think-sos that become the “real meaning” of the book. This means that two different readers, unencumbered by the “tyranny of facts,” can “discover” two contradictory “meanings,” both of which, the postmodernists are quick to tell us, are equally “true.” This kind of “unity in diversity” is celebrated by these postmodernists as a “good” thing. In the same way, they assert that Western monotheism and Eastern pantheism, although logically contradictory, are both mutually “true” in the sense that they are the paradigms or systems through which different societies construct their own “realities.” However, in actual practice, postmodernists are quite sympathetic to Eastern religions. This is because of Eastern religions’ assertions that all religions are but man’s imperfect attempts to describe what he believes to be ultimate reality. This is exemplified by the Hindus who claim that there are, in fact, many paths leading to God/heaven—all of which are equally “true.” Like the postmodernists, they are tolerant of every view except that one view which claims to be the only correct view. They deny the idea that man can know “the truth” about God. To Eastern religionists, all religions are simply “a way,” and according to postmodernists, each culture has its “own truth.” All this, of course, violates the law of non-contradiction which says, basically, that two contradictory statements cannot both be true at the same time and in the same way. But, according to the postmodernists and the Eastern religionists, there is no such thing as true truth.

It ought to be apparent that postmodernists are as crazy as crazy can get. Nevertheless, it is this kind of craziness that permeates our society today. “Facts” or “truth” mean nothing to those who think this way, as evidenced by the general theory of evolution, which contradicts all the known facts of science, but continues to be believed by the overwhelming majority of people today, or the recent O.J. Simpson trial, where the preponderance of factual evidence indicating the guilt of Simpson was rejected by the jury. It is unfortunate, but true, that the historical accuracy of the Bible can have no impression on anyone infected with such a total disregard for truth and truthfulness. But, for those who continue to be interested in historical truth, it is still possible to distinguish truth from falsehood, fact from theory, and divine revelation from religious propaganda. For those who have not lost their minds to postmodernism, it is still possible to put the Bible to the historical accuracy test. If it were to fail this test, the Bible could easily be relegated to the garbage heap of religious propaganda. On the other hand, if it passes, and it does, this is but one more proof that it is what it claims to be.

A historical fact is either the historical event itself or a piece of accurate information about that event. Contrary to what many of us might think, there is no such thing as a “meaningless fact.” Even on its surface, such thinking must be seen as blatantly absurd. Why? Because, what the fact is, is its meaning. For example, the meaning of the fact that James Garfield was the twentieth President of the United States is obvious: A man named Garfield was the twentieth man to be the head of the executive branch of the government of the country named the United States. Therefore, meaning is inherent in the concept of fact.

(Reprinted from Allan Turner's "Bible Proofs And The Historicity Of Jesus" Page)

It would be bad to hear God say that, wouldn't it? Well, He said that to the church at Laodicea but it is recorded here for me and you as well. And sometimes I get the feeling that nearly every Christian is lukewarm. You see, Paul left us a difficult example. So did many of the other early Christians. So does my friends from Kenya, Benard and Elias.

Since we don't know just exactly what level of activity it takes to be considered hot or just lukewarm, we really need to turn up the heat and make sure. Attending 4 services per week and living a clean life is nice, but I don't believe that cuts it. Giving a small percentage of what we are blessed with, back to the Lord, is nice but I don't think that cuts it either. What it is going to take is that we must get serious about our efforts. Did we convert anyone last year? I'm not saying that is a requirement...but did we TRY? That is a requirement.

Sometimes when I talk this way to an individual, they say, "Well, just living a good Christian life before people, can influence someone to become a Christian." I don't question the truthfulness of that statement, but on the other hand...How many have you influenced in the past 5 years? How many have you converted in your lifetime by your prudent lifestyle? I hear the saying, "I'd rather see a sermon, than to hear one anytime." But I say that is wishful thinking. I'm not trying to degrade the need for a Christian living an exemplary life, that is also a requirement. But, when we decide that this is an adequate means of evangelism, I fear we are become lukewarm.

If you say that you are just not well enough acquainted with the scripture to teach others, you ought to be ashamed. You can read through the Bible in about 72 hours. Two hours a day will put you through it in about a month and a half. Reading through the Bible is not necessarily the best method of studying, but if you read through it 8 times in one year (and 2 hours a day will do that), you'll be far better equipped to defend the truth than you were the year before. I'm only trying to show how much one can study if they will only replace their TV time with reading.

There are two kinds of pedestrians: The quick and the dead.

Confucius say: Man who run in front of car get tired.

Confucius say: Man who run behind car get exhausted.

Drive very fast, you won't have to worry about cholesterol.