Category Archives: Uncategorized

A Testimony Against Modern Textual Criticism


A Testimony Against Modern Textual Criticism

September 13, 2022

The following testimony to the authority and authenticity of the Holy Scriptures is by George Sayles Bishop. Preached in 1885 at the dawn of the modern era of modern textual criticism, this message lays out that unquestioning faith in God’s Holy Word that has characterized true believers from the beginning of time. It is not a blind faith. It is not an ignorant faith. It is faith in a God who cannot lie.

In the following passage, Bishop is writing in defense of the one word “God” in 1 Timothy 3:16.

The acceptance of modern textual criticism is almost universal among denominational Baptists, such as Southern Baptists and the American Baptist Church, and has spread widely among fundamental Baptists.

Modern textual criticism was invented by heretics, particularly theological modernists and Unitarians such as Richard Simon, Richard Bentley, Johann Wettstein, Johann Griesbach, Karl Lachmann, George Vance Smith, B.F. Westcott, F.J.A. Hort, Philip Schaff, Ezra Abbot, Joseph Henry Thayer, William Mounton, Charles Briggs, Francis Brown, Samuel Driver, William Sanday, William Robertson Smith, Caspar Gregory, Eberhard Nestle, Hermann Von Soden, Rudolph and Gerhard Kittel, Frederick Conybeare, F.F. Bruce, James Elliott, Edgar Goodspeed, James Moffatt, Fredric Kenyon, Francis Burkitt, Kirsopp Lake, George Ladd, Reginald Fuller, F. Wilbur Gingrich, Walter Bauer, Alexander Souter, J.B. Phillips, C.H. Dodd, Ernest Colwell, Kurt Aland, Bruce Metzger, and Carlo Martini. (For extensive documentation see the free eBook The Modern Bible Version Hall of Shame, http://www.wayoflife.org.)

Modern textual criticism is the heretical theory behind the modern Bible versions. It assumes that God has not precisely preserved the Scripture, but that it had to be recovered in modern times by textual critics. It produces uncertainty concerning the details of Scripture. A confident “thus saith the Lord” is replaced with “this reading has more support than that reading.” The congregation’s one Bible standard is replaced with a multiplicity of conflicting Bibles.

The voice of George Sayles Bishop is the voice of confidence that can only come by a rejection of modern textual criticism:

‘Oh, but it is only one word!’ Yes, but one word of Scripture of which it is said, ‘Thou hast magnified Thy Word above all Thy Name!’ ‘Only one word!’ But that word ‘God.’ Better the whole living church of God should perish than that one word should perish. ‘If any man take away from the words of the book of this prophecy God shall take away his part.’ Let criticism pause. The principle at stake is solemn.

The point at issue in the whole controversy with ‘modern criticism’ is, whether the Bible can be placed upon the same plane with other, merely human, literature and treated accordingly; or whether, as a Divine Revelation, it addresses us with a command and sanction? The power of the Book is shaken from the moment we deny its a priori binding claim on our belief and obedience. The Book is a royal document, or series of documents issued by the King of kings, and binding upon every subject. The Book, then, is to be received with reverence by one who falls upon his bended knees beneath the only shaft of light which, from unknown eternity, brings to the soul the certainties of God—of His dealings in grace with men, and of a judgment. The Old Testament is—in some sense—more awful than the New—as it begins with a creation out of nothing—as it thunders from Sinai, and as it prefigures and predicts the momentous facts of Calvary and the Apocalypse. But it has been represented that the Bible has twisted itself up like a worm from the dust by an Evolution in which the human element is most conspicuous.

The inspiration of the Old Testament, including that of the whole Bible, is a matter, first of all, of pure Divine testimony, which leaves us nothing but to receive it. God says, ‘I am speaking.’ That ends it. The instant order of the Book to every reader is ‘Believe or die!’ The Book brings with it its authentication. Who would think of standing up under the broad blaze of the noonday sun to deny the existence of the sun? His shining is his authentication.

The Jews cherished the highest awe and veneration for their sacred writings which they regarded as the ‘Oracles of God.’ They maintained that God had more care of the letters and syllables of the Law than of the stars of heaven, and that upon each tittle of it, mountains of doctrine hung. For this reason every individual letter was numbered by them and account kept of how often it occurred. In the transcription of an authorized synagogue manuscript, rules were enforced of the minutest character. The copyist must write with a particular ink, on a particular parchment. He must write in so many columns, of such a size, and containing just so many lines and words. No word to be written without previously looking at the original. The copy, when completed, must be examined and compared within thirty days; if four errors were found on one parchment, the examination went no farther—the whole was rejected. When worn out, the rolls were officially and solemnly burned lest the Scripture might fall into profane hands or into fragments.

The Old Testament, precisely as we have it, was endorsed by Jesus Christ, the Son of God. When He appeared on the earth, 1,500 years after Moses, the first of the prophets, and 400 years after Malachi, the last of them, He bore open testimony to the sacred canon as held by the Jews of His time. Nor did He—among all the evils which He charged upon His countrymen—ever intimate that they had, in any degree, corrupted the canon, either by addition, diminution, or alteration of any kind. By referring to the ‘Scriptures,’ which He declared ‘cannot be broken,’ the Lord Jesus Christ has given His full attestation to all and every one of the books of the Old Testament as the unadulterated Word of God.

Our Blessed Lord puts ‘what is written’ equal to His own declaration. He saw the Old Testament inspired from one end to the other, divine from one end to the other. Ah! how He valued the sacred text! Our modern critics, with arrogance which rises to daring impiety, deny to Christ the insight which they claim for themselves. The point right here is this, Did Jesus fundamentally misconceive the character of the Old Testament? Did He take for a created and immediate revelation what was of a slow and ordinary growth? Or was He dishonest, and did He make about Abraham, for example, statements and representations which belong only to a geographical myth—a personality which never existed?

The authority of Jesus Christ, God speaking—not from heaven only, but with human lips—has given a sanction to every book and sentence in the Jewish canon, and blasphemy is written on the forehead of any theory which alleges imperfection, error, contradiction, or sin in any book in the sacred collection. The Old Testament was our Lord’s only study book. On it His spiritual life was nurtured. In all His life it was His only reference. Through His apostles He reaffirmed it. Five hundred and four (504) times is the Old Testament quoted in the New. The whole Jewish nation, down to this day, acknowledge, without one dissenting voice, the genuineness of the Old Testament. The Book reflects upon them and condemns them; it also goes to build up Christianity, a system which they hate, and yet, impressed with an unalterable conviction of their divine origin, they have, at the expense of everything dear to man, clung to the Old Testament Scriptures.

The Old Testament is inspired from beginning to end. What do we mean by this? We mean infallibility and perfection. We mean that the books are of absolute authority, demanding an unlimited submission. We mean that Genesis is as literally the Word of God as are the Gospels—Joshua as is the Acts—Proverbs as are the Epistles—the Song of Solomon as is the Revelation. We mean that the writings were inspired. Nothing is said in the Bible about the inspiration of the writers. It is of small importance to us who wrote Ruth. It is every importance that Ruth was written by God. How did God write? On Sinai, He wrote, we are told, with His finger. We are told this in seven different places. God used men with different degrees of style. He made Amos write like a herdsman and David like a poet. He made the difference, provided for it, and employed it because He would have variety and adapt Himself to all classes and ages.

He wrote through the men. How did He do this? I do not know. The fact, I know, for I am told it. The secret is His own. I read that ‘holy men of old spake as they were moved’—then they did not choose their own language. … I do not know how my soul dictates to and controls my body so that the moving of my fingertips is the action of my soul. I do not know how, in regeneration, God does all and I do all. He produces all and I act all, for what He produces is my act.

‘But there are discrepancies—contradictions.’ No! Scores of times I have corrected myself, but never God’s Word. Patience and a larger knowledge will solve every knot. Dr. Hodge, of Princeton, says: ‘Not one single instance of a discrepancy in Scripture has ever been proved.’ Would all the united wisdom of men have led them to relate the history of the creation of the universe in a single chapter, and that of the erection of the tabernacle in thirteen? The description of the great edifice of the world, would it not seem to require more words than that of a small tent?

To discredit the statement repeated in almost every chapter of Exodus and Leviticus—’And the Lord said to Moses.’ To charge Christ with falsehood, who says, ‘Moses said,’ ‘Moses taught you,’ ‘David says’—quoting as He does, not from the 7th and the 18th only, but from the 41st, the 110th, the 118th, and other Psalms. The result is to disintegrate the Bible and throw it into heaps of confusion mingled with rubbish—to shake faith to the very foundations and scatter Revelation to the winds. It is to elevate Robertson, Smith, Wellhausen, Baur, Astruc, Cheyne, and other heretics, who seem to have taken God into their own hands, to a level with the Saviour of men and His prophets, whom they criticize freely. THIS IS NOT EXEGESIS, IT IS CONSPIRACY. IT IS NOT CONTRIBUTION TO RELIGIOUS KNOWLEDGE, IT IS CRIME!

Think of the amazing, the stupendous difference between Christ quoting from a human compilation, or from the living Oracles of God! ‘I came not to destroy,’ He says, ‘but to fulfil’—to fulfil what? A haphazard collection of Ezra’s time—made up of fragmentary documents of men, some of whom had an inspiration little above that of Browning and Tennyson! … I beseech you, therefore, Brethren, beware of what is called ‘the modern school.’

‘In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth!’ Here are the Pillars of Hercules through which we pass from Time with all its changes into Eternity—a shoreless, changeless sea. Here are the frontiers of human exploration, beyond which rolls and surges the illimitable Ocean of Deity, Self-existent, blessed forever and independent of all creatures.

The first utterance of the Bible fixes it that matter is not eternal. That there was a point when the universe was not and when God, by simple fiat, brought it into being. So that, as the apostle says, He called the existent out of the non-existent—the visible from that which had no visibility. In other words, God made the world out of nothing—an awful nothing—the idea of which we cannot comprehend. A lonely and a solitary Worker, out of emptiness, He created fullness—out of what was not, all things—getting from Himself the substance as well as the shaping—the fact as well as the how.

‘In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.’ HE had to tell us that, for He ONLY was there. He had to TELL us that, but, being told, we at once, believe it, for everything outside the Self-existent must have a beginning. Matter must have had a beginning, for—push the molecules back as far as you will, either matter was the egg out of which God was hatched, or God hatched matter. Can there be any question as to which of these is true?

‘In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.’ IF THIS FIRST SENTENCE IS UNAUTHENTIC, THE WHOLE BIBLE IS UNTRUE AND FOR SIX THOUSAND YEARS MEN HAVE BEEN DUPED AND DELUDED WHO HAVE LOVED AND CHERISHED ITS TEACHINGS. The credibility of the Bible, then, depends upon the truth of the First Chapter of Genesis. If that chapter contains ‘a few small scientific lies,’ then the Book is a compilation of deceptions from cover to cover. Thus we are either Christians or skeptics! It has been claimed that no essential injury is done to Christian faith by concessions made to modern criticism—that if one believes in redemption, it is of small account what he believes of creation. But MEN WHO SPEAK SO RASHLY, OVERLOOK THE FACT THAT CREATION IS THE BASIS OF REDEMPTION—THAT THERE MUST BE MAN, AND MAN FALLEN, BEFORE THERE CAN BE MAN SAVED—AND THAT THE BELIEF IN CREATION DEPENDS ENTIRELY UPON THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF GENESIS, AS A HISTORICAL DOCUMENT.

The difficulty with Higher Criticism is that it disbelieves in advance, and the reason of this too frequently is that it is working with a brain whose crooked and vapid conclusions are guided by a heart averse to God—at enmity with God and working every way to get rid of Him.

George Sayles Bishop, The Doctrines of Grace and Kindred Themes, 1910

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

A Testimony Against Modern Textual Criticism


A Testimony Against Modern Textual Criticism
September 13, 2022


The following testimony to the authority and authenticity of the Holy Scriptures is by George Sayles Bishop. Preached in 1885 at the dawn of the modern era of modern textual criticism, this message lays out that unquestioning faith in God’s Holy Word that has characterized true believers from the beginning of time. It is not a blind faith. It is not an ignorant faith. It is faith in a God who cannot lie.

In the following passage, Bishop is writing in defense of the one word “God” in 1 Timothy 3:16.

The acceptance of modern textual criticism is almost universal among denominational Baptists, such as Southern Baptists and the American Baptist Church, and has spread widely among fundamental Baptists.

Modern textual criticism was invented by heretics, particularly theological modernists and Unitarians such as Richard Simon, Richard Bentley, Johann Wettstein, Johann Griesbach, Karl Lachmann, George Vance Smith, B.F. Westcott, F.J.A. Hort, Philip Schaff, Ezra Abbot, Joseph Henry Thayer, William Mounton, Charles Briggs, Francis Brown, Samuel Driver, William Sanday, William Robertson Smith, Caspar Gregory, Eberhard Nestle, Hermann Von Soden, Rudolph and Gerhard Kittel, Frederick Conybeare, F.F. Bruce, James Elliott, Edgar Goodspeed, James Moffatt, Fredric Kenyon, Francis Burkitt, Kirsopp Lake, George Ladd, Reginald Fuller, F. Wilbur Gingrich, Walter Bauer, Alexander Souter, J.B. Phillips, C.H. Dodd, Ernest Colwell, Kurt Aland, Bruce Metzger, and Carlo Martini. (For extensive documentation see the free eBook The Modern Bible Version Hall of Shame, http://www.wayoflife.org.)

Modern textual criticism is the heretical theory behind the modern Bible versions. It assumes that God has not precisely preserved the Scripture, but that it had to be recovered in modern times by textual critics. It produces uncertainty concerning the details of Scripture. A confident “thus saith the Lord” is replaced with “this reading has more support than that reading.” The congregation’s one Bible standard is replaced with a multiplicity of conflicting Bibles.

The voice of George Sayles Bishop is the voice of confidence that can only come by a rejection of modern textual criticism:

‘Oh, but it is only one word!’ Yes, but one word of Scripture of which it is said, ‘Thou hast magnified Thy Word above all Thy Name!’ ‘Only one word!’ But that word ‘God.’ Better the whole living church of God should perish than that one word should perish. ‘If any man take away from the words of the book of this prophecy God shall take away his part.’ Let criticism pause. The principle at stake is solemn.

The point at issue in the whole controversy with ‘modern criticism’ is, whether the Bible can be placed upon the same plane with other, merely human, literature and treated accordingly; or whether, as a Divine Revelation, it addresses us with a command and sanction? The power of the Book is shaken from the moment we deny its a priori binding claim on our belief and obedience. The Book is a royal document, or series of documents issued by the King of kings, and binding upon every subject. The Book, then, is to be received with reverence by one who falls upon his bended knees beneath the only shaft of light which, from unknown eternity, brings to the soul the certainties of God—of His dealings in grace with men, and of a judgment. The Old Testament is—in some sense—more awful than the New—as it begins with a creation out of nothing—as it thunders from Sinai, and as it prefigures and predicts the momentous facts of Calvary and the Apocalypse. But it has been represented that the Bible has twisted itself up like a worm from the dust by an Evolution in which the human element is most conspicuous.

The inspiration of the Old Testament, including that of the whole Bible, is a matter, first of all, of pure Divine testimony, which leaves us nothing but to receive it. God says, ‘I am speaking.’ That ends it. The instant order of the Book to every reader is ‘Believe or die!’ The Book brings with it its authentication. Who would think of standing up under the broad blaze of the noonday sun to deny the existence of the sun? His shining is his authentication.

The Jews cherished the highest awe and veneration for their sacred writings which they regarded as the ‘Oracles of God.’ They maintained that God had more care of the letters and syllables of the Law than of the stars of heaven, and that upon each tittle of it, mountains of doctrine hung. For this reason every individual letter was numbered by them and account kept of how often it occurred. In the transcription of an authorized synagogue manuscript, rules were enforced of the minutest character. The copyist must write with a particular ink, on a particular parchment. He must write in so many columns, of such a size, and containing just so many lines and words. No word to be written without previously looking at the original. The copy, when completed, must be examined and compared within thirty days; if four errors were found on one parchment, the examination went no farther—the whole was rejected. When worn out, the rolls were officially and solemnly burned lest the Scripture might fall into profane hands or into fragments.

The Old Testament, precisely as we have it, was endorsed by Jesus Christ, the Son of God. When He appeared on the earth, 1,500 years after Moses, the first of the prophets, and 400 years after Malachi, the last of them, He bore open testimony to the sacred canon as held by the Jews of His time. Nor did He—among all the evils which He charged upon His countrymen—ever intimate that they had, in any degree, corrupted the canon, either by addition, diminution, or alteration of any kind. By referring to the ‘Scriptures,’ which He declared ‘cannot be broken,’ the Lord Jesus Christ has given His full attestation to all and every one of the books of the Old Testament as the unadulterated Word of God.

Our Blessed Lord puts ‘what is written’ equal to His own declaration. He saw the Old Testament inspired from one end to the other, divine from one end to the other. Ah! how He valued the sacred text! Our modern critics, with arrogance which rises to daring impiety, deny to Christ the insight which they claim for themselves. The point right here is this, Did Jesus fundamentally misconceive the character of the Old Testament? Did He take for a created and immediate revelation what was of a slow and ordinary growth? Or was He dishonest, and did He make about Abraham, for example, statements and representations which belong only to a geographical myth—a personality which never existed?

The authority of Jesus Christ, God speaking—not from heaven only, but with human lips—has given a sanction to every book and sentence in the Jewish canon, and blasphemy is written on the forehead of any theory which alleges imperfection, error, contradiction, or sin in any book in the sacred collection. The Old Testament was our Lord’s only study book. On it His spiritual life was nurtured. In all His life it was His only reference. Through His apostles He reaffirmed it. Five hundred and four (504) times is the Old Testament quoted in the New. The whole Jewish nation, down to this day, acknowledge, without one dissenting voice, the genuineness of the Old Testament. The Book reflects upon them and condemns them; it also goes to build up Christianity, a system which they hate, and yet, impressed with an unalterable conviction of their divine origin, they have, at the expense of everything dear to man, clung to the Old Testament Scriptures.

The Old Testament is inspired from beginning to end. What do we mean by this? We mean infallibility and perfection. We mean that the books are of absolute authority, demanding an unlimited submission. We mean that Genesis is as literally the Word of God as are the Gospels—Joshua as is the Acts—Proverbs as are the Epistles—the Song of Solomon as is the Revelation. We mean that the writings were inspired. Nothing is said in the Bible about the inspiration of the writers. It is of small importance to us who wrote Ruth. It is every importance that Ruth was written by God. How did God write? On Sinai, He wrote, we are told, with His finger. We are told this in seven different places. God used men with different degrees of style. He made Amos write like a herdsman and David like a poet. He made the difference, provided for it, and employed it because He would have variety and adapt Himself to all classes and ages.

He wrote through the men. How did He do this? I do not know. The fact, I know, for I am told it. The secret is His own. I read that ‘holy men of old spake as they were moved’—then they did not choose their own language. … I do not know how my soul dictates to and controls my body so that the moving of my fingertips is the action of my soul. I do not know how, in regeneration, God does all and I do all. He produces all and I act all, for what He produces is my act.

‘But there are discrepancies—contradictions.’ No! Scores of times I have corrected myself, but never God’s Word. Patience and a larger knowledge will solve every knot. Dr. Hodge, of Princeton, says: ‘Not one single instance of a discrepancy in Scripture has ever been proved.’ Would all the united wisdom of men have led them to relate the history of the creation of the universe in a single chapter, and that of the erection of the tabernacle in thirteen? The description of the great edifice of the world, would it not seem to require more words than that of a small tent?

To discredit the statement repeated in almost every chapter of Exodus and Leviticus—’And the Lord said to Moses.’ To charge Christ with falsehood, who says, ‘Moses said,’ ‘Moses taught you,’ ‘David says’—quoting as He does, not from the 7th and the 18th only, but from the 41st, the 110th, the 118th, and other Psalms. The result is to disintegrate the Bible and throw it into heaps of confusion mingled with rubbish—to shake faith to the very foundations and scatter Revelation to the winds. It is to elevate Robertson, Smith, Wellhausen, Baur, Astruc, Cheyne, and other heretics, who seem to have taken God into their own hands, to a level with the Saviour of men and His prophets, whom they criticize freely. THIS IS NOT EXEGESIS, IT IS CONSPIRACY. IT IS NOT CONTRIBUTION TO RELIGIOUS KNOWLEDGE, IT IS CRIME!

Think of the amazing, the stupendous difference between Christ quoting from a human compilation, or from the living Oracles of God! ‘I came not to destroy,’ He says, ‘but to fulfil’—to fulfil what? A haphazard collection of Ezra’s time—made up of fragmentary documents of men, some of whom had an inspiration little above that of Browning and Tennyson! … I beseech you, therefore, Brethren, beware of what is called ‘the modern school.’

‘In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth!’ Here are the Pillars of Hercules through which we pass from Time with all its changes into Eternity—a shoreless, changeless sea. Here are the frontiers of human exploration, beyond which rolls and surges the illimitable Ocean of Deity, Self-existent, blessed forever and independent of all creatures.

The first utterance of the Bible fixes it that matter is not eternal. That there was a point when the universe was not and when God, by simple fiat, brought it into being. So that, as the apostle says, He called the existent out of the non-existent—the visible from that which had no visibility. In other words, God made the world out of nothing—an awful nothing—the idea of which we cannot comprehend. A lonely and a solitary Worker, out of emptiness, He created fullness—out of what was not, all things—getting from Himself the substance as well as the shaping—the fact as well as the how.

‘In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.’ HE had to tell us that, for He ONLY was there. He had to TELL us that, but, being told, we at once, believe it, for everything outside the Self-existent must have a beginning. Matter must have had a beginning, for—push the molecules back as far as you will, either matter was the egg out of which God was hatched, or God hatched matter. Can there be any question as to which of these is true?

‘In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.’ IF THIS FIRST SENTENCE IS UNAUTHENTIC, THE WHOLE BIBLE IS UNTRUE AND FOR SIX THOUSAND YEARS MEN HAVE BEEN DUPED AND DELUDED WHO HAVE LOVED AND CHERISHED ITS TEACHINGS. The credibility of the Bible, then, depends upon the truth of the First Chapter of Genesis. If that chapter contains ‘a few small scientific lies,’ then the Book is a compilation of deceptions from cover to cover. Thus we are either Christians or skeptics! It has been claimed that no essential injury is done to Christian faith by concessions made to modern criticism—that if one believes in redemption, it is of small account what he believes of creation. But MEN WHO SPEAK SO RASHLY, OVERLOOK THE FACT THAT CREATION IS THE BASIS OF REDEMPTION—THAT THERE MUST BE MAN, AND MAN FALLEN, BEFORE THERE CAN BE MAN SAVED—AND THAT THE BELIEF IN CREATION DEPENDS ENTIRELY UPON THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF GENESIS, AS A HISTORICAL DOCUMENT.

The difficulty with Higher Criticism is that it disbelieves in advance, and the reason of this too frequently is that it is working with a brain whose crooked and vapid conclusions are guided by a heart averse to God—at enmity with God and working every way to get rid of Him.

George Sayles Bishop, The Doctrines of Grace and Kindred Themes, 1910

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Ted Talk


1Ki 4:34  And there came of all people to hear the wisdom of Solomon, from all kings of the earth, which had heard of his wisdom. 

Solomon gave the first “Ted talk,” before anyone knew about Ted. He gave more truth and wisdom than all the “Ted” talkers that came later.

1Ki 10:24  And all the earth sought to Solomon, to hear his wisdom, which God had put in his heart. 

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Abortion is Ungodly 6


Abortion is Ungodly 6

6. The Bible says God forms the child in the womb (Psalm 139:13-16).

a. God possessed or fashioned David’s reins (Psa. 139:13).

(1) The word “reins” refers to the immaterial part of man, his heart, soul, and spirit. The term “reins” is closely associated with the “heart” and refers especially to man’s will, the seat of his desires, affections, and passions. See Psalm 16:7; 26:2; 73:21; Proverbs 23:16; Isaiah 11:5; Jeremiah 11:20; 17:10; 20:12; Revelation 2:23.

(2) This is God’s realm. Man doesn’t know enough about this to interfere. If an egg is fertilized for scientific research and the new life begins to grow and then is cut off, this means that a life made in God’s image has been extinguished. According to Psalm 139 it appears that the reins are already present in that newly conceived person even though its body has not yet formed. The Psalms teach us that man’s reins are possessed of God. They are formed by Him and owned by Him and return to Him at death (Ecc. 12:7). Let man beware!

b. God fashioned David’s body (Psa. 139:13-16). Here David thinks about the amazing complexity of his body and states that God is the author and should be praised for His works. “I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well” (Psa. 139:14). No other evidence for the existence of an almighty, all-wise Creator is needed than the fact of man’s miraculous makeup.

(1) David was curiously wrought and fashioned in continuance (Psa. 139:15, 16). This is a wonderful description of how the infant grows in the womb, beginning with the microscopic fertilized egg. The statement that David was made “in the lowest parts of the earth” does not refer to places under the earth but to the womb itself. It is a poetic description of the womb as a dark, inaccessible place where man’s eye does not penetrate. The Hebrew word translated “curiously wrought” (raqam) means “to variegate color, i.e. embroider; by implication, to fabricate” (Strong). It is elsewhere translated “needlework” (Ex. 26:36) and “embroiderer” (Ex. 38:23). Barnes comments: “It refers to the act of ‘weaving in’ various threads–as now in weaving carpets. The reference here is to the various and complicated tissues of the human frame–the tendons, nerves, veins, arteries, muscles, ‘as if’ they had been woven, or as they appear to be curiously interweaved. No work of tapestry can be compared with this; no art of man could ‘weave’ together such a variety of most tender and delicate fibres and tissues as those which go to make up the human frame, even if they were made ready to his hand: and who but God could ‘make’ them? The comparison is a most beautiful one; and it will be admired the more man understands the structure of his own frame” (Barnes). Alan Gillen, M.D., says, “The body is woven together just like a tapestry. For example, look at the interwoven complexity of a single skeletal muscle. … Under the microscope, the amazing interwoven design manifests itself” (Body by Design, 2001, p. 8).

(2) A description of David’s body was written in God’s book before he was formed (Psa. 139:16). This amazing divine book of human blueprints apparently exists in heaven.

c. In light of this Bible teaching, abortion is certainly murder. That child does not belong to the mother; it belongs to the Creator. A woman is not free to do with her body as she pleases because she is a created being and is accountable to God, and further, that infant in her womb is a separate body and a separate individual.

7. Idolaters killed their sons and daughters, and this was something that God hated (Psalm 106:38).

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Abortion Ungodly 5


2. God forbids man to shed innocent blood. Twenty times the Bible forbids the shedding of “innocent blood” (e.g., Deut. 19:10-13; 2 Kings 21:16). This refers to killing a person without a just cause (1 Sam. 19:5). To put a murderer to death, for example, is a just cause, but to kill an innocent person is unjust. God hates those who shed innocent blood (Prov. 6:16-17). What person is more innocent than an unborn child?

3. Modern science calls the unborn a “fetus,” but it is called a “child” in the Bible (Gen. 25:22). The child that dies before it is born is called an “infant” (Job 3:16). Therefore, to kill a “fetus” is to kill an infant child. The Bible says that children are distinct individuals even when they are in the womb. This was true of Esau and Jacob (Gen. 25:23). Jeremiah was called to be a prophet while he was still in the womb (Jer. 1:5), and John the Baptist was filled with the Spirit and responded to Christ while in the womb (Luke 1:15, 41-44).

4. The law of Moses demanded punishment if an unborn baby was harmed (Ex. 21:22-23). The injury or death of an unborn child was treated as a serious crime.

5. The Bible says that God is in control of conception (Genesis 20:18; 29:31; 30:22). The Bible says children are the heritage of the Lord (Psalm 127:3). The child in the womb does not belong to the mother; it belongs to God.

Our reading today – Jeremiah chapters 49-50

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Abortion Ungodly 4


The Bible forbids the abortion of an unborn child. Consider the following truths:

1. The Bible says that man is created in God’s image (Gen. 1:26). Man is not the product of blind naturalistic evolution, and he is not an animal that can be killed for convenience.

The doctrine of evolution has been a moving force behind the abortion industry, because it teaches that man is only an animal. In fact, the evolutionary doctrine of “recapitulation” claims that the embryo is not fully human until late in its growth stage.

This theory was popularized by Ernst Haeckel, Charles Darwin’s most prominent supporter in Germany. Haeckel taught that “ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny.” Ontogeny is the growth in the womb, and phylogeny is evolutionary development. The unborn child supposedly goes through a series of evolutionary stages from single cell to fish to amphibian to reptile to mammal to ape to human. Thus, the fetus only becomes human in its later stages. Haeckel produced drawings that showed that the human embryo is the same as that of animals such as a fish, a pig, and a monkey, but the drawings were fake. Haeckel mislabeled embryos; he changed the size of embryos; he deleted parts; he added parts; he changed parts. For example, he took a drawing of a monkey embryo and removed its arms, legs, navel, heart, and yolksac to make it look like a fish embryo. He then labeled it “Embryo of a Gibbon in the fish-stage.” Haeckel’s theory has been totally disproved, but his drawings are still used in textbooks today. Haeckel’s myth has encouraged the modern abortion industry. In 1957, child psychologist Benjamin Spock wrote, “Each child as he develops is retracing the whole history of mankind, physically and spiritually, step by step. A baby starts off in the womb as a single tiny cell, just the way the first living thing appeared in the ocean. Weeks later, as he lies in the amniotic fluid of the womb, he has gills like a fish…” (Baby and Child Care, p. 223). In 1990, Carl Sagan and his wife argued that abortion is ethical on the grounds that the fetus is not fully human until the sixth month. Taking Haeckel’s recapitulation theory as fact, they claimed that the embryo begins as “a kind of parasite” and changes into something like a fish with “gill arches” and then becomes “reptilian” and finally “mammalian.” By the end of the second month, the fetus “is still not quite human” (“The Question of Abortion: A Search for the Answers,” Parade, April 22, 1990).

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Abortion Ungodly 3


The most common types of abortion are the following:

Suction Aspiration. This is the most common method during the first trimester of pregnancy. The tiny infant is literally sucked out of the womb by a powerful pump with a suction force nearly 30 times that of a home vacuum cleaner. The procedure tears the baby’s body into pieces.
Dilation and Curettage (D&C). This method is used up to 18 weeks of gestation. The abortionist uses a curette, a steel knife, to cut the baby into pieces so they can be removed.
Partial Birth (D&X). Used for “advanced pregnancies,” the baby is partially removed from the womb so that about half of its little body is exposed with its legs hanging outside the woman’s body. The abortionist then plunges scissors into the baby’s head at the nape of the neck and spreads them open to kill the child. Its brain is then removed by suction before the lifeless body is removed entirely.
Salt Poisoning. This is used after 16 weeks. The abortionist injects a strong salt solution directly into the amniotic sac (the fluid surrounding the baby). As the baby breathes and swallows the solution, it is poisoned. It takes over an hour to kill the baby, with it struggling and convulsing during this time. Infants aborted in this manner are called “Candy Apple Babies,” because the corrosive effect of the salt exposes the raw, red, glazed-looking subcutaneous layer of skin and its head thus looks like a candy apple.
Prostaglandin Chemical Abortion. Drugs delivered through injection or suppository produces a violent labor and delivery of the child. Sometimes the baby is born alive, but it is too small to survive.
RU-486. This drug taken in pill form produces an abortion by not allowing the newly-implanted baby access to an essential hormonal nutrient. RU-486 is used after the mother misses her period, at which stage the baby is at least two to three weeks old. This is old enough to have a beating heart.

Our reading for today is Jeremiah chapter 38-40 and Psalms 74 and 79.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Abortion Ungodly 2


By 21 days, the baby’s heart begins to beat and the blood flows through its body. At 45 days, the tiny baby’s brain waves can be detected. By 8 to 9 weeks the eyelids have begun forming and hair appears. By 9 or 10 weeks, it sucks its thumb, jumps, frowns, swallows, and moves its tongue. By 12 or 13 weeks, the baby has fingernails and its own unique fingerprints; all arteries are present, vocal chords are complete; the baby can cry and recoils from pain. At 14 weeks ,the mother begins to feel the baby moving. At 15 weeks, the baby has fully-formed taste buds. At 16 weeks, it has eyebrows and eyelashes, and it can grasp with its hands, kick, and even somersault. At 20 weeks, the baby can hear and recognize its mother’s voice.

Job_31:15 Did not he that made me in the womb make him? and did not one fashion us in the womb?

Psa_127:3 Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.

Ecc_11:5 As thou knowest not what is the way of the spirit, nor how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child: even so thou knowest not the works of God who maketh all.

Our reading today is Jeremiah chapters 35-37.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Killing Babies in the Womb


Killing Babies in the Womb

Abortion is legal to some extent in all but 21 countries. Worldwide, roughly 46 million babies are destroyed in the womb each year. About one in five pregnancies end in abortion. The overwhelming majority of abortions are done as a means of birth control and convenience.

God’s people are obligated to honor God’s law more than man’s. Though abortion is legal, that does not mean that it is right in God’s eyes.

(Acts 5:29). Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Covenant Breaker


Will God Break His Covenant with David that David should have a son to reign upon his throne?

Jeremiah 33:20-21 – Thus saith the LORD; If ye can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, and that there should not be day and night in their season; 21. Then may also my covenant be broken with David my servant, that he should not have a son to reign upon his throne; and with the Levites the priests and my ministers.

If one can take away day and night, God’s covenant with David can be broken.

Our reading today is – Jeremiah chapters 32-34.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized