Faithlife
Faithlife

Refuge Culture 170801

Sermon  •  Submitted
0 ratings
· 1 view
Notes & Transcripts | Sermon Questions

Playing God

"Who is really ‘playing God’—the doctor who euthanizes a dying patient, or the doctor who extends the life of a terminally ill patient, or recreating the DNA structure to have a better and disease free human race?"
The question brings to light or to the surface a few points in the consideration in the end of life decision. Is there or can there be meaning in this life? Other words, is there any significant contributions to be made, is there any value in it? Take in account their suffering.
The only problem with this decision making process in determining “meaning” is that it is subjective. We have a belief or a hope of a particular outcome through emotion and not facts.
The thought behind euthanasia or mercy killings is that suffering is evil and must be eliminated. Or the popular one today is that it is my body, I can do as I want!
Euthanasia is nothing more than murder, just like abortion. We are deciding on when life ends, and taking it completely out of God’s control.
On the flip side, extending the life of a terminally ill patient may not be beneficial either. Is there a chance of cure or treatment or is the reason is that you don’t want to let go, so you extend the suffering past God’s appointed time. says that death comes at an appointed time, which God has set.
Creating a better race,
Scientists have long been able to make specific changes in the DNA code. Now, theyʹre taking the more radical step of starting over, and building redesigned life forms from scratch
They say Their work is part of a bold and controversial pursuit aimed at creating custom‐made DNA codes to be inserted into living cells to change how they function, or even provide a treatment for diseases.
Their work is part of a bold and controversial pursuit aimed at creating custom‐made DNA codes to be inserted into living cells to change how they function, or even provide a treatment for diseases.
it also opens the door to life with new and useful characteristics, like microbes or mammal cells that are be er than current ones
Redesigning DNA is alarming to say the least. They are dealing with and creating properties in organisms that we cannot fully know or understand. Their on admissions state they don’t know how these organisms will work. But this is done in the chase of a better and healthier race.
This is not just a science project, but is a moral and ethical theological proposition with significant repercussions.
Does anyone remember the last time someone said let’s create a better race. One that is healthier, stronger and purer blood line. This came out of Germany a few decades ago. It was wrong then and it is wrong now.
Science says that we should trust them, they know what they are doing but this is conceded and arrogant thinking.
1 Samuel 2:3 ESV
Talk no more so very proudly, let not arrogance come from your mouth; for the Lord is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed.
Romans 12:3 ESV
For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned.
Isaiah 13:11 ESV
I will punish the world for its evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; I will put an end to the pomp of the arrogant, and lay low the pompous pride of the ruthless.
They have no idea of what they are creating, kinda like Dr Frankenstien and what did his creation do? Kill him. If we are not careful, how will God use this to punish future generations?
There is a clear and present danger in all three of these examples of “playing God”. Eliminating pain and suffering, trying and utilizing every medical option to preserve life, or trying to prevent disease in future generations. I think it boils down to a matter of the heart. What is the real motive behind the drive and the decisions we make. Is it a selfish reason that we want to hang on to someone a little longer, or can’t imagine the world without them? We have to rely on God. Let God be God. We should seek His wisdom in all matters and submit to His will and plan.
James 1:5 ESV
If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him.
James 1:5
Considering and we should rely on God’s wisdom and strength in making decisions. We should make the most out of what time God allows us here and use His gifts to glorify Him, make others lives better and be the best representative of God’s we can be.

DNA Disproves The Bible

In a post modern, post truth society; claims that science has disproved the Bible is nothing new or surprising. What is surprising is the specific naming of “facts” to support the claim.
Normally the claims are date issued in the millions of years or unverifiable alternative facts.
In The July 29th issue of evolution and science today is another article that claims to disprove the Bible.
Slide 1 Web Title
Headlines around the world have broadcasted the news and revelations that the Bible has been disproved or at least doubt has been cast on it.
Slide Bullet headlines (2)
“Study disproves the Bible’s suggestion that the ancient Canaanites were wiped out” (The Telegraph)
“Bible says Canaanites were wiped out by Israelites but scientists just found their descendants living in Lebanon” (The Independent)
“Bronze Age DNA disproves the Bible’s claim that the Canaanites were wiped out: Study says their genes live on in modern-day Lebanese people” (Daily Mail)
“Scientists Find Evidence That Ancient Canaanites Survive Today: Was The Bible Wrong?” (Tech Times)
“New DNA study casts doubt on Bible claim” (Mother Nature Network)
“The Bible was WRONG: Civilisation God ordered to be KILLED still live and kicking” (Express)
“Genetic evidence suggests the Canaanites weren’t destroyed after all” (Ars Technica)
“Canaanites Weren’t Annihilated by Ancient Israelites After All” (Newser)
“Study disproves the Bible’s claim that the ancient Canaanites were wiped out” (Click Lancashire)
“Canaanites survived Biblical ‘slaughter’, ancient DNA shows”(ABC Online)
“DNA vs the Bible: Israelites did not wipe out the Canaanites” (Cosmos)
“The Bible got it wrong: Ancient Canaanites survived and their DNA lives in modern-day Lebanese” (Pulse Headlines)
AS the article says, “The science story itself is fascinating and to all appearances solid. Human remains dating to some 3,700 year ago from ancient Canaanites yielded DNA revealing a startling overlap with modern-day Lebanese.”
Judges 1:27 ESV
Manasseh did not drive out the inhabitants of Beth-shean and its villages, or Taanach and its villages, or the inhabitants of Dor and its villages, or the inhabitants of Ibleam and its villages, or the inhabitants of Megiddo and its villages, for the Canaanites persisted in dwelling in that land.
The article and subsequent news articles are specific about how the Bible is wrong. But there is only one problem, the Bible is very clear and detailed in the account of the Canaanites and the authors don’t know their Bible to well.
Slide
Judges 1:27 ESV
Manasseh did not drive out the inhabitants of Beth-shean and its villages, or Taanach and its villages, or the inhabitants of Dor and its villages, or the inhabitants of Ibleam and its villages, or the inhabitants of Megiddo and its villages, for the Canaanites persisted in dwelling in that land.
list areas where the Israelites did not kill/ destroy or even drive out the Canaanites. This wasn’t one area but several areas and territories.

The Evangelical Roots of Our Post-Truth Society

So we now have an attack specifically on Evangelical Christians, what a surprise. A journalist from the New York Times writes and proposes that the post truth society grew out of the evangelical church. She is writing about the concept of a “biblical worldview”. She lays a foundation that the church misleads and mis-guides people through this doctrine.
She writes: “Conservative evangelicals are not the only ones who think that an authority trusted by the other side is probably lying. But they believe that their own authority — the inerrant Bible — is both supernatural and scientifically sound, and this conviction gives that natural human aversion to unwelcome facts a special power on the right. This religious tradition of fact denial long predates the rise of the culture wars, social media or President Trump, but it has provoked deep conflict among evangelicals themselves.”
Did you catch the few put-downs here:
But they believe that their own authority — the inerrant Bible — is both supernatural and scientifically sound
1st off we don’t believe in our own authority, it is God’s authority that we submit too. We surrender our will, our wants and desires for His will and His direction in our lives.
We do believe in the inerrant Bible but God is the authority and the author of it. We believe in the authority of God’s word, because it is from God. But her attack is on the Bible itself, she is insinuating that the Bible is wrong and that many evangelicals believe this also. The proof is in the last sentence:
it (the Bible and the inerrant theology) has provoked deep conflict among evangelicals themselves.
She made the argument a sentence before:
“natural human aversion ( a strong dislike) to unwelcome facts She calls this “a special power on the right”. This religious tradition of fact denial”
So in my own words she says we deny facts. That we do not follow the facts to scientific enlightenment.
Molly says: “The phrase is not as straightforward as it seems. Ever since the scientific revolution, two compulsions have guided conservative Protestant intellectual life: the impulse to defend the Bible as a reliable scientific authority and the impulse to place the Bible beyond the claims of science entirely.”
Apparently ever since the scientific revolution (around 1700) Christians have developed two impulses. 1st is the inerrancy of scripture. The charge is being made this way to try and refute anyone from challenging her. This is around the same time period, the 1400 when the first printed bible was completed. The Gutenberg Bible in 1456, but that wasn’t the first Bible. There have been scribes working from the turn of the 1st century handwriting the text and churches have been passing them around since then.
Even today we look to new discoveries and not scoff or coward in the corner as a denier. But we do follow the truth and the facts. But the second impulse gets to the heart of the matter.
“The second impulse, the one that rejects scientists’ standing to challenge the Bible, evolved by the early 20th century into a school of thought called presuppositionalism. The term is a mouthful, but the idea is simple: We all have presuppositions that frame our understanding of the world. Cornelius Van Til, a theologian who promoted this idea, rejected the premise that all humans have access to objective reality.”
This is where she and most liberal believers are wrong. Presuppositionalism did not begin in the 20th century nor the 15th. This goes all the way to the time Jesus walked the earth. When Jesus asked the disciples in Whom do you say I am?
We all have some type of presupposition (or let’s call it for what it is our beliefs) that shape our view of the world and our life. But the left tends to try and slant the view off-center. What I mean is this, here her statement insinuates that presuppositionalism came about in the 20th century, but that is the modern version of apologetics. However apologetics has been around since Paul used it in Acts.
Molly’s presupposition is that religion is wrong. That religious people are deniers of truth and facts. But that is contrary to actual events. Go back to her own statement again, “natural human aversion ( a strong dislike) to unwelcome facts She calls this “a special power on the right”. This religious tradition of fact denial”
Now go back to the previous study, about how DNA was suppose to disprove the Bible that the canaanites actually survived when the Bible said they did not. But that was proven false. Because the Bible clearly stated that Israel did not obey God and utterly destroy the Canaanites. Not once but many times in many locations. So instead of disproving the Bible, science proves the Bible. Molly’s own presupposition that the bible is wrong, she will never admit to these facts prove Joshua, Judges, 1 & 2 Samuel. Christians will gladly look objectively at science, and we will follow the truth (not man’s subjected truth).
RELATED MEDIA
See the rest →
RELATED SERMONS
See the rest →