When Jesus know he is God?

by fact-s.net

Physiologically, no one among us humans know anything at time of birth except basic emotions. It is a stretch in credulity to believe that the newborn Jesus knew that he was “god”. After all, we are a composite of accumulated knowledge learned since birth through our senses, e.g., eyes, ears, etc. It is obvious that Jesus did not know that he was “god” at birth.

However, as a full grown man he knew that there are many “gods”, like Satan as god of this world (Jn 12:31;II Cor 4:4), idols, and all humans as in …Jn.10:34 when Jesus classified humans as, “Jesus answered them , Is it not written in your law , I said , Ye (humans) are gods ?”

There is no indication since his birth until Luke 2:49, when as a boy about 12 years old, Jesus acknowledged “his Father’s business”, suggesting that he knew he is the prophesied Son. As we all have learned from our parents, presumably, Mary and Joseph told him about ” immaculate conception” during childhood.

And this identity as prophesied Son became official at baptism not only from John the Baptist but from God the Father himself through the Spirit in Luke 3:22 “And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased”

After that baptism, he was then “full in Spirit” since. Also, Jesus was reading Isaiah in Luke 4:18 “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,”.”; v-21 “And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.”

During Satan’s temptation of Jesus, Luke 4:12 he indicated himself as “Lord your God”. This is a reference made from Deut. 6:16 about the Lord God (YHVH ELOHIM), who was the Creator (Gen. 2:4), Logos and Jesus himself (Jn. 1:1-3).

In summary, Jesus as YHVH ELOHIM knew he was God. But, after incarnation into man-Jesus, he did not know this as a newborn. During childhood, he learned that he was the “prophesied Son” from his parents Mary/Joseph, later from John the Baptist and officially from God the Father himself.

Light on the 1st day, yet sun was still on the 4th day?

by fact-s.net

Yes, this certainly is problematic. And the reason maybe because of traditional understanding of Gen. 1:1 & 1:2, which should be re-analyzed.

Gen. 1:1 should be interpreted as “did not” come from anything that can be seen”(Heb 11:3 NLT). Meaning, that the Creator God Logos (John 1) simply said the words “let there be” and the “heavens and the earth” were created.

Yes, the Creator Logos can easily say the “word” and things were created. The truth is, He did not need anything to create something. Meaning, that the Creator did not start with “without form”/bohuw and “void”/tohuw”, not with “darkness”/choshek”(Gen. 1:2) that described something already existing prior to creation.

Also, notice that from creation, it started with “good”, not with chaos or destruction. Instead, I Tim 4:4 “For everything God created (or started) is good,…,”

That said, an original “very good/perfect” creation of “heavens and earth” in Gen. 1:1 became “without form”/bohuw and “void”/tohuw”, with “darkness”/choshek” in Gen.1:2. Could there have been a “celestial war” that caused this devastation that occurred in the time span between these 2 verses?

With this scenario, the sun, moon, stars and earth were already created in Gen. 1:1 which could be eons ago. Then in Gen. 1:2 there was this history of destruction and chaos. After that “destruction”, was “cleansing” in v-2 that started on the literal “first day” as in “And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters(mayim or waste)”. The Spirit of God “cleanse the waste” and “darkness” that covered those already existing celestial bodies within that 6 day-period. The living things like plants, animals, humans were actually created on “literal” “sunset-to-sunset” days, as “very good”.

This pattern of creation was also shown in the creation of man as originally “very good/perfect”, then because of sin became “marred clay” which will be “re-conformed” (and cleansed) by the Potter (Jer.18:4; Heb 2:6; Ps.8:4) into the “likeness of Christ (Rom 8:29) to bring many sons to glory” (Heb 2:10).

What happens when one dies?

by fact-s.net

Life is conferred when “the breath of life” gets into the body. See Gen 2:7 and Gen 7:21-22.

Functionally, we observe this among newborns; unless there is spontaneous or artificial breathing, they are dead.

When this “breath of life”, which is the “spirit” of life”, leaves us and go to the Creator or origin of life, we are declared “dead” and our physical body becomes “dust”. See Eccl 12:7

Paul considers us “asleep” to reckon the fact that this state of “physical death” is temporary. We shall be resurrected either as “flesh” or as “spirit-beings” with “immortal, spirit-composed bodies” that can metamorphose into “visible “flesh composed bodies” to be seen, at our discretion. See the narrative of Christ’s resurrected body, and the angel-spirits visible to Abraham and Lot as in Gen 18 and 19.

What is the gospel message?

by fact-s.net

The “gospel of the kingdom of God”, is the “gospel of salvation”. But, how are they synonymous? Please follow me on this progression of “mocking” thought by Isaiah, “precept upon precept, line upon line, here a little, there a little” (Isa 28:10, 13).

Remember, that mankind was made in the “image” (or likeness, and it was so) of YHVH Elohim (Gen.1&2) to have (future) dominion (radah,to subjugate) over all earth (Gen.1:26-28). Moreover, that the “world to come” will not be “subject” (again) to angels but to mankind (Heb.2:5-18). And also, that the Lamb was “slain from the foundation of the world” (Rev.13:8). Indeed, it goes back even before the beginning of this world.

There is this strategic plan that while God did not like mankind to sin, man was created “very good” but still mortal and can die, even without sinning. He was “very good” as a “formed clay” but still “incomplete” as God will re-visit this “marred clay” as a potter can do to any clay to make it better, into “another vessel”(Jer 18:4).

However, in the garden of Eden, Adam sinned against God’s commandment, “thou shall not eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.. as he would surely die”(Gen.2:17). What death was God referring to? Notice this, “As it was once appointed that man would die and after that, the judgment” (Heb 9:27), therefore everyone will die (naturally, being mortal) then be resurrected to be judged as to the final destiny: “eternal life or “eternal death”.

The death therefore that God was referring to in Gen 2:17 was not “mortal death” that everyone was “once appointed” to be resurrected from. It has to be “eternal death”, from which there is no resurrection. The sin of Adam warrants eternal death not mortal death. Mankind will all die being mortals and be resurrected, but will be facing the judgment of eternal life or eternal death. The sin of Adam has a consequence of “eternal death” from which by substitution was imputed to the death of Jesus. That death of Jesus could have been eternal had it not been for the promise of Father God that Jesus would be resurrected. The faith (of) Jesus (in) the Father is anchored securely on this. Jesus’ death was an imputation for the “eternal death”, not the physical or mortal death. As Jesus was resurrected from what could have been “eternal death”, so shall those who follow Jesus as he is “bringing many sons to glory” (Rom 2:10).

The sin of Adam is punishable with “eternal death” that would have separated mankind “eternally” from the Father. The God of Gen 1 & 2, the YHVH ELOHIM/Lord God has to incarnate and die so that mankind would be reconciled to the Father. But, his death was only for reconciliation, not for salvation. Instead, we are saved “by his life”, i.e., Jesus has to be resurrected, for what? Notice, John 16:7 and John 14:16, 26 that he has to be resurrected to “life”, so the Holy Spirit will be sent to us “to dwell” in us (Acts 2). Why should the H.S. dwell in us? So that we will power (Acts1:8) and for sanctification (1Pet.1:2;RoRom 15:16; Cor.6:11; II Thes 2:13).
This HS provides spirit-power for “cognition, conviction, affection” and “oneness” with God. As circumcision is a “seal” to identify Israel, so is the HS a seal (Jn.6:7;2 Cor 1:21-22; Eph 1:13-14; 4:30; 2 Cor 5:5.

This HS prepares us to have the “mind of Christ”, so that at resurrection and endowed with spirit-body we will “be like him” and no longer just “an “image” (Gen 1) but co-substance with God.

Finally, “salvation” is about becoming a “new creation”, a “kingdom of God”. When God created living things, he created angelic-kingdom, plant-kingdom, and animal-kingdom. But, when it came to “man”, God was not creating a “human kingdom”, instead, God was creating a kingdom composed of spirit beings “like him”, a ” kingdom of God” and above angelic beings. The kingdom of God is more than just a “government of God” and a place. It is a “new creation”.

What an awesome gospel and destiny of man

Is Salvation by Faith alone or with works?

by fact-s.net

On this question, the answer becomes understandable after addressing the confusion that arises from what one understands about:
A. What is the mechanism of salvation? Are we saved already or is this still future?
B. How do we “show fruits” of the Holy Spirit towards salvation?
C. What salvation is and from what?
Answering these questions requires reconciling the following verses. Comments are made after quoting them:

A. Mechanism of salvation, saved already or yet future?
It helps to start with Ephesians 2:8-9
“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.”




COMMENT: Salvation is indeed by grace of the Father and a gift, not by our own works, so no man (even Jesus) can boast of what he did,i.e., crucified for us. Mankind has been alienated from Father God because of sin (Gen. 3), so egregious and a seminal event that deserved eternal death. Everyone’s sin reverted or defaulted to, by imputation, to Adam’s sin, one man,((Rom.5:12-21), so that his eternal death, as a consequence thereof, could be imputed to Jesus’ eternal death, also one man. But, the proximate result/effect of the death of Christ is to reconcile us to Father God, i.e., his death did not proximately or actually save us. It restored us back to the state of Adam before he sinned. It justified (just-as-if-did-not-sin) us in the eyes of the Father . As Rom 5:10 states, 
“For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God (through the death) of His Son, much more, having (been reconciled), we shall be saved by His life”. 



Notice, Adam’s/mankind’s eternal death was imputed to Jesus’ eternal death which then reconciled/justified us to Father God, but still we (shall) be “saved by his life”, i.e., we will (still) need to be saved (future) by “his life“. Meaning, after his death and our reconciliation, Jesus (on his belief) has to be resurrected to “life” before we can be saved. But, why did Jesus need to be resurrected? Notice in John 16:7 
“Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart (to the Father), I will send him unto you.” 



And, after resurrection and departing to the Father, what would Jesus do: Luke 24:49 
“And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be imbued with power from on high.”

The “faith (of) man-Jesus” in the Father is evidence-based as he was with the Father before the world began and he knew him as the source of power and wisdom. Predicated on that evidence-based faith, Jesus then trusted the Father and hoped, that:
 (1) His death would bring “reconciliation/justification“for mankind, 

(2) At his resurrection, the Spirit would be gifted to be “in us“,through Jesus, as promised, and 

(3) For the ultimate purpose of “bringing many sons to glory“(Heb. 2:10). 

It was prophesied that from a “stony heart”, figuratively “tables of stone“, that we had before, the Spirit will get into us to reside in the “fleshly tables of our heart” to write his laws (2Cor.3:3;Ex.31:18; Ezekiel.11:19, 36:26; Jer. 31:33) changed from “stony heart” to “fleshly tables” of our heart, now open for learning, guidance and “wisdom“. As Pharaoh was “hardened and blind” (Ex 9:12), so were we “deaf and blind” spiritually (Jn 12:40; Mk 4:12; Isa 6:10) until the Spirit was given to us, starting on chosen people at Pentecost. The Spirit is sorely needed by us, that Christ had to die, because “the flesh is weak” (Matt 26:40-43). Without this Spirit, we will not have “the empowering tool” for us to “see” even with our physical eyes, nor “ears” to hear, even with our physical ears. Yes, we are “blind and deaf” to spiritual things without this Spirit of God. Just remember that Peter did not know who Christ was until the Father “revealed it to him” by the Spirit (Matt. 16:15-17), the empowering tool. This is the principle and importance of having the Spirit in us, for guidance, safety, protection, nurturing, yes, sanctification.
B. How do we “show fruits” of this Holy Spirit towards salvation? 
Consider James 2:17-18
“So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.”


COMMENT: The context was about “showing“, our faith. The Spirit of God in us, molding the “spirit of man” (breath of life in Genesis) will have “fruits of the spirit”(Gal 5:22-23). True faith will then show or manifest in “good works“. These “works” however are “works of God” through us by the Spirit given by grace and as a gift because of the “faith of Jesus”. Any “good work” that emanates from us, are as “filthy rags” (Isaiah 64:6) to God; it has to be a product or “fruit of the Holy Spirit” in us. No one can therefore “boast“, even when our personal faith is required, as from “faith (of Jesus) to our faith“. Notice that in the garden of Gethsemane, Jesus followed, not his will, but the will of the Father (Lu. 22:42; Jn.4:34; 6:32-44). So must we, as empowered by the Holy Spirit. Indeed, not our “own works“, but the “works” of the Spirit given to mold us “like clay being shaped” (Isa 64:8; Jer 18:1-23; 18:2-6; Rom 9:21) into the mindset of Christ, the Head of the “body of Christ”, the church. Without these fruits manifested, how then can one be sure about the presence of true faith? Indeed, “showing” translates to expression seen in “good works”.
C. What salvation is and from what?
In Gen. 2:17 “But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.  



COMMENT: The death referred to here, is that death wherein there is no resurrection, the 2nd death, eternal death. There are 2 kinds of death:
1. The death from which there is resurrection, aka, “sleep“being temporary. This refers to natural death and buried in “hades“(hell/grave) from which there is coming resurrection. Many examples of man dying but resurrected back to life:
A. Elijah raised the son of the Zarephath widow from the dead (1 Kings 17:17-22). 

B. Elisha raised the son of the Shunammite woman from the dead (2 Kings 4:32-35). 
C. A man was raised from the dead when his body touched Elisha’s bones (2 Kings 13:20, 21). 
D. Many saints rose from the dead at the resurrection of Jesus (Matt 27:50-53). 
E. Jesus raised the son of the widow of Nain from the dead (Luke 7:11-15). 
F. Jesus raised the daughter of Jairus from the dead (Luke 8:41, 42, 49-55). 
G. Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44). 
H. Peter raised Dorcas from the dead (Acts 9:36-41). 
I. Eutychus was raised from the dead by Paul (Acts 20:9, 10). 
All were resurrected to live again on earth but died again. 

2. “Second” death or “eternal death” from which there is no resurrection (Rev 2:11; 20:6, 7- 14; 21:8). Rev. 20:14-15 ” And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire”



Notice that those in the end who overcame through the power of the Holy Spirit in them, will participate in the 1st resurrection and the 2nd death has no power as they have eternal life. Those who are alive and those dead prior to the start of the Millenium, will be changed from mortality to immortality “in a twinkling of an eye”(I Cor. 15:52);  the first resurrection. Those who did not participate in the 1st resurrection will still be in the grave/hades and stay dead, but will resurrect to mortal life, their “first resurrection“, after the Millenium. At that time, God will give them their first chance to receive the promise of the Holy Spirit to sanctify them. As to whether they “submit themselves” (Eph. 5:1-33 ) freely and be “one” with God, depends on their choice; mandated but not forced down their throats. 
The second death will be at beginning of the Millenium when Christ returns and will be to those who fought against him, i.e., 7th Head of Babylonian remnant, the Woman, and their minions. This is repeated and exacted after the Millenium when Satan will be released from “prison” (hell,Tartaros) and will again attempt to deceive the world; Gog and Magog will suffer this. This is the death from “Gehenna fire” in the “valley of the son of Hinnom” outside Jerusalem, on current earth mentioned in Matt 5:29-30; 10:29; 18:9; 23:33; Mk 9:43-50; Lu 12:5; James 3:6; Rev 20:14). Gehenna fire’s death is clearly a punishment from which there is no resurrection; eternal or second death. Being mortal, their lives will cease , unlike Satan who will be “living in torment”, being a spirit-being.
There is “first” death which is a reversible death that can be resurrected from into “physical life” like Lazarus, et al (John 11:14; Lu.7:15; 8:51-56;Acts 9:40-41;20:9-12).

This is why from “mortal” we need to be changed in a “twinkling of an eye“(I Cor. 15:52) to “immortal bodies“. All who died naturally will be resurrected, as in, “it is once appointed for man to die, then the resurrection“(Heb. 9:27); this refers to the “physical resurrection“. N.B. “Valley of dry bones” (Ezek. 37:1-14) prophesied for those mortal who died and to be restored as Adam before committing sin. Lazarus and some others died a “natural death” and physically resurrected by God’s power but died again into as “appointed“. 
Consider the following:

Gen. 1:26 “And God said, Let …make man…image, after likeness (of God): and let them have dominion over every … thing …upon the earth.”   
Also, I John 3:2 “Beloved, now are we the (begotten) sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.”



COMMENT: Humans were created to be in the God-kingdom, not in the plant-kingdom nor the animal-kingdom. There is no “physical missing link” that is intermediate between one kind to another. As stated, each has to stay within and “after their kind” (Gen 1:11-13,21), a principle of Genetics. The “missing link” is spiritual that comes through the Spirit. We were created to be “like him” and we will be so, at Jesus’ second coming, the “first spirit-body resurrection”. After which, they that participated in this “1st spirt-body resurrection“, (firstfruits) will not die, an eternal life with God. The “latter fruits” of believers and overcomers will later come/latter harvest, after the Millenium. 
SUMMARY:
Salvation is being saved from the “second death” (Rev 20:14), where there is no resurrection. Mortals who were given a chance (pre/post Millenium) to bear fruits of the Holy Spirit but instead rejected or did not follow the wisdom of this power (unpardonable sin;Mk.3:29 , Matt 12:31) will be thrown in Gehenna fire. Salvation is indeed by grace, a gift to us by the Father. This came about, not by “our works or our faith”. Rather, by man-Jesus’ belief/hope/trust, based on faith/evidence,  in the promises of the Father and his works as “fruits of the Holy Spirit” in him. Yes, faith and works (through the Holy Spirit) of man-Jesus. Because of Jesus’ death, we are then accounted as reconciled to the Father; justified. After resurrection to “life“, the Holy Spirit gifted to Jesus, post-resurrection, was given and dwelt in us, as it did to man-Jesus in the river Jordan at baptism. Having been imbued with this Spirit, we, like Jesus, will then voluntarily manifest the “fruits of the Spirit“. Faith without works is not shown and therefore dead, i.e. without proof that it existed in us. The actual first realization of our salvation is still future at “the twinkling of an eye“(I Cor 15:52-57), at the second coming of Christ; the “firstfruits”, afterwards, the latter-fruits. True faith in God has to have works, manifested as “the fruits of the Spirit.” From faith-to-faith (Rom..1:17), i.e., from faith (of) Jesus (in) the Father, to our faith (in) Christ that transcends to the Father. And, while many, we will all be “one” with the Father, as Christ is “one” with him.
Original Post:April 10, 2015

Revised:January 10, 2018

Did God die and still claim Jesus is God?

by fact-s.net

It depends on one’s concept of “What is God?” and what comprises “death”. 

To begin with, there is no “upper case” in the original Hebrew word “elohim” translated from Old Testament to an English word that starts with capital letter “G” as in “God”. Moreover, the word “elohim” beginning in Gen. 1:1 and on, is a generic or common name. It can refer to the only true God the Creator to be worshipped, false gods to be avoided, god as angels (like Lucifer the god of this earth/world), rulers, even ordinary man: see Concordance and definitions of elohim as well as http://fact-s.net/2014/06/29/what-is-god-2/.

Much like the common name Smith, the proper name John Smith identifies which particular Smith is referred to. In Genesis 1:1, the “common name” of the Creator God is “Elohim” and was specifically identified with a “proper name” in Gen. 2:4 as “YHVH ELOHIM” or Lord God in English. This YHVH ELOHIM is numerically one, “above all gods” (Ps. 95:3; 135:5) and the only Lord God commanded to Israel to be worshipped and not any other; this became the basis of Israel’s SHEMA doctrine ( Deut. 6:4).

The immortal Creator God “elohim” or YHVH ELOHIM/Lord God is also named LOGOS in John 1. He incarnated into man-Jesus to die for Adam’s and mankind’s sin to reconcile us to God the Father. This particular Elohim was the God referred to in the O.T. Whereas, the Father was the God referred to, in general, in the N.T.  They are indeed different, yet “one”, as we are all different, yet “one” with our Lord God Jesus and our God the Father ( I Cor. 12:12; 12:20).

Without this incarnation into “mortal flesh” like Adam, the spirit-composed and immortal Creator God would not have died. This is an absolute expression of love and faith “of” Jesus (Rom. 3:21-22) for him to “give up his divine/ spirit composition”(Phil. 2:7) and be human to die. Indeed, there is no greater love than for one “to give his life for another”(Jn.15:13). As man-Jesus, a mortal flesh, he is still .”god”, as in John 10:34.

Regarding death, the mechanism can be understood by going back to the “creation of man”. Remember that Adam was formed “from the ground, and it was good” but became “living” or alive only after the “breath of life” was breathed into him (Gen. 2:7; 7:21-22). Presence of this “breath of life” in “mortal flesh” defines life or death. Functionally, we observe this among newborns; unless there is spontaneous or artificial breathing, they are dead.

This is why death happens when the “breath of life”, (the “spirit of man”) leaves the “mortal flesh”, goes back to God the Father and our physical body becomes “dust”. See Eccl 12:7. What happens to that ” breath of life/spirit of man” depends on what the Father decides. Without that ” breath of life” restored into another body, “physical or spirit- composed”, for practical purposes, the person is dead. Consider all “data” in the computer can be downloaded into a “thumb-drive” and you can take the “thumb-drive” anywhere you go. The computer may be buried/ destroyed but the “data/ memory” in the ” thumb-drive” can be “restored” in a “new” computer, thus like being “resurrected”. 

With the context laid out in the preceding prolegomenon, Jesus is the Creator God YHVH ELOHIM, Logos and eternal, the “same yesterday, today and forever” (Heb. 13:8). As a Creator God and Logos, he is immortal. But, as incarnated “mortal flesh”, yes God “died” for our sake

GOAT FOR AND TO AZAZEL?

by fact-s.net

Controversy continues as to what these 2 goats of the Day of atonement represents.

What is undeniable is that these 2 goats are for the atonement of sins. But, whose sins? From the narrative in Leviticus 16, the goat for YHVH (Lord) was killed and the goat to Azazel was presented alive to YHVH (Lord). The 1st goat was for the atonement of sins of mankind. Could the atonement of the 2nd goat be for sins of the “fallen angels”?

Notice that in v-15, the killed goat was a sin offering for the sins of Israel and by extension includes that of Gentiles. On the other hand, in v-10, the other goat was presented alive and was sent into the wilderness to Azazel. But why should Aaron after atonement of sins of Israel through the death of the first goat in v-16, again, in v-21, “lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins..”?

Looking back at creation, angels and humans were created by YHVH, the Word-Creator. Adam, representing humans, sinned and death came to all mankind. Similarly, Lucifer sinned and in fact took away with him a third of angelic beings. To be a substitute for humans, the second Adam (Jesus) has to be human as well.

YYHVH has to incarnate as man-Jesus to die for mankind. The parallel here, is shared by many, that the 1st goat that was killed represented the atoning sacrificial death of Jesus to reconcile mankind to God. But, how about the sins of angelic beings? Notice in V-10 “…but the goat on which the lot fell for Azazel shall be presented alive before the Lord to make atonement over it, that it may be sent away into the wilderness to Azazel”. The purpose of the live-goat was also for atoning the sins of “fallen angels” and to reconcile them to God.

As a goat that was killed, so was the man Jesus killed. But as a resurrected Jesus, “he went and preached unto the spirits(fallen angels) in prison” (I Pet. 3:19). These fallen angels are in “… chains of darkness,..”(2 Pet 2:4), “… everlasting chains…”(Jude 1:6).

The live-goat (resurrected Jesus) with sins of mankind “upon the head of the goat” as proof, told these “fallen angels” about his atoning sacrifice for man. As Jesus reconciled mankind to God with his death, having been resurrected and alive he can also atone and reconcile the “fallen angels” as he will be sitting in “the right hand of God”.

As YHVH, and the Word-Creator being the incarnate Jesus, these 2 goats foreshadow what Jesus will do in the future. He has provided a mechanism for atonement of all sins to reconcile all to God

“Thou shalt surely die”, what does God mean?

by fact-s.net

The death referred to in Gen. 2:17 is that death wherein there is no resurrection, the 2nd death.

There are 2 kinds of death:
1. The death from which there is resurrection. This refers to natural death and buried in “hades” from which there is coming resurrection. Many examples of man dying but resurrected back to life:

A. Elijah raised the son of the Zarephath widow from the dead (1 Kings 17:17-22).
B. Elisha raised the son of the Shunammite woman from the dead (2 Kings 4:32-35).
C. A man was raised from the dead when his body touched Elisha’s bones (2 Kings 13:20, 21).
D. Many saints rose from the dead at the resurrection of Jesus (Matt 27:50-53).
E. Jesus raised the son of the widow of Nain from the dead (Luke 7:11-15).
F. Jesus raised the daughter of Jairus from the dead (Luke 8:41, 42, 49-55).
G. Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead (John 11:1-44).
H. Peter raised Dorcas from the dead (Acts 9:36-41).
I. Eutychus was raised from the dead by Paul (Acts 20:9, 10).

All were resurrected to live again on earth but died again.

2.”Second” death or “eternal death” from which there is no resurrection (Rev 2:11; 20:6, 7- 14; 21:8). Notice that those in the end who overcame through the power of the Holy Spirit in them, will participate in the 1st resurrection and the 2nd death has no power as they have eternal life. Those in the 1st resurrection are those living and dead prior to the start of the Millenium, who will change from mortality to immortality “in a twinkling of an eye”(I Cor. 15:52). Those who did not participate in the 1st resurrection will still be in the grave/hades and stay dead, but will resurrect to mortal life, their “first resurrection”, after the Millenium. At that time, God will give them their first chance to receive the promise of the Holy Spirit to sanctify them. As to whether they “submit themselves” (Eph. 5:1-33 ) freely and be “one” with God, depends on their choice.

The second death will be after the Millenium when Satan will be released from “prison” and will again attempt to deceive the world; Gog and Magog will be with him. This is the death from “Gehenna fire” in the “valley of the son of Hinnom” outside Jerusalem mentioned in Matt 5:29-30; 10:29; 18:9; 23:33; Mk 9:43-50; Lu 12:5; James 3:6; Rev 20:14).

Gehenna fire’s death is clearly a punishment from which there is no resurrection; eternal or second death. Being mortal, their lives will cease , unlike Satan who will be “living in torment”, being a spirit-being.

Did God literally create heaven and earth in six literal days?

by fact-s.net

No, to Gen 1:1. Also, “no” to “literal 24 hours” but “yes” to literal “sunset-to-sunset” in Gen 1:2 and onwards. How so?

Reconciling scientific data with what has been biblical understanding is challenging.

On one hand, the omnipotence of Creator God should not be doubted. He can do anything, even in “one day”, except that in wisdom the Gen. narrative was “6 days and rested on the 7 th day”. 

On the other hand, how could one “ignore” dating the “universe” millions of years? To others, that may require “cognitive estrangement to promote suspension of disbelief”.

The argument using 2 Peter 3:8 “A day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day” does not apply as Genesis was very precise, as to “literal day” as in, “And the evening and the morning were the first day”(Gen 1:5). 

Could this controversy be resolved by re-analyzing popular concept of Gen 1:1 and 1:2?

“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth was(hayah) without form (tohuw), and void(bohuw); and darkness(choshek) was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters”(mayim).

Common teaching of these 2 verses was that from “tohuw and bohuw”, heavens and earth were created. Meaning that God started “creating from and with” tohuw and bohuw” already existing. Really? Meaning, God did not create “from nothing”? 

This concept does not harmonize with this fact: “By faith we understand that the entire universe was formed at God’s command, that what we now see “did not” come from anything that can be seen”(Heb 11:3 NLT). 

Yes, the Creator Logos can easily say the “word” and things were created. The truth is, He did not need anything to create something. Meaning, that the Creator did not start with “bohuw and tohuw”, not with “choshek” that described something already existing prior to creation. 

Also, notice from creation, it started with “good”, not with chaos or destruction. Instead, I Tim 4:4 “For everything God created (or started) is good,…,”

Going through my “memory bank”, there was nothing created that was “originally bad”. But, from the literal “first day through…”, celestial bodies (heavenly) like sun, moon, stars and earth were taught to have started from “waste, ruin, wicked or destruction”. Yet with living things, like plants, animals and man they started and declared from creation as “very good”(mod towb).

Going back to the original Hebrew, and getting the context of Gen 1:1 & 1:2, we can have English translation of “hayah” as “has become”;”tohuw” as “lie wasted”; “bohuw” as “undistinguishable ruin” and “choshek” as “destruction”. 

Contextually and taking translations in consideration, Gen.1:1 “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” means they were “very good” when it started “from nothing”. This could be millions of years ago as far as to human concept of time. In fact, the creation was originally “very good” that the angels who were already created, “sang together…and shouted for joy”(Job 38:7). Even Satan(bad) originally was Lucifer(good).

Then, something happened between verses 1 & 2, that resulted in Gen 1:2 “And the earth has become (hayah) wasted (tohuw), and indistinguishable ruin(bohuw); and destruction(choshek) was upon the face of the deep”. Because of celestial upheaval, the sun, moon, stars and  earth that were already created “good” became “ruin, chaotic” and “darkness” prevailed. After that “destruction”, was “cleansing” in v-2 that started on the literal “first day” as in “And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters(mayim or waste)”. The Spirit of God “cleanse the waste”. The living things like plants, animals, humans were actually created on “literal” “sunset-to-sunset” days, as “very good”.

This pattern of creation was also shown in the creation of man as originally “very good”, then because of sin became “marred clay” which was “re-conformed” by the Potter (Jer.18:4; Heb 2:6; Ps.8:4) into the “likeness of Christ (Rom 8:29) to bring many sons to glory” (Heb 2:10).

Hopefully with this concept, the “old earth and new earth” controversy maybe put to

Ice-Bucket Challenge: Defining when Life Begins and Ends

by fact-s.net

Ice-Bucket Challenge: Defining when Life Begins and Ends

Pouring ice-cold water onto ourselves is indeed a “bone-chilling” challenge. This has picked up steam nationwide with participation from regular folks, celebrities and even billionaire Bill Gates(1). Funds “have come from 1.7 million donors.The ALS Association (as of August 25) has raised $79.7 million to combat Lou Gehrig’s Disease since July 29, as the Ice Bucket Challenge continues to encourage people around the world to dump ice over their heads and send in money.”(2). This did not come without detractors from animal rights’ supporter like Pamela Anderson and others of different views , including those against embryonic stem cell research (3).

McClaren & Beeson (4,5) commented that “much recent interest has focused on whether stem cell therapy could alleviate or even cure common degenerative diseases. This has been accompanied by debate on the ethics of destructive research on early human embryos. Stem cells derived from various sources raise different ethical issues, but their contribution to medical research could be immense.” While there are tailwinds for placental and adult tissue sources, headwinds to embryonic stem cell research surfaced and related to an issue not dissimilar to debates between pro-life vs. pro-choice and questions related to the other end of the spectrum, end-of-life.

When life is defined as beginning at conception, rights are conferred at that time and had to be championed and supported (6). Similarly, end-of-life issues bring to bear the rights of those still “living” even in a “vegetative state” or, for any other reason, at the throes of death. In our healthcare system, private and public resources are at stake to fund efforts to support, terminate or prolong life. Reflexively, what then follow are moral values, religious overtones, socio-political agenda, personal upbringing and citizenship that stoke the fire of controversy. When does life really begin and when does it end, are questions that rise to a decibel of priority for society , whether personal or national.

This article is not about casting aspersions nor endorsing the merits of either side of the debate, a controversy aplenty (7,8,9,10,11,12,13). Rather, the goal is to give pause to the animus, make time for reflection and provide salutary perspective. Some may not like to hear the truth, but somehow, one needs “to tell how the cow ate the cabbage”, a Southern catchphrase. This subject is a difficult one to resolve in its entirety and we will not be able to “carry forests on my back” but at least let us put a “crack” on this “nut”(14). People have to muster gumption to tackle this dilemma of “when life begins and ends”. It is a yeoman’s task to venture on finding a balance among different perspectives, biblical or secular, cerebral or emotional they may be. That said, one recognizes the consequences emanating from issues about pro-life/pro-choice and life/death dilemma.

Consequences
“Incidents of violence have included destruction of property, in the form of vandalism; crimes against people, including kidnapping, stalking, assault, attempted murder, and murder; and crimes affecting both people and property, including arson and bombings” (15). In the U.S., violence directed towards abortion providers has killed at least eight people, including four doctors, two clinic employees, a security guard, and a clinic escort” (16). “Another abortion doctor, George Wayne Patterson, was shot and killed outside an adult movie theater in Mobile, Alabama on August 21, 1993, but authorities attribute his death to a botched robbery”(17). Other links are accessible regarding the problem (18,19,20).
End-of-life issues also affect society’s responses to longer longevity that “presents unprecedented ethical and fiscal challenge”, rationing healthcare, hospice care, etc.(21,22,23,24). Disregard for life may lead to the horrors and slippery slope of euthanasia and assisted suicide according to Krauthammer (25, 26,27).

Who defines?
All things considered, the trunk-of-the-tree origin of these conflicting positions stems from the question “when does life begin and end?”. While progress in scientific knowledge, like ultrasound, helps us determine a “functioning entity” in the womb, does life really begin “at conception”? Pro-lifers use biblical passages frequently to make the case for human life beginning at conception(28,29). Consider the following excerpts::

Luke 1:39-44: Mary’s visit to Elizabeth: “… And it happened, when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, that the babe leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. Then she spoke out with a loud voice and said, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! But why is this granted to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For indeed, as soon as the voice of your greeting sounded in my ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy”. (N.B. Does heart beat, motor function like “fetal kick”, response to pain sensation or Mozart effect in the womb constitute or define “life”?
And for that matter, do dummy patient simulators with heart beat, etc.,have life?(30)

Psalm 139:13–16
For You formed my inward parts:You covered me in my mother’s womb….My frame was not hidden from You, When I was made in secret….Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed….The days fashioned for me, When as yet there were none of them.

Jeremiah 1:4–5
...“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; Before you were born I sanctified you;….”

Psalm 51:5
Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.

All the preceding verses confirm the omniscience, omnipresence and omnipotence of God Almighty. They are related to specific people who were already born and were living. They did not define when life begins, as these verses also include the period ” being yet unformed, “as yet they were none of them, “before formed in the womb”. It appears to be a stretch of one’s imagination to assume that the preceding verses support that “life” begins at conception. Moreover, this extrapolation minimizes other verses that actually define it. Let us now consider the following and comments that follow:

Gen. 2:7
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Notice, that a fully formed Adam from the “dust of the ground” was still “non-living” until the “breath of life” got into him from God. Then, he became a “living” being. This is akin to a “still birth” baby who was not breathing and therefore “non-living”. Or, a fully formed baby immediately after delivery, cyanotic and not breathing , no life in it although with heart rate and brain activity, “non-living”, but after a few seconds, with or without resuscitation, started to breathe in natural air as an evidence of “life”. This also reminds us of patients that are “brain-dead”, in a vegetative state, with flat-line EEG, sustained only by life-supporting means like ventilator and/or therapeutic interventions. Yet, when ventilator is turned off, they do not breath spontaneously, no natural breathing and subsequently declared “dead”, i.e., not breathing or no breath of life. Atmospheric air has to be breathe into, “before life begins”. It is arguable that by virtue of the oxygen derived from the mother, i.e., fetal respiration, that this is “breathing”. But, this denies the biblical definition of “living”, viz., presence of functional lungs (mature or premature) that have to breathe in natural and environmental air. The breath cycle continues until the last breath at death. Breathing air defines and sustains life. “In with your very first breath, out with your very last”(31). Without this “breath of life”, a person is “non-living”, as in:

Job 34: 14-15
If he should set his heart to it and gather to himself his spirit and his breath, all flesh would perish together, and man would return to dust. ( N.B. Without breath, the flesh is dead).

Ecclesiastes12:7
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

Psalm 146:4
His spirit departs, he returns to the earth; In that very day his thoughts perish.

Also, notice the function of this “breath of life” to the “non-living”:
Ezekiel 37 9-10, 13-14
9 Then said he unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord God; Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live. 10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army.
13 And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves, And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land: then shall ye know that I the Lord have spoken it, and performed it, saith the Lord. (N.B.the word “spirit” comes from “ruwach” from 07306 in Concordance meaning breath or wind).

Schwartz concurs, “there is nothing in the bible to indicate that a fetus is considered to be anything other than living tissue and, according to scripture, it does not become a living being until after it has taken a breath” (32).

Also, notice the following controversial verses:

Exodus 21:22–24

If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot . ( NB. When the “child” is viable and delivered prematurely but “no harm” done, then compensation maybe sought by the husband since the fetus did not mature to full term; if any “harm” follows after birth as when the fetus perished, then life for life, etc. In this accidental death after birth, the key point is viability by natural means to exact redress at that time. Today, by artificial means, fetal viability can be extended as a dying person’s life/suffering can be prolonged. However, this example should not be used to justify voluntary/intentional abortion, especially to viable fetus still in the womb).

Numbers 5:11-31
” …. And he shall cause the woman to drink the bitter water that causeth the curse: and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter. Then the priest shall take the jealousy offering out of the woman’s hand, and shall wave the offering before the LORD, and offer it upon the altar: And the priest shall take an handful of the offering, even the memorial thereof, and burn it upon the altar, and afterward shall cause the woman to drink the water. And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people. And if the woman be not defiled, but be clean; then she shall be free, and shall conceive seed. This is the law of jealousies, when a wife goeth aside to another instead of her husband, and is defiled; ….. ” (N.B. This is what is generally known by biblical scholars as an “adultery test” by ritual of intentional abortion performed by a priest through drinking “bitter/curse water”. But this is not done anymore, even by priest; it has ceased a long time ago(33). Similarly, if Jewish priest discontinued this practice, all the more reason for this not be used to justify abortion by anyone, through pharmacological means.)

Job 3:3, 10-11, 16
“Let the day perish in which I was born. … Because it shut not up the doors of my mother’s womb, nor hid sorrow from my eyes. Why died I not from the womb? Why did I not give up the spirit when I came out of the belly? … Or as an untimely birth I had NOT been; as infants which never saw light.” ( NB. According to Martin & Sielaff (34) in their commentary, “…fetus was reckoned as “NOT HAVING BEEN” — and that is how God and the Bible defines the status of the fetus.” I do not support the connotation of outright disregard for fetus nor should it be summarily disrespected. The alternative interpretation may well be that Job may just be too remorseful for his suffering that he wished “NOT HAVING BEEN”; this was Job’s wish and not God defining the status of the fetus or how we should regard it.) From the same link, (which I could not confirm,) “An April 8, 2004 United Press International reported about this limitation:
“At what point is a human fetus viable? … a government witness testified in U.S. District Court in Nebraska that a 20-week fetus can feel pain, suggesting the fetus is a living being. Neonatology specialists have countered, however, that a 20-week fetus cannot yet survive outside the mother’s womb. … [Dr. Avroy] Fanaroff 2 [notes], ‘There may be a beating heart, there may even be some gasping attempts at breathing, but this is not a baby that can be resuscitated — it is not viable,’ … ‘such signs of life typically ‘last only seconds.’ …What, then, differentiates between live birth and viable birth? The maturity of the lungs, Goldsmith said. ‘It is the ability of the lungs to exchange oxygen and carbon dioxide,’ he said, which explains the reason why a non-viable fetus in 1973 can be a viable baby today.”On viability 3 See http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20040406-051104-8080r.htm.

Difference in counting child’s age among cultures
In Jewish culture, “....it is their day of birth (or the year in which they first exited the womb) that gives them a legal existence. Thus, for a man to be able to go to war he had to be twenty years of age, or a priest to commence his official duties had to be thirty years of age. These ages for legal purposes were always reckoned from birth, not from conception. The reason for this is plain. No one could be sure in all cases just when conception took place, and even if one knew the exact moment of conception, for legal purposes one had to wait to be born to enter human society.”(35).

In Korea, China and East Asia, “..the countdown of children’s age does not begin with the birth of a child, like in the West, but starts in the beginning of the year, rounding up the time spent by a child in the mother’s womb. In addition, people become older not on the day of birth, but on January 1st, according to the lunar calendar. For example, a child born in late December of 2013 will turn two on January 1st, 2014“(36).

Summary
Now that the major elements firing the debate have been presented, the question still remains as to what the correct response should be? The decision to act, one way or another, for anyone at the crossroads of this question may still be problematic for any particular set of circumstances. Without being facetious, when one reaches “the fork of the road”, Yogi Berra(37) quipped,”take it”, but which side of the fork should one take? Even the advice from Apostle Paul about moderation (Phil. 4:5) may not suffice to confer peace of mind. Raw courage is needed to face criticism of whatever action one takes, as there will always be “Cannon to right of them, Cannon to left of them, Cannon behind them Volley’d and thunder’d” as in “Charge of the Light Brigade” by Alfred Tennyson (38).

As one may now deduce, the operative word for when life begins and ends, is “natural”,i.e., natural development to viability, not ex-vivo or in-vitro; natural breathing, not fetal respiration nor through artificial means; natural air, even augmented, but not artificial. How then should one respond to the biblical truth that breathing air defines and sustains life? “In with your very first breath, out with your very last“. The advice from Martin & Sielaff resonates well, “Children are an heritage of the Lord: and the fruit of the womb is his [God’s] reward” (Psalm 127:3). Adoption should always be considered, so someone else can receive the “reward” from God. Life is important. Christians should respect it very highly. Not only should they recognize the sanctity of their own lives, but they should acknowledge that God has granted the same life to all in the world. All people should be honored and respected. This is a Christian duty which no one can deny.”(39). When the choice is between the life of mother vs. the fetus, there should be no hesitation that life of the mother takes precedence; there maybe exception even on this that we may not know. As to rape and incest, adoption is a better alternative; here again, there can be exception and the victim needs tremendous emotional support to overcome an excruciating experience. A non-breathing baby just delivered and an adult who had a cardiac arrest should also be resuscitated to life. After sometime, how long artificial breathing should continue would depend on other factors, most especially the ability to be weaned off respirator and breathe spontaneously. Currently, with technology, the status of brain activity helps in decision-making. Similarly, judgment has to be made regarding sources that potentiate stem cell research depending on overwhelming evidence for “overall good”. Failure to act can delay progress to the detriment of population that needed it most. Vaccine and immunization have detractors, yet society as a whole decided in favor of general use; again this has exception, especially invoking the 1st( religion) and 4th ( privacy) amendments rights. When it comes to “euthanasia and assisted suicide”, our stance should be to advise against these methods. But, who will have the final say? Should it be the patient and/or immediate relative, society or the “death-provider”? Not privy to all the facts surrounding every case and in whatever action is decided by the “stakeholders”, one should not be judgmental but, in love, be commiserating and (sans approval) empathizing with the difficulties in arriving at any decision. True, one should not be dogmatic nor flexible every time and be mindful of the cautionary verses in Ecclesiastes 3:1-8 :
“To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.

Defining when life begins and ends just opens doors. What action plan for any specific situation may still leave us with conflicted conscience and second-guessing. Hopefully, people will choose life and seek an obstetrician, rather than death from an obitiatrist (death-doctor)(40). Flee from temptation. Decide we must, is an “ice-bucket challenge” for all of us.

References:
1. Retrieved from: http://youtube/XS6ysDFTbLU

2. Retrieved from:http://time.com/3173833/als-ice-bucket-challenge-fundraising-total/

3. Retrieved from:http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/ice-bucket-challenge-haters-110298.html

4. Retrieved from:Anne McLaren. Nature 414, 129-131 (1 November 2001) | doi:10.1038/35102194

5. Retrieved from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1472648310606475

6. Retrieved from :http://www.nrlc.org

7. Retrieved from:Why is abortion so controversial? http://news-basics.com/2011/abortion/

8. End of life controversies. Retrieved from:http://ajcc.aacnjournals.org/content/18/5/401.1.full.pdf
85% of hospital trusts adopt controversial end-of-life care regime

9. Retrieved from:http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/85-of-hospital-trusts-adopt-controversial-endoflife-care-regime-8273345.html

10. Baby Joseph.Retrieved from: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/baby-josephs-treatment-sparks-controversy-pediatric-end-life/story?id=13032001

11. Terri Schiavo case. Retrieved from:http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terri_Schiavo_case

12. Survey of Controversial Issues.
Retrieved from:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24093519

13. New and Lingering Controversies in Pediatric End-of-Life Care. Retrieved from: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/116/4/872.abstract.

14. The mountain and the squirrel: retrieved from: http://www.familyfriendpoems.com/poem/the-mountain-and-the-squirrel-by-ralph-waldo-emerson#ixzz3AvpOfLJS

15. Retrieved from:http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence

16. Retrieved from:Clinic violence and intimidation”. NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation. 2006. Archived from the original on February 11, 2010.

17. Man Arrested in Killing of Mobile Abortion Doctor. Retrieved from:The New York Times. September 5, 1993.; H. Kushner, Encyclopedia of Terrorism, Sage Publications, 2003, p.39.

18.”Mental Health Risks of Abortion: Scientific Studies Reveal Significant Risk of Major Psychological Sequelae Of Abortion” . Retrieved from: http://www.wprc.org/21.46.0.0.1.0.phtml.

19. “The Emotional Effects of Induced Abortion”. Retrieved from: http://www4.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/medicalinfo/abortion/fact-010600-emoteff.xml#1097838460671::-3808445079817008491.

20. Retrieved from:http://www.justfacts.com/abortion.asp#%5B184%5D

21. Callaghan, D. and Lawler, P., Ethics & health: Rethinking end-of-life care, Retrieved from:http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/07/ethics-and-health-care-rethinking-end-of-life-care

22. Shepherd, Lois Rationing health care at end-of-life. Retrieved from: http://web1.millercenter.org/debates/whitepaper/deb_2010_0324_life.pdf

23. Ration end-of-life care. Retrieved from: http://intelligencesquaredus.org/iq2-tv/item/769-ration-end-of-life-care

24. Debate on hospice care. Retrieved from: http://jop.ascopubs.org/content/4/3/153.full

25. Krauthammer, Charles. The Dutch example, Things That Matter: Three Decades of Passions, Pastimes and Politics – 13 edition, Chapter 9, ISBN13: 978-0385349178
ISBN10: 0385349173, Publisher: Crown Business, Published: 10/22/2013

26.The lady of Assen and Dr Chabot in Holland. Retrieved from:http://articles.philly.com/1997-01-15/news/25560299_1_terminally-euthanasia-dutch-doctors

27. A Judge In Washington State Says The People Had No Right To Veto Mercy Killing by Charles Krauthammer. Retrieved from: http://articles.philly.com/1994-05-17/news/25826934_1_personal-dignity-and-autonomy-physician-assisted-suicide-abortion-decisions

28. Tommy Mitchell,Retrieved from:https://answersingenesis.org/sanctity-of-life/when-does-life-begin/)

29. When life begins. Retrieved from: http://www.openbible.info/topics/when_life_begin

30.One Smart Dummy: Patient Simulators Help Save Lives. Retrieved from: http://rushnews.rush.edu/2014/09/02/one-smart-dummy-patient-simulators-help-save-lives/

31. Life Begins at Breath, Not Conception
, originally posted by Will McLeod on Mar. 19/2014 ; http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/03/19/1285933/-Bible-Life-Begins-at-Breath-Not-Conception

32. Retrieved from: http://joeschwartz.net/life.htm

33. Retrieved from: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordeal_of_the_bitter_water

34. Abortion and the Bible by Ernest L. Martin, Ph.D., July 1991
Edited and expanded by David Sielaff, February 2005.
Retrieved from:http://www.askelm.com/doctrine/d050201.htm

35. Ibid

36. Retrieved from:http://english.pravda.ru/society/stories/16-07-2013/125145-korea_children-0/

37.Retrieved from: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/y/yogiberra105761.html

38. Charge of the Light Brigade” by Alfred Tennyson. Retrieved from: http://www.nationalcenter.org/ChargeoftheLightBrigade.html

39.Retrieved from:
http://www.askelm.com/doctrine/d050201.htm

40. Obitiatrist: Goodman, Ellen. Retrieved from:http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1993-12-28/news/1993362063_1_word-for-death-happy-mistakes-column