The most controversial and debated topics of a generation expose its firmest held beliefs. The subject of abortion is a case in point. For one side, religion proves the murderous and godless nature of abortion. For others, abortion rights are pursued and defended with great religious fervor. The sad truth is that the religious nature of abortion is not new. In fact, the scripture says, “The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the son” (Ecclesiastes 1:9). To understand this ancient controversy, consider its origins and opposition.
Many who accept or reject the sovereignty of God do so based upon a faulty understanding of the word and of the doctrine. The common assumption is that God’s sovereignty means He is irresistible and without limitations in the scope of His power or practice in the affairs of men. But, is this what sovereignty means?
We read, Job 13:4, of “physicians of no value:” such indeed are all to whom application for remedy is made, besides this heavenly Physician, who never fails to cure such as receive his prescriptions. In what respects Christ is termed a Physician, is to be seen in the following parallel.k
Three prominent James’ exist in the New Testament. What can we learn of these men and can this help us identify the author of the book bearing that name?
Shortly before He drew His last breath, Jesus Christ cried out, “It is Finished”. At that place and time He bore our sins in His body on the tree, became a curse for us and paid the debt for our sins. On the cross He completed all of the physical and spiritual sufferings needed for the salvation of mankind.
What kind of limitations are placed on tracts? Are tracts large enough that one could be saved by reading it alone and nothing else? Can a man be saved without a human witness present? In this article, David Reagan responds to an article claiming that a tract cannot save anyone unless a human is present.
