ScienceDaily (Mar. 2, 2007) — Scientists to investigate a startling discovery in the depths of the Atlantic.

Scientists have discovered a large area thousands of square kilometres in extent in the middle of the Atlantic where the Earth’s crust appears to be missing. Instead, the mantle - the deep interior of the Earth, normally covered by crust many kilometres thick - is exposed on the seafloor, 3000m below the surface.

Marine geologist Dr Chris MacLeod, School of Earth, Ocean and Planetary Sciences said: "This discovery is like an open wound on the surface of the Earth. Was the crust never there? Was it once there but then torn away on huge geological faults? If so, then how and why?"

To answer some of these questions Dr MacLeod with a team of scientists, led by marine geophysicist Professor Roger Searle, Durham University, will travel to the area which lies mid-way between the Cape Verde Islands and the Caribbean.

The expedition will be the inaugural research cruise of a new UK research ship RRS James Cook. The team intends to use sonars to image the seafloor and then take rock cores using a robotic seabed drill. The samples will provide a rare opportunity to gain insights into the workings of the mantle deep below the surface of the Earth.

Re: http://townhall.com/columnists/PatBuchanan/2009/06/30/making_a_monkey_out_of_darwin

If Darwinism is a religion filled with fraud, deception and intimidation, then how are we to explain its appeal and its power to capture the scientific community and the halls of academia? How could they all be wrong?

Re: http://townhall.com/columnists/StarParker/2009/06/29/is_this_the_end_for_mark_sanford

Who are the biggest hypocrites and the most self-righteous: those who deny sin and man’s accountability before the Law of God or those who believe in the Law as the standard of righteousness and yet transgress the Law?

The lost man doesn’t know that he is lost; he is completely blinded by his sin, thinking he is free while a slave to unrighteousness. He does what is right in his own eyes, judging others by his own standard of judgment; he is righteous in his own eyes.

But he does not understand that in his condemnation of another man’s transgression he has agreed that the Law is good. He condemns himself as a law breaker and is without excuse. Since sin is of the heart, how shall any escape its condemnation? How can a man change his heart?

The Christian does not claim sinlessness because he knows his own heart. He has a renewed heart, but it is not without sin. There is a struggle now against sin, where before he was a willing captive to its power. He knows that all his righteousness is as filthy rags and claims no righteousness of his own, except that imputed to him through faith in Christ.

We see again the deceitfulness of sin in the believer and in those who accuse him. All men know that God exists by the living things He has made and through the world He has made to sustain their life. The biggest hypocrites are the ones who suppress this knowledge and deny that they will give account to God for their own sin.

Not only does moral guilt exist for transgressions of the Law that carries with it a death penalty described in Revelation 20 as the second death, but a real redemption that removes guilt is accomplished in Christ and its application continues to bring life over which the second death has no power…

Certainly, where there are basic gospel truths, Christians may be found. That such basic truth survives within the formularies of the Roman Church is not denied, nor has such a denial ever been part of the Protestant case against Rome. The issue is whether the system of teaching and practice with which Rome indoctrinates her people is consistent with those basic truths. The Reformers judged that system against Scripture and showed the fundamental contradictions:

‘Calvin's birthday comes six days after the Independence Day that owes much to his teaching’ – Marvin Olasky

Re: http://townhall.com/columnists/MarvinOlasky/2009/06/23/on_his_500th_birthday,_three_cheers_for_john_calvin

There would be no free America without the influence of Calvinism in northern Europe and then in colonial America. Calvin leaves a rich testimony as a faithful expositor of the Scriptures, and therefore his influence is testimony to the veracity of the Bible.

Trying to set the record straight is a futile effort because the secularists and religionists alike have determined to disparage this man and to impugn his character along with those associated with him.

Calvin is hated for the same reasons that men hate Jesus Christ. Prideful men despise the doctrines of Christ; that God is sovereign over men as the potter is master over the clay and that men are dead in sin and wholly dependent on the grace of God for salvation. The apostate Jewish church hated Christ and plotted against Him. And so the apostate Christian church hated Calvin and Luther and plotted against them.

Biblical truth remains the only effective force against apostasy as demonstrated in the Reformation. Luther was raised up to rediscover the truths of Augustinianism buried beneath 1000 years of superstition under the traditions of men. Calvin was raised up to apply the forgotten truths to the state. Jesus Christ is Lord over all things. His kingdom extends to every sphere of life because His Law and Gospel are universal and absolute.

http://www.ianpaisley.org/article.asp?ArtKey=lloydjones

Mr. Schaeffer did say that ‘God is there’; he also said that ‘God has spoken’. He reveals Himself in Creation and in the Holy Scriptures. The modern Protestant Church has compromised both leading to weakness and irrelevancy.

Re: http://townhall.com/columnists/JaniceShawCrouse/2009/06/19/picking_a_fight_with_fellow_evangelicals

Many are saying that the Reformation is over and some call the evangelical movement “the richest, most powerful religious movement in history”. But herein is the problem. Our people do not recognize that the Reformation was the act of the triune God reforming His Church. What we have now is a religious movement that has exchanged truth for the wisdom of men.

Who will call for a return to Reformation doctrine? That is, a belief in the absolute sovereignty of God over all things including salvation;

a belief in a victorious and powerful Christ who has all authority in heaven and earth so that nothing is able to prevent Him from accomplishing His will;

a belief in the sufficiency of Scripture for the rule of faith and practice for the Christian and the churches;

a belief in the New Covenant promise that all believers are priests and kings to their God through the merits of Christ alone with the great privilege to read and study the Scriptures for themselves.

Herein are the foundations of liberty that are the first things that led to what we now refer to as conservatism.

If our doctrine is no different than Rome, then why not return to Rome for the sake of a hollow unity? We who call ourselves evangelical would do well to consider 1 Kings 18…

Far from being an obsolete Reformation issue, the 1998 Papal Bull, Incarnationis Mysterium, states in detail how by obtaining an indulgence the pains of purgatory may be reduced for oneself or for the dead.

Yet the spokesmen of Rome tell us that the Holy Spirit has inspired the tradition of the Church as He has inspired Scripture. We may therefore trust Rome as much as we may trust Scripture. Indeed we may trust Rome more, because we cannot depend on our own understanding of Scripture: ‘The task of interpreting the Word of God authentically has been entrusted solely to the Magisterium of the Church, that is, to the Pope and of the bishops in communion with him.’ These words are not from the sixteenth century, but from the official Vatican teaching of 1994. The convert to Rome today is required to believe what the Church believes.

The charge made by John Owen long ago remains true: ‘The church of Rome lays claim to the very same authority over and conduct of the consciences of men in religion as were committed unto Jesus Christ and His apostles.’ [Works, vol 14, p. 499]

The issue of authority is the real key to the Roman/Protestant division. Far from being an isolated belief it underpins everything that stands against evangelical Christianity. Let Rome’s claim to share in the rule of faith with Scripture be taken away, and her claim to mediate salvation through priest and sacrament must fall. It is irresponsible for Noll and Nystrom to write as though the nature of the church is an issue separable from the way of salvation, especially as they know that Rome claims their Church to be ‘an integral part of the Gospel’. [Evangelicals and Catholics Together] On this point the Roman Catechism is explicit…

‘They could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it, or to remain in it.’ [Catechism of the Catholic Church, pp. 196-197]

Noll and Nystrom tell us that the anathemas pronounced by the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century on those who left Rome to uphold evangelical belief are now removed. But they are only removed for those ready to blur the evangelical beliefs recovered at the Reformation. How can a person be an evangelical and acquiesce to such official statements of Roman belief as, ‘Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith…It is the sanctifying or deifying grace received in Baptism’. [Catechism, pp. 433-434]

On the primary issue nothing has changed. The old claim stands that the Roman church of the apostolic age is the same Church of Rome today; the true Church as compared with the communities that only began with Martin Luther and are not to be called churches. So Pope Benedict, in his decree of July 10, 2007, answered the question why the Second Vatican Council did not use the word ‘church’ when speaking of the congregations of the Reformation:

-Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Preaching on ‘The Wiles of the Devil’, January 29, 1961

Re: http://townhall.com/columnists/SandyRios/2009/06/12/the_confusion_of_the_pagans

We thank Sandy Rios for writing with clarity on this issue in the midst of confusion.

The pagans usually reference Abraham and the sacrifice of Isaac to accuse God. Causing the death of the first born of Egypt is sure to make their point that God is unrighteous and hypocritical. But these are only pictures of the things to come. If they want to mock God, then why don’t they reference the final judgment when not just the Egyptians, but all men will stand before the righteous Judge?

Modern people may no longer make idols in the form of physical images, but their very idea of “scientific law” is an idolatrous twisting of their knowledge of God. They conceal from themselves the fact that this “law” is personal and that they are responsible to Him. Or they substitute the word “Nature,” personifying her as they talk glowingly of the works of “Mother Nature.” But they evade what they know of the transcendence of God over nature.

http://townhall.com/columnists/MarvinOlasky/2009/06/11/glory_observed

Luther and the other Reformers rediscovered the good news of ‘a direct, personal, two-way link between the individual and God’ through Jesus Christ. This is the gospel that through the abundant grace in Christ, sinners can become a kingdom of priests and offer up their sacrifices of praise and thanksgiving, being joint heirs with Him to every spiritual blessing…

The world around us is energized by a general discontentment, and every politician and advertiser is stoking the fire.  This is nothing new; it is just the natural state of man.  Two thousand years ago, Jesus addressed the issue with His followers.  After assuring them that their heavenly Father would lovingly provide for all their needs, He summed up all His instruction with these words: “But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you (Matt. 6:33).” The practical application is this: contentment is a matter of priorities and not circumstances.  Seek first God’s kingdom and He will take care of your circumstances.

Why is our country wasting away in discontentment?  Because our priorities are askew.  Our current circumstances are the judgment of God, and let us pray that He does not relent until there is repentance.  The current socialist agenda is being executed by those who say they hate to waste a good crisis.  But I say that our current crisis will have been wasted unless we repent of our rebellion against a holy God.  It is better to die in faith than to live in unbelief.  And it is better to be impoverished to the point of being absolutely dependent upon God than to live in luxury but forget Him.

“The experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity of that conceit of Plato’s and other ancients applauded by some of later times; that the taking away of property and bringing in community into a commonwealth would make them happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser than God…”

http://townhall.com/Columnists/MeredithTurney/2009/06/09/americas_first_experiment_with_socialism

Governor Bradford and his elders held to the sufficiency of Scripture; they knew from the history of Israel that Joshua had divided the land according to family. This was the plan of God instituting the principles of private property, including the fruits of one’s own labor. Given the failure of collectivism, Bradford was bold in his faith to forsake the wisdom of this world and to venture all on the authority of the Bible. His statement is classic and could only have come from a Puritan. Man in his depravity and his autonomous wisdom thinks “as if they were wiser than God.”

Now, has anything changed with man? We have new Platos and many drones who advocate naturalism and collectivism. Man is still lost in his depravity and is unwilling to seek the eternal wisdom of the self-revealed God. He still seeks the same failed solutions dictated by the autonomous wisdom of men that is the same in every generation.

Now, we have new evidence that supports our doctrine of depravity. In the face of the unparalleled blessings of prosperity and freedom resulting from a culture that built on the foundation of Jesus Christ, a new generation has arisen that does not know its heritage. They are ignorant of the origins of liberty and cannot see the danger of losing what has been given to them from past generations. They would consume the foundations on which they stand.

“Assuredly, I say to you that tax collectors and harlots enter the kingdom of God before you. For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him; but tax collectors and harlots believed him; and when you saw it, you did not afterward repent and believe him…Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing the fruits of it.” [Matthew 21:30-32; 43]

In the Parable of the Wedding Feast, Jesus continues with their condemnation, identifying them as the unworthy invited guests. The prophets are the faithful servants; they had written of the New Covenant and the coming of Messiah and the Kingdom of Heaven. Jesus pronounces wrath on the teachers of Israel who should have recognized the signs of His coming; those invited would not come and even abused the servants sent to invite them. But when the king heard about it, he was furious and sent out his armies to destroy those murderers, and burned up their city.

The Jewish church rejected the establishment of the kingdom in the coming of Messiah and the new order in the New Covenant. The destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD marked the end of the Old Covenant. There is now a New Covenant and a new nation that bears the fruit of the Lord’s vineyard.

Who are the guests that fill the wedding hall? The new servants are the ministers of the New Covenant; these are the apostles and the pastor teachers. They extend the invitation to all men. All are invited without regard to kindred, tribe, nation or tongue. ‘There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise’ [Galatians 3:28-29]. This is the new order inaugurated in the New Covenant church.

This is Christ’s invitation: “whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely” [Revelation 22:17]. And here is Christ’s satisfaction, “All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out” [John 6:37].

So how can we explain the man who is bound and expelled from the wedding feast? We ask this question: do all who profess Christ know Him? Are all that are in the church partakers of salvation? The NT doctrine of spurious faith is illustrated in Judas, Demas and Ananias.

There is an outward call of the gospel that goes out to all men without distinction. Jesus explains in His doctrine that hearing they do not hear and seeing they do not see. It must be given to understand the mysteries of the kingdom. So, not all hear this call, because they cannot see the kingdom. The ones who hear and see have been given this ability in regeneration. These are the chosen. This is the effectual call as compared with the general call.

The wedding guests must be dressed with a garment given to him by the king. This covering is the robe washed white in the blood of the Lamb. Christ must cover us with His righteousness because our righteousness is filthy rags in comparison, making us unfit to stand in the wedding feast.

“Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity” [Matthew 7:22-23].

These words come at the conclusion of the parable of the Wedding Feast given in Matthew 22. The parable begins with these words…

‘And Jesus answered and spoke to them again by parables and said…’ [Matthew 22:1]

In order to establish the context of the parable we must know who Jesus is addressing and what He is trying to teach them. Matthew 21 establishes these things…

‘Now when He came into the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people confronted Him as He was teaching…’ [Matthew 21: 23]

They question His authority. Jesus then questions them concerning the authority of John the Baptist. They answer Him, “We do not know.” [Matthew 21:23-27].

Jesus follows this encounter with the Pharisees with three parables of which the Wedding Feast is the third.

The first is the Parable of the Two Sons and is introduced as follows: “But what do you think?” The second is the Parable of the Wicked Vinedressers and is introduced with, “Hear another parable:” So, it is clear that Jesus is addressing the ‘chief priests and the elders of the people’ in all three parable.

The Parable of the Two Sons addresses the reference to John and how they had responded to him compared with the sinners who repented. The Parable of the Wicked Vinedressers addresses their responsibility as vinedressers of Israel [Isaiah 5:1-7]. In both these parables they unwittingly condemn themselves with their answers before Jesus makes the application to them…

 ‘Now when the chief priests and Pharisees heard His parables, they perceived that He was speaking of them.’ [Matthew 21:45]

The third parable starts with these words…

“The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his son…”