why do we dream?

This is one question that only God has the answer. We are aware that dreams, though a natural exercise, have far more tremendous spiritual wave than we can explain. The Bible teaches that God often speaks via dreams as well as visions. But are all dreams messages from God? If not, then what causes the rest of our sleep time voyages? According to science, the human brain is a mysterious little ball of gray matter. After all these years, researchers are still baffled by many aspects of how and why it operates like it does. Scientists have been performing sleep and dream studies for decades now, and we still aren't 100 percent sure about the function of sleep, or exactly how and why we dream. We do know that our dream cycle is typically most abundant and best remembered during the REM stage of sleep. It's also pretty commonly accepted among the scientific community that we all dream, though the frequency in which dreams are remembered varies from person to person.
The question of whether dreams actually have a physiological, biological or psychological function has yet to be answered. But that hasn't stopped scientists from researching and speculating. There are several theories as to why we dream. One is that dreams work hand in hand with sleep to help the brain sort through everything it collects during the waking hours. Your brain is met with hundreds of thousands, if not millions of inputs each day. Some are minor sensory details like the color of a passing car, while others are far more complex, like the big presentation you're putting together for your job. During sleep, the brain works to plow through all of this information to decide what to hang on to and what to forget. Some researchers feel like dreams play a role in this process.
It's not just a stab in the dark though -- there is some research to back up the ideas that dreams are tied to how we form memories. Studies indicate that as we're learning new things in our waking hours, dreams increase while we sleep. Participants in a dream study who were taking a language course showed more dream activity than those who were not. In light of such studies, the idea that we use our dreams to sort through and convert short-term memories into long-term memories has gained some momentum in recent years.
Another theory is that dreams typically reflect our emotions. During the day, our brains are working hard to make connections to achieve certain functions. When posed with a tough math problem, your brain is incredibly focused on that one thing. And the brain doesn't only serve mental functions. If you're building a bench, your brain is focused on making the right connections to allow your hands to work in concert with a saw and some wood to make an exact cut. The same goes for simple tasks like hitting a nail with a hammer. Have you ever lost focus and smashed your finger because your mind was elsewhere?
Some have proposed that at night everything slows down. We aren't required to focus on anything during sleep, so our brains make very loose connections. It's during sleep that the emotions of the day battle it out in our dream cycle. If something is weighing heavily on your mind during the day, chances are you might dream about it either specifically, or through obvious imagery. For instance, if you're worried about losing your job to company downsizing, you may dream you're a shrunken person living in a world of giants, or you're wandering aimlessly through a great desert abyss.
There's also a theory, definitely the least intriguing of the bunch, that dreams don't really serve any function at all, that they're just a pointless byproduct of the brain firing while we slumber. We know that the rear portion of our brain gets pretty active during REM sleep, when most dreaming occurs. Some think that it's just the brain winding down for the night and that dreams are random and meaningless firings of the brain that we don't have when we're awake. The truth is, as long as the brain remains such a mystery, we probably won't be able to pinpoint with absolute certainty exactly why we dream.

why we forget

I'm going to try and answer this question scientifically because though I believe that all forms of mental illness, there is equally natural/scientific explanation to this situation. In order to combat forgetfulness, it is important to understand some of the major reasons why we forget things. Elizabeth Loftus, one of the world's most renowned experts on human memory, has identified four major reasons why forgetting occurs. One of the most common explanations is a simple failure to retrieve the information from memory. This often occurs when memories are rarely accessed, causing them to decay over time.
Another common cause of forgetting is interference, which occurs when some memories compete with other memories. For example, imagine that a woman just started a new school year as an elementary school teacher. She spends some time learning the names of each of her students, but over the course of the year she finds herself constantly calling one particular girl by the wrong name. Why? Because the girl's older sister was in the same class the year before, and the two look remarkably similar. It is the memory of the older sister that makes it so difficult to recall the younger student's name.
Other causes of forgetting include failing to store the information in memory in the first place, or even intentionally trying to forget things associated with a troubling or traumatic event.
Amnesia is a common plot device in the movies, but these depictions are often wildly inaccurate. For example, how often have you seen a fictional character lose their memory due to a bump on the head only to have their memories magically restored after suffering a second knock to the skull?
There are two different types of amnesia:

• Anterograde amnesia: Involves the loss of the ability to form new memories.


• Retrograde amnesia: Involves losing the ability to recollect past memories, although the ability to create new memories may remain intact.

While most movie depictions of amnesia involve retrograde amnesia, anterograde amnesia is actually far more common. The most famous case of anterograde amnesia was a patient known in the literature as H.M. In 1953, he had brain surgery to help stop the seizures caused by his severe epilepsy. The surgery involved the removal of both hippocampi, the regions of the brain strongly associated with memory. As a result, H.M. was no longer able to form any new long-term memories.
Popular movies and television programs tend to depict such memory loss as fairly common, but true cases of complete amnesia about one's past and identity are actually quite rare.
Some of the most common causes of amnesia include:

• Trauma: A physical trauma, such as a car accident, can cause the victim to lose specific memories of the event itself. Emotional trauma, such as being a victim of childhood sexual abuse, can cause the individual to lose memories of specific situations.


• Drugs: Certain medications can be used to cause temporary amnesia, particularly during medical procedures. Once the drugs wear off, the individual's memory returns to normal functioning.

Can a Christian be cursed? Will God allow a curse on a believer?

Answer: The Bible tells us that “like a fluttering sparrow or a darting swallow, an undeserved curse does not come to rest” (Proverbs 26:2b). This means that foolish curses have no effect. God does not allow His children to be cursed. God is sovereign. No one has the power to curse one whom God has decided to bless. God is the only One able to pronounce judgment.

“Spells” in the Bible are always described negatively. Deuteronomy 18:10-11 numbers those who cast spells with those who commit other acts “detestable to the LORD” such as child sacrifice, witchcraft, sorcery, divination, or necromancy (consulting with the dead). Micah 5:12 says that God will destroy witchcraft and those who cast spells. Revelation 18 describes spells as part of the deception that will be used by the antichrist and his “great city of Babylon” (v. 21-24). Though the end-times deception will be so great that even the elect would be deceived if God did not protect us (Matthew 24:24), God will utterly destroy Satan, the antichrist, and all who follow them (Revelation chapters 19-20).

The Christian has been born again as a new person in Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17), and we are in the constant presence of the Holy Spirit who lives within us and under whose protection we exist (Romans 8:11). We do not need to worry about anyone casting any sort of pagan spell on us. Voodoo, witchcraft, hexes, and curses have no power over us because they come from Satan, and we know that “the one who is in you [Christ] is greater than the one [Satan] who is in the world” (1 John 4:4). God has overcome him, and we have been freed to worship God without fear (John 8:36). “The Lord is my light and my salvation—whom shall I fear? The Lord is the stronghold of my life—of whom shall I be afraid? ” (Psalm 27:1).

why do we care what people think of us?

In many of my sessions with clients I see a common theme that disrupts their happiness and sense of self worth. Many people care too much about what other people think and it greatly impacts the choices they make. To start, here are some of the reasons we may care too much about what others think:

• We don't want to disappoint someone
• We want to fit in
• We were wounded in some way in our early years if being different or being authentic was responded to in a negative way
• Messages we received from significant people in our lives let us feel that our self-worth was tied to external factors and status
• We want to be accepted, validated, and loved
• We didn't feel accepted, validated or loved unless we conformed to what other people thought was right instead of following our own path

Of course it is normal to care about what other people think of us and everyone does to an extent. However, when we care to the point that our own happiness and well being is suffering, or making choices that are best for us result in extreme guilt, it reaches an unhealthy point. It's not easy to just decide, "ok, I don't care what anyone thinks of me anymore." It's a long process to stop caring so much about what others are thinking and to start caring more about what personally makes us happy and fulfilled in life. It has always been hard for me to put into words how strongly I feel about people being able to just be themselves without shame, guilt, or judgment. Then, recently I read a brilliant blog in the online magazine, Psychology Tomorrow called "Learning to Think for Ourselves" and it helped me formulate the words for this post. Here are some of my favorite nuggets from the piece that resonated with me. I hope they resonate with you too:My point is, as far as we know, we only get one shot at this life. As far as I know, happiness comes when we are in a place of being our true authentic selves and making choices that are in line with who we are as an individual. Who we are is completely different from the next person and what is right for one person is definitely not right for another person. There is no ONE path. There is no "normal" and there is no universal advice that will work for all people. There is no one definition of success. The only person who truly knows what's best for you is YOU. Sometimes that journey is about a lot of information gathering. It's about knowing all your options, self exploration and self awareness and when that's in place we are best equipped to make those powerful decisions that dictate the course of our lives. What we do for a living, who we choose as a partner and the type of lifestyle we lead are all extensions of ourselves and who we are as unique individuals. Finding the balance of living for yourself in a way that feels comfortable and right to you is an art form but it is achievable. My hope is that people will be able to give themselves the gift of trusting and honoring their own unique beliefs and talents without letting others dictate choices that may be wrong for them.

do the souls of aborted babies go to heaven?

Answer: Abortion as we know it today was not practiced in biblical times, and the Bible never specifically mentions the issue of abortion. It is clear from the Scriptures that an unborn baby is known by the Lord, even from the time of conception (Psalm 139:13-16). Although the Bible does not mention abortion or aborted babies, we do have two keys to help us unlock the answer to the question of whether the souls of aborted babies go to heaven.

The first key is from the only passage in the Bible where something specific is said about the death of infants. In 2 Samuel 12 we learn of David’s affair with Bathsheba, another man’s wife. David was informed by the prophet Nathan that the child produced by that union would die. David then began to fast and pray, asking the Lord to not carry out His judgment. When the child did die, David got up from praying and fasting and ate something.

When asked about this behavior, David uttered the words recorded in 2 Samuel 12:23, “Now he is dead; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.” David’s words reflect a clear understanding that the child could not come back to earth, but David would be with his child one day in heaven. This indicates not only David’s assurance of his own future in heaven (Psalm 23:6), but also the assurance that his child would share that future. From this account, we can conclude that infants who die are destined for heaven.

The second key to dealing with this issue is an understanding of the character and attributes of God. A God of justice must punish sin, for the Bible teaches us that “the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23). Neither an unborn child nor an aborted baby has had the opportunity to willfully sin; however, every child conceived bears the sin nature inherited from Adam (Psalm 51:5) and is therefore subject to judgment. At the same time, God reveals Himself as a God of goodness and mercy (Psalm 136:26). He is “gracious in all His works” (Psalm 145:17). It could very well be that God, in His grace, applies the sacrifice of Christ to the unborn victims of abortion. We know Christ’s blood is sufficient for such a thing. After all, Jesus died “for the sins of the whole world” (1 John 2:2).

The Bible does not specifically say whether or not an unborn child who dies goes to heaven. Without a clear passage, we can only speculate. However, we know of God’s love, goodness, and compassion. We know of David’s confidence that he would be with his child again. And we know that Jesus invited the children to come to Him (Luke 18:16). Based on these sureties, we believe it is appropriate to conclude that the souls of children are immediately in the presence of God when their lives are cut short by abortion.

HOW CAN SIBLINGS BE SO DIFFERENT FROM EACH OTHER?

For most of history, psychologists thought of the study of siblings as backwater: Parenting was important — siblings were not.
Then in the 1980s, a researcher named Robert Plomin published a surprising paper in which he reviewed the three main ways psychologists had studied siblings: physical characteristics, intelligence and personality. According to Plomin, in two of these areas, siblings were really quite similar.
Physically, siblings tended to differ somewhat, but they were a lot more similar on average when compared to children picked at random from the population. That's also true of cognitive abilities.

Tom Hoebbel (left) became an artist, while Eric (right) chose finance.

Courtesy of Tom Hoebbel

"The surprise," says Plomin, "is when you turn to personality."
Turns out that on tests that measure personality — stuff like how extroverted you are, how conscientious — siblings are practically like strangers.
"Children in the same family are more similar than children taken at random from the population," Plomin says, "but not much more."
In fact, in terms of personality, we are similar to our siblings only about 20 percent of the time. Given the fact that we share genes, homes, routines and parents, this makes no sense. What makes children in the same family so different?
Separating Genes From Environment
To come up with an answer, Plomin and other researchers did study after study. They were trying to tease out what role genes played in the personality differences they saw, and what role the environment played in those differences. When they began, they assumed, like everyone else, that being raised in the same environment would be one of the things that made children similar. This, however, is not what they found.
"The environment works in a very odd way," says Plomin. "It's making two children in the same family different from one another. Not similar to one another — different."
The question was: Why is it that being raised in the same family pushes children in opposite directions in terms of personality?
No one knows for sure, but there are three major theories.
Theory One: Divergence
The first is a view popularized by a Darwin scholar named Frank Sulloway. In Sulloway's view, competition is the engine that pushes evolution — just as in the wild. Therefore, in the context of a family, one of the main things that's happening is that children are competing for the time, love and attention of their parents.
"And when organisms compete," says Sulloway, "there tends to be a phenomenon that Darwin long ago identified in the origins of species called the principle of divergence. The role of divergence is basically to minimize competition so it's not direct. And that leads to specialization in different niches."
So if one child in a family seems to excel at academics, to avoid direct competition, the other child — consciously or unconsciously — will specialize in a different area, like socializing.
Sulloway says he saw a small version of this happen in his own family. His elder brother was a great tennis player, and he eventually became a professional tennis player. Sulloway says he never in his life was able to take a set from his brother. "And in the course of my high school experience, I discovered I was much better in track than in tennis," Sulloway says. So he switched. "It was a very conscious decision. I just was never going to be as good in tennis as he was."
Theory Two: Environment
The second theory has a slightly confusing name; it's called the non-shared environment theory, and it essentially argues that though from the outside it appears that we are growing up in the same family as our siblings, in very important ways we really aren't. We are not experiencing the same thing.
"Children grow up in different families because most siblings differ in age, and so the timing with which you go through your family's [major events] is different," says Susan McHale, a researcher at Pennsylvania State University. "You know, a parent loses a job, parents get divorced. If you are three or five years behind your sibling, the experience of a 5-year-old whose parents get divorced is very different from the experience of a 9-year-old or a 10-year-old."
Also, McHale says, children in the same family are rarely treated the same by their parents, even if parents want to treat them the same.
"Children have different needs," McHale says. "They have different interests. They have different personalities that are eliciting different treatment from parents."
Theory Three: Exaggeration
The final theory is the comparison theory, which holds that families are essentially comparison machines that greatly exaggerate even minor differences between siblings.
Imagine, says McHale, two friendly children born in the same family. "One of those children is incredibly extroverted, and the other is just very sociable," says McHale. In the context of any other family, says McHale, the second child would be considered an extrovert. "But in this family," says McHale, "she's the introvert."
And once the introvert label is assigned — even if in an absolute sense it's not really true — it influences the choices that the child makes.
"And so we pick different groups of friends, we spend our time in different ways that only reinforces what may have been a very small difference to begin with," McHale says. "And, you know, once you get these forces feeding on one another, differences escalate over time."

Tom and Eric Hoebbel with their father, who died in 1982.

Courtesy of Tom Hoebbel

Different Homes
So, why are Tom and Eric Hoebbel so different?  Both said the answer was clear. In their case, it wasn't Darwinian. Eric especially was convinced he didn't gravitate toward the path he's on to be different from his brother.
"No, I don't think it was a reaction to him at all," Eric says.
Tom agrees.
Instead they point to the death of their father. When their father died, Tom was 17 and heading off to college — but Eric was only 12. So, in a sense, they grew up in different homes. Tom, the radical, grew up in a secure, two-parent home.  But Eric the financial planner, as Tom points out, spent many years as the only man in a house destabilized both emotionally and financially by death.
"And as he grew and went to college, I think maybe that was for him his primary motivation — is to be the provider," Tom says.
So, this Thursday as you eat your turkey, look across the table. There, you may see a brother, a sister, a step-sibling, a twin. And maybe they're your friend, and maybe they're your enemy, but one thing is for certain: Their very existence has had a profound influence on your life.

can people have psychic powers?

Answer: Telepathy (the ability to read another’s thoughts) and telekinesis (the ability to move an object with one’s mind) are stalwart tools in the realm of superheroes. From Star Wars to the X-Men, mental powers seem to be ubiquitous. But what does the Bible say about such “super powers”?

The Bible actually has quite a bit to say about knowing another’s thoughts. Genesis 6:5 says, “Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” In 1 Chronicles 28:9, David tells his son Solomon, “The LORD searches all hearts, and understands every intent of the thoughts.” Psalm 94:11 says, “The LORD knows the thoughts of man.” And Jesus knew the thoughts of the scribes in Matthew 9:4. But we cannot know the thoughts of another. First Corinthians 2:11 says, “For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him?” God did not create humans to be able to communicate simply through thought. Instead, he gave us forms of communication that require much more work and humility, forms that breed community instead of simple, quick information transfers.

There are those who seem to have abilities that resemble telepathy. Mothers are particularly good at this. But it isn’t anything mysterious. It’s simply knowing others well enough, and knowing their situation well enough, to be able to make an accurate, educated guess about their motives. Job exemplifies this in Job 21:27 when he tells one of his “comforters,” “Behold, I know your thoughts, and the plans by which you would wrong me.” He knows his friend well, and he’s sat through enough lectures to be able to figure out where Zophar is coming from. That’s not telepathy. That’s just paying attention.

The Bible also mentions cases of objects moving or changing into something else. In Genesis 5:24 “Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him.” In I Kings 17:15, a widow’s flour and oil miraculously continue to provide throughout a long drought. In the next chapter, fire falls from heaven to consume a water-saturated sacrifice. In John 2, water turns into wine. But in all these cases, the purpose of the transformation or movement of materials was to glorify God and authenticate His messenger. At no time was it used merely for convenience or for frivolous purposes.

It is possible, however, for the enemy to use similar signs to draw attention to himself. Moses faced this when Pharaoh’s magicians turned their staffs into snakes (Exodus 7:12) and brought up frogs (Exodus 8:7). It is possible even now for people to make strange things happen. But we must examine what exactly is going on. Humans cannot use their minds to move or create objects. Those in the spirit realm can. So, every mysterious occurrence must be powered either by God or the enemy. If God is glorified through the event, if He caused the event to occur to validate His prophet, we can deduce the event occurred through Him. If, however, the event was frivolous and had nothing to do with God’s glory, it must have come through another source. And the Bible makes it clear that witchcraft and sorcery are to be avoided at all costs.

God made humans to interact in specific ways, ways that foster community and glorify Him. Some people may be blessed with a keen insight, but that doesn’t mean they have telepathy. The prophets of old were given the ability to ask God to act on their behalf in miraculous ways, but they didn’t have powers of psycho-kinesis. We are to look to the Holy Spirit for our strength. Trying to read another’s thoughts, move objects around a room, or create an energy ball takes time and effort away from the business of loving God and loving others and opens a dangerous door into the world of the occult.

If you have a lot of debt, can you temporarily stop tithing while paying off the debt?

Answer: It is permissible to stop tithing while paying off debt. Paying debts is a duty; tithing is "optional." Please do not misunderstand—giving to the Lord's work is very important. Sacrificial financial giving is part of God's calling for every Christian. If it is truly impossible to pay off the debt and continue tithing at the same time, it would not be wrong to decrease giving, or stop giving entirely, temporarily, in order to pay off the debts that are owed.

Our one unalterable duty toward other people is that we love them, dealing with them as we want them to deal with us (Matthew 7:12). All of us want people to pay the debts they owe us. Therefore, as Christians, we should “let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for he who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. The commandments, ‘Do not commit adultery,’ ‘Do not murder,’ ‘Do not steal,’ ‘Do not covet,’ and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law” (Romans 13:8-10).

The tithing law of the old covenant was God’s provision for meeting the material needs of the priests from the tribe of Levi. They needed support in order to minister in the temple and meet the needs of the poor (Numbers 18:26; Deuteronomy 26:12-15). Therefore, when the Israelites failed to give the temple tithe, God warned, "Will a man rob God? Yet you are robbing Me! But you say, 'How have we robbed You?' In tithes and offerings” (Malachi 3:8).

The writer of Hebrews revealed that the tithe was a tenth of a man’s income: “Now the law requires the descendants of Levi who become priests to collect a tenth from the people—that is, their brothers—even though their brothers are descended from Abraham” (Hebrews 7:5). The Levitical priesthood continued to serve in the temple throughout the earthly lifetime of Jesus. But after the death, resurrection, and ascension of the Lord Jesus, the structure of leadership changed: "For when there is a change of the priesthood, there must also be a change of the law" (Hebrews 7:12). Christ is now our High Priest. Christians are now God's temple and His royal priesthood (Hebrews 4:14-15; 1 Corinthians 6:19-20; 1 Peter 2:9-10).

Our High Priest ministers the new covenant to us (God's law written on our hearts) by giving us the Holy Spirit (Hebrews 12:24; 10:16). This law operates powerfully, causing us to love others with Spirit-produced love (Galatians 5:22-23). That is why John writes, "If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him?" (1 John 3:17-18). Because God’s love compels a true Christian to give, none of the New Testament epistles command or recommend that Christians pay a tithe. Rather than being a requirement, giving results from a Christian’s love.

Christians may, if they choose, give a tenth of their income to the church, meeting spiritual and material needs in their needy world. Some will choose to give less than a tenth; some will choose to give much more than a tenth. Paul recommends giving to the church on Sunday: “On the first day of every week, each one of you should set aside a sum of money in keeping with his income” (1 Corinthians 16:2a).

Christians shouldn’t hoard but give as much as God directs. It is God’s money. His rewards outweigh the cost. “Remember this: Whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows generously will also reap generously. Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver. And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that in all things at all times, having all that you need, you will abound in every good work” (2 Corinthians 9:6-8).

Should Christians today give a first fruits offering?

The first fruits offering was an offering required by God of the Israelites. It's mentioned several times in the Old Testament law:

Exodus 23:19a: "The best of the firstfruits of your ground you shall bring into the house of the LORD your God."
Leviticus 23:10: "'Speak to the people of Israel and say to them, When you come into the land that I give you and reap its harvest, you shall bring the sheaf of the firstfruits of your harvest to the priest."
Proverbs 3:9-10: "Honor the LORD with your wealth and with the firstfruits of all your produce; then your barns will be filled with plenty, and your vats will be bursting with wine."

The most comprehensive passage about the first fruits offering is found in Deuteronomy 26. It explains that the purpose of the first fruits was to acknowledge how God took the Israelites down to Egypt, multiplied their number, released them, and gave them the land of Canaan for an inheritance. Canaan was a fertile land that was already settled by people who did horrible things like sacrifice their children. For their sin, God had the Israelites destroy the Canaanites, and then He gave the Israelites the land.

God told the Israelites that the first fruits offering was to be given in thanks for "cities that you did not build, and houses full of all good things that you did not fill, and cisterns that you did not dig, and vineyards and olive trees that you did not plant…" (Deuteronomy 6:10-11). The offering was brought to the temple where it was displayed before God, and then given to the priests for their sustenance (Numbers 18:11-12). Proverbs 3:9-10 does say that offering first fruits will bring blessings, but it's unclear if this is a general proverb or a specific promise of God to His people; in the majority of appearances, first fruits is associated with thanks to God for bringing the Israelites from Egypt to Canaan.

The law is somewhat vague in the specifics, and has opened itself up to rabbinic interpretation. For instance, Scripture does not dictate how much the first fruit offering should be in comparison to the harvest. Leviticus 23:17 mentions two loaves of bread for an offering for wheat, and rabbinic custom stated the minimum offering should be 1/60th of the harvest, although this is not in the Bible. Rabbis decided that only the seven species characteristic to Canaan were required: wheat, barley, grapes, figs, pomegranates, olive oil, and dates (or honey). The offering could be brought anywhere between late spring and the fall. If the giver lived far from Jerusalem, the fruit could be dried.

The most significant aspect of the first fruits offering was the reason behind it: it was designed to acknowledge and thank God for providing the Israelites with the land flowing with milk and honey after their captivity in Egypt. It was a ceremonial act for the nation of Israel. It was not meant to be an act of faith that God would provide in the future, nor even to honor God as first in their lives. It was an act of obedience, and while that obedience was part of God's promise to Israel that He would bless them, it was the faithfulness of obedience that ensured His blessing, not the offering itself.

The term "first fruits" is used in another, somewhat metaphorical way in the Old Testament. It refers to the firstborn son of each human man or female animal. All firstborn males belonged to God, but depending on the species, they could be redeemed—that is, a sacrifice could be made so they could stay. God provided the redemption for the "first fruit" sons by taking the Levites for Himself to care for the tabernacle and the temple (Numbers 3:12). The firstborn male of each female herd animal had different standards depending on what they were. For instance, a firstborn male donkey could be redeemed by donating a lamb (Exodus 13:12), but cows, sheep, and goats were to be sacrificed (Numbers 18:17). Use of "first fruits" in this manner does not directly relate to the first fruit offering. The firstborn animals were dedicated in remembrance of God taking all the firstborns of men and animals in Egypt. The first fruits produce in remembrance of God providing for Israel in Canaan.

First Fruits in the New Testament

First fruits are mentioned in several ways in the New Testament:

- Romans 8:23 states "And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the spirit…" As in other passages, Paul is using "first fruits" as a metaphor for the first appearance of a promised blessing. Here, it is the Holy Spirit, the "helper" who Jesus promised in John 14:26. The very first followers of Jesus were also the very first to experience the blessing of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit—they received the "first fruits" of the Holy Spirit's work in the lives of believers.

- In Romans 11:13-16, Paul makes a confusing statement in regards to the rejection of Jesus by the Jews. It was always God's intent to bring salvation to the Gentiles (non-Jews). It was not His intent that the Jews would reject that salvation. But, since they have, God hopes that His new relationship the Gentiles will make the Jews jealous—envious—and cause them to want that relationship for themselves. Apparently some Gentile Christians turned their acceptance of Christ into pride and harassed the Jewish Christians. God is for all, and even the Gentiles who accepted Christ should not have treated the few Jewish Christians they came into contact with arrogantly.

Verse 16 continues: "If the dough offered as firstfruits is holy, so is the whole lump…" The phrasing is odd, but it's believed that the "dough" refers to the first Jewish Christians and the "whole lump" to Jews in general. Meaning that God has not abandoned the Jewish nation indefinitely. If the first Jewish Christians were redeemable, then the Gentiles needed to remember that every Jew is redeemable. "First fruits" is used as a metaphor to mean the first part of the harvest of Jewish souls that are to be saved through Christ's sacrifice.

- 1 Corinthians 15:20, 23 refer to Jesus as the "firstfruits" of those who will be raised from the dead. He is the firstborn Son of the Father, and His resurrection is the first of the promise that all who follow Him will also be raised. He is a guarantee of our future blessing.

- 2 Thessalonians 2:13 and James 1:18 call New Testament saints "firstfruits." They were the first to follow Christ, and act as a promise that there will be more to come. In fact, James 1:18 infers that the Christians in the early church were the "firstfruits" of all of creation and the promise that creation itself will be restored.

- The final mention of firstfruits in the Bible is in Revelation 14:4 and speaks of the 144,000 Jewish witnesses who will spread the Gospel during the Tribulation. They will have a special role in Heaven and are claimed by God and Jesus as special representatives of those who are saved.

All to say that although the term "firstfruits" is used in the New Testament, it does not refer to giving, whether to the Temple or the church. It acts as a metaphor to mean those who experience God's blessing first or in a special way.

First Fruits Today

The concept of first fruits is sometimes used by preachers today to encourage their parishioners to give an offering above and beyond tithing. The first fruit itself may vary:

- First paycheck of a new job or the first paycheck of the year
- Portion earned from the sale of something
- Portion of each subsequent paycheck
- Take a Sabbath the first day of the week, and/or have a quiet time in the morning

The reasons given for giving a firstfruit offering also vary:
- To show sacrificial faith that God will provide
- To give thanks that God did provide
- To "sow a seed" so that God will make the giver rich
- To ensure God will bless the giver's plans for the new year

The problem is, the first fruit offering was for the Jews for a specific purpose. Nowhere does the New Testament mention that the church is required or even encouraged to give a "first fruits offering." Like tithing, giving to the church is left up to the personal convictions of the individual believer. There is no blanket policy for giving.

This presumes that the work of God be understood in a dispensational manner instead of following the teaching of replacement theology. Replacement theology teaches that the church has replaced Israel in God's plan for the world. All of the promises God gave Israel (including material blessings for obedience) are transferred to the church. Dispensational theology claims that God gave Israel and the church different promises, and many of Israel's promises will not come to fruition until the Millennial Kingdom. It is the belief of this ministry that dispensational theology best interprets the Scriptures. The church cannot claim all the promises God made to Israel in the Old Testament.

That doesn't mean that giving a first fruit offering is bad in and of itself. Like the term (or even the practice) "tithing," "first fruit" can be used as a sort of shorthand to mean "voluntary offering given in thanks or faith." There's nothing wrong with giving above and beyond what is regularly budgeted for—as long as the motivation is personal and not pressured by church leadership.

The ways in which churches use the phrase (and the practice) vary in theological truth. To say that "laying down a seed" so that God will make someone rich, or that you can pay off God to bless future plans, is an abusive lie from adherents of the prosperity gospel. To give sacrificially is to follow in the example of the widow of Mark 12:41-44, and is commendable as long as it isn't coerced. To give an offering in thanks that God provided is perfectly acceptable. But if a church wants to have a period of fund-raising, it would be better to have a specific purpose and not just try to spiritualize the desire to have more capital in the bank.

This brings to mind the purposes the New Testament gives for church offerings. First Timothy 5:17-18 says that the church should support those who run the church. First Corinthians 9:14 says that those who preach the gospel should be supported by their work. Several times the New Testament exhorts believers to give to those who are in need (Matthew 25:34-36; 1 John 3:17-18). The New Testament says we are to give in faith, but it doesn't say that we are to give to the point of destitution so that our faith can grow (1 Corinthians 16:2). There is a difference between faithful sacrifice and bad resource management.

As far as the first fruit offering as described in the Old Testament, the church is exempt. Jesus did not come to abolish the law, but He did come to fulfill it—including being the first fruit, Himself (1 Corinthians 15:20). If the usage of the term "first fruit" in the New Testament is to be considered, the manifestation of first fruit in the church age means that those who were saved in the early church were a promise that more would follow. And Jesus' resurrection is a promise that we, too, will be resurrected. Any other use of "first fruits" is either abusive or careless. There are better terms to use when a church collects a special offering, and there are more biblical ways to do so than to insist, cajole, and threaten people to give.

Ironically, what the New Testament teaches about giving is more extreme. God wants all of us (Romans 12:1). Because of that, every monetary blessing we have is His, and we should do with it as He leads—whether to use on ourselves or to use for others. Matthew 25:14-30 tells us that we should be responsible with His blessings. This would include giving for a purpose, giving by the leading of the Bible and the Holy Spirit, giving for the spread of the Gospel and the aid of the needy, and giving cheerfully. Whatever you choose to call that, it's simply Christian giving.

---

 

Does the teaching on tithing in Malachi 3:9-10 apply to us today?

Answer: Malachi 3:9-10 is often used to teach the need for Christians to tithe to local churches today. That passage reads, “You are cursed with a curse, for you are robbing me, the whole nation of you. Bring the full tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. And thereby put me to the test, says the LORD of hosts, if I will not open the windows of heaven for you and pour down for you a blessing until there is no more need.” Does this teaching apply to Christians today?

First, the context of this passage concerns the Israelites not bringing their offerings to the temple. Because of their disobedience, God had judged them with a small harvest. The Lord challenged them to bring the “full tithe” of grain sacrifices (Leviticus 6:14-23) and see that He would bless them with an abundance of future crops. The “storehouse,” mentioned in verse 10, is a place to store grain in the temple.

Second, this passage teaches that the Jews were to give a tithe as part of the temple worship, but it does not teach that Christians are to give to churches. Malachi was written more than 400 years before the start of the first church in Jerusalem. Applying its command of temple giving to the local church takes these verses out of their original context.

Are New Testament Christians commanded to tithe or not? To be clear, a tithe is literally a “tenth,” or 10 percent. Abraham gave a tenth of all he had to the priest of Salem in Genesis 14:20. Later, the Mosaic Law included commands to give a tenth for tabernacle worship. Tithing is mentioned 18 times in the Law, as the people were to share their produce and livestock to support the Levites, the caretakers of the tabernacle. This same system of tithing would later be applied to the temple (2 Chronicles 31:5).

Jesus rebuked the religious leaders of His day, saying, “But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and every herb, and neglect justice and the love of God. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others” (Luke 11:42). These Pharisees obeyed the Law of Moses in that they tithed scrupulously, yet did not truly love God. They were challenged to do both.

The Law was fulfilled in Jesus Christ (Matthew 5:17). When the church began to grow beyond the Jewish people and reach Gentiles, leaders struggled with whether or not to command these new believers to follow the Mosaic Law. In the end, only a few instructions were given for the sake of peace, but tithing was not among them (Acts 15:19-21).

The principle in the New Testament is to give voluntarily to support the needs of others (Acts 2:45; Romans 15:25-27), support Christian workers (1 Corinthians 9:11-12; 1 Timothy 5:18), and expand Christian outreach (Philippians 4:15-16). No specific amount is ever commanded, and no percentage is suggested. While a tithe or tenth of one’s finances may be a good standard to use for Christian giving, it is clear the early church did not focus on a specific amount but rather on meeting needs. This sometimes included giving much more than a tenth, as some believers sold homes or land to meet the needs that existed in the church (Acts 4:34-37).

WHAT THE BIBLE MEANS BY WE ARE NOT TO JUDGE OTHERS

Answer: This is an issue that has confused many people. On one hand, we are commanded by the Lord Jesus, “Do not judge, or you too will be judged” (Matthew 7:1). On the other hand, the Bible also exhorts us to beware of evildoers and false prophets and to avoid those who practice all kinds of evil. How are we to discern who these people are if we do not make some kind of judgment about them?

Christians are often accused of "judging" whenever they speak out against a sinful activity. However, that is not the meaning of the Scripture verses that state, "Do not judge." There is a righteous kind of judgment we are supposed to exercise—with careful discernment (John 7:24). When Jesus told us not to judge (Matthew 7:1), He was telling us not to judge hypocritically. Matthew 7:2-5 declares, "For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye." What Jesus was condemning here was hypocritical, self-righteous judgments of others.

In Matthew 7:2-5, Jesus warns against judging someone else for his sin when you yourself are sinning even worse. That is the kind of judging Jesus commanded us not to do. If a believer sees another believer sinning, it is his Christian duty to lovingly and respectfully confront the person with his sin (Matthew 18:15-17). This is not judging, but rather pointing out the truth in hope—and with the ultimate goal—of bringing repentance in the other person (James 5:20) and restoration to the fellowship. We are to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15). We are to proclaim what God's Word says about sin. 2 Timothy 4:2 instructs us, "Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage — with great patience and careful instruction." We are to "judge" sin, but always with the goal of presenting the solution for sin and its consequences—the Lord Jesus Christ (John 14:6).

WHY WE YAWN

All humans yawn. So do most vertebrate animals. Surely it serves some useful function. But what that might be has puzzled scientists throughout the ages.
Now a series of experiments suggests a surprising reason for yawning. It cools the brain, says Andrew C. Gallup, PhD, a postdoctoral research associate at Princeton University.
"We have collected data on rats, parakeets, and humans. All the data supports the brain-cooling hypothesis," Gallup tells WebMD.
Here's the basic idea:

• When you start to yawn, powerful stretching of the jaw increases blood flow in the neck, face, and head.
• The deep intake of breath during a yawn forces downward flow of spinal fluid and blood from the brain.
• Cool air breathed into the mouth cools these fluids.

"Together these processes may act like a radiator, removing [too hot] blood from the brain while introducing cooler blood from the lungs and extremities, thereby cooling [brain] surfaces," Gallup says.
To answer skeptics, Gallup has laid out a more detailed anatomical description of the process in the medical literature.

We Yawn More When It's Cool

Gallup's theory predicts that colder outside air should cool the brain better than hot air. The body should therefore yawn more when the air is cool, and yawn less when the air is hot.
Where better to test this than in Tucson, Ariz.? Gallup's team went there twice: Once in the winter, when it was a cool 71.6 degrees F outside, and once in early summer, when it was 98.6 degrees F.
The researchers asked 80 pedestrians to look at pictures of people yawning. It's well known that people often yawn when they see others yawn.
Sure enough, in the cooler weather 45% of people yawned when they looked at the pictures. But in hotter weather, only 24% of people yawned. Moreover, people yawned more if they'd been outside longer in the cool weather, and yawned less if they'd been outside longer in the hot weather.
These results mimicked an earlier study in which Gallup's team showed that budgie parakeets yawned more in cool temperatures than they did in hot temperatures. And it supported a rat study in which rat brains cooled a bit when the animals yawned.

What We Say When We Yawn

Gallup says his brain cooling theory of yawning is the only theory that explains all these experimental results. But he has not yet convinced those who prefer another theory.
University of Geneva physician Adrian G. Guggisberg, MD, agrees with Gallup that changes in room temperature can trigger yawning. But he's wary of the brain cooling theory. And he offers an alternative interpretation of Gallup's Tucson study.
"The fact that yawning is suppressed during high temperatures suggest that it fails precisely when we need it," Guggisberg tells WebMD. "There are other [ways to regulate body temperature], such as sweating, and it is unclear why we would need another regulator which fails when it matters."

Why are so many evangelical Christian leaders caught in scandals?

a
a
Answer: First, it is important to point out that “so many” is not an accurate characterization. It may seem like many evangelical Christian leaders are caught in scandals, but this is due to the vast amount of attention such scandals are given. There are thousands of evangelical Christian leaders, pastors, professors, missionaries, writers, and evangelists who have never participated in anything “scandalous.” The vast majority of evangelical Christian leaders are men and women who love God, are faithful to their spouses and families, and handle their activities with the utmost honesty and integrity. The failures of a few should not be used to attack the character of all.

With that said, there is still the problem that scandals do sometimes occur among those claiming to be evangelical Christians. Prominent Christian leaders have been exposed for committing adultery or participating in prostitution. Some evangelical Christians have been convicted of tax fraud and other financial illegalities. Why does this occur? There are at least three primary explanations: 1) Some of those claiming to be evangelical Christians are unbelieving charlatans, 2) some evangelical Christian leaders allow their position to result in pride, and 3) Satan and his demons more aggressively attack and tempt those in Christian leadership because they know that a scandal involving a leader can have devastating results, on both Christians and non-Christians.

1) Some “evangelical Christians” who are caught in scandals are unredeemed charlatans and false prophets. Jesus warned, “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves … Therefore by their fruits you will know them” (Matthew 7:15-20). False prophets pretend to be godly men and women and appear to be solid evangelical leaders. However, their “fruit” (scandals) eventually reveals them to be the opposite of what they claimed to be. In this, they follow the example of Satan, “And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve” (2 Corinthians 11:14-15).

2) The Bible makes it clear that “pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall” (Proverbs 16:18). James 4:6 reminds us that “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.” The Bible repeatedly warns against pride. Many Christian leaders begin a ministry in a spirit of humility and reliance upon God, but as the ministry grows and thrives, they are tempted to take some of this glory for themselves. Some evangelical Christian leaders, while paying lip-service to God, actually attempt to manage and build the ministry in their own strength and wisdom. This type of pride leads to a fall. God, through the prophet Hosea, warned, “When I fed them, they were satisfied; when they were satisfied, they became proud; then they forgot me” (Hosea 13:6).

3) Satan knows that by instigating a scandal with an evangelical Christian leader, he can have a powerful impact. Just as King David’s adultery with Bathsheba and arranged murder of Uriah caused great damage to David’s family and the entire nation of Israel, so has many a church or ministry been damaged or destroyed by the moral failure of its leader. Many Christians have had their faith weakened as a result of seeing a leader fall. Non-Christians use the failure of “Christian” leaders as a reason to reject Christianity. Satan and his demons know this, and therefore direct more of their attacks against those in leadership roles. The Bible warns us all, “Be self-controlled and alert. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour” (1 Peter 5:8).

How are we to respond when an evangelical Christian leader is accused of or caught in a scandal? 1) Do not listen to or accept baseless and unfounded accusations (Proverbs 18:8, 17; 1 Timothy 5:19). 2) Take appropriate biblical measures to rebuke those who sin (Matthew 18:15-17; 1 Timothy 5:20). If the sin is proven and severe, permanent removal from ministry leadership should be enforced (1 Timothy 3:1-13). 3) Forgive those who sin (Ephesians 4:32; Colossians 3:13), and when repentance is proven, restore them to fellowship (Galatians 6:1; 1 Peter 4:8) but not to leadership. 4) Be faithful in praying for our leaders. Knowing the problems they deal with, the temptations they suffer, and the stress they must endure, we should be praying for our leaders, asking God to strengthen them, protect them, and encourage them. 5) Most importantly, take the failure of an evangelical Christian leader as a reminder to put your ultimate faith in God and God alone. God never fails, never sins, and never lies. “Holy, holy, holy is the LORD Almighty; the whole earth is full of His glory” (Isaiah 6:3)

what does the bible say about vampires?

Answer:The popularity of the teen romance novels in theTwilightseries has given rise to a renewed interest in vampires. The vampire is a mythological being who is said to exist by drinking the blood of other people, usually by biting their necks, after which the victim also becomes a vampire who seeks new victims. The vampire legend can be traced back to medieval and Eastern European folklore, but variations of tales of vampire-like creatures also exist in Africa, Asia and the Americas.

The current vampire craze really has its roots in two quasi-romantic novels of the 19th century, TheVampyreby John Polidori (1819) and Dracula by Bram Stoker (1897). These two are the progenitors of the romantic vampire genre of fantasy fiction. The seductive “kiss of the vampire” has generated an alluring mystique, especially for young women, and that mystique, along with the “forbidden fruit” syndrome, is the basis for the popularity of theTwilightseries. The romantic/sexual attraction of the suave, sophisticated vampire Count Dracula as portrayed by Frank Langella in the movieDracula(1979) is an example of the allure of the vampire. The film's tagline is "Throughout history, he has filled the hearts of men with terror, and the hearts of women with desire."

While fantasy fiction such asTwilightis probably for the most part harmless, any obsessive interest in vampires—or, for that matter, witches, ghosts, and other occult figures—can be unhealthy at best and dangerous at worst. It depends on the spiritual state of the person whose interest is piqued by such subjects. A weak, emotionally fragile young girl, for example, whose life is characterized by family stress, self-esteem issues, and a lack of strong role models, could be at risk for developing an unhealthy interest in the occult. Such an interest can be an open door for demons to infiltrate her mind and spirit. Satan, as we know, is the enemy of our souls, who “prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour” (1 Peter 5:8). This is why God, in His wisdom, forbids occult practices, describing them as an “abomination” and “detestable” (Deuteronomy 18:9-12).

How is the Christian to think about vampires and vampire fiction? We are reminded inPhilippians 4:8to fill our minds with “whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy.” While there are elements of nobility in the Twilight books, there are also elements of darkness and the occult. There is also a very strong pull toward the “hero” of the book, Edward, who is a vampire. He is a seductively attractive, charismatic figure who has a great deal of appeal to teen girls. The author skillfully portrays a beautiful, romantic, perfect—although flawed—character, the kind of guy most teen girls are drawn to. The problem comes from idealizing such a person and then setting out to find someone like him. No human male can live up to such an ideal. Christian girls and young women should be seeking beauty and perfection in Christ. When they understand true beauty of character, they will be able to recognize it in the young man God brings to them for a husband.

So does this mean that Christians should avoid vampire fiction altogether? For some families, the answer is yes. For others, the answer is no. Parents whose teen or preteen daughter is interested in the series would do well to read it for themselves, discuss it with their girls, and perhaps point out the ways in which it contradicts God’s Word. Such an analytical discussion can do much to dispel the mystique that surrounds the vampire myth. Ultimately, the decision regarding any reading material for Christian children and teens is the responsibility of parents.

is it ok for dating christians to kiss?

hose who ask this question are usually looking for guidelines regarding physical boundaries in dating. However, intimacy is a much broader issue than physicality. A dictionary definition of intimacy talks about close friendship, deep emotional connection, and sexual involvement. To be intimate with someone is to be close to him or her, to reveal private information, to feel linked together. Intimacy includes emotional and spiritual connectedness as well as physical connection. Dating couples grow more and more intimate as they become more serious about the relationship. If proper boundaries are not established, increasing intimacy can have some undesirable results – such as feelings of abuse or betrayal following a break-up, loss of appropriate personal boundaries without a commensurate commitment, and beginning to become one before the couple actually belongs to one another. With this in mind, let's explore some boundary guidelines.

Physical: It is difficult to provide solid physical boundaries that apply to every dating relationship. Depending on one's culture and one's typical physical contact with others, physical boundaries may vary. For instance, some people hug everyone they know. This is not a sign of intimacy or love so much as it is a greeting. For others, hugging is an intimate gesture. It is also important to look at the degree to which the physical touch is carried out. There is a difference between a hug of greeting and a long embrace. Each person should be aware of the meaning he or she attaches to certain gestures when considering appropriate boundaries. It is also wise to be aware of whether certain physical touches lead a person to desire more intimate touch. For example, does a hug of greeting quickly lead to a make-out session? Recognizing personal healthy boundaries is the first step, but physical boundaries should be mutually established prior to physical contact. In the heat of the moment, it is difficult to stop a kiss that is later regretted. If both parties know the limits beforehand, maintaining boundaries becomes easier. Boundaries for physical touch should be a matter of prayer and discussion. The partner with the stricter boundaries should set the norm for the couple.

All that being said, there are certain physical boundaries that are clearly biblical. These are not a matter of personal meaning or choice. It is inappropriate to have sex, in any form, prior to marriage. It is also inappropriate to be naked in one another's presence. Sex is a gift from God that is meant for a married couple to enjoy (Proverbs 5:19; Song of Solomon;1 Corinthians 7:1-4;Hebrews 13:4).Ephesians 5:3says, "But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints." The New International Version puts it this way, "But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God's holy people." Anything in a premarital relationship that hints of sexual immorality – like dry sex, foreplay, nudity, sleeping in the same bed, pornography, and the like – is unacceptable.

Emotional: Often, dating couples who have chosen to abstain from physical intimacy still struggle with emotional intimacy. Emotional intimacy occurs when couples share their inner thoughts with one another and rely on one another for emotional support. To an extent, dating couples will become increasingly emotionally intimate. This is a natural progression even of friendship. As people begin to know and trust one another, they become more deeply emotionally linked. However, it is wise for couples to continue to guard their hearts. Dating implies no long-term commitment. When couples find their only emotional support in one another, they set themselves up for heartbreak. There should be private portions of a heart that a person shares only with his or her spouse.

Spiritual: Some well-intentioned Christian couples begin devotionals or prayer times with one another. These are both great practices, but they also need boundaries. Our relationship with God is perhaps the most intimate thing we have. When we invite others into this, we are inviting them into intimacy. One way married couples strengthen their relationship is by praying together. Certainly, dating couples should pray together. But the manner in which they pray should preserve their personal boundaries. Married couples can pray as one unit before God. Dating couples are still two individuals.

First Thessalonians 4:3-7says, "For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality; that each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor, not in the passion of lust like the Gentiles who do not know God; that no one transgress and wrong his brother in this matter, because the Lord is an avenger in all these things, as we told you beforehand and solemnly warned you. For God has not called us for impurity, but in holiness." (See alsoColossians 3:5andGalatians 5:19-24). While this passage primarily applies to physical boundaries, it can also cover other areas of intimacy. In essence, Paul is saying that we need to learn to control ourselves. We are not to take advantage of others – whether it's taking physical liberties or pressing for another type of intimacy. We are told not to wrong each other in matters of intimacy. Dating couples do not have the commitment that married couples do. They have not yet been made one (Mark 10:8) and are no more attached to one another than friends. Dating couples should honor one another by respecting boundaries. Though dating couples are deepening their relationships and learning whether they are compatible for marriage, they should not act as though they are married. Certain gifts are reserved for marriage only.

It has often been said that you should date as if you are dating someone else's future husband or wife. What level of intimacy would you want your future spouse to have had with a previous boyfriend or girlfriend? Many people regret being too intimate before marriage, but you will never regret not being intimate enough.

who is satan?

Answer:People's beliefs concerning Satan range from the silly to the abstract—from a little red guy with horns who sits on your shoulder urging you to sin, to an expression used to describe the personification of evil. The Bible, however, gives us a clear portrait of who Satan is and how he affects our lives. Put simply, the Bible defines Satan as an angelic being who fell from his position in heaven due to sin and is now completely opposed to God, doing all in his power to thwart God's purposes.

Satan was created as a holy angel.Isaiah 14:12possibly gives Satan’s pre-fall name as Lucifer.Ezekiel 28:12-14describes Satan as having been created a cherubim, apparently the highest created angel. He became arrogant in his beauty and status and decided he wanted to sit on a throne above that of God (Isaiah 14:13-14;Ezekiel 28:15;1 Timothy 3:6). Satan’s pride led to his fall. Notice the many “I will” statements inIsaiah 14:12-15. Because of his sin, God barred Satan from heaven.

Satan became the ruler of this world and the prince of the power of the air (John 12:31;2 Corinthians 4:4;Ephesians 2:2). He is an accuser (Revelation 12:10), a tempter (Matthew 4:3;1 Thessalonians 3:5), and a deceiver (Genesis 3;2 Corinthians 4:4;Revelation 20:3). His very name means “adversary” or “one who opposes.” Another of his titles, the devil, means “slanderer.”

Even though he was cast out of heaven, he still seeks to elevate his throne above God. He counterfeits all that God does, hoping to gain the worship of the world and encourage opposition to God's kingdom. Satan is the ultimate source behind every false cult and world religion. Satan will do anything and everything in his power to oppose God and those who follow God. However, Satan’s destiny is sealed—an eternity in the lake of fire (Revelation 20:10).

WHERE DID IT ALL GO WRONG?

Three separate but related recalls of automobiles by Toyota Motor Corporation occurred at the end of 2009 and start of 2010. Toyota initiated the first two recalls   after reports that the vehicles experienced unintended acceleration. As of January 28, 2010 Toyota had announced recalls of approximately 52 million vehicles for pedal entrapment/floor mat problems and additional 2.3million vehicles with accelerator pedal problems. A lot more millions of vehicles were recalled globally. Its remarkable how with state of the art technologies and the best man-power the world can offer yet perfection eludes the mighty. There is in fact a common saying that no one is perfect. But we certainly cannot say the same about God. There is no impossibility with God, therefore no room for faults with Him or in Him. Alright. In genesis verse one, we see God begin the process of creating the universe we know and live today. We equally see in verse 31 where '...God looked over all He had made, and He saw it was very good!' the exclamation mark at the end of the statement is from scriptures and it denotes excitement. We could envision God stepping back and examining His handiwork then nod in satisfactory approval. He had made a great product. He had created an invention worthy of an entity like Him- God! And He thought it was very good-perfect. Alright. In genesis 6:5-6 we read, 'The Lord observed the extent of human wickedness on the earth and He saw that everything they thought or imagined was consistently and totally evil. So the Lord was sorry He had ever made them and put them on the earth. It broke His heart.' king James version reads, 'and it repented the Lord that He had made man...'. This is mind blowing. What do we see here? The perfect God with whom there is no shadow regretting His own product? Is He sorry that He had made what He made? Is He thinking 'I shouldn't have done this'? Or 'I should have done it the other way instead of this way'? Or 'I regret ever doing this. It’s not what I thought'? Not so fast to a hasty conclusion. There is yet another contradiction. In 2timothy 1:9 we read, 'for God saved us and called us to live a holy life. And He did this, not because we deserved it, but because that was His plan from before the beginning of time- to show us His grace through Christ Jesus'. Before the beginning of time means before the clock even began ticking. It simply means before creation or before the world came to existence. Now, if God's plan had been from that long ago that humanity would have salvation through Jesus, does that not mean He already knew salvation from sin and death will be needed even before He set out to create a seemingly perfect world? Does that not also imply that He deliberately created a flawed world or sowed the seeds of failure in His creation in anticipation of future salvation through the Christ? If that were the case then how could He pretend to be taken by surprise at the subsequent decay that permeated the world? Now lets go back to the beginning. Genesis 6:6 says that God regretted, not for making the world, but for making man and putting him there. Man was His regret. Man was the problem. The scripture says it broke His heart. It grieved His heart. So does this mean that a perfect God made an imperfect human species which He put in a perfect world? That can't be further from the truth. In genesis 1:26 we read, "Then God said 'let us make human beings in our image, to be like us'. God made species that were His replica. That's what it means to be made in His image. ‘To be like us' means to behave, function and operate like Him. If God is perfect, then humans were made perfect for we were made in the image of God. There was and is no room for any kind of defect in the creation of God. Adam and Eve were perfect beings in spirit, soul and body. Now that leaves us with the big question; where did things go wrong? The first time God installed a king for Israel He chose the best looking man-Saul. The bible records that Saul was, in fact, a head taller than the tallest men in all Israel. When God sought a wife for Isaac He selected the prettiest girl for him. That's the kind of persona God is! He is the best; He gives the best and naturally expects the best. Therefore when He decided to make man in the earth He made them to be the best, hence, in His image. It’s only in our being the best can He expects the best from us. Pointedly, being in the image of God means that we are free moral agents. Take note that God could have made man robotic if He wanted. He could have put only one mind in us which would leave man without a choice but to do as God wishes. But He didn't! In His love which transcends understanding He made us completely like Him-free to choose. With great and exemplary faith, He trusted us to choose the best just like Him (although we could choose differently). God was aware that just one choice of man could ruin His entire creation yet He took the chance. In faith, in love, in hope, He took the chance. Now that's not all! In His infinity He realized that as free beings just like Him we could make the wrong move and ruin ourselves together with the world He had made so He hatched a plan B even before He set out to create the universe. With such knowledge His plan B could be anything like a weapon that would probably zap humanity off the earth at the first sign of side-stepping. That way the earth remains intact and a fresh humanity can always be formed. Instead God settled for a plan B that involved rescuing man from His own mess and ultimately the earth. That plan B is Jesus, the Christ. Throughout scriptures we can now see that Jesus had been God's plan B from before the beginning of time. This is why 2timothy 1:9 says, 'that was His plan... To show us His grace through Jesus Christ'. Yes God is perfect. He didn't fail at His attempt of creating the world. He neither failed in His attempt at creating man. He didn't fail in His attempt at enforcing His plan B when man failed. Jesus Christ offers salvation to the hurting and lost soul. RIGHT NOW, you hold the candle to the fate of your life and the world around you. "Today I have given you the choice between life and death, between blessings and curses. Now I call on heaven and earth to witness the choice you make. Oh, that you would choose life, so that you and your descendants might live!(Deuteronomy 30:19)"

All scripture quotations taken from the New Living Translation of the bible