Collateral damage II,

Taken for a ride.

On bread from heaven.

A reproduction of the reform study bible's commentary on John6:32

 

6:32 the true bread from heaven. The word “true” has a special meaning. Jesus refers to what is everlasting, as opposed to something merely representative. The bread God provided through Moses (Ex. 16; Num. 11) was only material and temporary, not spiritual and eternal. See note at 4:24.

 

 A reproduction of the reform study bible's commentary on revelation2:17

 

 

2:17 hidden manna. Perhaps an allusion to the manna preserved in the Most Holy Place of the tabernacle (Ex. 16:33–35; Heb. 9:4). Christ promises to nourish the faithful with an unfailing supply of heavenly, spiritual food (John 6:32–58).

 

In other words the physical relief  brought about by the miracles That Jehovah empowered is apostles(including Christ and his apostles) to perform in bible times was only temporary and relatively incomplete,and an allusion to something permanent and complete.

 Isaiah33:24NKJV"And the inhabitant will not say,"I am sick";The people who dwell in it will be forgiven their iniquity"

"The stones will cry out"

On why the Christianity one sees today often bears little resemblance to the Christianity one reads of in the scriptures.

The following is a reproduction of the watchtower society's article

MAN OF LAWLESSNESS

An expression used by the apostle Paul at 2 Thessalonians 2:2, 3 in warning of the great anti-Christian apostasy that would develop before “the day of Jehovah.” The Greek word for “apostasy” here used, a·po·sta·si′a, denotes more than a mere falling away, an indifferent sliding back. It means a defection, a revolt, a planned, deliberate rebellion. In ancient papyrus documents a·po·sta·si′a was used politically of rebels.

A Religious Revolt. This rebellion, however, is not a political one. It is a religious one, a revolt against Jehovah God and Jesus Christ and therefore against the Christian congregation.

Foretold. Other forecasts of this apostasy were made by the apostles Paul and Peter both verbally and in writing, and the Lord Jesus Christ himself warned of its coming. In his illustration of the wheat and the weeds (Mt 13), Jesus said that the Devil would sow “weeds,” imitation Christians, “sons of the wicked one,” among the “wheat,” the “sons of the kingdom.” These would exist until the conclusion of the system of things, when they would be identified and ‘burned up.’

Paul warned the Christian overseers of Ephesus that after his going away “oppressive wolves” would enter in among true Christians and would not treat the flock with tenderness but would try to draw away “the disciples” after themselves (not just making disciples for themselves but trying to draw away the disciples, Christ’s disciples). (Ac 20:29, 30) He wrote, at 1 Timothy 4:1-3: “However, the inspired utterance says definitely that in later periods of time some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to misleading inspired utterances and teachings of demons, by the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, marked in their conscience as with a branding iron [feelingless, seared, so that they do not feel any twinges of conscience because of hypocritically speaking lies]; forbidding to marry, commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be partaken of with thanksgiving.”

Paul later wrote to Timothy that “there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the healthful teaching, but, in accord with their own desires, they will accumulate teachers for themselves to have their ears tickled; and they will turn their ears away from the truth.”—2Ti 4:3, 4.

The apostle Peter drew a parallel between the apostasy from Christianity and that which occurred in the natural house of Israel. He said: “However, there also came to be false prophets among the people, as there will also be false teachers among you. These very ones will quietly bring in destructive sects and will disown even the owner that bought them, bringing speedy destruction upon themselves. Furthermore, many will follow their acts of loose conduct, and on account of these the way of the truth will be spoken of abusively.” Peter goes on to point out that these would exploit the congregation but that “the destruction of them is not slumbering.”—2Pe 2:1-3.

A composite “man.” The “man” of 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 is, therefore, not an individual, but a composite “man,” a collective group, as the foregoing scriptures show, and this “man” was to continue after the apostles’ death and exist down until the time of the Lord’s presence.

Treason against God. The “lawlessness” that this composite apostate “man” commits is lawlessness against Jehovah God the Universal Sovereign. This “man” is guilty of treason. He is called “the son of destruction,” as was Judas Iscariot, the traitor who betrayed the Lord Jesus Christ and who was instrumental in bringing about his death. He, like Judas, is to be annihilated, sent into extinction forever. This “man” is not “Babylon the Great,” who also fights against God, for she is a woman, a harlot. However, since he carries on a religious rebellion against God, he is evidently a part of mystic Babylon.—Joh 17:12; Re 17:3, 5.

“The man of lawlessness” sets himself in opposition to God and is therefore a “satan,” which means “resister.” And, indeed, his “presence is according to the operation of Satan.” (2Th 2:9) In the days of the apostle Paul, there was “mystery,” or a religious secret, about the identity of this “man of lawlessness.” To this day mystery shrouds his identity in the minds of many persons, because his wickedness is practiced under the guise of godly devotion. (2Th 2:7) By his lying teachings contrary to or superseding, as it were, the law of God, “the man of lawlessness” sets himself up over Jehovah God and other ‘gods,’ mighty ones of the earth, and also against God’s holy ones, true spiritual brothers of Jesus Christ. (Compare 2Pe 2:10-13.) Since he is a hypocrite, a false teacher claiming to be Christian, he “sits down in the temple of The God,” that is, what such false teachers claim to be that temple.—2Th 2:4.

A restraint. Paul speaks of “the thing that acts as a restraint.” (2Th 2:6) It appears that the apostles constituted this restraint. Paul had told the Ephesian overseers that after his going away wolflike men would enter in. (Ac 20:29) He repeatedly wrote admonitions about such apostasy not only here in Second Thessalonians but in many exhortations to Timothy. And he counseled Timothy to commit the things he had heard from Paul to faithful men who would be qualified to teach others. He spoke of the congregation of the living God as being “a pillar and support of the truth.” He wanted it built up as strongly as possible before the great apostasy blossomed out.—2Ti 2:2; 1Ti 3:15.

Much later, at the command of Christ, the apostle John was told to write, warning against sects, mentioning especially the sect of Nicolaus and speaking of false prophets like Balaam and of the woman Jezebel who called herself a prophetess.—Re 2:6, 14, 15, 20.

At work in apostles’ days. The apostle Paul said that the mystery was “already at work.” (2Th 2:7) There were those trying to teach false doctrine, some of these even disturbing the Thessalonian congregation, prompting, in part, the writing of his second letter to them. There were antichrists when John wrote his letters, and doubtless before that. John spoke of “the last hour” of the apostolic period, and said: “Just as you have heard that antichrist is coming, even now there have come to be many antichrists . . . They went out from us, but they were not of our sort; for if they had been of our sort, they would have remained with us. But they went out that it might be shown up that not all are of our sort.”—1Jo 2:18, 19; see ANTICHRIST.

Revealed. Following the apostles’ death, “the man of lawlessness” came out into the open with his religious hypocrisy and false teachings. (2Th 2:3, 6, 8) According to Paul’s words, this “man” would gain great power, operating under Satan’s control, performing “every powerful work and lying signs and portents.” Persons deceived by the operation of the composite “man of lawlessness” are referred to as “those who are perishing [literally, “destroying themselves”], as a retribution because they did not accept the love of the truth that they might be saved.” The apostle shows that they “get to believing the lie” and they will all “be judged because they did not believe the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness.” (2Th 2:9-12; see Int.) The judgment is therefore a condemnatory one.—See RESURRECTION (Sin against the holy spirit).

Destroyed. This composite, hypocritical “man of lawlessness” is to be done away with by the Lord Jesus “by the spirit of his mouth” and brought to nothing “by the manifestation of his presence.” The annihilation of this wicked opposer of God will be visible, concrete proof that the Lord Jesus Christ is sitting and acting as Judge. He will not judge according to his own standards, hence the destruction “by the spirit of his mouth” evidently means in expression of Jehovah’s judgment against this wicked class of persons.—2Th 2:8; compare Re 19:21, as to “the long sword . . . which sword proceeded out of his mouth"

it-2 p. 311-312

No end in sight IV

Spy vs Spy.

Rotten to the core III

Letting the puzzle solve itself

The following is a reproduction of the watchtower society's article 

THE WATCHTOWER (STUDY EDITION) 2006-08-15

“Let Us Compare Scripture With Scripture”

A MAN found a pamphlet on the floor of a railway car bound for New York City. ‘The human soul is mortal,’ said the pamphlet. Intrigued, the man, a minister, started to read. He was amazed because he had never before doubted the teaching of the immortality of the soul. At the time, he could not tell who had written the pamphlet. Still, he found the argument plausible and Scriptural and the material worthy of serious study.

The minister was George Storrs. The incident took place in 1837, the year that Charles Darwin first recorded in his notebook thoughts that would later develop into his theory of evolution. The world was still religious, and most people believed in God. Many read the Bible and looked up to it as having authority.

Storrs later found out that the pamphlet was written by Henry Grew of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Grew held fast to the principle that “the scripture . . . is its own best interpreter.” Grew and his associates had been studying the Bible with the aim of conforming their lives and activities to its counsel. Their studies revealed some beautiful Scriptural truths.

Stimulated by Grew’s writing, Storrs carefully looked into what the Scriptures had to say about the soul and discussed the matter with some of his fellow ministers. After five years of serious study, Storrs finally decided to publicize his newly found gem of Scriptural truth. At first, he prepared one sermon to give on a Sunday in 1842. However, he felt the need to give a few more sermons to do justice to the subject. Eventually, his sermons on the mortality of the human soul numbered six, which he published in Six Sermons. Storrs compared scripture with scripture in order to uncover the beautiful truth buried beneath the God-dishonoring doctrines of Christendom.

Does the Bible Teach the Immortality of the Soul?

The Bible speaks of Jesus’ anointed followers putting on immortality as a reward for their faithfulness. (1 Corinthians 15:50-56) If immortality is a reward for the faithful, Storrs reasoned, the soul of the wicked cannot be immortal. Instead of speculating, he went to the Scriptures. He considered Matthew 10:28, King James Version, which reads: “Fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” So the soul can be destroyed. He also referred to Ezekiel 18:4, which says: “The soul that sinneth, it shall die.” (KJ) When the whole Bible was put into perspective, the beauty of the truth stood out. “If the view I take of this subject be correct,” wrote Storrs, “then many portions of Scripture, which have been obscure on the common theory, become clear, beautiful and full of meaning and force.”

But what about scriptures like Jude 7? It reads: “Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.” (KJ) Reading this text, some may conclude that the souls of those who were killed in Sodom and Gomorrah are tormented by fire forever. “Let us compare Scripture with Scripture,” wrote Storrs. He then quoted 2 Peter 2:5, 6, which reads: “And spared not the old world, but saved Noah . . . , bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly.” (KJ) Yes, Sodom and Gomorrah were turned into ashes, destroyed forever with their inhabitants.

“Peter throws light on Jude,” Storrs explained. “Both together show most clearly what displeasures God has manifested against sinners. . . . Those judgments inflicted on the old world, Sodom and Gomorrah, are a standing, and perpetual, or ‘eternal’ admonition, warning, or ‘example’ to all men to the end of the world.” So Jude referred to the effect of the fire that destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah as eternal. That in no way alters the fact that the human soul is mortal.

Storrs was not putting together scriptures that supported his view while ignoring others. He considered the context of each text as well as the overall tenor of the Bible. If a verse seemed to contradict other scriptures, Storrs looked into the rest of the Bible for a logical explanation.

Russell’s Studies in the Scriptures

Among those who became associated with George Storrs was a young man who was organizing a Bible study group in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. His name was Charles Taze Russell. One of his first articles on Scriptural themes was published in 1876 in the magazine Bible Examiner, edited by Storrs. Russell acknowledged that earlier Bible students had an influence on him. Later, as the editor of Zion’s Watch Tower, he appreciated Storrs’ giving him much assistance, by both word and pen.

At the age of 18, C. T. Russell organized a Bible study class and established a pattern for studying the Bible. A. H. Macmillan, a Bible student associated with Russell, described this method: “Someone would raise a question. They would discuss it. They would look up all related scriptures on the point and then, when they were satisfied on the harmony of these texts, they would finally state their conclusion and make a record of it.”

Russell was convinced that the Bible, when taken as a whole, must reveal a message harmonious and consistent with itself and with the character of its Divine Author. Whenever any part of the Bible seemed difficult to understand, Russell felt that it should be clarified and interpreted by other parts of the Bible.

Bible students in the 19th century who let Scripture explain scripture: George Storrs, Henry Grew, Charles Taze Russell, A. H. Macmillan

Scriptural Tradition

However, neither Russell nor Storrs nor Grew was the first to let the Scriptures become their own interpreter. The tradition goes all the way back to the Founder of Christianity, Jesus Christ. He used a number of scriptures to clarify the true meaning of a text. For instance, when the Pharisees criticized his disciples for plucking heads of grain on the Sabbath, Jesus demonstrated from the account recorded at 1 Samuel 21:6 how the Sabbath law should be applied. The religious leaders were familiar with that account, in which David and his men ate the loaves of presentation. Jesus then referred to the part of the Law that said that only the Aaronic priests were to eat the showbread. (Exodus 29:32, 33; Leviticus 24:9) Still, David was told to go ahead and eat the loaves. Jesus concluded his persuasive argument by quoting from the book of Hosea: “If you had understood what this means, ‘I want mercy, and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless ones.” (Matthew 12:1-8) What a wonderful example of comparing a scripture with other scriptures to reach an accurate understanding!

The apostle Paul proved his point by references to scriptures

Jesus’ followers held to the pattern of using scripture references to shed light upon a scripture. When the apostle Paul taught people in Thessalonica, “he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and proving by references that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead.” (Acts 17:2, 3) In his divinely inspired letters too, Paul let the Bible become its own interpreter. Writing to the Hebrews, for instance, he quoted one scripture after another to prove that the Law was a shadow of the good things to come.​—Hebrews 10:1-18.

Yes, sincere Bible students in the 19th and early 20th centuries were simply restoring this Christian pattern. The tradition of comparing scriptures with other scriptures continues in the Watchtower magazine. (2 Thessalonians 2:15) Jehovah’s Witnesses use this principle when they analyze a scripture.

Let the Context Speak

When we are reading the Bible, how can we imitate the fine examples of Jesus and his faithful followers? First, we can consider the immediate context of the scripture in question. How can the context help us understand the meaning? To illustrate, let us take Jesus’ words recorded at Matthew 16:28: “Truly I say to you that there are some of those standing here that will not taste death at all until first they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.” Some may feel that these words were not fulfilled because all of Jesus’ disciples who were present when he said those words died before the establishment of God’s Kingdom in the heavens. The Interpreter’s Bible even says of this verse: “The prediction was not fulfilled, and later Christians found it necessary to explain that it was metaphorical.”

However, the context of this verse, as well as that of the parallel accounts by Mark and Luke, helps us understand the real meaning of the scripture. What did Matthew relate right after the words quoted above? He wrote: “Six days later Jesus took Peter and James and John his brother along and brought them up into a lofty mountain by themselves. And he was transfigured before them.” (Matthew 17:1, 2) Both Mark and Luke also linked Jesus’ comment about the Kingdom with the account of the transfiguration. (Mark 9:1-8; Luke 9:27-36) Jesus’ coming in Kingdom power was demonstrated in his transfiguration, his appearing in glory in the presence of the three apostles. Peter verifies this understanding by speaking of “the power and presence of our Lord Jesus Christ” with regard to his witnessing Jesus’ transfiguration.​—2 Peter 1:16-18.

Do You Let the Bible Be Its Own Interpreter?

What if you cannot understand a scripture even after you have considered its context? You may benefit from comparing it with other scriptures, having in mind the overall tenor of the Bible. One excellent tool for doing this can be found in the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, now available in whole or in part in 57 languages. This tool is a list of marginal references, or cross-references, that appears in the center column of each page in many of its editions. You can find more than 125,000 of them in the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures​—With References. The “Introduction” to that Bible explains: “A careful comparison of the marginal references and an examination of the accompanying footnotes will reveal the interlocking harmony of the 66 Bible books, proving that they comprise one book, inspired by God.”

Let us see how use of the cross-references can help us to understand a scripture. Take the example of the history of Abram, or Abraham. Consider this question: Who took the lead when Abram and his family went out of Ur? Genesis 11:31 reads: “Terah took Abram his son and Lot, . . . and Sarai his daughter-in-law, . . . and they went with him out of Ur of the Chaldeans to go to the land of Canaan. In time they came to Haran and took up dwelling there.” Just reading this, one might conclude that Abram’s father, Terah, took the lead. However, in the New World Translation, we find 11 cross-references on this verse. The last one takes us to Acts 7:2, where we read Stephen’s admonition to the first-century Jews: “The God of glory appeared to our forefather Abraham while he was in Mesopotamia, before he took up residence in Haran, and he said to him, ‘Go out from your land and from your relatives and come on into the land I shall show you.’” (Acts 7:2, 3) Was Stephen confusing this with Abram’s leaving Haran? Obviously not, for this is part of the inspired Word of God.​—Genesis 12:1-3.

Why, then, does Genesis 11:31 state that “Terah took Abram his son” and others of his family and went out of Ur? Terah was still the patriarchal head. He agreed to go with Abram and thus was credited with moving the family to Haran. By comparing and harmonizing these two scriptures, we can see in our mind’s eye exactly what took place. Abram respectfully convinced his father to go out of Ur in accord with God’s command.

When we read the Scriptures, we should take into account the context and the overall tenor of the Bible. Christians are admonished: “We received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is from God, that we might know the things that have been kindly given us by God. These things we also speak, not with words taught by human wisdom, but with those taught by the spirit, as we combine spiritual matters with spiritual words.” (1 Corinthians 2:11-13) Indeed, we must implore Jehovah for help to understand his Word and try to “combine spiritual matters with spiritual words” by checking the context of the scripture in question and by looking up related scriptures. May we keep finding brilliant gems of truth through the study of God’s Word.

 

No end in sight III

No end in sight II

No end in sight.

Fear itself.



On collateral damage.

Good luck with that.

Revelation18:3NJB"All nations have drunk deep of the wine of her prostitution;every king on the earth has prostituted himself with her,and every merchant grown rich through her debauchery."

 The accompanying video deals with a portion the new catholic pope's attempts to uproot a deeply entenched culture.One wonders though if it may be a case of too little too late.Of course  the rest of christendom is hardly in position to point fingers.

 

Truth is dangerous II

One empathizes with much of what is stated here,but there is a lot of naivete involved in notion that intiatives like this one can deal with these issues.It's not simply a question of a particular government spying on its citizens.All of the major powers are spying on their own and their neighbour's citizens and what about private players,corporations,hackers,criminal networks.

 The genie is out of the bottle.

On attempting to mix iron with clay.

Daniel2:42,43NKJV"And as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay,so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly fragile.As you saw iron mixed with ceramic clay,they will mingle with the seed of men;but they will not adhere to one another just as iron does not mix with clay."

 Here is an example of what this text is referring to.

Going mainstream.

Jehovah,the great physician.

Mark2:17NWT(2013 edition)"On hearing this,Jesus said to them:"those who are strong do not need a physician,but those who are ill do.I came to call not righteous people,but sinners."

Truth is dangerous.

Lost!

Well,turning to politicians for guidance will do that to you.

Are we there yet?

On shadow wars and shadow warriors II

Truth is stranger than fiction.

So much evolving,so little time II

Liberte,egalite,fraternite or secularism gone mad?You make the call.

A more detailed treatment of subject,

"Peace,peace!"

Ezekiel13:10NWT(2013 edition)"all of this because they have led my people astray by saying,"there is peace!"when there is no peace.When a flimsy partition wall is built,they are plastering it with whitewash."

Rotten to the core II

On making new gods.

The more I think about it the more it seems that the terms atheist and atheism are misnomers.Those who like to call themselves atheists are simply atheists in the same sense that we all are i.e they do not believe in the gods of their neighbours.But it is clear that they have made gods out of chance,necessity and matter,and saints and prophets of prominent advocates of their religion.

 The accompanying video looks at the issue of photosynthesis.A process perfected by the the very first lifeforms on this planet,but as yet beyond the capability of our greatest technologists.

   

  

Read God's word the Holy Bible daily

Read the 2013 revision of the New World translation of the holy Scriptures

On the third horseman.

Revelation6:6NKJV"And I heard a voice in the midst of the four living creatures saying,"a quart of wheat for a denarius,and three quarts of barley for a denarius;and do not harm the oil and the wine."

I found this Commentary on the issue of world hunger to be  interesting reading.

Why so much hunger?

What can we do about it?
To answer these questions we must unlearn much of what we have been taught.
Only by freeing ourselves from the grip of widely held myths can we grasp the roots of hunger and see what we can do to end it.

Myth 1

Not Enough Food to Go Around
Reality: Abundance, not scarcity, best describes the world's food supply. Enough wheat, rice and other grains are produced to provide every human being with 3,500 calories a day. That doesn't even count many other commonly eaten foods - vegetables, beans, nuts, root crops, fruits, grass-fed meats, and fish. Enough food is available to provide at least 4.3 pounds of food per person a day worldwide: two and half pounds of grain, beans and nuts, about a pound of fruits and vegetables, and nearly another pound of meat, milk and eggs-enough to make most people fat! The problem is that many people are too poor to buy readily available food. Even most "hungry countries" have enough food for all their people right now. Many are net exporters of food and other agricultural products.

Myth 2

Nature's to Blame for Famine
Reality: It's too easy to blame nature. Human-made forces are making people increasingly vulnerable to nature's vagaries. Food is always available for those who can afford it—starvation during hard times hits only the poorest. Millions live on the brink of disaster in south Asia, Africa and elsewhere, because they are deprived of land by a powerful few, trapped in the unremitting grip of debt, or miserably paid. Natural events rarely explain deaths; they are simply the final push over the brink. Human institutions and policies determine who eats and who starves during hard times. Likewise, in America many homeless die from the cold every winter, yet ultimate responsibility doesn't lie with the weather. The real culprits are an economy that fails to offer everyone opportunities, and a society that places economic efficiency over compassion.

Myth 3

Too Many People
Reality: Birth rates are falling rapidly worldwide as remaining regions of the Third World begin the demographic transition—when birth rates drop in response to an earlier decline in death rates. Although rapid population growth remains a serious concern in many countries, nowhere does population density explain hunger. For every Bangladesh, a densely populated and hungry country, we find a Nigeria, Brazil or Bolivia, where abundant food resources coexist with hunger. Costa Rica, with only half of Honduras' cropped acres per person, boasts a life expectancy—one indicator of nutrition —11 years longer than that of Honduras and close to that of developed countries. Rapid population growth is not the root cause of hunger. Like hunger itself, it results from underlying inequities that deprive people, especially poor women, of economic opportunity and security. Rapid population growth and hunger are endemic to societies where land ownership, jobs, education, health care, and old age security are beyond the reach of most people. Those Third World societies with dramatically successful early and rapid reductions of population growth rates-China, Sri Lanka, Colombia, Cuba and the Indian state of Kerala-prove that the lives of the poor, especially poor women, must improve before they can choose to have fewer children.

Myth 4

The Environment vs. More Food?
Reality: We should be alarmed that an environmental crisis is undercutting our food-production resources, but a tradeoff between our environment and the world's need for food is not inevitable. Efforts to feed the hungry are not causing the environmental crisis. Large corporations are mainly responsible for deforestation-creating and profiting from developed-country consumer demand for tropical hardwoods and exotic or out-of-season food items. Most pesticides used in the Third World are applied to export crops, playing little role in feeding the hungry, while in the U.S. they are used to give a blemish-free cosmetic appearance to produce, with no improvement in nutritional value.
Alternatives exist now and many more are possible. The success of organic farmers in the U.S. gives a glimpse of the possibilities. Cuba's recent success in overcoming a food crisis through self-reliance and sustainable, virtually pesticide-free agriculture is another good example. Indeed, environmentally sound agricultural alternatives can be more productive than environmentally destructive ones.

Myth 5

The Green Revolution is the Answer
Reality: The production advances of the Green Revolution are no myth. Thanks to the new seeds, million of tons more grain a year are being harvested. But focusing narrowly on increasing production cannot alleviate hunger because it fails to alter the tightly concentrated distribution of economic power that determines who can buy the additional food. That's why in several of the biggest Green Revolution successes—India, Mexico, and the Philippines—grain production and in some cases, exports, have climbed, while hunger has persisted and the long-term productive capacity of the soil is degraded. Now we must fight the prospect of a 'New Green Revolution' based on biotechnology, which threatens to further accentuate inequality.

Myth 6

We Need Large Farms
Reality: Large landowners who control most of the best land often leave much of it idle. Unjust farming systems leave farmland in the hands of the most inefficient producers. By contrast, small farmers typically achieve at least four to five times greater output per acre, in part because they work their land more intensively and use integrated, and often more sustainable, production systems. Without secure tenure, the many millions of tenant farmers in the Third World have little incentive to invest in land improvements, to rotate crops, or to leave land fallow for the sake of long-term soil fertility. Future food production is undermined. On the other hand, redistribution of land can favor production. Comprehensive land reform has markedly increased production in countries as diverse as Japan, Zimbabwe, and Taiwan. A World Bank study of northeast Brazil estimates that redistributing farmland into smaller holdings would raise output an astonishing 80 percent.

Myth 7

The Free Market Can End Hunger
Reality: Unfortunately, such a "market-is-good, government-is-bad" formula can never help address the causes of hunger. Such a dogmatic stance misleads us that a society can opt for one or the other, when in fact every economy on earth combines the market and government in allocating resources and distributing goods. The market's marvelous efficiencies can only work to eliminate hunger, however, when purchasing power is widely dispersed.
So all those who believe in the usefulness of the market and the necessity of ending hunger must concentrate on promoting not the market, but the consumers! In this task, government has a vital role to play in countering the tendency toward economic concentration, through genuine tax, credit, and land reforms to disperse buying power toward the poor. Recent trends toward privatization and de-regulation are most definitely not the answer.

Myth 8

Free Trade is the Answer
Reality: The trade promotion formula has proven an abject failure at alleviating hunger. In most Third World countries exports have boomed while hunger has continued unabated or actually worsened. While soybean exports boomed in Brazil-to feed Japanese and European livestock-hunger spread from one-third to two-thirds of the population. Where the majority of people have been made too poor to buy the food grown on their own country's soil, those who control productive resources will, not surprisingly, orient their production to more lucrative markets abroad. Export crop production squeezes out basic food production. Pro-trade policies like NAFTA and GATT pit working people in different countries against each other in a 'race to the bottom,' where the basis of competition is who will work for less, without adequate health coverage or minimum environmental standards. Mexico and the U.S. are a case in point: since NAFTA we have had a net loss of 250,000 jobs here, while Mexico has lost 2 million, and hunger is on the rise in both countries.

Myth 9

Too Hungry to Fight for Their Rights
Reality: Bombarded with images of poor people as weak and hungry, we lose sight of the obvious: for those with few resources, mere survival requires tremendous effort. If the poor were truly passive, few of them could even survive. Around the world, from the Zapatistas in Chiapas, Mexico, to the farmers' movement in India, wherever people are suffering needlessly, movements for change are underway. People will feed themselves, if allowed to do so. It's not our job to 'set things right' for others. Our responsibility is to remove the obstacles in their paths, obstacles often created by large corporations and U.S. government, World Bank and IMF policies.

Myth 10

More U.S. Aid Will Help the Hungry
Reality: Most U.S. aid works directly against the hungry. Foreign aid can only reinforce, not change, the status quo. Where governments answer only to elites, our aid not only fails to reach hungry people, it shores up the very forces working against them. Our aid is used to impose free trade and free market policies, to promote exports at the expense of food production, and to provide the armaments that repressive governments use to stay in power. Even emergency, or humanitarian aid, which makes up only five percent of the total, often ends up enriching American grain companies while failing to reach the hungry, and it can dangerously undercut local food production in the recipient country. It would be better to use our foreign aid budget for unconditional debt relief, as it is the foreign debt burden that forces most Third World countries to cut back on basic health, education and anti-poverty
programs.

Myth 11

We Benefit From Their Poverty
Reality: The biggest threat to the well-being of the vast majority of Americans is not the advancement but the continued deprivation of the hungry. Low wages-both abroad and in inner cities at home-may mean cheaper bananas, shirts, computers and fast food for most Americans, but in other ways we pay heavily for hunger and poverty. Enforced poverty in the Third World jeopardizes U.S. jobs, wages and working conditions as corporations seek cheaper labor abroad. In a global economy, what American workers have achieved in employment, wage levels, and working conditions can be protected only when working people in every country are freed from economic desperation.
Here at home, policies like welfare reform throw more people into the job market than can be absorbed-at below minimum wage levels in the case of 'workfare'-which puts downward pressure on the wages of those on higher rungs of the employment ladder. The growing numbers of 'working poor' are those who have part- or full-time low wage jobs yet cannot afford adequate nutrition or housing for their families. Educating ourselves about the common interests most Americans share with the poor in the Third World and at home allows us to be compassionate without sliding into pity. In working to clear the way for the poor to free themselves from economic oppression, we free ourselves as well.

Myth 12

Curtail Freedom to End Hunger?
Reality: There is no theoretical or practical reason why freedom, taken to mean civil liberties, should be incompatible with ending hunger. Surveying the globe, we see no correlation between hunger and civil liberties. However, one narrow definition of freedom-the right to unlimited accumulation of wealth-producing property and the right to use that property however one sees fit-is in fundamental conflict with ending hunger. By contrast, a definition of freedom more consistent with our nation's dominant founding vision holds that economic security for all is the guarantor of our liberty. Such an understanding of freedom is essential to ending hunger.

Drinking from a poisoned cup.

Revelation17:4NJB"The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet and glittered with gold and jewels and pearls,and she was holding a winecup filled with the disgusting filth of her prostitution.
 James4:4NJB"Adulterers!Do you not realise that love for the world is hatred for God?Anyone who chooses the world for a friend is constituted an enemy of God."


Washington (CNN) - American Catholics overwhelmingly support newly installed Pope Francis, according to a poll released Friday, and agree with his statements that the church should focus less on contentious social issues.
Nearly seven in 10 American Catholics say the church has become too focused on same-sex marriage, abortion, and contraceptives, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released Friday.
What's more, 60% of American Catholics support same-sex marriage, a number that continues to be larger than support from all American adults. Thirty-one percent of American Catholics said they do not support same-sex marriage.
This number is consistent with other polls, like a Public Religion Research Institute poll in 2012 that found 59% of American Catholics support same-sex marriage.
Despite the support among American Catholics, the Roman Catholic Church maintains rigorous opposition to same-sex marriage. But in a recent wide-ranging interview with America Magazine, the pope brushed off critics who have said he should be more vocal in trumpeting the church's position on abortion and same-sex marriage.
In the interview, Francis said if the church fails to find a "new balance" between its spiritual and political missions, its moral foundation will "fall like a house of cards."
“We cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods," he told his Jesuit interviewer. "I have not spoken much about these things, and I was reprimanded for that."
But the pope said the church's teachings on those issues are clear, and he clearly believes in those teachings, so what else is there to say?
"It is not necessary to talk about these issues all the time," Francis said.
The poll also found 36% of American Catholics say abortion should be legal in most cases, compared to 34% of all Americans.
“On the two issues that have prompted some pulpit thundering, same-sex marriage and abortion, Catholics are right in line, or even a little ahead, of their non-Catholic neighbors,” said Maurice Carroll, director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.
While the poll shows support for Francis' statement on social issues, American Catholics appear to disagree with the pope on the ordination of female priests.
According to the survey, 60% of American Catholics support women priests, while 30% are against it.
Earlier this year, Francis emphatically closed the door on women's ordination, telling an audience that the "door is closed" to that possibility.
In his recent interview, Francis reiterated this statement but said that does not mean the church should see women as secondary or inferior.
"Women are asking deep questions that must be addressed," the pope said. "The church cannot be herself without the woman and her role."
Overall, American Catholics are roundly supportive of the new pope, with a whopping 89% saying they have either a very favorable or favorable view of Francis. Only 4% say they have an unfavorable view.
Quinnipiac interviewed 392 Catholics by telephone from September 23-29. The poll has a sampling error of plus or minus 2.3 percentage points.

The Good News II

The voice of the sentinels.

The search for a simple beginning to life.

It's been one dead end after another,the accompanying video gives just a small glimpse as to why it's likely to be more of the same in the future.

The Sahidic Coptic's Insight on the proper translation of John1:1

Read article here.

Know your enemy

Read the watchtower society's article here

SATAN

[Resister].

In many places in the Hebrew Scriptures, the word sa·tan′ appears without the definite article. Used in this way, it applies in its first appearance to the angel that stood in the road to resist Balaam as he set out with the objective of cursing the Israelites. (Nu 22:22, 32) In other instances it refers to individuals as resisters of other men. (1Sa 29:4; 2Sa 19:21, 22; 1Ki 5:4; 11:14, 23, 25) But it is used with the definite article ha to refer to Satan the Devil, the chief Adversary of God. (Job 1:6, ftn; Job 2:1-7; Zec 3:1, 2) In the Greek Scriptures the word sa·ta·nas′ applies to Satan the Devil in nearly all of its occurrences and is usually accompanied by the definite article ho.

Origin. The Scriptures indicate that the creature known as Satan did not always have that name. Rather, this descriptive name was given to him because of his taking a course of opposition and resistance to God. The name he had before this is not given. God is the only Creator, and ‘his activity is perfect,’ with no injustice or unrighteousness. (De 32:4) Therefore, the one becoming Satan was, when created, a perfect, righteous creature of God. He is a spirit person, for he appeared in heaven in the presence of God. (Job chaps 1, 2; Re 12:9) Jesus Christ said of him: “That one was a manslayer when he began, and he did not stand fast in the truth, because truth is not in him.” (Joh 8:44; 1Jo 3:8) Jesus here shows that Satan was once in the truth, but forsook it. Beginning with his first overt act in turning Adam and Eve away from God, he was a manslayer, for he thereby brought about the death of Adam and Eve, which, in turn, brought sin and death to their offspring. (Ro 5:12) Throughout the Scriptures the qualities and actions attributed to him could be attributed only to a person, not to an abstract principle of evil. It is clear that the Jews, and Jesus and his disciples, knew that Satan existed as a person.

So, from a righteous, perfect start, this spirit person deviated into sin and degradation. The process bringing this about is described by James when he writes: “Each one is tried by being drawn out and enticed by his own desire. Then the desire, when it has become fertile, gives birth to sin; in turn, sin, when it has been accomplished, brings forth death.” (Jas 1:14, 15) In the course that Satan took, there seems to be, in some respects, a parallel with that of the king of Tyre as described in Ezekiel 28:11-19.—See PERFECTION(The first sinner and the king of Tyre).

The Scriptural account, therefore, makes it plain that it was Satan who spoke through the medium of a serpent, seducing Eve into disobedience to God’s command. In turn, Eve induced Adam to take the same rebellious course. (Ge 3:1-7; 2Co 11:3) As a consequence of Satan’s use of the serpent, the Bible gives Satan the title “Serpent,” which came to signify “deceiver”; he also became “the Tempter” (Mt 4:3) and a liar, “the father of the lie.”—Joh 8:44; Re 12:9.

Issue of Sovereignty Raised. When Satan approached Eve (through the speech of the serpent), he actually challenged the rightfulness and righteousness of Jehovah’s sovereignty. He intimated that God was unrightfully withholding something from the woman; he also declared that God was a liar in saying that she would die if she ate the forbidden fruit. Additionally, Satan made her believe she would be free and independent of God, becoming like God. By this means this wicked spirit creature raised himself higher than God in Eve’s eyes, and Satan became her god, even though Eve, at the time, apparently did not know the identity of the one misleading her. By his action he brought man and woman under his leadership and control, standing up as a rival god in opposition to Jehovah.—Ge 3:1-7.

The Bible, in lifting the veil to give a glimpse into heavenly affairs, reveals that Satan later as a rival god appeared before Jehovah in heaven, challenging Jehovah to His face, saying that he could turn God’s servant Job, and by implication any servant of God, away from Him. He charged God, in effect, with unrighteously giving Job everything, along with full protection, so that he, Satan, could not test Job and show what was really in his heart, which, Satan intimated, was bad. He implied that Job served God primarily for selfish considerations. Satan made this point of his argument clear when he said: “Skin in behalf of skin, and everything that a man has he will give in behalf of his soul. For a change, thrust out your hand, please, and touch as far as his bone and his flesh and see whether he will not curse you to your very face.”—Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; see SOVEREIGNTY.

In this special case, Jehovah allowed Satan to bring calamity upon Job by not interfering when Satan brought about a raid from Sabean marauders as well as destruction of flocks and shepherds by what Job’s messenger called “the very fire of God” from the heavens; whether this was lightning or other fire is not stated. Satan also brought a raid by three bands of Chaldeans, as well as a windstorm. These things caused the death of all of Job’s children and destroyed his property. Finally, Satan inflicted a loathsome disease upon Job himself.—Job 1:13-19; 2:7, 8.

These things reveal the might and power of the spirit creature Satan, as well as his vicious, murderous attitude.

It is important to note, however, that Satan recognized his impotence in the face of God’s express command, for he did not challenge God’s power and authority when God restricted him from taking Job’s life.—Job 2:6.

Continued Opposition to God. By his challenge of God and his charging God’s servants with lack of integrity, Satan lived up to his title “Devil,” meaning “Slanderer,” which title he deserved for having slandered Jehovah God in the garden of Eden.

Joined by other wicked demons. Before the Flood of Noah’s day, it appears that other angels of God left their proper habitation in the heavens, as well as their assigned positions there. Materializing human bodies, they came to dwell on earth, marrying women and producing offspring called Nephilim. (Ge 6:1-4; 1Pe 3:19, 20; 2Pe 2:4; Jude 6; seeNEPHILIM; SON[S] OF GOD.) These angels, having left God’s service, came under the control of Satan. Hence Satan is called “the ruler of the demons.” In one instance, when Jesus expelled demons from a man, the Pharisees accused him of doing so by the power of “Beelzebub, the ruler of the demons.” That they had reference to Satan is shown by Jesus’ answer: “If Satan expels Satan, he has become divided against himself.”—Mt 12:22-27.

The apostle Paul associates Satan with “the wicked spirit forces in the heavenly places,” and he speaks of them as “the world rulers of this darkness.” (Eph 6:11, 12) As a governing force in the invisible realm immediately about the earth, Satan is “the ruler of the authority of the air.” (Eph 2:2) In Revelation he is shown to be the one “misleading the entire inhabited earth.” (Re 12:9) The apostle John said that “the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.” (1Jo 5:19) He is therefore “the ruler of this world.” (Joh 12:31) That is why James wrote that “the friendship with the world is enmity with God.”—Jas 4:4.

His Fight to Destroy the “Seed.” Satan made early efforts to block the promise of the “seed” to come through Abraham. (Ge 12:7) He evidently tried to get Sarah contaminated so that she would be unfit to bear the seed; but God protected her. (Ge 20:1-18) He did everything possible to destroy the ones whom God chose as Abraham’s seed, the nation of Israel, by inducing them to sin and by bringing other nations against them, as Bible history shows throughout. A high point in Satan’s ambitious attempts in his fight against God, and what appeared to Satan to be success, was reached when the king of the Third World Power of Bible history, Babylon, took Jerusalem, overturning the rulership of King Zedekiah of the line of David, and destroyed the temple of Jehovah, desolating Jerusalem and Judah.—Eze 21:25-27.

As an instrument of Satan, the ruling dynasty of Babylon, initially headed by Nebuchadnezzar, held Israel in exile for 68 years, until Babylon’s overthrow. Babylon had no intention of ever releasing its captives and so reflected Satan’s own boastful, ambitious attempts as a rival god opposed to the Universal Sovereign Jehovah. The Babylonian kings, worshiping their idol god Marduk, the goddess Ishtar, and a host of others, were actually worshipers of the demons and, as part of the world alienated from Jehovah, were under Satan’s domination.—Ps 96:5; 1Co 10:20; Eph 2:12; Col 1:21.

Satan filled the king of Babylon with the ambition to have complete domination over the earth, even over “Jehovah’s throne” (1Ch 29:23) and “the stars of God,” the kings of the line of David sitting on the throne at Mount Moriah (by extension, Zion). This “king,” that is, the dynasty of Babylon, ‘lifted himself up’ in his own heart and was in his own eyes and in the eyes of his admirers a “shining one,” a “son of the dawn.” (In some translations the Latin Vulgate term “Lucifer” is retained. It is, however, merely the translation of the Hebrew word heh·lel′, “shining one.” Heh·lel′ is not a name or a title but, rather, a term describing the boastful position taken by Babylon’s dynasty of kings of the line of Nebuchadnezzar.) (Isa 14:4-21) Since Babylon was a tool of Satan, its “king” reflected Satan’s own ambitious desire. Again, Jehovah came to the salvation of his people by restoring them to their land, until the real Seed of promise should come.—Ezr 1:1-6.

Efforts to cause Jesus to stumble. Satan, no doubt identifying Jesus as the Son of God and the one who was prophesied to bruise him in the head (Ge 3:15), did everything he could to destroy Jesus. But, when announcing the conception of Jesus to Mary, the angel Gabriel told her: “Holy spirit will come upon you, and power of the Most High will overshadow you. For that reason also what is born will be called holy, God’s Son.” (Lu 1:35) Jehovah safeguarded his Son. The efforts to destroy Jesus when an infant were unsuccessful. (Mt 2:1-15) God continued to protect Jesus during his youth. After his baptism, Satan approached Jesus in the wilderness with three different strong temptations, thoroughly testing him on the issue of devotion to Jehovah. In one of his appeals Satan showed Jesus all the kingdoms of the world, claiming them to be his own. Jesus did not contradict this claim. Nonetheless, Jesus refused to contemplate even for the briefest instant of time any “shortcut” to kingship, nor did he consider for an instant the doing of anything merely to please himself. His immediate reply to Satan was, “Go away, Satan! For it is written, ‘It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.’” At this, “the Devil . . . retired from him until another convenient time.” (Mt 4:1-11; Lu 4:13) This illustrates the truth of James’ words later written: “Oppose the Devil, and he will flee from you.”—Jas 4:7.

Jesus was ever alert to the danger of Satan’s machinations and to the fact that Satan desired to cause his destruction by getting him to entertain a thought contrary to Jehovah’s will. This was demonstrated when Peter, on one occasion, though with good intentions, was actually throwing temptation in his way. Jesus had spoken of the suffering and death he was to undergo. “At this Peter took him aside and commenced rebuking him, saying: ‘Be kind to yourself, Lord; you will not have this destiny at all.’ But, turning his back, he said to Peter: ‘Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me, because you think, not God’s thoughts, but those of men.’”—Mt 16:21-23.

Throughout Jesus’ ministry he was in danger; Satan used human agents to oppose Jesus, trying either to cause him to stumble or to kill him. At one time the people were about to seize Jesus to make him king. But he would not consider such a thing; he would accept kingship only in God’s time and way. (Joh 6:15) On another occasion those of his own hometown attempted to kill him. (Lu 4:22-30) He was constantly harassed by those whom Satan used to try to trap him. (Mt 22:15) But in all of Satan’s efforts, he failed to cause Jesus to sin in the slightest thought or deed. Satan was thoroughly proved to be a liar, and he failed in his challenge of God’s sovereignty and the integrity of God’s servants. As Jesus said, shortly before his death: “Now there is a judging of this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out”—completely discredited. (Joh 12:31) Satan had a grip on all mankind through sin. But, knowing that Satan would soon bring about his death, Jesus, after celebrating his last Passover with his disciples, could say: “The ruler of the world is coming. And he has no hold on me.”—Joh 14:30.

A few hours later, Satan succeeded in having Jesus put to death, first getting control of one of Jesus’ apostles, then using the Jewish leaders and the Roman World Power to execute Jesus in a painful and ignominious manner. (Lu 22:3; Joh 13:26, 27; chaps 18, 19)Here Satan acted as “the one having the means to cause death, that is, the Devil.” (Heb 2:14; Lu 22:53) But in this Satan failed to promote his cause; he only unwillingly fulfilled prophecy, which required that Jesus die as a sacrifice. The death of Jesus in blamelessness provided the ransom price for humankind, and by his death (and subsequent resurrection by God) Jesus could now help sinful humankind to escape from the grip of Satan, for, as it is written, Jesus became blood and flesh “that through his death he might bring to nothing the one having the means to cause death, that is, the Devil; and that he might emancipate all those who for fear of death were subject to slavery all through their lives.”—Heb 2:14, 15.

Continues to fight Christians. After Jesus’ death and resurrection, Satan continued to wage a bitter fight against Christ’s followers. The accounts in the book of Acts and in the letters of the Christian Greek Scriptures furnish numerous proofs of this. Paul said that he had been given “a thorn in the flesh, an angel of Satan, to keep slapping” him. (2Co 12:7) And as in the case with Eve, Satan disguised his real nature and purposes by “transforming himself into an angel of light,” and he had agents, ministers who “also keep transforming themselves into ministers of righteousness.” (2Co 11:14, 15) Examples of these were the false apostles who fought against Paul (2Co 11:13) and those in Ephesus ‘who said they themselves were Jews, and yet they were not but were a synagogue of Satan.’ (Re 2:9) Satan never ceased in making accusations “day and night” against Christians, challenging their integrity, as he did Job’s. (Re 12:10; Lu 22:31) But Christians have “a helper with the Father, Jesus Christ, a righteous one,” who appears before the person of God in their behalf.—1Jo 2:1.

His Abyssing and Final Destruction. At the time of Satan’s act in causing Eve and then Adam to rebel against God, God said to the serpent (actually speaking to Satan, since a mere beast could not understand the issues involved): “Dust is what you will eat all the days of your life. And I shall put enmity between you and the woman and between your seed and her seed. He will bruise you in the head and you will bruise him in the heel.” (Ge 3:14, 15) Here God made it known that Satan, cast outside God’s holy organization, would have no life-sustaining hope but would ‘eat dust,’ as it were, until he died. The “seed” eventually was to bruise him in the head, which would signify a death wound. When Christ was on earth, the demons identified him as the One who was to hurl them into the “abyss,” evidently a condition of restraint that in the parallel account is spoken of as “torment.”—Mt 8:29; Lu 8:30, 31; see TORMENT.

In the book of Revelation, we find described the last days of Satan and his end. Revelation reports that at the time of Christ’s taking Kingdom power, Satan is hurled down out of heaven to the earth, no longer having access to the heavens, as he did in the days of Job and for centuries thereafter. (Re 12:7-12) After this defeat Satan has only a “short period of time,” during which he makes war with “the remaining ones of [the woman’s] seed, who observe the commandments of God and have the work of bearing witness to Jesus.” In his efforts to devour the remaining ones of the woman’s seed, he is called “the dragon,” a swallower or crusher. (Re 12:16, 17; compare Jer 51:34, where Jeremiah speaks for Jerusalem and Judah, saying: “Nebuchadrezzar the king of Babylon . . . has swallowed me down like a big snake [or, “a dragon,” ftn].”) In the earlier description of his fight against the woman and his efforts to devour her man child, he is pictured as “a great fiery-colored dragon.”—Re 12:3.

Revelation’s 20th chapter Re 20 describes Satan’s being bound and abyssed for a thousand years, at the hands of a great angel—doubtless Jesus Christ, who has the key of the abyss and who is the “seed” to bruise Satan’s head.—Compare Re 1:18; see ABYSS.

Satan’s final effort culminates in permanent defeat. The prophecy says that he is to be let loose for “a little while” as soon as Christ’s Thousand Year Reign is ended and that he will lead rebellious persons in another attack upon God’s sovereignty; but he is hurled (along with his demons) into the lake of fire and sulfur, everlasting destruction.—Re 20:1-3, 7-10; compare Mt 25:41; see LAKE OF FIRE.

What is meant by ‘handing a person over to Satan for destruction of the flesh’?

In instructing the congregation at Corinth as to the action to take toward a member of the congregation who had wickedly been committing incest with the wife of his father, the apostle Paul wrote: “Hand such a man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh.” (1Co 5:5) This was a command to expel the man from the congregation, cutting off all fellowship with him. (1Co 5:13) Turning him over to Satan would put him out of the congregation and into the world over which Satan is the god and ruler. Like “a little leaven” in “the whole lump” of dough, this man was “the flesh,” or fleshly element inside the congregation; and by removing this incestuous man, the spiritually minded congregation would destroy “the flesh” from the midst of it. (1Co 5:6, 7) Similarly, Paul handed Hymenaeus and Alexander over to Satan, because they had thrust aside faith and a good conscience and had experienced shipwreck concerning their faith.—1Ti 1:20.

Later, the incestuous man in Corinth apparently repented from his wrongdoing and cleaned up, prompting the apostle Paul to recommend his being received back into the congregation. In exhorting them to forgiveness, he gave as one of the reasons, “that we may not be overreached by Satan, for we are not ignorant of his designs.” (2Co 2:11) In the first instance, Satan had brought the congregation into a bad condition in which they had to be reproved by the apostle, for they were too lenient, in fact, were letting the wicked man carry on his practice without regard for the reproach it brought, being “puffed up” in allowing it. (1Co 5:2) But on the other hand, if they now swung to the other extreme and refused forgiveness to the repentant one, Satan would be overreaching them in another direction, namely, that he could take advantage of their becoming hard and unforgiving. Through God’s Word, Christians are enlightened to realize Satan’s existence, his power, his designs and purposes, and his manner of operation, so that they can fight this spiritual foe with the spiritual weapons God provides.—Eph 6:13-17.