• The 3DEXPERIENCE Platform combines modeling, simulation, data science, artificial intelligence and collaboration in the virtual world to achieve sustainable innovation in life sciences • Dassault Systèmes, together with Medidata Solutions, will lead the digital transformation of life sciences in the age of personalized medicine and patient-centric experience • Connecting the 3DEXPERIENCE Platform with Medidata’s Clinical Trial platform connects the dots between research, development,...

Medidata Accelerates Launch of myMedidata Platform, Responding to COVID-19

CandidATS version 2.1.0 suffers from a cross site request forgery vulnerability.

The U.S. Department of Energy released the long-awaited Hydropower Vision report -- alongside $9.8 million in funding for hydroelectric power -- earlier today at HydroVision International 2016 in Minneapolis.

The U.S. Department of Energy released the long-awaited Hydropower Vision report -- alongside $9.8 million in funding for hydroelectric power -- earlier today at HydroVision International 2016 in Minneapolis.

It is too soon to deliver a verdict on the Swedish 'non-lockdown'. However, should Stockholm succeed in containing the virus without bringing its economy to a standstill, Sweden will enter the looming economic recession in a much better shape.

Pezaro & Anor v Bourne & Anor [2019] EWHC 1964 (Ch) The High Court has held that a right of way was not extinguished where a landowner had relied on an oral agreement made with the previous owner of the land which benefited from the right of...

Encore un soutien venu de l'ext�rieur...

Andre Harrell, the Uptown Records founder who shaped the sound of hip-hop and R&B in the late '80s and '90s with acts such as Mary J. Blige and Heavy D and also launched the career of mogul Sean "Diddy" Combs, has died. He was 59.

Turkey has been the host to many ancient civilizations and empires for ages. Its heritage can be seen in its preserved sites, inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage List. Some of them remain largely undiscovered, though. Click through for our list, prepared by İnci Hazal Özcan, including the 16 UNESCO sites in Turkey that you should --but probably did not-- see. (Photos: Alamy)

Israeli doctors and scientists look back at how the country has handled COVID-19 and predict what might happen next

Turkey’s official coronavirus infections rose to more than 86,000 with 2,000 deaths on Monday.

In the lead-up to the Truth Matters conference in October, we will be focusing our attention on the sufficiency, authority, and clarity of Scripture. Of our previous blog series, none better embodies that emphasis than Frequently Abused Verses. The following entry from that series originally appeared on September 25, 2015. -ed.

What does this verse mean to you?

Most of us have heard that question before—it lurks inside countless Bible studies and Sunday-school classes. It is a postmodern mindset that has become pervasive in the church.

When reading a book, an article, or a blog post, we implicitly understand that its meaning is bound to the author’s intent. The same ought to be true for Scripture—God alone is the arbiter of what He means through what He has revealed in His Word. Yet Scripture is now subject to the whims of the reader, who is prone to read personal experience into the text instead of discovering—and coming under—its objective truth. The worst forms of this are when people think they’re helping God—improving upon His perfection, sanitizing His story, and smoothing out the sharp edges of His truth.

Life is not as subjective as we might like to think. We don’t get to decide what a red light means when we approach a traffic signal. Bank managers can’t arbitrarily determine your account balance. And, thankfully, airlines don’t hire pilots who take the liberty to decide what “runway” means to them. It is absurd to think that we can approach God’s Word with lower standards. God says what He means and means what He says, always speaks without error, and has been kind enough to speak to us with simplicity and clarity.

The tsunami of topical preaching we see today has scarred the evangelical landscape. A topical message is not wrong in and of itself, but problems are inevitable when that becomes the main diet of a congregation. Pastors who preach texts divorced from their context invariably beget congregations who interpret texts divorced from the Author’s intent. The result is that too many believers today have a propensity to treat God’s Word as their own private smorgasbord of theology.

Another place you see this trend—interpreting verses out of context—in action is in choosing of a “life verse.” Many Christians like to pick a verse that speaks to them and try to make it the theme for their lives. It’s no surprise that none of the passages concerning God’s judgment make the cut. Instead, the spectacular promises of blessing and success reign supreme.

And sitting on top of the mountain of verses evangelicals frequently misappropriate and misapply is Jeremiah 29:11, “‘For I know the plans that I have for you,’ declares the Lord, ‘plans for welfare and not for calamity to give you a future and a hope.’”

It’s All About You

Unsurprisingly, Jeremiah 29:11 is a go-to verse for celebrity pastor, Joel Osteen. His takeaway is that “God desires to see you flourish in this life. He wants to see you come out of setbacks stronger, wiser, increased and promoted. He wants to give you hope in your final outcome and see you come to a flourishing finish.” ^[1] Joel Osteen, Today’s Word with Joel Osteen—May 29, 2012 (Devotional).

Andy Stanley, pastor of America’s largest congregation, says “We may not know for certain everything our future holds, but we know that God thinks good thoughts toward us, to give us a future and a hope.” ^[2] https://thekingdomcorner.wordpress.com/2009/08/10/andy-stanley-life-may-be-uncertain-but-god-isnt/

Rick Warren also typifies that me-centric approach in his book, The Purpose-Driven Life:

If you have felt hopeless, hold on! Wonderful changes are going to happen in your life as you begin to live it on purpose. God says, “I know what I am planning for you. . . . I have good plans for you, not plans to hurt you. I will give you hope and a good future.” ^[3] Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Life (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012) 35.

One has to wonder if Osteen, Stanley, or Warren understand how badly they have misconstrued and misapplied God’s Word—and how they’ve misled their followers. They give zero acknowledgement to the Author’s original intent or His original audience when they rip this verse from its biblical setting. Reading Jeremiah 29:11 in context paints a starkly different picture and delivers a far more profound truth.

It’s Not About You

The nation of Israel had been taken by the Babylonians into captivity. The Temple, as well as the entire city of Jerusalem, was in ruins. Their king was in chains with his eyes gouged out. The glory of Israel as a nation was finished. But in the midst of that terrible situation, God spoke through His prophet Jeremiah:

Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, to all the exiles whom I have sent into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon, “Build houses and live in them; and plant gardens and eat their produce. Take wives and become the fathers of sons and daughters, and take wives for your sons and give your daughters to husbands, that they may bear sons and daughters; and multiply there and do not decrease. Seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf; for in its welfare you will have welfare.” For thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, “Do not let your prophets who are in your midst and your diviners deceive you, and do not listen to the dreams which they dream. For they prophesy falsely to you in My name; I have not sent them,” declares the Lord.

For thus says the Lord, “When seventy years have been completed for Babylon, I will visit you and fulfill My good word to you, to bring you back to this place. For I know the plans that I have for you,” declares the Lord, “plans for welfare and not for calamity to give you a future and a hope. Then you will call upon Me and come and pray to Me, and I will listen to you. You will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart. I will be found by you,” declares the Lord, “and I will restore your fortunes and will gather you from all the nations and from all the places where I have driven you,” declares the Lord, “and I will bring you back to the place from where I sent you into exile.”

Because you have said, “The Lord has raised up prophets for us in Babylon”—for thus says the Lord concerning the king who sits on the throne of David, and concerning all the people who dwell in this city, your brothers who did not go with you into exile—thus says the Lord of hosts, “Behold, I am sending upon them the sword, famine and pestilence, and I will make them like split-open figs that cannot be eaten due to rottenness. I will pursue them with the sword, with famine and with pestilence; and I will make them a terror to all the kingdoms of the earth, to be a curse and a horror and a hissing, and a reproach among all the nations where I have driven them, because they have not listened to My words,” declares the Lord, “which I sent to them again and again by My servants the prophets; but you did not listen,” declares the Lord. You, therefore, hear the word of the Lord, all you exiles, whom I have sent away from Jerusalem to Babylon. (Jeremiah 29:4–20)

In context, verse 11 is clearly not meant as a love letter or a promise of blessing to individual believers in the twenty-first century.

And here are a few other points to consider: How do Joel Osteen, Andy Stanley, and Rick Warren know that God is directly speaking to their congregants in verse 11 but not in Jeremiah 29:17–19, where God promises to send “the sword, famine and pestilence”? Have they considered that God’s soothing promises in verse 11 are delivered to Israel while He has His foot on their neck in judgment (Jeremiah 29:4)? What about the fact that those who received the promise in verse 11 would likely not live to experience its fulfillment seventy years later (Jeremiah 29:10). And in their egotistical exegesis, can they grasp the irony that Israel was in Babylonian slavery because they listened to prophets who tickled their ears (Jeremiah 29:8–9)?

There is something far greater and eternally significant that we learn from this story in its true context. God does not abandon His people! In spite of their sin, God was relentlessly faithful to His covenants regarding Israel’s future and His promised Messiah. Not even Babylonian captivity could prevent His promises from coming to pass.

Likewise His promises to us as New Testament believers concerning our calling and election are also unshakeable (John 10:27–29). And they provide far more lasting comfort than Old Testament verses plucked out of context and misappropriated for modern audiences.

In the lead-up to the Truth Matters conference in October, we will be focusing our attention on the sufficiency, authority, and clarity of Scripture. Of our previous blog series, none better embodies that emphasis than Frequently Abused Verses. The following entry from that series originally appeared on February 10, 2016. -ed.

Next week will mark the second anniversary of Jamie Coots’s death. He was a father, pastor, and one of the stars of the National Geographic Channel’s reality series, Snake Salvation. The show followed Coots’s life and ministry as a prominent leader in a sect of Holiness Pentecostals who incorporate handling poisonous snakes into their worship in fulfilment of the promise of supernatural power and protection in Mark 16:17-18.

Coots died from a snakebite.

Snake handling—once popular throughout the Appalachian states—has dwindled to a tiny subculture of Pentecostals who believe in the practice of the extreme signs and wonders described in Mark 16:17-18. Specifically, they teach that they have the ability to cast out demons, speak in tongues, handle poisonous snakes, drink poison, and heal the sick (they also expose themselves to open flames, although that particular sign is not included in Mark’s gospel). And every couple years, the movement garners headlines because another pastor or congregant has died attempting to fulfill those supposed promises.

Virtually all other charismatics would disavow such extreme behavior, while holding just as tightly to the promises conveyed in the closing verses of Mark’s gospel—albeit more selectively.

For example, charismatic prosperity preacher Benny Hinn cites the passage in defense of his faith-healing ministry: “I knew the Lord had told me to pray for the sick as part of preaching the gospel, just as He told the disciples, in Mark 16:18: ‘They will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.’” ^[1] Benny Hinn, The Anointing (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1997) 49.

And in his book When Heaven Invades Earth, Bill Johnson—pastor of Bethel Redding, one of the most influential charismatic churches in the country—points to the end of Mark’s gospel as a promise of God’s ongoing miraculous work.

As our ministry teams travel around the world, we have come to expect certain things. Healing, deliverance, and conversions are the fruits of our labors. While healing is seldom the subject we teach on, it is one of the most common results. As we proclaim the message of the Kingdom of God, people get well. The Father seems to say, Amen! To His own message by confirming the word with power (see Mark 16:20). ^[2] Bill Johnson, When Heaven Invades Earth (Shippensburg, PA: Treasure House, 2003) 89.

We could go on with examples of how charismatics of various traditions lean heavily on the closing verses of Mark’s gospel, but you get the point. For many it’s a foundational passage—one that explicitly promises all believers the power to perform signs and wonders.

But is that really the point of the passage? And more importantly, do those verses even belong in your Bible to begin with? Even a simple reading of the text raises some significant questions about its Scriptural authenticity.

Now after He had risen early on the first day of the week, He first appeared to Mary Magdalene, from whom He had cast out seven demons. She went and reported to those who had been with Him, while they were mourning and weeping. When they heard that He was alive and had been seen by her, they refused to believe it. After that, He appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking along on their way to the country. They went away and reported it to the others, but they did not believe them either. Afterward He appeared to the eleven themselves as they were reclining at the table; and He reproached them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they had not believed those who had seen Him after He had risen. And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation. He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned. These signs will accompany those who have believed: in My name they will cast out demons, they will speak with new tongues; they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.” So then, when the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God. And they went out and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them, and confirmed the word by the signs that followed. [And they promptly reported all these instructions to Peter and his companions. And after that, Jesus Himself sent out through them from east to west the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation.] (Mark 16:9-20)

As you can see, there are actually two endings to Mark’s gospel contained in the above quote. Verses 9-20 are referred to as the longer ending, while the portion in brackets at the end of verse 20 is called the shorter ending—on its own it would appear immediately after verse 8. Both have appeared individually in a variety of translations—the NASB includes both.

But neither ending appears in the earliest and most reliable New Testament manuscripts. No ancient book has been more carefully preserved than the Bible—we have several thousand manuscripts, with some dating all the way back to mere decades after they were first written. And through the science of textual analysis, scholars have determined that the final verses of Mark were not in the original, inspired text.    

On top of that, as John MacArthur explains in his commentary on the passage, there are also several internal indications that Mark didn’t write either ending.

First, the transition between verse 8 and verse 9 is awkward and disjointed. The conjunction now (from the Greek word de) implies continuity with the preceding narrative, but the focus of verse 9 abruptly shifts to Mary Magdalene rather than continuing a discussion of the women referred to in verse 8. Moreover, it would be strange for Mark to wait until the end of his narrative to introduce Mary Magdalene, as if for the first time . . . when she was already mentioned three times in the prior context (Mark 15:40, 47, 16:1). A similar discontinuity regards Peter, who is singled out in verse 7 yet not mentioned again in verses 9-20. The “shorter ending” . . . attempts to rectify those incongruities by highlighting both Peter and the other women. . . . But this shorter ending has even weaker manuscript evidence to support it than the longer ending.

Second, the vocabulary, style, and structure of the longer ending is not consistent with the rest of Mark’s gospel. There are eighteen words in this section that are not used elsewhere in Mark. For example, the title “Lord Jesus” is used here (v. 19) but is never used anywhere else in Mark’s account.

Third, the inclusion of apostolic signs does not fit the way the other three gospels conclude their accounts of the resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ. Though many signs mentioned in this section parallel portions of the book of Acts (cf. Acts 2:4; 9:17; 10:46; 28:8), some are clearly without biblical support, such as being able to “pick up” venomous “serpents” (though perhaps loosely based on Paul’s experience in Acts 28:3-5) or “drink any deadly poison.” ^[3] John MacArthur, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Mark 9-16 (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2015) 411-412.

Summing up the case against the scriptural credentials of Mark 16:9-20, John MacArthur writes,

The evidence, both external and internal, conclusively demonstrates that verses 9-20 were not originally part of Mark’s inspired record. While they generally summarize truths taught elsewhere in the New Testament, they should always be evaluated in light of the rest of Scripture. No doctrines or practices should be established solely on them. The snake-handling preachers of the Appalachians provide a prime example of the errors that can arise from accepting these verses as authoritative.

Nonetheless, knowing that Mark 16:9-20 is not original should give believers more confidence in the accuracy of the New Testament, not less. As noted above, the science of textual analysis makes it possible for biblical scholars to identify the very few passages that were not part of the original. Such places are clearly marked in modern translations, making it easy for students of Scripture to identify them. Consequently, believers can approach the rest of the text with the settled assurance that the Bible they hold in their hands accurately reflects the original. ^[4] The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Mark 9-16, 412.

That conclusion then begs the question: Where did these verses come from?

Most likely, they were added in by a scribe who felt Mark’s original ending was missing something. However, it does not appear that he was so audacious as to concoct an ending from his own imagination. Instead, Mark 16:9-20 is a patchwork quilt of other biblical passages concerning the life of Christ after His resurrection, His commissioning of the apostles, and stories from their ministry in the founding of the church.

Time and space don’t permit me to break down the probable origin of each verse, but let me encourage you to listen to John MacArthur’s sermon on the passage, called “The Fitting End to Mark’s Gospel,” or consult his commentary on Mark 9-16 for more details on how this extrabiblical passage was likely assembled.

And what of Mark’s original ending? Why was it deemed so deficient in the first place? True, it is abrupt and to the point: “They went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had gripped them; and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid” (Mark 16:8). But as John MacArthur explains, that abrupt ending perfectly fits both Mark’s style and his purpose for writing at all.

Mark’s ending is abrupt but it is not incomplete. The tomb was empty; the angelic announcement explained that Jesus had risen; and multiple eyewitnesses confirmed those events. The purpose of Mark’s gospel was to demonstrate that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God (Mark 1:1). Having amply made that point, no further proof was necessary.

Throughout his gospel, Mark consistently punctuated key events in the life of the Lord Jesus by emphasizing the wonder He evoked in the hearts and minds of others. Mark simply moves from one point of amazement about Christ to the next. So the narrative ends where it ought to end. It climaxes with amazement and bewilderment at the resurrection of the crucified Savior (cf. John 20:31). In so doing, it leaves the reader in a place of wonder, awe, and worship, centered on its glorious subject: the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God. ^[5] The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Mark 9-16, 417-418.

So while Mark 16:9-20 may be a significant proof text for many charismatics, their interpretation is invalidated when we understand that those verses never belonged in Scripture to begin with.

In the lead-up to the Truth Matters conference in October, we will be focusing our attention on the sufficiency, authority, and clarity of Scripture. Of our previous blog series, none better embodies that emphasis thanFrequently Abused Verses. The following entry from that series originally appeared on April 3, 2017. -ed.

If you wanted to find one verse that encapsulates the glorious truth of the gospel, you couldn’t do much better than the words of the apostle Paul in 2 Corinthians 5:21. Describing God’s reconciling work Paul writes, “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”

That verse gets to the heart of the good news of the gospel—Christ’s substitutionary death on our behalf. And it gives us the confidence that Christ’s righteousness will be imputed to us. It depicts the blessed reality of both those great doctrines—that when God looked at Christ on the cross, He saw us; and when He looks at us now, He sees His Son. Can you imagine a greater promise or a richer blessing?

And yet, buried in that verse is a short phrase that often trips up Bible students. Worse, this phrase has become a playground for heretics and charlatans. By manipulating these few simple words, they pervert the character and nature of Christ, and pollute the gospel.

Here’s the phrase, in its context: “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.”

Those three little words seem innocuous. But in the hands of a man like Kenneth Copeland, they can unleash a world of blasphemous error. Copeland is effectively the leader and the face of the Word-Faith movement, which is the primary proponent of the prosperity gospel. Copeland was the chief disciple of Kenneth Hagin, and has expanded Hagin’s family tree of heresy through his mentoring relationships with Benny Hinn, Joseph Prince, and many others.

Copeland and many of his acolytes teach that the short phrase “to be sin” in 2 Corinthians 5:21 indicates that Christ actually became sinful on the cross. They say it wasn’t merely the penalty for our sins that He took on Himself, but all the sins themselves, exchanging His divine and righteous nature for the nature of Satan.

Here is Copeland in his own words:

The righteousness of God was made to be sin. He accepted the sin nature of Satan in His own spirit, and at the moment He did so, He cried, “My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?”

You don’t know what happened at the cross! Why do you think Moses, upon the instruction of God, raised a serpent upon that pole instead of a lamb? That used to bug me! I said, “Why in the world do You have to put that snake up there, the sign of Satan? Why don’t you put a lamb on the pole?”

The Lord said, “Because it was the sign of Satan that was hanging on the cross! I accepted in My own spirit spiritual death, and the light was turned off . . . made to be sin.” ^[1] Kenneth Copeland, “What Happened from the Cross to the Throne, Part 2” March 31, 2015.

Benny Hinn holds to the same erroneous doctrine. Hinn has declared that Jesus “did not take my sin; He became my sin. . . . He became one with the nature of Satan.” ^[2] Benny Hinn, quoted in Hank Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 1993), 155-156. Hinn embellished the point further one night on TBN:

He [Jesus] who is righteous by choice said, “The only way I can stop sin is by me becoming it. I can’t just stop it by letting it touch me; I and it must become one.” Hear this! He who is the nature of God became the nature of Satan when he became sin! ^[3] Benny Hinn, Trinity Broadcasting Network, December 1, 1990.

Even Joel Osteen—who reigns in his Word-Faith proclivities just enough to maintain his mainstream popularity—teaches this spurious doctrine:

Not only did Jesus pay for the punishment for your sins, the Bible says He actually became sin. He took sin upon Himself and into His being so that you could take God’s righteousness upon yourself and into your being. It’s the great exchange. ^[4] Joel Osteen, “The Great Exchange,” December 19, 2013.

Over and over these charlatans corrupt the nature of Christ and poison the gospel with these repulsive lies. Make no mistake—these are not small or insignificant errors. Accusing the Son of God of becoming a sinner is a direct assault on His divinity. Moreover, it’s an attack on the very aspect of His nature that made Him a suitable sacrifice for our sins in the first place: His righteousness.

In the Old Testament, the Lord specifically demanded a spotless, unblemished lamb as the sacrifice for sin (Exodus 12:5). Those sacrifices pointed ahead to Christ, who would serve as the one, true sacrifice for our sins. But His sacrifice would be worthless if He became sinful during His crucifixion. Not only would He have ceased to be a fitting sacrifice, He would have completely ceased to be God.

In his commentary on 2 Corinthians, John MacArthur explains that all of God’s Word testifies to the crucial truth of Christ’s sinlessness.

The impeccability (sinlessness) of Jesus Christ is universally affirmed in Scripture, by believers and unbelievers alike. In John 8:46 Jesus challenged His Jewish opponents, “Which one of you convicts Me of sin?” Before sentencing Him to death, Pilate repeatedly affirmed His innocence, declaring, “I find no guilt in this man” (Luke 23:4; cf. vv. 14, 22). The repentant thief on the cross said of Jesus, “This man has done nothing wrong” (Luke 23:41). Even the hardened, callous Roman centurion in charge of the execution detail admitted, “Certainly this man was innocent” (Luke 23:47).

The apostles, those who most closely observed Jesus’ life during His earthly ministry, also testified to His sinlessness. Peter publicly proclaimed Him to be the “Holy and Righteous One” (Acts 3:14). In his first epistle he declared Jesus to be “unblemished and spotless” (1 Peter 1:19); one “who committed no sin” (2:22); and “just” (3:18). John also testified to His sinlessness, writing, “in Him there is no sin” (1 John 3:5). The inspired writer of Hebrews notes that “we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin” (Heb. 4:15), because He is “holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens” (7:26). ^[5] John MacArthur, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: 2 Corinthians (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2003), 214.

John goes on to explain that the most powerful testament to the sinless nature of Christ comes in His unbroken fellowship with the Father, summed up in the simple statement, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30). John writes,

It is equally unthinkable that God, whose “eyes are too pure to approve evil” (Habakkuk 1:13; cf. James 1:13), would make anyone a sinner, let alone His own Holy Son. He was the unblemished Lamb while on the cross, personally guilty of no evil. ^[6] The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: 2 Corinthians, 215.

So how should we understand the idea that God made Christ “to be sin on our behalf”? Isaiah’s prophetic words give us the answer:

Surely our griefs He Himself bore,
And our sorrows He carried;
Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten of God, and afflicted.
But He was pierced through for our transgressions,
He was crushed for our iniquities;
The chastening for our well-being fell upon Him,
And by His scourging we are healed.
All of us like sheep have gone astray,
Each of us has turned to his own way;
But the Lord has caused the iniquity of us all
To fall on Him. (Isaiah 53:4-6)

On the cross, the Lord bore the punishment of our sins, not the sins themselves. He did not exchange His divine nature for Satan’s, or accept any blemish that would render Him as anything less than our spotless Lamb and perfect sacrifice. As John MacArthur explains,

Christ was not made a sinner, nor was He punished for any sin of His own. Instead, the Father treated him as if He were a sinner by charging to His account the sins of everyone who would ever believe. All those sins were charged against Him as if He had personally committed them, and He was punished with the penalty for them on the cross, experiencing the full fury of God’s wrath unleashed against them all. It was at that moment that “Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, . . . ‘My God, My God, why have You forsaken me?’” (Matthew 27:46). It is crucial, therefore, to understand that the only sense in which Jesus was made sin was by imputation. He was personally pure, yet officially culpable; personally holy, yet forensically guilty. But in dying on the cross Christ did not become evil like we are, nor do redeemed sinners become inherently as holy as He is. God credits believers’ sin to Christ’s account, and His righteousness to theirs. ^[7] The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: 2 Corinthians, 215.

Imputation is the key; if Christ was not fully righteous in His sacrificial death, we can’t be considered fully righteous in the eyes of God. If Christ wasn’t completely sinless, there is no hope of reconciliation for us.

In the lead-up to the Truth Matters conference in October, we will be focusing our attention on the sufficiency, authority, and clarity of Scripture. Of our previous blog series, none better embodies that emphasis than Frequently Abused Verses. The following entry from that series originally appeared on April 10, 2017. -ed.

False teaching thrives in environments where it is unlikely to be questioned. Charlatans and heretics prey on uncritical minds, and work tirelessly to protect and preserve that gullibility. Their success depends on dismantling every challenge to their authority and accuracy.

John MacArthur describes why that problem is rampant in the modern church:

In a time like this of tolerance, listen, false teaching will always cry intolerance; it will always say you’re being divisive, you’re being unloving, you’re being ungracious, because it can only survive when it doesn’t get scrutinized. And so it cries against any intolerance. It cries against any examination, any scrutiny.

In recent decades, some of the most notorious charismatic church leaders have been doing just that. They continually warn their critics to back off or face the imminent danger of divine judgment. Claiming God’s stamp of approval, they wield Psalm 105:15 like a loaded gun: “Touch not [the Lord’s] anointed” (KJV).

And lest you think such a description to be hyperbole, the following clip from Benny Hinn is a spectacular example. 

Hinn’s handling of Psalm 105:15, as well as the story of Saul and David, is hopelessly wrong on too many levels to address in one blog post.

For example we could discuss how Hinn utterly fails to understand Judas’s role in God’s sovereign plan for the crucifixion, while woefully underestimating the deity of Christ. We could invalidate Hinn’s warnings against criticism by pointing out the time Paul rebuked Peter—or when Hinn has publicly rebuked Joel Osteen, among others. Then there’s the problem of Hinn basing his threats upon the extra-biblical revelation of another false teacher (Kenneth Copeland).

 What does it mean to “touch”?

But there is one simple, glaring error that explains all the other problems and exposes Hinn as the incompetent and unqualified Bible teacher that he is. When David says, “I will not stretch out my hand against [Saul], for he is the Lord’s anointed” (1 Samuel 24:10), he is explaining why he didn’t kill Saul, not why he didn’t criticize Saul. In fact, David was openly critical of Saul on numerous occasions. Moreover, 1 Samuel 24:10 is part of a larger discourse where David rebukes Saul face-to-face over his murderous scheming: “I have not sinned against you, though you are lying in wait for my life to take it. May the Lord judge between you and me, and may the Lord avenge me on you; but my hand shall not be against you” (1 Samuel 24:11–13). Even if Benny Hinn was “the Lord’s anointed”—he’s not—none of his critics are attempting to “touch” him in the sense described in 1 Samuel 24:10 (or Psalm 105:15; or 1 Chronicles 16:22).

Who are the anointed?

There is another fatal flaw in Hinn’s interpretation. He—and all those who follow this teaching—assume that only certain persons are “anointed.” They claim that pastors and self-appointed prophets and apostles have a unique anointing from God that immunizes them from criticism. But such a concept is foreign to Scripture. In short, the Bible teaches that all believers have an anointing from God.

In his first epistle, the apostle John explained what it means to be anointed as a New Testament believer. After warning his readers about antichrists who were coming to deceive them, John reminded them of their security because of Christ’s anointing:

These things I have written to you concerning those who are trying to deceive you. As for you, the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you; but as His anointing teaches you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you abide in Him. (1 John 2:26–27)

The anointing John refers to is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit—a reality for all true Christians. John MacArthur explains the context and meaning of “anointing” as it appears in 1 John:

The false teachers who threatened John’s readers employed the terms for knowledge and anointing to describe their religious experience. They arrogantly saw themselves as possessing an elevated and esoteric form of divine knowledge, and as the recipients of a special, secret, transcendent anointing. That led them to believe they were privy to truth that the uninitiated lacked. John’s response, which was both a rebuttal to the antichrists and a reassurance to the believers, was to assert that, in reality, all true Christians have an anointing from the Holy One.

Because believers have received that anointing, they have the true understanding of God that comes exclusively through Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 4:6), “in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Colossians 2:3). They do not need any secret, special, or transcendent understanding or esoteric insight. Anointing (chrisma) literally means “ointment” or “oil” (cf. Hebrews 1:9). In this text it refers figuratively to the Holy Spirit (cf. 2 Corinthians 1:21–22), who has taken up residency in believers at the behest of Jesus Christ, the Holy One (cf. Luke 4:34; Acts 3:14), and reveals through Scripture all they need to know (John 14:26; 16:13; 1 Corinthians 2:9–10). ^[1] John MacArthur, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: 1–3 John (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 2007), 102.

The anointing we have as believers reveals the truth and therefore exposes the lies of false teachers. How ironic that the “anointing” Benny Hinn evokes to extort and manipulate churchgoers is actually our warning system to expose the self-serving deception of wolves like him.   

You probably remember the “What Would Jesus Do?” trend from the late ’90s. It seemed everywhere you looked, plastered across T-shirts, hats, jewelry, and all kinds of other merchandise, the WWJD slogan was a blithe, shallow reminder to live up to Christ’s moral code...

Chinese ride-hailing giant Didi Chuxing’s core business has been profitable, president Jean Liu Qing said for the first time, as ride orders in its domestic market recover from the impact of the coronavirus pandemic.In a rare interview, Liu told the CNBC that Didi’s core business has been profitable, without providing specific figures or explaining how or when the company had measured its profitability. The company has no plans for job cuts or raising capital, Liu said in the interview that…

The Philippines’ largest broadcaster ABS-CBN was forced off the air on Tuesday, the same day Conchita Lopez Taylor turned 90.“We’re used to it,” she said in a phone interview from her home in California.“We” referred to the large Lopez clan who owns the company, which had been forced to shut once before.Taylor was a 42-year-old mother of seven when ABS-CBN’s facilities were seized in 1972 by the clan’s former political ally, then-President Ferdinand Marcos. Her husband, former ABS-CBN chairman…

A group of 150 Chinese workers believe the world’s largest maker of trainers used the coronavirus as an excuse to fire them, having helped Taiwanese firm Pou Chen successfully expand its production into Vietnam for more than a decade.Pou Chen, which makes footwear for the likes of Nike and Adidas, informed the group in late April that they would no longer be needed as they were unable to return to Vietnam from their hometowns in China due to the coronavirus lockdowns.“We believe we contributed…

When 93-year-old Thomas Abraham was being treated for Covid-19 in the intensive care unit of a hospital in Kottayam, southern India, the one thing he missed was making black coffee for his wife, Mariyamma, 88.He need not have worried, the two would soon be having their morning cuppa together again – Mariyamma had contracted the disease too and both were being treated in the same hospital.“[At first] we were in separate wards but when both of us started missing each other, the doctors moved us…

A 14-year old girl sitting for her Kenya Certificate of Primary Education (KCPE) in Samburu County died tragically on Wednesday after she complained of stomach cramps.

Neha Kakkar opened up about handling pressure and competition from her peers

Rekha and Amitabh Bachchan and their longstanding history together is no news for fans

US Space Force chief explains why he didn't want Steve Carell to play him on Netflix film

Gigi Hadid was seen snubbing Harry Styles while embracing other bandmates after Zayn Malik’s ‘One Direction’ exit

Marriage is not too unlikely for Zayn Malik and Gigi Hadid, as per a source

Gigi and her sister Bella have been spending more time in the kitchen under quarantine

‘Build back better’ is often easier said than done after a disaster, but one example from the People’s Republic of China shows that it can be done well. 

The National Intelligence Service here said Wednesday that North Korean leader Kim Jong-un did not have any heart treatment as widely rumored before he resurfaced last week.In a closed-door briefing to lawmakers, the NIS said Kim is believed to have conducted state affairs even when he was out of th...

Olm are salamanders that spend all their lives in pitch-black caves, and it turns out they don’t move very much – sometimes lurking in the same spot for years

TikTok's rise has been meteoric. With more than 3 million people a day now downloading the app, its success is down to more than just luck

Supermodel Gigi Hadid on Thursday confirmed she was expecting a baby with former One Direction singer Zayn Malik, saying the couple were both excited and happy.

Justin Bieber and his wife Hailey Baldwin are opening up in an intimate series for Facebook Watch in which they discuss their marriage, their problems and their lives together.

Title: Thrush (Oral Candidiasis)
Category: Diseases and Conditions
Created: 1/31/2005 12:00:00 AM
Last Editorial Review: 3/27/2020 12:00:00 AM

Title: Did the Movie 'Joker' Reinforce Prejudice Against Mentally Ill?
Category: Health News
Created: 4/27/2020 12:00:00 AM
Last Editorial Review: 4/28/2020 12:00:00 AM

ABSTRACT

Over the past decade, Candida auris has emerged as an urgent threat to public health. Initially reported from cases of ear infections in Japan and Korea, C. auris has since been detected around the world. While whole-genome sequencing has been extensively used to trace the genetic relationships of the global emergence and local outbreaks, a recent report in mBio describes a targeted genotyping method as a rapid and inexpensive method for classifying C. auris isolates (T. de Groot, Y. Puts, I. Berrio, A. Chowdhary, and J. F. Meis, mBio 11:e02971-19, https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.02971-19, 2020).

ABSTRACT

Fungal infections are a major contributor to infectious disease-related deaths worldwide. Recently, global emergence of the fungal pathogen Candida auris has caused considerable concern because most C. auris isolates are resistant to fluconazole, the most commonly administered antifungal, and some isolates are resistant to drugs from all three major antifungal classes. To identify novel agents with bioactivity against C. auris, we screened 2,454 compounds from a diversity-oriented synthesis collection. Of the five hits identified, most shared a common rocaglate core structure and displayed fungicidal activity against C. auris. These rocaglate hits inhibited translation in C. auris but not in its pathogenic relative Candida albicans. Species specificity was contingent on variation at a single amino acid residue in Tif1, a fungal member of the eukaryotic initiation factor 4A (eIF4A) family of translation initiation factors known to be targeted by rocaglates. Rocaglate-mediated inhibition of translation in C. auris activated a cell death program characterized by loss of mitochondrial membrane potential, increased caspase-like activity, and disrupted vacuolar homeostasis. In a rocaglate-sensitized C. albicans mutant engineered to express translation initiation factor 1 (Tif1) with the variant amino acid that we had identified in C. auris, translation was inhibited but no programmed cell death phenotypes were observed. This surprising finding suggests divergence between these related fungal pathogens in their pathways of cellular responses to translation inhibition. From a therapeutic perspective, the chemical biology that we have uncovered reveals species-specific vulnerability in C. auris and identifies a promising target for development of new, mechanistically distinct antifungals in the battle against this emerging pathogen.

IMPORTANCE Emergence of the fungal pathogen Candida auris has ignited intrigue and alarm within the medical community and the public at large. This pathogen is unusually resistant to antifungals, threatening to overwhelm current management options. By screening a library of structurally diverse molecules, we found that C. auris is surprisingly sensitive to translation inhibition by a class of compounds known as rocaglates (also known as flavaglines). Despite the high level of conservation across fungi in their protein synthesis machinery, these compounds inhibited translation initiation and activated a cell death program in C. auris but not in its relative Candida albicans. Our findings highlight a surprising divergence across the cell death programs operating in Candida species and underscore the need to understand the specific biology of a pathogen in attempting to develop more-effective treatments against it.

ABSTRACT

The Candida albicans high-affinity phosphate transporter Pho84 is required for normal Target of Rapamycin (TOR) signaling, oxidative stress resistance, and virulence of this fungal pathogen. It also contributes to C. albicans’ tolerance of two antifungal drug classes, polyenes and echinocandins. Echinocandins inhibit biosynthesis of a major cell wall component, beta-1,3-glucan. Cells lacking Pho84 were hypersensitive to other forms of cell wall stress beyond echinocandin exposure, while their cell wall integrity signaling response was weak. Metabolomics experiments showed that levels of phosphoric intermediates, including nucleotides like ATP and nucleotide sugars, were low in pho84 mutant compared to wild-type cells recovering from phosphate starvation. Nonphosphoric precursors like nucleobases and nucleosides were elevated. Outer cell wall phosphomannan biosynthesis requires a nucleotide sugar, GDP-mannose. The nucleotide sugar UDP-glucose is the substrate of enzymes that synthesize two major structural cell wall polysaccharides, beta-1,3- and beta-1,6-glucan. Another nucleotide sugar, UDP-N-acetylglucosamine, is the substrate of chitin synthases which produce a stabilizing component of the intercellular septum and of lateral cell walls. Lack of Pho84 activity, and phosphate starvation, potentiated pharmacological or genetic perturbation of these enzymes. We posit that low substrate concentrations of beta-d-glucan- and chitin synthases, together with pharmacologic inhibition of their activity, diminish enzymatic reaction rates as well as the yield of their cell wall-stabilizing products. Phosphate import is not conserved between fungal and human cells, and humans do not synthesize beta-d-glucans or chitin. Hence, inhibiting these processes simultaneously could yield potent antifungal effects with low toxicity to humans.

IMPORTANCE Candida species cause hundreds of thousands of invasive infections with high mortality each year. Developing novel antifungal agents is challenging due to the many similarities between fungal and human cells. Maintaining phosphate balance is essential for all organisms but is achieved completely differently by fungi and humans. A protein that imports phosphate into fungal cells, Pho84, is not present in humans and is required for normal cell wall stress resistance and cell wall integrity signaling in C. albicans. Nucleotide sugars, which are phosphate-containing building block molecules for construction of the cell wall, are diminished in cells lacking Pho84. Cell wall-constructing enzymes may be slowed by lack of these building blocks, in addition to being inhibited by drugs. Combined targeting of Pho84 and cell wall-constructing enzymes may provide a strategy for antifungal therapy by which two sequential steps of cell wall maintenance are blocked for greater potency.

ABSTRACT

Lassa virus (LASV) poses a significant public health problem within the regions of Lassa fever endemicity in Western Africa. LASV infects several hundred thousand individuals yearly, and a considerable number of Lassa fever cases are associated with high morbidity and lethality. No approved LASV vaccine is available, and current therapy is limited to an off-label usage of ribavirin that is only partially effective and associated with significant side effects. The impact of Lassa fever on human health, together with the limited existing countermeasures, highlights the importance of developing effective vaccines against LASV. Here, we present the development and characterization of a recombinant LASV (rLASV) vaccine candidate [rLASV(IGR/S-S)], which is based on the presence of the noncoding intergenic region (IGR) of the small (S) genome segment (S-IGR) in both large (L) and S LASV segments. In cultured cells, rLASV(IGR/S-S) was modestly less fit than wild-type rLASV (rLASV-WT). rLASV(IGR/S-S) was highly attenuated in guinea pigs, and a single subcutaneous low dose of the virus completely protected against otherwise lethal infection with LASV-WT. Moreover, rLASV(IGR/S-S) was genetically stable during serial passages in cultured cells. These findings indicate that rLASV(IGR/S-S) can be developed into a LASV live-attenuated vaccine (LAV) that has the same antigenic composition as LASV-WT and a well-defined mechanism of attenuation that overcomes concerns about increased virulence that could be caused by genetic changes in the LAV during multiple rounds of multiplication.

IMPORTANCE Lassa virus (LASV), the causative agent of Lassa fever, infects several hundred thousand people in Western Africa, resulting in many lethal Lassa fever cases. No U.S. Food and Drug Administration-licensed countermeasures are available to prevent or treat LASV infection. We describe the generation of a novel LASV live-attenuated vaccine candidate rLASV(IGR/S-S), which is based on the replacement of the large genomic segment noncoding intergenic region (IGR) with that of the small genome segment. rLASV(IGR/S-S) is less fit in cell culture than wild-type virus and does not cause clinical signs in inoculated guinea pigs. Importantly, rLASV(IGR/S-S) protects immunized guinea pigs against an otherwise lethal exposure to LASV.

ABSTRACT

Cold seeps and hydrothermal vents deliver large amounts of methane and other gaseous alkanes into marine surface sediments. Consortia of archaea and partner bacteria thrive on the oxidation of these alkanes and its coupling to sulfate reduction. The inherently slow growth of the involved organisms and the lack of pure cultures have impeded the understanding of the molecular mechanisms of archaeal alkane degradation. Here, using hydrothermal sediments of the Guaymas Basin (Gulf of California) and ethane as the substrate, we cultured microbial consortia of a novel anaerobic ethane oxidizer, "Candidatus Ethanoperedens thermophilum" (GoM-Arc1 clade), and its partner bacterium "Candidatus Desulfofervidus auxilii," previously known from methane-oxidizing consortia. The sulfate reduction activity of the culture doubled within one week, indicating a much faster growth than in any other alkane-oxidizing archaea described before. The dominance of a single archaeal phylotype in this culture allowed retrieval of a closed genome of "Ca. Ethanoperedens," a sister genus of the recently reported ethane oxidizer "Candidatus Argoarchaeum." The metagenome-assembled genome of "Ca. Ethanoperedens" encoded a complete methanogenesis pathway including a methyl-coenzyme M reductase (MCR) that is highly divergent from those of methanogens and methanotrophs. Combined substrate and metabolite analysis showed ethane as the sole growth substrate and production of ethyl-coenzyme M as the activation product. Stable isotope probing demonstrated that the enzymatic mechanism of ethane oxidation in "Ca. Ethanoperedens" is fully reversible; thus, its enzymatic machinery has potential for the biotechnological development of microbial ethane production from carbon dioxide.

IMPORTANCE In the seabed, gaseous alkanes are oxidized by syntrophic microbial consortia that thereby reduce fluxes of these compounds into the water column. Because of the immense quantities of seabed alkane fluxes, these consortia are key catalysts of the global carbon cycle. Due to their obligate syntrophic lifestyle, the physiology of alkane-degrading archaea remains poorly understood. We have now cultivated a thermophilic, relatively fast-growing ethane oxidizer in partnership with a sulfate-reducing bacterium known to aid in methane oxidation and have retrieved the first complete genome of a short-chain alkane-degrading archaeon. This will greatly enhance the understanding of nonmethane alkane activation by noncanonical methyl-coenzyme M reductase enzymes and provide insights into additional metabolic steps and the mechanisms underlying syntrophic partnerships. Ultimately, this knowledge could lead to the biotechnological development of alkanogenic microorganisms to support the carbon neutrality of industrial processes.

ABSTRACT

Candida auris has emerged globally as a multidrug-resistant yeast that can spread via nosocomial transmission. An initial phylogenetic study of isolates from Japan, India, Pakistan, South Africa, and Venezuela revealed four populations (clades I, II, III, and IV) corresponding to these geographic regions. Since this description, C. auris has been reported in more than 30 additional countries. To trace this global emergence, we compared the genomes of 304 C. auris isolates from 19 countries on six continents. We found that four predominant clades persist across wide geographic locations. We observed phylogeographic mixing in most clades; clade IV, with isolates mainly from South America, demonstrated the strongest phylogeographic substructure. C. auris isolates from two clades with opposite mating types were detected contemporaneously in a single health care facility in Kenya. We estimated a Bayesian molecular clock phylogeny and dated the origin of each clade within the last 360 years; outbreak-causing clusters from clades I, III, and IV originated 36 to 38 years ago. We observed high rates of antifungal resistance in clade I, including four isolates resistant to all three major classes of antifungals. Mutations that contribute to resistance varied between the clades, with Y132F in ERG11 as the most widespread mutation associated with azole resistance and S639P in FKS1 for echinocandin resistance. Copy number variants in ERG11 predominantly appeared in clade III and were associated with fluconazole resistance. These results provide a global context for the phylogeography, population structure, and mechanisms associated with antifungal resistance in C. auris.

IMPORTANCE In less than a decade, C. auris has emerged in health care settings worldwide; this species is capable of colonizing skin and causing outbreaks of invasive candidiasis. In contrast to other Candida species, C. auris is unique in its ability to spread via nosocomial transmission and its high rates of drug resistance. As part of the public health response, whole-genome sequencing has played a major role in characterizing transmission dynamics and detecting new C. auris introductions. Through a global collaboration, we assessed genome evolution of isolates of C. auris from 19 countries. Here, we described estimated timing of the expansion of each C. auris clade and of fluconazole resistance, characterized discrete phylogeographic population structure of each clade, and compared genome data to sensitivity measurements to describe how antifungal resistance mechanisms vary across the population. These efforts are critical for a sustained, robust public health response that effectively utilizes molecular epidemiology.

ABSTRACT

The capacity of Candida albicans to reversibly change its morphology between yeast and filamentous stages is crucial for its virulence. Formation of hyphae correlates with the upregulation of genes ALS3 and ECE1, which are involved in pathogenicity processes such as invasion, iron acquisition, and host cell damage. The global repressor Tup1 and its cofactor Nrg1 are considered to be the main antagonists of hyphal development in C. albicans. However, our experiments revealed that Tup1, but not Nrg1, was required for full expression of ALS3 and ECE1. In contrast to NRG1, overexpression of TUP1 was found to inhibit neither filamentous growth nor transcription of ALS3 and ECE1. In addition, we identified the transcription factor Ahr1 as being required for full expression of both genes. A hyperactive version of Ahr1 bound directly to the promoters of ALS3 and ECE1 and induced their transcription even in the absence of environmental stimuli. This regulation worked even in the absence of the crucial hyphal growth regulators Cph1 and Efg1 but was dependent on the presence of Tup1. Overall, our results show that Ahr1 and Tup1 are key contributors in the complex regulation of virulence-associated genes in the different C. albicans morphologies.

IMPORTANCE Candida albicans is a major human fungal pathogen and the leading cause of systemic Candida infections. In recent years, Als3 and Ece1 were identified as important factors for fungal virulence. Transcription of both corresponding genes is closely associated with hyphal growth. Here, we describe how Tup1, normally a global repressor of gene expression as well as of filamentation, and the transcription factor Ahr1 contribute to full expression of ALS3 and ECE1 in C. albicans hyphae. Both regulators are required for high mRNA amounts of the two genes to ensure functional relevant protein synthesis and localization. These observations identified a new aspect of regulation in the complex transcriptional control of virulence-associated genes in C. albicans.

Nutrient acquisition is a central challenge for all organisms. For the fungal pathogen Candida albicans, utilization of amino acids has been shown to be critical for survival, immune evasion, and escape, while the importance of catabolism of host-derived proteins and peptides in vivo is less well understood. Stp1 and Stp2 are paralogous transcription factors (TFs) regulated by the Ssy1-Ptr3-Ssy5 (SPS) amino acid sensing system and have been proposed to have distinct, if uncertain, roles in protein and amino acid utilization. We show here that Stp1 is required for proper utilization of peptides but has no effect on amino acid catabolism. In contrast, Stp2 is critical for utilization of both carbon sources. Commensurate with this observation, we found that Stp1 controls a very limited set of genes, while Stp2 has a much more extensive regulon that is partly dependent on the Ssy1 amino acid sensor (amino acid uptake and catabolism) and partly Ssy1 independent (genes associated with filamentous growth, including the regulators UME6 and SFL2). The ssy1/ and stp2/ mutants showed reduced fitness in a gastrointestinal (GI) colonization model, yet induced greater damage to epithelial cells and macrophages in a manner that was highly dependent on the growth status of the fungal cells. Surprisingly, the stp1/ mutant was better able to colonize the gut but the mutation had no effect on host cell damage. Thus, proper protein and amino acid utilization are both required for normal host interaction and are controlled by an interrelated network that includes Stp1 and Stp2.

RiVax is a promising recombinant ricin toxin A subunit (RTA) vaccine antigen that has been shown to be safe and immunogenic in humans and effective at protecting rhesus macaques against lethal-dose aerosolized toxin exposure. We previously used a panel of RTA-specific monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) to demonstrate, by competition enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), that RiVax elicits similar serum antibody profiles in humans and macaques. However, the MAb binding sites on RiVax have yet to be defined. In this study, we employed hydrogen exchange-mass spectrometry (HX-MS) to localize the epitopes on RiVax recognized by nine toxin-neutralizing MAbs and one nonneutralizing MAb. Based on strong protection from hydrogen exchange, the nine MAbs grouped into four spatially distinct epitope clusters (namely, clusters I to IV). Cluster I MAbs protected RiVax's α-helix B (residues 94 to 107), a protruding immunodominant secondary structure element known to be a target of potent toxin-neutralizing antibodies. Cluster II consisted of two subclusters located on the "back side" (relative to the active site pocket) of RiVax. One subcluster involved α-helix A (residues 14 to 24) and α-helices F-G (residues 184 to 207); the other encompassed β-strand d (residues 62 to 69) and parts of α-helices D-E (154 to 164) and the intervening loop. Cluster III involved α-helices C and G on the front side of RiVax, while cluster IV formed a sash from the front to back of RiVax, spanning strands b, c, and d (residues 35 to 59). Having a high-resolution B cell epitope map of RiVax will enable the development and optimization of competitive serum profiling assays to examine vaccine-induced antibody responses across species.