Matthew 10.29.

Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father. (My emphasis).

I took this photo this morning. It is of a seagull as you can see; it comes every morning to tap on my kitchen window with it's beak asking for food! The verse under consideration teaches that even a sparrow cannot "fall on the ground" unless God has ordained it! for He is "upholding all things by the word of His power" Hebrews 1.3. Note, all things, not some things.
Many in Christendom are guilty of having "despised the day of small things" Zechariah 4.10. Believers, unless of course they believe in absolute pre-destination/election, tend to think that God is only involved in the big things, such as the nations in their perpetual striving with Israel, which we hear about everyday.

If you know anything about seagulls, you will know that they have many friends and relatives, and are generally regarded as pests, being especially aggressive when there is food about the place. I keep hens in the paddock beyond the fence in the window above, and feed them every morning, so this gull, must have figured out where the source of the food came from! It has been doing this for about a month now, but it is the only one (so far!), but being only yards from the coast, I was a little tentative about feeding it, because I don't want a gull invasion!
I can't figure out why God would direct this single gull to my window, other than to show me how he can control every living creature, such as "the great fish to swallow up Jonah"! (Jonah 1.17). Many marvel at the formation, and precision a flock of birds can fly in, as if it were but one bird, similar to the unison a shoal of fish will swim in. But what, or rather Who, is responsible for this common spectacle? The believer will find the answer in Hebrews 1.3!

It is my prayer that the Almighty won't send anymore than one seagull at a time to my window!

Does Revelation 15.8 prove that there can be no rapture before the Second Coming? And side-roads that lead off from it!

And the temple was filled with smoke from the glory of God, and from His power; and NO MAN was able to enter into the temple, till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled.
Revelation xv 8. (My emphasis).

The verse under consideration tells us that "no man was able to enter into the temple, till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled." No man was ever able to enter the holy place on earth in the presence of God in a body of sin (the high priest apart), but His resurrected saints will be able to enter the holy place in heaven, in a soon coming Day, in their sin-free glorified and immortal bodies. In the tabernacle and temple dispensations, only the high priest could enter into the holy place one day a year on Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement), and that was only after a series of God ordained complex rituals and purifications that the high priest first had to undergo, and not to do so would have meant certain death!
On the Mount of Transfiguration (Matthew 17, Luke 9, Mark 9) stood Moses and Elijah in their glorified bodies, these are the physical bodies that all the righteous dead (and those alive at His Coming) will receive when the Lord returns to the Earth. Is Rev. 15.8 telling us that after the point that the seventh angel has "poured out his vial" in Rev. 16.17, when the "great voice out of the temple" says "it is done." will be precisely the time that men will be able to "enter into the temple" in their glorified bodies? This, on its own would of necessity invalidate any pre-tribulation, and pre-wrath rapture of the saints. Regarding the pre-wrath rapture theory, if this doctrine were scriptural, then they would be able to enter into God's presence before "the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled." Is it possible that Enoch and Elijah (the only men recorded in Scripture who have not tasted the "sting of death") have already received their glorified bodies and are therefore now at liberty to "enter into the temple"? have these Old Testament saints received their glorified bodies as yet? Certainly the event on "the holy mount" is past, as it is recorded in Scripture; but, it must be remembered that it was "a vision" ( Matt. 17.9); this was a prophetic foretaste of what will surely come to pass. The elect in Christ will receive bodies of the same constitution as the three apostles witnessed on "the holy mount".
The question, we must ask regarding Enoch and Elijah, whom I believe to be the 'future' "two witnesses" in Rev. 11.3, is this; were their bodies glorified when they ascended to heaven? If they are the future "two witnesses", it is written that they are yet to die (Rev. 11.7-9), which then, of necessity implies that their bodies are presently not glorified, for how can a glorified, immortal and incorruptible body die? As Paul teaches in 1 Cor. 15.52-54; "this mortal shall have put on immortality"; and "Death is swallowed up in victory." Furthermore, it is written; "It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment." Heb. 9.27. This would then fulfil this scripture regarding Enoch and Elijah! At His Coming, those who "are alive and remain" (1 Thess. 4.16), will also assume glorified bodies. It is written "that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God", so exactly how Enoch and Elijah are sustained in the heavenly realm in their current mortal bodies it is vain to speculate upon! But, "Is anything too hard for the LORD?" Genesis 18.14.

The temple in Rev. 15.8, is surely the same as that mentioned in ch. 21.22, where it says "I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God the Almighty, and the Lamb, are the temple thereof." The apostle Paul says of God in Christ; "Who only hath immortality, which no man can approach unto"; 1 Timothy 6.16. God's word is telling us in no uncertain terms that no man can enter into His presence, that is "the temple" unless he is clothed accordingly. We can only enter into His presence through the blood of the "Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." Rev. 13.8, and then only behold His glory in a glorified sinless body. Rev. 11. shines much light on the heavenly temple, and in verse 19, it says "the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in His temple the ark of His testament." (my emphasis). The aforesaid verse happens at the very point in time when the righteous receive their glorified bodies and will then be able to enter the holy of holies; after "the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled." Rev.15.8.

It is true that upon death, God's elect will immediately enter into Christ's presence ( Phil. 1.23, 2 Cor. 5.8, Luke 23.43 etc). Nevertheless, as 2 Cor. 5.8 says, it will be an "absent from the body" presence as Paul clearly states. Is a man, a man without a body? these are deep things, but clearly a man cannot be a man without a body! Yet in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16.19-31) we note that Abraham, the rich man, and Lazarus appear to have bodies, yet have not been resurrected! We know that this scene is not of a future vision, for Dives  wanted to warn his five brethren who were yet still in their mortal bodies. Dives is now "in torments" and Lazarus "is comforted"; so how do we account for the obvious sensations they are experiencing if they are "not in the body"? Clearly we believe this 'anomaly' because "it is written". We read in Rev. 6.9 of "the souls of them that were slain for the word of God"; these souls are clearly conscious, and they "cried with a loud voice" (v.10). They, as indeed the participants in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, are also able to perform functions that we would normally limit to being "in the body". Regarding the "souls" in Rev. 6.9, it is said of them that they are "underneath the altar"(RV); the altar was obviously outside of the holy of holies in the temple at Jerusalem, as it would be also in the heavenly temple of which the earthly one was a pattern of (Heb. 8.5). It is noteworthy that though the aforesaid souls in heaven are said to be in the temple precinct, as it were, yet it will only be when they receive their immortal and glorified bodies will they be able to enter into the holy of holies. See also Revelation 11.19; after "the seventh angel sounded, that the way into the holiest place could be seen; "And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in His temple the ark of His covenant". Was it possible for the martyred souls in heaven prior to Rev. 11.19 to enter into the holy place? I don't believe so, for it is said "that they should rest for a little season, until their fellow servants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled." (Rev. 6.11).

But, this "little season"; exactly how long is it? The fifth seal martyrs cried "how long...?" in verse 10.  Have they been resting in bliss under the altar for 2000 plus years, waiting for Jesus to perform His work of judgment? Scripture says that "one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day" 2 Peter 3.8. God is in eternity, so it stands for reason, that when His saints go "to be with Christ" (Phil. 1.23), then they too, have entered into eternity. With this line of biblical thought; Abel has been with Christ for approximately only six days, Noah around four days, the apostles two days, and those martyred for Christ at the start of the Reformation, not even half a day!

It is interesting that in the account of the rich man and Lazarus, the only other person mentioned there was the patriarch Abraham, but the pre-incarnate Christ must have been there as well, in order to relay the parable to us, for God is omnipresent. Christ is the One into whose presence His elect will enter into upon death, for He said "before Abraham was, I Am" John 8.58.

This 'unknown' period as it were, between death and resurrection, has been called the "intermediate state", and is what is known as purgatory by those within Roman Catholicism. Of course, the Bible knows nothing of this false teaching, but it is nevertheless admitted that many within the Reformed Faith have differing views on what exactly happens in the so-called intermediate state. Some believe in soul-sleep, but such a notion can be easily disproved from Scripture.

I can see why many who study God's word refer to extra canonical writings, for it makes it easier as it were, to 'prove' a theory, but this can be a treacherous road to travel down...

Going back to the pre-wrath doctrine, as I understand it to teach, there will still be two Second Comings of Jesus, one to rapture His saints out of great tribulation, the next when He Comes with His saints to Earth. Yet, Hebrews 9.28 clearly says He "will appear the second time without sin unto salvation." (my emphasis).

A work in progress.

Politics and religion.

It was always said that "politics and religion don't mix", the reality however, is that true religion as it is in Christ (His coming theocracy) will prevail! In a soon coming Day, God in Christ will put "all enemies under His feet." 1 Corinthians 15.25, Psalm 110.1. In reality, what is politics anyway- is it not chicanery, deceit, half truths, and the like?

Back in the 1980s and early 90s I took an interest in politics, and would avidly look forward to programmes such as Question Time, when it was hosted by the late Sir Robin Day. Politicians hotly debated the issues of the day. The political establishment back then was dominated by the three main parties, Conservatives, Labour, and Liberal. The Social Democrats emerged about this time forming an alliance with disenfranchised members of the Liberal and Labour parties, if I remember rightly, to form a new centre ground in politics. The Green Party also emerged at this period in time with many other 'single issue' political parties.
I identified myself as a true blue Tory for during the Thatcherite period (1979-1990) was my most successful period in business, and I gave credit to the Conservatives for creating a favourable business climate.
I never became a member of the Conservative Party, but I always voted for them (apart from my first vote at 18 in 1979 when I voted Labour, for I didn't want a woman to become PM!).
At this period in time I was an avowed atheist, I considered religion of any kind to be the source of conflict, for as a teenager in the 70s I remember the daily news, with bombings, shootings, murders, streets on fire, being broadcast on TV from across the channel in Northern Ireland. I knew that the Irish trouble had religion at the bottom of it all, for I remember it was all about Catholics and Protestants, and I am sure the great many involved in the fighting didn't understand what it was all about, they just took their 'corner' as it were because they were born into a certain religion. One image from that era will always stay etched in my mind's eye, is that of the firebrand Protestant preacher Rev Ian Paisley (later became Baron Bannside!), he often spoke of "burning in hell", and would thunder out; "NEVER! NEVER! NEVER!", yet, look what happened, how very sad! He formed a political alliance with Roman Catholic terrorists! And because of this 'peace' process became a Lord!

The point of all this, is that like most people, I became interested in politics for I was trying to make sense of the world I was living in, and would stay up past the early hours on election nights as the votes came in. Remember Screaming Lord Sutch,of the Monster Raving Loony Party? He would always be there on the same platform as a political "big-wig". Here we are now, some near 30 years later in 2018, and look at society today! Just look at the morals of all the political parties; would not their ideologies be more fitting for the Monster Raving Loony Party? There are a great many sodomites in parliament today. They all approve of same-sex marriage, LGBT rights, and the right to assign yourself whatever sex you please! (yes, apparently there is a wide range between male and female!), and the sodomite infested education system etc. The previous prime minister, David Cameron said it was his "greatest achievement"; getting same-sex marriage into law! Yes, there are some dissenting voices in the political circus speaking against some of these issues, but they just don't seem to be listened to. (and they won't be!).
As the world becomes ever more wicked by the day, I can almost hear the footsteps of the coming Antichrist! Society is becoming more intolerant by the day toward Christians; in fact the hostility toward the Gospel message is now so bad, how long will it be before Christians are treated in this erstwhile great Christian nation, as they are in Islamic countries?

Sir Robert Anderson (1841-1918) said it well;

"The full and final development of democracy will be despotism."

Is that not what we are seeing developing before our very eyes?

Revelation TV and Christian Voice.

These two organisations e-mailed me last month saying that they would no longer be allowed to send me any more e-mails unless I gave them permission to do so.

I didn't grant them permission, but they still send me their e-mails!

Christian ethics!

2 Peter 3.9

"The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness; but is long suffering to US-WARD, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." 2 Peter 3.9 KJV. (my emphasis).

Does this verse teach that God wants every person in the world to "come to repentance" and that He doesn't want any to "perish"? Clearly, any with a little understanding regarding the case of Peter would know that the Lord was indeed "longsuffering" toward him!

To understand what any single verse in Holy Writ teaches it is necessary to read it in its proper context, and not twist it to teach something else. We must, if we are to be blessed with the study of God's word apply ourselves with an honest conscience. Let us then turn to the first verse of the chapter under consideration: "This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance." (my emphasis). Who, then are the "beloved" that Peter is writing to? The first verse of Peter's second letter reads; " Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ."
To any honest student of God's word, it can be clearly seen that Peter isn't writing to the world, but to the "beloved", (the us-ward of 2 Peter 3.9) who are also the "elect" of his first epistle; "Peter an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the elect who are sojourners of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father..." 1 Peter 1.1-2a. Of these he says "..give diligence to make your calling and election sure." 2 Peter 1.10. (my emphasis).
It is only those belonging to the US-WARD that God is "not willing that any should perish"! If God didn't want every person in the entire world to perish, none would perish, for His will be done on earth as it is in heaven! let us not forget the Lord's words in Luke 22.31: "Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat." Truly, Peter would have been the Devil's child, had it not been for the pre-destined intervention of God in Christ!

Once Saved Always Saved

Arminian's* are those who teach that man has a free will; they deny the absolute sovereignty of God, and that He has chosen in eternity past an elect people, and that Christ bore their sins only. They deny the total depravity of man, as they insist that man has the capacity in himself to accept Christ as Saviour by a decision of their own making. They flagrantly disregard clear and plain teaching in God's written word as is clearly evidenced by the following Scriptures; John 1.13, 6.44, 8.36, Romans 9.16 etc..
To borrow Arthur W. Pink's words, "Where any teacher or preacher is unsound on these basic truths, no confidence must be placed in him on any other subject. If he is all wrong at the foundations, his superstructure is bound to be faulty.

"No man can come to Me, except the Father which hath sent Me draw him." John 6.44 (my emphasis).

If only believers would dwell on those words as they do with John 3.16! No man! this one verse alone should settle the matter, but apparently not! how many today teach that a true believer can fall away and perish is, well, quite beyond me. What kind of Head would He be if any of the members of His mystical body could be torn from Him? What kind of Shepherd would He be, if a single sheep of His flock could be left behind to perish in the wilderness? What kind of Physician would He be, if any patient under His hand were in the end found to be incurable? What kind of High Priest would He be, if any name written on His heart were found wanting when He makes up His jewels? What kind of Husband would He be, if He and any soul once united to Him by faith were ever put asunder?
As William Gurnall (1655) said:

"How well do they consult for Christ's honour that say His sheep may die in a ditch of final apostasy?
"Christ and His members make one Christ. Now, is it possible a piece of Christ can be found at last burning in hell? Can Christ be a crippled Christ? Can this member drop off and that? How can Christ part with His mystical members and not with His glory?" (Taken from J.C. Ryle's Old Paths).

Those names in God's Book of Life can never be lost, for they have been pre-destined to glory.
God's elect will persevere to the end. Was it for nothing Peter said "..give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things ye shall never fall." 2 Peter 1.10?

*This is also the position of people who would call themselves "Biblicists", they think they are neither Calvinists nor Arminian, yet they are Arminian by default, for they know not what they affirm.

Ruin in Eden!

"Some master in Israel who wanted to help the memories of his hearers has said that the three things to be preached above everything else are the three R's- Ruin, Redemption, and Regeneration. He spake wisely and well. How will men seek salvation if they do not feel their ruin? Where is their salvation save in the atoning blood? What is salvation but being created anew unto holiness? It is a noteworthy fact that, in Holy Scripture, there are three third chapters which deal with these things in the fullest manner. The third of Genesis reveals Ruin; the third of Romans teaches Redemption; the third of John sets forth Regeneration."

C.H. Spurgeon p 22; The Teachings of Nature in the Kingdom of Grace.

Mr Spurgeon asked; "How will men seek salvation if they do not feel their ruin?"

Liberal Christian theology which abounds in our present 'enlightened' age, broadcasts the message that "God loves the sinner, but hates the sin."

On this message A.W. Pink writes:

"One of the most popular beliefs of the day is that God loves everybody, and the very fact that it is so popular ought to be enough to arouse suspicions of those who are subject to the Word of Truth. God's love toward all His creatures is the fundamental and favourite tenet of Universalists, Unitarians, Theosophists, Christian Scientists, Spiritualists, Russellites, etc....

It has been customary to say God loves the sinner, though He hates his sin. But that is a meaningless distinction. What is there in a sinner but sin?  To tell the Christ rejecter that God loves him is to cauterize his conscience, as well as to afford him a sense of security in his sins.

Of this message, Pink said "perhaps the late D.L. Moody (Arminian) - captivated by Drummond's 'The Greatest Thing in the World' did more than anyone else last century to popularize this concept."

Some years back, it took me sometime to get my head around the fact that the saying under consideration is not Biblical, yet how many think otherwise? Again, is this not due entirely to a false understanding of John 3.16?