In this new "socially distanced" world, I wonder?
If we choose to put our faith in the world governments and their false science, then true faith will indeed be rare, very, very, rare. The oft repeated mantra of our UK government is "we will follow the science!" Yeah, and into the pit with it!
Just imagine if the "social distancing" nonsense was implemented by Herod back in the New Testament era?
My little daughter lieth at the point of death: I pray thee, come and lay thy hands on her, that she may be healed; and she shall live. Mark 5:23.
Surely Jairus! as a "ruler of the synagogue" knowing of the strict social distancing measures being currently enforced, you should know better than to make such a request!
Four verses on, what of the woman "who touched His garment"? and of the unruly and disobedient "crowd" who thronged Him, which prompted His disciples to say "Thou seest the multitudes thronging thee, and sayest thou, "Who touched me?"
They shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. Mark 16:18.
But! this cannot be done! we are not allowed to approach a healthy person within 2 metres, let alone a sick one!!! (a confirmation, if we needed one, that diseases, viruses etc cannot be transmitted).
It was well said by Dr Gill that if one feared something, the event invariably came to pass (self fulfilling prophecy) for "fear hath torment" 1 John 4:18.
Is any sick among you? Let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. James 5:14.
Sorry James! haven't you heard of the social distancing guidelines? We must remain 2 metres apart from everyone, unless they live in one's own house, also church assemblies are now illegal. So please don't encourage lawlessness!
And it came to pass, that the father of Publius lay sick of a fever and of a bloody flux: to whom Paul entered in, and prayed, and laid his hands on him, and healed him. Acts 28:8.
Needless to say, the apostle broke all known social distancing criteria to heal this man!
Peter saith unto Him, Thou shalt never wash my feet. Jesus answered him, if I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me. John 13:8.
Does this not show what the Lord thinks of 'social distancing'?
Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved. John 13:23.
Social distancing has now eradicated all public shewing of friendly contact!
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Matthew 28:19ff
What of the great commission-how does one baptize from 2 metres away? Are not the Lord's words eternal? or are we scared of catching a mythical virus?
What of when Mary took "a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped His feet with her hair." John 12:3?
Examples like these can no doubt be multiplied many times over!
We are told that Christ's Gospel is an everlasting gospel. Revelation 14:6. That Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and to-day, yea and forever. Hebrews 13:8. So how can 'viruses' (so-called) travel by contact-through touch, the air, or spittle? The Gospel message is predicated upon close social human interaction, intimacy, touch, etc! Once upon a time, when greeting a person I would always shake his or her hand, hug or whatever..... O how Satan must be enjoying all of this!
With all this satanically inspired 'social distancing' going on around us, it wasn't for nothing that the eternal Word said For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. Matthew 18:20 (my emphasis) WAS IT? Mega churches-bah!
Friday 15 May 2020
Wednesday 13 May 2020
Did Paul Believe The Earth To Be A Globe? Obviously Not!
For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing. Acts 17:21. (emphasis mine).
In my interlinear Bible, on this verse, the margin reads; or, had leisure for nothing else.
The Greeks brought Paul "unto the Areopagus" to hear "this new doctrine", certainly they had "itching ears" for they would listen to anything, for they "spent their time in nothing else"! These men of leisure would philosophise and theorise about anything and everything "under the sun", and we have them to thank for the theory of the solar system. Eratosthenes (276-194 BC) was a Greek scientist/astronomer who is universally credited as being the first man to calculate the so-called circumference of the ball-shaped Earth.
Though the Earth was still widely believed to be flat, or at least not a spinning ball, right up until the time of Copernicus (1473-1543), when he expanded upon Eratosthenes theory and through the Roman Catholic Church via the Hegelian dialect (thesis, antithesis, synthesis) after Galileo (1564-1642) championed the heliocentric theory, to Rome's apparent chagrin. To cut a long story short, the heliocentric solar system theory became the accepted truth. Out went the biblical geocentric Earth and in came the king of the solar system, the sun! Instead of our 'humble' little sun that would illuminate the world on its daily circuit, at a stroke it became some 110 times larger than our Earth and 93,000,000 miles away from us! Consequently, the non-twinkling wandering stars became planets, for they are reckoned to be closer to us, and the twinkling stars became gas giant 'suns' at the centres of their own respective solar systems (billions of miles/light years apart), and our own sun became a star.
Needless to say, none of this wild theorising based on ancient Greek 'wisdom' is taught in Holy Writ! Only that God made "two great lights" on day four (Genesis 1:16), that is four days after He "created the heaven and the earth" Genesis 1:1. Aptly, the time of Copernicus was known as the "dark ages" when the masses were still entrenched in deep superstition and pagan Romish idolatry, and the popes were busy burning Bibles, keeping them back from the people. Praise God for raising up Martin Luther, when the mighty Reformation began in earnest! Luther opposed Copernicus's "novel theory" nevertheless, the solar system was here to stay, and all false science that would come after was built upon it (gravity, evolution, meteorology/weather cycles, atomic theory etc, etc). If the Roman Church was Christ's Church, and they had faithful men teaching the people truth from God's Book, the heliocentric theory could never have been, but it was not to be, for as a believer in absolute predestination, God would use the old Roman Empire's sun worship (Sol Invictus) system to bring about "His strange work; and bring to pass His act, His strange act." Isaiah 28:21.
The modern world's superstructure would be built upon a lie! how could it be otherwise? "For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent." 1 Corinthians 1:19. "Whosoever therefore would be a friend of the world maketh himself an enemy of God." James 4:4 (RV). The first Roman Empire was at its zenith in the apostolic age, having succeeded the Grecian Empire; it absorbed the learning which came from that source. So it is plainly obvious how the Romans became worshippers of the "unconquered sun" (Sol Invictus) an image that the pagan Roman Catholic Church venerates to this day (adding to the many others that God expressly said not to do, making void the Second Commandment of the Decalogue!)
The Scripture is silent on it, but I believe Paul would have been very familiar with Eratosthenes's theory, which would explain why he went on to write of "science falsely so called." 1 Timothy 6:20. He would have heard those proud "Epicurean and Stoic philosophers" Acts 17:18(RV) thunder out their 'wisdom' from the court of the Areopagus on Mars hill. But this 'wisdom' was not according to knowledge, it was of their own making.
The great wonder in our day is why so many otherwise sound Christians hold tenaciously to the nonsense that we live on a planet!
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 2 Timothy 2:15.
The next verse speaks of "vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness." So true! Truly, "there is no new thing under the sun" for our own government (as is true of all nations) constantly blare out on the mythical Covid 19; "WE WILL FOLLOW THE SCIENCE!" and so they will!
In my interlinear Bible, on this verse, the margin reads; or, had leisure for nothing else.
The Greeks brought Paul "unto the Areopagus" to hear "this new doctrine", certainly they had "itching ears" for they would listen to anything, for they "spent their time in nothing else"! These men of leisure would philosophise and theorise about anything and everything "under the sun", and we have them to thank for the theory of the solar system. Eratosthenes (276-194 BC) was a Greek scientist/astronomer who is universally credited as being the first man to calculate the so-called circumference of the ball-shaped Earth.
Though the Earth was still widely believed to be flat, or at least not a spinning ball, right up until the time of Copernicus (1473-1543), when he expanded upon Eratosthenes theory and through the Roman Catholic Church via the Hegelian dialect (thesis, antithesis, synthesis) after Galileo (1564-1642) championed the heliocentric theory, to Rome's apparent chagrin. To cut a long story short, the heliocentric solar system theory became the accepted truth. Out went the biblical geocentric Earth and in came the king of the solar system, the sun! Instead of our 'humble' little sun that would illuminate the world on its daily circuit, at a stroke it became some 110 times larger than our Earth and 93,000,000 miles away from us! Consequently, the non-twinkling wandering stars became planets, for they are reckoned to be closer to us, and the twinkling stars became gas giant 'suns' at the centres of their own respective solar systems (billions of miles/light years apart), and our own sun became a star.
Needless to say, none of this wild theorising based on ancient Greek 'wisdom' is taught in Holy Writ! Only that God made "two great lights" on day four (Genesis 1:16), that is four days after He "created the heaven and the earth" Genesis 1:1. Aptly, the time of Copernicus was known as the "dark ages" when the masses were still entrenched in deep superstition and pagan Romish idolatry, and the popes were busy burning Bibles, keeping them back from the people. Praise God for raising up Martin Luther, when the mighty Reformation began in earnest! Luther opposed Copernicus's "novel theory" nevertheless, the solar system was here to stay, and all false science that would come after was built upon it (gravity, evolution, meteorology/weather cycles, atomic theory etc, etc). If the Roman Church was Christ's Church, and they had faithful men teaching the people truth from God's Book, the heliocentric theory could never have been, but it was not to be, for as a believer in absolute predestination, God would use the old Roman Empire's sun worship (Sol Invictus) system to bring about "His strange work; and bring to pass His act, His strange act." Isaiah 28:21.
The modern world's superstructure would be built upon a lie! how could it be otherwise? "For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent." 1 Corinthians 1:19. "Whosoever therefore would be a friend of the world maketh himself an enemy of God." James 4:4 (RV). The first Roman Empire was at its zenith in the apostolic age, having succeeded the Grecian Empire; it absorbed the learning which came from that source. So it is plainly obvious how the Romans became worshippers of the "unconquered sun" (Sol Invictus) an image that the pagan Roman Catholic Church venerates to this day (adding to the many others that God expressly said not to do, making void the Second Commandment of the Decalogue!)
The Scripture is silent on it, but I believe Paul would have been very familiar with Eratosthenes's theory, which would explain why he went on to write of "science falsely so called." 1 Timothy 6:20. He would have heard those proud "Epicurean and Stoic philosophers" Acts 17:18(RV) thunder out their 'wisdom' from the court of the Areopagus on Mars hill. But this 'wisdom' was not according to knowledge, it was of their own making.
The great wonder in our day is why so many otherwise sound Christians hold tenaciously to the nonsense that we live on a planet!
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 2 Timothy 2:15.
The next verse speaks of "vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness." So true! Truly, "there is no new thing under the sun" for our own government (as is true of all nations) constantly blare out on the mythical Covid 19; "WE WILL FOLLOW THE SCIENCE!" and so they will!
Thursday 7 May 2020
Was The Lord Jesus Crucified On Good Friday? A little Study.
There are professing believers who take the Lord's words in Matthew 12:40 to mean that He must truly and literally have been a full 72 hours "in the heart of the earth." Such teaching can only serve to wreak havoc on one's faith in the inspired written word, that is the God given received text. Granted, there are what we may call "renderings" and "punctuations" in certain places that us moderns may think should have been better translated, but ever remember the Authorized Version was published over 400 years ago when English was an altogether different language! The KJV 1611 is only a translation. The Scriptures are only inspired in the original Hebrew and Greek tongues, and they came without "chapter and verse" and 'English' punctuation, nevertheless, it is the content in the manuscripts employed by the translators of the KJV 1611 that are inspired. A full defence is beyond the scope of this small article.
It is agreed by all teachers of God's written word that it is not wise to base any doctrine on one verse alone without scriptural support. So, if the Lord was truly and literally "in the heart of the earth" for a full "three days and three nights", that is 72 hours, then the Friday crucifixion could not have happened, this much is obvious.
In Matthew 12:40, on "the three days and three nights" the Lord is quoting Jonah 1:17 verbatim; "Now the LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights." It is an established fact in Mosaic Judaism (biblical Judaism!) that the Jews reckoned the night with the day*. Therefore if Jonah wasn't in the "belly of the fish" for the timescale of what us moderns understand as a full 72 hours, then the same would be true of the Lord in Matthew 12:40.
So it must have been that Jonah was "swallowed up" and inside the "great fish" late on a Friday, all through the Saturday Sabbath, and "vomited out" (Jonah 2:10) early on a Sunday morning. He 'rose' on a Sunday morning to go to Nineveh. This "great city" being a microcosm for the whole Gentile world to whom the Lord would give the "great commission" (Matthew 28:18-20). Again, let me remind the reader that the Lord was quoting verbatim from the Jewish Scriptures, and that He is a Jew! When He "created the heavens and the earth" the "morning" was always spoken with the "evening", see Genesis 1:5-1:31. The Lord quoted extensively from the book of Genesis throughout the Gospels, and everyone knows, believer and unbeliever alike that every day includes an evening and a morning.
Let us look for evidence that the Lord was indeed resurrected on Sunday morning.
"And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread" Acts 20:7. Why would Jewish believers come together on a Sunday to "break bread" in the name of the Lord if they didn't believe He was resurrected on the first day of the week, also known as "the Lord's day"? Similarly, the disciples were ordered on "the first day of the week" to "lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him.." (1 Corinthians 16:1-2); again, why on "the first day of the week"? what be the significance? John "was in the Spirit on the Lord's day" Revelation 1:10, again, what be the significance of this, if He hadn't risen on that Easter Sunday morning? Likewise, in John 20:19, "Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week". This buttresses perfectly with Mark 16:9 where we read that the Lord "was risen early on the first day of the week." (Emphasis's mine). Abraham, the father of faith, "of all them that believe" (see Romans 4:11) was given the covenant of circumcision which pointed to the eighth day, a new day, the resurrection day of our Lord which was the first day of the week. This new day came to be known as the Christian Sabbath, the Lord's day. The unbelieving Jewish sabbath remains the same, the Christian believer is under the new covenant, the Lord Jesus is truly "Lord even of the sabbath day." Matthew 12:8.
Let us not lose sight of the fact that the Jewish Scriptures are none other than our Old Testament; the unbelieving Jews are blinded to the truth of the New Testament. I believe that those who believe and teach a literal 72 hour stay in "the heart of the earth" are deceived and are doing a very great disservice to the Gospel Truth of Christ. "For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven." Psalm 119:89. But not according to those who would shipwreck the faith of some, who would otherwise trust the plenary inspiration of holy writ.
The Lord "rose the third day according to the Scriptures." 1 Corinthians 15:4.
*On the 'difficulty' of accepting that the Lord was not a full 72 hours "in the heart of the earth".
Dr John Gill writes (and to this all, the other great reformed expositors agree, Matthew Henry, Matthew Poole, Jamieson, Fausett & Brown, and countless others) .
"To solve this difficulty, and set the matter in a clear light, let it be observed, that the three days and three nights mean three natural days, consisting of day and night, or twenty four hours, and are what the Greeks call "night days"; but the Jews have no other way of expressing them, but as here; and with them it is a well known rule, and used on all occasions, as in the computation of their feasts and times of mourning, in the observance of the Passover, circumcision, and diverse purification's, that "a part of a day is as the whole" and so, whatever was done before sun setting, or after, if but an hour, or ever so small a time before or after it, it was reckoned as the whole preceding, or following day; and whether this was in the night part, or day part of the night day, or natural day, it mattered not, it was accounted as the whole night day: by this rule, the case here is easily adjusted; Christ was laid in the grave towards the close of the sixth day, a little before sun setting, and this being part of the night day preceding, is reckoned as the whole; He continued there the whole night day following, being the seventh day; and rose again early on the first day, which being after sun setting, though it might be even before sun rising, yet being a part of the night day following, is to be esteemed as the whole; and thus the Son of man was to be, and was three days and three nights in the grave; and which was very easy to be understood by the Jews; and it is a question whether Jonas was longer in the belly of the fish."
It is agreed by all teachers of God's written word that it is not wise to base any doctrine on one verse alone without scriptural support. So, if the Lord was truly and literally "in the heart of the earth" for a full "three days and three nights", that is 72 hours, then the Friday crucifixion could not have happened, this much is obvious.
In Matthew 12:40, on "the three days and three nights" the Lord is quoting Jonah 1:17 verbatim; "Now the LORD had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights." It is an established fact in Mosaic Judaism (biblical Judaism!) that the Jews reckoned the night with the day*. Therefore if Jonah wasn't in the "belly of the fish" for the timescale of what us moderns understand as a full 72 hours, then the same would be true of the Lord in Matthew 12:40.
So it must have been that Jonah was "swallowed up" and inside the "great fish" late on a Friday, all through the Saturday Sabbath, and "vomited out" (Jonah 2:10) early on a Sunday morning. He 'rose' on a Sunday morning to go to Nineveh. This "great city" being a microcosm for the whole Gentile world to whom the Lord would give the "great commission" (Matthew 28:18-20). Again, let me remind the reader that the Lord was quoting verbatim from the Jewish Scriptures, and that He is a Jew! When He "created the heavens and the earth" the "morning" was always spoken with the "evening", see Genesis 1:5-1:31. The Lord quoted extensively from the book of Genesis throughout the Gospels, and everyone knows, believer and unbeliever alike that every day includes an evening and a morning.
Let us look for evidence that the Lord was indeed resurrected on Sunday morning.
"And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread" Acts 20:7. Why would Jewish believers come together on a Sunday to "break bread" in the name of the Lord if they didn't believe He was resurrected on the first day of the week, also known as "the Lord's day"? Similarly, the disciples were ordered on "the first day of the week" to "lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him.." (1 Corinthians 16:1-2); again, why on "the first day of the week"? what be the significance? John "was in the Spirit on the Lord's day" Revelation 1:10, again, what be the significance of this, if He hadn't risen on that Easter Sunday morning? Likewise, in John 20:19, "Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week". This buttresses perfectly with Mark 16:9 where we read that the Lord "was risen early on the first day of the week." (Emphasis's mine). Abraham, the father of faith, "of all them that believe" (see Romans 4:11) was given the covenant of circumcision which pointed to the eighth day, a new day, the resurrection day of our Lord which was the first day of the week. This new day came to be known as the Christian Sabbath, the Lord's day. The unbelieving Jewish sabbath remains the same, the Christian believer is under the new covenant, the Lord Jesus is truly "Lord even of the sabbath day." Matthew 12:8.
Let us not lose sight of the fact that the Jewish Scriptures are none other than our Old Testament; the unbelieving Jews are blinded to the truth of the New Testament. I believe that those who believe and teach a literal 72 hour stay in "the heart of the earth" are deceived and are doing a very great disservice to the Gospel Truth of Christ. "For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven." Psalm 119:89. But not according to those who would shipwreck the faith of some, who would otherwise trust the plenary inspiration of holy writ.
The Lord "rose the third day according to the Scriptures." 1 Corinthians 15:4.
*On the 'difficulty' of accepting that the Lord was not a full 72 hours "in the heart of the earth".
Dr John Gill writes (and to this all, the other great reformed expositors agree, Matthew Henry, Matthew Poole, Jamieson, Fausett & Brown, and countless others) .
"To solve this difficulty, and set the matter in a clear light, let it be observed, that the three days and three nights mean three natural days, consisting of day and night, or twenty four hours, and are what the Greeks call "night days"; but the Jews have no other way of expressing them, but as here; and with them it is a well known rule, and used on all occasions, as in the computation of their feasts and times of mourning, in the observance of the Passover, circumcision, and diverse purification's, that "a part of a day is as the whole" and so, whatever was done before sun setting, or after, if but an hour, or ever so small a time before or after it, it was reckoned as the whole preceding, or following day; and whether this was in the night part, or day part of the night day, or natural day, it mattered not, it was accounted as the whole night day: by this rule, the case here is easily adjusted; Christ was laid in the grave towards the close of the sixth day, a little before sun setting, and this being part of the night day preceding, is reckoned as the whole; He continued there the whole night day following, being the seventh day; and rose again early on the first day, which being after sun setting, though it might be even before sun rising, yet being a part of the night day following, is to be esteemed as the whole; and thus the Son of man was to be, and was three days and three nights in the grave; and which was very easy to be understood by the Jews; and it is a question whether Jonas was longer in the belly of the fish."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)