The School Of Grace.

The first, and perhaps most difficult lesson we have to learn in the school of grace .

A Christian man once said that it took him forty-two years to learn three things:

1) That he could do nothing to save himself.

2) That God did not require him to do anything.

3) That Christ did it all.

It is by God's grace in Christ alone that any are saved; grace, pure and undeserved grace! 

I cry out; why choose an undeserving sinner like me? 

The Miraculous Gifts, Did They Cease? A Brief Study:

The miraculous gifts are generally known as the gifts of Healing, deliverance, and tongues.

Today, these 'gifts' predominantly exist within Pentecostalism, and even within that denomination there is much strife on whether these 'gifts' are genuine, especially when practiced by the Charismatic branch thereof. But, really, is there such a thing as a non-Charismatic Pentecostal Church?
I have questioned many Pentecostal theologians, yet I have not received one answer when I ask; "What is it within Pentecostal theology that has given rise to the Pentecostal Charismatic "madness", "lunacy", or "excesses" as the extreme manifestations of the continuing 'gifts' have since come to be known as?" There is but one answer, the veritable fact that the miraculous gifts are not continuing, for they have ceased, but this they cannot admit, for to do so would undermine their theological cornerstone! Also, who presently is the one who decides on whether a 'healer', 'deliverer', or 'tongues' speaker has superceded what is permissible?

I write from painful personal experience, having fellowshipped  in a Pentecostal outfit for some three years, and showing it a clean pair of heels approximately 15 years ago. In the Sunday morning meetings (and mid-week home-groups) I would for the first time become aware of people singing and praying in words that I couldn't discern, subsequently I learned that this was called "Tongues". It was generally the more 'spiritual' members of the congregation (elders, deacons etc) that were foremost in this activity; and I wondered if I would ever attain such spiritual heights myself. Not being a "happy-clappy' sort, I didn't feel led to join in with the utterances, as it were, although my wife was encouraged by a couple of ladies to do so, but, thankfully she resisted. There was much peer pressure to fit-in with the rest of them, otherwise you really did feel like an outsider, an experience not new to me!

As the months rolled by, I spent much time studying whether the practice of singing, praying, and talking in tongues was biblical, and of-course it is biblical, for it is mentioned in the Bible! I read that we should desire spiritual gifts, 1 Cor.14:1, and covet earnestly the best gifts, 1 Cor.12:31, yet the previous verse says do all speak with tongues? (my emphasis). Paul clearly says that not all Christians in the Apostolic age spoke in tongues, the question then for me was, are there any (biblically speaking)  that do so today? for in my own little fellowship it appeared that most did! In the next chapter it plainly reads whether there be tongues, they shall cease, 1 Cor.13:8 (my emphasis). The issue then became; when did, or will tongues cease? Paul said If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will not they say ye are mad? 1 Cor.14:23. Now, when I joined this congregation, I most certainly was unlearned with regard to spiritual gifts, having hitherto only attended a so-called orthodox church.  Evidently the Apostle is strongly suggesting that there is a proper order, restraint, or procedure that must be performed regarding the gift of tongues. And so there is, for God is not the author of confusion, 1 Cor.14:33, for the Scripture says If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church: and let him speak to himself, and to God. 1 Cor.14:28. Not at any time was an interpreter present to interpret what I could now only assume to be gibberish (or worse), but, what I heard with my own ears, seemed to me, at any rate, to break all known Scriptural parameters! No doubt, those who were gifted to speak in tongues,subsequently became aware of their gift, and they became somewhat puffed up? This being a phrase exclusively used by Paul in the Authorized Version some seven times! Six in first Corinthians 4:6, 4:18, 4:19, 5:2, 8:1, & 13:4, and once in Col. 2:18.

I have since learned the reason why tongues was used by God in the New Testament, it was purely so that every man heard them speak in his own language. Acts 2:6. In Jerusalem, when the day of Pentecost was fully come, Acts 2:1, there were Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven, Acts 2:5, that heard every man in his own language, Acts 2:8 (RV). There are some 15 nations mentioned in Acts 2:9-11, and without God's enabling those men on that day to hear in his own language, how would they have ever heard the Gospel truth? But, today, we have Bibles printed practically in every language under the sun; and in this "on-line" age we can decipher languages by the touch of a button! The Scripture also says those at Pentecost began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. Acts 2:4 (my emphasis). In fact, they didn't know that they were doing it-for they were supernaturally enabled! Today, however, unless you decide to rattle away as it were, you have to be coerced, or coached into doing it!

As for the miraculous healings, they were designed by God to bear witness of Me. John 10:25, that was the express purpose of the miracles, they were not recorded in the Scripture of Truth to give licence to latter day wannabe faith healers! The whole verse reads; Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in My Father's name, they bear witness of Me. The Lord Jesus delegated His God given miracle working powers to His disciples; And when He had called unto Him His twelve disciples, He gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of disease and all manner of sickness. Matt.10:1 RV (my emphasis).
Regarding the so-called Christian faith healers around today, the 'miracles' they perform bear no resemblance to anything in the New Testament performed by Christ and His disciples. Just a word, or a touch was all that was needed to make the blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up..." Matt.11:5. As for the charlatans around today, what of them? When their patients are not healed, they will often have the effrontery to tell them it was because of "their lack of faith", leaving them in even more despair.

I have written a whole lot more on this, but for brevity's sake, I try to keep it short and to the point as possible. But, why did Paul write; And now abideth faith, hope, charity (love RV), these three; but the greatest of these is charity. 1 Cor.13:13? Most surely, it is not too difficult to see that in our present dispensation in time, that we need faith, hope, and love? But! When that which is perfect is come (the Lord Jesus) 1 Cor.13:10, we will no more need hope and faith! Whatever for? For who hopeth for that which he seeth? Rom.8:24. His elect will then be in His presence forevermore! Little wonder, he said; the the greatest of these is love, for love will endure forever!

God is love. 1 John 4:8.

Zechariah 5 and the Ephah.

There will be a literal rebuilt city of Babylon on the self same site of the one of old where Nebuchadnezzar extolled himself saying Is not this great Babylon which I have built for the house of the kingdom by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty? Dan.4:30. Many would have us believe that Rome the is the new Babylon, when the Bible is explicit that it is Babylon that will yet face a future and sudden destruction as described in Revelation 18.

Zechariah 5:5-11.
Then the angel that talked with me went forth, and said unto me, Lift up now thine eyes, and see what is this that goeth forth. And I said, What is it? And he said, This is an ephah that goeth forth. He said, moreover, This is their resemblance (appearance) through all the earth. And, behold, there was lifted up a talent (weighty piece) of lead: and this is a woman that sitteth in the midst of the ephah. And he said, This is wickedness. And he cast it into the midst of the ephah; and he cast the weight of lead upon the mouth thereof. Then lifted I up mine eyes, and looked, and, behold, there came out two women, and the wind was in their wings; for they had wings like the wings of a stork: and they lifted up the ephah between the earth and the heaven. Then said I to the angel that talked with me, Wither do these bear the ephah? And he said unto me, to build it an house in the land of Shinar: and it shall be established, and set there upon her own base.

(The two interjections were added by B.W.Newton; page 63 Babylon & Egypt Their Future History And Doom).

On this passage of Scripture, Mr Newton remarks, "The Scripture does speak of an event yet unaccomplished of which the scene is to be the land of Babylon. That the event predicted in this remarkable passage remains still unaccomplished, is sufficiently evident from the fact of Zechariah's having prophesied after Babylon had received that blow under which it had gradually waned.  Zechariah lived after Babylon had passed into the hands of the Persians, and since that time, it is admitted by all, that declension - not "establishment" - has marked its history. From that hour to the present moment there has been no "preparation of a house," no establishment of anything - much less of an Ephah in the land of Shinar. But an Ephah is to be established there, and a house to be built for it there, and there it is to be set firmly upon its base."

Now, the ephah is the emblem of commerce, "the Hebrew unit of dry measure - 1 bushel,or about 33 litres" according to the British dictionary (Dictionary.com). It cannot have escaped the notice of even the most dilatory Bible student, that the whole world is presently under the sway of trade (i.e. that is buying and selling, profit and loss). The "Ephah" as Mr Newton correctly observes, denotes all that is done under the name of trade; he says "its sovereign influence is to pervade the nations, and to imprint on them a character derived from itself, as the formative power of their institution. In other words commerce is for a season to reign. It will determine the arrangements, and fix the manners of Israel, and of the prophetic earth. The appearance of every nation that falls under its control is to be mercantile." He said, moreover, This is their appearance through all the earth. 

Commerce, then is what presently drives the nations. We read daily of trade disputes between the so-called super powers (USA and China) and as it is plainly evident that all nations are desirous of economic growth and prosperity, who would disagree?
Babylon, then is eponymous for what is done under the banner of commerce. It will be the nations that drive the Ephah back to its base as it were; for the Scripture says, Wither do these bear the ephah? And he said unto me, to build it an house in the land of Shinar: and it shall be established, and set there upon her own base. Zech.5:10-11.

Let us not forget what was said in Genesis 11:8; they left off to build the city. The reason that they left off to build the city, was because, the same verse tells us that the LORD scattered them from thence upon the face of all the earth.

In these last days (of the present dispensation - that is before the millennium) we will see Babylon restored to a prominence that will far surpass her former glory.

How then does the literal rebuilding of Babylon fit in with the theory of pre-tribulationism? Clearly, it doesn't ! For if the Bible teaches that the rebuilding of a literal city of Babylon must take place before the Lord's Second Coming in glory, then how is it that the any moment rapture could have taken, or will take place?

Share the Gospel? A few thoughts...

Share the Gospel?

I received an e-mail from the ecumenical Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN) on 28th December with the heading saying "Help Share The Gospel All Donations Matched-Now Through December 31st!"

Yes - today it is all about donations and financial chicanery!

But, is such phraseology as "share the Gospel" even biblical? Search for this phrase in the King James Version, and you will not find it written once. The closest perhaps is 1 Thess.2:8, where it reads So being affectionately desirous of you, we were willing to have imparted unto you, not the Gospel of God only, but also our own souls, because ye were dear unto us. Some lesser, much later English versions have "share the Gospel" rather than having it imparted unto you. And this but once in the entire New Testament! But, surely, to have imparted unto you, means to have first had it preached unto you?

When this hitherto once great nation of ours was more biblically literate in the dim and distant past (i.e the post Reformation period of the puritans), Christians would not have talked about "sharing the Gospel", the clarion call would have been to PREACH THE GOSPEL! declare it LOUDLY and PROCLAIM it! this very phrase is used, (plus its various derivative forms such as preaching the Gospel, preached the Gospel, etc) some 41 times in the King James Version of the New Testament. Furthermore, it is written that God now commandeth all men everywhere to repent. Acts 17:30. There is an urgency in all of this, for a man's life is even a vapour, Jam.4:14. The Lord said compel them to come in, Luk.14:23, and behold, now is the day of salvation, 2 Cor.6:2. Hell has enlarged herself and opened her mouth without measure, Is.5:14, hell fire is increasing in intensity, the flames are being fanned, yet people in this day and age talk of "sharing the Gospel!" as if they were sharing a bag of sweets! The sense of urgency in our gratuitous age of plenty has been all but silenced and stifled. Even the poorest among us seem to have everything; so why do we need God; and if we do become Christians, don't we have to give, donate, tithe and the like to the charlatans such as CBN and the rest?

The Pleiades

According to accepted secular astronomy the Pleiades are the "seven sisters". The "seven sisters" are reckoned to be "an open star cluster containing middle aged, hot B-type stars located in the constellation of Taurus. It is among the nearest star clusters to Earth, and is the cluster most obvious to the naked eye in the night sky. (source Wikipedia).

What are we to make of this? The Bible says that the Pleiades (Job 38:31) are the The seven stars (RV, margin), and as noted above, secular science/astronomy based on heliocentricism, use this term to describe an entirely different group of celestial bodies. They impose the view that the Pleiades are altogether a different group of heavenly bodies to what the Bible teaches them to be.

There are seven stars orbiting above the Earth, however, according to Wikipedia and accepted secular astronomy there are eight planets, including 'planet' Earth! (which is not a planet). Left to Scripture alone, we know the Earth is stationary, that is it doesn't move (geocentric). But, are the seven planets, as we have hitherto understood them to be, actually planets at all? What exactly is a planet? It is said in the margin of 2 Kings 23:5 (the only mention of "planets" in the entire Bible) that the planets are indeed the twelve signs, that is what most know to be the zodiac, of which the monthly prognosticators give forth their predictions! It would seem that confusion prevails if the Christian tries to understand biblical cosmology through secular astronomical wisdom, it cannot be done. The Pleiades, then as the Bible speaks, would have us know that what the secular astronomers consider to be the eight (seven) planets are in reality seven stars that orbit above the earth under the roof of the firmament. As for the other stars, that is the Comets, meteors, and asteroids, I believe that, these also, come under the category of stars. Smaller and less frequently sighted stars, such as Halley's 'comet' for example, come into view every seventy or so years; such is their elongated orbit.

So the celestial bodies given the names of Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune, are according to God's word, stars that are in constant motion, perhaps there may be a case for categorizing them under the heading of wandering stars, Jude 1:13? But, I understand they have a fixed orbit. The other stars known as comets, meteors, and asteroids, would certainly come under this heading because they have a more 'random' celestial path.

Man ever tries to reverse God's order and change what is written in His word, but a day is fast approaching when a greater than king Ahusuerus is coming, when what is written in the King's name, and sealed with the King's ring, may no man reverse. Esther 8:8.

Hyper-spiritually sensitive?

This very morning my wife brought back this photo of Mitre Peak, Milford Sound, NZ, which belonged to her late parents, they did visit the place. It had a prominent position on their living room wall. I must have seen it many times, and to me it just looked like a nice landscape portrait. When she brought the picture in from the car, she inadvertently left it the 'wrong' way round on the hall floor, and intended to have it hung up somewhere. I came down the corridor and exclaimed "that's Baphomet!!!". She wondered what on earth I was on about at first, then she could clearly see it. Needless to say, we will get rid of it!

My late father in law was a Freemason, and I do wonder if he knew there was more to this image?

Do you see Baphomet?

Radical Islam.

Driving my car today on my little journey into Stornoway I 'chanced' upon a BBC news report on the recent shooting in Strasbourg that has left four dead and many others injured; one apparently brain dead, and six others more than seriously injured.
The reporter, whose name was a certain Hugh Scofield, kept referring to "radical Islam"; he was insistent upon emphasizing throughout his short narrative, that this latest terror attack of whom its instigator shouted "Allah Akbar" whilst he was perpetrating his wicked act, that the perpetrator thereof had been radicalized: The inference being that Islam is absolutely fine, just as long as you don't obey the more radical precepts of its doctrine!  However, the grand question is; what is it in Islam that gives rise to said radicalization ? Why is it that men like scofield and the wider media aren't prepared to dig a little beneath the surface and find the truth? Those that perpetrate such wicked acts as the one just described are being absolutely faithful to the Koran; otherwise, why would they carry out such atrocities in the name of their god?

We all well know by now, that after such terror attacks, the standard practice for the imams, Muslim councils, and other so-called 'non-radicalized' Muslims is to publicly condemn these attacks, but, do they privately? Taqiya permits Muslims to lie through their teeth! so how can you trust what any of them say? I do not say that there aren't nominal Muslims out there, who call themselves such, because they were born to Muslim parents, that would do such things, but, what of those who take their 'faith' seriously?

Because of the sixth Commandment; Thou shalt not kill, Ex.20:13, many Christians will not take up arms, and does the Bible anywhere, in any place, permit any to tell lies? Absolutely not! Thou shalt not bear false witness, Ex.20:16, all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death. Rev.21:8. And remember, of the holy city, new Jerusalem, Rev.21:2, it is written that there shall in no wise enter into it, anything that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie. Rev.21:27a.