One of the interesting things about Christian forums is that they can give exposure to all kinds of weird and not so wonderful beliefs that are being paraded in the name of Christ. They give a picture of what is happening outside of our familiar Christian environment.
It’s not surprising that Jesus warned that many deceivers would come in His name.
The latest thing to hit a forum that I frequent is the claim that working for money (that is, working to earn a living), is evil.
Paul’s insistence that he who doesn’t work should not eat is seen to be contrary to Jesus’ alleged teaching on the matter. Also the fact that Paul worked as a tentmaker is seen as weakness displayed by Paul.
These people* support their view by saying that Jesus’ words should take priority over any of Paul’s words. That is: the parts of scripture that record Jesus sayings are more reliable than the parts of scripture expressing Paul’s teaching.
Further to this it seems that some of these people are promoting the idea that the “mark of the beast” from Revelation relates to money – that those who work for money are in more danger of taking the mark of the beast.
I’m not sure how these people are supported, where their food and clothing comes from. They won’t say. They merely say “the Lord provides”.
It seems to me that scripture isn’t so reticent to say how God provided. Scripture tells of manna and quails in the wilderness, ravens feeding a prophet. It tells of a never ending supply of oil feeding a prophet and a widow. And there is Jesus feeding 5000 and 4000 people with a few loaves and fish.
The most dangerous thing being promoted by these people is the idea that we can pick and choose which bits of scripture are more truthful. They say they choose Jesus’ words over Paul’s words – but they ignore the fact that Jesus’ words have been presevered and given to us by the very same group of writers they deem to be unreliable.
Jesus Himself didn’t write down His teaching. Jesus Himself didn’t record His acts in writing. He entrusted this to men. If we can’t trust the teaching of these men. If we can’t accept ALL their writings as Spirit inspired and authoritative – then why should be accept anything they have written – even their accounts of Jesus’ words?
And on this point their arguments and their doctrine collapses.
_____________
*it’s interesting how these controversial things always seem to be promoted by groups people who arrive on a forum at the same time out of nowhere
Friday, March 25, 2011
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
One of the Many?
Read the scripture quote given in the previous post (Matt 24: 3-14), take special note of the word "many" and see what the word is being applied to.
In summary it refers to many deceivers (of various types) and many who will be deceived and fall away.
Can we grasp what that means?
What greater encouragement do we need to make sure that we keep our eyes on Jesus and that we keep faithful to His word - to ensure that we are NOT one of the many.
"Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few." (Matt 7:13-4)
In summary it refers to many deceivers (of various types) and many who will be deceived and fall away.
Can we grasp what that means?
What greater encouragement do we need to make sure that we keep our eyes on Jesus and that we keep faithful to His word - to ensure that we are NOT one of the many.
"Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few." (Matt 7:13-4)
Monday, March 14, 2011
Signs and Warnings in Today's World
So soon after the earthquake in Christchurch, New Zealand comes even more devastation with the earth quake, tsunami and the potential nuclear disaster in Japan. At time like this many Christians call to mind Jesus’ words in Matthew 24:
While wars, famines and earthquakes have been happening to varying degrees throughout history, they seem to be increasing in intensity in our own time. And usually these are the things that bring the believer’s attention to Jesus’ words quoted above.
But overall, there is not much the Christian can do about these things. We can pray and we can contribute to aid appeals, if we have the skills and the opportunity we can personally assist those who are suffering. If we are in an affected area we can trust God for the safety of ourselves and our family.
And of course we can note them as the signs they are.
However some of Jesus’ predictions don’t attract so much attention, maybe because they are not always so obvious, and they don’t get the same kind of media coverage given to political and natural disasters. While it is understandable that the world pays no attention to these things, for the church to ignore them is foolishness. In fact Jesus has more detailed things to say about these than He does about the wars, earthquakes and famines. These are things that believers can do something about, things that we can avoid falling victim to.
Jesus starts his discourse with this warning:
3 As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will this happen, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?” 4 Jesus answered: “Watch out that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am the Messiah,’ and will deceive many. 6 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of birth pains.
9 “Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. 10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
While wars, famines and earthquakes have been happening to varying degrees throughout history, they seem to be increasing in intensity in our own time. And usually these are the things that bring the believer’s attention to Jesus’ words quoted above.
But overall, there is not much the Christian can do about these things. We can pray and we can contribute to aid appeals, if we have the skills and the opportunity we can personally assist those who are suffering. If we are in an affected area we can trust God for the safety of ourselves and our family.
And of course we can note them as the signs they are.
However some of Jesus’ predictions don’t attract so much attention, maybe because they are not always so obvious, and they don’t get the same kind of media coverage given to political and natural disasters. While it is understandable that the world pays no attention to these things, for the church to ignore them is foolishness. In fact Jesus has more detailed things to say about these than He does about the wars, earthquakes and famines. These are things that believers can do something about, things that we can avoid falling victim to.
Jesus starts his discourse with this warning:
“Watch out that no one deceives you”.
But why is it necessary for Him to say this?
Because many deceivers will come in the name of Jesus and they will go unnoticed if there is not due diligence; they may not be as obvious as we expect and clearly we need to “watch out” for a reason: so “no one deceives” us.
Jesus says they will come proclaiming Jesus as Messiah or maybe they will be promoting themselves as being messiah, “the anointed one” coming in His name (or likely both). They will convey an image of Christian legitimacy.
Jesus also warned there will be persecution against the saints leading to martyrdom – not only in localised areas but ALL NATIONS will be involved. That many will turn away from their faith and betray others and false prophets will arise deceiving even more people.
Wickedness will increase and the love of MOST will grow cold. But whose love will grown cold? Is this a broad sweeping statement about mankind in general or is it referring to those who had been believers?
Look at the context in verses 10-13, the statement is sandwiched between “many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people” and “but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved.” Surely there is at least a strong hint contained there?Also a person needs to have love in the first place in order to have it grow cold. And the word used for love here is agapē, which seems to imply that it refers more to the believer than a non-believer.
While the wars, earthquakes and famines get so much attention – how many are paying attention to the other things, the subtle deceptive things that Jesus warned about that could have very personal consequences for the believer’s relationship with the Lord?
All of these latter signs are portrayed as being interrelated: deception, falling away, persecution. Many who are deceived and fall away will be the ones who persecute and even kill those who stand firm in the faith. This may be hard for the Christian to comprehend or even accept as truth, but this is what Jesus reveals as some of the signs preceding His return.
If this section of scripture went no further than the “signs” mentioned above it would seem very discouraging, but praise God it doesn’t end with doom and gloom. It ends with important promises.” The one who stands firm to the end will be saved”, and “this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come”. Along with the increasing problems and apostasy - the gospel of the Kingdom WILL be preached in the whole world prior to the end. The true church WILL be effective, and the bad times WILL be brought to an end by the return of Jesus.
We have been given signs that point to the coming of Jesus and the end of the age. But while these signs increase in the world today, they are only SIGNS of something bigger and much more important. They are not intended to draw attention to themselves but they do help to point us to the right direction. If we heed the directions Jesus gave we will remain secure on His path (on the Way) and that path will take us to the correct destination.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
The Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart
An excellent article on the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart can be found here:
http://wesleyanarminian.wordpress.com/2011/03/09/the-hardening-of-pharaohs-heart/
http://wesleyanarminian.wordpress.com/2011/03/09/the-hardening-of-pharaohs-heart/
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Time flies...life is a mist.
I am only a few months away from my 53rd birthday and I’ve been thinking about the years behind and the years ahead. Clearly, after passing the half century mark it is most likely that I have fewer years in front of me than I have behind.
I recall hearing (and saying) that time seems to go faster as we get older. Those school years seemed like they would never end – but as an adult time seems to slip away far too quickly (although the hours at work still seem much slower than hours at home).
I’m beginning to see the reality of growing older and how short our time on earth is.
I’m not sure which experience gives the greater understanding of the passing of time and the aging process. Is it my own physical body, its greying/receding hair; the increase in aches and pains; the recognition that I’m not as agile or fast on my feet? Is it the realisation that the daughter I saw being born into this world is now 26 and married? Or maybe it’s seeing my parents fading away with old age and ill health, my dad barely holding on to prove a doctor’s predicted 9 month lifespan has been wrong by at least three years…
Should I still be around twenty years in the future I would have exceeded my “three score years and ten”. I look back twenty years and it seems so close, almost yesterday. At that time I was at University as a “mature age” student, hoping for a new start in life. Putting 13 years of mundane work behind me to increase the chances of getting a job I enjoyed.
While those hoped for changes were never realised and I didn’t seem to gain anything from my studies, I did eventually regain a faith that had slipped away years earlier. No, not merely a regained faith – a renewed faith! In earlier days I had been tossed to and fro from one appealing teaching to another, always searching for something real to give substance to what I knew I needed to believe. I relied on others to show me the way, but each time found my guide was just as desperate and blind as I was.
This renewed faith is more focused. It centres on God and His word rather than the latest “spiritual” fad to hit the church. It centres on God and His word instead of theologies that have been handed down through church systems. It centres on God and His word instead of popular religious opinion.
The Bible describes this as a narrow way accessible through a narrow gate. It is the only way according to Jesus. The way He established. The way centred on Him. He is the Way.
And it is that Way; it is Jesus and Him alone who makes the reality of aging, the reality of the shortness of life, a non-issue.
While this life may be brief – it’s not the be all and end all. There is something far more glorious to come.
I recall hearing (and saying) that time seems to go faster as we get older. Those school years seemed like they would never end – but as an adult time seems to slip away far too quickly (although the hours at work still seem much slower than hours at home).
I’m beginning to see the reality of growing older and how short our time on earth is.
“What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes.”
I’m not sure which experience gives the greater understanding of the passing of time and the aging process. Is it my own physical body, its greying/receding hair; the increase in aches and pains; the recognition that I’m not as agile or fast on my feet? Is it the realisation that the daughter I saw being born into this world is now 26 and married? Or maybe it’s seeing my parents fading away with old age and ill health, my dad barely holding on to prove a doctor’s predicted 9 month lifespan has been wrong by at least three years…
Should I still be around twenty years in the future I would have exceeded my “three score years and ten”. I look back twenty years and it seems so close, almost yesterday. At that time I was at University as a “mature age” student, hoping for a new start in life. Putting 13 years of mundane work behind me to increase the chances of getting a job I enjoyed.
While those hoped for changes were never realised and I didn’t seem to gain anything from my studies, I did eventually regain a faith that had slipped away years earlier. No, not merely a regained faith – a renewed faith! In earlier days I had been tossed to and fro from one appealing teaching to another, always searching for something real to give substance to what I knew I needed to believe. I relied on others to show me the way, but each time found my guide was just as desperate and blind as I was.
This renewed faith is more focused. It centres on God and His word rather than the latest “spiritual” fad to hit the church. It centres on God and His word instead of theologies that have been handed down through church systems. It centres on God and His word instead of popular religious opinion.
The Bible describes this as a narrow way accessible through a narrow gate. It is the only way according to Jesus. The way He established. The way centred on Him. He is the Way.
And it is that Way; it is Jesus and Him alone who makes the reality of aging, the reality of the shortness of life, a non-issue.
While this life may be brief – it’s not the be all and end all. There is something far more glorious to come.
“Jesus said … ‘I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die; and whoever lives by believing in me will never die.’”
Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, "Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
AWFUL SHAKING in CHRISTCHURCH – Andrew Strom
Andrew Strom wrote the following article about yesterday's earthquake in Christchurch New Zealand.
In the continuing news coverage I have seen a few severely damaged church buildings. I think what Andrew says might shed some light on a reason for this.
AWFUL SHAKING in CHRISTCHURCH – Andrew Strom
It was with terrible sadness that I learned yesterday of another huge earthquake hitting the New Zealand city of Christchurch. It has only been 2 months since we left that city and we have many dear friends there. The first earthquake last year had no fatalities but this one looks to have many dead and injured.
I want to share a few things about our time in Christchurch that left me quite disturbed and concerned when we left. But I want to be sensitive because of the terrible sadness associated with this new quake.
As some of you know, one of the main things that I hoped to do in Christchurch after the first quake was to organize a large open worship event in the city – to praise and glorify God that nobody had been killed even in a huge 7.1 earthquake. I found that no such event was being planned, but there were thousands of evangelical Christians in Christchurch, and I felt very strongly that it was important for us to publicly glorify God for the miracle of surviving such a disaster with no-one killed. The place was traumatized and it was obvious that a sensitive Worship event would do much good – and even many non-Christians would likely attend. But sadly it was not to be. And this is the disturbing part.
I have organized large events before, so the Christian Radio network knows me – and quickly agreed to promote the event for free. The PA sound people also agreed to supply excellent sound for a very low cost. And the Christchurch City Council couldn’t have been more helpful. Everything was looking good. But then we ran up
against the Christian leaders.
One of the main “networking” Pentecostal leaders in the city told me that we could count him OUT of any support for the event. Then I spoke personally with the Dean of Christchurch Cathedral who told me that we could NOT use the main Square in Christchurch for a worship event for the whole Body. (Today this man’s Cathedral
lies in ruins. It had survived the first quake, but it did not survive
this new one).
I called a number of prominent pastors and worship bands around Christchurch. I said we had the support of Radio, the Council, the sound and everything. No response. Worship bands not interested. Pastors not returning calls. (You might think they were busy after the quake – but remember no-one died and Christchurch was up and running pretty fully after only a couple of weeks). I simply couldn’t understand it. The evangelicals of Christchurch had made no public acknowledgement of God at all – no public worship for this miraculous escape – no public glorifying of Jesus. Even the secular News and the politicians were calling it a “miracle”. People were traumatized everywhere. Wasn’t it a “no-brainer” that we should be doing such a thing? Doesn’t God deserve public praise after protecting so many people from harm?
In fact, it was such a no-brainer that the secular people themselves decided to do something. A number of the top bands and musicians from New Zealand came down and gave a free concert in the park for the traumatized city. It was heavily advertised on Radio – and 20,000 people showed up. Of course it was a secular event – not
Christian. The Pentecostals, Charismatics and Evangelicals of Christchurch had made virtually no public sound at all.
I felt strongly that I could not push things any further without some basic support from the church. We managed to hold a couple of outdoor concerts for the homeless, and got involved with distributing “care packages” and things, but I was so disappointed. In fact I was more than disappointed – I was alarmed and deeply disturbed. I even told some friends that it was “dangerous” to offer no public praise
after God has just so obviously saved your city. I felt so strongly about it – and deeply saddened for the state of the Body of Christ.
But I could do nothing more.
On December 17, 2010, my family departed from Christchurch. OnDecember 28th we boarded a plane for Australia. I believe it may be some time before we ever return.
My heart truly goes out to the people of Christchurch – and to all the world so poorly served by the church of our day. This was truly one of the worst “lost opportunities” that I have ever witnessed in all my years with the church. And Christchurch was truly one of the most beautiful cites I have ever seen. The people are so dear to us. Our thoughts and prayers are with you, my friends. May God bless and protect you all in these dark times.
Yours with great sadness,
Andrew Strom.
http://www.johnthebaptisttv.com/2011/02/23/awful-shaking-in-christchurch-andrew-strom/#more-894
Illustrating photos from gallery here:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/news-gallery/a/-/article/8882846/image/1/devastating-earthquake-strikes-christchurch/
See also:
http://onefiles.blogspot.com/2011/09/sept-28-christchurch-prophecy.html
http://onefiles.blogspot.com/2011/09/christchurch-prophecy-aftermath.html
In the continuing news coverage I have seen a few severely damaged church buildings. I think what Andrew says might shed some light on a reason for this.
AWFUL SHAKING in CHRISTCHURCH – Andrew StromIt was with terrible sadness that I learned yesterday of another huge earthquake hitting the New Zealand city of Christchurch. It has only been 2 months since we left that city and we have many dear friends there. The first earthquake last year had no fatalities but this one looks to have many dead and injured.
I want to share a few things about our time in Christchurch that left me quite disturbed and concerned when we left. But I want to be sensitive because of the terrible sadness associated with this new quake.
As some of you know, one of the main things that I hoped to do in Christchurch after the first quake was to organize a large open worship event in the city – to praise and glorify God that nobody had been killed even in a huge 7.1 earthquake. I found that no such event was being planned, but there were thousands of evangelical Christians in Christchurch, and I felt very strongly that it was important for us to publicly glorify God for the miracle of surviving such a disaster with no-one killed. The place was traumatized and it was obvious that a sensitive Worship event would do much good – and even many non-Christians would likely attend. But sadly it was not to be. And this is the disturbing part.
I have organized large events before, so the Christian Radio network knows me – and quickly agreed to promote the event for free. The PA sound people also agreed to supply excellent sound for a very low cost. And the Christchurch City Council couldn’t have been more helpful. Everything was looking good. But then we ran up
against the Christian leaders.
One of the main “networking” Pentecostal leaders in the city told me that we could count him OUT of any support for the event. Then I spoke personally with the Dean of Christchurch Cathedral who told me that we could NOT use the main Square in Christchurch for a worship event for the whole Body. (Today this man’s Cathedral
lies in ruins. It had survived the first quake, but it did not survive
this new one).
I called a number of prominent pastors and worship bands around Christchurch. I said we had the support of Radio, the Council, the sound and everything. No response. Worship bands not interested. Pastors not returning calls. (You might think they were busy after the quake – but remember no-one died and Christchurch was up and running pretty fully after only a couple of weeks). I simply couldn’t understand it. The evangelicals of Christchurch had made no public acknowledgement of God at all – no public worship for this miraculous escape – no public glorifying of Jesus. Even the secular News and the politicians were calling it a “miracle”. People were traumatized everywhere. Wasn’t it a “no-brainer” that we should be doing such a thing? Doesn’t God deserve public praise after protecting so many people from harm?In fact, it was such a no-brainer that the secular people themselves decided to do something. A number of the top bands and musicians from New Zealand came down and gave a free concert in the park for the traumatized city. It was heavily advertised on Radio – and 20,000 people showed up. Of course it was a secular event – not
Christian. The Pentecostals, Charismatics and Evangelicals of Christchurch had made virtually no public sound at all.
I felt strongly that I could not push things any further without some basic support from the church. We managed to hold a couple of outdoor concerts for the homeless, and got involved with distributing “care packages” and things, but I was so disappointed. In fact I was more than disappointed – I was alarmed and deeply disturbed. I even told some friends that it was “dangerous” to offer no public praiseafter God has just so obviously saved your city. I felt so strongly about it – and deeply saddened for the state of the Body of Christ.
But I could do nothing more.
On December 17, 2010, my family departed from Christchurch. OnDecember 28th we boarded a plane for Australia. I believe it may be some time before we ever return.
My heart truly goes out to the people of Christchurch – and to all the world so poorly served by the church of our day. This was truly one of the worst “lost opportunities” that I have ever witnessed in all my years with the church. And Christchurch was truly one of the most beautiful cites I have ever seen. The people are so dear to us. Our thoughts and prayers are with you, my friends. May God bless and protect you all in these dark times.
Yours with great sadness,
Andrew Strom.
http://www.johnthebaptisttv.com/2011/02/23/awful-shaking-in-christchurch-andrew-strom/#more-894
Illustrating photos from gallery here:
http://au.news.yahoo.com/news-gallery/a/-/article/8882846/image/1/devastating-earthquake-strikes-christchurch/
See also:
http://onefiles.blogspot.com/2011/09/sept-28-christchurch-prophecy.html
http://onefiles.blogspot.com/2011/09/christchurch-prophecy-aftermath.html
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Jesus gives empty warnings!
Jesus wastes His breath through making empty statements:
Of course my introductory statement is a total lie. Jesus’ warnings are not empty. They are serious and need to be heeded, yet so many who profess belief in Jesus do NOT believe they need to heed His warnings. They consider themselves immune from deception. They believe they will be kept from deception.
Perhaps their main assurance is the single phrase “if that were possible” that Jesus adds when He mentions“the elect” . However I think that assurance is based on presumption: people PRESUMING they are part of this deception-proof elect – and yet they assume they don’t have to heed Jesus’ words of warning.
Can anyone really be part of “the elect” if they don’t consider that ALL of Jesus’ words need to be personally heeded?
Within the context of these warnings we are told that “he who stands firm to the end will be saved". Jesus did not say those who are saved will stand firm to the end.
I see the matter of the elect and deception in this way. It will not be possible for “the elect” to be deceived because “the elect” are those who DO take Jesus seriously enough to avoid falling for the various false ministers He warned about.
We should not see the single phrase “if that were possible” as assurance of safety, but we should take the rest of Jesus prophecy as an indication of the strength and danger of the deceptive forces – that extreme diligence is required to ensure we stand firm to the end and are counted among “the elect”.
Matt 24: 4 Jesus answered: "Watch out that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Christ,' and will deceive many. 6 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of birth pains.
9 "Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. 10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. 14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.
15 "So when you see standing in the holy place 'the abomination that causes desolation,' spoken of through the prophet Daniel—let the reader understand— 16 then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. 17 Let no one on the roof of his house go down to take anything out of the house. 18 Let no one in the field go back to get his cloak. 19 How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! 20 Pray that your flight will not take place in winter or on the Sabbath. 21 For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now—and never to be equaled again. 22 If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened. 23 At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'There he is!' do not believe it. 24 For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect—if that were possible. 25 See, I have told you ahead of time.
Of course my introductory statement is a total lie. Jesus’ warnings are not empty. They are serious and need to be heeded, yet so many who profess belief in Jesus do NOT believe they need to heed His warnings. They consider themselves immune from deception. They believe they will be kept from deception.
Perhaps their main assurance is the single phrase “if that were possible” that Jesus adds when He mentions“the elect” . However I think that assurance is based on presumption: people PRESUMING they are part of this deception-proof elect – and yet they assume they don’t have to heed Jesus’ words of warning.
Can anyone really be part of “the elect” if they don’t consider that ALL of Jesus’ words need to be personally heeded?
Within the context of these warnings we are told that “he who stands firm to the end will be saved". Jesus did not say those who are saved will stand firm to the end.
I see the matter of the elect and deception in this way. It will not be possible for “the elect” to be deceived because “the elect” are those who DO take Jesus seriously enough to avoid falling for the various false ministers He warned about.
We should not see the single phrase “if that were possible” as assurance of safety, but we should take the rest of Jesus prophecy as an indication of the strength and danger of the deceptive forces – that extreme diligence is required to ensure we stand firm to the end and are counted among “the elect”.
Friday, February 11, 2011
Lady Jane Grey
On February 12th 1554, Lady Jane Grey was executed at the age of sixteen. Part of her story is told in Foxe’s Book of Martyrs and she is deemed by some as being the first protestant martyr of Queen Mary’s reign.
Jane was designated by Edward VI to be his successor to the throne of England, overruling the succession decreed by his father Henry VIII. According to Henry’s instructions, the successor to a childless Edward would be Edward’s half sister Mary.
However, during Edward’s short reign the religious climate changed drastically.
While Henry is usually credited with taking England away from Catholicism and into Protestantism, the real changes began under Edward.
Henry attempted to break away from the Pope’s political influence while retaining most of the Roman Catholic Church’s beliefs, but Edward moved to establishing religion more in line with the teachings of the reformers. As illness made Edward’s premature death a foregone conclusion he was advised to pass the throne to his cousin Jane to avert the certainty of a return to Rome should his sister Mary be crowned Queen.
Under Henry’s decreed order of succession, Jane would have been next in line after Mary and Elizabeth, but since Henry had previously had these two daughters declared illegitimate their position in the line of succession was legally questionable. Therefore to a degree, Jane had a legitimate right to the throne.
Upon Edward’s death, moves were quickly made to establish Jane as Queen and to take both Mary and Elizabeth prisoner to remove any threat of them raising opposition. However the plan went terribly wrong when Mary avoided capture and was able to draw strong support.
Jane’s reign lasted less than two weeks. She was imprisoned by Mary who was accepted by the people as the rightful Queen. Initially, despite constant pressure from advisers, Mary resisted suggestions to execute Jane, recognising that Jane had been reluctant to take the crown.
But political complications interfered. Firstly Jane’s father helped lead a revolt against Mary, making Jane seem to be a threat as a potential figurehead for future hostilities against Mary. Also, Mary was keen to marry Phillip of Spain and the possibility of this marriage was made doubtful while Jane lived. The Spanish requiring the threat of protestant Jane to be dealt with before the marriage could go ahead.
Mary tried to give Jane a lifeline by sending a trusted Catholic priest to persuade her to turn away from her protestant beliefs. Her execution may have been averted had she converted to Mary’s religion. However Jane stood firm and her execution became unavoidable.
Can Jane be rightly as a martyr of Mary’s reign, one of the first of many?
I think both yes and no, and in explanation I’ll deal with the “no” first.
Her execution was not primarily a religious act it was political. Had it not been for her father’s involvement in the revolt against Mary, Jane may well have been spared from the executioner and may have eventually been given her freedom. Her religious convictions were not the condemning factor.
However, she would not have been in her position had she not had strong protestant beliefs. She allowed herself to be made Queen, with strong misgivings, because she had been made to see that the security of Protestantism in England was on her shoulders. Then later, when given the opportunity to deny her faith and to convert to Catholicism to possibly save her life, she saw death as the preferable option.
As a young teenager, Jane demonstrated strong faith in her God. Her convictions were strong and well considered. And when it really counted she knew what was most important.
____________
Our understanding of history is always shaped by our sources of information. I’ve read several accounts of Jane’s life and from those sources I have drawn my own understanding of her life and the reasons for her death.
See for reviews of my sources. http://out-shadows.blogspot.com/2011/01/visiting-lady-jane-grey-and-tudor.html
Jane was designated by Edward VI to be his successor to the throne of England, overruling the succession decreed by his father Henry VIII. According to Henry’s instructions, the successor to a childless Edward would be Edward’s half sister Mary.
However, during Edward’s short reign the religious climate changed drastically.
While Henry is usually credited with taking England away from Catholicism and into Protestantism, the real changes began under Edward.
Henry attempted to break away from the Pope’s political influence while retaining most of the Roman Catholic Church’s beliefs, but Edward moved to establishing religion more in line with the teachings of the reformers. As illness made Edward’s premature death a foregone conclusion he was advised to pass the throne to his cousin Jane to avert the certainty of a return to Rome should his sister Mary be crowned Queen.
Under Henry’s decreed order of succession, Jane would have been next in line after Mary and Elizabeth, but since Henry had previously had these two daughters declared illegitimate their position in the line of succession was legally questionable. Therefore to a degree, Jane had a legitimate right to the throne.
Upon Edward’s death, moves were quickly made to establish Jane as Queen and to take both Mary and Elizabeth prisoner to remove any threat of them raising opposition. However the plan went terribly wrong when Mary avoided capture and was able to draw strong support.
Jane’s reign lasted less than two weeks. She was imprisoned by Mary who was accepted by the people as the rightful Queen. Initially, despite constant pressure from advisers, Mary resisted suggestions to execute Jane, recognising that Jane had been reluctant to take the crown.
But political complications interfered. Firstly Jane’s father helped lead a revolt against Mary, making Jane seem to be a threat as a potential figurehead for future hostilities against Mary. Also, Mary was keen to marry Phillip of Spain and the possibility of this marriage was made doubtful while Jane lived. The Spanish requiring the threat of protestant Jane to be dealt with before the marriage could go ahead.
Mary tried to give Jane a lifeline by sending a trusted Catholic priest to persuade her to turn away from her protestant beliefs. Her execution may have been averted had she converted to Mary’s religion. However Jane stood firm and her execution became unavoidable.
Can Jane be rightly as a martyr of Mary’s reign, one of the first of many?
I think both yes and no, and in explanation I’ll deal with the “no” first.
Her execution was not primarily a religious act it was political. Had it not been for her father’s involvement in the revolt against Mary, Jane may well have been spared from the executioner and may have eventually been given her freedom. Her religious convictions were not the condemning factor.
However, she would not have been in her position had she not had strong protestant beliefs. She allowed herself to be made Queen, with strong misgivings, because she had been made to see that the security of Protestantism in England was on her shoulders. Then later, when given the opportunity to deny her faith and to convert to Catholicism to possibly save her life, she saw death as the preferable option.
As a young teenager, Jane demonstrated strong faith in her God. Her convictions were strong and well considered. And when it really counted she knew what was most important.
____________
Our understanding of history is always shaped by our sources of information. I’ve read several accounts of Jane’s life and from those sources I have drawn my own understanding of her life and the reasons for her death.
See for reviews of my sources. http://out-shadows.blogspot.com/2011/01/visiting-lady-jane-grey-and-tudor.html
Wednesday, February 02, 2011
Not Another Rant About Context???
Here I am AGAIN repeating what I have said before – but the problem will not go away.
The most frustrating Christian practices I continually see is the use of bible quotes out of context to support a favoured doctrine. Most times this is done the context CLEARLY gives no validity for using the quote in that particular way.
We’ve all done it.
And we are all prone to doing it – often with memory verses that come to mind when we want to support what we are saying.
Maybe its time for honest, for integrity. At least it is if we genuinely want to know and promote the truth.
Before applying a “text” for a chosen purpose make sure that it is REALLY supporting the point without the need to stretch or force meaning into the “text” that was never intended.
_____________
illustration credit "Open Bible by Petr Kratochvil
The most frustrating Christian practices I continually see is the use of bible quotes out of context to support a favoured doctrine. Most times this is done the context CLEARLY gives no validity for using the quote in that particular way.We’ve all done it.
And we are all prone to doing it – often with memory verses that come to mind when we want to support what we are saying.
Maybe its time for honest, for integrity. At least it is if we genuinely want to know and promote the truth.
Before applying a “text” for a chosen purpose make sure that it is REALLY supporting the point without the need to stretch or force meaning into the “text” that was never intended.
_____________
illustration credit "Open Bible by Petr Kratochvil
Tuesday, February 01, 2011
Conspiracy and Ideological Sleight of Hand.
Last night I listened to an audio recording that claimed information had been gained from some high level government sources warning of the downfall of the American dollar. (I think March this year was mentioned as the time of trouble).
The dollar's downfall is supposed to be a major step towards a one world currency. While I was thinking about this I realised that a one world currency is NOT on the way. If we are waiting for one to come we are probably waiting in vain, we are too late.
We ALREADY have a one world currency - but we don't realise it because our different nations still use different notes and coins on a daily basis. But the thing behind those notes and coins is the REAL currency, the electronic data that makes up the world's financial system.
I have suspicions about the "high level sources" that have leaked this information about the dollar's downfall. In the last week I have also heard reports of other "reliable government sources" leaking information about other things - such as ufos, alien technology and treaties with alien beings... I have also heard (again with reference to a government source) that the extreme weather around the world is caused by a "weather weapon".
Rather than these sources leaking reliable, truthful data to prepare the world for great changes ahead, there is perhaps something else going on - our gullibility is being put to the test and our attention is being distracted. The question is - what are the distractions designed to stop us from seeing?
___________________________
illustration from here: dollars
Monday, January 24, 2011
Desire to Believe
The Desire to Believe and the Way it Shapes Perception.
(Christians Don't Lie part 3)
In my article about Ghosts, I started with some personal experiences. Here I continue my thoughts on the topic, but will widen the perspective to include some related issues.
I had an interest in strange phenomena from my childhood. I think it started with UFOs. I grew up during the “space race” and like many young boys at the time I became fascinated with the space programme. Around the same time UFOs were getting a lot of publicity with many parts of England experiencing a “UFO flap”.
Somewhere along the way my interest broadened to include other unexplained things. It was an interest I kept well into adulthood and I read a great deal over the years about UFOs, the Bermuda Triangle, ghosts, and anything else that defied rational explanation. I strongly believed there was something beyond our everyday world and I was so willing to believe that I never considered that any of the things I read might be less than truthful. Why would anyone make these things up? I was beyond trusting, I was totally gullible. I believed some of the wildest claims.
Even after becoming a Christian in my teens I managed to keep one foot in each camp – without seeing any contradiction between the two. Somehow I kept things separated in my mind. My main concession was to attribute experiences of ghosts, aliens and other aspects of “the unexplained” to demonic activity. That conclusion was even supported by some UFO writers who didn’t have a Christian bias. Jacques Vallee, John Keel and Whitley Streiber all made comparisons between UFO activity and folkloric accounts of demons – suggesting that UFOs were a modern day way of interpreting what previous generations had seen as spiritual entities: fairies demons, angels etc.
Those non-religious writers confirmed my own conclusions. But they were conclusions based on the assumption that the reports of experiences were trustworthy. Here I would like to stress an important point. Note the change in emphasis at the beginning of this paragraph, from “experiences” to “reports of experiences”.
My own understanding began to change slowly. Perhaps this started with my personal UFO encounter.
One morning I was driving to work. The road followed the shores of a lake so there was a clear view across the water with an open unobstructed sky. I saw something above me, coming across from the lake. I glanced up and saw it was a very strange, clearly mechanical object. It had a narrow, elongated hourglass-like shape. After my brief sight of the object I turned my attention back to the road and then looked up again for a second look. This time everything became clear. The object turned and revealed itself to be a common light plane. My initial view of it had been from an unusual angle and my mind hadn’t correctly processed what I saw.
This experience reminded me of a UFO report I’d read a few years earlier. I think it came from a book called The Flying Saucerers by Arthur Shuttlewood. Shuttlewood was a prominent figure in the 1960s UFO “flap” that helped spark my childhood interest. In that book he wrote of an experience where a UFO approached him, changed into a plane when it was overhead, and then after passing turned back into a UFO. I think the similarity to my experience is easy to see – the big difference being the degree to which each observer (myself/Shuttlewood) was willing to continue believing an extraordinary conclusion even when faced with clear evidence for a very ordinary explanation.
I can only wonder what the results of my own experience may have been if I hadn’t taken that second look to see that the object was only a plane, if that first glimpse had remained as the only “fact” to build my conclusions upon.
Around the same time as my “UFO” experience, I was introduced to a new concept related to UFOs, one that I didn’t come to understand until many years later. I had written to a well known British UFO expert and had mentioned a series of iconic UFO sightings. In her reply she referred to those sightings as mostly “media hype”, it was a concept that I later realised could be extended to other reported experiences of anomalous phenomena. And I had to consider the extent of which our knowledge and understanding of those phenomena is totally dependant on the quality and veracity of the information we receive.
Another eye-opening encounter I had was with the writings of Jim Schnabel. His book Round in Circles rescued me from any remaining gullibility. The book was about crop circles, but instead of merely investigating the circles himself, he also spent time with the major players in crop circle research – the ones who provide US with the reports about all of the various formations found (mainly) around southern England. He clearly showed how public understanding of the crop circles was formed by the information being fed to them by investigators who were often far from objective in their reporting. Schnabel gave the example of a crude circle he had personally created being announced as “genuine” – even though his own muddy footprints were clearly evident across the circle
Not surprisingly Schnabel was accused of being an agent of CIA disinformation by those who refused to be swayed from their belief.
Basically, people believe what they want to believe. They are not swayed by evidence. They do not even consider evidence. They will merely collect and refer to stories that seemingly support what they believe, no matter how dubious those accounts may be. And Christians aren’t immune to this. We are often too quick to swallow the same kind of stories, but instead of seeing spirits of the dead, or alien spacecraft we interpret these things as demonic manifestations. Effectively we give “credit” to demons when in most cases credit is definitely not due.
Before we think of attributing a reported experience to demonic manifestation, we should be certain that the experience was a reality and not a misperception, a misunderstanding or even a lie. Through being too credulous in accepting everything as valid, we can effectively undermine the evidence and acceptance of those experiences that ARE genuine.
(Christians Don't Lie part 3)
In my article about Ghosts, I started with some personal experiences. Here I continue my thoughts on the topic, but will widen the perspective to include some related issues. I had an interest in strange phenomena from my childhood. I think it started with UFOs. I grew up during the “space race” and like many young boys at the time I became fascinated with the space programme. Around the same time UFOs were getting a lot of publicity with many parts of England experiencing a “UFO flap”.
Somewhere along the way my interest broadened to include other unexplained things. It was an interest I kept well into adulthood and I read a great deal over the years about UFOs, the Bermuda Triangle, ghosts, and anything else that defied rational explanation. I strongly believed there was something beyond our everyday world and I was so willing to believe that I never considered that any of the things I read might be less than truthful. Why would anyone make these things up? I was beyond trusting, I was totally gullible. I believed some of the wildest claims.
Even after becoming a Christian in my teens I managed to keep one foot in each camp – without seeing any contradiction between the two. Somehow I kept things separated in my mind. My main concession was to attribute experiences of ghosts, aliens and other aspects of “the unexplained” to demonic activity. That conclusion was even supported by some UFO writers who didn’t have a Christian bias. Jacques Vallee, John Keel and Whitley Streiber all made comparisons between UFO activity and folkloric accounts of demons – suggesting that UFOs were a modern day way of interpreting what previous generations had seen as spiritual entities: fairies demons, angels etc.
Those non-religious writers confirmed my own conclusions. But they were conclusions based on the assumption that the reports of experiences were trustworthy. Here I would like to stress an important point. Note the change in emphasis at the beginning of this paragraph, from “experiences” to “reports of experiences”.
My own understanding began to change slowly. Perhaps this started with my personal UFO encounter.
One morning I was driving to work. The road followed the shores of a lake so there was a clear view across the water with an open unobstructed sky. I saw something above me, coming across from the lake. I glanced up and saw it was a very strange, clearly mechanical object. It had a narrow, elongated hourglass-like shape. After my brief sight of the object I turned my attention back to the road and then looked up again for a second look. This time everything became clear. The object turned and revealed itself to be a common light plane. My initial view of it had been from an unusual angle and my mind hadn’t correctly processed what I saw.
This experience reminded me of a UFO report I’d read a few years earlier. I think it came from a book called The Flying Saucerers by Arthur Shuttlewood. Shuttlewood was a prominent figure in the 1960s UFO “flap” that helped spark my childhood interest. In that book he wrote of an experience where a UFO approached him, changed into a plane when it was overhead, and then after passing turned back into a UFO. I think the similarity to my experience is easy to see – the big difference being the degree to which each observer (myself/Shuttlewood) was willing to continue believing an extraordinary conclusion even when faced with clear evidence for a very ordinary explanation.
I can only wonder what the results of my own experience may have been if I hadn’t taken that second look to see that the object was only a plane, if that first glimpse had remained as the only “fact” to build my conclusions upon.
Around the same time as my “UFO” experience, I was introduced to a new concept related to UFOs, one that I didn’t come to understand until many years later. I had written to a well known British UFO expert and had mentioned a series of iconic UFO sightings. In her reply she referred to those sightings as mostly “media hype”, it was a concept that I later realised could be extended to other reported experiences of anomalous phenomena. And I had to consider the extent of which our knowledge and understanding of those phenomena is totally dependant on the quality and veracity of the information we receive.
Another eye-opening encounter I had was with the writings of Jim Schnabel. His book Round in Circles rescued me from any remaining gullibility. The book was about crop circles, but instead of merely investigating the circles himself, he also spent time with the major players in crop circle research – the ones who provide US with the reports about all of the various formations found (mainly) around southern England. He clearly showed how public understanding of the crop circles was formed by the information being fed to them by investigators who were often far from objective in their reporting. Schnabel gave the example of a crude circle he had personally created being announced as “genuine” – even though his own muddy footprints were clearly evident across the circleNot surprisingly Schnabel was accused of being an agent of CIA disinformation by those who refused to be swayed from their belief.
Basically, people believe what they want to believe. They are not swayed by evidence. They do not even consider evidence. They will merely collect and refer to stories that seemingly support what they believe, no matter how dubious those accounts may be. And Christians aren’t immune to this. We are often too quick to swallow the same kind of stories, but instead of seeing spirits of the dead, or alien spacecraft we interpret these things as demonic manifestations. Effectively we give “credit” to demons when in most cases credit is definitely not due.
Before we think of attributing a reported experience to demonic manifestation, we should be certain that the experience was a reality and not a misperception, a misunderstanding or even a lie. Through being too credulous in accepting everything as valid, we can effectively undermine the evidence and acceptance of those experiences that ARE genuine.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
A few things I've learned
I have learned these things from interaction on Christian forums:
1) Relativism rules! – Everyone seems to have his/her own truth and we are expected to tolerate everyone’s right to determine truth. (However, that tolerance is not extended to those who deny that truth is relative).
2) If you insist a biblical foundation is required for what we believe, and if you question someone’s right to their own truth, you are a Pharisee.
3) Some things are just too hard and cause too much strife so we are better off avoiding them.
4) Play the Word vs Spirit game, taking the side of the Spirit if you want to appear REALLY free in the spirit (unlike those dogmatic Pharisees).
5) Promote sound teaching and someone will take offense or will contradict it.
I have learned these things in my own relationship with the Lord – through allowing the Holy Spirit to teach me from His word.
1) Doctrine reliant on selective proof texts is highly questionable
2) Scripture is not a book of doctrine – it is a biography, a history, a love story all centred on God and His relationship with mankind, culminating in Him presenting His Son with a pure bride, after which they GENUINELY live happily ever after.
3) Before I can understand a single verse, a single chapter, a single book from the bible, I need at least a basic understanding of the whole bible and how each part fits together.
4) ALL doctrinal disputes would be resolved if EVERYONE looked at what scripture ACTUALLY says in context rather than trying to reinterpret parts of scripture to support a desired belief.
1) Relativism rules! – Everyone seems to have his/her own truth and we are expected to tolerate everyone’s right to determine truth. (However, that tolerance is not extended to those who deny that truth is relative).
2) If you insist a biblical foundation is required for what we believe, and if you question someone’s right to their own truth, you are a Pharisee.
3) Some things are just too hard and cause too much strife so we are better off avoiding them.
4) Play the Word vs Spirit game, taking the side of the Spirit if you want to appear REALLY free in the spirit (unlike those dogmatic Pharisees).
5) Promote sound teaching and someone will take offense or will contradict it.
I have learned these things in my own relationship with the Lord – through allowing the Holy Spirit to teach me from His word.
1) Doctrine reliant on selective proof texts is highly questionable
2) Scripture is not a book of doctrine – it is a biography, a history, a love story all centred on God and His relationship with mankind, culminating in Him presenting His Son with a pure bride, after which they GENUINELY live happily ever after.
3) Before I can understand a single verse, a single chapter, a single book from the bible, I need at least a basic understanding of the whole bible and how each part fits together.
4) ALL doctrinal disputes would be resolved if EVERYONE looked at what scripture ACTUALLY says in context rather than trying to reinterpret parts of scripture to support a desired belief.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Ghosts
How do ghosts fit into a biblical view of reality?On one of my other blogs I questioned the possibility of an authentic Christian ghost story. The article was partly of a review of a book I’d recently read (see here: review ).
Within that article I mentioned I’d had some “ghostly” encounters of my own without giving a lot of detail.
The first happened in my Sydney home. One morning I’d been getting ready for work when I saw a shadowy figure on the other side of the room where the dining room merged into a hallway leading to the front door. It was only a momentary glimpse and apart from feeling slightly startled I thought little more of it, until later that day.
In the afternoon, my wife and I were sitting at the dining table when she saw someone/something standing behind me – in exactly the same place as the figure in my experience. Again it was only a momentary glimpse.
She told me what she had seen and it was only then that I told her what I had seen earlier that day.
Despite the strangeness of the experience, there was no fear associated with it, neither then or any other time while we lived there. We were merely curious.
On another occasion we were on holiday and staying at a motel in Tamworth, NSW. We were there for two nights. At 1.00am on the first night I woke up and saw that the bed was surrounded by several human shaped shadowy figures. Even though the room was dark, the standby light on the TV cast enough light to give definition to the figures around me. I lay there watching them for some time until eventually I fell asleep again. In the morning I more or less dismissed the experience as a trick of my half-asleep brain.
Then the next night a sudden sound, a sharp rap woke me. I looked at the clock and saw it was again 1.00am (exactly the same time I’d woken the previous night) and this time I saw a single figure near the bed; it seemed to have a bottle in its hand which it raised up to drink from, tipping its head back in the process.
The next morning I told my wife of both experiences and she was annoyed that I hadn’t woken her to let her see what was happening. Again, like the time at home, I felt no fear from the experiences.
The question that arises from this is what was really going on? What did we see? Were they disembodied spirits caught between the physical world and the afterlife? Were they demons masquerading as something else? Or were they merely tricks of the mind, misperceptions or the result of over active imaginations.
How often do we think we’ve seen something but soon dismiss it as a misunderstanding? We see the hunched figure in the corner of a darkened room – only to turn on the light and find it is a coat, a wayward curtain, or a piece of furniture. Also interrupted sleep can bring us into a semi-woken state in which we think we are more alert than we actually are and we find our real surroundings becoming part of dream-like experiences.
But despite these mundane solutions, some reported experiences can’t be so easily explained away. Are they all hoaxes or did something out of the ordinary really happen?
No matter what the experiences may infer, no matter what theories seem to fit the situation. The only conclusions a Christian can draw are those compatible with God’s revelation in scripture. (to be continued later...)
Monday, January 10, 2011
“When in Rome” and Irresistable Grace, by Kevin Jackson
I recently saw the film When in Rome but I failed to see the parallel with Calvinist doctrine that Kevin Jackson brings out in the inspired article here:
http://wesleyanarminian.wordpress.com/2011/01/08/when-in-rome-and-irresistable-grace/
Thanks Kevin for sharing that inspired insight.
.
http://wesleyanarminian.wordpress.com/2011/01/08/when-in-rome-and-irresistable-grace/
Thanks Kevin for sharing that inspired insight.
.
Wednesday, January 05, 2011
CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT!!!
The importance of scriptural context can’t be stressed enough. So often we jump to conclusions and make interpretations of a particular verse without taking into account what the surrounding context is saying. This can lead us to a totally different understanding to the one intended by the writer.
Today I came across a very clear example of this in the comments section of another blog.
The writer was trying to prove that baptism was only a symbolic act and he quoted 1 Peter 3:21 “this water symbolises baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God.”
“Woa!” the writer says – “Peter emphasises the symbolic nature of water baptism…”.
Woa! I say – what about context? What is being presented as the symbol? Is it baptism or is it something else?
Let’s look at the context – let’s look at the preceding verse.
20…God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 21 and this water symbolises baptism that now saves you also…
Here we can see a totally different meaning to the one the comment writer proposed. It is not the waters of baptism that are being presented as the symbol; it is the water of the flood that is being presented as symbolising the waters of baptism.
A TOTALLY different meaning arises out of a CONTEXTUAL reading of the text.
I have seen this happening over and over again.
I have found myself doing the same thing, but now I have learned to be cautious whenever a verse comes to mind.
I stop and check it again.
Are my thoughts consistent with the overall context?
Don’t be lazy about it.
Don’t take the risk of deceiving yourself and others.
Today I came across a very clear example of this in the comments section of another blog.
The writer was trying to prove that baptism was only a symbolic act and he quoted 1 Peter 3:21 “this water symbolises baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God.”
“Woa!” the writer says – “Peter emphasises the symbolic nature of water baptism…”.
Woa! I say – what about context? What is being presented as the symbol? Is it baptism or is it something else?
Let’s look at the context – let’s look at the preceding verse.
20…God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 21 and this water symbolises baptism that now saves you also…
Here we can see a totally different meaning to the one the comment writer proposed. It is not the waters of baptism that are being presented as the symbol; it is the water of the flood that is being presented as symbolising the waters of baptism.
A TOTALLY different meaning arises out of a CONTEXTUAL reading of the text.
I have seen this happening over and over again.
I have found myself doing the same thing, but now I have learned to be cautious whenever a verse comes to mind.
I stop and check it again.
Are my thoughts consistent with the overall context?
Don’t be lazy about it.
Don’t take the risk of deceiving yourself and others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)