by Adam Bishop afterword by John McGlone Dec 25, 2017
A nice chart which debunks the myth of claims by Zeitgeist and other New age disinformation propaganda material.
Note: I do believe that Jesus was born on December 25th.
Biblically speaking, it’s really based off of the conception of John the Baptist and the annunciation of the Holy Spirit to Mary.
The Archangel Gabriel appearing to Zachariah in the High Temple when he was serving as high priest on the Day of Atonement (Luke 1:8). This placed the conception of St. John the Baptist during the feast of Tabernacles in late September, as the Archangel Gabriel said (Luke 1:28) and his birth nine months later at the time of the summer solstice.
Since the Gospel of Luke states that the Archangel Gabriel appeared to the Virgin Mary in the sixth month after John’s conception (Luke 1:26), this placed the conception of Christ at about the time of the spring equinox, that is, at the time of the Jewish Passover, in late March. His birth would thus be in late December at the time of the winter solstice.
Historically speaking, we see numerous examples.
Saint Telesphorus, Bishop of Rome, who reigned from 126-137 AD, instituted the Lord’s Supper on Christmas Eve. Liber Pontificalis, shows that he was already keeping Christmas, and then added the Supper right before the day occurred.
Theophilus (115-181 AD) was a Bishop in Caesarea who lived under the reign of the Roman Emperor Commodus. Within 100 years of the Apostles, he wrote:
“We ought to celebrate the birth-day of our Lord on what day soever the 25th of December shall happen.” Magdeburgenses, Cent. 2. c. 6. Hospinian, de orign Festorum Chirstianorum
Hippolytus of Rome (170-240 AD), in his commentary on Daniel, wrote this in regards to the date of our Lord’s Birth:
“The first coming of our Lord, that in the flesh, in which he was born at Bethlehem, took place eight days before the calends of January, a Wednesday, in the forty-second year of the reign of Augustus, 5500 years from Adam.” (Commentary on Daniel 4:23)
The eighth before the calends of January is the twenty-fifth day of December, and the forty-second year of Augustus counting from the death of Julius Caesar was 2 BC.
Clement of Alexandria (160-215 AD), also wrote concerning our Lord’s Birth:
“And there are those who have determined not only the year of our Lord’s birth, but also the day; and they say that it took place in the twenty-eighth year of Augustus, and in the twenty-fifth day of Pachon.” (Stromata, I, xxi)
Counting from the death of Antony in 30 B.C., the 28th year of Augustus would have been 2 B.C. The first month of the Egyptian calendar was Thoth, answering to late August (Thoth 1 = August 29). The ninth month was Pachon. The 25th of Pachon answers to the 20th of May. However, this is usually explained by the fact that the months originally took their names from where they occurred in the year. Hence, October, November and December were the eighth, ninth, and tenth months counting from March in the original Roman calendar, which had only ten months. But the Greek Fathers frequently took April, instead of March, for the first month of the year, as we see expressly in St. Chrysostom, in Anastasius Patriarch of Antioch, the Apostolic Constitutions, in Macarius, Stephanus, Gobarus, and other of the ancients. This would make December the ninth counting from April.
Irenaeus of Lyons (120-202 AD), in his works “Against Heresies” believe that March 25th was the date of the annunciation of the Holy Spirit to Mary in Luke 1. Since He based this off of John the Baptist’s birth. Since John the Baptist, was born on the day of atonement, he then set the date of it to September 25th as the day of the feast. Add 9 months later (as you would typically see in a mother giving birth to her child) and you have December 25th
See: Irenaeus: Against Hereseis, 3.10.1-2
Tertullian (160-220 AD), links and equates the equinox with the birth of Christ:
“And the suffering of this “extermination” was perfected within the times of the lxx hebdomads, under Tiberius Caesar, in the consulate of Rubellius Geminus and Fufius Geminus, in the month of March, at the times of the passover, on the eighth day before the calends of April [March 25th], on the first day of unleavened bread, on which they slew the lamb at even, just as had been enjoined by Moses”.(An Answer to the Jews, 8.18)
In 221 AD, you have the Christian Historian Julius Africanus who in his work “chronographai” which lists all of history dating back from 5500 B.C. to the time he wrote this work, lists the conception of Jesus Christ on March 25th.
In the Apostolic Constitutions, which were completed around 380 A.D., lists and dates back all the way to the beginning of the Church, says this about the date of Christ’s Birth:
In the Fifth book, Sec. III, we find:
“Brethren, observe the festival days; and first of all the birthday which you are to celebrate on the twenty-fifth of the ninth month.”
The ninth month counting from Nisan (April) is Casleu in the Jewish calendar. Transferred to our Roman calendar, the ninth month answers to December.
The Byzantine Christian, Nicephorus, wrote an ecclesiastical history in which he lists the Roman Emperor, Diocletian destroying a church on December 25th which celebrated the nativity of Jesus:
“At Nicomedia (a city of Bithynia) when the festival of Christ’s birth-day came, and a multitude of Christians in all ages had assembled together in the temple to celebrate that birth-day. Diocletian the tyrant, having gotten an advantageous occasion whereby he might accomplish his madness and fury, sent men thither to enclose the temple, and to set it on fire round about, and so consumed them all to ashes, even twenty thousand persons.”
John Selden in his work, “Theanthropos” (1661, pp. 33, 34), confirms Nicephorus’ report, saying that ancient Greek and Roman martyrologies date this event to Dec. 25th. And that this event occurred in either 303 or 304 AD.
afterword by John McGlone
I will be updating this section as I have time to finish studying Adam’s fine assemblage of information concerning this divisive issue that rears it’s ugly head every year. God bless you, and Happy Birthday Jesus!
Legalism and Antinomianism are both deadly, fiery, spiritual arrows in the quiver of the devils, unbelievers, and even the elect! The first puts traditions of men, which God never required to be instituted for salvation. The second states there are no more moral obligations to obey God in any area of our walk because of His grace. They are opposing ends of theological errors which lead many to condemn brothers or to ruin their pure walks with the Lord through living in sin. These questions that the world, the devils, doubters, and even sincere believers and unbelievers alike put forth for consideration continually assail the body of Christ to bring about divisions, compromise, and legalism among the fellowship of the saints. Personally, I have seen such problems enter among the saints in our local fellowship, on the streets preaching, believers on social media, and even in my own earthly and spiritual family.
Legalism is defined several ways. But, generally is an unbiblical concept that is required to be kept or shunned in order to be accepted into fellowship and considered to be a believer. The Judaizers of the New Testament were attempting to get the NT Holy Ghost filled Gentile believers to follow the Mosaic law to be saved, ie circumcision, Sabbath, and festivals.
Some examples for legalism that leads to believers condemning others believers are:
1. Only certain colors, lengths, patterns for modest fashions for women and men. If you wear something different you can’t be part of the church, thus you are condemned.
2. fellowship meetings only on Saturday, though they don’t observe the Shabbat properly according to Jewish oral and written tradition. This hypocrisy is painfully obvious yet you can’t share without offending their traditions, so they condemn and shun you.
3. No modern equipment, tires, motors, or technology. Hmmm, how do I even address this nonsensical thinking? The technology with which people traveled has dramatically changed from horseback to planes, trains, and automobiles. The Bible speaks of the idea of in the later days people will be given unto going to and fro and flying in silver eagles.
4. Only certain foods and drinks, ie vegetables, nothing with ears, ears, or nose, coke products, etc. Every time you sit to a meal it can not be enjoyed simply because every latest scientific finding must be discussed at length and your food examined and critiqued while you are trying to consume it.
Antinomianism is defined as a ‘putting away’ of the law of God. They believe any form of nomas or law does not have to be kept by the NT believer. If people try, then they are labeled as working for their salvation.
Some examples of the practices of antinomianism are: smoking, vaping, drinking, sexting, tatoos, makeup, immodest fashions, fornicating, pornography, etc.
The antinomian ‘believer’ will simply excuse any and all sin that may be in their lives at the expense of God’s grace.
Col 2:16-23 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: 17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. 18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19 And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God. 20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, 21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not; 22 Which all are to perish with the using;) after the commandments and doctrines of men? 23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.
Col 3:1-15If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. 2 Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. 3 For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God.4 When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory. 5 Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry: 6 For which things’ sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience: 7 In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them. 8 But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth. 9 Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; 10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: 11 Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all. 12 Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering; 13 Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye. 14 And above all these things put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness.
Many will use Col 2 passage as reasonings to bring in various lowly standards of questionable behaviors and ideologies. Also, for legalists to bring in traditions of men that God never intended to be standards for believers to live by.
I don’t think vs 5 is an all encompassing list, as we see other lists that show other sins which are not listed here. But, in comparing all the lists are vaping, tatoos, etc shown in them? I simply want to ensure as we go forward to that we are not casting aside people for traditions we are making up which are based on our preferences which hate certain tastings, touchings, and handlings of earthy objects or ideas.
I also see in vs’ 12-17 which clearly outlines how believers are to deal with such things. Very convicting to me to be more long suffering in all things with all people, but especially those of the household of faith.
God’s grace solves the problem! Titus 2:11-15 was a passage in the Bible I am sure I must have read somewhere over the seven years of my lukewarm walk with Jesus. But, it never registered in my heart and mind of the blind fool in sin.
The Law of Love solves the problem! Obey the Holy Spirit and walk as He guides and you will find yourself on the narrow and difficult way Jesus taught about. Resist the temptation to rebuke other believers in the Gospel of Christ who have varying traditions about holidays, festivals, etc. We are to be an example to the flock not sheep butchers or beaters. God bless you as you seek to please Jesus supremely and love your neighbor as yourself.
Rom 14:12-17 So then each of us shall give account of himself to God. 13 Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way. 14 I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 15 Yet if your brother is grieved because of your food, you are no longer walking in love. Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died. 16 Therefore do not let your good be spoken of as evil; 17 for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.
Ptolemaic Mathematical Model of Biblical Cosmology
Historians, Astronomers, Mathematicians, Philosophers, and the New Age Scientism…
Is it really a proven scientific fact that the earth rotates on its axis at 1,000 mph. as it races through space at a speed of 66,000 mph. in orbit around the sun? Or is the earth, according to Scripture and verified scientific evidence actually at the center of the universe, stationary, and orbited by the sun, planets and star field? The glorious Biblical and scientifically validated truth set forth herein is sure to challenge the mythical heliocentric status quo and possibly your worldview as well. The tragic repercussion of rejecting the totality of the Scriptures as the perfect and authoritative standard of all reality, knowledge, ethics and beauty is that man will of necessity be relegated to grope in darkness as he vainly seeks to acquire certain knowledge independent of the Creator. Moreover, the Bible declares that all those who reject the self-attesting authority of God’s word will be given over to some degree of deception. This absolute spiritual truth is manifest in our day by the fact that “folly is set in great dignity” (Eccl 10:6). Case in point: What could be more laughable than evolution? What could be more barbaric than abortion? What could be more perverted than sodomy? What could be more demonic than Islam? What could be more arbitrary than psychology? Yet these antichrist ideologies are celebrated and promoted in our land and thought to be “normal” and even scientific.
To understand this cultural and epistemological dynamic, one must first understand the primary issue of history. Ultimately there has been only one battle which has raged since the beginning of time, and that is regarding what would be man’s ultimate standard and thus final authority in all things; The word of God or his own autonomous mind.
Thus in every discussion about any topic, the apparent issue of contention is usually not the ultimate issue; unless one is discussing the ultimate issue of course. Please allow me to explain. Whenever we engage anyone in dialogue regarding anything, the real battle of our discussion is not the “issue” but rather what will be the self-attesting final authority by which we will evaluate the facts and arrive at the truth.
For example, consider the abortion debate. The issue is not really pro-choice versus pro-life, but rather who defines and thus governs life; God’s word or man. The real issue in the marriage debate is likewise not heterosexual marriage versus homosexual marriage, but rather is God’s word the perfect and final authority, or does man have the right to autonomously define marriage. The controversy regarding origins and Genesis chapter one is not ultimately a battle between Creationism and Evolutionism or Religion and Science, but rather one regarding the veracity and authority of God’s Word as the only source of truth concerning ultimate issues.
The defining issue of life has always been and still is one regarding Lordship, and there are ultimately only two choices; God or man? Furthermore, one’s God/god is revealed, not by what one professes with his lips, but by his ultimate source of law; God’s word or his autonomous mind. Thus in the final analysis there are only two religions upon earth; Christianity and Humanism. Therefore in every facet of life there is one question to ask, “By what standard” do I form all of my beliefs and live my life. And the answer to that question determines if we will win or lose in the great battle of life.
If my thesis is true then we would expect satan to concentrate his efforts in the realm of final authority, and this is indeed exactly what we see. In his initial engagement with man, he leveled his attack upon God’s word with the question, “Hath God said?” For Adam and Eve, the real issue was thus not the tree of life versus the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, but rather the question of what would they look to as their ultimate standard of reality, truth, ethics and beauty; the perfect word of God or their own fallible mind. Satan knew that if he could win this battle, then he would win the war.
However, while many will rightly declare that the Bible is the ultimate authority over all of life, the real issue is whether or not one actually believes the Bible and even more significantly whether or not one allows the Bible is the ultimate authority for the Bible itself. Satan understands this essential foundational aspect and has deceived multitudes who erroneously believe they can either arbitrarily decide which portions they will believe or arrogantly stand in judgment over the Scriptures in correcting its contents. Some are ashamed of its seemingly outdated and “unscientific” teachings and thus succumb to the propaganda of “science falsely so called,” ( I Tim 6:20) which arrogantly calls the Scriptures unscientific. Such is the folly of so called higher criticism. I for one however, am unashamed to cleave to and declare the plain testimony of the perfectly preserved and thus scientifically accurate word of God with child-like simplicity and I boldly mock any and every deviation therefrom.
“But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets.” Acts 24:14
For roughly 5,400 years of history man held to a geocentric view of the universe because this was and is the unmistakable testimony of the Scriptures. However, in 1542 Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543) insisted that the sun, and not the earth, was worthy to be at the center of the universe and this heliocentric position would over the next one hundred years become the status quo. However, this Copernican Revolution, was not fundamentally scientific in nature but rather theological, for the real revolution was against the perfection and authority of Scripture over every facet of life.
“The reverberations of the Copernican Revolution still ring today, particularly in the realms of politics and theology; for without said revolution, there could be no higher criticism which assumes God is incapable of writing what he meant to say or meaning what he wrote. Without the Copernican Revolution there would be no Marxism in which the state replaces God. Nor could there be any evolutionism with its bigotry and racism and faith that man will eventually evolve to ultimately overpower God. After all, if God cannot be taken literally when he writes of the “rising of the sun,” then how can he be taken literally in writing of the “rising of the Son?” According to ‘science’ both are impossible.” Gerardus Bouw, Ph.D Perhaps you may be tempted to muse, “Is this controversy really that important?’ Indeed it is! For the very character, word and eternal purpose of God in His creation are at stake. Moreover, if one does not understand what God has declared about the nature and position of our world in the universe, how can he even begin to establish a sound “Worldview.” Furthermore, if something is taught in Scripture, it must be important since there are no insignificant or disposable doctrines in the Bible. It was this very posture of fundamentalism which influenced men to wrongly believe that if something was not a salvific fundamental then it was not significant and thus a surrendering of said minors would not affect the foundations. Additionally and most significantly, we must realize that it was on this very issue of geocentricity that satan through “science” challenged God’s word before the eyes of the world.
A Brief Historical Sketch
An important question we should ask is this, “Why did Copernicus come to the conclusion that the sun is the center of the universe?” The answer to this question is to be found, not in the realm of science, but rather in the realm of religion and philosophy. Copernicus was particularly interested in the pagan Greek philosophers, Pythagoras and Aristarchus. Both of these men considered that the sun, being the embodiment of everything good and noble in the universe, should be the center of all of life. Copernicus agreed with his ancient Greek counterparts, and thus devised a heliocentric cosmological model in which the sun was the center of the universe and the stars and planets, including the earth, revolved around it. Although Copernicus’ theory provided explanations for odd phenomena like retrograde motion, it really did not prove that the planets actually orbited the sun.
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642), a Renaissance scientist, enthusiastically took up Copernicus’ position. In doing so he attracted the attention of the Inquisition, who demanded that he produce proof for the new system. However, he had no proof, but simply stated that “he could not persuade himself” that the sun moved around the earth, because if it did, it would have to travel at a vast speed. This, however, was not a scientific proof either, and so Galileo was ordered to stop teaching the heliocentric view as fact. Galileo however continued to teach it anyway and was eventually placed under house arrest. Galileo claimed that he had found proof for the Copernican system when he constructed a telescope through which he was able to observe the four moons of Jupiter. Just as Jupiter’s moons circled Jupiter, he said, so the earth and the other planets of the solar system circle the sun. Of course, this did not prove anything except that the moons of Jupiter do indeed go around Jupiter. However, Galileo falsely deduced that his observation necessitated the smaller earth must orbit the larger sun. (It is also of note that a year before Galileo’s death he recanted of his heliocentrism and sided with the Scriptures.)
Tycho Brahe (1546–1601), recognized as one of the greatest observational astronomers of all time, devised a different model to account for these cosmological observations. In his model, he placed the earth at the center of the universe for one reason only: the Bible indicates that that is where it is. Brahe had the sun circling the earth, and the planets circling the sun, and being dragged around with the sun in their orbits, just as Jupiter carries its moons around with it as it orbits the sun. Brahe could satisfactorily account for his observations using this model. Unfortunately, Brahe died before he could publish his findings. He asked his assistant, Johannes Kepler, to publish them for him in terms of his geocentric view. Kepler, however, only partially kept his promise. He described Brahe’s model and showed that all the observations were consistent with it, but he personally preferred Copernicus’s model and came out openly in support of it.
Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727) was a giant in scientific history, however it is interesting that Newton wrote more about Bible prophecy and chronology than all his other works combined. Newton’s formulas regarding gravity and motion affirmed the present heliocentric model with the stipulation that there were no forces outside our solar system exerting its influences thereupon. For, according to Newton, if there were other forces outside of our galaxy, a geocentric model could be sustained. “In reality, Newton did not teach that the smaller must go around the larger; rather, he taught that all celestial bodies will revolve around the center of mass. As such, even Newton agreed in his Principia that the earth could occupy the center of mass if all the other bodies in the universe were strategically placed around it so that all their gravitational masses balanced out at the center. In short, this is the scientific basis for geocentrism – the earth is the center of mass for the universe, and thus the universe will revolve around the earth.” Robert Sungenis Through the findings of Ernst Mach (1838-1916) some years later, this erroneous presupposition of Galileo regarding smaller bodies necessarily orbiting larger bodies was discredited. Mach, one of the greatest scientists of the last century, was responsible for introducing the additional necessary influences of the starfield upon our galaxy and thus meeting the stipulation of Newton. In essence Mach proved that due to the gravitational effects of the stars, there was no difference scientifically between a rotating earth and a fixed sun and a fixed earth and a moving sun and starfield, for both were scientifically viable and would produce the same effects upon the earth. Mach was troubled by the fact that there was no sound reason, based on observation, to reject the idea that the earth could be stationary at the centre of the universe. “Obviously it matters little if we think of the earth as turning about on its axis, or if we view it at rest while the fixed stars revolve around it. Geometrically these are exactly the same case of a relative rotation of the earth and the fixed stars with respect to one another.” In other words, according to Mach the two views of geocentrism and heliocentrism were equally valid on the basis of scientific equations and observation.
Ideas Have Consequences
Copernicus was in essence a Humanist who for philosophical reasons posited his deviant theory of heliocentrism which was nothing short of a direct attack upon the Scriptures. This tragic paradigm shift removed the earth from its God given privileged position in the universe, and reduced it to a wandering and insignificant planet hurtling through space. Higher criticism was a direct result of this satanic undermining of the Scriptures scientific accuracy. Upon the heels of the Copernican Revolution came the French Revolution. Not long after came Charles Lyell, who taking advantage of the revolutionary spirit unleashed by Copernicus, attacked Noah’s flood and posited his theory of Uniformitarianism which became the foundation of Darwin’s evolutionary speculations. Darwin confessed that without Copernicus opening the door of higher criticism, his theory never would have seen the light of day. It was then Marx who applied Darwin’s principles to politics and economics as he too acknowledged his indebtedness to Copernicus. Later came Nietzsche, Hitler, Sanger and others riding the wave of deception unleashed via the Copernican Principle. In the 1920’s Lenin himself expressed his indebtedness to Copernicus for making the world a safe place for Marxism and Communism. And if that is not enough just consider the devastating effects upon society which Einstein’s theory of Relativity has wrought not in the scientific realm only, but in regards to morality and truth. Ideas indeed have consequences, and when the foundation of Scriptural perfection, relevance and authority are undermined, the flood gates of hell are opened upon mankind. “After the [Copernican Revolution], the Bible was no longer considered authoritative in the realms of science, philosophy, and day to day reality. Less than 200 years after surrendering the Bible’s authority in the realm of Physical science, man surrendered it’s spiritual authority at the hands of the German school of higher criticism, a way of criticizing the Bible which is supposedly is based on natural revelation, that is, upon ‘scientific’ principles.”
What saith the Scripture?
When I was first challenged regarding the Biblical truth of geocentricity I laughed at this seemingly unscientific position. However, when I realized I had absolutely no Scripture for my then present heliocentric view I was troubled. Once I saw the clear testimony of Scripture on this subject that was all I needed and I was immediately convinced of this glorious God honoring and Scripture exalting truth.
“To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” Isaiah 8:20
The clear testimony of Scripture declares that the earth is indeed stationary, neither revolving on an axis nor orbiting the sun. Furthermore the Scriptures state throughout its testimony that the sun both rises and sets (over 60 verses in the Scriptures), and thus orbits the earth. Not once does the Bible ever refer to the earth as rotating or moving through space. Those who say that the Bible is only recording the “appearance” of the movement of the sun are having to add to the plain meaning of the understanding of the Scriptures. Furthermore such are adopting the same position as liberal critics who have tried to destroy the perfection and authority of the Bible. Many erroneously declare that the passages which seem to posit geocentricity are merely figurative or poetic language. But this hermeneutical observation is more erudite than helpful, for poetry is as clear in its meaning as prose. “The world also is established that it cannot be moved” (Psalms 96:10) can hardly be a poetic way of saying that the earth is spinning on its axis and gyrating through space in a path determined by its orbit of the sun.
“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” Genesis 1:1-2
The Earth was created on day one as the focal point and center of God’s creation. If the earth moved, what did it orbit on the first three days of creation? Why would it remain stationary for three days and then begin moving? Why would the earth revolve around the sun since the sun was created for the earth? It makes perfect sense in light of God’s unique purposes in the earth that it was created to be the very center of His Creation, a fact which undeniably declares His existence and authority over all things. For if the earth is indeed the center of our universe, then Someone with a capital “S” put it there. In fact, it is the theological significance of this favored position which keeps modern cosmological humanists from adopting the equally scientifically valid position of geocentricity. Modern scientists freely admit that geocentricity is just as scientifically valid as heliocentricity. Esteemed scientists such as Lawrence Krauss and Max Tegmark admit that the scientific evidence seems to point to geocentricity, but due to the theological and thus moral implications of such a position, they choose heliocentrism, not for its scientific superiority but rather because of said philosophical reasons.
Joshua’s Long Day
“Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the valley of Ajalon. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.” Joshua 10:12-13
Regarding Joshua’s long day, the evidence in support of a geocentric model is overwhelming. Joshua commanded the sun to stand still and the Holy Ghost narrative confirms that this is indeed what happened. Joshua did not order the earth to cease rotating, nor did he qualify his statement with the divine knowledge that the sun was merely made to appear stationary. The sun was commanded to stand still because it is the sun that moves. Moreover, it is only possible to stop something that is moving.
Hezekiah’s Sign
“Behold, I will bring again the shadow of the degrees, which is gone down in the sun dial of Ahaz, ten degrees backward. So the sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down. “ Isaiah 38:8
Again, the Holy Ghost narrative declares that the sun returned ten degrees and thus it was clearly the sun that moved and not the earth. Please note that in both of these accounts (Joshua and Hezekiah) that we are not reading what appeared to happen from man’s perspective, but rather what indeed happened from God’s perspective as the Spirit of God declares these things. The Psalmist plainly states that the sun is “as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. His going forth is from the end of the heaven, and his circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof.” Psalm 19:5-6
Moreover the Scriptures declare that not only does the sun have a cricut, but the stars have a circuit as well. “They fought from heaven; the stars in their courses fought against Sisera.” Judges 5:20 However, nowhere is the Earth described as having any kind of circuit or course in all the word of God.
The Earth is at Rest
The plain testimony regarding the earth in the word of God is that it is at rest, neither orbiting or rotating. The times which the Scriptures refer to the earth moving is an anomaly which is always in regards to judgment. “And they answered the angel of the LORD that stood among the myrtle trees, and said, We have walked to and fro through the earth, and, behold, all the earth sitteth still, and is at rest.” Zechariah 1:11
“Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.” 1 Chronicles 16:30 “Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble.” Job 9:6
“Therefore will not we fear, though the earth be removed, and though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea.” Psalm 46:2 “The LORD reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is stablished, that it cannot be moved.” Psalm 93:1
“Say among the heathen that the LORD reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved: he shall judge the people righteously.” Psalm 96:10 “Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.” Psalm 104:5 “Thy faithfulness is unto all generations: thou hast established the earth, and it abideth.” Psalm 119:90 “One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.” Ecclesiastes 1:4 “Therefore I will shake the heavens, and the earth shall remove out of her place, in the wrath of the LORD of hosts, and in the day of his fierce anger.” Isaiah 13:13 “Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.” 1 Corinthians 8:13
Although I realize that the prominent meaning of some of these descriptions may not be cosmological, it is an obvious inference that the testimony of the Scriptures regarding the earth is that it is neither rotating or orbiting but stationary. Coupled with the Scriptures regarding the clear movement of the sun and stars, the implications are obvious.
The Resurrection of Christ and the Rising of the Sun
But perhaps the greatest consequence of denying the literal rising of the sun is that if the sun does not rise, then according to the Scriptures neither does Christ. God sets forth the sun as a type of Christ rising from the dead and if we make such language poetical then we negate the very essence of Christianity, the resurrection of Jesus Christ who in like manner rose from the dead. But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall. Malachi 4:2
What saith Science?
“…All this evidence that the universe looks the same whichever direction we look in might seem to suggest there is something special about our place in the universe. In particular, it might seem that if we observe all other galaxies to be moving away from us, then we must be at the center of the universe.” Stephen Hawking
No scientific experiment has ever been performed to prove the earth either rotates on an axis or orbits the sun. In fact, every “proof” for a moving earth rotating on its axis has been discredited. Moreover, multitudes of scientific experiments have shown the earth to be stationary and at rest.
In fact, Einstein’s theory of Special Relativity was primarily to counter the many experiments which showed the earth was not moving. His subsequent General Theory of Relativity was to cover weaknesses in the Special Theory. (It is also significant that Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity allowed for the possibility that the Earth was at the center of the universe and motionless.)
Scientific Experiments Proving Geocentricity
1. The Michelson-Morley Experiment
In 1887, using an interferometer this experiment failed to detect any movement of the earth around the sun. It compared the speed of light in perpendicular directions, in an attempt to detect the relative motion of matter through the stationary aether. The result was negative, in that the expected difference between the speed of light in the direction of movement through the presumed aether, and the speed at right angles, was found not to exist. This result was a threat to the heliocentric status quo and had to be overcome. Thus the rescuing device of the ad hoc Fitzgerald-Lorentz shortening of the experimental apparatus was proposed, and eventually the paradoxical Relativity Theory was invented by Einstein to overcome this problem. However, there are three other experiments that have been deliberately ignored by universities because they support geocentricity.
2. The Michelson-Gale Experiment
This experiment detected the aether passing the surface of the earth with an accuracy of 2% of the speed of the daily rotation of the earth. Thus, the Michelson-Morely experiment detected no movement of the earth around the sun, yet the Michelson-Gale experiment measured a specific movement which was either the earth’s rotation or the aether’s rotation around the earth. This result speaks volumes for geocentricity because a rotating universe around a stationary earth would produce said effect. Moreover, the heliocentric model demand both a rotating and orbiting earth and this experiment would only validate its orbit.
3. “Airey’s failure”
If the earth were indeed moving through space, a telescope would have to be tilted slightly to get the starlight to go down the axis of the tube. In 1871 Airey filled one telescope with water which would slow down the speed of the light inside that telescope, but he discovered that he did not have to change the angle of the telescope at all. This showed that the starlight was already coming in at the correct angle so that no change was needed. This demonstrated that it was the stars that were moving relative to a stationary earth and not the fast orbiting earth moving relative to the comparatively stationary stars. For if it was the telescope moving he would have had to change the angle.
4. The Sagnac Experiment
Sagnac Experiment
Sagnac rotated a table complete with light and mirrors with the light being passed in opposite directions around the table between the mirrors. He detected the movement of the table by the movement of the interference fringes on the target where they were recombined. This proved that there is an aether that the light has to pass through and this completely destroys Einstein’s theory of Relativity that says there is no aether. It is for this reason that this experiment is completely ignored by scientists.
[An interesting sidenote is that all GPS satellites have the “Sagnac Effect” included into their computer programs which is another evidence against the theory of Relativity and an accredidation to the truths set forth in this article.]
Scientific Facts
According to Newton, Mach, Hawking, and Einstein both a moving earth in a fixed universe or a fixed earth with a moving sun/planets/star field are scientifically valid. Thus there are no scientific problems with the geocentric model.
“People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations.” […] “For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations.” […] “You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds. In my view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that. What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that.” George F.R. Ellis
“The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS (Coordinate System) could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, ‘the sun is at rest and the earth moves,’ or ‘the sun moves and the earth is at rest,’ would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS.” Albert Einstein
All celestial phenomena such as stellar parallax and stellar aberration, the retrograde motion of planets, Coriolis Effect, Euler forces, and the Foucault Pendulum can all be explained from the geometry and dynamics of geocentrism.
Furthermore geocentrism solves many of the problems of modern Cosmology for it needs no Inflation, Dark Matter or Dark Energy, and does not have a limit the speed of light. In fact the latest cosmological evidence regarding CMBR studies places the earth at or near the center of the universe.
Is Heliocentricity Really Scientific?
The famous astronomer Edwin Hubble published on 1937 a study on the cosmological model of the universe, under the title “The Observational Approach to Cosmology.” In the data published in that study it was evident that Earth appeared as having a “unique” position in the cosmos, i.e. that it was in the center or very close to it. However Hubble chose not to accept that unique position based on philosophical propositions that he presupposed.
In particular, even though the nebula distribution showed that Earth should be in a center position, he discarded that idea based on the “principle” that we are not unique. In order to accommodate that “principle” he added some corrective factors to his equations. It was as unscientific and simple as that! No hard data, no scientific analysis, but merely an arbitrary and philosophical belief was the basis of his choice of heliocentricity over geocentricity.
Even though scientific data showed that the Earth is at a privileged centric position in the universe, cosmologists in the days of Hubble chose simply not to “accept” that data based on philosophical grounds. Here is a quote from Hubble himself when he saw the redshift phenomena in his telescope indicating that the earth was at the center of the universe…
“Such a condition would imply that we occupy a unique position in the universe, analogous, in a sense, to the ancient conception of a central Earth…This hypothesis cannot be disproved, but it is unwelcome and would only be accepted as a last resort in order to save the phenomena. Therefore we disregard this possibility…. the unwelcome position of a favored location must be avoided at all costs…. such a favored position is intolerable…”
One prominent “scientist” George Wald once declared “There are only two possibilities as to how life arose. One is spontaneous generation arising to evolution; the other is a supernatural creative act of God. There is no third possibility. Spontaneous generation, that life arose from non-living matter was scientifically disproved 120 years ago by Louis Pasteur and others. That leaves us with the only possible conclusion that life arose as a supernatural creative act of God. I will not accept that philosophically because I do not want to believe in God. Therefore, I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible.” Thus, like the unscientific evolutionist, we see that modern Cosmology is neither led to its position of heliocentricity via an honest pursuit of truth, but rather it is unnaturally driven there by its refusal to accept the obvious scientific and Scriptural evidence which would necessitate a Creator and thus a Judge.
“Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. ” Richard Lewontin
What do you believe regarding this subject my friend? And more importantly, why do you believe it? Is the word of God your epistemological foundation, or have you exalted your reason above God’s testimony and perhaps given credence to another myth of scientism inspired by the spirit of the age which is hostile to God and His word? CK.
ERRATA: I have since publishing this article repented of vulgar speech, brawling, etc or anything that brings a reproach upon Jesus Christ and the Gospel.
See confession video HERE>
by John McGlone
We hosted a formal debate at the Fall SOAPA Conference in Atlanta, GA. It was a struggle to say the least and not as ‘Great’ as I had hoped and prayed for. I think overall the most of the debate went well. Unfortunately, due to my lack of good moderation and some intemperance of some preachers it ended in a less than ideal way which showed some very bad fruits. Many naysayers and gain sayers, yet some like myself are encouraged that we at least have the apple cart overturned to inspect our fruit as a group.
JESUS WAS A RAILER, YES OR NO? On the face of it, this seems to be a no brainer. Jesus never railed, and railers obviously are on their way to hell according to the Bible and most Christians understanding of the Bible. I want to make it clear that the debater, Aden Rusfeldt nor myself believe that Jesus was a railer in the common understanding of the word. We and a few others hold that Jesus was/is a Holy upbraider, which is also defined in the Strong’s as rail and revile. This was the basis for the weak argument of, “Jesus was a Railer”. Personally, I have only understood this idea for about six months prior to the debate. I was encouraged when I saw Aden post a video with the very thing we were thinking and talking about. There is one of the lynch pins in this concept which makes sense and must be explained by opponents of the idea.
Here is a list of passages that use the word RAIL or some form of it:
2 Chr 32:17
He wrote also letters to RAIL on the LORD God of Israel, and to speak against him, saying, As the gods of the nations of other lands have not delivered their people out of mine hand, so shall not the God of Hezekiah deliver his people out of mine hand.
1 Cor 5:11
But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a RAILER, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
1 Pet 3:9
Not rendering evil for evil, or RAILING for RAILING: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing.
2 Pet 2:11
Whereas angels, which are greater in power and might, bring not RAILING accusation against them before the Lord.
Jude 1:9
Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a RAILING accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.
1 Sam 25:14
But one of the young men told Abigail, Nabal’s wife, saying, Behold, David sent messengers out of the wilderness to salute our master; and he RAILED on them.
Mar 15:29
And they that passed by RAILED on him, wagging their heads, and saying, Ah, thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days,
Luk 23:39
And one of the malefactors which were hanged RAILED on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.
Notice that in this list not one of the words is in a positive sense, they are all negative. So, obviously we can not direct such a negative word or behavior to the Master, Jesus Christ, can we?
Some months before the debate was even thought of or arranged a dear brother of mine brought forth the idea that upbraiding is also defined as rail. Here is the definition and the verses.
NOTICE HOW THREE WORDS WORDS ARE TRANSLATED INTO RAIL OR REVILE?
This creates a conflict of understanding especially in the Matt 11 passage as Jesus was never a reviler or railer according to our Scriptural understanding. For the layman to overcome this conflict from the lexicons, he must conclude that Jesus was not a sinner, but a holy reviler or railer. These words mean the same thing on different levels, the railing Jesus would have done would have been holy vs. unholy. This would kind of be like holy hatred vs unholy hatred that God has for sinners vs. men have for men in unrighteous anger. Keep in mind you can’t ignore it, you must deal with it in some manner or another.
Mar 16:14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
Jas 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
Jdg 8:15 And he came unto the men of Succoth, and said, Behold Zebah and Zalmunna, with whom ye did upbraid me, saying, Are the hands of Zebah and Zalmunna now in thine hand, that we should give bread unto thy men that are weary?
Mat 11:20 Then began he to upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repented not:
The way Br. Aaron dealt with it was to introduce an idea of hypernym vs. hyponym. Here is a clear picture of the idea
According to Aaron’s argument for the hypernym word, UPBRAID, we have many ambiguous hyponyms: reproach (3x), revile (2x), cast in (one’s) teeth (1x), suffer reproach (1x).reproach (27x), defy (8x), betrothed (1x), blasphemed (1x), jeoparded (1x), rail (1x), upbraid (1x), winter (1x).
My conclusion is that UPBRAID is synonymous with those words and needs no grammatical gymnastics to try and disprove that Jesus was a Holy upbraider, This is clearly defined as railing and reviling in the Strong’s. I must add that this would have to be holy as we know that Jesus did not sin. This inconsistency is not explained by Br. Aaron’s presentation. He never dealt with why the word UPBRAID is defined as RAIL & REVILE by both Strong’s and Thayer’s Lexicon.
Harsh Words
I have been preaching open air about 13 years very regularly and the idea of how a preacher should speak and conduct themselves in the open air is a continuing source of controversy. I have wrestled over this in the spirit for going on four years now. Who can I associate with? Is there a line or standard that should be held up for all to see?
What do you say preacher?
The Finality of Chaos? The destructive chaos during the Q&A session was inexcusable on many fronts. The vendettas, backbiting, and overall lack of self control on the parts of a few were instrumental for making the debate to be utterly vain as some have said. But, God uses base things to teach us. I believe this is actually a good thing. In our home fellowship we have determined through many long discussions to be above reproach as the Spirit leads us, but not to quench the Holy Ghost’s work of holy upbraiding as we see the sinful land where we live is in need of our final warning. People all over the country and the world are using this base thing to talk out these issues and purifying themselves by faith.
Final Warning
I warn you brethren do not become divisive and discordant between the brethren that work in the open air. 1 Cor 5:11 is used as a tool of the devil by some to sow much harm to the body of Christ.
1 Cor 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.
The Greek word Loideros for railer used in this passage is someone who’s heart is bent on the bad motives toward the hearers of the message preached. Unless you are sure by the Holy Spirit that the person is using attitudes of opprobrium then you must withhold judgment and allow the Lord to judge.
Aaron, used the word opprobrius to bring understanding to what railing means. But, he failed to take it to the root word;
Opprobrium
OPPRO’BRIUM, noun [Latin ob and probrum, disgrace.]
Reproach mingled with contempt or disdain.
This is the heart of the matter preachers. Don’t mix your rebukes in the open air for sinners with contempt or disdain. I would go further don’t mix your counsel to brethren on Facebook with the same contempt or disdain as you would become the man with the log in your eye.
Lastly, and ironically the ones who are trying to bring all of this holy correction on the few, are stepping all over themselves trying to set, keep, and enforce these words standards sowing all manner of discord.
Prov 6:16-19 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: 17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, 18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, 19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.
This is a letter from one of the ‘loving’ Christians on Marshall University who has seen our preaching these last two days with Br. Zachary Humphrey and myself. They loved us so much they called us niggahs, threatened us with bodily harm, stole my camera, sexually harassed us, blew multiple saxophones most of the day for both days in an attempt to shut down our freedom to speak and be heard, lied and slandered about us, and had the audacity to call us bigoted, racist, and unloving.
The charge that one of us said, “…one of the preachers telling a Freshman that she was “asking to be raped”.” is in light of that bisexual exposing her breasts and tempting the preacher with taunting asking if her deserving to be raped. Zachary called out the bisexual’s wicked fruit of her ‘Christian’ life. He replied that her immodesty was a way of provoking men on campus to rape her. I’ll let Zachary give his testimony if he would like to clarify or if I have miscommunicated.
Below, is the imbalanced view and poor communication of one of the students from Marshall U
Here at Marshall University, these past few days have been filled with nothing but pure hatred from two street preachers who label themselves as “Christians.” These two street preachers hated each other the first day, but then the second day something horrific happened–they decided to join forces and work together to yell horrible things at the students of Marshall University. I’ve never been so heartbroken in my life after hearing some of the things that were said during this event.
Seeing as I am a Christian myself, some of the stuff they said was biblically accurate, but it is the way in which they portray their presentation that turns people off and make them want to retailiate. Yes, Jesus did die for our sins, but Jesus does not hate us, nor will Jesus EVER hate us. The street preachers have been shouting terrible remarks and making derogatory comments towards not only females but males as well. I even witnessed one of the preachers telling a Freshman that she was “asking to be raped” due to her outfit which consisted of jeans, and a crop top. Both of the preachers also had the audacity to tell the women that were just simply walking by, that they were “whores” and “sluts.” Then five minutes later one of them was preaching about “loving one another,” while minutes before this he was preaching nothing but pure hatred.
During this insane encounter, I also heard one of the preachers say that he doesn’t sin and that after we become Christians we don’t sin at all. Well, as Christians we sin everyday. Sometimes we don’t even realize that we sin, but we do. He was also pointing out the flaws and imperfections of students as they were walking by. As Christians, we are in no place to judge our peers. The only person who can judge us is God, the only perfect person to walk this Earth.
Yesterday as I was walking through campus I heard multiple people say “This is why I hate Christianity.” Well I have three words for you: I am sorry. I am so unbelievably sorry that you have to witness these horrific things being said to you from people who are claiming to be so called “Christians.” Yes, I am a Christian, but I will never hate you or say such terrible things to you. In the bible it talks about loving one another, and that my friends is what I am here to do. I will never judge you based upon appearance, religion, sexuality, race, gender, etc. As a Christian, I am supposed to be a caring and loving individual. Marshall University, I just want to apologize if you have ever been hurt by the Christian community, or anyone who claims to be a “Christian.” It’s very possible that I may or may have not been that person to hurt you, but this is my God. This is my religion. This is what I live for. Therefore, I am sorry if you have been hurt by our community. Just please know that as Christians, we are not to judge or hate anyone.
In a weird but wonderful way, Marshall University is coming together and joining forces to tell people that what they are saying isn’t Christianity. It’s amazing to see the Sons and Daughters of Marshall standing up for what they believe in, and doing it so passionately.
My God is a loving, generous, and caring Father, whom I am very thankful for. He died for me knowing that I might not ever want him, but he still loved me anyway. To me, that right there is something live for.
Luke 23:3 ESV– And Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”
I have gathered together differing resources; videos, audios, pdf documents, etc. to bring to light this question which has been on my heart and mind for some time. I ask myself, “If we are the body of Christ, then how is that the same body as the Bride of Christ?” If it is different bodies, then who is the Bride that Scriptures speaks of over and again? The Word teaches that it was and is Israel. As I began to research this some months ago I got confused by the differing views especially Dispensationalism. When I recently heard and read Bob Enyart’s teaching in these audio and pdf links below, regarding Israel being the bride the spiritual white flag of surrender went up.
I think the Apostle Paul in Rom 11 is very clear about how the Jews were cut off because of unbelief in the Messiah so that the Gentiles may be grafted in. Yet, the Gentiles are warned not to by haughty or high minded because they could still be rejected for that.
Rom 11:11-36 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. 12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness? 13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office: 14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them. 15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? 16 For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy: and if the root be holy, so are the branches. 17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; 18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. 19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. 20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: 21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. 22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. 23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again. 24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree? 25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. 26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: 27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. 28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. 29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. 30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: 31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy. 32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. 33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! 34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? 35 Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? 36 For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.
Could this be the answer I’ve been looking for? Take a listen and let me know your thoughts and how this view may be truth according to the understanding of your heart and mind. God bless you.
BOB ENYART ON THE BODY OF CHRIST &
ISRAEL, THE BRIDE OF CHRIST
OTHER RESOURCES WHICH ARE BOTH CONFUSING & DISPENSATIONAL
08/03/17 Coach Dave Daubenmire spoke of a Hageman and Hageman radio show which featured Pr. David Lankford [Hyper Dispensationalist] This is what got me started down this inquiry of these ideas.
Saints of God, we all need to involve ourselves in the process of getting legislation passed in our home states to ensure that freedoms of ; speech, assembly, religion, and press remain effectual on public Universities. There is a pattern of legislation on this issue that has already passed in MO, KY, TN, NC, and CO.
We need to ensure that our lawmakers ADD protections to the legislation for unaffiliated speakers to be allowed on campus in the public areas to speak. This would apply to legislation that is being worked on, or even legislation that is already in place if provision was not made for this group of citizens in the first place.
There are many individuals like myself and scores of other Christian campus preachers that will be left out of the opportunity if we don’t address this issue now to our home state legislators. PLEASE, make this an important and urgent task to contact by phone, letter, and emails to every member of your Representatives and Senators.
Antifa, BLM, GLBTQ, Communist, and other such ‘progressive’ and liberally minded organizations want to foster hatred for these freedoms calling them racist, bigoted, and many other untrue names. Not only that they are fostering racial divides, riots, destruction, even on our University campuses. Americans need to stand up and ensure we are heard that we will not allow these groups to rule over the institutions that our hard work and tax monies have built!
Here is a short instructional video I made to share how we can efficiently contact our Representatives and Senators about this important issue of including the non affiliated or non sponsored speaker on College campuses:
PENDING
Here is what happened last term at Miami University in Oxford, OH when we preached the Gospel for three days on campus. The Communists and Antifa yelled and suppressed our speech and even threatened and stalked us to our car every day yelling, “Go home, go home, go home…ad nauseum.”
Racism works both ways for and against all manner of colored people groups. I am 7/8ths Irish and 1/8th Cherokee. I am labeled as white though my skin is darker than many ‘black’ people. Both of my ancestor groups have experienced slavery, hardships, famine, pestilence, etc. Yet, I am supposed to feel guilty because of ‘white’ privilege because I have blue eyes, light brown/grey hair and appear to be ‘white’? I know Hispanic and white people who are pretending to be black in skin, thinking, and culture. I am happily married to a Filipina who is very beautiful and golden in color. Many ask her if she is Mexican and look down upon her and our children because of the scourge of racism within. Most of our children are adopted, they are a mix of; Irish, Filipino, Mexican, Portuguese, and some other races I believe.
So, for Christians how do we deal with these important and sensitive issues of acceptance or rejections by others in or outside the body of Christ? Well, we should do it from the Bible. Here is my favorite anti racist passage in God’s Word.
Act 17:26-31And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; 27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: 28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. 29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device. 30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: 31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.
But, then how do we forgive the way our ancestors were treated? Also, how do we get forgiveness for the way our ancestors treated others? Well, another appeal to the Bible is surely the only answer.
Eze 18:18-21As for his father, because he cruelly oppressed, spoiled his brother by violence, and did that which is not good among his people, lo, even he shall die in his iniquity. 19 Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live. 20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. 21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
So, our grandfathers or beyond who may have done heinous things to each other, bear no guilt upon us. Past sins as horrible as they may be must not be applied to our current generation of people. I am not saying we should forget what happened but to learn from it and not blame those of current generation because they are white, or black or red or any other color. This must be taught by every dad in every family in our nation or we will destroy each other. How is destroying our historical monuments and records a way of fixing the problems we face as a people, nation, and culture?
Don’t you know God loves to create using color? Look at the sunsets, or the different birds or flowers or any multitude of creatures in God’s handiwork and try and say God prefers one color over another. Have you oxymoronic ‘Christian’ racists lost your minds?
Why do so many churches polarize into color and cultural groups? Because, that’s what they are comfortable with, and I suppose it is an insipid form of racism. The kind that isn’t really seen with burning crosses, white KKK hoods, and lynchings. This kind of racism that is down low in the conscious of our people and culture. I remember when I was four or five and our mother had kidnapped us from the home we were placed in. We were on the run, and our mother in a distraught condition not knowing what to do to get some water and go to the bathroom for her three little white children pulled into a run down trailer park. I had only seen a black man once before, but this whole neighborhood was full of colored folks. Dusty roads, but neatly kept homes, about dusk our car rumbled into the park. My mom stopped and spoke to a young black woman with some children on her porch. The lady got some nice cold water for all of us from her cooler. I have never forgotten that act of kindness for a bunch of poor ‘white’ children from that woman. Why can’t we just see the value of humans beyond the % of melanin in their skin? Like we say in the open air preaching, it’s not about skin, it’s about sin! So, how does the bad of one person’s acts negate the good that another does? It doesn’t, we simply are tempted to lump people together if we have a traumatic experience.
I thought that I would touch on Martin Luther’s writing, “The Jews and their Lies.” to expose how even a patriarch of the Protestant Christian movement can be so corrupted by racism. Here from that book the following :
Final excerpts, from pages 268 to 272, horrifically prefigure Hitler and the National Socialists as Martin Luther describes what should be done to the Jews:
“First, to set fire to their synagogues or schools and to bury and cover with dirt whatever will not burn, so that no man will ever again see a stone or cinder of them… Moses… would be the first to set fire to the synagogues and houses of the Jews.”
“Second, I advise that their houses also be razed and destroyed… Instead, they might be lodged under a roof or in a barn…”
“Third, I advise that all their prayer books and Talmudic writings… be taken from them.”
“Fourth, I advise that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life…”
My German friend stood among the stacks reading, sweating, and translating faster until, under his breath, he began reading only in German. We both noticed his hands shaking. While we had heard accusations of Luther’s anti-Semitism, the extent of the actual hatred horrified us both. Luther’s suggestions continued:
“Fifth, I advise that safe-conduct on the highways be abolished completely for the Jews. For they have no business in the country-side… Let them stay at home.”
“Sixth, I advise… that all cash and treasure of silver and gold be taken from them…”
Then Luther adds, “let us emulate the common sense of other nations such as France, Spain, Bohemia, etc., compute with them how much their usury has extorted from us, divide this amicably, but then eject them forever from the country.”
This filthy racism against the Jews is unwarranted and forbidden directly by New Testament teachings. Check the mysterious wisdom of God as He uses the Apostle Paul to instruct believers not to hinder from brotherhood or hate the natural branch the Jews.
Rom 11:18-36 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. 19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in. 20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear: 21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee. 22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. 23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again. 24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree? 25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. 26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: 27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. 28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. 29 For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. 30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: 31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy. 32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. 33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! 34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? 35 Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? 36 For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen.
I would like to deal with how certain gang, Muslim, or other racists cultures affect our culture. Gangster rap with all of it’s hideous lyrics which promote rape, drinking, drugs, dealing, greed, brawling, murder, and gang culture in general are an abomination that the black Christians need to deal with in their own communities. To the Muslims, I call you out of your hypocritical religion that won’t rebuke the jihadi but will rebuke the intolerance of westerners to accept your religious terrorism. To the racist; KKK, Black Hebrew Israelites, Alt right, alt left monsters you will give an account to the God of the Bible who made every color of mankind that you hate so much. Why do Christians have to warn their families, friends, and even enemies? Because you have a moral duty to warn your earthly fathers, sons, mothers, daughters, brothers, sisters, and cousins. Well, if you love your neighbor as Jesus taught that would extend beyond your earthly family, even unto the whole world. The Christian witness to family members and beyond is one of the most difficult things for us to do as the fear of man creeps into our hearts. See, a blogpost I did on this very idea HERE.
Also, I would like to share a view from Pastor David Manning from Harlem’s ATLAH Worldwide Church on why, “The Confederates were Right Biblically and Constitutionally About Slavery”.
Another great teaching on racism by Pastor Joe Schimmel from
Blessed Hope Chapel here:
Lastly, Jesus taught His disciples to forgive 70 X 7, which equals 490 times. Do you really think God meant for us to stop forgiving at the 491st offense? Aren’t we supposed to forgive our enemies? Do you believe that teaching of Jesus? Do you know what color all of us have in common? Blood red, that which was shed on Calvary for the sins of every tribe, tongue, and nation. It’s also the same color that runs through every human being’s veins. What’s the answer? When it comes to race we all need to claim we are the human race, created by a loving and benevolent Creator who wants us to love each other. This should be apparent to every Christian of every color. Here is a wonderful word picture of what it will be like before the throne of God with all peoples.
Rev 5:6-14And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth. 7 And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne. 8 And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints. 9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; 10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth. 11 And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands; 12 Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing. 13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever. 14 And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever.
John 3:16¶ For God so loued þe world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne: that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life.
English spelling differences in John 3:16 U = V (Example: loued = loved; gaue = gave) y with ‘e’ above it was used as represent the ‘thorn’ character, which means ‘the’) [learn more] nn (Sonne = Son) Other spelling differences V = U (Example: vnto = unto | See John 1:11. As a variation of the same letter, ‘V’ was used at the beginning of a word and ‘U’ within. ) VV = W (Example: svvord = sword) [The V was called a ‘U’, this is why we still call a W a ‘double U’] I = J (Example: Iesus = Jesus | See John 1:17) Long “s” letters look similar to “f” letters (Notice the ‘Old Testament’ type example on the right) KJVOnlyists make the claim this is only a font issue and nothing else.
I really liked Pastor Britt Williams defense of the KJV only years ago when I was actively preaching and teaching from the NKJV. He is the senior Pastor of Consuming Fire Fellowship. It was challenging, yet there are some straws that must be dealt with to answer with assurance. Here is a link to that four part series on his FB.
If you liked that video, check this one with 22 errors in the KJV. I’m sure the KJVO will decry that I am a Bible corrector. Here is the work of a Bible ‘corrector’ that found twenty two problems. 22 Errors
When I became a believer August 3rd, 1996, I did so by confession at the prompting of the Holy Ghost. I didn’t have a Bible, a church, or even a witness at the baptism of new birth, save the Comforter whom had been convicting me for about 9 months. When I got to a local church a week later, they gave me a NIV Bible. I won’t even start to defend all the problems I have found therein over the course of 21 years. But, by faith I used this translation for about five years. I was then introduced to the idea by a faithful brother that the NASB was a better translation. He gave me a copy and I picked up the mantle of that translation that many reformed brothers will prefer. A few years later, our Pastor had changed to the NKJV, and I liked the ease of reading and being able to follow along exactly with what the Pastor was teaching. Then about 13 years ago, I came to holiness and the Lord led me to immediately pick up the KJV translation. I then faithfully used that translation; teaching my family, for our children a first reading primer, and open air preaching for about five years. We by faith moved to NC to join a family in ministry and very shortly after we started out fellowship together, Kerrigan introduced me to the idea that the KJV and NKJV were from the same family of manuscripts. He also pointed out for the open air work that we would do together, that the lost soul would better understand from a more modern English translation. We were yoked together preaching the NKJV for about seven years. Unfortunately, our ministry together had a falling out which was partly due to the differences between the NKJV he had convinced me to use, and what I found in the KJV which contradicted his beliefs about how Matt 18 should be handled, and other issues. Here is a link to that problem which I believed the KJV was far superior in translation in these key verses regarding the dispute. NKJV vs. KJV Confusion
However, there are problems on the other side of the coin which the KJVOnlyists will not deal intelligently with. I don’t mean I have a problem with the translation, but the idea that the KJV is the ONLY inspired Word of God in the English language.
Some of the Many Major Points of Controversy for the KJV
Fifth, the Historic English Bible Record Ante-1611
Firstly, The Dramatic Text Difference Problem The 1611 Authorized KJV Bible translation is nothing like what we have in our hands today. This begs the question if it is the inspired Word of God in the Englifh, it should never have been changed at all. Here is a link to look at a copy of the original language of that Bible from the OSU server: Authorized KJV 1611 original manuscript
Can you see how difficult this is to read in the modern English language? Is this the inspired Word that you study daily and bring to church with you? My KJVO friends will say, “This is a non issue as it is just changes in fonts.” But, is that true? The letter ‘J’ didn’t even exist in it’s use at that time so Jesus’ name was spelled Iesus. So, this wasn’t a font issue but a letter non existence issue. Then, my point would be that for the KJVO position to be true you would have to read and be able to understand and communicate this language that is almost unrecognizable only a bit over 400 years later.
Secondly, The KJV 1611 Preface by Translators to the Reader Problems In the preface of the original KJV we see the translators admitting many things which contradict the KJVOnly position. Here are but a few samples of contradictions from the translators themselves that clearly contradict the ideology of KJVOnlism. All quotes are from this SOURCE. Another great resource of the Preface HERE.
Example #1
“Yet for all that, as nothing is begun and perfected at the same
time, and the latter thoughts are thought to be the wiser: so, if we
building upon their foundation that went before us, and being holpen
by their labours, do endeavour to make that better which they left so
good; no man, we are sure, hath cause to mislike us; they, we persuade
ourselves, if they were alive, would thank us.” pp. 280 If this be so, “…’nothing’ is begun and perfected at the same time.” Then the KJV translator did not believe they had a perfect translation of God’s Word in the English.
Example #2
“… so all the while that our adversaries do make so many and so various editions
themselves, and do jar so much about the worth and authority of them,
they can with no show of equity challenge us for changing and correcting.” pp. 285 If many additions is problematic then the KJV has had the same problem. If ‘changing and correction’ is a problem then why did they do that themselves in the first place?
Example #3
Truly, good Christian Reader, we never thought from the beginning that we should need to make a new translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one; (for then the imputation of Sixtus had been true in some sort, that our people had been fed with gall of dragons instead of wine, with whey instead of milk;) but to make a good one better,
or out of many good ones one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath been our endeavour, that our mark. pp. 285 Here the translators are appealing to the idea that there was already a good translation in the English, but they’d like to make it better and they wish the readers wouldn’t hold that against the translation.
Example #4
They that are wise had rather have their judgments at liberty in differences of readings, than to be captivated to one, when it may be the other. pp. 288 Here the translators are supposing that is it is wisdom to have liberty to read varying manuscripts that to hold to one specific translation only. This is exactly the position of them that hold preferences to include the KJV, which is my favorite.
CAUTION: The page references may not line up with the preface in your KJV Bible if the publisher and printer are not the same as the headnoted SOURCE above.
Thirdly, a concept right from the very end of God’s Holy writ is the concept that if anyone adds or takes away from the words of the prophecy of this book. God will heap judgment upon them.
Rev 22:18-19 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Now, the KJVOnlyist will usually say this only applies to the book of Revelation. But, my view is that this is a warning seal that God has placed on the whole of canonized Scripture. Well, if there is a warning about future additions or subtractions and the threats that God has placed there we must induct something from that warning! The text assumes that there will be those that introduce errors or take away truths from the Bible thus annihilating the view that God’s Word in the KJV text is the ONLY inspired and immutable trustworthy Bible. What’s a good answer to this point? Well, I believe that Jesus is the Logos Word of God who is unchangeable and perfect. He is the epitome of the will of the Father. His teachings can be known, clarified, and walked out by the believer under the instruction of the Holy Ghost.
Fourthly, The Not Inspired But Preserved Dilemma KJVOnlyist’s will often take this shell game argument when someone is trying to understand their position. Sam Gipp, a major proponent of KJVOnlyism, offers this ARGUMENT on his website to answer this question. In a sense, I agree with Sam, that God inspired the original text, then used men through the ages to bring us the Bible we have today in it’s many various translations. However, his position goes too far to give the KJV the inerrant status their camp claims. The forensic evidence against this position is amazing, yet the promoters of it will blindly continue in this doctrine causing discord and division in the body of Christ. One of my great regrets of flipping between the KJVO position I had in 2009 to NKJV preferred, is that for the last seven years or so is all I have memorized is NKJV. Now, I find myself going back to the KJV translation memory work and getting confused by the previous eight years work of remembrance of Scripture. It is frustrating to say the least and looks to the open air listeners, like I don’t know the Bible I am preaching from!
Fifthly, the Historic English Bible Records Pre-1611 Here is a rough outline with historical information from Wikipedia concerning Bibles written before the KJV was translated, published, and printed. Hotlinks to each footnoted article are provided. Keep in mind that as much as Wikipedia is mocked these particular articles are very well footnoted.
Wycliffe’s Bibleis the name now given to a group of Bible translations by John Wycliffe. They appeared over a period from approximately 1382 to 1395
Tyndale Bible generally refers to the body of biblical translations by William Tyndale (c. 1494–1536). Tyndale’s Bible is credited with being the first English translation to work directly from Hebrew and Greek texts. The original 1611 version of the King James New Testament is reckoned to be nearly 90% unaltered Tyndale.[3]‘A complete analysis of the Authorised Version, known down the generations as the AV or the King James, was made in 1998. It shows that Tyndale’s words account for 84 per cent of the New Testament, and for 75.8 per cent of the Old Testament books that he translated.’[4]
Matthew’s Bible was produced by John Rodgers, working under the pseudonym “Thomas Matthew” for safety, in 1537. It was based on Tyndale’s previously published editions with the addition of his unpublished Old Testament material. The remainder used Coverdale’s translation. It received the approval of Henry VIII.
Great Bible appeared in 1539, also compiled by Myles Coverdale. The Great Bible was issued to meet a decree that each church should make available in some convenient place the largest possible copy of the whole Bible, where all the parishioners could have access to it and read it at their will. The version gets its name from the size of the volume. That decree dates 1538, twelve years after Tyndale’s books were burned, and two years after he was burned.
I think it is a very shallow philosophical position to take to discount these previous translations when fellow brothers and sisters in Christ were arrested, tortured, and killed for the simple possession of them by the Catholic church and the English government. But, praise Jesus as much as many men try to take many hammers to the anvil of God’s Word is is not affected, still delivered, and still available to the child like heart and mind that would receive the Word implanted.
In conclusion, after introducing all of this doubt about translations, how can we trust any? Well, as I have always done when reading Scripture we need to trust and believe what God has said by faith. The Word of God teaches us that the Holy Ghost will teach us all things. This being truth then we can deduct that God will correct by the Spirit any errors or lack we find by pointing out other Scripture which will guide us purely and surely. Did I mention that I regularly; study, teach from, preach from, and promote the KJV translation? God bless you as you seek the Truth in Christ!
Well here is my confession for the world to see. A world that for the most part doesn’t understand the term nor apply it properly to their lives. I have been in a wrestling match in the spirit for the last three years trying to figure out where the line is drawn for believers in relation to open air preaching; speech and behaviors. The link below you can find what I think is a good defense of harsh words in the open air. An excerpt from that blog is a standard I set for myself in regards to these important truths. NOTE: If you are not preaching open air at all, you can’t even begin to judge these matters righteously. See this blog about all men of God preaching..HERE.
Setting a Standard of Holiness in Speech and Conduct
With that said, I have wrestled with a standard for which I would govern myself according to the Holy Ghost in my open air work. So, whatever motivates another brother to preach and how he preaches, I give God glory and thanks the Gospel is preached. For myself, I must come to a place where I am obeying the Holy Ghost and what He is teaching me in these matters.
Here are some standards I am laying out for myself:
1. I will use words from the KJV Bible(preferred) in context and applicability.
2. I will use words that are scientific or biblical in regards to sexual sins or otherwise.
3. I will limit the use of slang, inflammatory, or non biblical words which may unnecessarily incite hearers.
4. I will seek to use primarily biblical type parables vs. parables that play to the imaginations of sin.
5. I will not apply my standard to other people but pray they seek the Holy Ghost for a standard for themselves and walk according to His direction if they have not already done so.
6. I will seek to check my heart toward the lost, both before, during and after a preach.
7. I will seek to do the Lord’s will in all things even if men don’t understand or approve. 8. I will seek to be flexible on words or behaviors for weaker brothers or sisters I am working with. Rom 14
Do you see the red words, ” limit the”?Well, there is my confession that I changed that words, “limit the”, from the word “not”. This happened after a period of not obeying the original standard of, “NOT”. As I made my subtle change I wondered about it and told myself, “I’ve simply changed my mind.” But, why you may ask? Well, I wasn’t practicing the NOT standard I had put upon myself in the first place. The Lord have convicted me to return to my original standard. That has been violated numerous times as I reflect back on it. I have videos that have been posted using terms like; flogging the log, fudge packer, etc that I will practice not saying those types of things again.
Lastly, keep in mind that does not mean that I will not use bible words like; whore, dogs, pigs, bastards, etc. if I am quoting certain passages or concepts. This would include calling someone out for looking like a whore, acting like a dog, etc. Synonymous words are something I have liberty in as well. Well, this standard I have set for myself is a good standard to consider for yourselves add and subtract as you follow the Holy Ghost.
I am adding a point #8 which has come up a few times in working with groups of believers. I don’t want to stumble anyone, yet shouldn’t they apply the same standard to me and others that believe the way we do? I will also add if it is just too much too bear that splitting off to ease the conscience of the others is an option as well.
Why critique another man’s ministry call him a heretic, gossip about him, and then try and influence people away from standing with the truth of things God hath said? Ironically, most of these men and women do this without ever speaking to the object of their disdain, the open air preacher. Isn’t that sowing discord among believers even if you don’t consider them a brother? What if they are and your doubt is causing the problem in the first place? Doesn’t God hate that? Prov 6:16-19
Pro 6:16-19 These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: 17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, 18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, 19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.
