image05 image06 image07

300x250 AD TOP

Feature Label Area

Thursday, September 25, 2014

Tagged under:

Spam Email

If you have come to this site because you have received an email from saying 'Payment Overdue', this email is fake and not from me. Someone is spoofing my email. I am in the process of trying to sort this out.

Friday, August 01, 2014

Tagged under: , , , ,

The Holy Spirit and Fire

A question was raised in a forum I participate in asking what is the fire that is referred to in Matthew 3:11:

I baptise you with water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptise you with the Holy Spirit and with fire
There was a number of suggestions made such as:

  • It means fire through faith
  • It is a purging
  • It relates to being made bold or zealous

All fair suggestions, but it spurred me on to performing some study on the passage. It seems that 'fire' within the context of this chapter refers to an action that takes place when a person is baptised in the Holy Spirit.

Why do I say this? Well, if we look at the exegetical information, we can see that 'Fire', πῦρ, which is transliterated into pyr, is a singular noun which is a prepositional object (relates to the main meaning of a sentence rather than being the main object). So 'fire' is not necessarily the direct object of the verse, but something that is related, or links, with the main subject. In this case, the suggested sense of the meaning of fire indicates a 'process', therefore, we can see that when a person is baptised in the Holy Spirit, the fire is a process of something that happens at the same time.

So what is the process? Well, this is where we look to scripture itself to interpret the meaning. Now 'fire' appears over 2500 times in scripture, so we cannot rely on the definition of the word alone, we need to look at the surrounding context to see how fire relates. Fire is used in scripture to indicate a number of things including:

Protection:   Zech. 2:5
God:  Deut. 4:24
Servant: Heb. 1:7
Gods word: Jer. 23:29
To purify: 1 Cor. 3:13-15
Indicates Gods presence: Exod. 3:2)
Judgement: 2 Pet. 3:7

Keeping the above in mind, if we look back to the chapter, we can see that John is talking about repentance and judgement, he is telling the Pharisees and Sadducees who a arrived to be baptised that they had better be genuine in repentance otherwise they will fall under Gods wrath (every tree that does not bear fruit will be cast into the fire), he then goes on to tell them that he baptises in water, but when Jesus comes, He will baptise with the Holy Spirit and fire. I would suggest that the appropriate interpretation of fire here relates to the two things John was talking about, repentance and judgement, if repentance is genuine, the fire will purify, but if it isn't, then the fire will destroy, just as is said in 2 Peter 3:7.

The Pharisees and Sadducees were well known to be a law unto themselves and to proclaim themselves holy, and for them to go to John for baptism? Well, John could not really turn to them and tell them they are fake since he could not judge their hearts, instead, look at what he said "you brood of vipers, who told  you to escape from the wrath to come!" Matt 3:7, John baptising them in water would not reveal their hearts, but the Holy Spirt and fire would. When a true believer repents and receives the baptism of the Holy Spirit, the fire will purify, but if a person has not genuinely repented, the fire will destroy. Now, I do not mean that the Holy Spirit will fall upon a non believer, he won't, only a believer who has truly repented will receive the Holy Spirit, but the fire John was talking about to the Pharisees and Sadducees  was more of a warning "you're not going to be able to hide your heart from God, because the fire that comes from Him will either purify you or destroy you on the day of judgement". He basically told them in laymans terms, just because you say your father is Abraham, you are deceiving yourselves if you think that will wash on the day of judgement. No, unless your repentance is genuine and you bare good fruit, the fire of God will destroy you on the day that you face Him.

Saturday, June 28, 2014

Tagged under: , , ,

The Book of Job Explained

I always remember thinking that Job was pretty hard done by, but I had this opinion because I didn't understand what Job was about, but now I realise that he was a religious man who forgot what it was to be in true relationship with God, he more looked at God as someone you have to be 'righteous' before in order to receive blessing, however, God loved Job so much that he wanted to remind Job what it was to be in true relationship with Him. This video really spells things out about Job in a way that brings light and understanding to how God moved in order to bring Job into a real relationship with him


Friday, June 14, 2013

Tagged under: , , , ,

Quote of the Day

It is not a true Gospel that gives us the impression that the Christian life is easy, and that there are no problems to be faced. That is not the New Testament teaching. The New Testament is most alarming at first, indeed terrifying, as it shows us the problems by which we are confronted. But follow it-go on! It does not stop halfway, it goes on to this addition, this second half; and here it shows us the way in which, though that is the truth concerning the battle, we can be enabled to wage it, and not only to wage it, but to triumph in it. It shows us that we are meant to be "more than conquerors."
Tagged under: , ,

William Lane Craig v Christopher Hitchens

If you've never watched it, and have an interest in Apologetics, this is definitely worth watching.

“Debate - William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens - Does God Exist?” — April 4, 2009 - Craig vs. Hitchens Debate from Biola University.

Saturday, March 09, 2013

Tagged under: , , , , ,

Faith and Works

James talks about living faith and dead faith James 1:21-26

James uses Abraham as an example. God told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, yet Abraham knew that God had given promises regarding Isaac.. and since Abraham knew that God was not a liar, his faith was steadfast in God in believing that if he sacrificed Isaac God is surely still going to be faithful to his word.

Because of Abrahams faith in God (faith), he obeyed God and went to sacrifice Isaac (works). This was faith and works working together.

Faith and works is even at work even at the point of Salvation. Firstly you believe in God (faith), secondly you repent of your sins (works), and believe that God is just and will forgive sin just as he said he would and once you receive that forgiveness, you are saved. Salvation comes from putting that faith into action. (faith and works working together)

However, there were no works which resulted in salvation in the sense that salvation could be earned. It is a gift that comes from God through Jesus by faith in the grace of God and that God is just and true to his word. So there was nothing we could do which bought us to a place deserving of salvation.

Once we are saved, faith and works still work together, but the works is not only about physical work, but is evident in many different ways, but once someone is saved, it is inevitable that we will be changed and righteous deeds will follow as evidence of salvation and relationship with God.

Faith and works working together is about putting faith into action. As James said, what good is faith without works? What good would Peters faith have been if he told the cripple he had faith to heal him but carried on walking without the cripple being healed? There would have been no justification of Peters faith had he not healed the cripple. So since Peter did heal the cripple, his faith was justified by works, just as Abrahams faith was justified by works and his faith was perfected and credited to him as righteousness.

The object of our faith is always Jesus. Trusting in who God is. Abraham trusted God, Peter trusted Jesus, both relied on God being faithful to his promises and both put their faith into action believing that what God said was true, and God was faithful and true on both occasions, and it is through Gods faithfulness to his word and who he is that the justifications of putting our faith into action comes.

Monday, August 06, 2012

Tagged under: , , , , , , , ,

Defining Deity

...Well, I'm not about to try and define deity, but I've just started to read John Blanchard's 'Does God Believe in Atheists', and in his introduction, he explains what he means when he says God.

Blanchard led up to his definition by showing that statistics or 'opinion polls' do not give a true representation of facts since they are too general, an example was a poll that was taken in Western European which showed 75% of those polled said they believed in God, yet when the question was asked as to whether they believed in a personal God, the figures dropped to 32%.

This shows that words need definition. Voltaire (The pen-name of the French Philosopher, Francois-Marie Arouet who is the author of Candide (the best of all possible worlds...well worth a read it if you haven't as yet)) is quoted as saying "If any man reason with me, let us first define our terms". Blanchard goes on to say:

[box] "To talk about 'theism' and 'atheism' is to engage in a dialogue of the deaf until we determine what we mean when we use these words and, as the meaning of the second depends directly on that of the first, we must begin with 'theism'."[/box]

So, to get to the post...John Blanchard goes on to set out a bench-mark of what he means when he says 'God',  There are so many people with so many different ideas of 'god', that to add definition to who we refer to is helpful so we know where we stand when we talk about God. Since I am in agreement with Blanchard's definition, I thought I would write it here:

Blanchard says:

[box]Put in a nutshell, I mean 'a unique, personal, plural, spiritual, eternally self-existent, transcendent, immanent, omniscient, immutable, holy, loving Being, the Creator and Ruler of the entire universe and the Judge of all mankind.[/box]

That is a pretty good definition! He then goes on to elaborate:

  • By 'unique' I mean that there is only one God and that all other objects or ideas given that name are figments of misled imagination.

  • By 'personal' I mean that God is not a 'thing' or 'power', influence or energy, but that He lives, thinks, feels and acts

  • By 'plural' I mean that there are distinguishable persons withing a single Godhead

  • By 'spiritual' I mean that God has no physical attributes or dimensions, that he does not have a body, or any characteristics that can be defined in terms of size of shape

  • By 'eternally self-existent' I mean that he has always had the power of being within himself and had neither beginning or end

  • By 'transcendent' I mean that God is over and above all things, outside of time and space, completely distinct from the universe, and not to be confused with it in any way

  • By 'immanent' I mean that, while remaining separate from it in being and essence, he permeates the entire universe

  • By 'omniscient' I mean that he knows everything, including the past, the present and the future

  • By 'immutable' I mean that he is unchangeable in every aspect of his being

  • By 'holy' I mean that he is utterly without blemish or deficiency in his being, essence or actions

  • By 'loving' I mean that he cares for all of creation and that in a very special way he demonstrates his love to humanity and communicates this to individuals

  • By 'Creator' I mean that by his own choice and power he brought into being all reality other than himself

  • By 'Ruler' I mean that he is in sole and sovereign control of everything that exists or happens, and that nothing can prevent him doing as he pleases

  • By 'Judge of all mankind' I mean that he alone determines the eternal destiny of every member of the human race

Blanchard goes on to explain that this list is not exhaustive, but is enough to put across who we mean when we say 'God'.

This is just the beginning of the book! So I'm looking foward to reading what lays in the pages ahead.

John Blanchard - 'Does God Believe in Atheists'

Saturday, July 14, 2012

Tagged under: , , ,

Eight 'Rules' of Bible Interpretation

I just read an article found on The Apologetics Index which gave some 'rules' on grammatical interpretation which have been used and accepted by scholars past and present, so I thought I would post them here:

1. The Rule of Definition

A study of scripture, must begin with a study of words. For example, Greek words 'allos' and 'heretos' both translate as 'another', however, 'allos' literally means 'another of the same type' whereas 'heretos' means 'another of a different type'. Studying words in the original language (Greek and Hebrew) to grasp the correct meaning will help you interpret scripture correctly.

2.  The Rule of Usage

It must be remembered that the Old Testament was written originally by and for Jews, therefore the language would have been known and understood by them. The New Testament was written in a milieu of Greco-Roman culture, so we must not try to impose our modern culture when we try to interpret the text. Approaching interpretation with pre-conceived notions will likely lead to a mis-interpretation of the text. So it is important to recognise the cultural background.

3. The Rule of Context

Every word you read must be understood in the light of the words that come before and after. Text taken out of context becomes a pre-text and is not useful for anything. No text stands on its own in scripture, it relates to the verse, chapter, book and Bible as a whole.

4. The Rule of Historical Background

It is useful to have some knowledge of the of the life and society of the times with which the scripture was written, this can then give a better understanding of how to accurately understand the intended meaning of the text. Oliver Wendell Homes said:

[alert style="green"] Our only interest in the past is for the light it throws upon the present [/alert]

5. The Rule of Logic

Interpreting is merely logical reasoning. The Bible was given to us in the form of human language and therefore is expected to be understood with logical reasoning. Scripture invites investigation; applying the laws of language and grammatical analysis.

6. The Rule of Precedent

Words have meanings which should not be altered to suit a doctrine. We cannot impress a new meaning on a word that has previous meaning. Words and meanings should be interpreted as they have previously been defined.

7. The Rule of Unity

A great example in relation to unity of scripture is the Trinity. Although not one verse says God is Trinity, we can see evidence of this in scripture. The Father is called God, Jesus (The Word) is called God and The Holy Spirit is called God, yet scripture teaches there is only One God. Scripture working in unity reveals God is a Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Another rule of thumb is the old saying 'The new is in the old concealed, the old is in the new revealed'. Scripture is not full of isolated stories or events, the whole of scripture in unity reveals the outworking of Gods plan for the salvation of mankind.

8. The Rule of Inference

Inference is a fact reasonably implied from another fact. It is a logical consequence. It derives a conclusion from facts. Such facts are sufficiently binding when their truth is established by satisfactory evidence. There is of course the 'Law of First Mentions' where you see the first occurrence  of  a text, but this will be the starting point of seeing something unfold through scripture. For example, Jacobs ladder Genesis 28:12 (first mention) which was then interpreted in John 1:51

These are just a few rules to keep in mind when approaching scripture which will help gain a correct understanding of the meaning of the text.