Just Read Your Bible

During last week's morning sermon at Ascot Life Church, I was singled out for commendation for my faith remaining steady during trying times, especially when my dear beloved was confined to a hospital bed for nearly four months. Evening after evening, after a day's work, I cycled to the station to catch a train for the short run to Reading, simply because I wanted to be with her, to give her encouragement and to leave, two hours later, with her spirits raised - even if this included cracking jokes which made her howl with laughter, much to the annoyance of one elderly patient in the same ward whose grown-up son confronted me face-to-face one Saturday afternoon.

 

At least my calm reply was enough to cool his temper, even though I felt hot under the collar myself. To see my wife recover was the only thing I wanted. Yet in times like these, I have wondered how anyone without the love of God in their lives manage in similar situations. Personally, I thank the Lord dearly for reaching out for one who our culture calls a worthless lump of clay, such as myself, who was a catastrophic failure at school, yet had my eyes opened to the source of the richest wisdom anyone can possess. So no doubt I felt elated when I heard the commendation spoken out in front of everybody in the room.

 

When the service was over and enjoying a snack of coffee and doughnut, a young friend of mine approached and strongly encouraged me to stay close to Jesus. I replied that after forty years, if I had not strayed in all this time, it's not likely that I would fall away now. I could say that I knew the Lord while he was still a twinkle in his old man's eye! But I have found his advice encouraging, even if it may be for the wrong reason, which is to say that if I fell away, I could well end up in Hell. 

 

And it is this kind of thinking which so sadly prevails in many Christians at present. I once read in a survey, or an article which contained the results of the survey, that of every believer who becomes disillusioned with the faith, or even fall away, more than 80% of these were taught never to believe in Once Saved Always Saved (OSAS) or Eternal Security of the Believer. I was even given a hint of the higher suicide rate among those who were taught to "hold out faithful" or face the possibility of a lost eternity, and others who were committed to an institution. And I'm not just referring to "orthodox" Christians here, but also include Jehovah's Witnesses and other groups who believe that OSAS is heresy, and the necessity to work to keep our salvation. I would go as far to say that in the vast majority of such cases - known in theological circles as Arminianism, after Dutch theologian James Arminius who first published these ideas - are under the guidance of their pastor, elder, an itinerant preacher or evangelist, or even literature written by an "expert" all pointing to isolated Scripture verses "proving" their point.

 

When I attended Spring Harvest Bible festival in Minehead with my wife in 2002, one of the sermons, preached one evening at the Big Top was about the Fatherhood of God to all believers. The preacher, who believed in Eternal Security, talked with a face radiant with joy, and his joy was infectious right across the several thousand strong congregation. The following evening, another preacher began to put various conditions on the talk delivered the previous evening. In other words, he said that granted, God is our Father, providing that...such conditions are fulfilled on our part. There was no radiant joy issuing from his countenance. Rather, he looked as if he had just received news on the death of his mother. His lacklustre was also reflected on the rest of us. Such was the influence of those who don't believe in the eternal security of the believer.

 

This has brought me to thinking: Do we need any form of guidance in our Christian growth? I would say yes, indeed. I was very fortunate to have grown up spiritually in an environment where OSAS was accepted by our Elders and teachers. I have read books by different authors, the majority having believed in Eternal Security. And if I had came across an Arminian author, even by chance, then I would have sensed the dismay in my spirit which would have compelled me to put the book down. Alongside Christian authors such as Hal Lindsey and the late Dave Hunt, both eternal security believers, the one I had always referred to as my mentor was the late Dr. John R. Rice, founder and director of The Sword of the Lord, based at Murfreeboro in Tennessee. Although I had never met the man personally, back in 1974 I have accepted him as my mentor in getting to understand the Bible better through reading of his literature, particularly in why I had to differentiate between my present faith from my former Roman Catholic youth.

 

But as for personal reading of the Bible, here in the UK at least, many believers have a daily devotional such as Everyday with Jesus. This may be fine for some - I don't have any issues over this, it's solely between God and the person who reads it. But as I understand, a verse from the Bible is read, followed by a commentary on it, and a time to meditate on what was read. The shortcoming with this, to my mind, is allowing a third party to constantly direct the reading of the Bible, rather than letting the Bible speak for itself.

 

I have found by letting the Bible speak for itself, that is, without a third party involved, I was able, so to speak, to knock on Heaven's door for answers. Rather than read one verse a day, I wanted to find out what the bigger picture was about. One of the greatest truths that came out was God's Omniscience. The whole of Psalm 139 spells it out well. But for those who have a familiarity with the Old Testament, have you ever wondered why, in Daniel 7:5 for example, talks of the prophet's vision of a bear with three ribs in its mouth? What was that all about? Was it a detail thrown in to puzzle, or even to scare its readers? Here I did not have anyone to guide me on this matter, but by asking God direct in prayer, the answer lies with the Jews, Israel, and their capital city Jerusalem.

 

In 586 BC, Jerusalem was sacked by King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon. However, some time before then, the young King Jechoniah, a descendant of King David, was taken prisoner by Nebuchadnezzar and escorted to Babylon. After the death of Nebuchadnezzar, his son Evil-Merodach took the throne. But God gave this king a kind heart, and had Jechoniah released from prison to feast at the king's table. Jechoniah became the father of Shealtiel, who in turn became the father of Zerubabbel, the governor who was to lead the first group of Jews back to Jerusalem and rebuild the Temple that was razed by Nebuchadnezzar seventy years earlier. Evil-Merodach's son Belshazzar then took the Babylonian throne, and during his reign, Darius the Mede conquered the Babylonians and had its final king executed. Therefore Daniel's vision of the bear with three ribs in its mouth - of Nebuchadnezzar, Evil-Merodach, and Belshazzar, the only three Babylonian rulers who ever had dominion over the Jews and Jerusalem, therefore they were well symbolised by the three ribs in the bear's mouth.

 

Is all this relevant to us? Well, Zerubabbel was the ancestor of Joseph husband of Mary, the mother of Jesus. Through Daniel's vision, which was given to him while still under Babylonian rule, demonstrates the omniscience of God in protecting the Messianic line, including both the Royal title as well as the biological side. Then staying with Daniel, in the past I have wondered why so much prophetic detail is given in chapter 11 - the prophecy about the conflict between the Greek kings of the North and of the South. It is not an exciting read, to my mind at least. But the detail is so startlingly accurate, that the unbelieving had long insisted that this Scripture was written after all the events written therein had taken place. If ever the Omniscience of God was in its full display, this was it. But why did the Lord take so much trouble in such specific detail?

 

It was when I realised that no part of the Bible was written when the Jews were dominated by the Greeks. As with all the other empires which ruled over Israel, some parts of the Bible were written. During the rule of the Egyptians, Assyrians, the Babylonians, and the Mede/Persian empires which all had dominion over Israel, parts of the Old Testament were written. The entire New Testament was written under the Roman empire. But when the Jews were under the Greek empire, no part of the Old Testament was written, as Malachi, the last book of the Old Testament, was completed under the Mede/Persian rule. It was as if, by his Omniscience, God was preparing his word beforehand, prior to the Greeks taking over, and the chapter continues on right up to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, future from our own standpoint in time. As I see it, this not only demonstrates his Omniscience, but also his Covenant with Abraham and his descendants will endure forever.

 

Then I'm fascinated with Paul's letter to the Romans. If there is a letter which first describes the universal wickedness of mankind, then goes on to explain about a righteousness from heaven, imputed to everyone who believes in Jesus, Paul's letter to the Romans explains all these with clarity. He then uses the case of Abraham, how he was justified by faith when God revealed to him that he will have a son. The righteousness imputed on Abraham was God's own righteousness, expressed and demonstrated in Jesus Christ. This righteousness is imputed to all who believe in Jesus Christ Resurrected, making salvation a free gift given without works to earn it. Then after explaining the presence of sin in himself, which is aroused whenever the Law is read out in the synagogues, he then goes on into chapter 8, for me, the most beautiful chapter in the whole Bible, and can be seen as a direct reference for those who believe in OSAS.

 

But what makes this letter fascinating. Again, it's an expression of God's Omniscience. In what way? That it was addressed to the church in Rome, the very city of the Emperor's throne, who one day in AD 313 will become the Bishop of Rome. A union of Church and State which will give rise of the Roman Catholic Church with its emphasis on salvation by works. Paul's letter to the Romans is a direct rebuke to the Roman Catechism. Paul himself most likely did not realise this when he wrote the letter, but in his Omniscience, the Holy Spirit behind its inspiration, knew. Romans is the only letter which at its end greets every household who meets in the city. What was meant to be Paul's care for each individual or household, the Holy Spirit points out that the apostle Peter was not present in Rome throughout his life as a minister, or else he would have got a mention in the given list, if not actually heading the list. Much, if not all, of the Roman catechism was built on Peter being in Rome and was the first Pope. The listing shows his absence, as he was in Babylon, far in the opposite direction from Jerusalem, ministering to the Jewish Diaspora.

 

And here I conclude why I believe in Once Saved Always Saved. God's Omniscience. It looks to me that, according to the Ephesians, we have been saved from eternity past as we are already seated in Heaven, as the Lamb was slain from the foundation of the world. Could this be the reason why men from the dawn of history were justified by faith, the same as with every New Testament believer? As God sees it, outside of the human time frame, every saint was saved from eternity past. Yet He commands all men everywhere to repent and believe the Gospel. A mystery maybe. But God is God, beyond our finite understanding.

Did Jesus Act Childishly?

A typical Saturday afternoon. Dad stays at home to watch football on the telly while mother and toddler goes out to the local superstore to restock the pantry and the refrigerator with the coming week's groceries. Once the car is parked safely, both stroll through the aisles, passing a shelf stocked with all manner of confectionery, tempting candy bars, sweets and chocolates which had been purposely placed at the level intended to catch the child's attention. The youngster starts to tug at his Mum's sleeve, then protests loudly when she says "No!" with a firm tone.

 

Unfortunately, the child does not think to himself, Of course, how silly I was. Mum's budget is limited and food items which are best for my health and well being must be prioritised. Besides, confection is not only bad to my teeth but adds no nutritional benefit, leading, if unchecked, to obesity.

 

Rather, the child will start crying, possibly stamping his foot on the floor and causing an embarrassing scene at a public place. Maybe a passing shopper pitying the boy may think to herself, Come on, it's only a little treat, not that expensive, or takes the mother's side, Tut tut, what an ill-disciplined child! The bottom cause of the commotion was that the youngster did not get what he wanted and he made sure his mother was well aware.

 

 

When I first started to read the Gospels, one particular thing which Jesus did that struck me, so contrary to his image of "Gentle Jesus, meek and mild" was to curse the fig tree. It was early morning and holiday crowds in the city were beginning to stir. Jesus was hungry as he made his way down the hill to the city, and he passes a fig tree in full leaf which happened to have been beside the road. It was Spring and fig trees don't fruit until the Summer. So it must have looked rather surprising to his disciples when he began to comb through the branches hoping to find something to get his teeth into. When he found nothing to pick and eat, he said, in full earshot of his followers, Let no one ever eat fruit from you again! - Mark 11:12-14, Matthew 21:18-19.

 

A childish whim? Was this incident much different from the boy crying and stamping his feet in the superstore? Because Jesus didn't get what he wanted? The only difference between Jesus and the small boy was that the former had power to punish the tree while the child was powerless to take revenge on his mother other to create an embarrassing scene.

 Atheists and sceptics would love to get their teeth into this episode of Jesus' life to prove that all religion is bad. Richard Dawkins, the outspoken atheist and author of a bestselling book, The God Delusion which has sold millions across the western world, would use this as bona-fide proof that God's goodness is not what he seems to be, therefore his existence is highly questionable. After all, was it the fault of the tree itself that it could only bear fruit at a certain time of the year? Then to add to this, would the One who created the fig tree in the first place, and set its genome to function in a specific order, then curse it when the tree's health was at it's peak, and it was plain bad luck for it that it's Creator was hungry at the wrong time of year? In other words, as God and Creator, Jesus should have known better and found alternate ways to have breakfast without the need to condemn the tree to wither from the roots up. After all, Judas Iscariot had the money bag and plenty of bread and other fruit were available.

If I, as a believer, had difficulty in swallowing such an incident which seemed to have created a blip in Christ's love and goodness, how much more would the unbeliever, whether he was a die hard sceptic or a genuine doubter or even an interested enquirer? Or even among believers, thinking that their Lord is not always happy with their performance and his petulant, truculent character would have his believers punished for the smallest misdemeanour, with loss of salvation a possibility. Again, its worthwhile asking; if you were hungry in Israel, would you curse a fig tree, or any fruit-bearing tree at the wrong time of the year? Or would you simply go to a shop or market?

The incident of Jesus cursing a fig tree reminds me of one of his parables he spoke earlier in his ministry of Luke 13:6-9. It was about a barren fig tree planted in the middle of a vineyard. The landowner, who went regularly to the tree with a hope to collect its fruit, and finding it barren, eventually got cheesed off with it standing there in his field and taking up much of the soil's goodness. So he ordered it to be cut down, apparently leaving a stump with its roots still intact underground. It is an exact parallel to the withered fig tree, which dried up from the roots up. This would mean that the roots of both fig trees remain intact underground. They are the parts of the trees which people don't see.

When it comes to application of the trees to symbolise the nation of Israel, the meaning becomes clear. When Jesus was hungry on that road to the city, he was not being petulant - he was teaching his disciples a very important prophetic lesson - the dissolving of Israel as a nation sometime after the crucifixion, the resulting destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, and the scattering of the Jews across the globe. Since AD 70, when the armies of Rome under General Titus razed the city to the ground, the Jews wandered around the world with no homeland of their own for nearly two millennia. It was during this long period that the fig tree was merely a stump with its roots underground, out of view from the world - symbolising the nation of Israel, invisible around the world but actually still in existence.

Contrary to the atheist's great learning, the Bible is written in such a way that usually the unbeliever fails to understand it. Then not having understood it, he then dismisses it as such nonsense. He may even, for example, accuse the prophet Daniel of being high on the hallucinate drug LSD. One piece of Scripture which is shrouded in mystery, which for a while I did not understand, was Daniel chapter 7. But after prayer and reading, the veil was removed. Here he wrote of four beasts arising from the sea, here itself a symbol of non-Jewish nations. The first beast was a winged lion, the second a bear with three ribs in its mouth, the third was a four headed leopard and the fourth an unidentified beast with ten horns on its head.

The four beasts are interpreted as four kingdoms, one rising after the other - yet what were those kingdoms and what relevance have they to do with us - especially if their remains are long buried in the sands of the bleak desert? The key of understanding is the nation of Israel. Only when one is aware of the history of the Jews does one realise that the four kingdoms were Babylon, the Medes and Persian kingdom, the Greek and the Roman empires. All four ruled over Jerusalem, the capital city of Israel and the place where God has put his name there forever. But again, why was Babylon seen as a winged lion then having lost its wings, stood upright as a man? The same with the leopard, the Greek empire, having four wings and four heads?

The history of Israel provides the answer. The wings represent territorial expansion. The Babylon empire had conquered the Promised Land and Egypt; after this, its territory remain static, but stood proud as a man. It was the Greek empire, under Alexander the Great, which expanded its territory to cover the whole known world. Alexander died early in his life, in his thirties. After his demise, the kingdom was divided into four sub-kingdoms, each ruled by one of the four generals who saw themselves as the new kings, with one of them having direct rule over Jerusalem.

Then the bear, with three ribs in its mouth. This creature was the Mede/Persian empire, which too ruled over Jerusalem. This empire had conquered Babylon in 538 BC, but before then, Jerusalem was ruled by three Babylonian kings; King Nebuchadnezzar, who razed Jerusalem to the ground in 587 BC, his son King Avil-Maruduk, and his son King Belshazzar (Nebuchadnezzar's grandson) each ruled over Jerusalem before King Cyrus of the Mede/Persians took over. Those final three Babylonian kings were the three ribs in the bear's mouth of Daniel 7:5.

Then the unidentified fourth beast which had rule over Jerusalem, the Roman empire, its rule in full swing during the life of Jesus Christ. Upon the head of this creature, ten horns grew. History does not bear any record of ten kings co-reigning over the empire at the same time. In Daniel 7:23-25 an explanation is given of this phenomenon, describing another horn growing after the other ten and subduing three of them. If this 11th horn or king is the future Antichrist and his worldwide government, then these verses are about the future from this present point in time.

So very academic, but a very important truth here. Sometime in the future, unknown by any of us, the kingdom of Antichrist will rule over Jerusalem, the capital city of the Jews. Israel plays an important role in unfulfilled future prophecy. Furthermore, one can only understand the many symbols recorded in the book of Revelation if seen in the light of Israel, as when the Lord Jesus returns to destroy the Antichrist, he will then reign as King of kings and Lord of lords in Jerusalem, which will then be not only the capital city of Israel, but the entire planet.

The cursing of the fig tree, a prophetic symbol of the nation of Israel, demonstrates the sheer power of God; his sovereignty, his omniscience and his omnipotence. The cursing of the fig tree was a symbol of the future state of Israel from after the crucifixion. Basically, what's this was all about was the omniscience of God. Nothing can take God by surprise! God knew absolutely every detail of history from eternity past. Absolutely nothing can happen without God 's foreknowledge. God is God. God is infinite. God is all-knowing. God cannot be outwitted.

That's why I believe in eternal security of the believer. You call upon God to save you and he saves you. Your name enters the Lamb's Book of Life (if by his foreknowledge it wasn't written therein already) - you are adopted into his family. You became a child of God. You became a new creation. You have a regenerated heart. That means you lose desire to pursue sin and develop a desire to pursue holiness. God becomes your joy, your hope, your encouragement, your strength. Therefore, would God allow you to lose your salvation sometime after all this? If you have turned from your faith or have committed a grave sin, and you have lost your salvation as a result, would God have foreknew this? If so, would he have gone through everything to save you? If he did not foreknow, then God wasn't omniscient after all, was he?

Whatever you may believe, we can be sure of one certainty:
God is not petulant.

*********************************************************************************

In the coming week, access to a computer may be restricted. All comments will be welcomed and received but may be a delay before publication.
God bless.