Monthly Archives: October 2012

‘flesh and blood’ & ‘flesh and bones’

Posted on by

Carefully consider these references:

Matt 16:17      And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Heb 2:14        Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

1 Cor 15:50   Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

From the above we see that:
– the term ‘flesh and blood‘ is a clear reference to the human person
(Matt 16:17, Heb 2:14)
– ‘flesh and blood‘ cannot “inherit the kingdom of God”, so has no hope in its natural state of ever seeing heaven

Notice this. The Lord Jesus said to Peter, “flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven”. He was saying in effect: ‘I never told you and neither did anyone else on this planet.’ He was acknowledging He was ‘flesh and blood‘.

Now consider this reference:
Luke 24:39    Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

We understand that this is a reference to the resurrection body of the Lord Jesus. [No doubt similar to what we expect to have one day when we return to earth with Him.]  It was this body which the disciples saw ascend into heaven! So this body of ‘flesh and bones‘ never came under the same constraints physically or spiritually as the ‘flesh and blood‘ body. The ‘flesh and bones‘ body could enter heaven but the ‘flesh and blood‘ body could never.

That’s fine, we can all accept that. But now think about this reference:
Gen 2:23        And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh:

Doesn’t this strike you as being a very deliberate choice of words? It says flesh and bones. Why didn’t Adam speak of ‘flesh and blood‘? Does this suggest that Adam and Eve first had ‘flesh and bones‘ bodies when created and not ‘flesh and blood‘ bodies? Remember, this is said of Eve before they sinned.

Does this now explain why God said to Adam, “But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die”. In other words, Adam and Eve were initially built for everlasting life, in bodies which could “inherit the kingdom of God”. They had ‘flesh and bones‘ bodies and not ‘flesh and blood‘ bodies.

After Adam and Eve sinned did God’s pronouncement of a curse on the earth and His words to Adam and to Eve bring about changes to their bodies?

As sinners they would not now be fit to enter heaven. But did the “thou shalt surely die” now take on a very real meaning also? Ironically, it was the ‘flesh and blood‘ bodies of Adam and Eve which guaranteed their physical death, yet we associate blood with being the key essential element to give life.

And how significant it is that the Lord Jesus shed His blood in that one eternally efficacious atoning sacrifice for sin. In order to make that possible He took on a ‘flesh and blood‘ body when “God was manifest in the flesh.” Note the words of Romans 8:3:

For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh…

The Scriptures deliberately record that the Lord Jesus came in the likeness of sinful flesh.

I wonder how much has never really been uncovered yet in Scripture regarding the significance of the blood of Christ. I’m convinced there must be more on the subject that we should know about, and that we never hear spoken on.

Reading below the surface

Posted on by

As you have opportunity to read a few books when they hit the market, and Christian magazines, you need to be awake. Not everything is always what it appears on the surface.

Consider this statement from one of the books I read a while back:

[speaking of the man it was written about]…“that he would be enabled to present a balance between the truth of the Word and the ministry of the Holy Spirit”.

Can you see anything in this statement worth commenting on? I imagine many see nothing wrong. This statement above embodies a lie, an outright deception, even though written by someone who would claim to be a Christian.

The “Word” referred to here is clearly meant as the Bible. Who wrote the “Word”? The Holy Spirit inspired the writing (2 Peter 1:21 and 2 Tim 3:16).

What is the ministry of the Holy Spirit? “..he will guide you into all truth” (Jn 16:13). But in the next chapter of John we read, “Thy word is truth.” (John 17:17)

How is it, then, that the Holy Spirit could ever be at odds with the Word [written]? …unless the writer’s perceived “ministry of the Holy Spirit” was not really of God; but was a fake, a counterfeit, a deception. The writer, possibly without realising it, is perpetuating what is blasphemy.

This nonsense is typical of the kind of thing many Christians are accepting because it is written by people who claim to be believers. We must always remember what Paul wrote to the Galatians when he said, …if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. (Gal 1:9)  People need to see that the gospel Paul preached is the same and only gospel of grace by which anyone may be saved today. Writers like the above have accepted a gospel of grace plus something else. If it’s a gospel plus anything, even what they call “Holy Spirit”, they’re inviting the trouble Paul speaks of in Galatians 1:9. Remember that this is included in what Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 11:4 where he speaks of “…another Jesus, …another spirit, …another gospel”.

Observe for yourself how many people who claim to be “Christians” are constantly living under some kind of curse. Is it because they also have accepted a gospel of grace plus something else? We hear from some folk that they no longer see any need to meet to “remember the Lord” as is clearly outlined in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26, or they don’t now believe in a “rapture” – no wonder, if they accept any part of another Jesus, another spirit, another gospel.

“But we mustn’t judge anyone” we get told. Well, God’s Scriptures do! [Actually 1 Corinthians 2:15 and its context is clear when it says: But he that is spiritual judgeth all things.] So we just quote God’s Bible where appropriate. Let God be true but every man a liar. (Rom 3:4) It’s what God says that counts. It’s God’s Word as revealed in the Scriptures that we will all be judged against in a coming day. It is the standard.

It’s just everywhere; issues relating to what people refer to as God’s Word. The closer we get to the end, the more intense the battle for the truth, and, unfortunately, the greater the deception. We stand or fall on the Word of God. Instead of handing out trendy “Footrot Flats” look-a-likes we need to realise we have available in the ‘world language’ of English the no compromise, inerrant, pure Word of God, in the Scriptures, for which people in England, even, of all places, were prepared to give their lives [and be burnt at the stake].

Maybe the real problem lies with the belief of so many, who dare to claim the name of Christ, that their Bibles contain mistakes. [Sadly, very often they’re right. It’s often true – their ‘bibles’ do.] It is a joy to fellowship with believers who believe what their Bibles say and unashamedly, assuredly profess that “every word of God is pure”. How could we ever call God a liar?

Other ‘Christian’ books I’ve read in recent years were interesting but I can’t help wondering what God thinks of some of them. There were biographies and autobiographies that hardly give God a look in. Maybe He didn’t really figure in their experiences. Some were about well known missionaries, no less. An assembly magazine which is meant to inspire believers by its articles came across like a travel brochure.

But the thing that really stands out these days is the quotes. It’s trendy to quote all sorts of people or secular literature. We can read an editorial in a “Christian” magazine with its quotes of what godless people have said but nothing of what God says. Did I see that coming when I stopped our subscription to that magazine nearly two decades ago?

Revelation 13:16-17

Posted on by

Several years back there was an e-mail circulating with a Powerpoint presentation about Mondex and their “bio-chip”. It was well meaning but had one huge embarrassing error in it. While the presentation is now probably out of date in terms of its usefulness, this does illustrate an important point: Bible believers need to use truth not error to win others.

Note the underlined word in the verses quoted in the presentation (Revelation 13:16-17):

He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads, 17 and that no one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

But in the King James Bible that we are yet to find any errors in it says:

And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: 17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

There’s a big difference. You can see which one is right. You might want to do what we did – ditch any Bible that doesn’t tell the truth – they are part of Satan’s conspiracy of lies. There’s one Bible in English that doesn’t lie or leave out bits – use it.

If you have a copy of the Powerpoint presentation about Mondex we suggest you amend your presentations – it’s very easy to do. [You can all copy and paste, and save.]

Meantime, folks, we should remember our chief mission as believers is to reach people for Christ. If they turn to Him now they’ll never see the situation arise where people have to go through a Luciferian initiation [“worship the beast” see Revelation chapters 13 & 14] in order to take that mark. If they don’t turn to Christ now, there’s a high probability that they won’t later [see 2 Thes 2:8-12]

But for those who do turn to Christ after the Rapture has taken place there are 2 specific requirements placed on them according to the Bible:

1. They must NEVER, on any account, accept the “mark of the beast“.

And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb. (Rev 14:9-10)

2.　They must always help and side with God’s people, the Jews.

Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? 39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? 40　And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. (Matt 25:31-46)

23 March 2011 Calendar Reading

Posted on by

This might be one from last year but I believe it highlights something which many folk don’t get to appreciate until they come to use a King James Bible.

For I will have respect unto you, and make you fruitful, and multiply you, and establish my covenant with you…And ye shall eat old store, and bring forth the old because of the new. And I will set my tabernacle among you: and my soul shall not abhor you.
Leviticus 26:9, 11

Mr M comments correctly that the word “you” is found 5 times in these two verses, plus there are 7 more in the chapter. He asserts that this highlights the fact that God “deals with us always as individuals” and in doing so Mr M uses the words “intensely personal”. We all agree with Mr M that God has provided a means of sal­vation to the world (John 3:16) but individuals have to appropriate it and we agree that God’s personal interest in us as individuals is amazingly wonderful.

As I was writing this my teenage son entered the room and seeing what I had written up to this point commented that he also had read the calendar. My son then proceeded to tell me in his own words exactly what I am about to say! He had spotted it too.

As well-meaning as Mr M may be, he has based his whole comment on wrong interpretation. When “you” is used in the King James Bible it signifies plural [more than one] hearers. In the same way “ye” is used in the King James Bible to signify the hearers are plural. For singular [just one] hearer the King James uses “thee, thou, thy and thine”. This of course is one of the beauties of the wonderful King James Version. When we read in Luke 22:31-32 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren. . . you can see that the Lord was saying that while Satan was wanting to sift all of them (“you”) He [the Lord] had prayed for Peter (“thee”) that he wouldn’t fail . . Read it through again now that you know this and see what a different meaning it all takes on.

Mr M has fallen into the trap of presenting precious truth based on the wrong verses. He is not the only one to do this and have it printed by the calendar publishers. The verses he has chosen, by using the word “you” would actually suggest all those benefits mentioned in the verses to be with a group of people. And of course that is exactly what the truth is – God had established His covenant with a group of people.

So where has this well-meaning man gone wrong?

He has read the Bible verses as if they were written to him in the language of 2011. But they weren’t! This in itself is a trap commonly fallen into by Charismatics and Pentecostals who believe they can apply anything they like from anywhere in Scripture. We all need to remember that when we read the Scriptures it is like when we are reading someone else’s letter.

Firstly, the verses in question were written to the Children of Israel, a group of people, with a specific meaning intended. They were not written with me in 2011 in mind – apart from any secondary implications that the Lord, who knows everything, wanted to attach to the verses.

Secondly, just because we often say “you” today and use it to speak to an individual doesn’t mean that’s what God was intending in His message of Leviticus 26:9 and 11. He has specifically chosen to have it written in a plural form [i.e. intended for a group of hearers] – so I have no right to interpret it otherwise.

It appears Mr M has read the verses and spiritualised them. But why would you? If you’re looking for something to show that God’s dealings are with the individual, then why not choose verses that definitely show that?

Magazine No 188

Posted on by

I write with regard to magazine No 188. The Editorial states:

 . . He who was on equality with God, co-equal, co-eternal, “emptied himself” of his glory (Phil. 2:5-7). . .

The above statement seems to present a contradiction with the Scriptures.
How can someone who had equality with God, “empty” Himself of His glory and yet have it recorded by the disciple who was known for being the most physically close to the Lord Jesus: “and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father..” (Jn 1:14)?

 Not only does the quoted verse 14 of John 1 speak of the glory of the man, Christ Jesus, but it states the glory as of the only begotten of the Father which in itself clearly identifies the qualities of that glory.

 In reading the very next chapter of John’s gospel account we get another mention of His glory, observed by men: This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; (Jn 2:11) One would have to ask, “How was He able to manifest glory? Where did He get this glory from?” And especially so, if He had supposedly “emptied” Himself of it.

 Why does Luke 9:32 state: But Peter and they that were with him were heavy with sleep: and when they were awake, they saw his glory, and the two men that stood with him.

This was, once again, glory manifested by the Son of God, in human form.

 The editor would have us believe that the Son of God, in human form didn’t have any glory because He had emptied Himself of it. I cannot accept that premise on the basis of what I quoted above. But there is a reason why people accept this insidious heresy which in my mind is tantamount to blasphemy.

 It is very noticeable to those of us whom God has graciously opened the eyes of, that many bible versions based on the Revised Texts of Messrs Westcott and Hort have adopted the words “emptied himself”. The King James Bible translators have kept truth in tact by printing “made himself of no reputation”, which is in complete harmony with sound doctrine that “God was manifest in the flesh” (1 Tim 3:16). But why are we surprised; when we consider the associations of these two men and their apparent hatred of sound doctrine? Why would anyone trust their manipulation of the Greek texts when their names can be found listed in the Encyclopedia of the Paranormal, as I found myself directed to in a public library when researching the men in question?

 The harmony of the Scriptures, in comparing Scripture with Scripture, demands that in the course of “being made in the likeness of men” the Son of God veiled His glory. He never ceased being what He eternally had been; neither could He. I reject, totally and utterly, any thought that the Son of God ever changed from being anything but God...manifest in the flesh.

Magazine No 187

Posted on by

I write with regard to Magazine No 187.

 The Editorial states:  Elisha . . . instructs a stick (2 Kings 6:1-7) to be thrown into the water to locate an axe head, after a mistake.

 The choice of the word “mistake” may suit the thought being presented but it is a poor choice. There was no mistake made by the unfortunate user of the borrowed axe head. It was what anyone today would call an “accident”. There was no deliberate wrong doing involved; it was just one of those things that don’t go according to plan, through the fault of nobody.

 Once again we have an Editorial, no less, presenting a less than good enough standard in terms of theological purity. Alas, these things never come alone; where there’s one there’s usually more.

 Spiritualising the Scriptures is one thing, but anyone who does so had better get their exegesis correct or they could get themselves into big trouble with contradictions or inconsistency.

 Two lines down we read: One day we may have to cross Jordan.

 The implication is clearly that Jordan is a figure of death. Crossing Jordan has never been a picture of death. Canaan cannot be a picture of heaven. It does not match up. If Canaan is heaven I wouldn’t want to go there.

 How is it some of us have had to tolerate this same naive and ill-founded interpretation by two UK writers in separate conservative publications within a few weeks of each other? Do we wonder why the young ones are no longer seen in so many assemblies? Maybe Hebrews 5:12 could be applied to some UK writers.

 Mr John Ritchie wrote a little book called From Egypt to Canaan. How could his writings be ignored in the UK? A more recent UK writer, Roy Hession has written an excellent book about the Epistle to the Hebrews called From Shadow to Substance. This book has many refreshing truths explained simply; the Jordan and Canaan aspects included.

 Many over the years have fallen into this ‘Canaan is heaven’ trap – but certainly not all. Some well-known expositors of the word are very forthright in correctly pointing out these crucial details that put a different perspective on such naïve and grossly inaccurate interpretations:

– Egypt is a picture of “the world” [as in 1 John 2:17].
– The King of Egypt is a picture of Satan, mastermind of ‘the world’ (see 2 Cor 4:4).
– Israelite slaves in Egypt are a picture of people living in the ‘world’ controlled by Satan (Eph 2:2)
– The Israelites’ deliverance from Egypt pictures believers redeemed from Satan’s power and brought into God’s Kingdom (Col 1:13)

So far so good. The magazine Editor would agree, I’m sure.

I can’t help but notice that no death was involved up till now, on the part of those redeemed.

Now comes the crunch: Why were the Children of Israel delivered?

They were delivered in order for them to get into Canaan.

And what is Canaan a picture of then?

Canaan cannot picture heaven as many think! – because there were giants in Canaan. There were walled cities. There were sinful people living in Canaan who God asked to be wiped out. Achan, one of the very Children of Israel, sinned in Canaan. That’s not heaven, brother.

And if Canaan is not heaven then Jordan is not death.

To insist that Canaan pictures heaven would be suicide as far as a man’s spiritual integrity goes. No, admit it – it does not match.

So what is Canaan a picture of?

Canaan (the Promised Land) is a picture of the believer’s life of ‘walking in the Spirit’ (Gal 5:16). The believer’s walk is to be characterised by his fellowship with the Lord, living in obedience under the Lordship of Christ; living a life of victory while facing the same kinds of attacks, pressures, enemies and obstacles the Children of Israel did in Canaan; as many would say, against the world, the flesh and the devil.