Author Archives: kiwi

O and Oh usage in Scripture

Posted on by

I believe writers of Scripture have made a distinction when it comes to the use of Oh and O. I see a difference in the way they use these two distinct, in my view, words.

And I do not believe it is OK to interchange the two words. I would go as far as saying I am appalled with the apparent ignorance of some writers in allowing such an oversight to creep into their writings. Don’t they think about what they allow on their pages?

There is a pattern to how the King James translators, scholars of English certainly, but commissioned by God to preserve His Holy Scriptures in the then ‘coming’ world language of English, and so clearly ‘helped’ in doing so to produce an error free, better than Elizabethan English text. What they came up with was God’s English. Their usage of Oh and O is consistent.

Consider this usage:

— “O” is used in front of a name to give the effect of sincerity and solemnity or intensity or just real feeling. e.g. Psalm 71:1 In thee, O LORD, do I put my trust:

– “Oh” is really more of an exclamation that people give when in trouble, despair, excitement, hope, anticipation etc. e.g. Psalm 6:4 …oh save me … 

Choice Gleanings Calendar for 14 October 2012 has this text:
I will extol thee, Oh Lord. Psalm 30:1

I would be interested in seeing the Bible that this was copied from. Or is it a ‘typo’? But who doesn’t copy verses these days by doing a copy and paste?

In all fairness, I have seen this type of substandard attention to detail before. I well remember a so-called ‘Christian’ school that had the following verse on its letterheads and promotional pages:

Teach me Thy way, Oh Lord.

Nobody raised an eyebrow for ten years until it was pointed out by some alert teacher, I think, and they changed it. 

I will extol thee, Oh Lord should read I will extol thee, O Lord.

Teach me Thy way, Oh Lord should read I Teach me Thy way, O Lord.

14 October 2012 Calendar Reading

Posted on by

The opening sentence of the comment for the 14 October 2012 page on the calendar reads: 

No being in the universe is more deserving of exaltation and glorification than God our Father.

Well, that is what Mr K wrote and I’m sure he must think the comment is Biblically sound. But is it really scripturally accurate?

There is only one way to know that what you believe is Scripturally sound – that is by comparing Scripture with Scripture. So let’s do that. Does anything come to mind? Consider this:

Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Philippians 2:9-11

Yes, I am suggesting that there is Someone who is at least as deserving, and of whom it might be said ‘is more deserving of exaltation and glorification than God our Father’ – but only on the basis of what Philippians 2:9-11 says, along with other Scriptures.

Note what it does say:
1. The Lord Jesus Christ has been ‘given a name which is above every name’. So who else could be more deserving of ‘exaltation and glorification’ than He? How can I argue with Scripture?
2. ‘to the glory of God the Father’ must mean that it has the approval of God the Father.

But isn’t this ‘splitting hairs’, as some say? For some it may be regarded as such. For some of us there is more at stake here. The measure of a person’s Biblical theology and doctrine in particular may be gauged by considering the importance or place they give to the Lord Jesus Christ. ‘What think ye of Christ?’ has always been the king-pin of the Scriptures.

We can’t but notice the place given to the Lord Jesus Christ in the Scriptures and see a huge difference to the place given Him by those who come knocking at our doors in pairs, for example. On one hand the Lord Jesus Christ is presented in Scripture as the eternally existing Son of God, the Creator, Head of the Church, etc. . . but there are those who want to make Him a created being, a god and someone inferior to Jehovah. There’s only one camp for me when I read verses like these:

John 5:23 says: That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

Revelation 19:13 and 16 say: And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. . .16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

In the Revelation verses we see that the One spoken of is first of all ‘called The Word of God’ in verse13. So this is none other than the Lord Jesus Christ. When we get to verse 16 His ‘name written’ is KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS. What does that tell us? Is there any being greater?

There would be a difficulty finding anyone greater in light of Colossians 1:17-19:
And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

and Colossians 2:9-10 says:
For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

Please show me any verses I’ve missed that show the Lord Jesus Christ to be in any way inferior to God the Father in the Scriptures.

John 17:
Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. (24) – But why didn’t He ask for these to all be able to behold the Father’s glory?

Yes I know; there are lots of others. Here are some to read:

Jude 25  To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen. – A reference to the Lord Jesus. See the comment below about Titus 2:13..

2 Peter 3:18  But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.

Revelation 4:8, 11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.
Christ is the creator in John 1:3, Colossians 1:16 and in Hebrews 1:2 (below).

Revelation 5:13  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.

Hebrews 1:1-3  God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high. – Christ is ‘the brightness of his (God the Father’s) glory, and the express image of his person‘.  

2 Thessalonians 2:14  Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Revelation 1:5-6  And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

By the way – Who is God’s Father in verse 6? Therefore the ‘God’ referred to is the Lord Jesus, as often also seen in Paul’s writings. e.g. Titus 2:13 the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ. Also, the two are seen as one. ‘And’ does not always mean there are two separate things involved. It can rightly also mean that the two things spoken of are in fact one. e.g. The lady’s brother and owner of the cat saw the mouse escape could mean that a) there were two people who saw the mouse escape: the lady’s brother and the owner of the cat or there was one person who saw the mouse escape: the lady’s brother who is also the owner of the cat. The ‘who is also’ could be replaced by ‘and’.

Hebrews 13:21  Make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

Hebrews 2:9  But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

2 Timothy 4:18  And the Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom: to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. The context shows the ‘Lord’ to be the Lord Jesus. Compare verse 8 plus Romans 2:16 and Acts 17:31.

2 Timothy 2:10  Therefore I endure all things for the elect’s sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.

Colossians 3:4  When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory.

Colossians 1:27  To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory

1 Corinthians 2:8  Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

John 1:14  And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Luke 24:26  Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?

For further discussion of a similar theme see the posts titled:
Magazine No 188
Word of God – Part 1. 

The real ‘Christ-mass’

Posted on by

In pagan Rome the 25th December was known for the celebration of the birth of the Sun god. Pope Julius I brought about the substitution of this celebration with a ‘Christ-mass’. This came about due to Constantine’s counterfeit ‘conversion’ after which the leaders thought of the ‘Christ-mass’ celebration as a vital part of the process of converting the pagan world.. [italicized part quoted from the Christianity Today website which was set up by those with Church of Rome connections]

Alas, Constantine and friends and their modern day counterparts missed the most important part. The only true way of “converting the pagan world” comes about through the simple message of the Bible that:

  • Everyone chooses to sin. All are sinners. Isa 53:6, Rom 3:23
  • Sin results in separation from God and spiritual death. Rom 6:23
  • Christ paid the penalty for our sins in a once for all, never to be repeated sacrifice at Calvary. Heb 9:28; 10:12 [1-18]
  • Salvation is a gift, accepted by faith. It cannot be earned. Eph 2:8,9

In attempting to coerce people to become ‘Christians’ through the use of the ‘Christ-mass’ Constantine and friends [and their modern day counterparts] commit the most un-Christian, un-Biblical and blasphemous thing they could do – just as they do any and every time they partake in a “mass”. A mass, in effect, involves the re-crucifying of the Saviour – whereas Hebrews 10:12 says “But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever…” Christ was sacrificed once. Satan must rejoice every time sincere, well-meaning people ignorantly carry out a ritual that puts Christ back on a cross but still leaves them guilt-ridden, wondering, hoping they are saved. But they are still lost and without Christ if that is all they are putting their trust in.

The Bible’s message is that because Christ “offered one sacrifice for sins for ever” anyone may accept by faith God’s gift of salvation. There is certainly nothing we can add to it.

To think about:

  • The wise men gave gifts to “the young child”; How come people give gifts to each other?
  • Beware of quotes like this from Grapevine magazine, Issue 4, 2006:
    “Soul-search: He who hasn’t got Christmas in his heart will never find it under a tree.”  ≈ Well meaning but missing the mark because of what’s outlined above.
  • May the Spirit of Christmas bless you abundantly.
    ≈ Well meaning, but if it’s the spirit of the discussion above I wouldn’t want it, thanks.
  • We hung God’s Gift on a Tree. Have you received Him yet?
    ≈ Now we’re starting to get a bit closer.

These sayings are clever – but do they convey enough truth?

Last but not least:
It was never the Saviour’s birth that God asked us to remember – but Him (the Lord Jesus Christ) and His death. Note these verses:

Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come. (1 Corinthians 11:24-26)

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.