Category: Reflections Articles

Paul, in 2 Corinthians 7:1, set forth a two-step process which is integral to a Christian’s “Walk By Faith.” The process could be best described as 1) A subtraction; and 2) An addition. Notice the passage, “Therefore, having these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.” This two step process, “cleanse (-ing) ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, (and) perfecting holiness in the fear of God”, will be explained momentarily. But first, it must be determined what the “promises” are which are alluded to in the verse.

To determine the nature of the promises, you must go back to chapter 6, and notice verses 14-18. (Please read them now). Paul exhorted the Corinthians to not be “…unequally yoked together with unbelievers.” The reason for his exhortation is clear. It is not appropriate for a Christian to have an accord with someone who is so obviously his opposite. The two are antithetical. This is born out by the parallels drawn in verses 14-16. A Christian being yoked to a non-Christian would be like righteousness fellowshipping lawlessness, light communing with darkness, Christ striking an accord with Belial, or the temple of God having an agreement with idols!

This is obviously inappropriate, and Paul emphasized the obvious by pointing out the promises we have, predicated upon our separation and purity. He quoted, in verse 16, “I will be their God, and they shall be My People” (cf. Lev. 26:12; Ezek. 37:27). In verse 17 and 18, it is recorded. “…I will receive you. I will be a Father to you, and you shall be My sons and daughters.” BUT, the promises are predicated upon their acknowledgement and obedience to the command, “Come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch what is unclean” (cf. Isa. 52:11; Ezek. 20:34,41).

Paul’s statement in 7:1 merely builds upon this premise. He stated first that believers are not to be unequally yoked together with, or have a part with (6:15) unbelievers. Next, he gave the reason why a yoking would be inappropriate. It is so because reception by God (the promises) is predicated upon separateness. You can’t expect for God to “dwell” in you, to be your God, to “receive” you, and to be a “Father” unto you if you refuse come out from among the world, and be separate. Beginning chapter seven, Paul in essence stated the parameters of this separateness. Read it again, “Therefore, having these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.” How do we “come out from among them, and be separate?” By “cleansing ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, and by perfecting holiness in the fear of God!” (The aforementioned “two-step” process).

A wise man (an elder in the Lord’s church) once told me, “Before you go and yank the rug out from under someone, make sure there is something there to catch them.” Jesus stated the same in Matthew 12 when describing the cast out demon. The demon walks about looking for a home, and finding none, returns to his former abode. He finds it empty (the man not having replaced the evil with good), and inhabits it again with seven other demons more insidious than himself. The importance of this principle was not lost on Paul. He stated here that 1) evil must be banished, and 2) good must replace it.
Sin defiles. It defiles the flesh and the spirit. We are not to actively engage in sin. Immorality, idolatry, and unlawful behavior are to be expunged from our lives. We are not to be guilty of such sins as envy, hatred, jealousy, and lust. This evil is indeed filth of the flesh and spirit. Separateness demands purity. If we want the benefit of God as our Father, then we must “…cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit…”

When we remove the filthiness from our lives, we must replace it with that which is perfectly holy. In reverence and godly fear, we must seek to conform ourselves to Christ’s example. The easiest way to explain it may be in referring to Galatians 5. Paul there gave a list of the lusts of the flesh. These are the things we are to “cleanse” ourselves from. Then Paul gave the list of the “fruit of the Spirit”, which is, “love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control” (vs. 22-23). A man who incorporates into his character the “fruit of the Spirit” is one who is perfecting holiness in the fear of God.

One fact should be remembered by any individual who wishes to please God. Namely, God demands separateness. This separateness is necessary if we claim to be “walking by faith”, and it is defined as a purifying of flesh and spirit, and a perfecting of holiness in the fear of God. Are you “Walking by Faith”?

One of the most beautiful passages in all of scripture, illustrating the exalted virtue of loyalty, is found in Ruth’s statement of love for her mother-in-law Naomi.

“But Ruth said: ‘Entreat me not to leave you, {or to} turn back from following after you; for wherever you go, I will go; and wherever you lodge, I will lodge; your people {shall be} my people, and your God, my God. Where you die, I will die, and there will I be buried. The Lord do so to me, and more also, if {anything but} death parts you and me.'” Ruth 1:16-17

Certain aspects of this relationship between a woman and her daughter-in-law strike me as especially notable.

The Selflessness of Naomi

Naomi had endured a great deal of hardship in a very short period of time. A famine had hit Judah, necessitating that the family of Elimelech go to the country of Moab to survive. While in that country, Naomi lost Elimelech to death. Naomi’s two sons, Mahlon and Chilion, had taken wives from the daughters of Moab, Orpah and Ruth. After ten years spent in Moab, both of Naomi’s sons died as well. Naomi determined to return to the land of Judah, the famine being over. Now, just imagine for a moment the grief and loneliness of this woman as she was about to undertake her journey. All alone, her family buried in a foreign land.

It is from this backdrop we read her entreaty to her daughters-in-law. “And Naomi said to her two daughters in law, ‘Go, return each to her mother’s house. The Lord deal kindly with you, as you have dealt with the dead and with me. The Lord grant that you may find rest, each in the house of her husband.’ Then she kissed them, and they lifted up their voices and wept” (Ruth 1:8-9). Others may have implored that they stay, but Naomi, even in the midst of her grief and loneliness, concerned herself with the needs of those two women she dearly loved. Truly, she put them before herself.

The Loyalty of Ruth

It would be wrong to say that Orpah was disloyal to Naomi by giving heed to her, and returning to her mother’s house. She did no wrong, and her actions are completely sustainable. However, the loyalty of Ruth, crystallized in the beautiful speech above, is remarkable. A young maiden, willing to go to a foreign land, willing to give up the ties of her past, because of her love of this godly and virtuous woman.

After returning to Judah, she went into the fields of Boaz, and gleaned barley, to feed and support herself and her mother-in-law. The character of Ruth serves as a sterling example to all women, and men, concerning the comeliness of loyalty to others.

The Reward of Loyalty

The ending of this story is familiar to all. Boaz married Ruth, she bore a son named Obed, the father of Jesse, the father of David (cf. 4:17). Thus a Moabite woman, a foreigner to Israel, became a link in the lineage of our Savior, Jesus the Christ (cf. Matthew 1).

Surely, this teaches us all the importance and rewards of fidelity and love. Brethren, think on these things.

The Hebrew word which is translated holiness in our English Bible is defined as, “A sacred place or thing; rarely abstract, sanctity…” (Strong’s). As such, it generally denotes something that is set apart from sinfulness. In effect, if a thing is holy it is sanctified, pure, whole. The term is used with reference to both God and man. Notice the following:

The Holiness of God

Holiness is an attribute of God. In God alone is holiness complete. When we speak of the holiness of God, we are referring to the fact that He is completely separate from evil. There is no sin in God. He is wholly good. There are many passages which affirm the holiness of God. Exodus 15:11, “Who {is} like You, O Lord, among the gods? who {is} like You, glorious in holiness, fearful in praises, doing wonders?” Psalm 99:9, “Exalt the Lord our God, And worship at His holy hill; For the Lord our God {is} holy.” Psalms 111:9, “He has sent redemption to His people; He has commanded His covenant forever: Holy and awesome {is} His name.” Truly, God is the epitome of holiness.

The Holiness of Man

When we speak of holiness with regard to any man, we recognize that the attribute is not complete in man. In other words, no man is wholly good. We read from Romans 3:23, “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” Notice the following from Unger’s Bible Dictionary, page 495, “…(4) Holiness, so far as it appears in man anywhere, is an outcome of God’s gracious work in salvation, and yet not without the proper exertion of one’s own free will, and the putting forth of strenuous effort (Eph. 4:22,24).”

The passage referenced by Unger is very revealing. Paul writes, “that you put off, concerning your former conduct, the old man which grows corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and that you put on the new man which was created according to God, in righteousness and true holiness” (Ephesians 4:22-24). We must realize that we are saved by the grace of God. However, that salvation and resulting holiness is available only as we “put off” the old man, and “put on” the new man.

If we really apply ourselves, it is possible to attain a high degree of holiness in this life. “Therefore, having these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God” (2 Corinthians 7:1). It takes dedication and effort, but it is possible for us to maintain our purity and be sanctified, even in the midst of an ungodly and hostile world.

In fact, God demands that we strive to be holy. Too often Christians are willing to embrace certain worldly influences, and in so doing compromise their holiness. Immodest dress, immoral hobbies, and ungodly associations all adversely affect our claim to holiness. Remember the solemn warning of scripture, “Pursue peace with all {men}, and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord:” (Hebrews 12:14).

In his letter to the Ephesians, the apostle Paul succinctly stated the means by which man is saved:

“For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast” (Ephesians 2:8-9).

Though a simple passage, these words of Paul have been twisted by many to say something Paul never intended to say about the grace of God.

Continue reading “Grace” →

April 1st came and went, and I managed to get through the entire day without being made a fool. Maybe it was because I spent the entire day in my office, working to get Watchman Magazine posted for April, and didn’t see anyone all day.

Of course, the day is a favorite of children and pranksters, as they try to play practical jokes on others.

Continue reading “April Fool” →

While reading Unger’s Bible Handbook, concerning the rise and history of the Catholic church, I came across this short quote on page 904.

Rise of Monasticism. It began in Egypt with Paul of Thebes and Anthony about A.D. 250, and spread throughout the empire. Their aim was holiness by isolation from the world. In Europe monks lived in monasteries and in the Middle Ages developed education, learning, literature and farming.

This philosophy of obtaining holiness by isolating yourself from the world is an understandable, if misguided reaction to such exhortations as James’ “…keep oneself unspotted from the world” (cf. James 1:27), and John’s “Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.” (cf. 1 John 2:15).

Continue reading “Holiness by Isolation” →

It has been said that the theme of Redemption runs as a scarlet thread throughout the Bible. The red color of the thread is, of course, indicative of the consummation of that redemption for man, as Christ shed his crimson blood upon the cross for our sins.

The purpose of scripture is to reveal that redemptive scheme, that man may know what God has done, and what he must do to obtain salvation.

Continue reading “Redemption” →

The Bible records for us an amazing feat, performed by a young man of faith. I refer to the slaying of Goliath by young David. The great victory of David over Goliath was a victory which made all of Israel grateful. This included Saul, who took David into his house where he was befriended by Saul’s son Jonathan (cf. I Sam. 18:1-5).

However, the friendship of Saul and David was not destined to last. It was destroyed by one of the most insidious weapons Satan has in his arsenal, the sin of envy. David performed in battle so well that the people began to talk of his prowess. The women of Israel sang, “Saul has slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands” (1 Samuel 18:7).

Notice Saul’s response to all of this. “Then Saul was very angry, and the saying displeased him; and he said, “They have ascribed to David ten thousands, and to me they have ascribed {but} thousands. Now {what} more can he have but the kingdom?” So Saul eyed David from that day forward” (1 Samuel 18:8-9).

So many emotions resulted from the envy of Saul. Anger, jealousy, paranoia, all led to murderous intent. On a number of occasions Saul tried to have David killed:

• Threw a spear at him while David was playing music (1 Sam. 18:11).
• Duplicitously plotted his fall at the hands of the Philistines (1 Sam. 18:25). Note after the Lord delivered David, we read in verse 29, “And Saul was still more afraid of David. So Saul became David’s enemy continually.”
• Instructed Jonathan and his servants to kill David (1 Sam. 19:1).
• Threw another spear at him (1 Sam. 19:10).
• David fled, and Saul pursued him until his own death at Mount Gilboa (1 Sam. 31).

The Lord was not with Israel during the battle against the Philistines at Mount Gilboa. Saul and his three sons were killed, including Jonathan, and the Philistines overran the cities of the Israelites.

It can be said that the envy of Saul ruined the rest of his life. His realization that David was the anointed, future king disturbed Saul so much that he became obsessed with his attempt to have David killed. This is a striking example of the terrible power envy can have. It is the first step in a progression of sins which can end in such tangibly damaging sins as slander, gossip, violence, and even murder.

Other examples of envy and its consequences:

• Jews delivered Jesus out of envy (Mt. 27:18).
• Jews expelled Paul and Barnabas from Antioch of Pisidia because of envy (Acts 13:45,50).
• The Corinthians divided in part from envy (I Cor. 3:1-4).
• Some preached Christ from envy, supposing to add affliction to Paul’s chains (Phil. 1:15-16).

At one time, we all were guilty of envy. But, brethren, that should not now be. We ought all to examine ourselves, and purge envy from us. It is not proper for children of God (cf. Titus 3:3-7).

The Apocrypha is the name given to 14 books which were written between the close of the Old Testament canon, and the writing of the New Testament. The books have been called by some “the lost books of the Bible”, and some claim that they should be included in our Bibles.

Continue reading “The Apocrypha” →

There is much to say on the subject of the conscience. I would like to share with you a quote from Robertson L. Whiteside’s commentary on Romans. The quote contains the best explanation I have read as to what the conscience is. I will follow the quote with a few comments of my own. Note: The comments are in the context of an explanation of Romans 2:15, which reads, “who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves {their} thoughts accusing or else excusing {them}).”

Following is Whiteside’s entire comment on Romans 2:15.

The construction of the Greek shows plainly that it was the work of the law, and not the law itself, that was written on the hearts of the Gentiles. This, of course, referred to the moral requirements of the law. The moral requirements of the law are just such things as any decent set of people would recognize as proper and right, even if they never had a revelation. Their conscience, like the conscience of those who had a revealed law, would accuse them when they failed to live up to their standard of right, and approve them when they did right as they saw it. That is the office of conscience.

But what is conscience? It is frequently referred to as a guide. But conscience is not a guide at all; that is not its office. Also, it is said that conscience is a creature of education; but I see not how any one would go about educating his conscience. It is also defined as the moral judgment, but that definition does not fit. Your moral judgment may tell you that a certain person did very wrong, but his act does not affect your conscience in any way, unless you feel responsible for his action. Liddell and Scott define the Greek word that is translated “conscience” thus: “(1) A knowing with one’s self, consciousness; (2) conscience.” Where we have two words – “consciousness” and “conscience” – the Greeks had one word, and the connection determined its meaning, or, perhaps speaking more accurately, the connection determined its application. “Consciousness” has a broader application than “conscience.” A person is conscious of his own bodily sensations, whether pleasurable or painful; he is also conscious of his own thoughts and emotions. We are getting at conscience when we think of it as that feeling of pleasure when we do what we think is right, and of pain when we do what we think is wrong. It is that which backs up our moral judgment. Saul of Tarsus always did what he thought was right, and therefore always had a good conscience. But his information was wrong, and therefore his moral judgment was wrong. Our judgment may be wrong because the ideas upon which we base our judgment may be wrong. But no matter how we have been taught, we can expect our conscience to urge us to do what we have judged to be right, unless it has been deadened by long indulgence in things we know to be wrong. It seems to me that a live, tender conscience is infallible. But as to moral judgment, no man can safely say that he is right on everything. Gain all the information you can so that you can form correct judgments, and give heed to the urge of conscience.

Robertson L. Whiteside A New Commentary On Paul’s Letter To The Saints At Rome, pages 58-59

Two thoughts to consider, with Whiteside’s excellent explanation in mind. In order to obtain “purity in conscience” it is necessary to:

• Make sure your moral judgment is well informed. In effect, study diligently to determine what God accepts and what God condemns. That way, you can heed your conscience with confidence.
• Make sure you heed your conscience at all times. Do not allow your heart to be hardened. If you get a feeling that you have done wrong, don’t ignore it, but rather give it place. We should never sublimate the shame we feel when we do wrong, rather we should confess our sin, and ask God’s forgiveness. Continually ignoring our feelings of shame eventually will lead to the point where we feel no shame at all. Our heart will be hardened, and the voice of conscience will cease.

The phrase “canon of scripture” refers to the books of the Bible commonly accepted as inspired of God, and thereby authoritative as expressions of His will. As Neil Lightfoot put it, in his book How We Got the Bible…

“The English word canon goes back to the Greek word kanon and then to the Hebrew qaneh. Its basic meaning is reed, our English word cane being derived from it. Since a reed was sometimes used as a measuring rod, the word kanon came to mean a standard or rule. It was also used to refer to a list or index, and when so applied to the bible denotes the list of books which are received as Holy Scripture. thus if one speaks of the canonical writings, he is speaking of those books which are regarded as having divine authority and which comprise our Bible. (pg. 81)”

Most people do not understand how the canon of scripture was set. Let it be understood that the books of the Bible are received as canonical based upon the authority inherent within them as inspired messages from God. They do not receive their canonicity by the decree of the Catholic church, as is erroneously believed by many.

An illustration helps here. A child confidently identifies his mother by recognizing certain characteristics that set her apart. However, this identification does not make her his mother. If he were to mistakenly identify another, or fail to identify her, it does not invalidate the fact that she is his mother. The same is true with our Bible.

God set the canon of scripture. Old Testament Scripture was recognized in the time of Jesus to consist of the same 39 books we have in our Old Testaments. The historian Josephus records in his writings that the books Jews received as “Scripture” were the same as we have in our Bibles today. Additionally, the Gospels, and writings of the apostles were received as having divine authority. As Paul instructed in I Corinthians 14:37, “If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord.” It was a gradual process, but as the New Testament writings were shared and spread among the churches, they became universally recognized as inspired and authoritative. As Lightfoot states, “The books of the bible possess their own authority and indeed had this authority long before there were any councils of the church. The teachings of the Roman Catholic Church completely ignore this important point” (pg. 82).

There are certain other writings, called the Apocrypha, that the Catholic church regards as canonical as well. The greek word apocrypha literally means secretive or concealed, and originally referred to a book whose origin was doubtful or unknown. In April of 1546, the Catholic church decreed that 12 of these apocryphal books were canonical, and authoritative.

The list of apocryphal books accepted as canonical by the Roman Catholic Church:

• Tobit
• Judith
• The Additions to the Book of Esther
• The Wisdom of Solomon
• Ecclesiasticus
• Baruch
• The Letter of Jeremiah
• The Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men
• Susanna
• Bel and the Dragon
• 1 Maccabees
• 2 Maccabees

These twelve books were written in the period between the close of the Old Testament (Malachi), and the earliest New Testament writings. They are vastly inferior works, and save for 1 Maccabees, which is a fairly accurate historical work covering Jewish history in the second century B.C., they have little value. It must be understood that a dictatorial decree by an Apostate church does not confer upon these books any canonicity, and that they were universally rejected from the canon by early Jewish and Christian writers. Additionally, although Jesus and his disciples liberally quoted from Old Testament books, and referred to events which were recorded in them, they nowhere quote from the Apocrypha as scripture.

Again, as we place our confidence in the Bible we have received as the inspired Word of God, we call upon logic to bolster our faith. As Christians we are confident that the same God who has determined to reveal Himself to us will providentially guide the hands of men to keep that will pure and complete. The Bible is whole, unadulterated, and the authoritative Word of God!

Recently I was reading through a book titled, Doctrinal Discourses, consisting of the writings of Robertson L. Whiteside. The following pithy saying appeared under the heading Anvil Sparks.

Narrow-minded? Well, a person’s mind should be narrow enough to shut out everything but truth, and broad enough to accept all truth. (pg. 221).

It is common for faithful Christians to be criticized as “narrow-minded.”

Continue reading “Narrow Minded?” →

Some are willing to concede the inspiration of the original manuscripts of scripture. They will say, “I believe that God inspired the writing of Paul when he penned his letters, BUT we don’t have the original manuscripts! Therefore there is no way we could have the actual, original message in an unadulterated state!” Is this true? I believe it is not.

First, logic demands the intervening hand of God’s providence. It stands to reason that if God revealed Himself to man, He would have a hand in the preservation of that will. We have touched on this in past articles.

Second, Jesus and his disciples labored under the same type of circumstances as we do with regard to copies and translations of the scriptures. And yet on numerous occasions our Lord quoted Old Testament, Hebrew scripture from a Greek translation, the Septuagint. And did so authoritatively, thus affirming that these were the words of God. One example is found in Matthew 15:7-9, where Jesus said to the Pharisees and Scribes, “Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying: ‘These people draw near to Me with their mouth, And honor Me with their lips, But their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ “

Finally, to say that because there are no known existing original letters there can be no surety of the inspired message is to ignore the abundance of copies of these manuscripts that exist. Any student of textual criticism knows that the Bible is the most well documented of all ancient books. There are literally thousands of copies, some complete, some partial, of scripture. There are quotations that can be gleaned from the “church fathers”. Some of these copies of the scripture are very ancient. And, any mistakes that might have been made by a particular copyist on any particular copy can be winnowed out with very little difficulty by the volume, as well as the quality, of the remainder of witnesses.

As new discoveries are made, they bear out the accuracy of the text we have received. One example of such a discovery I relay to you in a quote from Neil Lightfoot’s book, How We Got the Bible:

5. John Rylands Fragment (P52). This is only a fragment (3.5 X 2.5 inches) and would hardly deserve mention except for the fact that it is the oldest known manuscript of any part of the New Testament. Written on both sides, it contains a few verses of the Gospel of John (John 18:31-33, 37, 38). It was originally obtained in 1920 by the famous papyrologist Dr. B. P. Grenfell, but it was sometime later before Mr. C.H. Roberts made positive identification of it. Acquired for the John Rylands Library of Manchester, England, it remains there today. As to its date, it is confidently assigned to the first half of the second century. How it could be wished that we had more than a fragment; yet it gives undeniable evidence on the circulation of John’s Gospel in Egypt, where it was found, only a few years after it was written. It forevermore answers the view once held that John’s Gospel was not written until the middle of the second century. Also, it is important to note that although this papyrus piece contains only a few verses, these verses from the second century are precisely like our text 1800 years later.

This is just one small, but telling example of many that could be offered. It is not our intention in this short article to explain the intricacies of textual criticism. However, the three points made are sufficient to give us confidence in the Bible text as we have it today. What we have, in truth, is the Word of God!

The Bible claims inspiration for itself. Paul proclaimed in his second letter to Timothy, “All Scripture {is} given by inspiration of God, and {is} profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work” (3:16-17).

One of the reasons we can have confidence in this assertion is that the Bible is continually validated both historically and geographically by archaeological discoveries. I thought it would be interesting to share a few of these with you. All quotations will be taken from a book entitled The New Testament Documents – Are They Reliable? by F.F. Bruce.

The Middle Wall of Division

Scripture reveals that Gentiles were not allowed to enter beyond the outer court of the temple, as they were considered unclean. You may recall that Luke records a near riot which ensued when the Jews were under the impression that Paul had taken Gentiles into the inner areas of the temple, (Acts 21:27-ff). Apparently, the Roman authorities, in an attempt to curry the favor of the Jews in Jerusalem, had warnings posted in both Greek and Latin, warning the Gentiles not to pass beyond the outer court. As Bruce states, “One of these Greek inscriptions, found at Jerusalem in 1871 by C.S. Clermont-Ganneau, is now housed in Istanbul, and reads as follows: ‘No foreigner may enter within the barricade which surrounds the temple and enclosure. Anyone who is caught doing so will have himself to thank for his ensuing death'” (pg. 93). This helps to shine a light of understanding upon Paul’s statement, penned in Ephesians 2:14, “For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of division {between us}.”

The Pool of Bethesda

The pool of Bethesda is mentioned in an account of one of Jesus’ healings, in John 5. Take the time to read verses 2 and following, and compare closely with this passage from Bruce’s book:

“The pool of Bethesda, described in John 5:2, has been located in the north-east quarter of the old city of Jerusalem, the quarter which was called Bezetha, or ‘New Town’ in the first century AD. In 1888 excavations near St. Anne’s Church, in that quarter, revealed the remains of an ancient church building. Beneath this lay a crypt, with its north wall divided into five compartments in imitation of arches; on this wall there could also be distinguished traces of an old fresco representing the angel troubling the water. Clearly those who built this structure believed that it marked the site of the pool of Bethesda. And subsequent excavations below the crypt showed that they were right; a flight of steps was uncovered leading down to a pool with five shallow porticoes on its north side, directly underneath the five imitation arches on the north wall of the crypt. There are few sites in Jerusalem, mentioned in the Gospels, which can be identified so confidently” (pg. 94).

Zeus and Hermes

In Acts 14:11-12, Luke records, “Now when the people saw what Paul had done, they raised their voices, saying in the Lycaonian {language}, “The gods have come down to us in the likeness of men!” And Barnabas they called Zeus, and Paul, Hermes, because he was the chief speaker.” Interestingly, archaeological discoveries have lent credence to this account, revealing that the Lystra area commonly worshiped these two pagan deities. The following Bruce quote is revealing: “But more precise evidence of the joint worship of these two deities in the vicinity of Lystra was found in 1910, when Sir William Calder discovered an inscription of c. AD 250 at Sedasa near Lystra, recording the dedication to Zeus of a statue of Hermes along with a sundial by men with Lycaonian names, and again in 1926, when the same scholar, along with Professor W.H. Buckler, discovered a stone altar near Lystra dedicated to the ‘Hearer of Prayer’ (presumably Zeus) and Hermes.”

These are just a few, relatively minor examples of archaeological discoveries which confirm the veracity of God’s word. Many others could be cited, but these suffice to show that the New Testament is an accurate historical and geographical document. There is no documented inconsistency or mistake to be found anywhere in the New Testament. There are many today who assault the word of God, claiming it to be the work of fallible men. Their feeble attempts fall uselessly upon the anvil of truth. Our faith is based upon unassailable evidence. The Bible is the inspired word of God!

It seems today that people don’t take any offense when the words of the Bible are manipulated, just as along as they change for the better. Wait a minute. Change for the better? Could the Bible be any better? Is there any way that we could modify the text, somehow, someway, and give birth to a grander, better, more efficient way to salvation? The answer, hopefully obvious, is a big, resounding NO!

Continue reading “Religion in a Box” →