The Woman’s Curse

God cursed woman for several reasons.  He cursed her because He promised that in the day that she ate of the tree, she would surely die (Gen 2:17), and He kept His promise.  She died before she was one day old where a day is a thousand years (II Pet 3:8).  She died one week after Adam and was thus 930 (Gen 5:5) earth years old when she died according to extracanonical sources and was thus less than one divine day in age when she died.
 
God also cursed her in her primary role of reproduction, for death had been decreed upon Adam (Gen 2:17).  Therefore it was fitting that the woman’s role of bringing life into the world should be in pain.
 
A third reason for woman being cursed was that the woman’s pain in childbirth is a figure of what God is doing in this world.  God brings forth His children through the labour of this earth (Isa 66:8), but it is through pain and suffering that they are brought forth.  The suffering of woman in childbirth is a figure of the suffering God’s people undergo in this life before the new life is brought forth in the world to come (Heb 10:1).  God promises that even though we travail in this life that He will provide strength to bring forth (Isa 66:9).  God will bring forth His everlasting nation in its time (Isa 66:10-14).  He will provide strength (II Thes 1:7-10) in the travail of the earth to bring forth the eternal peaceful nation (Isa 9:5-7) of God.
Posted in Adam, Biblical Studies | Leave a comment

The Body and the Blood

In I Cor 11:26-27 Paul discusses the two elements of the Lord’s supper that he identifies as the bread and the cup.  He then relates these two elements to the body (the bread) and blood of Christ (the cup), but why does the one sacrifice of Christ need to be represented by two elements?  The answer appears to be that there were two things accomplished in the the sacrifice of Christ upon the cross.  The first element, the bread, represents His body that was a sacrifice for sin (Heb 10:5).  His body as a sin sacrifice was the legal remedy for sin; a remedy that man himself could not provide.  Because men are stewards of goods in this world, the only possession they have that is actually theirs is their life.  When God required a man’s life as a consequence for Adam’s sin (Gen 3:19), then there was nothing left that a man had that he could give as a ransom for sin.  However, because Jesus was born free from the curse of sin by virtue of His birth from a different parentage, He was legally able to offer His body as a sacrifice for sin, because He was not required to die.  Because He was the Creator of heaven and earth and all things therein (Jn 1:1-3, 14), then His sin sacrifice was worth more than the the entire creation for the Creator is greater than the things created.  Paul tells us that Christ died for all (II Cor 5:14-15) and Peter concurs (I Pet 2:24).  By the sacrifice of Christ’s body the legal debt for sin was paid, and God was free to justify any that He chose.  God chose to attach conditions to His grace but freely extends grace to every man who will accept the terms of pardon.
 
There is one thing lacking at that point, however, that God wanted for man.  At the point where redemption is paid, the sinner is merely freed from punishment.  He is in effect left to go about whatever he can do on his own.  At the point of redemption it is as if God opened the jail house door and said, “You are free to go.”  God desired more for man than to be merely set free, however.  God desired reconciliation with man.  Reconciliation is the second thing that the death of Christ accomplished.  The cup is the blood of Christ and it represents the reuniting of man with God through purification accomplished by the sprinkling of blood on the heart of man.  The process of cleansing is called sanctification and is accomplished by baptism where the sinner contacts the cleansing blood.  In Hebrews the writer states that our bodies are washed with pure water (baptism) and our hearts are sprinkled from an evil conscience (Heb 10:22).  It is the blood of Christ that sprinkes our hearts and purifies us so that we may be holy.  In I Cor 6:11 Paul also uses a reference to washing and sanctification to describe the purification of sinners.  He says, “But ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.”  The sanctification (setting apart, making holy) is accomplished by the blood of Christ (Heb 13:12). 
 
The two elements of the Lord’s supper then represent two things that God does for men.  He justifies (ransoms) men and He sanctifies believers.  Those who are sanctified by the blood are even said to be purchased by the blood of Christ (Acts 20:28).   Those who are purchased by the blood are a people of God’s own possession, redeemed from all iniquity and purified unto Christ (I Pet 2:9, Titus 2:14).  The people of God are not only forgiven of their sins, but they are also reconciled unto God (II Cor 5:20, Col 1:21, Eph 2:16).  Thus we see in Christians the complete redemption and reconciliation accomplished through the sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ.
 
The effects of the sin sacrifice of Christ’s body extend to every man.  Because Christ died and rose again, all shall be made alive (I Cor 15:22).  However, we must all come before the judgment seat of Christ (Rom 14:10), and those who have not repented of their sins and are not worthy of life will be condemned and sentenced to the second death (Rev 20:15).  Those who are penitent and were decent people will be granted freedom from the second death (Mt 25:34-36) and will be granted life as the nations (Rev 21:24, 2:27, 3:21).  However, they will be forever excluded from the immediate presence of God (Rev 21:24, 27, 22:14), because these nations are defiled since they have not been purified.  Though God grants them mercy because His legal wrath has been satisfied, they do not have access to His person because they are unclean.  God foresaw the eternal situation of separation between His sanctified and the unwashed nations, and He typified the distinction through the separation He created between the Jew and Gentile here on earth.  Just as the Gentile could not enter the Court of Israel, even so the nations will never be able to enter New Jerusalem (Rev 21:27).  Just as Israel has always been distinct from the Gentiles, even so with the sons of God ever be distinct from the nations in the world to come.  Just as the people had to approach God through the priests, just so will the nations of the new earth have to approach God through the sons of God, their priests (Isa 61:6) and intercessors (Isa 66:19, Zech 8:23).  The sons of God, sanctified by the blood of Christ, will be kings of the earth (Rev 3:21) and will be able to enter through the gates of the city into the very presence of God (Rev 21:24).  Even our eternal abode will be in the house of God (Jn 14:1-4, Ps 23:6).  The sanctifed sons of God, unlike the exiled Jews of old, will be pillars in the temple of God and will never again be separated from God’s service (Rev 3:12).  In the sons of God the sacrifice of Christ shows forth its complete work of salvation in freeing us from sin and reconciling us to God, and by reconciliation to God we thereby inherit the promises of Abraham through Christ Jesus (Gal 3:14), even eternal life (Mt 19:29, Rom 6:23) and sonship (Php 2:15), and all things (Rev 21:7)
Posted in Soteriology | Leave a comment

The Seed of Woman

In Gen 3:15 God pronounces a curse/blessing on woman.  He pronounces a curse in the form of enmity (deep-seated ill-will) between the seed of the Devil and the seed of the woman.  He pronounces a blessing in that the Seed of woman will crush the head of the serpent.  The prophecy is interesting from several aspects.  In Lk 1:35 Mary was promised that the Holy Ghost would come over her and she would conceive a Son.  There was no man-seed involved in that conception.  The holy One born of Mary was a Son of God, just as Adam had been (Lk 3:38, Gen 2:7).  Adam and Christ are half-brothers who have the same Father.  Adam was born of the earth (Gen 2:7), while Christ was born from heaven (Lk 1:35, I Cor 15:47). 
 
In Christ we have One who was born of the seed of woman and the power of God.  In Christ we have the fulfillment of the blessing God promised in Gen 3:15.  Though woman had been the means of introducing sin and death into the world, she is also the means of introducing righteousness and life in her seed, the Messiah.  Through her seed did the Messiah come to be born apart from the curse of death associated with the seed of Adam (Gen 3:19).  Since lineage and inheritance is traced through the man (Gen 5:2, I Tim 2:11-12), Jesus was not heir to the curse of Adam, as He was an immediate descendant of God.  Because He was not subject to the curse of death, unless He personally sinned, death would be an injustice to Him.  Because He was not subject to death by virtue of the curse, He could, if He lived perfectly, be a propitiation (atonement) for sin.  He did live perfectly (I Pet 2:22), and yet He died.  Because He accepted death as a penalty for the sins of men (I Pet 2:24), God accepted Christ’s death as an adequate sacrifice for sin (Rom 3:25-26, Heb 2:9, I Pet 2:24).  In His vicarious (taking our place) sacrifice Christ died and entered Hades.  However, God would not suffer Christ’s flesh to see corruption nor for His soul to remain in Hades (Acts 2:31) and raised Him from the dead (Acts 2:32-33).  By the act of raising Christ from the dead, Christ overcame the evil one and crushed the source of his power, the power of death (Heb 2:14). 
 
In the death, burial and resurrection of Christ, we see the fulfillment of the ancient promise made to Eve.  In her seed Christ was born.  He was afflicted and bruised even unto death by the serpent, and His soul went into the house of the serpent (Acts 2:27, Mt 12:29).  In the act of bruising the Seed of woman, the serpent unwittingly fatally bit himself.  By taking an innocent man into his stronghold and attempting to unlawfully retain Him in his house of death, the serpent’s act of war enabled Christ to lawfully spoil the serpent of his goods (Mk 3:27) and crush the head or seat of the serpent’s power, that is, death.  After 4000 years God had not forgotten His promise and in a way that no one would have suspected He carried out His promise in exact detail..  Truly our God is a wonderous God, and His ways past finding out.
Posted in Soteriology | Leave a comment

Tolerance

Our public schools today teach one absolute:  tolerance.  In the name of tolerance those who hold it are absolutely intolerant to anyone who opposes evil.  It is now defined as evil to oppose abortion and homosexuality.  The court threatened to shut down the business of an anti-abortion activist here in Dayton (Mehaffe’s Pies) unless he stopped protesting abortion clinics.  It is to the point now that many papers will refuse to print religious adverisements that contain anti-gay sentiment.  One Church of God in California had their building beseiged by gays.  They beat on the doors, yelled obsenities, threatened the people inside and kept the members under seige.  The police would not help. 
 
Here in Dayton we had a radio program for years on Sunday morning.  The radio station dumped us because we were not commercial enough.  They became uncomfortable with our unyielding position on sin.  It is now to the point in this country that merely to oppose gay behavior is to become a gay basher and is a hate crime.  We need to speak out while we still can.  We are going to lose the right to publicly oppose homosexuality.  If you were to oppose homosexuality in parts of San Francisco, your life would probably be in danger.  Here is what God says about homosexuality.
 
I Cor 6:9-10 NIV  Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders,  nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
Homosexuality is wrong. We are going to face increasing persecution in the future years, particularly as we speak against homosexuality.  We will have to oppose it no matter what it costs us.  If we go to jail, if we lose our buildings, if we lose our lives, we are going to have to stand against evil, no matter what form it takes.  The next time the left obtains power we will lose many of our religious and political freedoms in the name of tolerance.  When we lose power we will be lucky if we ever obtain it again.  Our country is split about 50/50 right now between those who support the traditional values of the country and those who will redefine it in godless secularism where anything goes but criticism of godlessness.  Businesses even now no longer celebrate Christmas in the name of toleration.  Now it is the “holiday season”.  At my work we no longer have any kind of religious decoration on our “Holiday” tree, but a Buddaist has a quotation from Buddah on his whiteboard.  Cities can no longer even have any religious decorations for Christmas.  It is ridiculous.  It is illegal to have the 10 commandments hanging in a picture in the gallery of a public building.  It is ridiculous.  It is obscene. 
 
“Tolerance” is a code word for absolute intolerance of righteousness.  There will be no tolerance for biblical Christianity.  Prepare for open conflict if you plan to serve God.
Posted in Biblical Studies | Leave a comment

How Could Christ Increase in Wisdom?

Tim wrote: I was in a recent discussion with a new man at work and he mentioned Jesus growing in wisdom. Wisdom? The creator of Heaven and earth needing to grow in WISDOM?

Remember John 13: 3.  Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God;

He already knew everything. What does growing in WISDOM mean when it comes to Jesus?

James replies: To answer your question, Tim, let us first consider what the Bible says regarding Christ incarnate:

Philippians 2:5-7  Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:  who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; (ASV)

Jesus became a man and gave up some of the things He had before He was incarnate.  “All wisdom” was one of those things He gave up.  “All power” was another.  He also gave up the glory that He had with God before the world was.

Jn 17:5  Now, Father, glorify me alongside yourself. Give me the same glory I had with you before the world existed. (CJB)

While He was on the earth, Jesus did not enjoy the same glory as He had before He came to earth (Jn 8:59, 10:31), Jesus had emptied Himself of His glory.  He also emptied Himself of His full grown likeness of God because He was a babe in body.  Therefore, we should not be surprised to find that He had also emptied HImself of all wisdom and grew up as a normal boy would grow up. 

I think that His success in avoiding sin was not due to having the full attributes of God expressed in His person before the HS came, but rather due to His divine character and His being born directly from the Father (Lk 1:35) and not from Adam (I Cor 15:45) and thus not being under the curse of Adam (Gen 3:17-19).

It is also interesting to note that at Christ’s baptism that the Holy Spirit was given unto Him (Mt 3:16).  If He already had all power and all wisdom in heaven and on earth, then why did He need the HS?  Christ would have already been equal to God in every respect and Christ receiving the Holy Spirit would have been bringing coal to Newcastle, so to speak.  If Christ was already equal to God in every respect while He was on earth, of what significance was it that He was given all power in heaven and on earth (Mt 28:18) because of His obedience (Php 2:8-9)?

In summary, I believe that when Jesus was a babe in the manger, He was no more spectacular than any babe, except that He was well behaved.  While He was subject to His parents (Lk 2:51), He was no more spectacular than a normal obedient teenager, for His brethren did not believe He was the Son of God (Mk 3:21, Jn 7:5).  Jesus received His powers after His water baptism when He was baptized with the HS.  After He was annointed of God, then He began to work miracles (Jn 2:11).  Before His baptism, except for His obedience, you could not have distinguished Him from any other boy.  The evidence is that Jesus grew in wisdom just like He grew from a babe into a full grown man.

Posted in Biblical Studies, Christ | Leave a comment

2 John 9 – What is the meaning of “doctrine of Christ?”

Robert wrote:  I think we agree that the idea some hold that all are lost that have not perfect knowledge and perfect practice of all N.T. teachings is absurd. 

James replies: Yes, if we had to have perfect knowledge of the law and keep God’s will perfectly, then we would surely fail, and that nullifies God’s will (II Pet 3:9), His grace, and the security of the believer.  With the teaching on II Jn 9 currently favored among the brethren, you cannot have any assurance of heaven  (cp. II Pet 2:11, II Tim 4:18). 

I also believe it is true that it is sinful to go beyond what is written (I Cor 4:6, I Pet 4:11).  I just do not believe that II Jn 9 teaches that.  If you take the position on II Jn 9 that it means the teaching from Christ, then you are logically forced into the perfectionist thinking.  That thinking does not harmonize with other scriptures that permit Christian growth (II Pet 3:18, Php 3:12-16, Heb 5:12-14, I Jn 1:7).  Taking the meaning to be “teaching from Christ”, there is no provision in II Jn 9 for introducing grace or allowing for the imperfection of babes in Christ.  To paraphrase it, II Jn 9 teaches that whosoever knowingly or ignorantly disobeys is without God and therefore without His help and therefore going to hell.  It is just a flat statement of condemnation of the sinner for all sin if you take the meaning to be the teaching from Christ.  There is no logical middle ground. 

II Jn 9 was a scathing rebuke by the apostle directed toward those arrogant disregarders of God’s word who were subverting the very basis of Christianity, i.e., the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.  These men were teaching that Christ had no flesh.  If Christ had no flesh, He could not die.  If He did not die, then He offered no blood for cleansing sin and no sacrifice for sin.  Therefore all men are still under the curse and destined for gehenna.  It was a hideous doctrine, and John rightly taught that men who denied the sacrificial death of Christ, did not have God.  Anyone who denied God’s sacrifice of His Son denied God’s love for man (Jn 3:16) and rejected the means of man’s redemption (Acts 20:7).  The Gnostic teaching is a denial of Christianity.  That is why John flatly stated that those men did not have God and we are not to bid them Godspeed.  They are destroyers of others and self-condemned by rejecting the sacrifice of Christ.  The teaching has nothing to do with a blanket condemnation of sin.  You cannot get a blanket condemnation of sin out of II Jn 9 without creating hopeless contradictions between II Jn 9 and other scriptures. 

Robert, this statement will be particularly meaningful to you, but I believe that the brethren’s view of II Jn 9 is one of two drivers for the current witch hunt in MDR.  Because men differ on MDR, one of them cannot be right, and therefore, according to popular view of II Jn 9, the one who is wrong does not have God and is therefore lost and going to hell.  Of course the other reason is not to company with one who is called a brother who is a fornicator, but II Jn 9 is a strong motivator for the brethren’s hostile attitude toward all who differ from them on MDR.

Posted in Biblical Studies, Christ, Church Doctrine | Leave a comment

Hath Not God — 2 Jn 1:9

Heb 6:1 is not parallel to II Jn 9.  A very literal rendering of the Greek from Berry’s Interlinear reads:
 
Wherefore, having left the discourse [logon] of the beginning of the Christ, to the full growth we should go on; not again a foundation laying of repentance from dead works, and faith in God;
 
The word translated “doctrine” in Heb 6:1 is “logon”.  The word for “doctrine in II Jn 9 is “didache”.  The two words are not synonomous.  “Logos” is a saying or word.  “Didache” is the act of teaching or that which is taught. 
 
Here are how some other versions render Heb 6:1
 
ASV  ¶Wherefore leaving the doctrine of the first principles of Christ, let us press on unto perfection; not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
 
BBE  ¶For this reason let us go on from the first things about Christ to full growth; not building again that on which it is based, that is, the turning of the heart from dead works, and faith in God,
 
CJB  Therefore, leaving behind the initial lessons about the Messiah, let us go on to maturity, not laying again the foundation of turning from works that lead to death, trusting God,
 
DBY  Wherefore, leaving the word of the beginning of the Christ, let us go on to what belongs to full growth, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and faith in God,
 
NASU  Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God,
 
NIV  Therefore let us leave the elementary teachings about Christ and go on to maturity, not laying again the foundation of repentance from acts that lead to death, and of faith in God,
If you look at the above translations, the BBE, CJB, NIV and NASU all use the phrase “about Christ” in Heb 6:1.  That translation would be much more friendly to my understanding of II Jn 9 (the teaching about Christ) than the KJV’s rendering of Heb 6:1 that you quoted. 
 
In Heb 6:1 there are certainly more things than just Christ.  However, Heb 6:1 identifies the context as the first teachings about Christ and that certainly includes faith and repentance.  The problem that I see with understanding II Jn 9 to include mercy is that it has to be read into the text.  What the text says is “Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in the teaching of Christ, hath not God”.  There is no provision for mercy in this statement if you understand it to mean “the teaching Christ gave”.  You are either obedient or else you are outside of God.  There is no middle ground.  You could theoretically ask God to forgive you, but the effect of the prayer would only last until you sinned by commission, omission, or ignorance.  Should you stand before God unexpectedly and before you had a chance to ask for forgiveness, your status would be the sad state of being without God.  Such a state of affairs is not what the Bible describes about God, but it is the logical outcome if II Jn 9 is understood to mean the teaching from Christ. 
Posted in Biblical Studies, Christ, Church Doctrine | Leave a comment

2 Jn 1:9 Is Not a Generic Condemnation of Evil

Bible commands are limited by their contexts.  We cannot, for example, apply I Cor 7:3 to the assembly for it violates other principles (e.g. Eph 5:12).  The principle that you apply from II Jn 9 acts in the same way that a generic application of I Cor 7:3 does in that it contradicts other Bible passages.  The principle that some draw from II Jn 9 causes a person to be lost for the most trivial violation of God’s law.  If you sit down in your car and don’t put on your seat belt, you are lost.  If you park in a handicapped parking spot, you are going to hell.  If you go 1 mile per hour over the speed limit, even if you didn’t intend to, you are lost.  The use made of II Jn 9 contradicts I Jn 1:7 and Rom 14 and serves as the foundation for the perfectionist doctrine.  That is, if you do not KNOW and KEEP God’s law perfectly, then you are lost unless and until you repent and pray.  That is the use that is commonly made of II Jn 9, and it is what you did with it.  However, II Jn 9 is not a generic catch-all to use when we can’t find anything else to condemn something. 
 
If we want to use a text in context to deal with eating in the church building, then I Pet 4:11 is much better than II Jn 9.  However, the context of II Jn 9 describes a very egregious error where men were claiming that Jesus did not actually come in the flesh and therefore (though these teachers did not say this) could not have actually been a sacrifice for sin.  The Gnostic teaching about Christ was a horrible doctrine because it leaves man hopelessly lost, and John said people holding that doctrine did not have God.  That is hardly comparable to some person who sins ignorantly or makes some small infraction of God’s law (Jn 19:11, Mt 5:19). 
 
God’s judgments are just (Ps 119:75), but our use of II Jn 9 does away with the justice of God.  Our use of II Jn 9 gives God no choice but to send any kind of transgressors directly to hell.  That is not correct (Rom 9:15, Rom 14:4), therefore our use of II Jn 9 is not correct.  II Jn 9 only makes sense limited to the context of just what John said–people who denied that Jesus came in the flesh.
 
The view that II Jn 9 applies to everything we do wrong springs from an interpretation of the verse that ignores its context and understands the text to refer to what Jesus taught rather than the doctrine about Jesus.  The context clearly means the teaching about Jesus (cp II Jn 1:7), therefore we cannot use II Jn 9 as a generic condemnation of everything that someone might do wrong.
Posted in Biblical Studies, Christ, Church Doctrine | Leave a comment

The Ratio of the Males to the Firstborn in the Exodus

As I was doing some research on the Levites as a type of Christianity, I ran across some very odd numbers.  The number of firstborn forms a very small ratio of firstborn to males.  Notice the following citations.

Numbers 1:2  Take ye the sum of all the congregation of the children of Israel, after their families, by the house of their fathers, with the number of their names, every male by their polls;

3  From twenty years old and upward, all that are able to go forth to war in Israel: thou and Aaron shall number them by their armies.

Moses counted the male children of Israel 20 and older and came up with the following numbers:

[Coming out of Egypt]

Numbers 2:32 BBE These are all who were numbered of the children of Israel, in the order of their fathers’ families: all the armies in their tents together came to six hundred and three thousand, five hundred and fifty. (603,550)

[Coming out of the wilderness]

Numbers 26:51  These were the numbered of the children of Israel, six hundred thousand and a thousand seven hundred and thirty. (601,730)

Having noticed that there were 603,550 males over 20 who came out of Egypt, we notice that at the same time there were only 22, 273 firstborn males.

Numbers 3:42 BBE So Moses had all the first sons among the children of Israel numbered, as the Lord said to him. 43  Every first son from a month old and over was numbered by name, and the number came to twenty-two thousand, two hundred and seventy-three. (22,273)

The firstborn is the first male born to a man no matter how many wives he has.  He may have many sons but only one firstborn.  If you compare the number of firstborn males with the number of males in the children of Israel, you observe some astounding statistics.  There are 603,550 / 22,273 = 27 males for every firstborn male.  That means that every firstborn male has 26 brothers and presumably that many sisters.  Every firstborn would therefore have had about 54 brothers and sisters.  Such an astounding ratio at once excites our curiosity.  The only possible way that I have been able to reconcile the number of the children of Israel with the number of firstborn involves polygamy.  If the men of Israel had on the average ten wives with five children each, then you could account for the 54 brothers and sisters of the firstborn.  Why would there have been such an astounding ratio of men to women?  If we reflect upon Israel’s recent past we remember Pharaoh’s command

Ex 1:22  And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river, and every daughter ye shall save alive.

Can it be that the ratio of firstborn to males reflects the enormous discrepancy between men and women caused by Pharaoh’s command to kill all male children?  It would be reasonable then to find that many of the women of that generation had to settle for being a second, third, fourth or even later wife.  We know that the practice of killing male infants was begun before Moses was born and he was 80 years old when he returned to lead Israel to freedom.  If Pharaoh’s command had been in force for 80 years, then it would account for the huge difference between males and females in Israel.  For 80 years the children of Israel had been forced to kill most of their male children.  The result was a population that was highly skewed toward women.  The continuation of Pharaoh’s policy does not, however, account for the large numbers of males implied by the ratio of 27/1.  In order to account for the large ratio of males to firstborn there must have been very large families with a presumably normal distribution of male and female children.  That is, most adult males must have had harems and very large families with an almost equal number of boys and girls.  In order for men to have had large numbers of male children and low numbers of firstborn, the men must have had large numbers of wives and Pharaoh’s policy of killing boys must have ended.

In order for the high ratio of males to firstborn to be observered but the gender distorting effects of Pharaoh’s policy to have persisted until the Exodus, the old policy of Pharaoh must have ended about 20 years before the Exodus.  The men of the generation who had somehow lived through the murder of the infants must have had many wives and many sons, but their sons must have been too young to begin families of their own.  If the generation produced after the end of Pharoah’s command was old enough to have children, then the ratio of males to firstborn would have fallen dramatically to about 6/1 due to the greatly increased availability of men who would start families and produce children with just one wife.  In the generation that grew up in the wilderness, the ratio of men and women would have returned to normalcy (about 1/1) and harems would no longer have been necessary. 

The most amazing thing about this analysis is that the ratio of males to firstborn is exactly what you would expect if the Bible record is true.  In an obscure number in a seldom read book the veracity of the Bible record regarding Pharaoh’s command to kill the innocents is validated in a totally unexpected way.  Buried in obscure statistics in the Book of Numbers is verification that the Bible record accurately records the history of the times.  In a totally unexpected way the Bible is once again shown to be true and thus the word of God, for, as the record says, God cannot lie, and yea, let God be found true, but every man a liar. 

Posted in Biblical Studies, Exodus | 2 Comments

Denominations

A denomination is a group of religious congregations having its own organization and a distinctive faith. It is the result of religious division and hence is contrary to the will of Christ who prayed that we might all be one (Jn 17:22). At the beginning of the church in Acts 2 Christ’s prayer for unity was an accomplished fact. However, as time went on, there were people who departed from the faith and went out from the church (I Jn 2:19) to establish their own groups.  These included “those of the circumcusion” (Titus 1:10) and those who “confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh” (II Jn 1:7).  These groups flourished for a while and then mostly disappeared from history though there has been a reestablishment of those who practice gnosticism in recent years.

After the Edit of Toleration by Constantine the church of Christ
became the religion of the Empire. It remained the dominant religion of Western Europe for over 1000 years. During this period the church became politicised and degenerated in its moral and ethical conduct and teaching. While the church of Christ drifted into apostacy during this time, there were brethren here and there who did not share in her prostitution to idolatry. We read, for example, of the Old People in Germany who remained much closer to the truth and existed up until their dispersion by WWII. Generally, however, denominationalism is
traced to the Rennaissance and the weakening of the iron grip that the apostate and oppressive church had come to exercise over men.

Martin Luther, a Catholic Augustinian monk, was the most prominant of the those who protested the secular and immoral practices often apparent among the clergy. One example is the hideous excesses that resulted from the erroneous doctrine of celibacy. In Spain, for example, a monastary and nunnary that were located some distance from each other were found to have been connected by a tunnel. In the middle of the tunnel was a graveyard for babies who resulted from the illicit liasons conducted through that tunnel. Another example is John Tetzel who was commissioned by the Pope to raise money for the
rebuilding of St. Peter’s after it was sacked and burned by the
barbarians. Tetzel carried out his commission by selling indulgences as a sort of spiritual insurance policy against the consequences of sin.

Luther nailed 95 points of contention on the bulletin board (the
castle door) at Worms. It listed complaints regarding the doctrine and conduct of the church and was focused on reforming these practices. The church failed to take kindly to Luther’s 95 theses, and excommunicated him. Unfortunately for the Catholic church, the recent invention of the printing press spread Luther’s theses all over Europe, and they became the subject of heated discussion throughout the land. When the church declared him a heretic and attempted to seize him, because he had friends in high places, he was able to flee
and hide in a castle. Other contemporary reformers such as the Swiss reformer, Zwingli, were not so fortunate. Luther’s writing and ability to avoid death led other men such as John Calvin to also speak out in protest to the church’s obvious problems. The church excommunicated these men, but they had obtained many followers. The result of the excommunication of these protesters was to establish groups of “protestant” churches.

The splits on ideological and moral basis were followed by a division that was more politically motivated. King Henry VIII of England sought a divorce from Ann Bolyn because of his desire to find a wife by whom he could sire a male heir to his throne. When the Pope refused to grant the requested divorce, he declared the church of England to be independent of the Pope. The pope of course excommunicated him, but the result was another permanent split and the birth of a new “protestant” religion, the Church of England.

The process of splitting continued from 1521 to the present day with various doctrines and theories arising among the  Protestants that drew away followers after them. The Churches of Christ arose in the the early 1800s on the frontier in America when men like Alexander Campbell and Barton W. Stone pursued a path of using the Bible only as a standard of faith and practice. These men came out of the Presbyterian and Baptist churches respectively. Though these men were historically associated with denominations, they repudiated denominationalism and creeds of men and assumed the plain Bible designation of “Christian” with no denominational affiliation. These two men and others like them continued where the Reformation movement left off. They began what is known as the Restoration movement. They had no creed but the Bible and accepted the Bible only as their sufficient standard for all faith and practice.

Other so called “Christian” relgions have adopted latter day prophets as authorities in addtion to Christ and the Bible. Organizations such as the 7th Day Adventists (Mary Baker Eddy), Jehovah’s Witness (Watchtower Bible and Tract Society with Rutherford and Russell), and Mormonism (Joseph Smith) have adopted writings of men in addition to the Bible to provide the basis for their individual practices.

God’s ideal is for Christians to speak where the Bible speaks and to be silent where the Bible is silent. They should have no creed but the Bible and no Lord but Christ. Ideally, Christians should not be of any denomination, but merely individuals belonging to the body of Christ which is the church of Christ (Rom 12:5) of which Christ is the head (Col 1:18).

Posted in Biblical Studies, Church Doctrine | Leave a comment