The Bible Blogger

One of the benefits of being retired, is that it allows me a lot of time to review and read material that is being disseminated across the Internet and the globe. Because many churches today have rejected the inerrancy of Scripture, and thus it’s authority, a great number of pastors and teachers flounder over issues that solid Bible-believing churches find as being “open for debate.”  The following is one such example.

Located on at Paleoevangelical Blog, is an article about two young pastors, Kevin De Young and Greg Gilbert.  They have decided to embark on a book-writing task about the Mission of the Church.  The video of their conversation is provided here:

The Mission of the Church from Ben Peays on Vimeo.

In this interview, they pose the following questions:

• What does it mean to be missional?
• How do you define what the Church is supposed to be doing?
• What ought we to be doing as Christians?

Kevin De Young points out that he feels it is a huge issue in the [New] Evangelical world, and that it ought to be addressed.  What should the Church be doing?

As a Fundamental Bible-believing Christian, I place my final authority on God’s Word.  The Bible is and always will be the foundation for everything; not just for correct faith (orthodoxy), but also for correct practice (orthopraxy).  Let’s first define the Scriptural purpose of the church and then we will deal with some of the issues raised in the video.

The Purpose of the Church

Matthew 28:18-20
18  And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19  Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20  Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

When our Lord Jesus Christ rose from the dead, He appeared before the disciples first, and in the end over 500 witnessed His resurrection.  Right before ascending into Heaven, Christ commissioned all believers with what we call the Great Commission, which is found in Matthew 28:18-20.

Command #1 – Go…

When God established Israel as a nation, His original plan was to bring the lost to His people in order to show how a Godly nation was to behave.  He allowed a temple to be built in Jerusalem, and laws were established, both political and theological.  For a short time, this worked, but as with anything sinful man touches, things went awry.  When the Northern tribes broke from Judah, they turned to idolatry, rather than continue in God’s Word and law.  Kings became corrupt, and this led their people to follow suit.  In the end, God brought judgment down in Israel and Judah, and their testimony was lost.

When Christ came, and Israel officially rejected their messiah, Jesus began to lay the groundwork for a new people, called the Church.  This body was never intended to be a physical body, but rather a spiritual collection of believers, because Jesus taught us that we must worship God in spirit and in truth (John 4:24). No longer will God bring the heathen and lost to His people, but God has commanded His saints to Go out into the world (Matthew 28:19).  This is why we teach fellow brothers and sisters in Christ how to share their faith with others.  This is why we go out on weekends and knock on our neighbor’s doors.  This is why we invest our time and money into missionaries who are willing to go out and bring others to Christ and start churches outside our communities.

Command #2 – …Teach All Nations…

This is where some good-hearted Christians go wrong theologically.  No where in Scripture are we told to go and “save others.”  Some really devout brethren and misguided into believing that it is their duty before God to win others to Jesus Christ.  While in college, we would go out to the streets of Seville Square, Pensacola and witness to people hanging out on the streets.  One guy, his name was Davey, I loved going out with because he was a fire-brand!  One night he must have scared a bunch of teenagers, because they started running away from him while he was preaching the gospel to them.  What did Davey do?  He chased them down!  By the time I caught up with him, he was sitting on one guy’s chest forcing him to listen!  Was Davey’s heart in the right place?  I think so.  He loved the Lord and loved telling others about the love of Jesus, but I must say that Davey was wrong in that it was not his responsibility to save these teen boys.

God commands us to teach others about Jesus Christ.  God’s Word says,

1 Peter 3:15
15  But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:

When we meet people on the streets, and God allows us to an opportunity to share with them the truth found in Scripture, we must take that opportunity.  We don’t save anyone, that is the work of God’s Holy Spirit, but we do sow the seed of Scripture (Matthew 13:3).  This is why programs like Bible Clubs and Sunday School Programs are so important.  Even something as small as this blog site, is fulfilling God’s commission to, “teach all nations.”

Command #3 – …baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:…

The third command is to baptize those who do get saved.  The issue of baptism is so messed up in churches who have rejected the inerrancy of Scripture.  Some churches sprinkle drops of water on their members, while others believe that infants ought to be baptized.  Still, there are even some who believe that baptism is required for salvation.  All of them are wrong because they refuse to read and accept the solid-rock truths of the Bible.

1. Scriptural Baptism is only for those who believe in Jesus Christ and are saved (Acts 8:36-38).
2. Scriptural Baptism is a picture of Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection (Romans 6:3-4), and not a picture of the Holy Spirit.
3. Baptism has nothing to do with salvation (Acts 16:31; Romans 5:1-2; Romans 10:9-10; Ephesians 2:7-8; Titus 3:5), but is an earthly picture of our ties to Jesus Christ (Romans 6:3-4).

When a believer first gets saved through faith in Christ, his very first commandment from God is to be baptized.  This is an open and public announcement that they are now a follower of Jesus Christ.  Any saved soul who refuses to obey God, even in the smallest of things such as baptism, cannot be used by God.

Command #4 – …Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.

While this off-hand appears to be a repeat on Command #2, I am convinced it is not.  The Great Commission falls into a sequence.  First you go.  Then you teach what the Bible says about sin and salvation.  When a person believes and is gloriously saved, they are then baptized publicly before everyone, announcing that they are obedient to Christ and have chosen to follow Him.

So, what is next?  Christ’s next command is to teach these babes in Christ how to live like a child of God.  We don’t live like the world, because we are not of this world (John 15:19; John 17:14; John 17:16).  Oh, how the world screams and hollers over this one issue!  They cry, “how dare you teach these people to walk and talk, and dress differently!”  The wicked world, and yes, even many back-slidden and worldly Christians will throw such accusations as, “You’re  nothing more than a LEGALIST,” at the God-fearing believer, only because Bible-believing Christians have committed themselves to following the mandates of Jesus Christ.

Why is the lost heathen and worldly Christian so adamant against changing the lifestyle of a new believer onto a path that glorifies God?  The answer lies in God’s Word:

2 Corinthians 2:15-17
15  For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish:
16  To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things?
17  For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

You see, as a Christian, we are earthly pictures and reminders that Jesus Christ is real, and that someday He will return to judge the nations.  If we dress the same as the world, and listen to the same filth and garbage the world dishes out, our public testimony is lost, and our witness fades.  Yet, if we have a public lifestyle that reflects glory and honor to Jesus Christ, we will stand out in the crowd, and the lost and back-slidden will in fact be ever reminded that Christ is alive in us, and that there will be a day of reckoning.

So, What Does it Mean to be Missional?

When you have a word that is being thrown around, and not properly defined, it becomes a dangerous tool which causes confusion and dissension among it’s users.  Though I am in no way, shape, or form a fan-boy of Christianity Today Magazine, they do have a good article on the term, “Missional”.  In the article, they first define what the meaning is NOT.

• Missional is not synonymous with emerging. The emerging church is primarily a movement attempting to contextualize Christianity for a postmodern generation.
• Missional is also not the same as evangelistic or seeker-sensitive. These terms generally apply to the attractional model of church that has dominated New Evangelical thinking for many years.
• Missional  is not a new way to talk about church growth. Although God clearly desires the church to grow numerically, it is only one part of the larger missional agenda.
• Finally, missional is more than social justice. Engaging the poor and correcting inequalities is part of being God’s agent in the world, but we should not confuse this with the whole.

So, what does the term “Missional” really mean?  Here is the response given in the article:

A proper understanding of missional begins with recovering a missionary understanding of God. By his very nature God is a “sent one” who takes the initiative to redeem his creation. This doctrine, known as missio Dei—the sending of God—is causing many to redefine their understanding of the church. Because we are the “sent” people of God, the church is the instrument of God’s mission in the world. As things stand, many people see it the other way around. They believe mission is an instrument of the church; a means by which the church is grown. Although we frequently say “the church has a mission,” according to missional theology a more correct statement would be “the mission has a church.”

In a nut-shell, Missional is a New Evangelical term pointing back to what Bible-believing Christians knew and practiced all along.  God doesn’t just command the missionary or pastor to “Go,” but this command extends to every single born-again Christian.  Missions is not just a tool or branch of the church, but is a mandate directly given by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ in Matthew 28:19.

So, with the knowledge of what the Bible teaches, what is the purpose of the Church?  To fulfill the Great Commission found in Matthew 28:18-20.  The next question is, what should a Christian be doing?  Well, if you believe the Bible, you know that the Christian is the Church, and therefore the answer is the same!  If you are saved, then YOU are a missionary.  To not “go” is willful disobedience to Christ.

Recently, I had a friend and brother in Christ as me my opinion regarding Biblical Archaeology Review Magazine.  I have been a subscriber to this magazine for several years, and he asked if he thought it would be worth subscribing to.  My response required me to pause and think about my response, and in so doing, I would like to include my response to you.

The Biblical Archaeology Society (BAS) was founded in 1974 as a nonprofit, nondenominational, educational organization dedicated to the dissemination of information about archaeology in the Bible lands.  BAS seeks to educate the public about archaeology and the Bible through its bi-monthly magazine, Biblical Archaeology Review, an award-winning web site www.biblicalarchaeology.org, books and multimedia products (DVDs, CD-ROMs and videos), tours and seminars. BAS works to present the latest scholarship has to offer in what BAS views as a fair and accessible manner. [SOURCE] {edited by John Calvin Hall}

Now, it is important to note several things.  First off, BAS is non-denominational.  What this usually means is that they will not take theological sides with anyone.  BAS is not designed to be a theological magazine but an Archaeological Magazine that focuses on the era relating to the Bible.  The focus of BAS is to provide as unbiased and as accurate data as possible.  The problem is that it is impossible to be completely vacant of theology.  It’s like saying, “My article on ____ will be completely unbiased.”  We know that this is impossible because everyone is biased one way or another, and to claim to be unbiased only shows you are fooling yourself.

The second issue we need to face is that BAS seeks to be scholarly.  This means that the articles printed in Biblical Archaeology Review and other materials by BAS are focused toward the scholars.  For these scholars to accept the material, it needs to be submittable to what is referred to as Peer Review.

Peer review is a generic term that is used to describe a process of self-regulation by a profession or a process of evaluation involving qualified individuals with the related field. Peer review methods are employed to maintain standards, improve performance, and provide credibility. [SOURCE]

Sad to say most scholars, especially in the area of Biblical Archaeology and Biblical Theology are quite liberal.  Bear in mind, just because someone claims to be a Bible Scholar or a Biblical Archaeology Scholar does not mean they are saved, let a lone Biblical.

And these two matters are the reasons why I paused to provide a response.

God’s Word teaches us that we need to be discerners of the Truth.

Colossians 2:8
8  Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Ephesians 5:6
6  Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.
Hebrews 13:9
9  Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace; not with meats, which have not profited them that have been occupied therein.
Romans 1:21-22
21  Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22  Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
1 Corinthians 3:18-19
18  Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.
19  For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.

Now, your next question might be, “why do you then subscribe to it if it is full of liberal and vain teachings?”  My reply is that much of the material that is in fact objective is good material.  Allow me to illustrate.  In my library, I own thousands of books, journals and theological magazines.  Among these books are Greek lexicons.  These are dictionaries that go into detail on Greek words.  Yet, these lexicons were compiled by some of the most liberal Bible Scholars that I know of.  Why use them?  because the raw data is good.  I praise God for the liberal scholars.  They are wired to seek after peer acceptance, and how they receive their peer acceptance is by providing demonstrably accurate raw data.

As a theologian/ scholar/ teacher, it is my responsibility to draw from the resources such as Biblical Archaeology Review and glean from this material profitable goods.  Here is another example of what I mean.

In the July/ August 2010 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, they had an article on the ruins of Jezreel.  The author (David Ussishkin) did an excellent job, laying out the story of Ahab and Jezebel, tying it all in with the report on what was found at the site.  Yet, in the September/ October 2010 issue another author wrote an article that I would view as being borderline blasphemous.   Michael M. Homan wrote an article entitled, “Did the Ancient Israelites Drink Beer.”  He opens the article with the following statement, “Ancient Israelites, with the possible exception of a few teatotaling Nazirites and their moms, proudly drank beer – and lots of it.“  Immediately I ask the following questions:

• How is it that Homan knows that they PROUDLY drank beer?
• How does he know they drank LOTS of beer?  How much is “lots”?
• And how does Homan know that the only “teatotalers” were a few Nazarites and their moms?

Later on in the article, Homan borders on the blasphemy by insinuating that God Himself consumed a “six-pack” a day as per Numbers 28[1].  Do you see my point.  Rather than putting forth a scholarly article, Michael M. Homan winds up being nothing more than a P.T. Barnum putting on a dog and pony show.  Why?  I can’t say what this individual’s intentions are, but to me it came across as a lame attempt to draw interest in a half-baked article.

So, how do I answer my friend?  Do I recommend Biblical Archaeology Review or not?  My answer is both yes, and no.  I would not recommend the magazine to a new believer, or one who is not grounded in the faith.  I would recommend it to individuals who I thought might profit from the articles and had the spiritual maturity to separate the profit from the dung.  Many people write in letters to the editor promising to revoke their subscription because of these bad articles.  This is because they didn’t know what they were getting into, and they assumed that everything would be biblical just because they claim to be writing about Biblical Archaeology.  If you know what you are getting into, and the work that is required to draw out the good material, then go for it.  Biblical Archaeology Review is a great magazine.  If you are looking for a periodical that is biblically sound, then pass by this rag.

[1]  Numbers 28:7 mentions where strong wine (or beer) is part of the offering to God.  He falsely relates the Levitical offering system to the neighboring pagan offerings where the worshipers thought they were “feeding” their gods.  Just because strong wine or beer is part of the Levitical offering, doesn’t mean that God is consuming such.  God’s Word repeatedly condemns the consumption of liquor due to its effects on man.  I would strongly recommend that Michael M. Homan go back to repeat some of his basic Bible classes.

As many of my readers notice, I have not been writing, nor active for over a week now.  One of the downfalls with my physical disability is that I am susceptible to infections, and this latest bout has had me off my feet for several days.  Though I am physically recovering, and am able to walk a bit, such illnesses also make a serious impact on my mental strength as well.  One or two of you have already been such a blessing to me, and have graciously helped my son and I and I cannot express how grateful I am for your gracious mercy.

Hopefully, within the week, I will be back up again, and be able to write more, and respond to many of your questions.

With Warmest Love in Christ,

John Calvin Hall

πᾶσαν τὴν μέριμναν ὑμῶν ἐπιρρίψαντες ἐπ᾽ αὐτόν, ὅτι αὐτῷ μέλει περὶ ὑμῶν. (1 Peter 5:7)

In 1 Peter 5:7, God's word admonishes us to cast all our cares upon Him, because He cares for us.  When we read this directly from the English, all we see is the double use of the word "care."  Yet, in the Greek, these are two separate and distinct words.

The first time the word care is used, it is coming from the Greek word, μέριμνα ("meh-rim-nah").  This is the word for cares, concerns and worries.  It is what keeps you up at night.  It's what you feel when your loved ones are late and don't show up.  It's that grinding inside the pit of your stomach that churns and twists when you get near the end of the month and the money is running out.

The second time the word is used is the word μέλει ("meh-lei"). This verb is sued to describe how a mother cares for her child, how a shepherd cares for his flock.  It bears the idea of having care or concern for someone.

This life will bring lots of cares and worries.  We have an adversary, who is the devil, and he seeks to devour you.  We have a world who exists in utter defiance toward God, our savior.  And my greatest foe is the flesh, who wants his own way, and is selfish and greedy.  All three of these enemies brings cares and worries into our lives.  They roar and hiss, frightening us with threats: some that are real and some that are baseless and false.

But our God is greater.

God did not save us, and forget our plight.  He is not surprised by the onslaught of our foes.  He sees above the battlefield and knows the path we need to follow.

I have cares, and I have concerns.  I worry all the time about my family.  I feel the crunch of economic hardships just like you.  How should I handle them?  By taking each one and placing them at the Master's feet.  You see, He cares about me, and He cares about you.  And best of all, He wants to show how He cares.

Hebrews 13:5-6
5  Let your conversation be without covetousness; and be content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.
6  So that we may boldly say, The Lord is my helper, and I will not fear what man shall do unto me.

Philippians 4:19
19  But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.

Proverbs 3:5-6
5  Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.
6  In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.

As a theologian and scholar, I find myself strong in certain areas of theology, while weaker in others.  This doesn't mean that I reject what I am not scholastically solid on, but rather differ to my peers and trust God's Word to be true.  One such area that I currently am not strong in is the area of Creation Science.  Though I am firmly convinced that the world was created in six literal days, I confess that my field of studies do not fall in geology, biology, nor any other -ology that would qualify me as an expert.  Yet, this fact does not negate me from having strong opinions on the matter, nor does it disqualify me from writing about it.

Recently a pseudo-Christian [1] organization has become more visible on the Internet.  They call themselves The BioLogos Foundation, and it's purpose is to legitimatize their beliefs in syncretizing [2] Scripture with the model of Evolution.

Tonight, I had the opportunity to watch a video put out by the BioLogos Foundation in an attempt to ordain their belief that the creation stories in Genesis should not be taken literally.  If this is true, then their organization would have a reasonable base.  They invited a popular liberal scholar NT Wright Bishop of Durham in the Church of England, and asked the question,

If you take Genesis in a non-literal fashion like the creation stories, why then take anything else literally?

NT Wright then spends the next three minutes explaining how he is able to believe the Gospels without believing the creation stories in Genesis.

Allow me to include the video:

Here is an analysis of the video:

[0:45-0:58]  NT Wright is asked the question, "If you take Genesis in a non-literal fashion like the creation stories, why then take anything else literally?"

[0:58-1:54] Wright changes the usage of the word "literally" to the word "concrete".  What this does is shift the question from a faith-based issue to an empirical issue.  Because he finds the word "literal" confusing, he redefines it, and then forces the use of the word "concrete" to replace it.  This is not necessary.  The word "literal" means without interpretation or embellishment; "a literal depiction of the scene before him."  It also carries the definition of being limited to the explicit meaning of a word or text; "a literal translation."   When this is completed, he then shifts the creation stories over as an "abstract" being equivalent to the parables Jesus taught in the Gospels.  When all is said and done, he shows that he believes the Genesis is nothing more than an abstract of ideas that are used to teach moral stories. 

So, what should the God-fearing, Bible-believing Christian do?  The answer is, remember what God's Word says about these wolves:

Colossians 2:8
8  Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Ephesians 5:6
6  Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.

Because I cannot explain it any better than those who specialize in the area of Creation Science, I am bringing in a short article to wrap up my post. 

A very important question we must ask is, “What was Jesus’ view of the days of creation? Did He say that He created in six literal days?” 

When confronted with such a question, most Christians would automatically go to the New Testament to read the recorded words of Jesus to see if such a statement occurs.

Now, when we search the New Testament Scriptures, we certainly find many interesting statements Jesus made that relate to this issue. Mark 10:6 says, “But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’” From this passage, we see that Jesus clearly taught that the creation was young, for Adam and Eve existed “from the beginning,” not billions of years after the universe and earth came into existence. Jesus made a similar statement in Mark 13:19 indicating that man’s sufferings started very near the beginning of creation. The parallel phrases of “from the foundation of the world” and “from the blood of Abel” in Luke 11:50–51 also indicate that Jesus placed Abel very close to the beginning of creation, not billions of years after the beginning. His Jewish listeners would have assumed this meaning in Jesus’ words, for the first-century Jewish historian Josephus indicates that the Jews of his day believed that both the first day of creation and Adam’s creation were about 5,000 years before Christ.[3]

In John 5:45–47, Jesus says,

John 5:45-47
45  Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.
46  For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.
47  But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

In this passage, Jesus makes it clear that one must believe what Moses wrote. And one of the passages in the writings of Moses in Exodus 20:11 states: “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.” This, of course, is the basis for our seven-day week—six days of work and one day of rest. Obviously, this passage was meant to be taken as speaking of a total of seven literal days based on the Creation Week of six literal days of work and one literal day of rest.

In fact, in Luke 13:14, in his response to Jesus healing a person on the Sabbath, the ruler of the synagogue, who knew the law of Moses, obviously referred to this passage when he said, “There are six days on which men ought to work; therefore come and be healed on them, and not on the Sabbath day.” The sabbath day here was considered an ordinary day, and the six days of work were considered ordinary days. This teaching is based on the Law of Moses as recorded in Exodus 20, where we find the Ten Commandments—the six-day Creation Week being the basis for the Fourth Commandment.

We should also note the way Jesus treated as historical fact the accounts in the Old Testament, which religious and atheistic skeptics think are unbelievable mythology. These historical accounts include Adam and Eve as the first married couple (Matthew 19:3–6; Mark 10:3–9), Abel as the first prophet who was killed (Luke 11:50–51), Noah and the Flood (Matthew 24:38–39), Moses and the serpent in the wilderness (John 3:14), Moses and the manna from heaven to feed the Israelites in the wilderness (John 6:32–33, 49), the experiences of Lot and his wife (Luke 17:28–32), the judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah (Matthew 10:15), the miracles of Elijah (Luke 4:25–27), and Jonah and the big fish (Matthew 12:40– 41). As New Testament scholar John Wenham has compellingly argued, Jesus did not allegorize these accounts but took them as straightforward history, describing events that actually happened just as the Old Testament describes.[4]  Jesus used these accounts to teach His disciples that the events of His death, Resurrection, and Second Coming would likewise certainly happen in time-space reality.

These passages taken together strongly imply that Jesus took Genesis 1 as literal history describing creation in six 24-hour days. But are there any more explicit passages?

I believe there are. However, one has to approach this issue in a slightly different manner. We are not limited to the New Testament when we try to find out if Jesus stated He created in six days; we can also search the Old Testament. After all, Jesus is the Second Person of the Trinity and therefore has always existed.

First, Colossians makes it clear that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was the one who created all things: “For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist” (Colossians 1:16–17).

We are also told elsewhere in Scripture how Jesus created: “By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.  For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast” (Psalm 33:6, 9). We see the meaning of this when we consider the miracles of Jesus during His earthly ministry. All the miracles occurred instantly—at His Word. He instantly turned water into wine in His very first miracle, which revealed His glory as the Creator (John 2:1–11; John 1:1–3, 14, 18). It was the instant calming of the wind and the waves that convinced His disciples that He was no mere man. So it was with all His miracles (Mark 4:35–41). He did not speak and wait for days, weeks, months, or years for things to happen. He spoke and it was done. So, when He said, “Let there be . . .” in Genesis 1, it did not take long ages for things to come into existence.

We also know that Jesus is in fact called the Word: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made” (John 1:1–3).

Jesus, who is the Word, created everything by simply speaking things into existence.

Now, consider Exodus 20:1: “And God spoke all these words, saying . . . .” Because Jesus is the Word, this must be a reference to the preincarnate Christ speaking to Moses. As we know, there are a number of appearances of Christ (theophanies) in the Old Testament. John 1:18 states: “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” There is no doubt, with rare exception, that the preincarnate Christ did the speaking to Adam, Noah, the patriarchs, Moses, etc. Now, when the Creator God spoke as recorded in Exodus 20:1, what did He (Jesus) say? As we read on, we find this statement: “For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day” (Exodus 20:11).

Yes, Jesus did explicitly say He created in six days.[5]  Not only this, but the one who spoke the words “six days” also wrote them down for Moses: “Then the Lord delivered to me two tablets of stone written with the finger of God, and on them were all the words which the Lord had spoken to you on the mountain from the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly” (Deuteronomy 9:10).

Jesus said clearly that He created in six days. And He even did something He didn’t do with most of Scripture—He wrote it down Himself. How clearer and more authoritative can you get than that?

[1]  Pseudo-Christianity is anything that claims to be Christian while in direct conflict with God's Word.  The BioLogos Foundation seeks to combine Christianity with non-Biblical Evolution.  Though it is not questioned that the organization might contain Christians within their circle, the foundation itself cannot be considered Christian since it contradict's Scripture.

[2]  Syncretism is the act of combining two philosophies or religions, in order to create a third.  Many members of the early church period (Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Augustine) sought to combine Greek Philosophy and Christianity together, which ultimately resulted in the Roman Catholic Church.

[3]  See William Whiston, transl., The Works of Josephus, Hendrickson, Peabody, Massachusetts, p. 850, 1987, and Paul James-Griffiths, “Creation days and Orthodox Jewish Tradition,” Creation 26(2): 53–55, www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v26/i2/tradition.asp.

[4]  John Wenham, Christ and the Bible, IVPress, Downers Grove, Illinois, pp. 11–37, 1973.

[5]  Even if someone is convinced that God the Father was the speaker in Exodus 20:11, the Father and Son would never disagree. Jesus said in John 10:30: “I and my Father are one” [neuter—one in the essence of deity, not one in personality]. He also said, “I speak these things as the Father taught me,” and “I always do the things that are pleasing to Him” (John 8:28–29).

* Original article can be found on AnswersinGenesis.org and was edited by John Calvin Hall.

When I was a child, I remember going to the grocery store with my parents.  While in the checkout line, my grandmother always grabbed the latest copy of the National Enquirer.  Though she claimed to not believe everything printed within it's leaves, she never missed an issue.

One time, I remember seeing the headlines where they announced the discovery of Missing Books of the Bible.  Well, I had been raised in Sunday School, and the idea of finding more books to the Bible only excited me.  Yet, for some unknown reason, both my parents were not as enthused as I was.  That night, my father explained to me that these books were not really missing, but were not accepted as "canonical."

Canonical?  What was that?  Keep in mind, I was only a little boy at the time, and when you mentioned anything related to canons, I got excited… but for completely different reasons.

When I attended college, I studied a little bit on the issues of canonization.  Why were some books accepted and why were some rejected?  After doing some research on the issue, allow me to explain.

During the time when the books of the Bible were first composed and disseminated among the believers, other cult groups stepped up and began writing their own epistles.  Cult groups like the Gnostics began distributing epistles emphasizing their particular heresies, and twisting the words of Christ and His disciples.  Paul the Apostle warns of these heresies in some of his letters to the Ephesians and Colossians.  John also fought against them in his epistles, Gospel, and Apocalypse.

By the time the last of the apostles had passed away, the true books of the Bible were all but lost in a sea of apocryphal (writings that are questionable in authority), and pseudopigraphical (writings falsely attributed to someone) books.

As the first century came to a close, it became popular for the Roman empire to start persecuting Christians.  The early believers held to Christ as their king, and would refuse to bow the knee to Caesar.  This became such a heated issue, everyone who was brought before a magistrate, whether guilty or not, were required to burn incense to Caesar and swear allegiance to him.  If anyone refused to do so, would be arrested for treason.  Also, anyone who was suspected of being a believer, would have his house searched.  If a Christian book was found, their guilt was secured, and their fate sealed.  So when a Christian obtained a copy of a book, the immediate question arose, "Is this book worth dying for?"  If the believer was convinced it was a legitimate book, they would keep it, but many times a book would be given to them that was questionable.  It contained stories that didn't quite fit into the nature of Christ or one of the apostles.  It had statements or quotes that contradicted reliable sources.  These books often times were not kept, and were discarded.  So, God used the fires of persecution to purify and bring out His correctly ordained books.

When the early church councils began to convene after the great persecutions*, one of the issues brought up was the canonicity of the Bible.  It wasn't man who was determining which book to accept or not, but rather identifying which book God had personally ordained.  True Christians believe that these books are God's Word, so canonicity is very important.  When the council was convened, they determined canonicity by the accuracy of the writings, the acceptance of the believers, and the harmony with known and reliable teachings.  In the end, the true books of the Bible rose to the surface, and the true churches rejected the apocryphal writings.

Now, you might be wondering what type of junk is found in these books?  Is it so hard to distinguish which book is true and which are false?  If you are a true Christian, you have God's Holy Spirit inside you, and the truth is not hard to see at all.  Below are two videos I had found on the Internet.  Take a look at what in contained in a few works, and see for yourself.

Then, ask yourself the question, "Is this the Jesus you follow?"

*Addendum – Thanks to Paul Pavao of christian-history.org, an error was found in this article and corrected for accuracy.   In several sources over the past years, I recall reading how one of the objectives of the Nicean Council was to answer the dilemma of which books are canonical and which ones were not.  Paul Pavao, having more experience in this specific field of theology pointed out that this was incorrect, and challenged me to look into the matter.  I did investigate the accuracy of my statement and could not find anything directly stating that the canon was discussed during the Council.  Therefore, I corrected my article, and thanked Mr. Pavao for his input.  No one, no matter who they are, or how much education they have should claim what is only attributed to our God: omniscience.

Jury Duty has a way with disrupting a person's schedule. With the priorities of working on my class notes, as well as my dissertation, I find the joy of blogging being temporarily set aside. Over the past couple of weeks, we have had visitors to BibleBlogger.org ask questions not directly related to theology or this blog.

I would greatly enjoy the privilege to respond to these questions, but am not able to, because of the fact that they do not leave a legitimate email address. Their questions are not bad, but would be inappropriate to post these answers on the blog itself. If you wish to reach John Calvin Hall, please, leave a working email address, so I might be able to respond. Without a usable email address, it is impossible for me to reply.

Thank you for your consideration.

John Calvin Hall

The BibleBlogger

Tonight, I had the fortune of spending the evening with John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion.  Though not a Calvinist myself, I did stumble across a couple of sentences that would horrify most of today's Calvinists.  Allow me to quote him:

1. THE human mind, when it hears this doctrine [referring to the Doctrine of Reprobation], cannot restrain its petulance, but boils and rages as if aroused by the sound of a trumpet. Many professing a desire to defend the Deity from an invidious charge admit the doctrine of election, but deny that any one is reprobated (Bernard. in Die Ascensionis, Serm. 2). This they do ignorantly and childishly since there could be no election without its opposite reprobation.

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book III, Chapter xxiii, Section 1. (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997).

Did you get what Calvin stated?  If not, go back and read it again.  

The Doctrine of Reprobation is the belief that not only does God chooses who goes to Heaven, but God also chooses those who will go to Hell.  He goes on to say that you cannot have the Doctrine of Election without the belief in Reprobation.

Most Calvinists today are against the idea that God chooses people to go to Hell.  They will claim that while God does in fact choose the elect for salvation, He then allows the rest to continue on their inevitable journey to destruction.  They go so far as to ostracize any Calvinist who does hold to the Doctrine of Reprobation, calling them Hyper-Calvinists.

According to John Calvin himself, anyone who denies the Doctrine of Reprobation is an ignorant child, and is not a true Calvinist.

My response?  I laugh at the heresy of Calvinism and weep over all the damage and destruction these individuals cause.  God be merciful to those who would don the mantle of Calvin and reject God's Word.  

Lord, open their eyes to the heresy they hold to!

"Good, better, best; never let it rest; until your good gets better, and your better gets best!"  

So many pseudo-Bible Scholars love to look at the mustard seed (ref. to Matt. 13:31-32) and tout that the Bible is wrong, because the seed is not the smallest.  While the mustard seed is approximately 1/20th of an inch in size, with the smaller petunia seed about 1/50th of an inch and the yet smaller begonia some 1/100th of an inch in scale.  Even yet the smaller orchid seeds are so tiny that a 10x to 30x microscope is required for the eye to see it in any detail. Furthermore, the microscopic spores of mushrooms, lichens, and molds, which also are seeds, are so tiny and lightweight that even the slightest currents of air may carry them vast distances. These too are seeds for the word spore itself means "seed." Therefore the mustard seed is technically not the smallest seed of all. The objection has been pressed even further to say something like, "Since the mustard seed isn't the smallest of all seeds then Jesus was wrong, and if Jesus was God and made everything, He should have known that the mustard seed is not the smallest seed!

The sad part is NO God fearing Bible Scholar has ever called them to the carpet!  Why… WHY… doesn't anyone look at the Greek?!?  The word MIKROTERON (translated small, less in verse 32) is a Comparative, NOT a Superlative.  Don't believe me?  Look it up.  I double-dutch dare you.

Allow me to give you a quick lesson on adjectives.  Adjectives are used to describe nouns.  An example is, "This is a SMALL seed."  But then you have a next level of adjectives, called Comparatives.  While an adjective would be used by saying, "this is a small seed,"  a comparative would state, "this is a smaller seed."  It is an adjective that is used to compare, hence the name: Comparative.  But then we have the next step, which is called a Superlative.  Superlatives include, but are not limited to highest, greatest, grandest, etc., etc., etc. So, if we used a superlative in this sentence, it would state, "this is the smallest seed."  Understand?

The accurate translation for verse 32 is, "Which indeed is the LESSER of all the seeds….".  

Now, ask yourself the question, why is our Lord and Savior using a comparative instead of a superlative?  Why?  You cannot argue with the Greek as you sometimes can with the English.  This adjective is a comparative and not a superlative.  So, again I ask, why is God's Word using a comparative and not a superlative.  The answer is simple, and comes in two parts.  

1.)  Christ, being Creator, knows that the Mustard seed is not the absolute smallest seed.  If the Bible was in fact stating that the mustard seed was the smallest, it would not use the comparative MIKROTERON, but the true superlative: ELAXISTOS (which btw, means smallest, least).  Yet it does not!  

2.)  He is also not using this parable to teach science, but to teach a moral.  What seed is so small as a mustard seed, yet grows to be so huge?  A petunia?  No.  A mushroom?  Nope.  It's the mustard seed.

Let God be true, and every man a liar…. – Romans 3:4

Ever since I started my Bible degree ('89), I always had a fascination with electronic books, especially Bible software and electronic texts.  Over the years I have always maintained the latest and greatest Bible programs, including e-Sword, TheWord, Logos, and BibleWorks.  All of these are great, but none of them provided many early Greek texts that I wanted.  Sure, they were eager to give you the Nestle-Aaland Critical Text, and even willing to provide Scrivener's Greek Text, but not Erasmus's New Testament in Greek and Latin.

For years I had scoured the Internet for a copy to no avail.  Once, in 2006, Ink and Blood English Bible Exhibit came to Idaho Falls and I had a chance to gaze upon a copy of Erasmus's text, but even think about touching it made the security guards nervous.  After dialoguing with several software providers, I almost gave up hope of even obtaining even a glance at the text.

Until now…

Last week, I ran across Bibles.org.uk.  It provided a list of free Bible texts, sadly of which were not in a pdf format but in DejaVue format.  I wasn't too excited about this, but I was curious about their online store.  Thinking that I was too poor to buy anything, I thought i was safe.  I was wrong.  The link directed me to Lulu.com's Bible Storefront.  There I found many interesting an wonderful pdf sources for Greek texts, but the most fantastic find was Erasmus's 1522 3rd Edition Greek-Latin New Testament.

Needless to say, I was not hesitant to grab a copy.  For less than $15.00 I had fulfilled a 20 year old quest.