Antipodean59's Blog

Restored New Testament Christianity

Archive for the tag “truth”

Thought For The Week

I thought I would add a new segment for to end the week with, called “Thought For The Week.”

LAW OF MOSES NOT IN EFFECT TODAY.

“For the promise that he would be the heir of the world was not to Abraham or to his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise made of no effect, because other law brings about wrath; for where there is no law there is no transgression” Rom.4:11-15.

People need to understand that the Law, as handed to Moses in Exodus, cannot logically be in effect today, for if it were it would contradict the passage above. Paul said it was “nailed to the cross” Col.2:14 meaning it is dead and no longer in effect.

May God bless you as you travel and study through His word.
Graham

Beware! This is coming to a place near you.

Beware! If you think your country is immune to this then think again. The extreme Muslim religion is making inroads to push out inhabitants and once they do it will only be time before law and order breaks down and the sword of the “thuggee cult” will rule. Time to take a stand and speak out!

God Defines Who Is A Christian

There are various definitions given of a Christian. The only one that is worthwhile is God’s definition. The only kind of Christian worthwhile is the one as defined by God. The reason for saying this is God’s definition of a Christian is because of the meaning of chrematizo, translated “called.” It is not a nickname, claimed by some. “And it was in Antioch that the disciples first received the name Christian.” Weymouth).

The Greek word rendered called implies a divine source. It is “to be divinely instructed, to receive a warning or revelation from God” (Green’s Greek-English Lexicon). “To give a response to those consulting an oracle, to give divine command or admonition, to teach from heaven; to be divinely commanded, admonished, instructed; to be the mouth-piece of divine revelations, to promulgate the commands God” (Thayer).

The word is found nine times in the New Testament (Mat. 2:12; 2:22; Luke 2:26; Acts 10:22; Heb. 8:5; 11:7; 12:25; Rom. 7:3; Acts 11:26). In all of these instances it has reference to divine revelation, unless Acts 11:16 is an exception. The meaning of the word fits Isaiah 62:2: “Which the mouth of Jehovah shall name.” Compare Romans 7:3: “She shall be called an adulteress.” Who calls her an adulteress? Compare “defer not, for thine own sake, my God, because thy city and thy people are called by thy name” (Dan. 9:19). In Israel, we have the root of Elohim, the Hebrew name for God, which supplies an explanation for the statement, “Thy people are called by thy name.” Amos 9:12 and Acts 15:17 are equivalents. Thus the subject: “God’s Definition of a Christian.’

Why was not this name given at Pentecost? We may not know, but I can think of a reason. Christian is the sum of Christianity. Christianity is not Jewish, not peculiar to Jews. This is implied in the very fact that the term that most describes Christianity was not given until Gentiles were brought in. Thus, those who think of Christianity offering something yet for Jews in a special way have not properly understood Christianity.

A Christian is one who heard the Gospel and believed it (Acts 11:19-21). Why were there no Christians in Antioch prior to this time? There were not any that had heard the Gospel and believe A Christian is one that assembles (Acts 11:26; Heb. 10:25; Acts 2:42). The Christians at Antioch assembled. The Christians in every place assemble.

A Christian is one that accepts responsibility (Acts 11:29). Note the words – every man – determined – according to his ability. They did not seek to do as little as they could but as much as they could. Many seem to think today that a Christian is one who does as little as he can.

A Christian does not shirk responsibility. A Christian is one in the Lord’s church (Acts 11:26). There were no Christians in Antioch that were not members of the church. There were no Christians in Antioch that were members of any other church. “I give in mine house and within my walls…a name” (Isa. 56:5). The church is God’s house (1 Tim. 3:15; Acts 2:42; Gal. 3:26-27).
The question is: are you a Christian defined by God?

Franklin Camp
(1915-1991)

The Restoration Movement

Have it your way; God will not be there!

The onus is on you to prove it

The apostle Paul said to make sure that one “Prove all things” (I Thessalonians 5:21). Just because something is widely accepted as being true and is therefore the supposed starting point i.e., an axiom, doesn’t prove anything. If it is true then you are under obligation to “prove” it.

The apostle Peter told the 1st Century church to do as much regarding their faith. He said they were obligated to give a “reason” for their “hope” (I Peter 3:15).  For instance the axiom “God is love” needs to be proven with valid reasoning if it is to be convincing. After all faith in such, according to Paul, can only come about by hearing God’s word (Romans 1:17; 10:17) which implies a reasoning mind.

The axiom that is widely accepted as being true is that of organic evolution. That is life somehow started from a single cell and grew to the complexity of life we see before us today.  If that be true then the adherent must prove it to be so.

Here is an excellent article that might help to explain why I say such and help you as well (that is, of course, if you have the willingness of mind to indulge:)

Graham

Be careful you do not skew the Bible message by your ommission

An excellent article regarding fundamental Bible understanding where the author says “One must take the “sum” of truth on a

particular item (Psalm 119:160) — not “some” of the truth.”

Go to the article and build your faith.

Graham

So, you think you know what faith is, uh?

Check out what my friend Dub McClish says about Biblical Faith

Importance of Pentecost

The day of Pentecost as referenced in Acts 2 was a result of fifty days from the Passover Sabbath (πεντηκοστή pentēkostē fiftieth from Passover, Strong’s Dict.). This day was counted from “the morrow of the Sabbath” (Lev.23:15) when the omer of barley harvest i.e. “wave sheaf” was first cut.  The count of these weeks was to start the day the sickle cut that first wave offering (Dt.16:9). This barley harvest was to be over and done within 7 weeks i.e. 49 days from which the “Feast of Ingathering” (Ex.23:16) or “Day of First Fruits” (Num.28:26) as they were known under the Old Testament could begin. This day of Pentecost marked the beginning of the wheat harvest, hence the term “first fruits”.  It is no coincidence, in my humble opinion, that the two different corns represent the Old (i.e., barley) and the New Testaments (i.e., wheat) [any crop farmer will attest barley always precedes wheat in harvest times].

 

A simple count of 49 days beginning “the morrow of the Sabbath” will, without exception, bring one to the first day of the week that we call Sunday.  This day marked the beginning of the church, of which there is, without exception, only one (Eph.4:4).

 

It goes without saying this church needed entry conditions explained i.e. the plan of salvation given by Peter upon request of those who crucified Jesus (Acts 2:37—41).  In addition, this church was instructed via the “apostle’s doctrine” regarding fellowship and worship (Acts 2:42-47). It is important to note that the “breaking of bread” in verse 42 differs from “breaking bread from house to house” found in verse 46. The former concerns the immediate context with the Lord’s Supper memorial for “the breaking” is tn klasis i.e. the fracture, the specific act of breaking the specific bread [the Greek places the definite article tn before breaking and tov before bread indicating specificity] that Adam Clarke points out: “Breaking of bread was that act which preceded a feast or meal, and which was performed by the master of the house, when he pronounced the blessing – what we would call grace before meat”. The word is employed by Matthew in chapter 26:26 where Jesus, the Master, “took the bread, blessed it and broke [klasis] it” because it represented His body upon the soon to be realised cross, a solemn and shameful (Gal.3:13) event.  This in contrast with the latter “break” is klaō i.e. to generically break which the immediate context of the remainder of the verse says “they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart”. They were simply breaking the food apart to eat it with gladness of fellowship together with people of common salvation.

 

This having been said indicates the absolute importance of the first day of the week for the church to assemble for authorised worship and fellowship.

Graham

O’Reilly is soft on ‘No Spin Zone’

Last night, Bill O’Reilly fished for a spokesman to counter Wafa Sultan’s statements about the anti-humanitairan postiton of Sharia Law and he came up with Harris Zafar.

To O’Reilly’s credit he presented Mr Zafar with damning quotes from the Quran and Hadith that incontrovertibly backed Ms. Sultan’s position and got him to explain them away. Unfortunately, O’Reilly did not live up to his show being a ‘No Spin Zone’ because the Islamist waffled on without a shred of proof, just as I predicted in my last post.

Come on O’Reilly, get in the ‘Zone’ ’cause you have gone soft on the ‘No Spin’!

Graham

Bill O’Reilly’s Islamic Ignorance

Watching the O’Reilly Factor last night on a segment regarding the rape and beating of the young woman Ms. Imam in Libya in recent days, I could not believe my ears to hear the ‘No Spin’ guy spout off this ignorant statement;

“I find it hard to believe the prophet Mohammad would preach a doctrine, a religious doctrine where women can be abused at anytime by any Muslim man and be, you know, not held accountable in heaven or hell.”

O’Reilly is as ignorant as the rest of the ‘liberal loons’ he likes to castigate regarding the truth behind the Moon-god worshipers. As Wafa Sultan. MD, the woman he was interviewing said, people need to do some honest research into what this evil religion is all about.

To top it off, O’Reilly said he would welcome on any Muslim on the show who would defend Sharia Law and deny the claims made by Ms Sultan. Yeah, like we are going to take the word of a follower of a raving lunatic who was responsible for the rape and murder of thousands in the 7th Century all in the name of the Moon-god, Allah.  Give us a break, mate!

By the way, latest reports are now saying the young woman at the centre of this horrific example of the so-called peaceful religion at work is to charged with defamation against Islam.

It is about time the truth needs to really stand up, O’Reilly and live up to your self-proclaimed slogan.

Graham

Post Navigation