The Law of the Angels

This is a book which exhibits an incongruence between the title and what the book actually talks about.  The title “The Law of The Angels” sounds rather mystical and interesting but, once you get into the book, there is very little written about angels.  The one reference I find to the title is on page 41 where, as the author is speaking about the different expressions of love, she injects the statement “This is angel law. This is the way the angels live.”  After this brief reference to angels, there is not much more on the subject of angels.  I have seen in certain blogs that some are saying that this book was re-titled upon reprinting and given the title “Love: The Law of The Angels.”  However, the 1979 edition I was able to obtain is simply titled “The Law of The Angels.”

It appears that the thesis of this book is to give the reader a broad overview of the subject of love and how love is to operate in the lives of Christians.  Then, upon giving a protracted and tedious definition of what love is supposed to be in the life of the Christian, the more subtle and actual core emphasis of the book comes out. 

Gwen Shaw in her book The Law of The Angels portrays love as a more feminine attribute than masculine and thus Shaw puts forth the thesis that the Christian women of the world are spiritually superior to the Christian men of the world. And, because women are more spiritually sensitive than men, then by function women can be used by God to express His love to the world more than can be accomplished through “insensitive men.”

I realized that I needed to activate my theological radar defense shield (discernment of spirits) when on page VII of the Introduction we see Shaw say “I wish I could say that my own love is perfect, or that I myself had attained unto the high degree of perfection which you will find in the pages of this book.  These are truths that God has made known to me.” This type of posturing is something that I have become quite wary of lately.  As you will see shortly, Shaw’s statements were born out of false humility.

Before we get into the “love” part of the book, I do want to point out what I believe is another area of problematic theology in Shaw’s book.  It has to do with why Jesus was crucified and what was accomplished in the crucifixion.  On page 14 we see Shaw state “You see, the Law of Moses will never point anyone to the cross.  You know what the Law of Moses did?  It crucified Jesus.  Do you know that it was on the authority of the Law of Moses that the Jews crucified Jesus?”  One might ask why I see this as problematic.  It is troublesome because traditional and orthodox theology teaches us that the Law of Moses had the function of making mankind aware of his sin.  Then, we see that Jesus came to fulfill the requirements of the Law of Moses by offering Himself upon the Cross as a sacrifice for our sin.  And, it was Roman Soldiers who actually crucified Jesus by the insistence of the Jewish Scribes and Pharisees. I see this theological awkwardness as a product of Shaw’s hurried attempt to get straight to her main thesis of her book which appears to be the desire of God to express His love toward mankind, rather than judgment.

One other area to make note of before we get to the main thesis is that of the belief of the eternal existence of man’s spirit or what is known as the “pre-existence and transmigration of souls.” We see this on page 68 where Shaw states “Way back there in antiquity, in the origin of time, far beyond your known history or ability to recall, you were in the plan of God.  You are an eternal living spirit.  Your body is loaned to you for only a season of sojourn on Earth.  As an eternal being, you are without beginning or ending.  And back there, hidden in the midst of a million forgotten eons of time we stood in His glory, being part of His spirit, fashioned even then in His likeness, as He planned for us.  There He created us male and female.”

The above theology is extremely troublesome.  So, according to Shaw, “we always existed”, “we are part of God”, but yet God created us.  So, is God creating “part of Himself” or, what is going on here?

As troublesome as the already mentioned items are, the real “bombshell” of The Law of The Angels happens on page 111.  After having “put men in their place” on pages 72 and 73, we read on page 111 what Shaw is really trying to get the reader to believe.  On page 111, Shaw has been describing a vision she had of Eve praying and asking God to forgive her for her sin of disobedience in the Garden of Eden.  Eve is described as being very distraught and in much aguish before God.  Then, we see Shaw state “I saw how through the centuries, even after her transition (whatever that means), she had wept and cried to God the Father to be merciful to her sons and daughters.  She had interceded for our release and had been permitted to see that her prayers had not been in vain, her intercession had accomplished its goal and she had prayed through.  God is going to begin to show His glory to Eve’s children.  We have finished drinking the cup of our iniquity, our day of redemption is here now.  That is the reason God is using us handmaidens.  Somehow God is going to allow us to make up for our mother’s failure.  We not only want to bless and help our brothers return to the lost paradise, we want to return ourselves.  Oh, God help us!  Brothers, help us!  We need you and you need us!  We went out together and we must return together!…As women travail and intercede, they will be used by the Lord to restore all that has been lost through the fall.” 

So, there you have it.  God is going to use women to restore mankind to Himself.  But, what about the accomplished work of Jesus on the Cross?  Is it not complete?  Didn’t Jesus, through His sufferings and crucifixion restore all?  What was left undone?  What can woman do that has not been accomplished through and by the crucifixion?  If you think these questions are unfounded then, go on to page 115 and see Shaw state “I believe the Blood of Jesus is going to become more powerful in the end time.  More powerful than in the day it poured from His veins…”

If all of this is not a problem for you then, I must direct your attention to the most theologically explosive part of the entire book.  On pages 165 and 166 we see Shaw state “This feminine aspect of the eternal God is the El-Shaddai, the mother-nature of God.  It is in the realm that the Shekinah is revealed and does its high office work.  You will remember us mentioning in chapter 13 that God had created Adam male and female.  If God created man male and female, it was because bisexuality somehow belongs to His own nature.  The fact has been recognized by early rabbinic commentators that this is true.  One even concluded that God had made Adam androgynous, and later separated him into Adam and Eve.  Lantero states that it is recognized that while individuals belong to one sex or the other, we are all androgynous in the sense of having both male and female hormones, as well as potential character traits traditionally associated with both sexes.  This beautiful aspect of the mother nature of God is one which we need to meditate upon more. Why is it that the Glory of God,  His Shekinah, seems to be resting in greater magnitude on the daughters of Eve in this generation? This is very evident, not only in one country but in all the nations where I have worked for God, and especially where women have been permitted by their male elders to let God’s glory be borne witness of through their freedom to speak.  The women are the great intercessors, the fasters, the praisers, prophetesses, missionaries, healers, and they are fast becoming the deepest of teachers.” 

Finally, in reference to the above excerpt, on page 67, we see Shaw describe that when God first created Adam, that he was created with a womb, which God subsequently took out of Adam and used it to create Eve. 

The theology presented in Shaw’s book is simply shocking.  Gwen Shaw, in no uncertain terms, portrays Adam as having been created as an androgynous hermaphrodite.  She even says so in her book.  This depiction simply leaves one speechless.

Such theology by Gwen Shaw opens the door wide open for Satan to flood in with a horde of demonic spirits.  Shaw has theologically emasculated Christian men.  Shaw sets Christian women on a higher plane of greater power and importance than Christian men.  This is a Satanic doctrine.

This book is available through Amazon.com.

read comments (0)

Jesus said to Nicodemus “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” John 3:3

Romans 3:23 tells us “…all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God.”

So, what happened to man?  Why do we need to be “born again”, as Jesus said?  To answer these questions and to understand what being born again means, one must go back to the beginning, back to the Garden of Eden.  For it is in the Garden of Eden that we see everything set in motion for mankind. 

Adam and Eve were created by God and they were created to live forever.  They were, in their original state, perfect and without sin.  Being perfect and without sin meant that they would live forever, if, they obeyed God’s command concerning a certain tree in the Garden of Eden. 

But, as we know, it didn’t take long before Adam and Eve fell to the temptation of the Devil to be “like God” and to know the difference between good and evil.  They both disobeyed God and with their disobedience, sin entered into the world and sin entered into the human race.  So, everyone born thereafter was born into a sinful state of existence and born with a sin nature. 

With the Fall of Man in the Garden of Eden we see that sin and all of its consequences entered into the world.  These consequences include sickness, disease, pain, suffering, heartache, fear, anger, depression, jealously, envy, strife and the flesh nature of man.  It wasn’t supposed to be this way, but this is how it ended up.  Also, with the Fall of Man, we see that Adam and Eve lost the “life connection” they had with God.  Adam and Eve lost their eternal life, and now one day they would die.  But, there was still hope.    

A note at this point.  For those who challenge Christianity as being the legitimate religion of the world today and challenge the origin of Christianity, it must be noted that Christianity began in the Garden of Eden at the time of the Fall of Man.  It began with God’s prophecy to Adam, Eve and Satan concerning the coming Messiah who would be called Jesus.  Therefore, for those skeptics, who say that Christianity is an “invention” of someone’s mind that evolved late in the overall history of mankind, that is simply an inaccurate and underdeveloped analysis.  Adam and Eve were the first human beings.  And, we see a Messianic prophecy introduced to Adam and Eve at the very beginning of man’s existence on the Earth, therefore, how can anyone say that Christianity “came later” than the other religions of the world.  To say such a thing would mean that the other non-Christian religions of the world would have to have existed…before… Adam and Eve.   

At the time of the Fall of Man in the Garden of Eden, we see a prophecy come forth concerning all that had happened and the state of sin that man now found himself.  God says, at that time, these words to Satan “…And I will put enmity between you and the woman, And between your seed and her Seed, He shall bruise your head (tread your head underfoot) and you shall bruise His heel.”  This is the first prophecy in the Bible and it is a prophecy about Jesus Christ who would be born into the world centuries later. 

So, getting back to the Fall of Man.  Now we see that Adam and Eve and every human being subsequently born into the world are now separated from God and have a sin problem that they have no power or ability to get rid of.  And, according to God’s holiness, if a man does not get rid of his sin, he can never be in the presence of a Holy God.  So, what is a man to do?

At first, in the Old Testament days, God required animal sacrifices for sin.  We see in Leviticus 17:11 that God says “For the life of the flesh in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.”  This is one of the most important verses in all of the Bible.  The importance of which we’ll visit later. 

We see that God, at first, set up a system of animal sacrifices for man’s sins.  The innocent animals were having to die for the sins of men.  This is the way that God set it up.  You simply have to accept this reality.  Our sins are unbecoming and ugly in God’s eyes, so, in turn, the “ugliness” of sacrifice was required to deal with sin.

So, finally, after many long centuries and many additional prophecies about the coming Messiah, we see in the Book of Matthew where Jesus arrives on the scene.  We see Jesus being born of the Virgin named Mary into the human race.  Jesus a God Man.  The first ever of His type, and the last of this type.  He is the Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last.  Jesus was both man and God at the same time. 

There is a pop song that has a line in it that goes “What if God was one of us, just trying to make it”.  Well, in fact, in the person of Jesus Christ, God was one of us and…He did “make it.”  Jesus did make it through all the trials and temptations of being a man without ever sinning. 

Then, we see in the Bible where Jesus came to the moment of allowing Himself to be taken prisoner by the Romans guards under the authority of the Pharisees and religious leaders of the day and falsely accused of crimes against the Roman government.  After a bogus trial, Jesus was beaten and then crucified on a cross where He bleed and died.

Then, on the third day after Jesus’ death, we read in the Bible where Jesus rose from the dead, appeared to many, ate food with the disciples, gave some final words of  instruction and then ascended into Heaven where He sat down at the Right Hand of The Father. 

So, today, as a human being, we must first recognize and accept the fact and reality that we have sin in our lives that must be forgiven.  Jesus says in Mark 1:15 “Repent and believe in the gospel.”  This means that we must ask God to forgive us for our sins.  Now at this point, there is a newly developing debate that you need to avoid.  Some are saying that it is impossible to remember all the sins you ever committed so, therefore, how can anyone ask for forgiveness for sins they can’t remember.  This argument is futile and comes from the Devil and it is a device to rob men’s souls.  Don’t go there. 

To ask forgiveness for your sins simply means that you acknowledge before God that you are a sinner and then ask Him to forgive you of all your sins (in general) that you have ever committed.  This covers all those you may have forgotten and I might add at this point, this also covers “all those sins you have committed that you didn’t even realize were sins in God’s eyes”.  So, to say that any one human being could even possibly know about and categorize every sin they may or may not have ever committed would in essence make that person equal with God.

At the same moment you are asking God to forgive you of your sins, you must ask Jesus to come into your life and be your Lord and Savior.  This is part of getting saved.  It is the blood sacrifice of Jesus that cleanses you of your sins.  And, by acknowledging Jesus as your Lord and Savior, you are saying that you accept His sacrifice for your sins.  It is extremely important that you understand this.  Remember the verse we looked at in Leviticus 17:11.   If the “life of the flesh is in the blood” then, this means that the life of Jesus was in His blood.  Jesus gave His “life” in order that you might live. 

So, if you have prayed this prayer with understanding, then, you are saved.  You are born again as Jesus said.  It is a spiritual re-birth.  Remember Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden.  They died spiritually on that day.  That is why we must be “re-born” or born again as Jesus said.   If you have said this prayer, then welcome to the family of God.  Amen.

read comments (0)

We read in Luke 13:3-5 where Jesus says “…unless you repent, you will all likewise perish”.   Next, we read in I John 1:9 which says “…If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins”.  Finally, we read in Acts 3:19 where a person must “…repent therefore and be converted”.

By the above scriptures we see that repenting of one’s sins is necessary for salvation.  You cannot be saved unless you repent to God for your sins.  You will not go to Heaven unless your sins are forgiven.  Jesus offers us that forgiveness through and by His blood sacrifice on the cross.  This is the gospel message.

Unfortunately, a new group has emerged on the scene and this group is saying that the concept of asking God to forgive you of your sins is a “works” gospel.  They are even saying that the tried and true, old-fashioned alter calls for salvation are “demonic” because in their words “it is works oriented”.  They are saying in simple terms that the idea of repenting involves an “action” or “effort” on our part and therefore somehow means that we are “working to earn” our salvation vs accepting salvation as a free gift.  This may sound unbelievable but, it is true. 

This same group is saying that simply having “faith” that Jesus exists is what saves the soul.  They quote many verses about simply “believing on the Lord” and they say that the idea that you have to do anything to be saved (including asking forgiveness for your sins) is a doctrine of works and therefore wrong. 

This same group is placing an inordinate emphasis on the 1611 King James Bible.  There are videos on You Tube of various ministers of this group who are ripping apart and throwing the NIV Bible on the floor as they preach in order to emphasize their point that the NIV is “demonic” as compared to the 1611 KJV. 

This group is so adamant about their belief that Christians should only use the 1611 KJV that it is cultish.  It almost seems as if they are worshipping the 1611 KJV Bible, rather than the God and Savior that the Bible speaks of.  They seem to be worshipping the ink and paper of the 1611 KJV Bible rather than Jesus Christ that the pages and words talk about.  One could say that a new “1611 KJV Cult” has emerged within the ranks of Christianity. 

This group leaves absolutely no room whatsoever for the Holy Spirit to operate in the life of the believer today.  They relegate the Holy Spirit to a “retired status” theologically as though His work is complete and that His power and presence is no longer necessary.  This group believes that I Corinthians 13:10 is referring to the canonized 1611 KJV of the Bible.  Go to You Tube, type in Spiritual Retardation and Speaking in Tongues pt2 and drop down to the comments section and see for yourself that this is, in fact, what they believe.  While you’re at it, also type in Pentecostal Speaking in Tongues = Being Demon Possessed and see what is transpiring with this group. 

This group is also adamant about the doctrine of “Eternal Security”.  In other words, they believe that once a person is saved, then, that person’s spiritual status can never change.  Never change no matter what that person may do, get involved in, or even believe, after they have been saved or, in their words “expressed their faith in Jesus”.   They do not believe that a person can fall away from the faith as is clearly described and warned about in Hebrews chapter 6. 

Speaking of their emphasis of “having faith”, it seems that, according the 1611 KJV group that even “expressing” faith in Jesus would be a form of “action” and therefore could be considered “works”.  In other words, just to exercise one’s mind and simply “think” that Jesus exists would be a “works salvation”.

Let’s look further into the emphasis on the 1611 KJV.  If someone is going to say that we must only follow the 1611 KJV because it is the “original version” of the Bible, then, logically, if you are going to follow that track of reasoning then, one would have to continue and say “but wait, where did the writings or material or manuscripts from which the KJV was derived come from”?  Perhaps, going back to those writings would be the more sure way of theological accuracy.  Perhaps, the early century Catholics had it right when they believed that the scriptures should be kept in and only read in Latin.  So, that would make the Latin Vulgate the true source of scriptural authority.  But, then what about the old Hebrew and Greek manuscripts.  Or wait, what about the language that Jesus spoke in, was it a now-extinct form of Aramaic?  If so, we’re now all in trouble, because no one living today could ever translate such a language, and adding to this dilemma is the fact that such manuscripts don’t exist.  And, we are not finished.  If you are going to say that we have to establish the authority of the language, or the original language in which scriptures were written, then one has to ask the question:  “What language did Adam and Eve speak in?”  This would be the source of true written  and recorded scriptural authority.  I mean, if anyone could “take us to school” about knowing God, understanding the nature and character of God, what works with God, and most definitely what does not work with God, it would have been Adam and Eve. Indeed.  Only one problem.  No one knows what language Adam and Eve spoke in and there are certainly no manuscripts written by Adam and Eve in our bookshelf. 

The only way out of this dilemma is to be led by the Holy Spirit.  We allow the Holy Spirit to bear witness in our hearts as to what is true or not true, as to what is of God and what is not of God, as to what we should believe is the true record and what is not genuine and inspired by God.  Only by the Holy Spirit can this be done. 

Furthermore, to say that I Corinthians 13:10 is talking about the 1611 KJV, and that with the canonization of the 1611 KJV all gifts of the spirit ceased to operate is totally illogical and cannot be supported theologically.  One quick question here that immediately pops into mind is if the 1611 KJV is what I Corinthians 13:10 is talking about, and if the gifts of the spirit ceased with the fulfillment of I Corinthians 13:10, and also, as this group believes, if the gifts of the spirit were dispensational and operated only in the time of the early 1st Century church, then, what about the 1500 year gap between the 1st Century and 1611?  What was the status of the gifts for this time period?  For that matter, I would like to ask if this group believes anyone could have been “saved” between 100 A.D. and 1611 A.D.?

It seems these fellows are painting themselves into a theological corner.  This new emerging group is a cult. 

Finally, on the question of Eternal Security which is also known as “Once Saved, Always Saved”, I have this observation.  The life that Jesus offers us through His blood sacrifice is a covenant.  It is known as the New Covenant or New Testament.  And, our relationship, as a body of believers to Jesus is described, even by Him, as that of a marriage.  So, to use the very analogy of Jesus, if we today, are going to say “Once Saved, Always Saved”, then, one would also have to say “Once Married, Always Married”. 

So, you are thinking of how many examples why you simply cannot say that.  You cannot say of a marriage today “Once Married, Always Married”.  It would be utter foolishness to speak in such terms, knowing that so many failed marriages in our society today are proof enough that you cannot make such a proclamation as a fact.   So, just the same, to say “Once Saved, Always Saved” does not hold water theologically. 

Sure enough, the New Covenant written in the  Blood of Christ will stand forever.  The New Covenant in Jesus Christ is established forever and cannot be altered, changed or negotiated.  We, as human beings, have the choice to join in this New Covenant with Jesus and accept His sacrifice for our sins.  And, we also, just as in a marriage covenant, have the prerogative and free will to “walk away” from such covenant if we choose.  We can walk away from our covenant with Jesus and simply say we don’t want to be in the relationship anymore.  It is the human choice that “breaks” the covenant with Jesus, for Jesus would never break covenant with us, so long as we desired His companionship. 

The problem with “Once Saved, Always Saved” or “Eternal Security” is that it takes away or bypasses the free will of man.  It is almost as if you don’t have a choice in the matter to begin with and that, once in the relationship, you cannot make the choice to “get out of it”.  This is totally illogical and it cannot hold water theologically.  It simply doesn’t work.  And, then, to make matters worse, if someone does walk away from their relationship with Jesus and falls away, the 1611 KJV group says “well, they weren’t saved in the first place”.  To say this would  be like seeing a couple get married, stay married for 10 years, have several children, live under the same roof and pay taxes together for 10 years, then, get a divorce.  And, upon getting a divorce someone would say of this same couple “well, they weren’t married in the first place”.  That would be illogical you say.  That would not be true you say.   Exactly.  Just as the fallacy of the doctrine of Eternal Security is not true.

There is a vagueness about what those who promote Eternal Security really believe.  They say that once a person is saved, then that person’s state of “being saved” can never change.  Even if this same person goes out and sins and participates in things like stealing, lying, getting drunk, doing drugs, participating in violence towards others etc.  In the theology of Eternal Security, once you are saved, you cannot sin again.  That’s right.  This is the pulse beat of this doctrine.  For you see, if once you have been saved, and God has said that your salvation can never be lost, then, it would be impossible for such person to do anything that God would look upon as sin.  For if such a Christian person did do something that was sinful in God’s eyes, then, that person would have to ask forgiveness for that sin.  But, in the view of those who believe in Eternal Security, it is impossible for the Christian to ever sin again and thus place his or her soul in jeopardy.  Therefore, what they are really saying is that once a person is “saved”, then even if this same person participates in what most would consider “sinful” behavior, God does not consider it sin anymore for this person because to do so God would be contradicting Himself, because in order for God to deal with this person’s sin, He would have to forgive this person who is supposed to be “eternally secure”. 

In reality the doctrine of Eternal Security or Once Saved, Always Saved is, in fact, a license to sin.  And, there is an escape device in this theology.  Let’s say such Christian really gets “out there” in their sinful behavior and really walks away from the Christian faith.  The answer to such a scenario given by the Eternal Security folks is “well, he wasn’t saved to begin with”. 

So, you can see how this doctrine works.  It is not too much dissimilar to the modalist doctrine which says that “a Christian’s body is separate from his spirit; therefore, what one does with their body does not affect their spirit man”.  Again, this is a license to sin.  For to believe this way, a Christian is not accountable for any behavior either good or bad.   So, this is how the Eternal Security folks are able to believe that once saved, always saved because once saved, you can no longer sin in God’s eyes.  It is a heresy.

Mark 1:15 – Jesus said “…The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.”   

read comments (0)

I have noticed a recent trend in television news interviews. It particularly deals with interviews of leading Christian figures as seen on some of the major news outlets. And, not only interviews with leading Christian ministers but, also leading politicians who claim to be Christian. There is a trend among some of our media elite to question the validity of the Bible. They ask the question “Do you believe that the stories as written in the Bible are literal and true? In other words, do you believe that the stories we read about in the Bible really happened?”.

The above question requires a yes or no answer. And, some of the answers that we hear people giving are surprising and, to say the least, disappointing. As a Christian, you must be able to say “yes” the stories in the Bible are true. If you are going to say “no”, then what is your frame of reference for giving such an answer? By what authority can anyone say that the Bible is not legitimate in regards to historical record? This is most important because whatever answer a person gives at this point will direct us to a source, or a body of knowledge, or a belief system that has greater authority than the Bible. To put it in street vernacular, if a person is going to say that the stories in the Bible are not true then, that person is claiming to have a source of knowledge greater than the Bible. What is it?

A brief note here before we move on. Why is it when someone who claims to be a Christian and that person is interviewed on national TV that we see their Christianity challenged. Why is it that we hear questions concerning the validity of that person’s religious belief system? Why do we not hear the same challenge to those of other religions? It is a clear and glaring double-standard. I mean, have your ever heard one of our great TV reporters, when interviewing a Muslim, ask that person if he or she believes that the stories in the Koran are true? Or, have you ever heard a TV news reporter, when interviewing a Hindu, ask that person if he or she believes that the writings of the Mahabharata or Bhagavad Gita are true? Even recently, we saw where reporter Cynthia McFadden conducted an interview with outgoing President Bush during which the authority of the Bible was discussed. So, why is such a question asked about the Bible and its validity? Just a thought.

One more note concerning TV interviews before we move on. Have you seen the earpiece that is often worn by the TV newsperson when interviewing? It is usually attached to the back of the person’s shirt collar and then is wired around, behind the ear so as to be as little noticed as possible. Well, when you see that, the interviewer is receiving communication from others who are sitting off in a room somewhere else in the studio. This can be, and is often more than one person. This is important in understanding how a national news interview is conducted. Have you ever wondered how a TV news interviewer can be so astute, so quick in their thinking, so abstract in their thoughts, so able to juggle the many variables and factors of the interview and ask such exact questions at the most precise time possible? They appear so confident as they often ask such questions with an insouciant and condescending smile. Indeed, the interviewers often come across as a super-genius in their ability to think and formulate their questions. How can the interviewer appear to be so brilliant as to ask the perfect question at the perfect time. There is a reason for this. If they have the earpiece in, then, in fact they are getting some of these great questions from others who are sitting in the production room off to the side. So, in essence, the interviewee is not being interviewed by just one person, but by others and they could be “experts” in the field of study of the subject being discussed. If you are having trouble with this reality then, ask yourself how many times have you heard a news reporter say “I’ve got to go, my producer is telling me it’s time for a commercial break”.

So, the question is “Do you believe the stories in the Bible are true?”. If someone is going to question the validity of the stories in the Bible then that person has a major problem on their hands. For you see, to challenge the validity of the stories in the Bible is to also challenge the validity of the words of Jesus Himself. You may ask how so? It is so because we see where Jesus many times in scripture quoted and made reference to the stories in the Old Testament. Therefore, if a person is going to say that the stories in the Bible are not true, then, you are also saying that the words of Jesus are not true. That’s right. A person who challenges the validity of the Bible is also challenging the validity of the words of Jesus. In essence, anyone who challenges the validity of the stories in the Bible is also calling Jesus a liar.

One of the Bible stories that often comes up is the story of Jonah and the whale. The experts try their best to debunk this story with all of their high-minded analysis. They give their natural analyses of their natural mind as they try to explain why the story simply cannot be true. But, in their analysis, as always, they leave out the supernatural and creative quality of God. Look, if God can create a whale and a man, and create the very sea that the whale lives in, then of course God is able to change the natural conduct of the whale and the natural process of the whale’s digestive system to accommodate Jonah for a few days to get Jonah’s attention. So, you see, to question the validity of the story is to question the greatness of God Himself. Is any man, and his feeble analysis, greater than God?

Next, we see in the New Testament, in Matthew 12:40 where Jesus makes the statement “For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the Earth”. Jesus is talking about His mission to save mankind. Jesus is making reference to His sacrificial death and uses the Old Testament story of Jonah spending three days and nights in the whale as an analogy of what He Himself is about to endure. Now, at this point, to say that the story of Jonah is not a true story would be not only challenging the authority of scripture but also calling Jesus a liar. Not only would you be calling Jesus a liar, but you would be calling Him a liar as He was talking about His sacrifice for the sins of mankind. This is extremely serious.
Read the rest of this entry »

read comments (0)