All posts by David Stevenson

Good works will not get you into Heaven

Good works will not get you into Heaven

You are horribly mistaken if you think that a few good works are going to get you into heaven. Jesus is the only way to heaven for several reasons. Jesus was “chosen by God” to be the Savior (1 Peter 2:4). Jesus is the only One to have come down from heaven and returned there (John 3:13). He is the only person to have lived a perfect human life (Hebrews 4:15). He is the only sacrifice for sin (1 John 2:2; Hebrews 10:26). He alone fulfilled the Law and the Prophets (Matthew 5:17). He is the only man to have conquered death forever (Hebrews 2:1415). He is the only Mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5). He is the only man whom God has “exalted . . . to the highest place” (Philippians 2:9).

Jesus spoke of Himself as the only way to heaven in several places besides John 14:6. He presented Himself as the object of faith in Matthew 7:2127. He said His words are life (John 6:63). He promised that those who believe in Him will have eternal life (John 3:1415). He is the gate of the sheep (John 10:7); the bread of life (John 6:35); and the resurrection (John 11:25). No one else can rightly claim those titles.

John 8:24 – “Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I AM [He], you will die in your sins.”

The Bread of Life

And Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst.” -John 6:35

Light of the World

Then Jesus spoke to them again, saying, “I am the light of the world. He who follows Me shall not walk in darkness, but have the light of life.” -John 8:12

The Door

“I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.” -John 10:9

Good Shepherd

“I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep.” -John 10:11

The Resurrection and Life

Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?” -John 11:25, 26

The Way, the Truth and the Life

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.” -John 14:6

The Vine

“I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing.” -John 15:5

How can Paul have invent Christianity

How can Paul have invent Christianity

How can Paul have invented what at first he was hellbent on wiping out? Seriously you need counselling for that cognitive dissonance problem.

1). Were the Gospels which contain the crucifixion narrative written by Paul?

No they were not.

2). Who as the arch persecutor of the early church?

Saul (Paul) was.

How can he have invented the faith which he was formerly trying to stamp out at source?

“Saul agreed with putting him [Stephen] to death. On that day a severe persecution broke out against the church in Jerusalem, and all except the apostles were scattered throughout the land of Judea and Samaria. Devout men buried Stephen and mourned deeply over him. Saul, however, was ravaging the church. He would enter house after house, drag off men and women, and put them in prison.” (Acts 8:1‭-‬3 HCSB)

This puts Muslims in a real bind. If Paul was inspired by Satan in his “invention” of Christianity why was he arrested on the road to Damascus? Surely he was already doing a good job in His persecution of the church which wasn’t Islam. Surely Muslims must applaud the original Saul of Acts chapter 8?

And if this is the case, then it simply doesn’t add up that he could have invented what he was trying to destroy.

Over to you Muslims.

So Muslims I have yet to see any attempt to reconcile the claim that Paul invented what he was dedicated to destroying before a certain encounter took place. Now is your chance to do so.

How Can We Trust The Testimony Of The New Testament

How Can We Trust The Testimony Of The New Testament

Muslims will often allege that since much of the New Testament, in particular the gospels, were written after the fact and after Jesus had left the world, that it never had His authorisation or approval.

They will also try to undermine Scripture in allegations that the Gospels contain events where Jesus is alone, eg His temptation with Him and Satan had no recorded witnesses, the insinuation being that such episodes and the conversational exchanges are an invention of the gospel authors, where the Biblical principle of multiple attestation breaks down.

How can we counter such arguments?

■ THE WITNESS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT

The principle that underlines everything written in the New Testament is that which Jesus established in His promise of the Comforter who is the Holy Spirit:

“But the counsellor, the Holy Spirit ” the Father will send Him in My name ” will teach you all things and REMIND YOU OF EVERYTHING I HAVE TOLD YOU.” (John 14:26 HCSB)

So the first response is if it’s in the Gospel (singular) accounts (plural) we can count on it that Jesus had told them what happened, whether or not they or others had personally witnessed it as well.

■ THE WITNESS OF THE DISCIPLES

Secondly, we find Jesus re-emphasising the principle of multiple attestation in this reference to the three persons of the Trinity, and the particular role of the Holy Spirit:

“When the counsellor comes, the One I will send to you from the Father ” the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father ” He will testify about Me. You also will testify, because you have been with Me from the beginning.” (John 15:26‭-‬27 HCSB)

So when we read for example in Acts Peter affirming the disciples witnessing the events of the crucifixion he describes, it can be counted upon:

Chapter 3 of Acts damns Islam and the Quran in one stroke.

Peter has just healed the man crippled from birth as if it was Jesus still with the disciples only it’s not Jesus in person it’s by the power of the Holy Spirit the promised Comforter. The people are amazed at seeing the man walk. This is how Luke records the scene:

“When Peter saw this, he addressed the people: “Men of Israel, why are you amazed at this? Or why do you stare at us, as though we had made him walk by our own power or godliness? The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified His Servant Jesus, whom you handed over and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he had decided to release Him. But you denied the Holy and Righteous One and asked to have a murderer given to you. You killed the source of life, whom God raised from the dead; we are witnesses of this.” (Acts 3:12‭-‬15 HCSB)

Did you get those words of Peter? “YOU KILLED THE SOURCE OF LIFE, WHOM GOD RAISED FROM THE DEAD; WE ARE WITNESSES OF THIS.”

Eyewitness testimony that confirms Jesus “the source of life” was crucified and rose from the dead and the disciples were witnesses”.

And Muslims want us to believe it never happened on the say so of a pagan who was assaulted by a demon in a cave 600 years after the events and 1000 kilometres away from the scene without any witnesses or a shred of evidence?

Peter along with the other disciples only fled the initial scene of Jesus arrest. Peter at least did not go far because he was very soon back following Jesus at a distance with another disciple:

“Meanwhile, Simon Peter was following Jesus, as was another disciple. That disciple was an acquaintance of the high priest; so he went with Jesus into the high priest’s courtyard. But Peter remained standing outside by the door. So the other disciple, the one known to the high priest, went out and spoke to the girl who was the doorkeeper and brought Peter in.” (John 18.15-16)

Note the “other disciple” is not named. It might be the Gospel author John which would seem unlikely since he likewise would have feared arrest (unless he has a very close relationship with the High Priest such that he might have been able to count on immunity). It might have been Joseph of Arimathea. The fact is we don’t know and aren’t told but that in itself is significant. It shows us that not EVERY detail of the story is recorded only what we need to have for the narrative. Clearly John the writer of the Gospel knew MORE than he tells us here. That principle needs to applied and kept in mind when reading the entire sequence of events surrounding the Passion of Christ.

We do know Peter and John were the first two disciples to witness the empty tomb but they were not the first to whom the risen Lord appeared. In a way which makes the entire narrative credible is the fact that women were the first witnesses of the resurrected Lord. No one would have written that into the story if it was a fabrication. Scholars regard that fact as highly indicative of its authenticity because by the Criterion of Embarrassment anyone inventing it would NEVER have had women as the first witnesses.

Jesus was crucified in public in front of hundreds of witnesses. We know from his gospel that John was there because Jesus speaks to him and his mother while hanging on the cross. We don’t know whether others were watching at a distance. Given Peter’s behaviour at the high priest’s house it would be surprising if he was not watching the crucifixion from a distance. Likewise others of the 11.

When Peter says to the crowd in Acts 2 that “we are witnesses to the crucifixion and resurrection” he is telling the truth. He had no reason to lie. In fact it’s impossible that he could have been doing what he was doing, in continuing the miraculous healing works of Jesus based upon a lie. Its also impossible he would have been martyred for being a false witness – see final section.

■ JESUS LAID OUT THE STRUCTURE FOR THE NEW TESTAMENT

He might not have been on earth when it was written but Jesus knew how it would be written.

For the New Testament as a whole, Jesus gives us a very clear road map of how that would be written in advance. Two main passages in the Gospel of John lay the ground work for our understanding of the authority and inspiration of the New Testament: John 14:25-26 and John 16:12-15. In these passages Jesus says:

“These things I have spoken to you while being present with you. But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.” (John 14.25-26)

“I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you.” (John 16.12-15).

Often these words of Jesus are taken to apply to Christians in general. I suggest that what Jesus is saying here is that his apostles were going to write what we now know as the New Testament.

It is evident that Jesus knew His message to the world would depend upon the words of His apostles. He expressly prays for them in John 17:20: “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word.”

Jesus had many things to say to His apostles but they would have to wait until the coming of the Holy Spirit to receive them. Notice the three main things the Holy Spirit would do in His guiding them into all truth.

1. First, the Holy Spirit would bring to their remembrance all things Jesus said to them. Since the apostles wrote about the words and actions of Jesus after the fact, it was vital that the Holy Spirit enable the apostles to remember the facts, the details and the verbatum conversations.

2. Second, the Holy Spirit, also called the Spirit of Truth, would teach them all things. The apostles and the authors of the New Testament would interpret events truthfully.

3. Third, the Holy Spirit would show them things to come. The prophetic messages in the New Testament would be authenticated and witnessed to by the power of the Holy Spirit.

It is no coincidence that these three actions by the Holy Spirit in His directing the apostles correspond to what we have discovered to be the three divisions of New Testament Scripture; historical (“bring to your remembrance”) which covers Matthew through Acts, teaching (“teach you all things”) which covers Romans through Jude, and prophecy (“show you things to come”) which covers Revelation.

Thus, in these passages of John 14:25-26; 16:12-15
we have Jesus pre-authenticating the writing of the New Testament by His apostles. The Three Divisions of the New Testament:

1). The historical survey (Matthew -Acts)

“… bring to your remembrance all things I said unto you”.

2). Teaching and interpretation of the principles laid down by Jesus (Romans – Jude)

“… teach you all things”.

3). The prophetic word (Revelation)

“… show you things to come”.

Each book of the New Testament is either written by an apostle of Jesus or by a contemporary of the events in proximity to an apostle of Jesus. The passages from the Gospel of John above directly authenticate the apostolic authority of the books of Matthew, John, 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, and Revelation since the writers of these books were a part of the original twelve to whom Jesus spoke these words.

We see from Acts 9:15; 26:17-18 and Galatians 1:11-19 that Jesus personally commissioned Paul as an apostle. Thus, the writings of Paul bear the authority of Christ. This authenticates the apostolic authority of Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and possibly Hebrews. Crucially, Paul’s authority is also corroborated by Peter’s testimony of Paul in 2 Peter 3:15-16.

“… and consider that the long suffering of our Lord is salvation; as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.”

Notice that Peter equates the writings of Paul with Scripture. Since Peter was one of the original twelve apostles of Jesus, his endorsement of Paul further establishes Paul as an apostolic authority.

Mark’s authority stems from his proximity to Peter and Paul in Acts 12:12-19,25; 1 Peter 5:13, and 2 Timothy 4:11. Luke’s authority stems from his proximity to Paul in 1 Timothy 5:18 and 2 Timothy 4:11. James’ and Jude’s authority stems from their proximity to Peter, John, and Matthew in Acts 1:14.

The authority of James is further manifested in how James presided over the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 and how the apostles Paul and Peter regard him during that council. James’ authority is also corroborated by Paul where we see Paul recognising him as an apostle (Galatians 1:19) and as a pillar of the church (Galatians 2:9). In addition we can see James’ authority in that when representatives came from Jerusalem to Antioch to address a theological issue, they were said to have come from James (Galatians 2:12). It is noteworthy also to see that Peter, as an apostle, reported to James (Acts 12:16-17).

The New Testament book that poses the greatest challenge is Hebrews since its authorship is in question. Many scholars believe that Paul wrote Hebrews, in which case its authority would be established. Others suggest that Barnabas might have written Hebrews. If this is so, we can establish Bamabas’ apostolic authority by Acts 14:14 where Barnabas is referred to as an apostle in his work with Paul. With thus we have every book in the New Testament accounted for regarding its apostolic authority. Each writer can be linked directly to Jesus or to someone who is linked directly to Jesus.

■ TESTIMONY WRITTEN IN THE BLOOD OF MARTYRS

Finally, we can further seal the authenticity of their witness testimony (and incidentally that Jesus is God), by Jesus’ prophetic words in Matthew 23:

“This is why I am sending you prophets, sages, and scribes. Some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will flog in your synagogues and hound from town to town.” (Matthew 23:34)

Who alone sends prophets? God does. Persecution that would follow them to their deaths would prove they were sent and set apart by God. All bar none of the Apostles, including Paul, suffered martyrdom (John uniquely and miraculously was spared the intended martyrs death). They wrote their testimonies in their own blood. Its the ultimate seal upon their truthfulness. No one will die knowingly to defend a lie.

By the apostles’ obedience and sacrifice, Christ has allowed their deaths to become an extremely powerful witness to us of His person. They died because they loved Christ, and Christ let them die for Him because He loves us. Belief in Christ is that important, and those who died knew it. So it is not God who devalues the apostles deaths, but us whenever we ignore the truth of Christ for which they surrendered their lives.

The deaths of Jesus’ closest followers are speaking to us. Their deaths are witness to, and are hard evidence for, Christ’s deity and ministry on earth. They reprise His death and fulfil His command that anyone wishing to follow Him must also be willing to pick up their own cross and die for Him as He died for us. This is evidence of the Bible’s veracity that no atheist, Muslim, historian, scientist, or other sceptic can ignore in clear conscience.

How Christ Fulfilled and Ended the Old Testament Regime

How Christ Fulfilled and Ended the Old Testament Regime

How Christ Fulfilled and Ended the Old Testament Regime
The glory of Jesus Christ shines more clearly when we see him in his proper relation to the Old Testament. He has a magnificent relation to all that was written. It is not surprising that this is the case, because he is called the Word of God incarnate (John 1:14). Would not the Word of God incarnate be the sum and consummation of the word of God written? Consider these summary statements and the texts that support them.

1. All the Scriptures bear witness to Christ. Moses wrote about Christ.

“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me. . . . If you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me.” (John 5:39, 46)
2. All the Scriptures are about Jesus Christ, even where there is no explicit prediction. That is, there is a fullness of implication in all the Scriptures that points to Christ and is satisfied only when he has come and done his work. “The meaning of all the Scriptures is unlocked by the death and resurrection of Jesus” (Graeme Goldsworthy, Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture, 54).

And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself. (Luke 24:27)
3. Jesus came to fulfil all that was written in the Law and the Prophets. All of it was pointing to him, even where it is not explicitly prophetic. He accomplishes what the Law required.

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.” (Matthew 5:1718)
4. All the promises of God in the Old Testament are fulfilled in Jesus Christ. That is, when you have Christ, sooner or later you will have both Christ himself and all else that God promised through Christ.

For all the promises of God find their Yes in him. That is why it is through him that we utter our Amen to God for his glory. (2 Corinthians 1:20)
5. The law was kept perfectly by Christ. And all its penalties against God’s sinful people were poured out on Christ. Therefore, the law is now manifestly not the path to righteousness; Christ is. The ultimate goal of the law is that we would look to Christ, not law-keeping, for our righteousness.

For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. (Romans 10:4)
“When you have Christ, you also have everything God promised through him.”

Therefore, with the coming of Christ, virtually everything has changed:

1. The blood sacrifices ceased because Christ fulfilled all that they were pointing toward. He was the final, unrepeatable sacrifice for sins. Hebrews 9:12, “He entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.”

2. The priesthood that stood between worshiper and God has ceased. Hebrews 7:2324, “The former priests were many in number, because they were prevented by death from continuing in office, but he holds his priesthood permanently, because he continues forever.”

3. The physical temple has ceased to be the geographic center of worship. Now, Christ himself is the center of worship. He is the “place,” the “tent,” and the “temple” where we meet God. Therefore, Christianity has no geographic center, no Mecca, no Jerusalem. John 4:21, 23, “Jesus said to her, ‘Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. . . . But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth.'” John 2:19, 21, “‘Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.’ . . . He [Jesus] was speaking about the temple of his body.” Matthew 18:20, “For where two or three are gathered in my [Jesus’s] name, there am I among them.”

4. The food laws that set Israel apart from the nations have been fulfilled and ended in Christ. Mark 7:1819, “[Jesus] said to them, . . . ‘Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him?’ . . . (Thus he declared all foods clean.)”

5. The establishment of civil law on the basis of an ethnically rooted people, who are ruled directly by God, has ceased. The people of God are no longer a unified political body or an ethnic group or a nation-state, but are exiles and sojourners among all ethnic groups and all states. Therefore, God’s will for states is not taken directly from the Old Testament theocratic order, but should now be re-established from place to place and from time to time by means that correspond to God’s sovereign rule over all peoples, and that correspond to the fact that genuine obedience, rooted as it is in faith in Christ, cannot be coerced by law. The state is therefore grounded in God, but not expressive of God’s immediate rule. Romans 13:1, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.” John 18:36, “My [Jesus’s] kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting.”

Let us worship the wonder of Christ, who unleashed these massive changes in the world.

How could Jesus say Your sins are forgiven before He died on the cross

How could Jesus say Your sins are forgiven before He died on the cross

Answer: We know that God forgives sins on the basis of Jesus’ shed blood on the cross (Ephesians 1:7; 1 John 1:7). Yet, before He went to the cross, Jesus told two people that their sins were forgiven. This fact puzzles some people. How could Jesus forgive sin before the sacrifice was even made? After all, Hebrews 9:22 says, “Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.”

Let’s identify the two people to whom Jesus said, “Your sins are forgiven,”
before He died on the cross. The first is the paralyzed man who was brought to Jesus by friends and lowered through a roof to be healed. “When Jesus saw their faith, he said, ‘Friend, your sins are forgiven’” (Luke 5:20). The second person is the sinful woman who came to Jesus while He ate at Simon the Pharisee’s house. Seeing her reverence, the Lord contrasted her love with Simon’s lack of love. “Then Jesus said to her, ‘Your sins are forgiven’” (Luke 7:48). In both cases, Jesus’ words caused quite a stir among the hearers (Luke 5:21; 7:49).

When Jesus said, “Your sins are forgiven””even before He died on the cross”He was not speaking empty words. He had the power to forgive sin, just like He had the power to heal paralysis. In fact, Jesus used the physical healing to confirm His authority to dispense spiritual healing: “‘I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins.’ So he said to the paralyzed man, ‘I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home.’ Immediately he stood up in front of them, took what he had been lying on and went home praising God” (Luke 5:24″25).

Turning to the Old Testament, we find other people whose sins were forgiven before Jesus died on the cross. David prayed for forgiveness (Psalm 51:2) and received it. “Blessed is the one whose transgressions are forgiven” (Psalm 32:1). As he touched Isaiah with a coal from the altar, an angel declared the prophet’s forgiveness: “Your guilt is taken away and your sin atoned for” (Isaiah 6:7). The atonement provided by the animal sacrifices resulted in forgiveness (Leviticus 4:20, 26, 31, 35).

The principle found all through the Bible is that forgiveness is God’s business. “With you there is forgiveness, that you may be feared” (Psalm 130:4, ESV). “You, Lord, are good, and ready to forgive” (Psalm 86:5, NASB). “To the Lord our God belong mercy and forgiveness” (Daniel 9:9, ESV). When Jesus displayed His power to forgive sins, He clearly showed that He was the Son of God wielding God’s authority in this world. “Who can forgive sins but God alone?” (Luke 5:21). No one; Jesus is God Incarnate.

◎ Forgiveness of sin in every dispensation has always been based on Jesus’ death on the cross (see Hebrews 9:15). In the Old Testament, sins were forgiven on the basis of Jesus’ death on the cross, of which the animal sacrifices were but a foreshadowing. During the life of Christ, sins were forgiven on the basis of His yet-future death on the cross”the benefits of that sacrifice were granted to those who had faith in Jesus. Now, by faith, we look back on the death and resurrection of Christ and receive God’s forgiveness. The good news is as Paul preached, “My friends, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of
sins is proclaimed to you” (Acts 13:38). When we trust Christ, the word to us is the same as that spoken to the forgiven woman in Simon’s house: “Your faith has saved you; go in peace” (Luke 7:50).

How could Melchizedek have had no father or mother

How could Melchizedek have had no father or mother

Q. How can the book of Hebrews say that Melchizedek, the priest who blessed Abraham, was “without father or mother” and “without beginning of days or end of life”? Wasn’t he human?

Byzantine icon of Melchizedek
Here’s what I say about this in my study guide to Deuteronomy and Hebrews, where I note that the author of Hebrews talks about Melchizedek in the third of the four messages or sermons that make up the book:

This message is based primarily on Psalm 110, but in it the author characteristically draws on other Scriptures for support, in this case the story in Genesis that describes who Melchizedek was.

The author first translates the word Melchizedek, explaining that it means “King of Righteousness.” Melchizedek was most likely not a given name, but an honorary title of the Jebusite kings who formerly ruled in Jerusalem, including the one in the Genesis story who greeted Abraham. (A similar example of an honorary title is the name Pharaoh that was given to all the rulers of Egypt.)

After the Israelites conquered Jerusalem, their own kings took over the title Melchizedek. Since the Jebusite kings had been priests, the Israelite kings also assumed an honorary role as priests and interceded for the nation in prayer. But they were not allowed to offer sacrifices; this was reserved for the descendants of Aaron under the law of Moses.

The author next explains that King of Salem (that is, of Jerusalem) means “King of Peace.” By translating these two terms, the author identifies Jesus, who is a priest in the order of Melchizedek by virtue of being the Messianic king of Jerusalem, as someone who helps people become righteous before God and so find peace with God.

Now come some more significant details”or rather, a significant lack of them. The Hebrew Scriptures usually introduce a new figure into their narratives by describing the person’s parentage and ancestry. They usually also report when a figure dies. But the book of Genesis doesn’t do either of these things in the case of Melchizedek.

This allows the author of Hebrews to observe that, when considered only in light of what the Scriptures say about him, Melchizedek seems to have no origin or ending. He appears to “remain a priest forever.” In this way he “resembles the Son of God,” and this allows him to serve as an earthly representation of the Messiah. This is why the Lord chose to name him as the head of the order of priests to which the Messiah (represented in Psalm 110 by the Davidic king) would belong.

This is a classic example of the author’s typological method, which is based on the understanding that transcendent spiritual realities are reflected in earthly replicas. A little later in this message the author makes the basis of this method explicit, noting how the earthly tabernacle had to be modeled after the heavenly pattern Moses was shown. The Greek word is typos, the source of the English word type, and so this interpretive method is known as typology.

To summarize what I say in the guide, the author of Hebrews is able to establish a connection between Melchizedek and Jesus by considering Melchizedek in light of what the Scriptures say about him (that his title means “king of righteousness” and that he was king of Salem = “peace“), but only in light of what the Scriptures say about him, not what they don’t say. Since the details of his parentage, birth, and death aren’t reported, this allows an even stronger typological connection to Jesus, who has a permanent priesthood “on the basis of an indestructible life.”

In other words, the key to understanding how the Bible could say that Melchizedek was “without father and mother” and “without beginning of days or end of life” lies in appreciating the distinctive typological method of the book of Hebrews.

How is Jesus Christ unique

How is Jesus Christ unique

How is Jesus Christ unique?

1. He is the only, unique Son of God (Psalm 2:7, 11-12; John 1:14; Luke 1:35).

2. He is eternal. He existed from eternity past, He exists in the present, and He will exist for all eternity in the future (John 1:1-3, 14; John 8:58).

3. Jesus alone is the One who bore our sins so that we could have forgiveness and be saved from them (Isaiah 53; Matthew 1:21; John 1:29; 1 Peter 2:24; 1 Corinthians 15:1-3).

4. Jesus is the only Way to the Father (John 14:6; Acts 4:12; 1 Timothy 2:5); there is no other way to salvation. He is the only righteous One who exchanged that perfect righteousness for our sin (2 Corinthians 5:21).

5. Jesus alone had power over His own death and the ability take back His life again (John 2:19; 10:17-18). Note: His resurrection was not a “spiritual” one, but was physical (Luke 24:39). His resurrection from the dead, never to die again, distinguished Him as the unique Son of God (Romans 1:4).

6. Jesus alone accepted worship as an equal with the Father (John 20:28-29; Philippians 2:6), and indeed God the Father states that the Son is to be honored as He is honored (John 5:23). All others, whether Jesus’ disciples or angelic beings, rightly reject that worship (Acts 10:25-26; Acts 14:14-15; Matthew 4:10; Revelation 19:10; 22:9).

7. Jesus has the power to give life to whom He will (John 5:21).

8. The Father has committed all judgment to Jesus (John 5:22).

9. Jesus was with the Father and directly involved in the creation, and it is by His hand that all things are held together (John 1:1-3; Ephesians 3:9; Hebrews 1:8-10; Colossians 1:17).

10. It is Jesus who will rule the world at the end of this present age (Hebrews 1:8; Isaiah 9:6-7; Daniel 2:35, 44; Revelation 19:11-16).

11. Jesus alone was born of a virgin, conceived by the Holy Spirit. The sin nature is genetically inherited from the male. He had no human father and therefore was born without a sin nature (Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:20-23; Luke 1:30-35).

12. It is Jesus who demonstrated that He had the attributes of God [e.g., the power to forgive sins and heal the sick (Matthew 9:1-7); to calm the wind and waves (Mark 4:37-41; Psalm 89:8-9); to know us, being perfectly acquainted with us (Psalm 139; John 1:46-50; 2:23-25), to raise the dead (John 11; Luke 7:12-15; 8:41-55), etc.]

13. There are a great number of prophecies concerning the Messiah’s birth, life, resurrection, person, and purpose. All were fulfilled by Him and no other (Isaiah 7:14; Micah 5:2; Psalm 22; Zechariah 11:12-13; 13:7; Isaiah 9:6-7; Isaiah 53; Psalm 16:10).

How Islam led to the Dark Ages

How Islam led to the Dark Ages

How Islam led to the Dark Ages.
by Bill Federer, The American Minute

Caliph Umar fought alongside of Mohammed in nearly all his battles. Umar’s daughter Hafsa was one of Mohammed’s wives. Waging jihad, Umar conquered enormous areas, including: -Eastern Roman Empire, Mesopotamia, parts of Persia, Egypt, Palestine, Syria, North Africa, Armenia, Anatolia, Damascus, and Jerusalem.

Muslim pirates terrorized the Mediterranean, blockading trade. This caused an economic disaster in Roman Europe by diminishing products moving from North Africa and the Middle East to Rome. An important item no longer shipped was papyrus — reeds from the Nile delta which were used for paper in Europe.

The sudden shortage of paper resulted in a decline of writing, literacy, and fewer books being written. This was a key factor in the beginning of THE DARK AGES.

The world’s largest and oldest library was in Alexandria, Egypt. Accounts were given by: Persian traveler Abd-Al-Latif of Baghdad (1162-1231), Jamal Ad-din Al-Kufti (1169-1248), and Syrian prelate Bar Hebraeus (1226-1286) that when Caliph Omar was asked in 642 AD what to do with the books in the library, he told his commander Amr bin al-Ass:

“Touching the books you mention, if what is written in them agrees with the Qur’an, they are not required; if it disagrees, they are not desired. Destroy them therefore.”

The account continued that the library books were burned to heat the city’s bath-houses for six months. Other libraries in Babylon, Syria and Greece met similar fates.

Current accounts, such as Breitbart News, April 13, 2016, reported this behavior continuing: “ISIS militants also raided the Central Library of Mosul to destroy all non-Islamic books. “These books promote infidelity and call for disobeying Allah,” announced a militant to the residents. “So they will be burned.”

In 711 AD, Muslim jihad crusaders crossed the Strait of Gibraltar and conquered all of Spain. Pope Gregory III put out a plea for help and Charles Martel stopped the Islamic advance just outside of Paris at the Battle of Tours in 732 AD, just 100 years after the death of Mohammed in 632 AD.

In 832 AD, Muslim Caliph Al-Ma’mun of the Abbasid Dynasty ordered raiders to seek out Pharaohs’ tombs for plundering. They broke into the Great Pyramid of Giza in search of treasure. The destruction of Egyptian history was so thorough that within a few generations, Egyptians had no memory of who built the Great Pyramids.

An Islamic Hadiths stated: “Abu’l-Hayyaj al-Asadi told that ‘Ali (b. Abu Talib) said to him … Do not leave an image without obliterating it, or a high grave without leveling it. This hadith has been reported by Habib with the same chain of transmitters and he said: Do not leave a picture without obliterating it.” (Hadith Bk 4, No. 2115)

As the “rightly guided” Muslim Caliphs conquered North Africa and the Middle East, it further interrupted Mediterranean trade, economically devastating Rome and Byzantium.

In 846 AD, just 46 years after Charlemagne was crowned Holy Roman Emperor in Rome’s old St. Peter’s basilica, 11,000 Muslim attacked. They sacked Rome, looted old St. Peter’s basilica and St. Paul Outside the Wall Church, desecrating the graves of both St. Peter and St. Paul.

As a result, Pope Leo IV built a wall, 39 feet high, all around the Vatican to keep the Muslim invaders out. It took four years to complete the wall. In 849 AD, Muslims Saracen raiders set sail from Sardina with a fleet to invade Rome.

Pope Leo rallied the cities of Amalfi, Gaeta and Naples to send ships to block the mouth of the Tiber River near Ostia. Muslims attacked. The fighting was fierce, when suddenly a violent storm arose, dividing the Christians fleet from the Muslim attackers in the Battle of Ostia.

Christian ships were able to make it back to port and weather the storm, but the Muslim ships were severely damaged and scattered. When the storm subsided, the remaining Muslim ships were easily captured.

In 1009 when “Mad Caliph” Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah, ordered the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem destroyed. Pilgrims returning from the Holy Land shared reports of Muslim persecution and cruelty toward “dhimmi” Christians.

In 1057, the Norman adventurer Robert Guiscard took control of Calabria in the “toe of Italy” and fought against the Muslims of Sicily.

In 1071, the Muslims delivered a major defeat to the Byzantine Christians at the Battle of Manzikert and took control of all but the coastlands of Asia Minor.

In desperation, the Byzantine Emperor Alexius I Comnenus humbled himself and sent ambassadors to the Council of Piacenza in March of 1095, appealing for help from his religious rival, the Roman Catholic Pope.

With Spain exuberant after driving the Muslims from Toledo and Leon by 1085, Pope Urban II gave an impassioned plea at the Council of Clermont in 1095 for Western leaders to help their Byzantine Christians brethren, whom Muslims “compel to extend their necks and then, attacking them with naked swords, attempt to cut through the neck with a single blow.” (Robert the Monk, Medieval Sourcebook, Fordham University.)

The First Crusade began in 1097. In the next two centuries there were a total of 9 major Crusades to return the Holy Land to its pre-Islamic inhabitants.

After the Crusades ended, in the 1300s, the Muslim jihad conqueror Tamerlane killed 17 million across central Asia, annihilating Christianity and leaving pyramids of skulls in Delhi, India.

In 1400s, as Muslims invaded Byzantium. When the Ottoman Muslims sacked Constantinople in 1453, it ended the land trade routes from Europe to India and China which led Columbus to looking for a sea route, beginning THE AGE OF DISCOVERY.

As Ottoman Muslims invaded Greece Byzantine Empire, they destroyed churches, libraries, museums, artwork, and graves of the Christian Saints. Greeks scholars fled west to Florence, Italy, reintroducing their Greek art, architecture and philosophy to western Europe.

This led to a flood of Greek treasures, art and literature hurriedly carried to Florence, Italy. This re-interest in Greek culture is called THE RENAISSANCE.

In retrospect, Islam was instrumental in bringing about “The Dark Ages” when they conquered Egypt, cut off trade across the Mediterranean and held back the ships of papyrus; and Islam was instrumental in “The Renaissance” when they invaded Greece and destroyed Greek culture, causing scholars to flee to Italy. Greek scholars also fled west with their Greek New Testaments and ancient Biblical manuscripts.

In fact, the very concepts of “Europe” and “Christendom” took shape in response to the Islamic invasion, as previously Europe viewed itself as innumerable independent kingdoms.

Later notable battles against the Ottomans include:
* Siege of Malta, September 11, 1565;
* Battle of Lepanto, October 7, 1571;
* Battle of Vienna, September 11, 1683;
* Battle of Zenta, September 11, 1697.

Today, fundamental Muslims also destroyed:
-City of Ani in Armenia;
-Buddhist statues in Afghanistan;
-Assyrian Museum;
-Egyptian rioters trashing mummies;
-Ancient Syrian and Chaldean churches dating back to the time of the Apostles;
-Ayotollah Khomeini’s attempt to destroy Cyrus’ ancient Persian palace at Persepolis;
-the graves of the Prophet Jonah and the Prophet Daniel in Nineveh (Mosul, Iraq) were blown up by ISIS militants on July 24, 2014.

How just is the God of Islam

How just is the God of Islam

If a person commits a sin such as murder or theft, should that person be punished? The obvious answer is yes. But, why should he be punished?
There are two primary reasons we can offer why someone who commits a sin should be punished. First, he has broken the law of God; and if God does not exercise punishment, then what is the purpose of the law? To not exercise punishment for committing sin is to permit the sin to exist without consequence. Second, he has harmed others; and if he is not punished, others will be encouraged to do the same.
Therefore, we can conclude that it is proper to exercise judgment/punishment for the crimes committed by individuals.
If the same person who has committed a sin, such as murder or theft, says that he is sincerely sorry for what he has done and that he would never do it again, should society excuse him from punishment? Maybe, maybe not.
God is holy and righteous; and if he didn’t carry a punishment for sins, he would be allowing evil to exist without consequence. The result would be, essentially, to condone evil; and since God cannot do that, His justice requires that a proper punishment be incurred for each sin.
Likewise, if God did not punish someone because that person said he was sorry and would not do it again, then is God being just? After all, if he did not exercise the punishment for breaking his law, he is then permitting evil to exist without proclaiming its error or dealing with its consequence.

In Islam
In Islam, a Muslim who commits murder and thievery can ask Allah for forgiveness and receive that forgiveness without Allah exercising any punishment whatsoever. There are undoubtedly situations where Muslims have committed grievous sins, have not been caught, and have later sincerely repented before their God, have asked forgiveness, and (theoretically) been forgiven. We ask, where is Allah’s exercise of judgment upon the sin that was committed?
According to Islam, Allah may forgive that person”if he so chooses. But, doesn’t that mean the righteous judgment of Allah is not satisfied? Doesn’t it mean that the sin has essentially been ignored by forgiving it; and that the Law of God, though broken, has resulted in no punishment? Is this just”not to exercise punishment for the sins committed? It is not. No, for we have already established that punishment is the proper and righteous response to sin. Declining to punish is to avoid satisfying the law of God.
Therefore, since we can rationally propose a situation where the God of Islam will forgive a Muslim without there being punishment according to law, we can conclude that the God of Islam is unjust. If Allah is unjust, then he is not the true God.

In Christianity
In Christianity, every sin is dealt with by God in one of two ways. Either God satisfies the law by exercising his punishment upon the sinner by sending him to eternal damnation, or, he places the sins of the person on Jesus Christ who suffers the punishment in place of the person. Either way, the justice of God is never ignored. It is proper that sin be dealt with by a punishment relative to the sin. To neglect to do so is to avoid being just.
Therefore, we see that the God of Christianity is just because no sin goes unpunished. After all, the Bible describes God as being holy and righteous. His standard of holiness is so great that all sin must be dealt with properly. The Law, which is a reflection of God’s holy character and nature, is not to be violated without consequence. The consequence of all sin is death.
The only way for us to escape the righteous and holy judgment of God is to receive the sacrifice of Christ made on our behalf where he bore our sins in his body on the cross (1 Pet. 2:24). There is no other way . . . except, that is, to pay for your sins yourself in hell forever.

Objections
First: This means that the Christian is escaping judgment. This is true (Christianity and Islam teach this). But it is also true that the sin is being addressed in the person of Christ, and the punishment of that sin is satisfied”unlike Islam where the proper punishment due for breaking the law is not met. Furthermore, in Christianity, the forgiveness of sins is assured by the sacrifice of Christ who bore our sins in his body on the cross, which is why we do not have to earn our forgiveness in any way.
“and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed.” (1 Pet. 2:24).
Second: Is it just to transfer the punishment from one person to another? Yes, since the law is still satisfied in that breaking it is dealt with. In Christianity, the debt, the penalty incurred by sin, was transferred to Christ; and the punishment of God fell upon the person of Christ on the cross.
“And when you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions, 14having canceled out the certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us and which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.” (Col. 2:13-14).
Therefore, all who trust in Christ for the forgiveness of their sins are trusting in the sacrifice of Christ, who fell under the wrath of God the Father and was punished in their place. In this way, sin is dealt with by an act of justice. Remember, a holy and righteous God cannot let sin go unpunished. We must ask then, why does the God of Islam not do what is just?

How To Refute Any Islamist’S Cherry Picked Bible Verses

How To Refute Any Islamist’S Cherry Picked Bible Verses

HOW TO REFUTE ANY ISLAMIST’S CHERRY PICKED BIBLE VERSES

Dear Christians,

When an Islamist cherry picks Bibles verses to feed his delusion, just ask him a simple question:

“Do you believe everything in the Bible?”

You will never get an affirmative answer.

A follow up question should be:

“Do you believe the whole Qur’an including Surah Al-Maidah 5.47 and Surah Yunus 10.94”?

You will get cricket sounds after that.

CASE CLOSED!

ADDITIONAL QUESTION: Why should a Christian explain a Bible verse from the Bible that Muslims don’t even believe in or consider authoritative?

After explaining and advising a Muslim to read and understand Bible narratives IN CONTEXT, would he read and believe you when he already has preconceived answer and opinion?

Does it ever work?

Always insist on the Muslim FIRST refuting the main post/argument to avoid diverting or evading the main post and asking him to explain his arguments using Islamic texts, those are the texts he considers authentic and authoritative. Telling a Muslim to interpret verses he consciously cherry picks or parrots from other Muslims has never worked in my years of interaction with indoctrinated people with a fixed mind, they will ignore and keep repeating the same thing over and over even after explaining for the umpteenth time. Just check how often they repost their favourite memes that they think refutes or damages the Christian doctrine. The very memes that have already been debunked before.

ALWAYS REMEMBER, Muslims do not quote the Bible because they believe it or understand it or because it is AUTHORITATIVE, NO. They desperately want to cling to their preconceived meaning and understanding of the text/verses, believing that way, they win the ARGUMENT in their favour and bolsters the faith and beliefs in opposition to Christianity.